Pod Save America - 2020: Beto O’Rourke on Biden, Iran and the puppy primary

Episode Date: June 21, 2019

Tommy talks to Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke about why he thinks he can win, what President O’Rourke would do on day one, recent comments by Joe Biden, lots and lots of policy and why his dog Artemis should be leading the pack.

Welcome to Pod Save America. This is Tommy Vitor. Thanks for tuning in to another one of our Pod Save America candidate series. Today's guest is Congressman Beto O'Rourke of Texas. He is running for president. He came to visit us here in Los Angeles and we talked about a whole bunch of stuff. I asked him about some of Vice President Biden's recent comments that were a touch controversial. We'll leave it there. We talked about his immigration plan. His plan to expand voting access.

Why he changed his mind on the Bernie Sanders Medicare for All bill. We talked through a whole bunch of foreign policy. We talked about Iran. We talked about funding for Latin America and what he'd do about Venezuela. We also talked about some random stuff. We talked about people getting radicalized online and what he'd do about Venezuela. We also talked about some, you know, random stuff. We talked about people getting radicalized online and what we can do about it. And he gave his pitch for why Artemis

should be the next first dog. So thank you for tuning in. It was great to have Congressman O'Rourke in studio. As always, I'm going to take a moment to plug Pod Save the World. If you are not subscribed, I need you to hit pause. Subscribe to Pod Save the World, then restart the show because we're doing good stuff. Okay. Here's Congressman Beto O'Rourke.

My guest today is from the great state of Texas, Congressman Beto O'Rourke, running for president. It's great to have you in the Crooked Media HQ. Thank you for doing this. Good to be at the world headquarters. Thanks for having me. First question. I'm going to dive into it here. So there are 23 Democrats running for president.

It is this big, diverse, impressive field of people. I think we all have a good handle on the challenges we face. We all want to beat Trump. People are struggling to figure out with all these great candidates who can win and who will be the best president. So can you make your pitch for why you're the one who can be Trump and why you would be the best person to serve in the job if elected? Yeah. So you mentioned this historic set of challenges, climate, health care, an economy that is not working for far too many people. And you mentioned Trump as well.

This country already very polarized. He is dividing further every day. This democracy already badly broken. He's undermining at every turn. So in other words, we've really got our work cut out for us. And it's important that we beat Trump. It's really important that we meet these challenges that we face, which in almost every instance preceded Trump, but were just made much worse by him. So in order to do this, I think we've got to bring something different to the campaign and something different

to the country. If we're divided, we've got to find a way to bring people in. If this democracy doesn't work, we've got to find a way to fix it. Everything that I'm about, everything that I've ever been a part of, has been bringing people in and making democracy work for everyone. So small, but I hope telling example, on city council for six years, every single week I held a town hall meeting. And it's important for me to listen to my constituents on proposals for economic development or how to make sure that we balance the budget, which we did every one of those six years, even to listen to those whom I could not help. Your neighbor's dog

was barking too loud last night, but you were going to make sure that you let me know about it. That direct accountability, fundamental to a successful democracy, made me such a better representative and also ensured that when we had to take on the tough fights, an example in 2009, extending healthcare benefits to the same-sex partners of city employees, despite the blowback and the recall elections. I had a grounding in working with my constituents, regardless of the differences between us. Taking that same approach to a campaign against an incumbent and against the odds for Congress in 2012, and winning by going door to door, bringing in new voters who

had not participated maybe ever, giving them a reason to register, or folks who dropped out for the last 15 or 20 years, including their voices and their concerns in our campaign. We won that race and used that same level of accountability to deliver on expanding veterans' health care, for example, or protecting public lands, all of which happened while I was in the minority. So finding Republicans and Democrats alike with whom I could work, getting that signed into law by Barack Obama, getting that signed into law by the one person with whom I agree on almost nothing, Donald J. Trump, but proving that we will work with anyone, anytime, anywhere to advance this country's agenda.

