Pod Save America - "Hangin' with Mike Pence."

Episode Date: February 10, 2022

The Republican Party is once again in disarray thanks to Donald Trump, Democratic Governors are ending Covid restrictions as Omicron recedes, and host of The Axe Files podcast and co-host of Hacks on Tap David Axelrod is here to talk about Democrats’ midterm strategy.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, the Republican Party is once again in disarray thanks to Donald Trump. Democratic governors are ending COVID restrictions as Omicron recedes. And our old friend David Axelrod will be here to talk about Democrats' midterm strategy. We're all recording from the University of Chicago together on the 15th anniversary of the day that Barack Obama announced his presidential campaign in Springfield, Illinois, which makes us old, Dan.

When Alyssa told me it was 15 years, I was 100% positive she had screwed the math up, but no. 15 years. Nice to be in Chicago, though. I know. Nice to be recording with you in person. Nice to be in Chicago, a place that is most definitely not our homes. Dan's first reaction when we sat down together in the studio was, wow, it feels weird sitting close to you.

I tested negative, don't worry. Before we start, check out the latest episode of Pod Save the World, where Ben talks to Estonia's Prime Minister, Kaha Kalas, about her views on Ukraine and what it's like to be a NATO ally bordering Russia. I'm sure not great. New episodes of Pod Save the World drop every Wednesday. Also check out this week's Pod Save the People, where Diara interviews Dustin Gibson about his roots, disability justice work, and recent Justice Rising award from the Open Society Foundation. New episodes drop every

Tuesday. All right, let's get to the news. So on Tuesday's pod, we talked about how the RNC's decision to pass a formal censure of Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger that called the January 6th insurrection legitimate political discourse wasn't just a horrific endorsement of violence, but pretty bad politics. And it seems like at least some Republicans now agree. One former RNC official told the New York Times, quote, it doesn't take David Axelrod or Karl Rove to figure out that it wasn't the politically smart thing to do. I had to bring that up since we have Axelrod or Karl Rove to figure out that it wasn't the politically smart thing to do. I had to bring that up since we have Axelrod today. More than 140 Republican leaders and former officials issued a joint statement condemning the RNC for the censure.

A bunch of Republican senators spoke out, including Mitch McConnell, who said this. The issue is whether or not the RNC should be sort of singling out members of our party who may have different views from the majority. That's not the job of the RNC should be sort of singling out members of our party who may have different views from the majority. That's not the job of the RNC. Now, obviously, most of the MAGA chuds in Congress are still on board with the party endorsing political violence. Kevin McCarthy literally ran away from a reporter when he was asked about this. And Donald Trump, of course, released a statement attacking McConnell. But what do you think is going on here with Mitch and some of these other Republicans who are condemning this? I think they believe, and I think for a very good reason, that they are on a glide path to winning the House and possibly the Senate. And the only thing they can

get in their way is reminding voters who they are. And in that situation, you don't want an unforced error. And the Republican Party National Committee passing a formal resolution sanctioning political violence is the textbook definition of an unforced error. And so they're trying to like hive this off. That's a bad one. They're trying to like hive it off. So it's like, oh, it's this extreme faction, like it's the Freedom Caucus or it's some yahoos on Fox News as opposed to the Republican Party itself, the body which writes the rules, does the platform, decides on the primaries are run. And so it's sort of a desperate attempt to distance,

but it's an attempt to distance. I saw Representative Mike McCaul, who's the ranking member on Foreign Affairs, talk to Martha Raddatz about this. And he's like, well, I'm not a member of the Republican National Committee really we're going to try that no you're a Republican in Congress but you I have no what's the RNC what does that stand for what is that no I mean I think it's interesting to see the split because and also the the pull of right-wing media on these people also because Ted Cruz like criticized criticized mitch mcconnell over his statement and said oh we shouldn't call it an armed insurrection that's what the democrats call it this is ted cruz still smarting from his gaffe where he got called out on tucker carlson

show for calling it domestic terrorism yeah so i mean it is you still have a bunch of them that feel like they need to endorse this but i do think it's the other thing that's interesting about this is like when it happened and we were talking about it on Tuesday, you know, every time the Republican Party does something crazy, your first instinct is, well, maybe no one's going to care. Maybe this maybe we're beyond politics now. But clearly the party thinks this is awful, or at least a lot of party leaders like McConnell. They don't think it's good politics. They think people are going to care about this. That's an important distinction. I don't think they think it's awful because morally endorsing political violence is awful.

