No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen - NJ Governor on his viral response to anti-vaxxers

Episode Date: September 19, 2021

A small group of centrist Democrats nearly sinks one of the most popular provisions of the Build Back Better plan. Brian interviews the governor of New Jersey, Phil Murphy, who’s up for re-election this year, about his approach to COVID and what NJ is doing on voting rights in the face of so many attacks on those rights across the country. And FOX LA host Elex Michaelson joins to debrief on the California recall and what it means for Trumpism moving forward.Donate to the "Don't Be A Mitch" fund: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/dontbeamitchShop merch: https://briantylercohen.com/shopYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/briantylercohenTwitter: https://twitter.com/briantylercohenFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/briantylercohenInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/briantylercohenPatreon: https://www.patreon.com/briantylercohenNewsletter: https://www.briantylercohen.com/sign-upWritten by Brian Tyler CohenProduced by Sam GraberRecorded in Los Angeles, CASee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Today we're going to talk about a small group of centrist Democrats who nearly sank one of the most popular provisions of the Bill Back Better Plan. I interviewed the governor of New Jersey, Phil Murphy, who's up for re-election this year about his approach to COVID and what New Jersey is doing on voting rights in the face of so many attacks on those rights across the country. And Fox L.A. host Alex Michelson joins the debrief on the California recall and what it means for Trumpism moving forward. I'm Brian Tyler Cohen, and you're listening to No Lie.

A little bit of a different focus. today, I want to talk about three House Democrats on the Energy and Commerce Committee who voted against a plan lowering prescription drug prices, which is a major element of the Democrats' buildback better plan. Now, the provision would allow the U.S. government to negotiate prescription drug prices through Medicare and would tie prices for prescription drugs to the prices paid in other countries, which is a welcome change considering Americans subsidized these companies with unimaginably excessive profits that no one else in the world is subjected to, that we're stuck paying these prices is bad enough on its own.

that we still have Democrats entrenching this system is just unacceptable in this party in the year 2021. And this should go without saying, but the proposal is fiercely opposed by the pharmaceutical industry. Obviously, allowing the government to negotiate lower drug prices on behalf of 350 million people, as opposed to each American being individually responsible for paying those prices, would result in a major hit to profits for the pharmaceutical industry. It's forecast to cut the prices of prescription drugs by half. So, yeah, on one hand, big farm, would make less money. On the other hand, Americans would be able to afford drugs and not have to choose between bankrupting themselves and their families and their own survival. So yeah,

you know, some really valid pros and cons on both sides. Now, those three Democrats are Scott Peters in California, Kathleen Rice in New York, and Kurt Schrader in Oregon, and they joined every Republican on the committee in voting against a proposal, which resulted in a 29-29 tie, and that blocked it from advancing out of the committee. But even though this proposal was blocked from advancing out of the Energy and Commerce Committee, an identical proposal was actually picked up by the Ways and Means Committee, where it did pass. So it's by no means dead, but the issue here remains the fact that there are Democrats who oppose it. And because we have a margin of, what, four votes in the House, even though this proposal did advance, those Democrats who voted against it still have the

ability to sink it in the final bill. And just to highlight the absurdity of this move, like first, so that we're clear, these people are from relatively safe districts. Kathleen Rice from New York's fourth congressional district won her election 56 to 43 over a Republican. Scott Peters in California's 52nd won re-election 61 to 38. And Kurt Schrader from Oregon's 5th won 52 to 45. We're not talking about deep red country. We're, we're hardly even talking about toss-up districts. And yet they're positioning themselves to unilaterally sink this insanely popular provision. Which brings me to the second point, allowing the government to negotiate lower drug prices is one of, if not the most popular provisions there is. Seriously, 88% of Americans support allowing the government to

negotiate with drug companies to get a lower price of prescription drugs. 88%. What other issue polls at almost 9 and 10 Americans supporting something? And there's actually polling on this issue from each of their districts. In Rice's district, 90% support it. In Schrader's district, 91% and Peters district 90%. So not only does this not make sense from a policy perspective, it makes even less sense from a political perspective. So look, at the end of the day, what's separates the Democratic Party from the Republican Party, I think, is that our party isn't built around any one person. And so if they're going to try and unilaterally block the entire agenda from passing, which so that we're clear will hurt every Democrat in every district up and down

