Pod Save America - Bernie Sanders on the War in Gaza and Beating Trump

Episode Date: April 5, 2024

Jon and Dan discuss why Donald Trump is suddenly so eager to debate, how the Florida abortion ballot measure could help Democrats’ chances there, and what doomed the No Labels presidential ticket. Then, Senator Bernie Sanders stops by the studio to talk with Jon about his frustrations with President Biden’s Gaza policy, what it will take to fix our broken health care system, and why beating Trump is so critical.PRE-ORDER DEMOCRACY OR ELSE: https://crooked.com/crookedmediareads/   For a closed-captioned version of this episode, click here. For a transcript of this episode, please email [e-mail] and include the name of the podcast.

Welcome to Pod Save America. I'm Jon Favreau. I'm Dan Pfeiffer. On today's show, Senator Bernie Sanders stops by the studio to talk about 2024, the war in Gaza, and more. Nebraska Republicans try to deny Joe Biden the electoral vote that could decide the presidency. Florida's abortion rights measure could make the state more competitive this fall. And No Labels finally throws in the towel on their idiotic quest to spoil the election for Trump. But first, after becoming the first presidential nominee to skip every single primary debate,

Donald Trump is suddenly very eager to debate Joe Biden. Trump pulled a little stunt in Wisconsin this week to make his point. Let's listen. We have an empty podium right here to my right. You know what that is? That's for Joe Biden. I'm trying to get him to debate. I'm calling on Crooked Joe to debate any time, any place. We'll do it any way you want, Joe, so that we can discuss in a friendly manner the real problems of our country,

of which there are many, instead of trying to have corrupt prosecutors fight your battles for you. The old empty podium trick. A classic of the genre. Where was the person in the giant chicken suit? Wait, didn't you wear the chicken suit once for John Kerry? No, I did not wear the chicken suit. I wore a trash bag for Gene Shaheen in the Senate race. But look, that's a story you're going to have to buy Democracy or Else,

How to Save America in 10 Easy Steps to read the entire anecdote. That is a that is a fucking professional organic plug. Cricket.com slash books. All right. Here's the Biden campaign's response. Trump said last fall only people who are losing want debates. At least we agree on something. Biden himself answered a reporter's shouted question about this in March by saying it depends on Trump's behavior.

Unclear whether Trump accusing Biden of ripping lines before the State of the Union counts as bad behavior, but that's what Trump did this morning during an interview with Hugh Hewitt. Let's listen. You know, that that white stuff that they happen to find, which happened to be cocaine in the White House. I don't know. I think I think something's going on there because I watched the State of the Union and he was all jacked up at the beginning. By the end, he was fading fast. There's something going on there.

I want a debate. And I think debates, with him at least, should be drug tested. Mr. President, are you suggesting President Biden's using cocaine? I don't know what he's using, but that was not... Hey, he was higher than a kite.

First of all, you know, if you got a couple extra minutes, go go read the transcript of the Hugh Hewitt interview. It's nuts. It is really just Trump at his finest. It sounds like Trump thinks that Biden's State of the Union was pretty effective. Sounds like he thought he was pretty good, huh? Yeah, they clearly. I think that there is no question that Trump and every Republican elected official, every Republican operative, all the people who work at Fox News and the MAGA media outlets

were just flabbergasted by the Joe Biden they saw because they 100% believe their caricature of Joe Biden as a doddering, senile old man. Yeah, they do. They believe it. And this is actually, I think, one of the biggest shifts in the Republican Party in the Trump era. When we worked in the White House, most of the people in the party, the leadership, the people who ran the campaigns, even the yahoos at Fox News, they knew what was real and what was farce, right? They were in on the joke. It was all a wink and a nod. They knew Obama wasn't a commie or born in Kenya, but they went along with

it because it was good politics and good money for the people who do online fundraising or run these networks. But once Trump took over, believing their own bullshit became the price of admission to the party. They all believe it. It's why they keep losing elections, I think, because they keep running against the Democrat or the Joe Biden that Fox News portrays, not the one that voters see. So I think this is like a real window into how much what they actually think of Joe Biden. And I think it actually becomes an advantage for his campaign because the way they're talking about it is not who he is. And it's not, I think, what the voters will see as the campaign goes on. I, uh, I liked that he was demanding a drug test, uh, when, uh, the last time the two debated, um, he, uh, had COVID, uh, didn't, uh, didn't let anyone know and almost, uh, killed

Joe Biden and other people in the debate room because he had COVID. So that was great. I'm a little torn on this and I'd like your opinion as the host of a prominent media tech podcast. Should it be a bigger deal that one presidential candidate accused the other one of doing cocaine and demanded a drug test before the first debate? Yeah, no, I think that should be big news. I think it should be some news. It should be a story somewhere. I haven't seen it anywhere. This is here. This is it. Crooked exclusive. Put this tweeted out with a siren emoji. So Trump clearly wants these debates. I wouldn't dare to call any of this a strategy, but what do you think he's up to here? I think he definitely wants to portray Biden as someone

who is scared to debate, to drive his narrative that Biden is mentally unfit for the White House. I think, I mean, yeah. And I think he's like raising expectations a little bit here for, of his own performance. I think Trump, I think the expectations could not be lower for Trump's performance. This is what, how he survives every time is that people think he's going to light himself on fire in the middle of it. When he kind of only does that for half the time, like just gets like one pant leg on fire. He usually comes out. I know, but when you're around me, I want to debate this senile old guy who can't even stand and blah, blah, blah. I think what he's doing is he's making the mistake of lowering expectations for Biden

just as he did in the State of the Union. His own expectation setting, I think, does not really matter when people have seen enough Donald Trump to know what they're getting on a debate stage. He's now done six presidential debates in the general election viewed by tens of millions of people. So that part I'm not worried about. I think it's part of the broader problem of you portray Joe Biden one way, and then he shows up a different way. That undermines your overall strategy. There is a way to make a case that Joe Biden is too old to be president. Donald Trump's not the best messenger for that, obviously. Obviously he's basically the same age, but there is a way to do that.

That does not like involve falling down a conspiracy theory rat hole about, you know, Joe Biden being senile and having dementia and Obama pulling the strings or someone else with like that, that part is stupid. And they continue to, they continue to double down on that error. So why do you think Biden and the Biden campaign hasn't yet said, like,

of course, we're going to debate Trump. Of course, we're looking forward to debating Trump. What do you think is going on there? Is it is it is it possible or wise for Biden to avoid these debates? I would love to know what they really think about this, because it's easy for us to sit here and say skipping those debates would be a disaster for Biden because people think he's too old. And, but like, what happens when you get on the stage with an absolute lunatic, right? Like he did four years ago.