And then lastly, Texas. So here's a state that had ranked 50th in voter turnout, not by accident, 100% on purpose, by design, drawn that way through racial gerrymandering to diminish the power of your vote or your voice, depending on the color of your skin. We went to every single one of the 254 counties of Texas without a single dime from a single political action committee, showed up with the courage of our convictions, a bold progressive agenda, but also showed up to listen and to learn and to include people and their stories in the campaign that we were running. And at the end of the day, though, we did not defeat Ted Cruz. We won more votes than any Democrat has ever won in the history of the state. We won independence for the first time in decades

and brought along nearly half a million Republicans who voted for Greg Abbott, very conservative Tea Party Republican, for governor and voted for me on the same ballot, not despite but because of the progressive campaign that we ran in what is thought to be one of the reddest states in the country. And we transformed our democracy no longer 50th in voter turnout. Those 38 electoral college votes now unlocked forever changing the political landscape in America. And that movement led by young people who turned out 500% greater than the last midterm election in early voting. So in other words, if you do not count anybody out or down, if you don't take anyone for granted, if you include everyone in a bold, progressive agenda, you can lead a grassroots

movement. That's what it's going to take to defeat Donald Trump. That's what it's going to take to meet the greatest challenges we've ever faced in our administration. So congratulations, you did it. That's speech one, you're elected president. You're sitting in the Oval Office. What you choose to do first matters a lot, right? Because you can burn political capital, administrations get overtaken by events, like whatever. So you can hammer out executive orders all you want, but that first legislative priority really matters. What would President O'Rourke put to Congress first? If I think about

the single greatest threat that we face, it's the fact that this climate is changing. And that's produced not as an act of God, not from Mother Nature, but from you and from me and from people in this country and around the world through our emissions, our excesses, and in our inaction in the face of the facts and the science. And the fires that we've seen here in California preceded by historic droughts in this state, the floods in Houston, Texas, the floods we're seeing on both sides of Iowa, along the Missouri, along the Mississippi. These disasters that are consuming the lives of our fellow Americans, our property and entire communities in some cases,

that will pale in comparison to the hell that awaits our kids unless we take action now. And so responding in the boldest, the most confident, the most courageous way, distinguishing ourselves by the way that we meet the most confident, the most courageous way, distinguishing ourselves by the way that we meet the greatest challenge. We have to lead on that because the clock is ticking and the scientists tell us that there are roughly 10 years left to us to free ourselves from a dependence on fossil fuel, to make sure that every single one of us is doing our part, that we're fortifying those communities, very often lower income and

communities of color that are on the front lines of climate change and pollution, to make sure that we not only survive this, but we lead the world in making sure that we overcome this challenge. So there are a host of threats and challenges that we face. That is the single greatest. I think it's important that we begin by bringing this entire country together around the solutions to it. Yeah. And it's worth noting, folks, one more detail. It's one of the major policy platforms on your website, so they can check that out. I don't want to dwell on Trump today, but just one question. I mean, Vice President Biden basically argues that Trump is an aberration and that Republicans will come to their senses once Trump is gone. Do you agree? And do you believe that cordial relations between Vice President

Biden and segregationist senators is a good example of civility in politics? Look, the Republican Party of today, at least those Republican members of Congress, at least those Republican members of Congress, is complicit in what this president is doing, absolutely tearing apart this country and tearing down our democracy. If you had any doubt about the president's efforts to collude with Russia, then those were completely dispelled. And it became crystal clear to you when he admitted to George Stephanopoulos that he would take the help of a foreign power to defeat his opponent in November of 2020. And where was the outrage from the Republican Party? I mean, if you had any doubt that he sought to obstruct justice into the investigation of what happened to our democracy in 2016, then, you know, his firing of James Comey or his tweeting to his attorney general to stop the

investigation or his calling of Vladimir Putin after the Mueller report is released and describes that as a hoax, giving the guy a green light to invade this democracy again, or Bob Mueller's crystal clear public statement that when the subject of an investigation lies to investigators or seeks to obstruct that investigation, he strikes at the very heart of our government of, for, and by people. Where is the Republican Party on this? And who cares about our prospects in the next election, about polling numbers? This is the very future and fate of this country and our democracy. This is something where countries should absolutely Trump party or any other consideration really

for that matter. So deeply disappointed in that party and still hold out some hope, although I'm not counting on it, that folks are going to come to their senses. Those in these positions of public trust who future generations are going to be looking back to, they've got to do the right thing and the windows closing on the ability to do that. Yeah. The Biden comments about segregation of senators, do you think that's a good example of civility? No. The fact that this country is so riven by partisanship being diminished every day by a president who will stop at nothing to secure ever more greater powers for himself might distract us from the fact that for African-Americans in this country, from the inception of this country, this country has not worked for them and in fact has been actively keeping them down by law and out of greatness and economic success.

