Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar - 5/11/26: Bibi Demands More War, Dire Economic Warnings, VA Maps Struck Down

Episode Date: May 11, 2026

Krystal and Emily discuss Bibi demands more war, dire economic warnings, VA maps struck down.   To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show AD FREE, uncut and 1 hour early visit: www.breakingpoints.com    Merch Store: https://shop.breakingpoints.com/   See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an I-Heart podcast. Guaranteed Human. Another podcast from some SNL, late-night comedy guy, not quite. Unhumor me with Robert Smygel and friends. Me and hilarious guests from Bob Odenkirk to David Letterman help make you funnier. This week, my guest, SNL's Mikey Day and head writer, Streeter Seidel, help an a cappella band with their between songs banter. Where does your group perform?

We do some retirement homes. Those people are starving for banter. Listen to humor me with Robert Smigel and friends on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. On The Look Back at it podcast. From 1979, that was a big moment for me. 84 was big to me. I'm Sam Jay.

And I'm Alex English. Each episode, we pick a year, unpack what went down, and try to make sense of how we survived it. With our friends, fellow comedians, and favorite authors. Like Mark Lamont Hill on the 80s. 84 was a wild year. It was a wild year. I don't think there's a more important year for black people. Listen to look back at it on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Hey, what's good, y'all? You're listening to Learn the Hardway with your favorite therapist and host Kear Games. This space is about black men's experiences, having honest conversations that's really not safe to have anywhere, but you're having them with a licensed professional who knows what he's doing. How many men carry a suit or armor it? It signals to the world that you're not to be played with. And just because you have the capability that does not mean that you need to. Listen to learn the hard way on the AHA radio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you get your podcast. Hey guys, Saga and Crystal here.

Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election, and we are so excited about what that means for the future of this show. This is the only place where you can find honest perspectives from the left and the right that simply does not exist anywhere else. So if that is something that's important to you, please go to breakingpoints.com, Become a member today and you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad-free, and all put together for you every morning in your inbox. We need your help to build the future of independent news media and we hope to see you at breaking points.com. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to Breaking Points. I'm speaking extra loudly today because Sager is not here and I'm in studio so I have to make sure Crystal hears me all the way out where she is. Crystal, good morning.

Good morning. Nice to see you. Lovely, as always, Emily. A lot of interesting stuff to get into you. in the show today. We've got Trump officially rejecting Iran's proposal, Bibi, telling us, informing us that the war isn't over. So always have to listen to what the actual president of the United States is saying. There's a new estimate that takes into account the broader impact of the war and says it is going to cost trillions of dollars already. In Virginia, some major political news. Those new maps that were just passed by voters here have been struck down by the Supreme Court. So now everyone is looking to see whether Democrats are going to just lay in a chalk outline of themselves like they typically do or try to fight that.

They're going to chalk outline of those. That's good. That's kind of their normal, you know, that's their normal mode. But maybe it's a new day. We're going to find out. We're also going to take a look at the Hanta virus. I know a lot of people very concerned. How much have you been following Hanta news, Emily?

I started following it closer over the last few days. Before that, I was ignoring it. Now I'm paying attention. How about you? So I actually followed it very closely right when the news broke. And then I convinced myself just not to worry about it because there's too many other things to worry about. So I'm rejoining the Hanta conversation.

But apparently Birdwatchers were vindicated. It was not contracted at the landfill, even though that seemed like a very likely suspect. Yeah, huge dub for the Birdwatchers. We're going to get into it. But so far, looking so good for them. Yes. We've also got some interesting comments from AOC on Marjorie Taylor Green and her views there.

MDG, also firing back a lot of discourse. I regret to inform you. We're going to also have a little more Hassan Piker discourse in that block as well. so get excited for that. And then very excited to talk to retired Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, formerly the chief of staff to Cole and Powell, a very important figure, anti-Iraq war figure during that time period, continues to be a really prescient voice on matters of war and peace. So we're going to talk to him about the Iran war. And I'm interested to get his reaction to a Mark Levine sought that Trump had tweeted out. Mark Levine telling us, you know, we just need to arm

these opposition groups because it went so great for us in the past, Emily, specifically uses the example of arming the Mujah Hadin, which is pretty interesting. And not just that. There are more examples. So you're going to want to stick around. He goes through the tour of all of our great experiences, arming proxy forces. So stick around for that. You can't miss this Mark Levinsot. Yes. All right. Let's go ahead and jump into the latest with regard to the war. As I mentioned before, Netanyahu was on 60 minutes and was asked specifically whether he thought the war was over or not. Let's go. Go ahead and take a listen to what he had to say.

Is the war with Iran over? And if it isn't, who will decide when it is? I think it accomplished a great deal, but it's not over because there's still nuclear material enriched uranium that has to be taken out of Iran. There is still enrichment sites that have to be dismantled. There are still proxies that Iran supports. There are ballistic missiles that they still want to produce. Now, we've degraded a lot of it.

But all of that is still there, and there's work to be done. How do you envision the highly enriched uranium will be removed from Iran? You go in and you take it out. With what? Special forces from Israel, special forces of the United States. Well, I'm not going to talk about military means, but what President Trump has said to me, I want to go in there. And I think it can be done physically.

That's not the problem. If you have an agreement and you go in and you take it out, why not? That's the best way. What if there isn't an agreement? Can it be taken out by force? Well, you're going to ask me these questions. I'm going to dodge them because I'm not going to talk about our military possibilities, plans, or anything of the kind. And I'm just trying to get at how long is it going to take to achieve that aim? I'm not going to give a timetable to it, but I'm going to say that's a terrifically important mission. Emily, we also understand that Trump and Netanyahu had a call yesterday. There was some suggestion that it was,

rather urgent and unexpected. We didn't get a lot of details out of what exactly was said on that call. But Netanyahu there saying that Trump told him he wants to go in and get that uranium and that the war is not over. What do you make of that? Well, he was asked by Major Garrett basically, what do you, what is the timetable for this, as everyone just heard? And Netanyahu says, well, I'm not going to give you any information. I don't want to give away our military plans. And then Garrett, I think actually pretty shrewdly, asked him the next question. Well, first he asked, are you going to do it or can you do it? And then Netanyahu said, oh, I'm not going to reveal anything.

And then the next question was, what's your timetable? And Bibi was like, well, okay, we don't want to get into specifics. So he confirmed by the next question that, hell yeah, he's planning to do it. He just didn't want to reveal any details, which is juxtaposed with President Trump, somewhat amusing in a very tragic way, crystal, because Trump is out there talking constantly about what this could look like and what his plans are. such a strange contrast where you have the president and then Netanyahu saying, I don't want to reveal too much. Well, Trump is constantly talking. It's very odd to see that juxtaposed.