He did. Right. And he, he navigated it quite well. Great. It's hard. He won. It's harder when you're the incumbent. I would say incumbent presidents tend to do much worse

in the debates as president than they did as – I was there. I was there in debate prep in that first debate. You were the first – if I remember correctly, you were chiefly responsible for preparing Barack Obama for that first debate, right? It was so bad. It was so bad. Ron Klain of former VP told Barack Obama in the first meeting when we prepped for the debate, incumbent presidents in their first debate always do horribly because they are not used to being,

they're not used to doing politics and being challenged because they've been president for four years. Yeah. And he did. Bush lost that first debate to Kerry. You're right. There's a long history of that. I think there's the ultimate question of, is it in Joe Biden's interest to be on that debate stage? I tend to think yes. But then there's a separate question of, how do you talk about it right now? Because I think you can clearly, there's a world in which you could say, I absolutely want to debate Donald Trump, because I look forward to getting on stage with him, to hearing him try to explain his support for cutting Social Security, to pay for big tax cuts to try to ban abortion nationwide to supporting russia invading recalcitrant nato countries or whatever pick your uh your hits on trump but my guess is he's too cowardly to get on a debate stage with a moderator any moderator other than like sean hendry and tucker carlson right just just say you

want to debate him because you're going to have negotiations over this and let's see if trump walks away from him i don't think you have to i think you can say you want to debate him because you're going to have negotiations over this. And let's see if Trump walks away from him. I don't think you have to. I think you can say you want to debate him now and let this play out over the next several months to see what Trump's actually willing to agree to. I don't think that's that. I don't think you're not locking yourself into a definite debate under all scenarios with any moderator if now you make it clear you want to debate. I think the hesitancy, no one really is paying attention to this. I think we should be clear about that. But you don't want the hesitancy to become a narrative. Yes, we are not real people. We are nerds. But even for the nerds, I think you don't want the hesitancy to be a narrative.

Well, I'm sure the Biden campaign is thinking this too. It's like they're going to wait for their time and place to say they want to debate and they probably don't want to be bullied into this by Trump, which I think there's some wisdom to that. And I'm sure they also don't want to get into a situation where they say, yeah, we're going to debate. And then Trump says, well, why are we waiting to the fall? Why don't we do it right now?

And suddenly he's setting the pace for when they, you know, you don't want to get into all that. So I do agree with you, though, that like at some point you want to, as the campaign heats up, you want to look like you are not afraid of debating him at all. Yeah. Yeah. So Trump just got a big political challenge in his own backyard this week. The Florida Supreme Court handed down two pretty big decisions, one that will cause the state's six week abortion ban to go into effect, bad, and a separate ruling that a constitutional amendment to protect the right to an abortion can appear on the ballot this fall. The Biden campaign responded by calling the decision an opening for the president in Florida,

which they will now be investing in as a, quote, pathway to victory. Florida resident Donald Trump hasn't yet weighed in on the rulings, but said he'll be making a statement on abortion next week. You holding your breath for that Trump statement, the big a statement on abortion next week. You holding your breath for that Trump statement, the big Trump statement on abortion next week? Next week is always one week away if you keep saying next week. I mean, at some point, Trump's going to have to say, if he gets asked this, that he'll either vote yes on the amendment,

which would make abortion legal in Florida, again, and protect abortion in Florida, or he'll vote no, which means he's voting for a six-week ban, and the abortion in Florida, or he'll vote no, which means he's voting for a six-week ban and the same six-week ban that he previously called, quote, a terrible mistake. What do you think? I think that he will probably never really answer that question and will just come out with his 15-week plan and just bullshit his way through it. Because in a normal world with a normal candidate, with a normal press corps,

he would not be allowed to not answer this question. Joe Biden would not be allowed to not answer this question. Every day, Karine Jean-Pierre went to the podium, she'd be asked, she'd be asked, she'd be asked. Every time Joe Biden walked to the helicopters, he'd be asked, he'd be asked, he'd be asked. And the White House would have a meeting. They're like, well, this is what we finally have to say something.

This will not happen with Donald Trump. This never happens with Donald Trump. They call, they say, hey, you got any thoughts on this? And then they get no response. And then we move on to the next crisis du jour, right? It's just, it does not, I think he's just going to bullshit his way through this as long as possible. Yes, at the very end, he is going to have to vote on this. He's clearly voting. He's not voting for a constitutional amendment to protect abortion, but he will just use his position as a 15-week plan or 16-week plan, whatever he comes up with. But that doesn't mean that that's the world we have to live in as Democrats.

We should just assert that he supports a six-week ban in Florida and that he would be supportive of that elsewhere. That's just what we should do. And that is a fair position because he has not opposed it. He is a resident of that state. fair position because he is not, he's not opposed it. He is a resident of that state and we should just assume he is voting against the right to access abortion in that state. And therefore, as you said, voting for a six week ban, that should just be our message, our social. We don't have to wait for him to give us his answer because he's never going to give us an answer and the president never going to force him to do it. Well, uh, yeah, there's, and there's a CNN story

about his sort of decision on abortion. And I guess there's still some question internally about whether he comes out for a 15 or 16 week ban or whether he just says it should be left to the states. I tend to think that they've telegraphed the 15 or 16 week ban too many times now, but who knows? I don't think it matters. He has done it. He has previewed it 15 times. They told the New York Times. They let the New York Times stories sit there for months now. That is his position. And if he wants to come out against that position and oppose it and oppose a national abortion man, that is his right. But ambiguity is not the same. Ambiguity around position he has already previewed that he has and refused to walk away from does not mean he doesn't have it.

We just do not have to play by this set of away from does not mean he doesn't have it. We just do not have to play by this set of old school rules where if he doesn't actually say it and we assert he has it, the Washington Post fact checker is going to just tattoo four Pinocchios on our forehead. I don't give a shit, right? We know what is going to happen if he becomes president of the Republican trifecta. There's going to be a national abortion ban and we should feel we are 100% within our rights morally, factually, politically to just assert that point over and over again. That is his position, right? That is his position. I don't care. I don't want to read another fucking story about the deliberations internally about

what they might say. They've already said it. They've done it, right? It is over. That is what the deal is. Yeah. I'm just saying for voters who are smart, despite what you may think. What I may think? I think they're smart. Don't put words in my mouth. They're going to be more persuaded by hearing Donald Trump say, yes, I'm for a 15-week ban than by Democrats saying, oh, he says he's not for a 15-week ban, but he really is. I don't think we have to say that first part. Yes, it would be better if he said it 100%. I think there is a difference. Yes. I think it'd be 100% better

if he said it, but we don't have to wait for him to actually bring the stone tablets down from Mar-a-Lago to continue to assert that position. I think we can just assert it. And we have plenty, plenty, plenty, plenty of footage of him taking credit for banning abortion and overturning Roe v. Wade and all of that. Oh yeah, he said it a million times. Alright, so now that Florida has banned abortion at least until November, when there's a constitutional amendment, there is now no abortion access in the South.