So one of the most obvious examples that people point to is the fact that we lock up almost two and a half million of our fellow Americans. Many there for nonviolent drug crimes, disproportionately comprised of people of color. But it's not just that. It's the economy where there's 10 times the wealth in white America than black America. Healthcare outcomes where you have a maternal mortality crisis in this country that is three times as deadly for women of color. Education in a kindergarten classroom, a four or five-year-old child is five times as likely to be disciplined or suspended or expelled if she is a child of color. So for the vice president to somehow say that what we're seeing in this country today is a function of partisanship or a lack of bipartisanship completely ignores

the legacy of slavery and the active suppression of African Americans and communities of color right now. So we've got to be focused on the future. And again, it means bringing people in, especially those who've been locked out and estranged from having any ability to participate in the success of this country. That's what I want to do as president. You proposed a major plan to make it easier to vote and to restore people's faith in government. I was interested, I was hoping you could walk us through the plan briefly and talk about why you made that a priority. Yeah. So you asked about, you know about the first policy priority, and I talked about climate for reasons that I hope are obvious to all of us,

maybe not to the president and much of the Republican Party today. But how are you going to do that? There's been scientific consensus on climate for decades. There's been political consensus, actually, for 30 years on this. Why have we not been able to act? It's because our institutions of power, Congress as the most telling example, have been captured and corrupted by special interests. Corporations, especially after 2010's Supreme Court decision on Citizens United, that they are equated to people and money is speech, and they can spend

unlimited amounts to not just affect, but I would argue purchase the outcomes of elections and legislation. Meanwhile, you have people locked out of their democracy. I mentioned the racist gerrymandering in Texas, but Stacey Abrams would be governor right now of Georgia, but for the fact the secretary of state could successfully and legally purge hundreds of thousands of voters from the rolls in that state, could serve as the referee in the competition where he was a competitor, and crown himself victor at the end of it. So how do we meet this challenge? We free ourselves from the influence of corporate interests and special interests by removing political action committees from federal elections.

We make sure that we restore faith in our elections by having paper ballots or paper receipts for every ballot cast. We audit those elections that take place. ensure that we have the resources to stop future foreign interference and guarantee that there are consequences in this country and outside of this country for those who have welcomed or participated in undermining the world's greatest democracy. And then we bring people in. We call for 55 million more Americans to be registered over the next four years through automatic and same-day voter registration, ensuring those who've been criminally justice-involved are not denied their rights to vote once they've paid their debt to society. And then we make sure that barriers in place, like those voter roll purges or voter ID

laws that we have in Texas, are removed through a new Voting Rights Act, and then ensure greater access to the ballot box through a national election day holiday to make sure that make it easier for people to cast their vote and ensure that their voice is heard in our democracy. We do all that and so many more things become possible. That's what's different going forward. That's again what we bring to this historically in the way that I've run and served and at the heart of what I propose to do as president for this country. Bring everybody in, remove the barriers, and ensure that people, not PACs or corporations, are calling the shots. One piece of the plan that I found particularly interesting was the proposed 12-year term limits for Congress and 18-year term limits for the Supreme Court.

So the argument against term limits is that lifetime appointments somehow make judges immune to politics. I roll my eyes at that. And that congressional term limits push people out right when they become experts. You served in the House. Why do you think some of those bozos need to retire earlier than they would otherwise want to? Look, I'll make the best case for term limits. Amy and I decided when we first ran for Congress in 2012 that I would serve no more than four terms, eight years. And the logic was, you know, the president of the United States can't serve more than eight years. The mayor of El Paso can't serve more than eight

years. What's special about a member of Congress? And then Amy's additional push on this is, I don't want you to turn out to be trying to say something polite. I don't want you to be a jerk at the end of this. I don't want you to think that you're more important than anyone else. I see what happens to people who hold on to power too long. So after three terms, six years, chose not to run again. That seat is now held by Veronica Escobar. She became the first woman to ever represent the 16th congressional district in Texas in the history of the district and the first Latino woman, in addition to Sylvia Garcia, to represent a congressional district in the state of Texas, a state that's more than 40 percent Mexican-American. district in the state of Texas, a state that's more than 40% Mexican American. So by getting out of the way, you demonstrate a faith in the people that you represent. You say, look,