I don't think they give a shit about that. I think they think it's bad politics. Yes. But it should remind all. It's a good lesson for all of us that some things are still bad politics. Yes. If it was good. Things still matter. If it was good politics,

it would be something legitimate discourse t-shirts. Of course, we're also learning more about what Trump thought about the violent insurrection, particularly the chance about assassinating his vice president. Here's a clip. So that was just a figure of speech. Apparently, if you were former President Trump. Trump telling New York Times reporter Jeremy Peters, quote, I think it was an expression. I don't think they would have ever thought of doing it. You know the expression. Boy, I'm so excited to be here.

I just want to hang Mike Pence. I think it's an expression people say. I think it's so funny because the most obvious way to try to explain this away is to say that what they meant to say was they want to hang with Mike Pence. But that is just so holy. Thank you for saying that because we have been trying to make that a title of Positive America for a little while. And now I feel like it's warranted now. It's just simply not believable. Anyone would ever want to hang with Mike Pence. So they had to go with something else.

Hanging with Mike Pence. We were saying hang with. So this is the first time, sadly, this year, the Republicans have been on the defensive. We're now on day six of this story. Like, what lessons should Democrats draw from their predicament here? I think there are two. One is a cardinal rule of politics, which is you want to do everything you possibly can to focus the political discussion on issues

that unite your base and divide theirs. And that is because, I mean, one, it is in your interest to have your opponents divided, but also that's how media works, right? For all the talk about ideological bias, whatever else, the primary bias in media is conflict. And so if Republicans are fighting each other, that is going to get coverage and is going to send the media to go ask more Republicans to respond to the criticisms of it becomes a self-perpetuating cycle. We know this because it's called what every reporter did for all of 2021 about Democrats. Right. The second part of it that I think matters is it shows that when we go on offense, when Republicans make mistakes, we can actually drive a narrative. And everyone was talking about this. A bunch of ads came out.

People were pushing it. And we didn't simply rely on the media to do all of the work. Democrats actually really pushed on this. And we had some stuff. I was going to ask about that because I have not seen. I thought that the media has been pushing on this the whole time. And I haven't really heard a lot of Democrats talk about it. But I have also been not paying super close attention to the news this week.

I'm not saying the media has not done a good job on this, but all the stuff that January 6th – it's not, I think, an accident that there have been all of these revelations about the findings of the January 6th commission thus far in the last week. Right. Whether it's the Trump phone law, some other things we're going to talk about, it's become pretty clear that they are using this, the context of this story to push the January 6th narrative forward. And I think that's smart and good. Oh yeah. So the committee is, have like, what about the political side of the Democratic Party? Like, have there been a bunch of ads about this? Like Biden hasn't said anything about it yet. Biden has not to my knowledge. I haven't checked in on the White House briefing recently. Same. So I don't know whether that's

I imagine someone had to have asked Jen about this. We should probably know this. I'm sure someone told us what it was and we just didn't remember, but it has not been the centerpiece, but there have been people pushing it. There have been ads. The Lincoln Project did an ad in their sort of

rapid-fire way. They came out, I think, the day of or the day after. There have been, the super PACs have said they're going to use it in the committee. There's a report this morning. So people are pushing on

and they see the opportunity here. It's just a question of whether we can be creative enough to keep it going beyond this week. I would have a line about it in the State of the Union. Like I wouldn't be, you have to be careful

because it's the State of the Union and you're not going to have Joe Biden up there being like, you endorse political violence. But I would say that if – I assume at some point being in the Capitol giving that speech, he will talk about January 6th. He gave a very forceful speech about it on the anniversary. I would say something about – and that was political violence and no party should ever endorse that. And then watch. I'd do the line so that obviously all the Democrats stand up and then someone like Mitch McConnell, who spoke out against it, would have to stand up and applaud.