Because Florida was the state where people were going to get abortions because so many of the other Southern states, all the other Southern states have banned it. And so now, with the six weeks ban, there's going to be no access to abortion in the South. And I wonder what you think about sort of what this does to the movement to protect abortion rights in Florida and whether they can reach the, it's not a 50% threshold for this amendment. It's a 60% threshold. And just so people know, uh, when it passed Ohio, it was 57%. So if this threshold was in Ohio, it would not have passed. So getting 60% in Florida, you know, it should, demographically, it should be easier than Ohio. But I don't know what you think.

is certainly possible, right? It's going to take a lot of work, but you can get there. I mean, Florida got 60% for a $15 minimum wage last year. They got to 60% for restoring the voting rights of people previously convicted of felonies. You can get there, but it's hard. And the demographics are confusing because in some ways you think it would be better, but you also have a large conservative Hispanic population there that may be more conservative on abortion. And so this is, this will be a real test case. Um, cause the other places where we've tested this have been, um, less Latino heavy States like Kansas and Ohio, um, in Michigan. And so it'd be interesting to see what happens here, but it is definitely doable. I think that, that if people should invest in it, cause I think it's a, is obviously a critically important thing

to do, um, for the people of Florida to try to get this done. And I hope money and time and resources will flow into the state to try to pass this because I think it is very passable. So what do you think about the Biden campaign's Florida optimism? Trump won the state by three points in 2020. And there have been two polls in Florida, I believe, in mid-March. And one had Trump up seven and the other had Trump up six. Look, Florida is a hard state. And it's a state that gets harder. Because we talk all the time about how some states like Georgia and Virginia have gotten blue over time because there's been this in-migration of Democrats to live in the cities

and the college towns in those states. Florida is the opposite, right? Florida is one of the few states where the in-migration is helping Republicans, right? You have Republicans moving from New Jersey, New York, other blue states to Florida to live in a red state. And as of November of last year, Florida Republicans had a 600,000 voter registration advantage over Democrats in the state. And so this is a state that is just – it's very challenging. Is there a world in which it can be won? Yes, it can be won, right?

Obama won it twice. But it's hard and it's incredibly expensive, right? Does abortion being on the ballot there help? Absolutely. But I still think it's very challenging. And are we going to be in a world where the Biden campaign is going to have an extra $100 million to spend in Florida? I hope so. And if so, that'd be great to do it. Because even if they run a competitive race there and fall short, that organizing, that messaging will help the next time around. Because if we just cede the state, we're never going to get it back.

But I just want to be realistic with people, and I hate being the Debbie Downer on this one always, is it's just a very, very challenging state for Democrats. North Carolina is way easier than Florida as we look at it right now. And cheaper. And much cheaper. Yeah. Not cheap, but cheaper. Yeah. Right. And the same was true with Georgia in 2020, it turned out. And people were like, what are they doing in Georgia? And then it turned out that they won. So not for nothing, but Democratic leaders in Florida say they're a little nervous about the Biden campaign nationalizing the abortion ballot measure,

apparently because it could turn off winnable Republicans. What's your take on that? You know, I obviously defer to the local leaders on what the best strategy is. I think if every day Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Chuck Schumer, Rachel Maddow, the cast of Pots of America all came down and campaigned for it, that's probably not helpful when you're going to have to obviously win just because we got to cancel that trip. We didn't. Was that on the books? I thought we said never again to Florida. I thought that was a rule. We're going to hear from Floridians right now. No, we'll be back.

Sorry, everyone. We'll be back. We love you all. We'll be back one day, I swear. Yeah, that's probably not helpful. You have to win a bunch of Republicans to do it. But Florida does have a history of having a split vote on these more progressive ballot initiatives. does have a history of having a split vote on these more progressive ballot initiatives. I mean,

minimum wage got almost 61% of the vote in 2020, and Biden only got 47%. So we had a 13-point spread there, right? 13.5 points, I think it was exactly. And so you can see a world where Trump wins by the same margin, or maybe slightly less than he won in 2020, but the abortion ballot initiative succeeds at 60%. That is possible. You don't want to say a vote for this is a vote for Joe Biden. Not that anyone's planning on doing that, but that would be a suboptimal strategy. That's the worst example. Yes. If you want to vote against Trump, vote for this abortion bill. Yeah, that's a bad idea. Also, marijuana legalization is going to be on the ballot. So probably get a little boost for that as well.

All right. Let's talk about another pathway to victory for both campaigns that runs right through the swing state of Nebraska, Dan. So right now, stay with me here. Right now, Nebraska is one of only two states that divides its electoral votes by congressional district. The other one is Maine. And in 2020, Biden won a single critical electoral vote out of the congressional district that includes Omaha, right? It's the biggest city in Nebraska.

Now, because of that, Trump and Nebraska's Republican governor are pushing the state legislature to change the law so that whoever wins Nebraska, which Trump did by quite a bit, gets all of the state's electoral votes. If they succeed, and if the only swing states Biden ends up winning or the blue wall of Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan, that would result in an electoral college tie 269 to 269. And that would throw the election to the House of Representatives where each state delegation gets one vote. And it is all but certain that Republicans will continue to control more state delegations in 2024, even if Democrats take the House. So Democrats in Nebraska say they're confident this won't happen. State Republicans tried to do this in 2016. They couldn't get it done. And the effort just failed in a procedural vote on

Wednesday night by 36 to 8. The legislative session ends in two weeks on April 18th. What do you think, Dan? How are you feeling? Worried but not panicked, I guess, which is my natural state of being. That's your thing. That's my thing. That's my bumper sticker. People in the state seem very confident they can defeat this, right? The only hesitancy I have is Donald Trump really wants this. There is real pressure on the Republicans in the state.

Charlie Kirk, the lunatic. He started it. He started it. And he's holding a rally there. Today, right? As we're recording, he's holding a rally. And you can just, when Donald Trump really, really wants something, Republicans tend to fold. And so maybe this will be the exception. Otherwise, his mob will threaten to hang them. Right. Hang them, primary them, whatever. Whatever works. And this is just so consequential because as we sit here today, Biden's most likely easiest path to 270 is Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, one congressional district in Nebraska, 270 on the dot. That is the easiest path. Cutting that off means Biden now has to win Nevada, Arizona, or Georgia, along with the

three states that made up the blue wall. Each of those are ones that Biden has done less well in in the polling thus far than those three blue wall states and are less traditionally democratic, especially Arizona and Georgia, which are states that Democrats have really only won once in a very long time. And so it just makes it that much harder. You want the easiest path possible. So if you're sitting in the Trump campaign, you really should be pulling every lever you possibly can to get this done. So hopefully everyone stands pat. We get through till April 18th and this doesn't happen, but I'm not done worrying about it yet. this doesn't happen, but I'm not done worrying about it yet. If it does happen, some people have floated that Maine could save the day because Maine's legislature is also in session right now. They're scheduled to go out on April 17th, and Maine has a Democratic trifecta right now.