out of more than 700,000 people in this district, certainly there's someone who will do just as good, if not a better job than I've been able to do. And we're going to add something to that institution of power that reflects the diversity and the genius of this country. Folks who in some ways have been locked out through the perpetual reelection of members of Congress. And listen, to be intellectually honest, I get the other side of this argument that you lose some of that institutional knowledge. You may empower lobbyists or some people say staff or federal employees. I'm not so concerned. And they seem pretty empowered. Yeah. Those are people that I so often relied on to be smarter and do a better job. But I think

this is about a faith in our democracy and a faith in people and that not any one of us is, you know, inherently any better than anyone else. And that if you don't refresh and recharge these institutions, they're not going to reflect the true genius of this country, and you're not going to meet these challenges with the urgency that they demand. Yeah. I mean, it would be nice if some of the U.S. Senate had used the internet before. From El Paso, you put out a major immigration proposal that includes protecting DACA recipients and their families from deportation, as well as temporary protected status recipients, ending immigration detention for everyone except, I think, violent criminals, better resourcing and speeding up the asylum process. And I've heard you talk about potentially tearing down some parts of the border wall.

Clearly, immigration is going to be a central part of Trump's campaign. He's going to lie. He's going to scare people. He's going to say there's a caravan on every corner. But do you worry that what you've put forward could be credibly described as opening the border or could be described as creating more of an incentive for people to come to the U.S. at a time when the system is taxed? Next. This is another reason to run. This is another way in which we can distinguish ourselves in an extraordinary field of candidates. The president has trained our focus on the U.S.-Mexico border in an attempt to try to scare us about Mexicans whom he described as rapists and criminals, about caravans that are coming to get us, about asylum seekers. He's described them as an infestation. He's described them as animals. I think it's only when you use language like that that you get kids in cages, that you are able to deport their moms back to the countries from which they fled, that you end up separating families and creating this kind of cruelty

that seems so un-American and yet is happening in this country right now. And I'll tell you, having lived there, raising our three kids there, I think I'm able to tell a really powerful and I hope compelling story about immigration being such a positive for this country. Not only the right thing to do, not just morally just, but in our own self-interest economically or from the perspective of safety and security. El Paso, Texas is one of the safest cities in the U.S. today, and it's because we are a city of immigrants and asylum seekers and refugees from the world over who are called to us and are making us better by their very presence. And then I'll say this. As a Democrat, I've been really frustrated by our party's response to this issue for my

entire life. I've seen us be so apologetic and defensive and really kind of half-hearted and making these bargains that never work out. I'm going to get really tough on immigrants. We're going to deport a bunch of people, break up families. We'll vote for walls and fences, though we know they've caused thousands of deaths of people who are trying to join their families or work jobs in this country that no one born in this country would take. But I'm going to do all this so that I can get to a place that will allow me, having shown how tough I was, to do the right thing. We're changing that. This is different. We're going to say doing the right thing makes us safer and more secure, adds to

our economy, makes the average American's life far better by ensuring that the 9 million green card holders in this country can become U.S. citizens as quickly as possible. Waive their fees, make sure that we send them pre-filled application forms with the data that they sent us when they first applied for legal permanent residency. For the more than 1 million Dreamers, make them U.S. citizens. Never again allow them to live in any fear of deportation to a country whose language they don't speak, where they no longer have family, where if against those long odds they're successful, they're going to be successful for that place, not here, not your community, not our country. They're going to be successful for that place, not here, not your community, not our country. And then the millions who are here doing the most backbreaking, the shittiest jobs that we have available in America, that no one born in America is willing to do, allow them to register and get right with our government, contribute even more to our country's success, and ensure that we're living up to the promise of this country that defined itself not by race, not by common genealogy, but by the fact that we are all created

equal. And that's the source of our strength. It's the foundation of our success. And we turn our back on that to our peril. So this is ambitious. It is bold. It is confident. It's in the best traditions of the United States of America. And I know that we can bring not just Democrats into this. We can bring independents and Republicans, folks who understand from their communities that this is the right thing to do. I left out a big piece of your plan, which is investing five billion dollars, mostly through NGOs, I believe, in Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, to improve the quality of life for people living in those countries so they don't want to leave. And