Yeah, well, Trump is constantly talking a lot of nonsense and saying sometimes contradictory things in the same sentence. He's loved this strategy of just calling random reporters who just reprint or reiterate the garbage that he gives them. I don't know who you are talking about, Crystal. I don't know who you could possibly. I'm not just referring to one in this particular instance. There have been a lot of people who've got on those calls, apparently. And I've, you know, listen, if I got a call from the president, I would also indicate what he said, but I also give some context for how much stock we should put in his words at this point. You have to look at the actions. And so the latest words we're getting from Trump are that they have rejected the Iranian proposal as unacceptable. Let's go ahead and put A3 up on the screen here. This is from Trump rejecting the Iranians. I've just read the response from Iran so-called representatives. I don't like it. Totally unacceptable in all caps. Thank you for your attention to this matter. This came after, if we could put a two up on the screen. This came after a different lengthier, truth social post

saying that Iran has been playing games with the United States and the rest of the world for 47 years. Delay, delay, delay, finally hit pay dirt when Barack Hussein Obama became president. He was not only good to them. He was great. Actually going to their side. jettisoning Israel, oh my God, I wish, and all of their allies and giving Iran a major and very powerful new lease on life, hundreds of billions of dollars and $1.7 billion in green cash flown into Tehran, no mention of the fact that was actually their own money, but whatever. Every bank in D.C., Virginia, and Maryland emptied out. Don't remember that. Really bad news for us. Yeah, exactly. So much money that when it arrived, the Iranian thugs had no idea what to do with it.

They'd never seen money like this. Never will again. It was taken off the plane in suitcases and satchels. The Iranians couldn't believe their luck. They finally found the greatest sucker of the mall in the form of a weak and stupid American president. He was a disaster as our leader, but not as bad as Sleepy Joe Biden for 47 years. The Iranians have been tapping us along, keeping us waiting, killing our people with their roadside bombs, destroying protests, recently wiping out 42,000 innocent unarmed protesters. The number is definitely not that anyway. And laughing at our now great again country, they will not, they will be laughing no longer President Donald J. Trump. And of course, you know, Any deal, any theoretical deal that could possibly be struck, Emily is going to result in some sanctions relief.

I think the Iranians are committed to full sanctions relief. They're also committed to reparations, although that could come in the form of being able to collect this toll, the Strait of Hormoos. So in any case, you know, the money, their own money that they receive back as part of the JCPOA is going to pale in comparison to the deal that would be available to Trump at this point. given the fact that the U.S. has flat out lost this war to them. So, you know, we're not really in a position in a position to be making demands. And yet we continue to make demands and posture as if we did not lose this war, as if Iran does not have us checkmated in some very real and significant sense. And that's why, as long as that persists, these negotiations are not going to go anywhere. Well, or the alternative. I mean, that's where this is somewhat chilling that Trump is going

so hard in the paint right now against the handing over of cash. These are in some of the deals. It was actually a point of disagreement intensely between Trump and Mark Levin, who he continues to tweet promotionally about or truth promotionally about, just last week. Lindsay Graham and Mark Levin were really unhappy with the contours of a plan that were released that did find exactly this, sanctions relief, and I think unfrozen assets, exactly, it's always hard to keep track of all of these plans, but I think that's pretty much stuck in just about, I mean, all of them that have come out so far. And that's where it gets to the point where, you know, you wonder escalation trap-wise,

if to avoid this type of consternation from Levin, the embarrassment of having people make this argument about him, Trump gets sucked into actually some type of ground operation, significant ground operation, that escalates the war further to, again, avoid exactly what he's saying is so horrible. Now, it could obviously go the other way at the same time, and he could just not care and think that he's spinning everything as a win, which he's been doing already for the past couple of months. But it is a little bit chilling, Crystal, to see him dunking so hard on that part of the JCPOA, or I'm sorry, that part of the Biden administration,

because he isn't indicating that he's moving further and further away from doing it himself, or is it just an outburst? You don't really know. Experience Harry Styles live in London, England at Wembley Stadium. This is Harry Stiles. Iheart Radio wants to send you and a mate across the pond. With flights from Virgin Atlantic, hotel from TripCentral.ca, tickets, and $1,000 cash.

Here we got it! Download the free IHeart Radio app. Listen to IHeart new music for 10 minutes. Enter to win. Every day is another chance to see Harry Stiles. Very excited to see you with the show. Kiss all the time, disco occasionally available now. Do you remember when Diana Ross double-tap little Kim's boobs at the VMAs?

Or when Kanye said that George Bush didn't like black people. I know what you're thinking. What the hell does George Bush got to do with a little Kim? Well, you can find out on the Look Back at it podcast. I'm Sam J. And I'm Alex English. Each episode, we pick a here, unpack what went down, and try to make sense of how we survived it.

Including a recent episode with Mark Lamont Hill, waxing all about crack in the 80s. To be clear, 84 was big to me, not just because of crack. I'm down to talk about crack on day, but just so you're all right. But just so y'all know. I mean, at this point, this is the second episode where we've discussed correct. So I'm starting to see that there's a through line. We also have AIDS on the table right now.

Now you're finishing that sentence. Yes. I don't think there's a more important year for black people. Really? Yeah. For me, it's one of the most important years for black people in American history. Listen to look back at it on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. My mother-in-law spent years sabotaging our relationship,

until karma made her pay for it. Wait a minute, Dakota. How bad did it get? Well, it got bad enough that her son-in-law had to eventually arrest her himself. Oh. She moved in for two weeks, lasted for five. She left nail clippings in the bathtub, candy stuck to the furniture, and then she pressed her ear against the bedroom door and burst in screaming.

She did not burst in while they were... She did. They kicked her out and paid for her hotel, and they thought, it's finally over. Days later, she called her son-in-law at work, claiming that his partner had been in some kind of freak accident and had been rushed to the hospital in an ambulance. He called every hospital in the city,

and his partner was making coffee the entire time. She faked a medical emergency just to test whether or not he loved her son? Yeah, and she sat in the hospital parking lot, waiting for him to see if he would show up. When that didn't work, she walked into the son-in-loss police station and filed a kidnapping report against him. She filed a kidnapping report against him in his own police station. And spoilers, karma's going to show up in the best way possible.

So if you want to hear her, how this story ends. Search OK story time on the Iheart radio app, Apple podcast, or wherever you're listening to podcasts. No, you don't. And let's put the next piece up on the screen here from Iranian sources to their state news outlets. They said they just saw the reaction of the so-called president of the United States to Iran's response has no importance. No one in Iran rights proposals to please Trump. The negotiating team should draft proposals only for the rights of the Iranian people and when Trump is dissatisfied with them, naturally, that is better. So that is the way they're posture.

I will say, though, based on what we know, the Wall Street Journal and some other outlet, I can't remember which one, had some details of what the supposed Iranian response was. And maybe we can put Trita Parcy as the last element in the block A9. Maybe we could put him up on the screen because he had an analysis of what the Iranians responded to Trump with. And essentially what he's indicating is on the. nuclear file that they have compromised in some regards. They have walked closer to what the Americans are looking for, but they have not gone all the way. And Trump has put some relatively

maximalist demands in there that are more in line with what the Israelis want to see than what his original, original posture had been back when we were, you know, originally starting these negotiations long before the war. So he has placed his expectations in, you know, impossible position for the Iranians to accept, but that doesn't mean they're not willing to, you know, willing to negotiate on that piece at all. I think since they, in particular, it's logical since they've demonstrated that they have this massive deterrent capability through their control of the Strait of Hormuz. In a sense, that gives them some more room to be able to negotiate on the nuclear file because what's the purpose of a nuclear weapon? It's deterrence. So if you have this

deterrent already established with the Strait of Hormuz, then you can afford to be a little bit flexible there. But it's also a matter of, you know, their sovereignty and asserting their rights and also reflecting the reality of the situation that the U.S. was not able to achieve its objectives on the battlefield. There's no expectation the U.S. will be able in the future to achieve its objectives on the battlefield. So any negotiated settlement is going to in some way have to reflect that reality. And Trump is going to then have to go out and do his best sales pitch job to convince people that this catastrophic loss was actually in some way a win. Unless, of course, again, he tries to do something even bigger and tries to escalate militarily to avoid the humiliation of obviously losing.