Trump won the extra electoral vote in Maine in 2016 and 2020 because it's a very rural district. It's the district that Democrat Jared Golden represents. And so some people have floated, well, if Nebraska does this, then the Democrats in Maine can just do the same thing. And then Trump loses an electoral vote and Biden gains one. It feels like that's, from reading all the coverage, less likely to happen even than Nebraska, just because of the way that Maine is set up in the legislature and it gets very complicated. But that Maine is set up in the legislature, and it gets very complicated. But that seems like a tall order. Yeah, it seems that way. I mean, yes, the governor of Maine could call a special legislative session to bring this up. Look, I've tried to learn as much as I possibly can about the rules that

govern the Maine state legislature in the last three hours here, and I wouldn't say I've gotten particularly far, but it seems like there are a lot of ways in which a bill could be blocked. And just in general, Maine has a very bipartisan legislative tradition. So as I understand it from reading people who cover Maine politics, this would be very culturally at odds to jam this thing through. It's just not how Maine Democrats and Maine people in Maine operate. So yes, that option would possibly be on the table, but it's certainly a challenging one, I think. Yeah. All right. So we talked about a lot of things that are keeping us up at night. We can now put one to rest. No labels, no problems, Dan. The Wall Street Journal reports that the group will announce on Monday that they are abandoning

their quest to run a third party bipartisan unity ticket in 2024 because they couldn't find any candidates dumb enough to say yes. They apparently reached out to 30, 30 different candidates, no's all around, but they did raise $70 million in secured ballot access in 19 states. So that's something, I guess. Obviously good news, though it does seem like the real third party threat remains RFK Jr. and to a lesser extent, Jill Stein, maybe Cornel West, but he's not on the ballot anywhere. What do you think, Dan? No labels? Welcome to the resistance? round no labels got paid a lot of money over the last year as they... I knew you were going to say that. I mean, why else do you do this, losing this total disaster of a losing... It's so much money.

It's so much money, people taking cuts of it, people getting consulting fees, all for something that the Constitution says cannot end with you being in the White House, right? So it's just like, it's an absurd grift that threatened democracy. And now let's put it to the side. I think one thing I would like to say about this is I think a lot of credit goes to a wide coalition of groups led by Third Way and MoveOn who raise awareness of the threat. They push back against the arguments no label was making. They helped expose this for what it is, which helped, I think, prevent people like Larry Hogan or Joe Manchin or Chris Christie or these other people to fall for this and get on this ticket.

And this was a group of people that included, this coalition included, obviously, Third Way, which is a moderate group, MoveOn, a historically progressive group of the Democratic Party, people all up and down the ideological spectrum. And so I think that's the party united to stop this and raise awareness about it. And it was successful. I think that's great. But you're right. The real threat here is primarily RFK Jr. and Jill Stein and where they get on the ballot, which we're still waiting to see. But if we can get to just Donald Trump against Joe Biden in these battleground states, we're in great shape. Every additional person makes it a little bit more challenging to win. I did see that Matt Bennett, who's from

Third Way, was saying in one of these pieces that they learned a lot of lessons in defeating the no-labels threat that they are going to bring to bear on RFK Jr. now. So they're going to turn their attention to him. And they're starting to turn the heat up on RFK Jr., which is good. And, you know, they're starting to turn the heat up on RFK Jr., which is good. And I just saw that their RFK Jr.'s campaign sent out a fundraising email that said that the January 6th convicts, who they called activists, have been, quote, stripped of their constitutional liberties. And then the campaign had to walk it back and blamed it on some new marketing staffer. This is actually very, very telling. Welcome to the big leagues. Well, this is very telling because these fundraising appeals are incredibly optimized,

right? They A, B test every iteration, right? And when some message hits, they double, triple down it. Which what that tells you is where RFK Jr. is finding grassroots support, financial grassroots supports, is among people who feel that way about the January 6th rioters. It's not just some marketing consultant who just wrote up their hopes and dreams about what would happen in a post-Trump world to protect these innocent patriots. That's the content that worked with their base. So I think it's very, it's very, very interesting. It's not just a dumb mistake. It's, it's very telling about

the kind of campaign he's running. And look, I know you, you talked to Liz Smith about this, but I think it's in 2016, the Clinton campaign, they didn't really want to give oxygen to Jill Stein and some of these third party candidates because the theory was like, oh, if you, if you talk about them, if you make them known, then more people vote for them. The strategy is completely different this time around. And I think that's smart because you want to sort of expose RFK Jr. for who he is, the lies he's told,

the conspiracies he's spread. I think you want people to have more information about him, not less, especially because of his name, right? And right now, he's just like, oh, a candidate running third party when I don't like both candidates? This is great. And the more information you know about him, I think the less popular he is. So I think it's a really smart strategy that the Democratic Party and allied groups are going all out on this one. Yeah. The 2016 view that talking about Jill Stein would help Jill Stein was a very antiquated view of how information spread in those days and a pretty tragic error in my estimation, right?

You had to publicly make the case that a vote for Jill Stein was a vote for Trump. And it felt like you didn't really have to do that because Hillary was probably going to win. And that's what everyone thought in the polls, but that was a terrible mistake. RFK Jr. is an even, yes, in any scenario, now you need to raise awareness or someone's going to raise awareness for you. But RFK Jr. is a particularly one because the polling shows, as Liz pointed out to me, the more people know, the less well he does. Because he's getting on both sides, right? He has this patina of liberal Democrat because of his name and some of his positions on the environment. And he's sort of really into this like health, climate world and agriculture and all this food stuff. And if you can expose what he really believes on a whole host of things and most importantly what that he can't win and sending your vote to him, Alex Trump, is very valuable.

So, yes, shout from the rooftops. I think it's great the DNC is doing it. It's great. They brought Liz on board to do this and spearhead that effort. And this is like people talk all the time about the Democrats don't learn the lessons. I think that's largely unfair, but this is a case where that lesson has absolutely been learned and is being executed the correct way this time. All right. One quick thing before we go to break a plain old ask. If you like what you hear on this show and other shows on the Crooked Network, we're asking you to consider becoming a member of our Friends of the Pod community. John, can I just do this pitch for you more directly? Yeah, great. I love that.

Okay, let me do this. You know I just read the housekeeping. You read the housekeeping. This is the first you've even heard about this. This Friend of the Pods program, it's great. You really like it. program. It's great. You really like it. No, look, you're being humble about this, but you love it. And Tommy started this company, feel it seemingly a hundred years ago, because you would watch Democrats get their ass kicked in the media space by a huge right-wing propaganda machine for a decade. That right-wing propaganda machine elected Trump, almost reelected him in 2020 and may elect him again in 2024. And you started this company to push back against that, right? That's why we have this podcast, that's why all the content is out

there, that's why this stuff you're doing on social to help inform our listeners, to make them better messengers, to advocate for progressive policies and against MAG Republicans. And so to build that operation, you need resources, you need help. If you support it, a great way to continue to help build that bulwark against apologies, but actual bulwark to build that, uh, defense mechanism against right-wing propaganda is to become a friends of the prod subscriber. And on top of that, you get a bunch of really great additional content, ad free episodes. And if I do say so myself, a pretty awesome podcast about polling. So I was just going to, I'm glad you said it. Cause I was like, Dan, you forgot to toot your own horn.

Look, I'm just here. I just, I've been listening to you do these. You get the polar coaster, the polar. I don't miss a polar coaster episode. They're so good. Yes. Look, I've been listening to you and my fellow co-hosts here do this very humble pitch for this incredibly important program to support your largest effort for weeks, months now.