the ballot, then someone should absolutely primary these people. Again, we're not talking about the back country of West Virginia. These are Democratic lawmakers in blue seats who are hurting the entire party. And we've replaced a number of lawmakers who are more interested in serving corporate interest over their own constituents before, and so I can promise you there will be an appetite to do it again. And just a side note on this. You know, the, the goal here isn't to do that thing that all the media does and desperately search for something to shit on the Democrats for just to prove to everyone that I'm capable of it, because the fact is that we're looking at a few Democrats in the House out of 220 who are blocking this. Ninety-eight percent of the Democratic

Party is on board with this. Republicans are literally 100 percent opposed. So trust me when I say that this is not my version of both sides of the same. They're not. My issue here is with these moderates who are more concerned with performative centristism than the bigger picture. I've said this a thousand times. We are in this rare, extraordinary period where Democrats control every branch of government. Even more rare if the Senate doesn't pass voting rights legislation because chances are decent that will lose the House for a decade, if not. So to squander that opportunity so that, what, you can prove just how independent you are that you can sink an entire party's agenda, or just as bad that you can deliver for pharmaceutical companies that funded your

re-election, a re-election that will inherently be way less likely because now you've just shown Americans that when you are given power, you wasted it? This isn't only self-serving, it's self-sabotaging. And beyond that, there's this myth that centrists are the responsible figures here, that the centrists are here to save us from the extremes in both parties. And yet, no one's acknowledging that the extreme on the left thinks that everyone should have health care and that the government should negotiate lower drug prices, while the extreme on the right doesn't think that elections should be certified if Democrats win them.

If you have one party that represents the views of 90% of Americans and the other party that represents the views of 10% of Americans, then a centrist, by definition, is still woefully out of touch by the vast majority of Americans. Honestly, you want to win elections in close districts? You want to know the secret? Stand for something. Help people.

Do the literal opposite of coutowing to pharmaceutical companies. Katie Porter represents a district that for my entire life has been read, but she specifically doesn't take corporate pack money and specifically does fight for regular Americans. And now she ranks number five in fundraising in the House. She won her last election with almost 54% in a district that was reliably read. When these centrists have trouble getting reelected, it's not because they didn't hedge enough,

it's not because they didn't listen to corporate lobbyists enough. It's not because they didn't block enough progressive legislation. It is expressly because they did. When you have people who are frauds who don't stand for anything who are looking out for their own re-election campaigns who are willing to sink a popular agenda for themselves, then the voters recognize that. So at the end of the day, we're lucky that this provision still passed out of one committee.

But this should be a warning to those centrists who are coddling corporate interests that your votes are on record and that people are paying attention. So don't be that person, because it's not going to save your job. It'll only ensure that you lose it. next step is my interview with the governor of new jersey phil murphy today we have the governor of the state that i grew up in the great state of new jersey phil murphy thanks for coming on good to be with you brad thanks for having me of course so new jersey was hit first by coronavirus but there's something that i'm not sure a lot of people know and that's that on the day that your

state had its first case can you speak on what you personally were dealing with it feels like five lifetimes ago. Yeah, I found out by complete happenstance in February of 2020 that I had a tumor on one of my kidneys, it turned out to be malignant. I had surgery scheduled for March 4th, which I might add was successful. And as I sit here, I just had another six-month checkup and so far so good. But it was pretty scary. And I come out of the operating room, go to the recovery room, go back to my hospital room, pick up my phone. The first text I read is for my chief of staff saying, we've had our first COVID positive case in New Jersey. So it was, you know, I had a multi-week plan to slowly get back on the saddle and that got thrown out pretty quickly. So