you've also talked about, I think, creating regional partnerships to get other countries in the region to bring money and provide political support. And I mean, I personally think this is the key to any long-term immigration proposal. If you're a kid, or if you're a parent and your kid is being forced to join a gang or could get killed, like nothing's going to convince you to stick around. Right. But I've also worked on the NSC and I know how hard it is to convince Americans that it's in their interest to support sending dollars to other countries unless we're blowing them up. So can you make the pitch? Like how do we convince a skeptical voter that this is a good use of taxpayer dollars? You can just decide where you're going to meet this challenge.

If you wait to meet it at the US-Mexico border and you, for example, believe in a wall, that'll cost you $30 billion. You'll have to take our fellow Americans' ranches and homes and farms and properties in order to build it because it won't be built on the true international boundary, the center line of the Rio Grande River Channel. It'll be built well into the interior of the U.S. You can even look at our current costs to accept these asylum seekers if we were to follow our laws. Incredibly expensive to do that. Or for a fraction of the cost, you could invest in reducing violence in Guatemala, in El Salvador, in Honduras, so that no family ever has to make that god-awful decision to send their child on that 2,000-mile trek. And when we empathize and we just put ourselves in the shoes of somebody who would have to make that decision, we realize no parent would ever do that for kicks or to take somebody's job or benefits or to take advantage of another country. You would put your child on that perilous journey if that were the only thing you could do to save her life.

That's exactly what people are doing now. So what if we can help them to protect their families and their kids in those countries? And as you mentioned, work with nongovernmental organizations, work with communities at neighborhood level policing, and then understand some of our culpability in the problem. We are the largest market for illegal drugs on the planet. We're 4% of the population. We consume 25% of the illegal drugs. That demand and our way of responding to that with the militarization of this drug war in Central America has helped to hollow out some of those civil institutions compounded by decades of intervention in Central America in their civil wars and civic life and eroding institutions for democracy. We also have some responsibility to do this as well. to do this as well. But again, if I were just to make the most basic self-interest argument,

it is far cheaper to meet this problem at its source than to meet it at the U.S.-Mexico border. And then the larger challenge I think that we have to address is the need to elevate the Western Hemisphere as a priority in foreign policy. It always is, you know, forgotten if it was ever remembered at all. And these are the people that we're literally connected to by land, by language, by culture, and increasingly by family. And it should not have come as a surprise to us that tens of thousands of kids showed up on our front door, but it was because we were so preoccupied on places half a world away, wars that we've been fighting now for 18 years and counting. So a great opportunity for our administration to elevate the Western Hemisphere, address these problems at their source. Agreed. So a quick healthcare question. So during the

Senate campaign, you talked about your support for Bernie Sanders' Medicare for All bill that would have essentially eliminated the private insurance market. You now say that's not the fastest way to get to universal care. When did you change your mind on that bill and why? Yeah. So two extraordinary women with whom I had the chance to work as a member of Congress introduced a proposal called Medicare for America, Jan Schakowsky of Illinois and Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut. And essentially, this plan says that if you are uninsured today in America, you can enroll in Medicare. It also importantly says that if you're insufficiently insured, so you have insurance, but really, it's a name only. You can't afford the copay on the medication. You can't afford the rising

premium costs. You can't bridge that deductible before you. You can choose to enroll in Medicare. But if you are somebody who has employer-sponsored insurance and you like it because it works for you and your family, if you're a member of a union that negotiated for a healthcare plan, perhaps in lieu of wage increases or other benefits, and you like that plan because it works for you and it works for your family, you're able to keep it. I think that gets us to the goal of guaranteed, high-quality, universal care as quickly and as surely as possible.

It incorporates the interests of everyone who's concerned about the affordability of prescription medication, the ability for women to make their own decisions about their own body and have access to the healthcare that makes that possible, ensuring that our county jails are no longer the largest providers of mental healthcare services. And it allows people who have insurance that they like right now to be able to keep it going forward. forward. Quick question about sort of your time growing up as a kid. You were kind of messing around on early internet message boards and these like pseudo hacker communities. You were in a punk band. I can imagine a 2019 version of Beto O'Rourke that is in these same communities and gets pulled into 4chan or force fed some like alt-right bullshit by the YouTube algorithm. And your life goes in a really different direction, you know.