I mean, he could end up, and this is obvious, he could end up in a situation quite clearly where the Strait of Hormuz is under Iranian control. They're getting money from the Strait of Hormuz from basically tolls. They're not bringing the United States in on it, as he suggested And at one point that we were basically being, that we would potentially like split toll fees in the straight of Hormuz looking less and less likely that that's what happens. And so you end up in a situation where Trump is forced to either massively escalate. We hear people in some neoconservative quarters still talking about potential like tactical nukes or great escalation in one way or another.

And again, I don't think that's likely. But when you're looking at the options for Trump on the table right now, it's either complete capitulation in a way that he tries to save face and spin this as a big win, or he escalates further. And so I don't think the latter is the likeliest outcome at this point, but I also don't rule it out because it is so, like, everything that we're seeing play out is so bad for his ability to try to spin this as a win, which he desperately wants to do. And he has people tripping in his ear about the potential historic legacy building implications of escalation. So we're in a dangerous spot, obviously.

That's absolutely the case. And especially because the Iranians are unlikely to bend any further here in terms of the negotiations, because, number one, again, they are looking at this like, y'all lost. And we can bear a lot more pain than you can. And the global economy is going to continue to, you know, to totter on the brink here. And we've got some elements we'll bring in the next block about exactly what that looks like. But I know oil is out back again this morning because of the rejection of this deal. And there's seemingly being no end in sight here.

But, you know, what else do you do if you're Trump and you're not willing to accept the humiliation that would be required for you to accept in whatever deal you could strike right now? You've got all kinds of people like you said who are going to be pushing him. Oh, let's arm this faction. Let's bomb this. Let's bomb that. Let's try for the uranium. whatever things he's being told. And he would rather take a gamble, I think.

I mean, just thinking of his own psychology, he would rather take a gamble than have to accept the reality that has been revealed by this war. Now, there is one positive thing, I would say here from the Iranian side, this is from the Iranian president of A6, up on the screen,

just defending the idea of dialogue and negotiation. So, Pasechkin says, we will never bow our heads before the enemy. and if talk of dialogue or negotiation arises, it does not mean surrender or retreat. Rather, the goal is to uphold the rights of the Iranian nation to defend national interests with resolute strength. So a defense there of diplomacy and negotiation and talks and dialogue, that's, you know, positive to see that from obviously an important and influential figure within Iran.

But again, the reality of where their position is and how far they're willing to go, it's still vastly different from what the American side, what Trump and the American side are willing to offer. And I continue to think, Emily, that is also a very dire sign that added to the negotiating team, not that there are in-face, in-person negotiations happening right now, but that officially added to the negotiating team is this hawk from the Foundation for the Defense of Democracy is very, very hawkish outfit that's been providing lots of the worst misinformation, apparently, to this administration. So the fact, that guy got added to the negotiating team, and seemingly Janie Vance, who's seen as a more reasonable figure, more desirous of an end to this war, was apparently taken off the team. Yeah, great point.

Senator Rubio did the briefing last week, I think notably as well, which was, you can read into it what you want, but to have him do that rather than VP Vance, who has been spearheading negotiations, I think there's probably something indeed to be read into that. And I just wanted to also make the point, Crystal, that on Trita Parsy's substack, him saying, he has a line in there. He says, I don't think Americans fully appreciate what it means that Iran is coming to the table on enrichment moratoriums. And that, Ryan and I covered last week, some of the Democrats, by the way, not just left-wing Democrats, but some people who are probably considered more moderate Democrats, pushing for the Israelis to be transparent about their own nuclear capability, that is more important right now than it ever has been to use that cliche that I think actually is fitting here,

because if you want to make a deal that actually achieves no nuclear enrichment in an Iran or with an Iran, that has just heard the president of the United States make threats about wiping out an entire civilization and ensure that there actually is no enrichment as part of the deal that will satisfy American president, you're going to have to be able to be honest. In order to enforce that, you have to be honest about Israel. There has to be transparency about Israel from our government and from their government. Otherwise, how on earth do you expect that to stick and hold without finding us back in this situation a year from now, two years from now, or whatever the deal is cut? Because the Iranians don't trust Israel and the United States in their nuclear capacity in Israel, the Israeli's nuclear capacity.

They have just been pushed into a situation where many people politically, as Jeremy Scahill was explaining to us on the Friday show, are more, more interested than ever before in obtaining quickly their own nuclear capacity. So that's right. It's an important push, I think, actually, from some Democrats right now. Yeah, absolutely. Very, very, very not that it's going anywhere right now in this House, but the very fact that such a proposal was offered and co-sponsoried. and co-sponsored by a lot of Democrats, mainstream Democrats, is a total, total sea change. Last thing I wanted to put up in this block is A7,

just to show you how precarious this moment continues to be. There was a ship that was struck off of Qatar's coast cargo ship that has caught fire. You know, I've seen some indications that there are more ongoing skirmishes in and around this region than what is being reported in the media. So this is extremely volatile. And you've got Trump in a very desperate situation. You have the landscape for the U.S. so dire that even Bob Kagan, who is the husband of Victoria Newland, who is the co-founder of an extraordinarily hawkish think tank, sort of died in the wool. Neocon is out in Atlantic Magazine saying, hey, we're in a checkmate here.

Like Iran's goddess, this is a massive strategic defeat. We're going to be. seeing the repercussions of this for years and decades to come. So the landscape is that dire on the American side, but the willingness to accept that reality from Trump, sublimate his ego, accept this humiliating defeat. And the reality that would set in once you've actually inked a solidified deal here, I just, it's hard for me to see him going in that direction, which is why it continues to be so dangerous. And when you see it out there retweeting, Mark Levin, Sotz, calling for all sorts of insanity, and you see the sorts of people he's surrounding himself with, who he's putting on the negotiating team.

It's no surprise that the Iranians fully expect that they're going to face renewed attacks from the U.S. and Israel and the UAE and Saudi and the other allies in the region. Yeah, and by the way, none of this has to mean that things are going swimmingly for Iran. It's a question of whether the cost-benefit analysis for Trump, for the United States,

is such that it's worth either escalating or, to your point, Crystal, Trump sublimating his ego and saving face. and cutting bait at a certain point. So, yeah, he continues to say they have no cards. Well, they do have a card, which is obviously the Strait of Hormuz. And he doesn't want to make that one of his key concessions in a peace negotiation

because it was obviously open before the war began. And that sticking point is not budging one bit, despite the Iranians, obviously, taking some real hits. But in asymmetric warfare, they continue to have several cards, despite what the president says. So massive geographic advantage, very low cost, their weaponry. They have a much more effective, frankly, industrial base than we do. You know, we are still learning.