the rest is history, as they say. I'm glad to hear that you're doing well now. Do you think that that experience gave you a little more appreciation of what New Jersey and we're dealing with in terms of confronting a deadly virus or lives being put at risk? I mean, I think any time you hear you've got a malignant tumor, it's a, you know, it's a moment of deep reflection, concern, obviously. But I will tell you now, we're well over 27,000 fatalities from coronavirus since March of 2020. I've spoken to many hundreds of families who have lost a loved one. The loss is overwhelming. So I'm a lucky. I'm a lucky group. I may have had a tumor, but I'm still standing. But these folks have lost a loved one. And that's why at all of our

press conferences, we memorialize a handful of folks who have died to make sure that even though we always say we make decisions based on the data, this can never be just about numbers. We have to remember the lives that were lived and were lost and the families that have left behind. Well, you know, speaking of those press conferences, in August, a video of you responding to anti-vax protesters went viral. These folks back there have lost their mind. You've lost your minds. You are the ultimate knuckleheads. And because of what you are saying and standing for, people are losing their life. People are losing their life.

And you have to know that. Look in the mirror. Look in the mirror. Can you speak on what led to that moment and whether you think that it's a response that more people should take as we remain mired in what's seeming like this endless perpetual cycle? Yeah, as a guy who grew up in Jersey, you'll appreciate I did my full-on jersey. It wasn't pre-planned.

It was spontaneous. In fact, my eyesight is not as good as it used to be. I saw some protests in the back of the crowd as I. I was pulling up and walking to my seat, and I thought they were there for a different reason. And then they started lighting up the speakers, lighting me up. And when I got to the podium, I had my glasses on. They were, you know, my body, my choice. And I said, enough.

This is crazy. They're putting themselves at risk in terms of their own health or even life. They're putting others at risk. They're saying stuff that's not based in fact. They're believing stuff that's completely made up. And it's completely utterly unacceptable. Frankly, I just lost it. Now, should we be doing more of that?

I don't know. But I will say this. The folks who are unvaccinated break into kind of two categories, Brian, for me. One of them is a legitimate group. They don't speak English. They're worried about their immigration status. They think it costs money. They work three jobs, whatever it might be.

For them, we reach out a helping hand. We're knocking on doors in communities up and down the state every day of the week. It's these other knuckleheads that just ruin it for the rest of us. And I think we owe it to ourselves and to everybody's well-being, including theirs, to call them out. Yeah. And what's ironic about that is these are the people screaming most loudly against the pandemic whose actions are prolonging the very thing that they're fighting back against. This is overwhelmingly right now a pandemic of the unvaccinated, which is tragic.

It doesn't have to be that way. Well, you know, with that said, you know, we are at the latter half of 2021. We're still mired in this pandemic, having the same stupid arguments with the same people where somehow the concept of freedom is being equated to taking steps to save lives in the middle of the pandemic. What's your strategy in New Jersey to help put an end to this? And what tools do you still have in your toolkit that you're prepared to deploy? Yeah, I mean, when I hear, it's my body, my choice.

Someone made this analogy. It's not mine, but I think it's an appropriate. at one. Is that what you say about drunk driving? Think about that for a second. If you're, if you're drinking and driving, you're putting your own life at risk, but you're also putting other people's lives at risk. That's what this is. So our biggest tool, Brian, continues to be vaccines. And we're doing, I'm happy to say we're still grinding away. We're averaging nine or 10,000 first shots a day, which is a lot lower than it was. But frankly, it's better than I I would have thought it would be at this point.

We are among the most vaccinated states in America. We are the most vaccinated big state in America. So I'd say the tool number one is vaccines. Tool number two are these things. As much as we're all sick aware of them, we've mandated it at least for the beginning of the school year in all schools. I would just say for anybody who's watching, if you're inside and you're packed in with other people,

closely. I'm not talking about you have a dinner with your wife or girlfriend or your neighbors where you know the vaccine status and you're at a table. But I mean you're in a club or something and you can't know for sure vaccination status. I hate to tell you the smart thing to do would be to put one of these on. A lot less worried about that when you're outside. So people ask me about MetLife and people go out of ball games. I think when you're inside, you should wear the mask. But if you're outside, I think you're largely going to be okay. And then the last thing, Brian, we just keep using the bully pulpit to make sure people know what the facts are. Yeah. To push back on these crazy made up myths just to make sure folks have comfort in knowing