And I know you have three kids. Do you worry about how many young people are finding friendship and community in some of these dark corners of the Internet? And do you think the government has a role in preventing radicalization? The answer to your question is yes. I want to just clarify that nothing about punk rock will lead you down that road. No, but I get your point. So I'll go back to where you started. I get your point. So, so I'll go back to where you started. Um, so in, in the 1980s, um, awkward,

um, kid who had a hard time socializing, um, found friendship online. Well, the version of online at the time, which was dialing into somebody's computer on a 300 baud modem. Um, so your mom picks up the phone and you yell at her and you're like, I'm online. Or your dad gets the phone bill. Oh, man. What are you doing? I got hammered for our AOL bill. Yes. I was with you. I weighed the same as I do now and I was much shorter and I was a lot of time in my room. Yeah.

But here's the positive side of that. I found this extraordinary community of people who also in some ways were misfits in their hometown or their school or in their lives, but who came together online or that version of online. And man, that was just a really powerful experience and really in some ways kept me going in the right direction. So I don't want to discount the value and the positive power of online communities. But I'll acknowledge your point that there's a really dark side, as there is in every aspect of life, right? There's a dark side to that as well. in hatred and violence and incitement based on race or religion or the differences that should not matter. It helps to explain some of the rise in public hatred that we see right now,

you know, right outside the United States Capitol, I think very recently, Charlottesville, Virginia, just a couple of years ago, and a president who then says that Klansmen and Nazis and white supremacists are very fine people. He's in part responding to a base that has been nurtured in these online communities, unfettered and undisturbed, especially by the platforms that enable this. And so I think expecting far more out of Facebook and Twitter and other digital platforms where people congregate to combat this kind of hatred and also to acknowledge that really young people are on there and are receiving an education in intolerance that's

going to manifest itself in violence. You've seen a rise in hate crimes every single one of the last three years in this country. And much of that is Donald Trump, but a lot of it is what is allowed to grow and exist unchallenged and unchecked. So I do see a role for government to help regulate that. I do see greater responsibility through enforcement of these social media platforms to make sure that we're protecting people and that everyone is able to thrive in this country without fear of our differences. turn to a couple of foreign policy questions. So there's been a lot of loose talk about Iran lately, whether to go to war with them. You're seeing New York Times columnists, senators, members of the administration. If Iran did sabotage the two commercial vessels in the Gulf of Oman with these limpet mines, and they continue to enrich uranium above the level set by the JCPOA, what do you think the Trump administration should do about it to stop them? America should find a way to work in concert with other countries, primarily our

allies, but countries who may have a shared interest in stability in the region to ensure that peacefully, without invading Iran, without firing a shot, we're able to resolve what would otherwise be an intractable problem. In part, because we know that the cost and consequence of invasion and military action will be measured in lives lost or fellow Americans who will be sacrificed, lives taken in the name of this country, and an understanding that rarely has military intervention produced the results that we're looking for. The CIA-led coup in Iran in 1953, the democratically elected Mossadegh, in part produced the revolution that we saw in 1979 and the impasse that we face today in 2019. We were talking about Central America earlier the next year in 1954.

Again, CIA-led coup in Guatemala, deposing Jacob Arbenz Guzman, leading to instability that has persisted to this very day. President Trump has made it very hard for us, though, to do this and to do it the right way, not just through the saber-r saber rattling and the threatening of war, but by exiting the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, which is one of the greatest foreign policy feats of the United States in the modern era, certainly of the UN Security Council, Germany and Iran, all to the table and be able to stop them from pursuing nuclear weapons and begin the process of addressing other tough challenges that Iran poses, the funding of terrorism in the Middle East, their development of ballistic missiles, their support of the Houthis in Yemen and the instability in that civil war that we see in that region. I felt like that was a great start towards addressing those other