Actually, there was a briefing, apparently classified briefing on Capitol Hill about how many of our munitions had been depleted. Senator Mark Kelly, of course, served in the military, came out and was horrified by the way that our stockpile has been diminished. That can't be dealt with in a matter of days or weeks or even months. This is we're talking about years-long effort to rebuild what we expended during what 40 days of warfare. I was pretty wild to see. So in any case, that's where things are this morning, extremely volatile, very precarious. The Iranian proposal dismissed outright by Trump and a lot of signs that we could be headed in a very dangerous direction. Experience Harry Stiles live in London, England at Wembley Stadium.

This is Harry Stiles. IHart Radio wants to send you and a mate across the pond with flights from Virgin Atlantic, hotel from tripcentral.ca, tickets, and $1,000 cash. Here we got out. Download the free IHart Radio app. Listen to IHart new music for 10 minutes.

Enter to win. Every day is another chance to see Harry Styles. Very excited to see you at the show. Kiss all the time, disco occasionally available now. Do you remember when Diana Ross double-tap Little Kim's boobs at the VMAs? Or when Kanye said that George Bush didn't like black people. I know what you're thinking.

What the hell does George Bush got to do with a little Kim? Well, you can find out on the Look Back at it podcast. I'm Sam J. And I'm Alex English. Each episode, we pick it here, unpack what went down, and try to make sense of how we survived it. Including a recent episode with Mark Lamont Hill, waxing all about crack in the 80s.

To be clear, 84 is big to me, not just because of crack. I'm down to talk about crack on day, but just so you're just so you, y'all know. I mean, at this point, this is the second episode where we've discussed crack. So I'm starting to see that there's a through line. We also have AIDS on the table right now. Thank you finishing that sentence. I don't think there's a more important year for black people. Really?

Yeah. For me, it's one of the most important years for black people in American history. Listen to look back at it on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. My mother-in-law spent years sabotaging our relationship until Carson's. She was her pay for it. Wait a minute, Dakota. How bad did it get? Well, it got bad enough that her son-in-law had to eventually arrest her himself. Oh.

She moved in for two weeks, lasted for five. She left nail clippings in the bathtub, candy stuck to the furniture, and then she pressed her ear against the bedroom door and burst in screaming. She did not burst in while they were... She did. They kicked her out and paid for her hotel, and they thought, it's finally over. Days later, she called her son-in-law at work, claiming that his partner had been in some kind of freak accident

and had been rushed to the hospital in an ambulance. He called every hospital in the city, and his partner was making coffee the entire time. She faked a medical emergency just to test whether or not he loved her son? Yeah, and she sat in the hospital parking lot, waiting for him to see if he would show up. When that didn't work, she walked into the son-in-loss police station and filed a kidnapping report against him.

She filed a kidnapping report against him in his own police station. And spoilers, karma's going to show up in the best way possible. So if you want to hear how this story ends, search OK Storytime on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you're listening to podcasts. The economy certainly had it in a very dangerous direction as well. No question about it. Republicans right now saying bombing might have to begin once more, but the American people are obviously not on board with the war, have not been on board with the war from the beginning. And the question is to whether the American people are making up their mind on the war with accurate information is now front and center because of a new, Well, some new reporting.

There's been some significant new reporting, actually, on this front. Do we know how much the war is actually costing? Let's put this New York Times. Tereshit up on the screen. Hegelisth says this war has cost $25 billion. I tallied up the true amount. This is from Justin Wolfer's, obviously professor of public policy, at the University of Michigan. And Wolfers wrote in the Times, quote,

The Defense Department says the conflict with Iran has cost $25 billion so far. He says this tally significantly understates the true cost. By my calculations, the bill for a typical American household likely runs to thousands or even tens of thousands of dollars. He says, yes, that's a wide range. Blame the economic fog of war. But, man, Crystal, these numbers right now, as they become more and more pronounced and obvious in the media and the American people are paying more at the pump and then looking at

exactly how much more debt we're going into to fund the war per person. So it's not even just, I think, first and foremost for most people, it's about prices increasing and what you're seeing every day on the table, but then just the long-term ramifications for your own budget as an American and American family because of this, as that becomes more and more obvious. I mean, let's put B2 up on the screen. And it becomes more obvious in people's everyday lives. This is the Kraft Heinz CEO who said in an interview this last week, quote, they're literally running out of money at the end of the month.

We're seeing negative cash flows in the lower income brackets where they're dipping into savings. So just about what you're already seeing in consumer patterns, we're what, two months of this thing, two and a half months into this thing. And even if it were to, hypothetically, someone waves a magic wand and today, the economy is not just going to get better. It's turning the Titanic around at this point, Crystal. So heading into the midterms, Trump is poised to lose what little support for the war he has left. The more we see of this. We haven't really even seen the beginning here in the United States. I should say we've probably just seen the beginning, just the tip of the iceberg. This is about to get much, much worse.

Yeah, that's absolutely the case. And Americans famously already don't have a lot of savings, don't have a lot of margin for error. So when you have the specter of gas prices going up and up and up, day after day, week after week after week with no end in sight, you know, people in elites in D.C., policymakers, they may not be feeling the pinch yet, but I can promise you, I can promise you. Ordinary Americans, for them, it's already a crisis. And that's what you see reflected there in the comments from the Croft Hines CEO. I always pay very close attention of those things. You know, we've covered before McDonald's CEO saying, hey, you know, people are just skipping breakfast now.

And not that we're celebrating people getting breakfast from McDonald's, although I am personally a big McGrittle fan, but we'll put that aside. Sausageageageageage. But when people are just saying, I'm just not doing this at all, that's a very dire sign. I wanted to go back just briefly to that estimate from Justin Wolfers because I think it's so significant. he says not only does the cost directly to each American family total in the thousands to tens of thousands of dollars, but when you look at the total cost of this war and you factor in, as you said, the increase in the cost of service our debt, which has already gone up significantly. When you factor in new disability benefits and mental health problems for veterans who are serving,

God forbid, if we do go in some sort of a ground invasion, those sorts of costs are going to escalate. when you think about repairing all the damages of those bases that have been obliterated, destroyed, if we even decide we're going to go back in there and fix them and, you know, take up those positions in the region again, which I think is a big question. But those are huge, huge costs. Then you think about the economic cost day to day of the oil markets, the gas prices going up, the way that fuels inflation. And he says, $25 billion is an insane low ball. This is his quote. The best any economist can do right now is to get the order of magnitude right. And my mask suggests the Iran war

will cost hundreds of billions of dollars and very possibly trillions, trillions of dollars for this folly, for this, you know, so far, 40-day and counting folly. He says, war is hell, and hell comes with a hefty price tag. So that is what this president has signed us up for. Yeah, and I also wanted to go back to Wolfers just on another point about what's happening in the market.