what the actual truth is. And then they make their decisions. And overwhelmingly by the millions New Jerseyans, for all to talk about the knuckleheads, the overwhelming majority have done the right thing here. We just want to make sure they can. continue to. Yeah. Now, do you support the recent vaccine mandate on private companies and hospitals that receive funding for Medicare and Medicaid? I mean, it's similar to the mandate that we have in place. So we call it a mandate, but for, say, educators or state workers, it's get vaccinated or subject yourself to what would potentially be multiple tests, COVID tests a week. That's a model that we're comfortable with. That looks like the same model that President Biden.

is suggesting or putting forward with the private sector. So it's similar to what we're doing. So in that respect, I think it makes sense. And I applaud the president for doing everything he can to get this thing into the ground and behind us as fast as possible. I do think it's a little tricky to implement it. I spoke to a CEO the other day, massive company, but 10,000 locations, some of which have three or four people in them.

Yeah. So there's a hundred person or up rule as part of this. I think how you define that is a little bit of the devils of the details. I think OSHA is going to come out with some specific guidance. So look forward to that. And again, it's broadly, if that's not quite similar to what we're doing in New Jersey. Now your opponent in the upcoming gubernatorial election, Jack Chitterelli, he's come out in favor of exemptions that allow public school students to skip immunizations.

He's claimed that kids aren't vulnerable to COVID. What's your response to these claims in the face of surging numbers of kids who are falling victim to the virus? Yeah, I mean, unfortunately, the facts don't lie. Never mind what we've seen in other states. Last I asked Judy Persson Kelly, our tremendous commissioner of the Department of Health, we had 20-something pediatric cases of COVID in the state, and a bunch of them were the intensive care unit. But thank God, we've not had much loss of life for anybody under the age of 18. but that doesn't mean that they can't get very sick or, God forbid, lose them. So it's just not, again, it's one thing to have a political disagreement,

but I think you've got to be very careful when you're making a statement that is based on a false premise that could get people sick, if not really sick. And immunizations that exist for measles and all the such of things that we've had forever and always, they're there for a reason. And they're scientifically supported. So again, this is my body, my choice stuff. I don't have any, I don't have much time for that, I have to say. So let's switch gears here.

I want to talk about voting rights. While so many other states are busy restricting voter access, can you speak on what New Jersey's done to expand voting rights? Yeah. I mean, we've done a bunch online voter registration. We've allowed folks who are on parole or probation, the right to vote again, which is a big social justice step that we had committed ourselves to. We did vote by mail, I think as well as any American state in last year's election.

The turnout numbers were enormous. But what I'm really excited about Brian this year is for the first time in our state's history, in-person, early voting. So election day is November 2nd, but you can still, by the way, do a mail-in ballot. That's still, if you request one, you can still do that. But you can show up on Saturday, October 23rd for nine straight days, you've got the ability to vote in person, which I think is a home run. It avoids any natural disaster, bad weather. Your train is late on election day, whatever it might be. If you work a couple of different jobs, right, it's going to allow us to do something that folks in other states have had this love called souls to the polls. So worship and then go vote. Again, it encompasses two different

weekends. I think it's a new habit though, right? So we've never done it before. So it's great, but we want to make sure people get that muscle memory and they get used to doing it. Yeah. Part of the reason I think I'm going to vote on that first day, October 23, just to shine a light on the fact that folks can vote as of that day. That's the big step we're taken this year. Well, now, your opponent has a plan to ensure, you know, voting integrity, which, of course, is code for purging the voter rolls and implementing voter ID. So first of all, was there any fraud in 2020 in New Jersey? And what's your message to your opponent as he perpetuates the big lie? Yeah, I mean, he's apparently spoken to stop the steel rally, which,

I mean, you know, it's not just that he spoke to a stop the steel rally. You're there with Confederate flags, white supremacists, the same cocktail that tragically led to the January 6th insurrection, which, by the way, where several people lost their lives, including a New Jersey native member of the Capitol Police. Tell the truth. I mean, the chances of voter fraud, and this is true, uncovering voter fraud, is less than the chances you get hit by lightning. And I don't say that with any sort of amount of humor. We lost a lifeguard a couple of weeks ago in Berkeley Township struck by lightning. It just isn't, it barely exists in terms of voter fraud.