issues. Now we have no one with whom to meet at the table. Iran's not going to trust us again. Europeans don't know how to handle a country that breaks its word and its commitments. And that has made us less, not more secure, less, not more safe, and has really made war a more likely outcome and option as we are seeing play out right now. So, yes, let's hold Iran accountable. Let's do this through partners and allies and friends. We're much more likely to be successful and achieve our aims. Sticking with the region, you've talked about Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu. You mentioned you, I think the quote was he openly sided with racists. If he follows through on his campaign pledge to annex the West Bank, do you think we should

cut assistance to Israel? And, you know, given some of the racist things he's done and said, do you think he's committed to a peace agreement? It is in our national security interests. It is in the interests of the people of Israel and the Palestinian Authority for there to be a two-state solution. Annexing the West Bank would spike any opportunity to achieve that, which would promote greater instability and violence in the region. It would make Israel less safe, make it less likely that you would ever achieve full human rights and dignity for the Palestinians. So it's got to be our priority, and it would be my goal as president, to make sure that we achieve a two-state solution, to provide encouragement, to facilitate where we can, to do so with the humility of understanding that we cannot impose this solution.

and his threat to annex the West Bank, his warning that Arabs are coming to the polls in a previous election, his siding with openly racist parties. In the Palestinian Authority, with Abbas, you don't have a full partner for peace either. You don't have somebody who can quell the incitement or control the violence or who can demonstrate a willingness to make the necessary concessions to get to that desired goal. make the necessary concessions to get to that desired goal. So I say this knowing that it's going to be extraordinarily difficult given the two leaders that we have in the region, but also making that commitment. And I would be hesitant to describe a punishment or negotiate in public with the prime minister right now, only to say that this will be the priority of the United States and that we will work, even if it is Prime Minister

Netanyahu in our administration, we will work with anyone to make sure that we secure peace and a two-state solution. There was a pretty depressing coda to the arab spring protests in egypt this week when muhammad morsi who was egypt's first democratically elected president died in prison of what appears to be neglect um but at the same time we're seeing these mass protest movements in algeria sudan hong kong it does feel like there's sort of an Arab Spring 2.0 going on, or maybe it never ended. What did you take away from watching that first round of protest movements that started in 2001? And how do you think the U.S. should respond to or support efforts to beat back authoritarianism? Yeah, it's such a good question. And it's obviously a tough one for us to answer and has been for decades. We mentioned Guatemala in 1954, Iran in 1953. today and compromising our values for democracy and independence and freedom in order to achieve those short-term security gains. And here we are faced with that again, only in this case,

it doesn't seem like there's a struggle on the part of the administration. They've openly sided with dictators and autocrats. Prince Mohammed bin Salman in Saudi Arabia was able to kill an American journalist or journalist based in America, Khashoggi, with absolute impunity. With President Trump, maybe this kind of stuff was said behind doors in the past, openly saying, yeah, but this guy buys billions of dollars in weapons systems from United States defense contractors. So I'm willing to turn a blind eye to that. And the fact that he's bombing Yemen into the last century and precipitating the greatest humanitarian crisis, perhaps, that we've seen since World War II,

and that we are effectively a co-combatant. It is Duterte in the Philippines. It's al-Sisi in Egypt, where Morsi just died in court. It's Erdogan in Turkey. And then to our allies, into the great democracies, we turn the back or give the middle finger. That is going to make us, and already is making us, demonstrably less safe. If we're going to be able to end these wars that we're in, if we're going to be able to confront climate change, if we're going to be able to stop nuclear proliferation, we're going to need partners and allies. And if we're going to be able to confront climate change, if we're going to be able to stop nuclear proliferation, we're going to need partners and allies.

And if we're going to answer the big open question that the world has right now, is the future authoritarian or is the future democratic? We're going to have to lead by example around the world and then here at home. Again, why democracy is central to this campaign and to the administration that I hope to lead. So as tough as it is in the short term, I think it's important that America side with democracy. In Egypt, it seems as though we were willing to forsake somebody democratically elected, politically, and maybe diplomatically inconvenient, in favor of somebody who has been incredibly brutal in his repression and has effectively closed down even the nominal democracy that existed before him. That can't be who we are