So before we go back to Wolfers, Let's put up this next tear sheet. This is B4. This is a quote from a Financial Times article. Oh, this is crazy. Yeah, where you have a banker speaking anonymously to FTE saying, quote, does anyone really care if the Strait of Hormuz is open? Now, in the Wolfers article, he writes, quote, Wall Street is worried,

despite the market touching new highs. Every time the president takes a more belligerate stance, stocks tank, suggesting that investors think this conflict will undermine the value of leading U.S. companies. My estimate based on the movement of oil, prices along with the S&P 500 is that stocks are about 5% lower than they otherwise would be, suggesting that the war has wiped out about $3 trillion off, $3 trillion off the value of these companies. And Crystal, the contrast between Wolfers, I think reading what's happened in Wall Street pretty

accurately and one banker just talking about how Wall Street is riding this AI boom for now, for now, is pretty interesting because it kind of depends on your vantage point. If you're worried about the market as a whole or what it means for average Americans or what it means for your returns, I guess you're probably thinking of this word differently, depending on that vantage point. Because if you're cool to just coast off of the AI boom, as opposed to being like an average American who really does have to worry about what's happening in the S&P 500, that is a pretty different vantage point. Just extraordinary. Yeah. And it wasn't just that one person. Apparently, there was a sort of rough poll, a show of hands about, hey, do you think the stock market is going to end up even further on the year?

Do you think it's going to end down from where we are right now? And the overwhelming consensus was that the line was going to continue to go up. The headline describes it as blissful ignorance. And look, I think this is proof positive that the stock market is not only divorced from the reality of what ordinary American. lives are, it is a negative indicator. The more the stock market goes up, oftentimes in recent years, it's been because, oh, we did a bunch of layoffs because we can use AI to replace a bunch of workers. Like that is what they're betting on. When we talk about this big bet on AI, it's not just, oh, the technology is going to help us cure cancer, whatever, no. What they are betting on is that

AI is going to be able to replace a large number of human beings. That is the bet. Now, will that that payoff or not, it's not entirely clear. I think that in some ways it will. You could also have a major bubble pop when one company succeeds and the rest of them fail, et cetera. There are a lot of dire outcomes that could come from this. But I think it's very important to understand that largely, largely at this point, when the stock market goes up, given the large bet on AI, that is a negative indicator for the well-being of Americans. And so, yeah, if you're in the top 0.01% as these individuals, you know, hang down at this milk-in gathering, as they would, as they would likely be, the little more gas prices at the pump. Yeah, you don't care about that. Who cares if this trade of Hormuzis is soap.

This is not really affecting my life. I haven't changed my consumption habits. So they are blissfully oblivious to what the reality is. They don't care. I mean, they genuinely don't care. about the way that this will cause ordinary people to struggle and suffer. Now, I think they're somewhat delusional that, look, at the end of the day, you do need some kind of consumer base? At the end of the day, you do need to avoid some sort of revolutionary fervor, which is very much increasingly on the table, especially the more they push things in this direction. But for today, apparently, they're feeling pretty good, Em.

Yeah, but we have another indicator from Costco. Let's put this up on the screen. This is the Costco CFO who is saying that members are basically switching from beef to chicken. Actually, I'm just going to read this whole quote, because it's very interesting. By the way, not just in this current quote recession or concern for recession. He said historically we've always seen some, like within fresh protein, we've always seen when there's a recession, whether it was 99, 2009, 2009, 2010. We would see some sales penetration shift from beef to poultry and pork. We have seen some of that now.

I think anecdotally, I heard a few months ago from our head of food and sundries buyer that we saw some switch even from some to some canned products like canned chicken and canned tuna and things like that. So again, just to emphasize, this is really the tip of the iceberg in terms of price inflation that we're likely to see if the war were to end today, hypothetically, that a lot of these prices would still be spiking for the months ahead. And there's already what feels like, I mean, we had Rohit Chopra on last week, former head of the CFPB, Crystal, to talk about the circular funding in a lot of AI companies. Actually, just in AI in general, the entire structure, which is now like 30% of the S&P 500 is the MAG7 companies, which is actually really horrifying. Because if you have investments from NVIDIA to Microsoft and then Microsoft to NVIDIA and that sort of thing, and they're not anticipating a particular shift in the market, or they just haven't, they don't, they don't. have it as a high likelihood. They haven't priced it in exactly as they probably should be doing. And everything starts dissolving in front of us. What could happen economically, what could happen culturally. We are not prepared for what we could be seeing in the next six

months, year, two years, just right on the cusp of something potentially catastrophic, I think, at least. I mean, I hope that's not the case. But also, all of this is going to amount to more and more spending from the U.S. government, which I think a lot of people, people on the right were correct to point to. I mean, yes, you have greedflation that's absolutely already taking place. There's no question about it. You see it sometimes in the earnings calls showing up. But also, government spending is going to cause average people who now are losing jobs because of the AI boom to spend more. Prices are going to go up. That's how this works. And so it's just a complete mess, a complete mess from the administration that was elected on a pledge.

to stop inflation, to bring inflation, or to halt the growth, at least, of inflation and is now back up to about the inflation level, about the monthly inflation level, as when Trump took office. It's around 3% in January of 2025. So any improvement that was made has been reversed effectively. Tax cuts, too. Have you seen the calculations that what average people are getting from their tax cuts has been erased by gas price increases? Yeah. Well, and I learned from you that they were really betting hard on, oh, that everything's going to turn around for us. Once people see their tax bill and getting their tax breaks, then that's going to save us. And guess what? Year it is May, people know what they're getting in terms of their refunds. And they're not feeling the love here. They're not feeling like this is going great for them whatsoever. Yeah, zooming out, it's just a very volatile mix. You've got this AI backlash, both of the ground level in terms of data centers. You've got deep concerns. You've got deep concerns.

about the way they want to replace labor, if this technology is anything like what they say, even if in the long term, the most hopeful, optimistic projections, which I don't believe, but let's give it to them, that over the long term, it's going to cause more job creation

than it is job loss. In the immediate to medium term, like go look at the Industrial Revolution, how long it took for in the developed world, right? In the places that really ended up being beneficiaries of the Industrial Revolution, took over 100 years for all of that to ripple through the economy. It's not like you just flip a switch. It's going to be extremely disruptive and extremely painful. If anything approaching

what they promise comes true. And if it if it doesn't come true, then you've got the biggest bubble probably in human history that's been inflated here. I mean, the amount of money that's being spent on these data centers is utterly, utterly insane. So you've got that. You have in addition to the labor displacement. Obviously, that is going to lead to a further spiraling of vast inequality, again, of the worst that we've probably ever seen in human history. You have an extraordinarily volatile political climate and an empire here that is coming unglued. And part of why it's coming unglued at this point is because of this disastrous war that the population did not want, does not want that has now been decisively lost from a strategic perspective and is imposing

massive daily costs on the American people. I mean, it's it's a pressure cooker, Emily. That's the only way you could put it. It is an absolute pressure cooker. And obviously we talk to Professor Pape every week here because we found his insights on the escalation trap very valuable. He's also writing a book on the likelihood of political violence. And we need to have a conversation with him about that as well because he's deeply concerned about the confluence of some of these events and the way that they contribute to a rising trend of political violence. I think I mentioned this last week, but my final thought here is Rod Gerrera has been, he's an Orthodox Christian conservative, has been working on a book about Weimar America, sort of drawing out parallels between

Weimar Germany and what we're seeing in America right now, just any like cultural indicators looking at some of that and economic indicators and looking at that stuff. And he finished a couple of weeks ago and said in his newsletter on Substack, basically that he believes the one thing that would really be the tipping point from America, as we know it today, to something much, much darker, including more political violence, would be an economic crisis. And, Chris, I feel like people sense that. I don't think it's, you have to write a manuscript on this. And I'm not saying, of course, you're not making the cliched apples to apples parallel

between War Marmar Germany itself and what came after in America and what might come after. But obviously, when you have economies, as you just laid out, with this level of instability and precarity, you could go to some dark places really, really, really quickly. Experience Harry Stiles live in London, England at Wembley Stadium. This is Harry Stiles. IR Radio wants to send you an mate across the pond with flights from Virgin Atlantic, Hotel from TripCentral.ca, tickets, and $1,000 cash. Here we go, that!