Does that mean there aren't situations that come up that our folks deal with? Yes, but it's a de minimis frequency. It just doesn't happen. Our elections are safe and secure, and we're going to make sure we keep in that way. Now, we just got done with the California recall here in my state. So next up, obviously, is your election in New Jersey. So what do you see as the biggest contrast between you and your opponent? What do you want to let New Jerseyans know is the biggest point of contention between the two of you?

Yeah, I think the California recall, by the way, I just say, Brian, was quite instructive, particularly the margin by which Governor Newsom won, and he deserved. that, by the way. And there are lots of lessons for that. Listen, I think my election is, these words are not on the ballot, but they might as well be. The difference between continuing to move forward or go backward, back to the battle days. We inherited a state that was broken three years and eight months ago, and we've come a long way toward getting it fixed. It's still work in progress. We still have more work to do, which is why, by the way, I'm running for re-election. Our work is not done. But I think you can say it literally is sunrise in New Jersey.

We used to be on all sorts of lists we didn't want to be on. We're now keeping the company that we want to keep. And other words that are not on the ballot that might as well be, per your questions earlier, making decisions based on the facts, the science, the data, or putting your finger in the air and seeing which way the political wind is blowing. We cannot afford an extreme leader in this state. We need responsible, fact-based, prudent leadership in this state. We cannot take extreme leadership, and that is my fear if you were to win this. I want to finish up with this.

Let's do a lightning round real quick. And there are correct answers to all of these questions, all right? Okay. So here we go. Wawa or Sheets? I think Wawa. That's right. But that's a close call.

Taylor ham or pork roll? Taylor roll. Oh, just hedge and bets there. You got to split the baby on that one. That is like a third rail. All right. Does Central Jersey exist? Absolutely.

I live in it. That's the correct answer as well. As I said on Stephen Colbert's show one time, it's kind of a mystical kingdom. Yeah. That's right. Okay. What is the correct time for a diner to close for the night? Oh, I think, I don't know I've got an actual hour, but they should go late. I like them going late because I've been on a lot of them late. The correct answer is no, is there is no time that a diner close. That's where I was headed. I was going to say 24-7. Yeah, there you go. I know a lot of the owners of the families who hold them, and I have too much respect for them. They got to make sure they get a good night's sleep and stuff.

point. Yeah. Okay. So there was a poll done lately that ranked the most hated states. Where did New Jersey come in? I think it was the states that are most envied is what people really were answering. And I think we came in near the top, as I recall. Yeah, I think we came in at the top or the bottom, depending on how you look at. I think that is pure envy by these other states. They can't take the fact that we have the attitude, the backbone, the character, the grit that we have at our state and they're envious. We'll leave it at that. All right.

Well, I do have one more note here before we go and just, as I mentioned, you know, I'm from New Jersey. My whole family still lives there. My mom and dad are both health care workers in the state. And I just wanted to thank you for taking steps as strong as was humanly possible to get things under control there. know, like, for me, it was scary. I remember when there weren't even enough masks for doctors and nurses, you know,

sitting at my desk 3,000 miles away and crying because I was worried for them to go to work. And, you know, I know that there are and were tens of thousands of people just like me. You know, and then I was lucky enough that my parents lived in a state where the leadership wasn't interested in turning their lives into a Fox News talking point about freedom. So, you know, my hope is that you'll continue to do literally whatever you can to protect people and that other governors in states will be able to look more toward people like you and less toward certain others. So anyway, just on a personal level, thank you. That means a lot, Brian. I appreciate those words and God bless your mom and dad and give them a high five for me