And it's driving me bananas. And I thought I just had to step in here. I've heard us, have heard us blab on about politics for so long. Hey, offline host, that's not how this works, right? You got to keep saying it over and over again. You got to say it more directly. So I'm here to do that for you. Thank you, Dan. Thank you, Dan. Cricket.com slash friends. Check it out. You get all kinds of good stuff. All right. When we come back, Senator Bernie Sanders. Joining us now, the longest serving independent in Congress

and a longtime friend of the pod, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders. Senator, welcome back to Pod Save America. Great to be here. Let's get right into it. So you and I know how important this election is. You and I are both going to do everything we can to reelect Joe Biden,

even though we don't agree with him on everything, like Gaza, which we can talk about. But not everyone in the coalition that defeated Trump in 2020 feels the same way we do, especially some progressives. defeated Trump in 2020, feels the same way we do, especially some progressives. What do you want to say to them about why it's so important to vote for Joe Biden? Thanks very much for that question. Look, we are living in crazy times, and the challenges that our country and the world face are probably the most dangerous for a very, very long time. This is tough stuff. And I think the first point to be made in answer to your question is people

have got to understand what a horrific danger Donald Trump will be if he is reelected. If you believe that climate change is real and a real threat to the future of this planet and our kids and grandchildren, Donald Trump thinks climate change is a hoax. If you think there's something wrong when three people own more wealth than the bottom half of American society and we have an unprecedented level of income and wealth inequality, Donald Trump very clearly wants to give more tax breaks to billionaires. Donald Trump very clearly wants to give more tax breaks to billionaires. If you think that our health care system today is broken, Donald Trump wants to end the Affordable Care Act and throw millions of people off the health care that they have. If you think that women should have the fundamental right to control their own bodies, something we have taken for granted for decades,

Donald Trump will be supporting a national abortion ban and make it harder for women to get abortions. And by the way, no tiny matter, if you happen to believe in democracy and the right of people to control their own lives, Donald Trump has made it very clear that he will take us to an authoritarian type of society. Those are the guys around the world, strong men around the world who do not believe in democracy are his heroes.

So it is absolutely imperative that we defeat Trump, clearly the most dangerous candidate in maybe American history. All right. Now, do I have disagreements with Biden? Do I have strong disagreements with Biden? The answer is yes, I do. And I'm going to do everything I can to move Biden in a more progressive agenda. But I'm not going to throw the baby out with the bathwater. I'm not going to allow Donald Trump to become elected president. So what do we have to do? We have to go forward in a several-pronged approach. Number one, we defeat Donald Trump. Number two, at the grassroots level, we mobilize people not only to vote for Biden, but to support the many, many good progressive candidates who are today under assault from AIPAC and other super PACs out there.

One of the very nice things that I think does not get the attention that it deserves is over the last six, eight years, we have seen a real growth of young, often people of color, progressives in the House of Representatives. Far more, I suspect, than in the history of this country. Far more than when I was in the House in the 1990s. We've got to protect those people

from the assault that they're going to be getting hit with by super PACs. And thirdly, at the grassroots level, we've got to continue the pressure for a progressive agenda, an agenda, by the way, which the American people support. Healthcare is a human right. Broadening the trade union movement, making it easier for workers to form unions. And we're making some real progress in

that direction. Moving aggressively, not only in this country, around the world to combat the fossil fuel industry and save the planet from climate, et cetera, et cetera. So these are extraordinarily difficult times. And on top of all of that, we've gone through COVID, gone through mental health crisis, going through that right now. But at the very least, Donald Trump must be defeated. All of us got to work on that effort. What would you say to a young Arab American in Michigan who says, I hate Trump. I don't want him to win. I just don't know if I can bring myself to vote for someone who keeps sending bombs to this extreme right-wing government that will not stop killing and starving people in Gaza. Maybe I should vote third party. You're an independent. You coxed with

the Democrats, but you've been an independent. You coxed with the Democrats, but you've been an independent your whole life. What do you say to that? I am the longest serving independent, I think, in the history of the United States Congress. I have supported third party candidates. And there's a time and a place. You know, if you're running for Congress

and you're running against some right-wing Republican and a corporate Democrat, give me a ring and I may well support you. I'm not, I am not in the Democratic Party because I think the Democratic Party is much too corporately and big money dominated. Uh, you know, I've been saying that for a few years and I say to that young Palestinian, I understand exactly where you're coming from. What is going on in Gaza is unspeakable. It makes me literally sick to be thinking about what's going on. Uh, States has for years given a huge amount of money, a military aid, to Israel.

And right now, as you've just indicated, you have not only a right-wing Netanyahu government. It's even worse than that. You've got some religious fundamentalists who think that God is talking to them. And they have, you know, God is telling them they have a right to do terrible things to the Palestinians and God's to take over that land. That's what some of these people actually think. So it's a horrible, horrible situation. And we, I would say to that person, some of us, and I want you to hear this, are working day and night. I'll be on the phone as soon as I get off of this podcast on an issue related to this.

Working day and night to try to turn the Biden administration around. What Israel is doing now is in clear violation of American law. The law is quite clear that when American humanitarian aid is blocked by a country, as is certainly the case right now. You've got hundreds of thousands of children facing starvation. Malnutrition is growing, and that is an issue that kids will never recover from in their lives. When you have that circumstance and you've got hundreds, if not thousands, of trucks at the border ready to get through, and Israel is blocking that. That is a, not only, you know, to me, a war crime, but that is a clear violation of American law. And we're working to do everything

we can to change the Biden policy. My own view has been for months, not another nickel. The leverage we have, what is the leverage we have? The leverage we have is money, is military aid. So the idea that we're sending bombs, the idea that we're sending money to Netanyahu is to me reprehensible. So I say to that young person, your gut feeling is right. And I'd have Palestinian friends who are worried every day what's going to happen

if their family members have not already been killed. It is horrible. But all that I ask is, let's not make a horrible situation even worse. Trump will be worse on that issue, let alone every other issue. So it's a tough moment, but that is what I think. So the White House says that in a call today, President Biden told Netanyahu that, quote, the strikes on aid workers in the humanitarian situation are unacceptable. He underscored that an immediate ceasefire is essential and said that, quote, the strikes on aid workers in the humanitarian situation are unacceptable. He underscored that an immediate ceasefire is essential and said that, quote, U.S. policy with

respect to Gaza will be determined by our assessment of Israel's immediate action to address civilian harm, humanitarian suffering, and the safety of aid workers. How do you take that statement? Do you take that to mean that he might be finally ready to budge on conditioning aid? As you know, there have been a lot of statements. Yes. I mean, one day I'm angry. You know, the president is angry at Netanyahu. The next day he's very angry.

And the next day he's very, very angry. You know, so what? At the same time, there is support for more military aid. We're talking about $10 billion in a supplemental bill that I voted against for that reason. I'm not going to give Netanyahu another $10 billion in military aid to continue to kill women and children

in Gaza. Now, I hope, I mean, the president is not stupid. And I know the president, and he is in his heart a very decent human being. I know he's hurting from what's going on. Now, why they have continued this policy, if you ask me that question, I cannot give you an answer. I have some speculation. I have some guesses, but I wouldn't even say in public. I don't know why. But I would hope that the president understands that from a moral perspective and from a political perspective, because that young Palestinian in Michigan is not the only person. The polls are very clear.