Download the free IHeart Radio app. Listen to IHeart New Music for 10 minutes. Enter to win. Every day is another chance to see Harry Styles. Very excited to see you with the show. Kiss all the time, disco occasionally, available now. Do you remember when Diana Ross double-tap Little Kim's boobs at the VMAs? Or when Kanye said that George Bush didn't like black people.

I know what you're thinking. What the hell does George Bush got to do? a little Kim. Well, you can find out on the Look Back at it podcast. I'm Sam Jay. And I'm Alex English. Each episode, we pick it here, unpack what went down, and try to make sense of how we survived it. Including a recent episode with Mark Lamont Hill waxing all about crack in the 80s. To be clear, 84's big to me, not just because of crack. I'm down to talk about crack on day, but yeah, yeah, literally. But just so y'all know. I mean, at this point, Mark, this is the second episode where we've discussed crack. So I'm starting to see that there's a through line. We also have AIDS.

on the table right now. Thank you for finishing that sentence. I don't think there's a more important year for black people. Really? Yeah. For me, it's one of the most important years for black people in American history. Listen to look back at it on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. My mother-in-law spent years sabotaging our relationship until karma made her pay for it.

Wait a minute, Dakota. How bad did it get? Well, it got bad enough that her son-in-law had to eventually. arrest her himself. She moved in for two weeks, lasted for five. She left nail clippings in the bathtub, candy stuck to the furniture, and then she pressed her ear against the bedroom door

and burst in screaming. She did not burst in while they were. She did. They kicked her out and paid for her hotel, and they thought, it's finally over. Days later, she called her son-in-law at work, claiming that his partner had been in some kind of freak accident

and had been rushed to the hospital in an ambulance. He called every hospital in the city, and his partner was making coffee the entire time. She faked a medical emergency, just to test whether or not he loved her son? Yeah. And she sat in the hospital parking lot, waiting for him to see if he would show up.

When that didn't work, she walked into the son-in-lost police station and filed a kidnapping report against him. She filed a kidnapping report against him in his own police station. Spoilers, karma's going to show up in the best way possible. So if you want to hear how this story ends, search OK Storytime on the IHeart Radio app,

Apple Podcast, or wherever you're listening to podcasts. So as you guys likely know, there was a ballot referendum here in Virginia to where voters went to the polls and voted on whether or not they wanted the maps here to be redrawn. This was a response to Trump's push to do these mid-decade redistricting so that Republicans could gain partisan advantage. You had Texas really kicked this off. They redrew their map. Their map has basically been validated at this point. You've had other Republican states that have followed suit. You also just had the Supreme Court striking out aspects of the Voting Rights Act that are going to enable southern states in particular to eliminate those majority black districts and wipe out many of the Democrats that represent the deep south. So that's the landscape and the context in which Virginia voters go to the polls and they say, yes, we are going to, two can play this game. we are going to also redraw our maps so that Virginia would become, I think it was 11 to 1,

where you'd likely have one Republican representative and 11 Democratic representatives. So this was working its way through the court system. And you just had the Virginia Supreme Court, again, after all these millions of people voted and said, yes, we want to do this. The Virginia Supreme Court come in and say, no, we believe that this ballot referendum violated some procedures that were required in the original of a constitutional amendment that required this whole process. There's a reason why Virginia's had to go to the ballot versus in other states where the legislature could just go in and redraw the maps. There was a procedure laid down in Virginia based on a constitutional amendment.

And the Supreme Court here said that you violated the process, not to get too much in the weeds here, but basically the deal was you had to have voted on this before the next election starts. And they're saying that since early voting has started, that you were too late, that you couldn't do this, that this wasn't proper. So obviously, Emily, Democrats are furious, absolutely furious and really quite beside themselves because they're looking around the country at all these other states that are redrawing their maps to gain a partisan advantage for Republicans. California has been able to do a version of this, although actually not the most backs was version. they may still go back to the drawing board, make it even more maximums. But California has been able to, it appears like redraw their maps. But when Virginia Democrats come and say, okay, we're going to do this too, then the court step in.

Oh, no, no, no, no, you can't. You can't. And again, coming right on the heels of this Voting Rights Act decision as well, I think it was particularly enraging. So the question now is whether Democrats are going to just accept this and say, all right, well, I guess the Republicans get to redraw their maps, but we don't. or if they're going to try to take some more extreme measures. And the New York Times has a report that indicates there is some brainstorming about what could be done here.

The headline, and this is significant reporting, this is the headline from the New York Times, the private call reveals Democrats, desperation over tossing of map. And so what they are considering is a couple-step process where effectively they would lower the retirement age for Supreme Court justices, I think down to the mid-50s, that would kick the entire seven justice court out, like everybody would be tossed out because they're all older than that. And then you would put in justices that you believe will be supportive of your view of the world. And then they would go back in with a case challenging the original Constitution amendment that required this whole process to.

begin with so that then the legislature, which is dominated by Democrats at this point, could just redraw the masks without having to go to the voters. So that is what they're contemplating. Obviously, this would be, especially for Democrats, a relatively radical move to change the retirement age and toss out all of Supreme Court justices so that you could put your people on the bench. But they point to something very similar that just happened in Utah where their Supreme Court also tossed down a pro-Republican gerrymandering in that state, and they decided to move forward with packing the court in Utah so that they could get ultimately what they want.

And there were some other examples of Republican states in the past who have done similar things. So these are the lines, Emily, that Democrats are thinking along. I'm curious for your thoughts. The Indiana results last week are really relevant here because what happened in that case is Republican voters. I mean, some people were very irked by the fact that you had around $10 million.

I've seen $8 million estimate, $12 million estimate, come into these state races in Indiana from national MAGA groups and try to oust as many people as possible who wouldn't go along with the Trump redistricting plan. And Indiana voters, Republican voters, look around and they say, we don't want to unilaterally disarm now that this has become like an arms race

to see who can out gerrymandered the other side, which is exactly what Democrats in Virginia are saying now too, which is don't just, what did you say at the beginning of this show, lay in a chalk outline, laying in the chalk outline of yourself. Yeah, laying the chalk outline of yourself. Don't do that. And it's, the pressure cooker is getting to a wild point. I don't know that anybody, I mean, you could have seen this coming as soon as Texas and California happened, but I don't know if anybody was like fully prepared for what it was going to look like. Like, what is the joke? Did you think it, what did you think gerrymandering was, just vibes, essays? No.