and tell them let's try to find each other somewhere out in the campaign trail and give each other a hug out there. We'll do. All right, Governor Murphy, thank you so much for taking the time to join. I appreciate it. Thanks for having me, Brian. You take care. Thanks again to Phil Murphy. Now we've got the host of Fox, L.A., and someone who's been on the front lines of this recall since day one, Alex, Michaelson. Alex, thanks for coming back on. Thank you so much, Brian. Appreciate the invite. Again, you've interviewed every candidate there is. You've hosted a debate. You've covered this to within an inch of its life. So after all was said and done, why did the Democrats run away with this? Well, the most obvious answer is there are just a lot more Democrats and there are in California and there are Republicans.

twice as many Democrats as there are Republicans. So the big question this entire time would be, would the Democrats show up and vote? And in July, the polls indicated that Democrats weren't all that motivated to vote in this race, weren't paying that close of attention to it, didn't care that much, didn't love Governor Newsom that much. And so then what happened?

Well, one, Larry Elder entered the race, who is unabashedly, unapologetically pro-Trump, somebody who was against vaccine mandates and against mask mandates, and then the Delta variant happened. And you saw the real world implications of these vaccine and mask decisions. You saw a state like Texas and Florida, where their outcomes in terms of public health were a lot worse than what we're seeing in California right now. Right now, there are six times as many kids hospitalized due to COVID. In Florida, a state where they're trying to ban kids from wearing masks in schools, then in California, where every kid has to wear a mask in school. And so COVID was on the ballot,

but really, republicanism, Trumpism, Larry Elder on the ballot. And what Governor Newsom was able to do was to make this a choice between him and Larry Elder, instead of making it a choice between is Governor Newsom doing a good job? And when they were able to make it a partisan issue in a state with a giant, giant plus blue 25% margin, they were able to win and win big. No, you did bring up the idea of Trumpism. Is this going to serve as repudiation for Republicans

who do insist on running on a platform of Trumpism? Well, at least in heavily Democratic states, I think it does. Obviously, there are states in Alabama, where, you know, you're running Alabama, Trumpism is a good thing. But in blue states, it's not. I think what's interesting is we should think about some of the states where Republicans have won in blue states in terms of the governor's race. People like Larry Hogan in Maryland or Charlie Baker in Massachusetts.

What are they doing? Well, first off, they're not very supportive of Donald Trump, publicly so. And they're focusing on issues that make sense for their state. If that had happened in this state and there was truly a more independent Republican that was not a fan of Donald Trump that ran, is it possible that they would have gotten more traction? Sure. You know, there's somebody like the former mayor of San Diego, Kevin Faulkner, who a lot of your listeners would agree with on a lot of issues. He's somebody who is pro-choice, who says that climate change is real and took action on it at San Diego mayor, who believes that there should be a pathway to citizenship, speak some. Spanish, grew up speaking Spanish. And so he's the kind of Republican that on paper makes sense,

but he also voted for President Trump and was unwilling to walk away from him in a meaningful way during the campaign. So for a lot of Democrats in a blue state, you know, President Trump is still an animating force. And I think when we've seen these policies, like I talked about, in terms of mask mandates and vaccine mandates, and also what happened in Texas, which you've covered so much in terms of the abortion law, you get a real time alternative of what a Republican governor can look like, a Trumpy Republican governor can look like. And in this deeply blue state, I think overwhelmingly the Democrats got out the vote to say we don't want that. Yeah. I mean, now, California has jungle primaries, obviously, but in most other

states in the country, the fact is that you're not going to get those moderate Republicans out of any primaries. And so really the choice is going to be between, you know, the trumpiest candidate there is because it's the Republican base who votes. And they're really not going to elevate those Charlie Bakers and Larry Hogan's anymore. I mean, this is a dying breed of Republican that we're seeing, you know, even Liz Cheney might not be in Congress any longer after this next midterm cycle. Right. And that's something that they'd worked hard on. Arnold Schwarzenegger was one of the main people behind this idea in California, which is we have top two primaries. which means that everybody's on the same ballot.