A majority of the American people, I think the last poll I saw was like 52 percent, think the United States should stop military aid to Israel. And among Democrats and among young people, the numbers are much higher. So the president is now engaged in a very, very difficult campaign. So from a moral perspective and from a political perspective, I hope very much that what he's saying today really does indicate a change of policy. But we will know. You cannot continue to talk about your worries about humanitarian situation in Gaza and then give Netanyahu another $10 billion or more bombs. You cannot do that. That is hypocritical. What, in your view, would it look like for the president to match his words with actions? And

do you think that the president himself would be able to stop, you know, congressional funding of further aid to Israel? I think the answer is pretty simple. Mr. Netanyahu, I'm here to inform you that if the border is not open tomorrow, if thousands of trucks do not get in to start feeding starving people, all military aid will cease. Have a nice day. Okay. Okay. How's that? Is that direct enough? No, I think that was pretty good. I'd like to hear that myself.

All right. So most voters tell pollsters that their number one issue in this election is the economy, especially the cost of living blame the pandemic for the economic downturn in 2020, and they haven't felt enough progress in their own lives to give Joe Biden credit for all the great progressive economic legislation that you've passed. Good, good. Okay, we'll do good. Yeah. And a lot of these people voted for Joe Biden in 2020. What's the argument you'll be making to those voters? What's the argument you'll be making to those voters? The argument that I'll be making is, in fact, we have made progress. We are making progress. But that we have a lot more that has to be done.

All right. I know you work for President Obama. We talked about infrastructure during that period. Well, you know what? Biden has delivered. Our infrastructure is crumbling. We've gotten a huge amount of money out to the states to start rebuilding our bridges. And based on what happened in Baltimore, it looks like we have to continue to do that.

Roads, water systems, wastewater plants, et cetera. We are making, under President Biden, far more progress than we have ever made before in dealing with a very powerful pharmaceutical industry. And I was just, as you may know, in the White House yesterday with the president on that issue. Have we done enough? No. But we are making progress. If you're a senior citizen, next year, no matter what kind of illnesses you have

and how many drugs you're taking, you ain't going to pay more than $2,000 out of pocket. That's a big deal. For the first time, we're beginning to do what countries all over the world have done and have Medicare negotiate prices with the pharmaceutical industry rather than accept the outrageously high prices they are giving us. In terms of insulin, we are moving so that seniors right now will not have to pay more than $35 per month for the insulin that they have. I have worked with the administration on the issue of asthma and COPD inhalers. Right now, if you have asthma, and 25 million Americans do, inhalers. Right now, if you have asthma, and 25 million Americans do, you're paying hundreds of dollars for an inhaler that may be sold in Europe or Canada for one-tenth the price. We have gotten

a commitment from three out of the four major manufacturers not to charge more than $35 at the counter for two of those companies that will go into effect June 1st, the other one a few months after that. So we're making some progress there. The president during a State of the Union address said, look, I want to expand the cap on prescription drug costs that we have gotten for seniors at 2,000. I want to expand that to all Americans. So listen up. That means if we can pull that off, no matter how many chronic illnesses you off, no matter how many chronic illnesses you have, no matter how many drugs you're paying, you won't pay more than $2,000 a year. That is a big, big deal. And that's what we're working on right now. So in terms of

women's rights, I think the president has been very clear in making sure, doing everything that he can to protect the woman's right to control her own body. And if you look at the economy right now, hey, in Vermont, we have a massive labor shortage, a labor shortage, all right? Wages are going up, beginning to tick up a little bit above inflation. So I think there are a number of good things that are happening, but it has to be put, things that are happening. But it has to be put, John, in the context of what has been going on in this country for the last 50 years. And that's what I think people are feeling. So if you're sitting there in West Virginia or someplace, likelihood is that you can't afford health care.

The idea of sending your kid to college may be an impossible dream. The idea of you're maybe one of the 60% of Americans who are living paycheck to paycheck. Childcare system is a disaster. And you're worried maybe about climate change and what it will mean to your community. So the problems we face are enormous. They're not Biden's fault, frankly. They're not Trump's fault. They're not Obama's fault. And we've gone on for a very long time. We've seen a massive transfer of wealth. We don't talk about it enough. All right. But right now you've got three people on top owning more wealth than the bottom half of American society. You have more income and wealth inequality than we've ever had as a nation. You have a corrupt political system dominated by billionaires right through the super PACs.

That's what we got. And I think a lot of that frustration, oh my God, all these things happening, got an immigration problem, you got a crime problem, you got all these things, it's all Joe Biden's fault. Well, it ain't all Joe Biden's fault. He's making a little bit of progress. Do we have to do a lot more? We do. So my message to the president and his team has been pretty simple. And that is take pride in what you've accomplished, which is not insignificant, but recognize that the vast majority of American people are hurting today.

And we have to be bold in taking on powerful special interests whose greed is destroying our country. A minute ago, you were talking about inflation. All right, you got Wall Street buying up housing all over America, gentrifying communities, raising rents. You've got to deal with that reality.

You've got the drug companies charging us 10 times more for drugs than they do in other countries. You've got to deal with that reality. You've got food companies making record-breaking profits. Well, elderly people can't afford groceries when they walk into a grocery store. So we've accomplished. Biden people should take pride in what they've accomplished,

but understand that much, much, much more needs to be done. And they should campaign on that basis. You mentioned the drug companies. When you were at the White House with the president, you criticized the manufacturer of Ozempic, Novo Nordisk, for charging $1,000 a month for a drug that apparently only costs $5 a month to make. They actually responded to your criticism and accused you of oversimplifying the science

that goes into developing new treatments. Care to respond? Somebody who failed biology in college, I don't want to argue about the science. Look, the scientists, amazingly enough, I am a fan of the scientists at these drug companies. They're coming up with some amazing cures. We have to support them. But the industry itself sees their function simply as making as much money as they possibly can. So you have 10 major drug companies last year that made $110 billion in profit. They pay their CEOs $10, $20, $30 million a year. And meanwhile, in America, one out of four people cannot afford the outrageously high cost of prescription drugs. And the truth is, he has a point, the pricing system, drug pricing

system, I don't know if you have any familiarity, it is a disaster in this country. No transparency, all you got PBMs playing their games. But bottom line is, there is no excuse for Americans being asked to pay, in some cases, 10 times more than the people in other countries. That Ozembic, for example, is sold in the U.K., I think, for $59 compared to $1,000 in this country. Explain that away. You can't explain it. So we'll be on the phone, I think, next Tuesday with the CEO of Novo Nordisk. We'll have a nice chat about how he's going to lower prices in this country. Good. Let's talk about healthcare in the 2020 primary. You really set

the pace on healthcare reform with Medicare for All. Even the candidates who didn't support your proposal pushed for a Medicare-like public option. Joe Biden was one of them. None of that has come close to happening over the last few years. What political lessons have you learned about how we can someday get to a place where we have truly universal health care in this country? Well, it raises the issue to how flawed and in many ways corrupt our democracy is. As I mentioned earlier, you have one vote and I got one vote, but a billionaire can spend hundreds of millions of dollars electing Kansas. If you look at the drug companies and the insurance companies, they're very bipartisan, aren't they? They give money to Democrats, they give money to Republicans, give money to anybody, but don't take us on. Allow us

to make huge profits at the expense of the American people. Now, we can go on for many hours. I'm chairman of the committee and I know a little bit about this one. But you've got a dysfunctional healthcare system. And I want, again, people to hear how dysfunctional it is. We are spending over $13,000. Imagine that for every man, woman, and child. You're a family of four, $52,000. That's Medicare, Medicaid, VA, everything else. Okay. And yet our life expectancy is far below most other countries. If you're working class in America, it's 10 years below the wealthiest people in this country. We've got 85 million people uninsured or underinsured. One out of four people can't afford prescription drugs. We don't have enough doctors. We don't have enough

dentists. We don't have enough nurses. We don't have a pharmacist. We don't have enough mental health counselors. It is a failed system. So you're right. I believe that you've got to junk this system. The idea, all right, you're an employer, right? You employ people here. So you're a nice guy. Maybe you have good health insurance. Maybe you don't. I don't know. I think we do, yeah. Okay. But maybe the person across the street is not a good employer whose needs are just as good as your employees, right? They work at McDonald's. They have crappy health insurance.