It's this. It's this. And Indiana Republicans said, listen, it's not that, you know, we're, we need you to, like, bow to Donald Trump, but we're pissed because we know what's going to happen in other states now that Democrats have said, we're going for it too. Obviously, gerrymandering goes back many, many years, and, you know, there are them states that have been gerrymandered. Republicans states have been gerrymandered. This current wave obviously really started with Texas. And so as soon as Gavin Newsom, took that bait, it was spreading nationwide. And Indian and Republican said, well, you know, you can't just say in principle, we're not doing this anymore because the principal has already been tossed out the window. You have to live in the here and now. And Crystal, it's interesting because that sounds like it's exactly how Virginia Democrats are reacting to. And you said you didn't want to get too much in the weeds. But I am curious.

I've heard some analyses that say Virginia Democrats were like maybe probably should have been prepared for this potential outcome. And I have no idea whether or not that's true, but that it was rushed and sloppy. Is there anything to that? Is that part of this? I, to be honest with you, I mean, obviously they should have foreseen it since this did happen. There, it was very, the attitude was very dismissive towards the idea that the Supreme Court would overturn this. And, you know, it was a four three decision. It was closely decided. Obviously, the three dissenting justices felt very strongly in the opposite direction, but there was a sense of we've got to go for this. This is what the base wants. And but I think it also, there was a bit of a half measure here because you didn't

deal with the partisan makeup of the court before you went in and tried to redraw the maps. So in that sense, I think you could say perhaps there was a lack of planning. And look, I find it really outrageous, quite frankly, that we had tens of millions of dollars spent on this thing and everybody going out, going to the polls, millions of people voting. And then after the fact, after everybody's voted, and by the way, after the court sees what the results of that vote are, that they come in, well, no, you're not allowed to do that. And that is the sort of thing that will absolutely enrage and radicalize people. And I feel that. I mean, it is, it is outrageous. You have all these other states, just thinking of a, from a fairness perspective.

all these other states, Texas can just go in and rewrite their maps. No problem. You've got Florida just came and they're going to rewrite their maps. But Virginia, and no input from the voters, but Virginia, you actually get input from voters in a pretty large turnout election for like this weird special election. And that gets thrown out as unacceptable. You could see how that is extremely, extremely frustrating for people. Let me put C5 up on the screen.

There was a sense when the Virginia maps passed. in this brief moment of time when the Virginia maps had passed, and you had not yet had the Supreme Court decision on the Voting Rights Act, where people are feeling like, okay, Democrats, they may not come out on top in the redistricting battles, but they're going to maybe at least be able to get it to a draw. You can see in this map that that is just nowhere near the case at this point. All of the red states in red here are ones where Republicans are going to be able to add

one to, you know, to like three or four seats to their, you know, based on their gerrymanders. Virginia's in yellow because it's been tossed down. So obviously no seats are going to change there outside of being able to win some seats, which I think is possible just with the maps as they exist. California and one seat in Utah are the only places where Democrats have made up ground. And I'm not sure if that Utah one is going to hold because of the court packing that they're engaged in there. I'm not sure what the timeline is in terms of whether they'll be able to reverse that map that was drawn there. But in any case, you know, Republicans now are just romping in the mid-discreet decade redistricting wars.

It's not even close. And so, you know, when you look at Donald Trump extremely unpopular, Republicans in every single special election, taking on water, losing seats that you never thought that they would lose. and then you see the way that these rules are being changed in a mostly one-sided direction to block the will of the people. Yeah, I think it's a very radicalizing thing. And we can put Hassan's tweet up here. He's sort of channeling that energy, quoting JFK, I think, in a way that maybe, especially because of who Hassan is, this is, C2 guys, was perhaps intentionally provocative,

especially because he didn't put the quote in quotes. So people who don't know any history. thought maybe he said this himself. Anyway, Hassan says the Virginia Supreme Court denied the results of the redistricting referendum. Scotus gutted the Voting Rights Act and Tennessee carved up the last M district districting black voter power in the state. Those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable, which again is a

JFK quote. And as an analysis of where we are of reality, I don't think you can deny that. And Emily, again, I think we already see the stirrings of that. I think when you see Luigi Mangione being treated like a hero, or at least a lot of very normal people going, well, I don't like it, but I kind of get it. When you see the level of fury and the backlash against Trump with very little outlet to be able to have the will of the people actually expressed,

yeah, you're going to have people begin to do crazy things because they don't have a peaceful means to be able to change reality in their supposedly democratic country. Yeah, I mean, it's a totally anodyne, accurate, eloquent quote, actually. So it's perfectly applicable in the situation. It's probably, you're probably right, coming from Hassan and the capitalist blood and the streets. Quote, in the past, people like connect the dots and like, oh, this guy is, he must be calling for violent revolution, which is obviously not all this happening in that case whatsoever.

And, Crystal, it's the disconnect between, I think this is real. One of the things that you referenced how Professor Robert Pape, who we've had on many times to talk about Iran, One of the points he made was in the daily last week, right? He had that interview in the daily about his work. He's currently working on a book. He's been researching for a long time. What he describes as, quote, populist violence, and we could get into that as a descriptor. But basically, he's saying that you have a situation right now where people feel like they are, the political class is not listening to them.

And if you look at polling over time, people do feel like they lack agency. they feel more powerless in the political process. And that is really dangerous because if you have an unpopular war, waged by a president who said he was elected not to get into, quote, new wars, put all of his hawkishness on Iran aside, that's what a lot of average normal Americans heard. When he said he didn't want to start new wars, that he wouldn't start new wars.

War is very unpopular. That is unlike George W. Bush, campaigning cynically, shamefully on not nation-building and then going to nation-build, because obviously 9-11 happened between point A and point B in that situation, which changed public support for the war, at least at first. So you have that happening. And people, from the right, I would just say, think about what you felt like when President

Biden's immigration policy was out of step with where public opinion was. Those things do matter. We don't have direct election for a reason. I think it's for a good reason. I believe in the Republican system. We don't have rule by referendum for a reason. And you and I could debate how that's gone in California. But the point is, yes, it's true that you have the cooling saucer of the Senate

and you have the lowercase our Republican process playing out in the United States, but you have wild mismatches. I mean, we're not just talking about one tough decision that the president is making. We're talking about wild mismatches across the board between what people say they want and what's actually happening not only in Washington, but now in their state houses. too, which is a really, really bad sign, especially because of the proximity. So there's some of this debate been playing out on CNN.

Kind of a fun exchange here between Scott Jennings and a Democratic strategist. Let's go ahead and take a list of the C4. Let's listen to a little of this. The political map, like, y'all are cheating. Okay, just accept it. I was a cheating. Let me just finish. You're cheating because you politically are not favorable right now.

And so this is the only way you would actually win the house is by drawing map. Partisan redistricting is a fact of life. And now... This isn't partisan. On the campaign... What is it? It sure it is. On the campaign...