There's no Democratic primary, no Republican primary. Everybody's on the same ballot in the top two people advance. That could be two Democrats, two Republicans, a Republican and a Democrat. And so what you sometimes see in these very Republican districts or very Democratic districts is sometimes the top two are, you know, two Democrats or two Republicans. And the idea is in order to attract the moderates on the other side, it's supposed to incentivize moderation and reaching out to other sides, whether that's something other states look to adopt, you know, we'll see.

I mean, for the most part, most parties that are in power do not like to do a lot of things to take away their power, although we've seen around the country some of this redistricting reform that the Democrats have done in the spirit of good governance. And it's something I know you as a principle agree with may end up hurting the party when it comes to actual performance. It's one of those things where it's great if everybody in the country did it at the same time, so everybody's equally affected by it. But when just your side does it because you're trying to do the right thing and the other side

doesn't do it, you're essentially in an unfair fight. Right. And that, of course, is the independent redistricting commissions that are happening in places like California. And so basically you have just the Democrats unilaterally disarming while Republicans are already preparing to legislate Democrats out of government in congressional districts. In red states where they have control of the legislature in a place like California, you know, the Democrats have a super majority in the legislature in both houses. So Republicans essentially have zero say. Now, more broadly speaking about this recall election, would it be

fair to extrapolate this as boating well for Democrats in upcoming elections? Or is the fact that this is California, does that just negate any broader lessons we can take from this election? Well, I mean, look, I think if Democrats could run in states where they had, you know, more than twice as many Democrats than Republicans, they probably would do better. But I think a lesson that the governor, when I talked to him about this and a lesson that President Biden talked about in a press release this week, is they're trying to at least spin the fact that this was a win for vaccine mandates and a win for aggressive COVID measures. And if you look at the exit polls, it showed that the most popular thing that Governor Newsom was doing

is this idea of mask mandates and vaccine mandates. I think overwhelmingly, people that have been vaccinated, which is the majority of the country at this point, are overwhelmingly frustrated with people who have not been vaccinated, holding the country back. And they're frustrated having to wear masks and having to do a lot of these things because there's a certain segment of the population

that just will not do it. And so Governor Newsom, who at the beginning of this recall race, was basically running away from COVID restrictions, trying to make this all about the fact that we were moving on from COVID, but by the end, because the Delta variant went the opposite way, I think learned the lesson and has been saying this over and over again, that this is a win for taking science seriously and not being afraid of these COVID mandates. In fact, it can be a real positive for that. Now, would you say that this damages Trump's stock at all? Again,

that's, you know, notwithstanding the fact that California is obviously a very blue state, but, you know, Larry Elder didn't run on Larry Elder's platform. He ran on Trump's platform. The guy wouldn't even promise to accept the election results, which is textbook verbatim Donald Trump. So do you think that this has any impact on Trump stock? Or, again, is this just moot because California is too blue? Well, I think it's a warning for people in more purple states that there is a danger to some of this Trumpism. in certain areas. And even Larry Elder, I think at this point, is not taking things as far as Donald Trump.

I pressed him on my show, the issue is, which people can download in podcast form or watch on YouTube if they want this week about, you know, he hinted about voter fraud. He had a website set up where people could talk about voter fraud, and he was suggesting that he had all these lawyers ready to go. I said, will you be launching any lawsuits? and he said no. And he said on the election night, you know, let's be gracious in defeat, which are two things that Donald Trump never said. I mean, Larry Elder at least admitted that he lost. Yeah.