Why is that? COVID comes. People lose their jobs. They lose their health insurance. Why is health insurance attached to your job? Does that make any sense at all? It doesn't make any sense at all. It goes back to the 1940s and World War II, as a matter of fact.

So what do we have to do? It's not a radical idea. I live 50 miles away from Canada. John, if you were in an automobile accident in Toronto, all right, you spent a month in the hospital. Do you know what you cost when you get out? Not much. Not as much as here. Zero.

Zero. There you go. And do you know how much they spend per capita compared to us on health care? How much? One half. So let's see. They spend half as much per capita and there's no out-of-pocket expense. Which system works better? Well, I think maybe the Canadian, but we can't even begin that discussion in this country because of the power

of the insurance companies and the drug companies in giving all kinds of campaign contributions, having a lot of influence over the media, et cetera. So to get Medicare for all, which is so commonsensical, we need a political revolution in this country. And it's, you know, you've got a right-wing Republican party, you've got a corporatist Democratic party in all their respects, and we need a political revolution from down below to transform the political system in this country and say, hey, you know what? You're elected to Congress. You represent me and not some big money lobbyist. Do you see, are you hoping for any steps in between what we have now and Medicare for all? Do you see a path for anything in the next couple

of years? Understanding that there's, we have no Republican support for Medicare for all, and, you know, I don't know, we have 15 or 16 Democrats in the Senate. So we have one third of the Democrats and no Republicans. So I'm not going to get that passed tomorrow. What I have focused on with limited success is primary health care. Why did I do that?

Because this system is so dysfunctional that what it says is, okay, you don't have any insurance, and you're going to get sick, and you're going to end up in the emergency room, and it's going to cost the healthcare system a fortune, but we're not going to let you have insurance to get to a doctor. is expand greatly community health centers. And President Obama was as well. We worked on that on Affordable Care Act. And we've done a lot since. So right now you have about 30 million Americans who are getting their health care, maybe dental care, mental health counseling,

lower-cost prescription drugs at community health centers, which are big in California, by the way, and all over the country and Vermont as well. So I try to come up with a figure, and I'd say, okay, how much would it cost to make sure that every American could walk into a community health center and get the healthcare that they need? How much would it cost for us to educate the doctors that we need? How much would it cost us to educate the nurses that we need? How much would it cost us if we were to lower, what it would mean if we lowered prescription

drugs? And we put that into a bill. Well, my Republican colleagues fell off the chair because it was a lot of money. But at the end of the day, you save money. When you keep people out of the hospital, right? If I give you the medicine that you need, or you go to a doctor who diagnoses your problem early, I keep you out of the hospital. So the system has no problem spending $100,000 on an operation for you, got a massive problem making sure you go to a doctor when you need it. It is insane. All right. So we focused on primary healthcare. We made modest success. We increased funding far more than inflation for community health centers. We made a good step over to what we call teaching health centers. We're getting resident doctors to get their training in community health centers, in smaller rural hospitals where they may stay in rural America.

And we got some increases for the National Health Service Corps. So if you want to be a doctor or a nurse and you're willing to serve in an underserved area, we'll forgive your debts. But it's a long and complicated issue. But I think focusing on primary health care will do a lot to improve health care in America and save us money. You recently introduced legislation to reduce the standard work week from 40 hours to 32 hours within the last day. Your staff is shaking their heads. They're ready to implement it right now.

Very popular here. Very popular here. Popular everywhere. It sounds great. Americans work more hours than any other wealthy country. Most of the gains in productivity have gone to the rich. One critique I heard at the hearing you held on this legislation is that for a lot of jobs in the U.S., four days isn't feasible. And to make up for the extra hours, companies would just end up hiring part-time workers for lower pay and no benefits. What do you make of that criticism and just the general, the criticisms you've gotten on it? Not much. The 40-hour workweek was established, if my memory is correct, in 1944, I think it was. 1944.

And the world has changed a whole lot since then. And the bottom line here is not just that we as Americans work a lot longer hours than people around the world. I'm sure you get to Europe every now and then. You talk to people in Germany, well, they get six weeks paid vacation. You know, when you have a baby, you have long maternal leave and paternal leave and all that. So we work a lot longer and harder than other people.

But what really galls me, which is tied into the larger picture of our movement toward oligarchy, is just think back since 1944, how the economy has changed. I mean, the average worker now is far, far, far, far more productive. And yet people are still working these same hours. And in terms of wages over the last 50 years, by the way, wages are today not any higher than they were 50 years ago. Inflation counted for dollars. So here's what I think.

I mean, I think what we have got to begin focusing on, who benefits from this radical transformation of the economy in terms of technology, which is only going to increase in years to come because of AI and robotics? Who's going to benefit from that? Are we going to make Mr. Bezos and Mr. Musk even richer? The high-tech companies even richer? Or are workers going to benefit from that? Are we going to make Mr. Bezos and Mr. Musk even richer? So high-tech companies even richer? Or workers going to benefit from this? This is not a radical idea.

I read an article after we had our hearing on this issue that Richard Nixon in the 50s, when he was running with vice president, was talking about a four-day work week or something like that. Economists way back when. So what I want people to appreciate is that when you have an explosion in technology, working people should benefit. And it should not be employers who say, well, hey, I don't need you. And I'm going to throw you out on the street. No job. So that's kind of the purpose of why we did what we do.

And I think it really struck a nerve. I got to tell you. I walk the streets. People come up to me and talk to me about it. Any a nerve i gotta tell you i walk the streets people come up to me and talk to me about it any of your colleagues uh on board yeah one uh uh the senator butler from california okay okay have you guys tried out a four-day work week in your senate office no i wouldn't let them do that not right now i don't i don't want to be ahead of the curve on that we're working too hard to try to get a four-day work week for the rest of America.

There you go. Okay. So you've spent your career talking about economic inequality as the central issue of our time. We were just talking about it. Since 2016, you've also forcefully and frequently spoken out about the threat to democracy posed by Trump and authoritarians all over the world. by Trump and authoritarians all over the world. There's been a debate within the Democratic Party about whether to focus this campaign on Trump's threat to democracy or the economic struggles of working people. Obviously, it's going to be both, but you only have so much time and resources as a campaign. What are your thoughts on that debate? And do you see a way to connect those two issues? Yeah. And the answer is, as you've just indicated, it is going to be both. Look, Yeah, and the answer is, as you've just indicated, it is going to be both. Look, what we have seen in state after state is that Republican efforts to take away a woman's right to control her own bodies really resonates, and not just with Democrats but with independents and Republicans as well. It is a horrible idea.