You literally are taking Memphis, which is a city with black voters, and you split it in three, stretching 3,000 miles. Who's the current Democrat congressman? Is it a black congressman? Just because black people are allowed to like people that don't look like them? Exactly. And that is the point I wanted you to make. Because just because you're not going to have a black congressman, why is it that a Republican

can't do just as well representing black voters is a doubt? Democrat. Why does your race determine your politics? It doesn't. It doesn't. It doesn't. No, just be, you're making my point actually. The assumption is black people, no, no, no, the assumption is black people will only elect black people. No, black people are smart enough to elect. No, let me finish. Black people, let me finish. Black people will elect people who will actually represent them, who have their best interest in heart. And what Republicans have done in Tennessee is dismantled the power for black people to have their voice. They did the same thing in Texas because they said they thought Latinos were going to swing for Republicans. There are black people that are represented. I'm black

and I got a Republican president right now. Black people don't elect black people based on race. They elect people that are aligned with their moral, their beliefs and justice. And just took that away from them in Tennessee and in other states. I just disagree that the only person, the only kind of a politician who can elect black people in Congress must be a Democrat. This is just an artificial for the Democratic Party. That's not what I'm saying. Black voters are still fully franchised and go vote for who are they want. That's not what I'm saying. So they're talking there, Emily, about Steve Cohen, who is the white representative for a majority black district in Tennessee. That map has already been redrawn going through the legislature in Tennessee over, you know, much

protesting. And so actually, Ryan, I didn't realize this. Ryan has told the story in the show before that Steve Cohen actually tried to join the Congressional Black Caucus because he's like, yeah, I'm not black, but my constituents are. And isn't that what this should be about, which I'm with him on. I agree with him. They should have led him in the Congressional Black Caucus. But in any case, I thought that was pretty funny for Scott Jennings to be taking that side. And in my opinion, it did prove the point of the Democratic strategist there of like, no, this is not about just like electing black people. This is about black people having a voice to vote who they want to vote for. And they do not want to vote for your Republican friends.

Well, this is where Republicans can get. I mean, I've seen some speculation about dummymandering happening, and I don't think that's entirely out of the question. Republicans are now really, really excited that their chances to hold on to the House have just gotten stronger. And I mean, I don't know. I went and looked at the generic congressional vote on RCP. So the RCP average where it was in 2018 versus where it is now.

Dems have, it's at plus 5.6. right now, it was at plus 5.8 for Democrats at the same point in the 2018 cycle. So it's very, very close to where it was then. And as we've been talking about, we're sort of at the tip of the iceberg in terms of what we're going to see with price increases in all likelihood between now and November. So they can do this all they want. I actually don't know that it's always going to be splendid for them, that it's going to salvage.

I certainly don't think it's going to salvage the House of Representatives. They may stanch some of the bleeding. They may be able to prevent a total. blue tsunami, like what happened in 2018 and thrust Nancy Pelosi back into the speakership. But I don't know that it's actually going to be like a huge, huge wave. And the Cook political analysis of this is not, doesn't suggest that it's going to be like a big wave for Republicans right now either, Crystal, because they still have to win support from voters.

You still have to get people to vote for you. And when you are even struggling with your own party in higher numbers, voter motivation, excitement for turnout. Someone else made a really good point, too, that this could, I think it was in Playbook this morning, that this could energize black voters in particular if you need in a midterm cycle, low propensity voters, people who might otherwise just not turn out because they're not super excited about candidates, so they have other stuff to do. That's a lot of Trump voters, so you already have that problem.

And then you could potentially be invigorating black voters to, like, get out and actually go vote. going to be a real problem for Republicans in November 2. I don't think any of this has necessarily been a guarantee of a higher success for Republicans, maybe a bit. I mean, maybe a few seats, but nothing that's going to be dramatic. I think overall, based on the landscape now, it's definitely going to help Republicans. I don't think it will save Republicans, but just to give everybody's sense of the magnitude here, and these are all rough estimates based on what we know of what the maps are and where the maps are going, blah, blah, blah. But one analyst I saw projected

that this would mean that Democrats have to win the popular vote by four points, four points, in order to take the majority in the House. And look, in past eras, maybe four points wouldn't be a lot. But now in a time when you have very strong partisan polarization and these things usually hang on a knife's edge, four points is a landslide. You know, Trump obviously won by less than four points. And he certainly considers that to be a landslide in terms of the popular vote. So that is the, level of a tilted playing field that we're talking about. And then you also do think about specific instances like, I think in Mississippi, I think the state population is like, it's like 40% black, something like that. They have one right now majority minority district and very likely that's

going to be race. So then you have 40% of your state that is, and I'm being a little bit brought, because obviously there are black people who vote for Republicans, but it's also pretty over as like 90% vote for Democrats, right? And so that part of the population is just not going to be represented. You know, and this isn't about an identity thing. This is about their political views and having any sort of voice for them in D.C. That's going to be erased. And when we talk about a crisis of democracy, I think that's a problem.

You know, I think this whole thing is a disastrous race to the bottom. Like, it would be great, in my opinion, if we pass national anti-jerrymandering laws. But certainly this outcome that we're having now where the reduction, districting battles are being won so out, you know, so lopsidedly for Republicans is going to create, you know, a significant, significant strain. But, you know, I think, I think you're right. I think Democrats probably still favor to win the House. You know, when I look at the, the odds, the Polymarka and the Cal Sheet and whatever, they're still very much favored to win the house. But when you have this tilted of a system, it does make it very difficult. And, you know,

it's another, it's another blow to the idea that we have even a representative. democracy. Well, some good news for Democrats. The 2018 popular vote margin in the House was 7%. 7.1%. And again, I think the conditions are only going to get more favorable for Democrats down the line. So it's as possible they still get a decent-sized blue wave. I actually think the Senate is very, very much in play. I'm sure you do too, Grissel, but Nebraska, Maine. Can't gerrymander states. No, given the rural power in the Senate, there's already a Republican advantage. there, but yeah. Well, but Democrats in like rural states have fielded much better candidates this time around, which is very interesting, like really learning from the mistakes I would argue of 2018. You have

a Platner instead of a Gideon-type candidate in Maine. You have Dan Osborne in Nebraska. Sure, Brown, I think is very, very competitive in Ohio. I think Texas is probably out of the question, but North Carolina looking really good for Democrats. And that's the ballgame right there. And Peltola in Alaska, too. So he's a very good candidate there. And the polling has her up as well. So, yeah, I think that's very possible. So we will see how that all goes.

Another podcast from some SNL late-night comedy guy, not quite. Unhumor me with Robert Smygel and friends. Me and hilarious guests from Bob Odenkirk to David Letterman help make you funnier. This week, my guest, SNL's Mikey Day and headwriter, Streeter Seidel, help an a cappella band with their between songs banter. Where does your group perform? We do some retirement homes. Those people are starving for banter.

Listen to humor me with Robert Smigel and Friends on the I-Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. On the Look Back at it podcast. In 1979, that was a big moment for me. 84 is big to me. I'm Sam J. And I'm Alex English. Each episode, we pick a year, unpack what went down, and try to make sense of how we survived it. With our friends, fellow comedians, and favorite authors.

Like Mark Lamont Hill on the 80s. Before it was a wild year. It was a wild year. I don't think there's a more important year for black people. Listen to look back at it on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Hey, what's good, y'all? You're listening to Learn the Hard Way with your favorite therapist and host, Kear Games. This space is about black men's experiences, having honest conversations that it's really not safe to have anywhere,

but you're having them with a licensed professional who knows what he's doing. How many men carry a suit or armor. It signals to the world that you're not to be played with. And just because you have the capability that does not mean that you need to. Listen and learn the hard way on the IHard radio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you get your podcast. This is an IHart podcast. Guaranteed human.