And I asked him, you know, if you were running again, I asked him, first off, can somebody who's pro-Trump win in California? He said, that's a good question, but basically suggesting that probably not. And I asked him, if you were to run again next year with the same strategy. strategy and same message. Why is there any reason to believe that the outcome would be any different? And he said, that's a good question. He said, basically, you know, he said he quoted a scene from Star Wars where there were invaders coming and they looked around and said, there's a lot of people coming. There's a lot of people on the other side. And basically that it's really hard to defeat

the Democrats in terms of the numbers. But, you know, I think this, for Governor Newsom at least, probably makes re-election a breeze with the exception of some other figure that we have not thought of yet, like the rock or somebody else coming out of the woodwork to run against him. And, you know, it potentially elevates Gavin Newsom on to the presidential stage as somebody who can say, credibly, I took on Trumpism because that's how they ran this. And I beat it. And maybe I should, should take on Trumpism on the national stage as well. To his credit, too, he did beat it by an even larger margin than the one he won by in 2018. So, you know, again, I don't know if that's more. I mean, it's very close. But the fact is, after everything that happened and all the millions of dollars

have spent and all of the effort and all the talk and the French laundry and all the scandals and everything else, at the end of the day, it's essentially the same election result as two years ago. And so he was able to bring people back from a partisan place. And given all the advantages that Republicans had for a recall, the fact that they couldn't do better on this, next year when they would have fewer advantages and have to go up against him one-on-one, you're not feeling very hopeful right now if you're a member of the Republican Party in California. So with that being said, should California move to change its recall laws? And I know that's not easy to do because it's in the California Constitution, but do you think that we're going to see some type of a change

given that it was so egregiously expensive and had ultimately zero difference between what we saw two years ago? Yeah, I mean, this is one of those things that conceptually, most Democrats probably agree with. The issue is, what about the specifics? So this obviously is a hot topic like today because the recall just happened.

Is this going to be something people are thinking about a few months from now or when they would need to pass this on the ballot next November or even after that? that, I don't know. Voters tend to not like to take power away from themselves. And what the recall is is a way for voters to be empowered. So can there be some reform that makes sense?

Maybe. I know that there are a lot of different people in the California legislatures that are interested in recall reform. I know Governor Newsom is interested in the concept of recall reform. I've talked to him about that. I talked to Gray Davis about that, who was the governor who was recalled back in 2003. He believes there should be recall reform.

Obviously, he knows a lot about the recall system here in California. There's a senator named Josh Newman, who I'm talking to today, a state senator in California, who was recalled himself out of the state Senate and then won re-election for his old seat. He was recalled over trying to get universal health care in California. He's among the people that are trying to reform the recall system. But we'll see, and in terms of the priorities of where the state is, you know, sometimes the priorities change as time moves on.

So now you've been crisscrossing the state. You've been everywhere, again, spoken to every candidate gone nonstop. What are you going to do now that California is no longer the epicenter of U.S. politics here? Well, you know, we still remain really important to the political scene. We've got the vice president of the United States. we've got the Speaker of the House, we've got the House Minority Leader, we've got potentially a senator who knows whether there'll be an opening in the Senate

from California sometime soon. We've got a new senator who's aggressive in getting out there. We've got people like Adam Schiff and Katie Porter and Maxine Waters and Barbara Lee and others who are real big stars in Congress. California is at the center of the political debate, and there are so many big issues going forward to, like homelessness and so many other things that need to be solved. I mean, the governor himself in the next month has to decide about 700 different bills,

whether to sign them or not. So there'll be plenty of activity. And I'm also really looking forward to football season and the Dodgers hopefully going to the World Series. That's what I'm focusing. There it is. All right. Well, for those of you listening to follow along with Alex as he does continue to cover

California politics, you can get him on Twitter and on YouTube, and that's Alex. Elex with an E, and you can also check him out on Fox L.A. Alex, thanks so much for joining. It's always great talking to you. Always great talking with you, Brian. Congrats on the success of the show. Thanks again to Alex. Now, one last thing, I'm selling merch on my website,

and all of the proceeds benefit might don't be a Mitch fund. So if you want some very reasonably priced swag and to help the critically important cause of voter registration, go to Brian Tyler Cohen.com and pick up a shirt or a mask or a bag. Okay, that's it for this episode. Talk to you next week. You've been listening to No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen. Produced by Sam Graber, music by Wellesie,

interviews captured and edited for YouTube and Facebook by Nicholas Nicotera, and recorded in Los Angeles, California. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe on your preferred podcast app. Feel free to leave a five-star rating and a review, and check out Brian Tyler Cohen.com for links to all of my other channels.