I mean, women have fought so hard for these basic rights, and to take them away is disgraceful. So I think the issue of abortion front and center is a very important issue. I think you have a lot of people in this country who may not agree with me politically, may not agree with Biden politically, but are really repelled by the pathological lying and the grossness and the authoritarian nature of Donald Trump. And they're going to say, well, you know what? I may not agree with Biden, but I just, you know, I want this country to remain democratic and not move us toward authoritarianism. So those are important issues.

And Democrats have got to focus on them, and I will. But I'll tell you something else. What really galls me, coming from a working class family, is when I go around the country and I see working class people who are now voting Republican, that trend, as you know, has gone on for a number of years. And that has a lot to do with the fact that, in my view, the Democratic Party has turned its back on working class issues. So you have in America today,

as I mentioned earlier, 60% of our people living paycheck to paycheck. Minimum wage at the federal level remains at $7.25 an hour. People can't afford to send their kids to college. Our healthcare system is broken. Our childcare system

is largely broken. And people worry, appropriately so, that the next generation, their kids, will be even worse off than they are. You cannot, I think from a moral perspective and from a political perspective, turn your back on the vast majority of people in this country who are working people. All right? And what the Democrats did way back in the 70s, maybe earlier than that, they said, hey, Republicans are getting all this corporate money. Why don't we start tapping some of the money from the rich? Well, they did.

And they raised huge amounts of money from the rich. And the working class has said, you know what? You used to be the party of the working class in this country, under Roosevelt, under Truman, under Kennedy. But day after day, that has dissipated. And I think the Democratic Party has got to reclaim what it once was, the party of the working class. But you can't do that. People are smart. They may not be politically conscious. No one goes on in Washington every day. They don't.

But they're not stupid. And they understand that if you don't have the guts to take on the wealthy and the powerful, which by and large Democrats don't. Why would we trust you? And then what really bothers me, in a country which has so many problems, people are saying, well, you know what? Democracy really isn't working for me. If you were an ordinary person and you are earning, you know, you live in paycheck to paycheck,

can't afford health care, you're worried about your kids. And somebody, oh, democracy, democracy, really ain't working for me. And Trump comes along and says, I'm going to clean up all this crap. I'm tired of democracy. Hey, give me the power. I'll take care of the problems for you. Now, that's familiar. We've heard that historically, right? Germany and other countries. But it has an appeal to it. Because people are tired, if I may use a word, political bullshit that they hear every day, right? They're tired of it. They don't believe it anymore.

They're tired of the press releases and the 30-second stuff and all that stuff. So I think it is very important to answer your question. Obviously, issues of democracy, very important in this campaign. Issues of women's rights, enormously important in this campaign. But from a more, you know, again, those are my people. I come from a working class background. I am not going to turn my back on the people that I came from. You know, whether it's, you know, Vermont or anyplace else.

So it's an either, it's a both. And the Democratic Party has got to reclaim its roots and stand up for working people. And by the way, by the way, in fairness to Joe Biden, roots and stand up for working people. And by the way, by the way, in fairness to Joe Biden, Joe Biden was the first president in American history to stand on a picket line at the United Order workers strike. He stood there with those workers. And that was, I was very proud of him for doing that. And he's been a strong supporter of the growth of organized labor, which is one of the very, very positive things I'm seeing politically and economically in America today. You talked about sort of the defection of working class voters from the Democratic Party. That's

been going on for decades with white voters. In recent elections, we've started to see some attrition among Latino voters, a little bit with black voters, and especially younger black and Latino men. And maybe they're not Republican yet, but they're, you know, listening to Joe Rogan and they're kind of, what do you think's going on there? I wish I could give you, you know, some kind of brilliant answer. I can't. But I think there is a feeling that status quo politics just is not working and people are tired of it. And then you say, hey, and people are tired of it. And then you say, hey, we passed this bill, and it's going to do something in five years from now.

Hey, you know, loosen up there, man. Lighten up. Things are going great. They don't believe that, and people don't believe it. I think the country, and I think COVID accentuated this. There is pain in this country. And, you know, COVID itself, we have millions of people with long COVID right now. And kids are not going to school

to the way that, you know, and there's a dissatisfaction. And I think that is one of the things that is turning a lot of people off. If you're turned off to the political process, you're more likely to vote for Trump than for Biden because Trump says everything is crap out there. I'll take care of it. Yeah. You said in January, you'd make a decision on whether you're

running for reelection in the near future. Filing deadline in Vermont is May 30th. Have you decided yet? May 30th. What do we know? Uh, we're April 4th. We're closing in on it. All right. Let me say a word on that one, which I feel fairly strongly about. I got to tell you, honestly, I get around my state a lot. And not one person, normal person, has ever come up and asked me about that. But about 1,000 media people have. Now, why is that? See, media, correct me if I'm wrong here. My recollection

is that, you know, 30, 40 years ago, campaigns really began in September, Labor Day. Remember that? Am I wrong on that? I mean, I wasn't around then, but yeah. But you read about it. I don't remember it. Yeah, yeah, right. All right. And what you got now, and I think largely foisted by the media, by the way, is never-ending campaigns. And I don't think the American people are happy about it, frankly. You know, I was elected to work for the people of Vermont, not to be campaigning all the time. And by the way, I'm known by 99% of the people in Vermont. Some like me, some don't like me.

I'm probably not going to change too many views. You know, they know me. But right now, what I am focusing on are things like lowering the costs of prescription drugs, expanding health care, demanding the wealthy stop paying their fair share of housing, building affordable housing. I'm kind of busy doing that. And I think the people of Vermont are tolerant and want me to do my job. And at the appropriate time, we'll let you know about my future political plans. All right.

All right. Senator Bernie Sanders, thank you so much for joining Pod Save America, as always. I had to try, you know. Good. Thanks for having me. Take care. Thank you to Bernie Sanders for joining us. Everyone have a fantastic weekend, and we'll be back with a new episode on Tuesday.

Bye, everyone. If you want to get ad-free episodes, exclusive content, and more, consider joining our Friends of the Pod subscription community at crooked.com slash friends. And if you're already doom-scrolling, don't forget to follow us at Pod Save America on Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube for access to full episodes, bonus content, and more. Plus, if you're as opinionated as we are, consider dropping us a review. Pod Save America is a Crooked Media production. Our show is produced by Olivia Martinez and David

Toledo. Our associate producers are Saul Rubin and Farah Safari. Kira Wakeem is our senior producer. Reid Cherlin is our executive producer. The show is mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick. Jordan Cantor is our sound engineer, with audio support from Kyle Seglin and Charlotte Landis. Writing support by Hallie Kiefer. Madeline Herringer is our head of news and programming. Thank you. life. This season on How to Be a Better Human, you'll learn why thinking about death can actually make your life better, how it's never too late to make a change, and much more. Find How to Be a Better Human wherever you get your podcasts.