and who we support and what we do going forward. And in my administration, we will absolutely change course in favor of democracy. Yeah, I mean, you talked about the Western Hemisphere as often forgotten. I mean, the one place in the Western Hemisphere that hasn't been forgotten by this administration has been Venezuela. And, you know, they've done this ham-handed sort of cool light regime change effort where they were supporting, you know, legitimate, brave opposition leaders like Juan Guaido, Leopoldo Lopez and their efforts to take power. But, you know, meanwhile, we have, I think, 4 million refugees have already flown out of Venezuela. So, I mean, I'm curious what you make of the administration's efforts to deal with Venezuela diplomatically and how

you might approach that. Yeah. You know, I'm concerned in much the same way about the administration's threat to invade or bomb Iran. It's threat to bomb North Korea. It's threat to invade Venezuela, threat that this president made. And perhaps unwittingly diminishing Guaido's stature, you the, you know, the resistance to Maduro and the ability to stabilize a country that is absolutely out of control. Once the richest country in Latin America, people are starving. They're going out, going without medications. I think Colombia alone has absorbed 1.5 million refugees. This is one of the greatest, if not the greatest, humanitarian disasters in the Western hemisphere. So enough of the saber rattling. Focus on resolving the humanitarian urgency that we have in people dying or potentially dying.

people dying or potentially dying. And then work collaboratively with the other stakeholders in the region, with Colombia, with Mexico, with our partners in Latin America to provide stability, a transition of power, and then a democratically elected government. Two final, much less serious or important questions. First, do you think that the way the DNC is structured and handled the debates has made sense or worked? Is this a good way to run a railroad? I don't know that it makes sense. I don't know. You've got this really good problem where you have 23 or 24 people, all of whom bring extraordinary expertise and biography and skills to this campaign and to what they want to provide for this country as president. And that's a great sign for our party. I think it's a great sign for

this country and our democracy. How do you facilitate the conversation necessary for people to make an informed decision when it comes time to caucus or to vote in the primary. So, for example, this 10 and 10 over two nights in Florida, maybe that was the best way to do it. The threshold of, I don't know what it was, 65,000 unique donations and a certain polling level, maybe that's the right way to do it. So I'm participating, obviously, in these debates. I'm looking forward to it.

But I'm also really focused on meeting people where they are through town halls that we've been holding all over the country, going to big blue communities, going to rural red communities, just listening and making sure that I have a chance to introduce myself and then take the questions from the people whom I want to serve and learn from them in the process. So I, you know, loathe to second guess, you know, how I would do this differently. I just think you want to make sure that every one of these candidates has a chance to make their case, to answer questions. And then we make the best, most informed decision for defeating Donald Trump and then bringing this country together around the greatest challenges we've ever faced. Last question. As you know, because you gave Leo a treat coming in, we're a very pro-dog podcast. So Elizabeth Warren's golden retriever, Bailey, has been getting a lot of press, has a big social media presence, and is reportedly a very good boy. Can you make the case for why Artemis should be chasing tennis balls on the South Lawn and State? Oh, so Artemis is amazing. She, Amy and I were just talking about this the other day.

She took our kids on a backpacking trip with her two brothers and their kids and took Artemis. on a backpacking trip with her two brothers and their kids and took Artemis. And she said, no matter, you know, how far the leader on the trail was from the last person on the trail, Artemis is going back and forth the entire way to make sure that everyone's okay, constantly checking on them. So she's incredibly loyal and faithful and is there to protect the family and the extended family. So I don't know those characteristics. She's incredibly loving and cute. Great dog to run with. She was maligned as a turtle eater. You know, that was my bad. I'll tell you the circumstantial evidence was pretty clear that, you know, she had taken the turtle food out of the turtle container into the backyard and eaten it. There was like turtle food wrapper everywhere.

The turtle was missing. I thought, you know, she ate the turtle food. Why not just eat the turtle as well? The turtle later showed up. I think she picked up the turtle in perhaps an attempt to eat it. I believe the turtle bit her. Oh. This is conjecture. And then Artemis dropped the turtle and the turtle went into a closet where it hid for three days

until we found it. Update on this, Molly, our 10-year-old who volunteers at an animal rescue, just adopted two more box turtles that were found and rescued and treated and cared for. So Gus has two more friends in the turtle enclosure. So we're adding to the, you know, the household zoo that Molly's running right now. That's a happy ending. It's a, you know, you're like a pizza away from Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Thank you for doing this. Congressman Beto O'Rourke, great to see you. Best of luck out there. Grateful. Thank you.