And then watch the assholes in the party who agree with it sit down and be quiet about it. And then use that video to make the point come out of it. Now, am I right in saying that there will only be 25 people there? Oh, Jesus Christ. i did see that somewhere which is like less than last year during covid what why are we i think that's what like kevin mccarthy said about nancy plosy i think she has not formally well so we'll see i hope they don't do that 25 people yeah that's that's weird how do you make the we talked a little bit about this on tuesday but i'd love to hear your thoughts on it like how do you make the republican party's embrace of political violence an issue that moves people when most voters either a may not have paid attention to this or b are thinking you know that's an issue in politics that was in the past. It was January 6th. I care about inflation. I care

about COVID, all that kind of stuff. I think there are two, if you step back from this, I think we have to sort of reframe how we think about this. Like if you look at polls today, there is definitely not an argument for making this a centerpiece of our message. I also think it is not politicians, The politicians should not look at polls today and talk about what people care about today. We should pick the issues that we believe we want to be of highest salience on election day and then spend the next several months making those highest salience. Immigration was not top of mind in 2016. Donald Trump made it top of mind and he won because of it. So if you look at

this issue and you look at Republican sanctioning political violence, you look at Trump promising pardons, these are all incredibly unpopular positions. Even for as many Republicans who believe the big lie or want to tell themselves or pollsters they believe the big lie, vast majorities of Republicans do not support what happened on January 6th. They do not support pardons for these people, the independents who have departed Democrats even more strongly. And so in an ideal world, people are not thinking about inflation on election day. They're thinking about this.

And so what can we do to make it top of mind? Now, the other part of this is I think we create this false binary choice between democracy and process issues or January 6th or whatever else and quote unquote kitchen table issues. We're running a campaign against Republicans. The main point here is we have to convince voters that Republicans should not be in control of anything. And I don't know how you run that campaign without pointing out that they have a dangerous, unhinged leader who wants to run for president again, and the party has officially sanctioned political violence. They have an agenda that's based on vengeance, and they have sanctioned political violence.

And so it goes back to part of the narrative that we sort of developed about Trump in 2020, which is it's chaos. Do you want chaos to reign if these people are in power? They're going to go after their enemies. They've already sanctioned political violence. You could see instability and chaos in the streets with these people. I mean, I was even thinking, have you been following this Canadian trucker thing? Oh, yes. I actually accidentally stumbled on Fox News. Fox has been covering the truckers that that these truckers are protesting um vaccine mandates in canada and so all these trucks are lined up in ottawa trying to like you know block traffic and everything else and i was reading that there's been a movement in the united

states from some right-wing groups to start doing the same thing the department of homeland security warned that it could interfere with the state of the Union, the Super Bowl. And that's just one issue where you're like people. I don't need to look at a poll. Most people in this country are not going to want that. They're not going to want huge trucks parked in their streets to because the Republican Party is pissed about vaccine mandates. However, you feel about vaccine mandates, which is a issue that has majority, strong majority support. So that's the kind of thing that like, I think framing,

starting to frame the Republican Party as these people are chaotic and out of control and have endorsed political violence. And if you put them back in power, like there's going to be some real, it's going to affect your life. And if you think about the three legs

of the coalition that gave, one for Democrats in 18 and 20, it's our base turning out incredibly high rate. It is people who got engaged in politics for the first time because of the crisis that was Trump and people who switched sides because of Trump. Independents, Republicans, people going back and forth in parties, Romney voters, all those people. To win, we have to get those people back. And reminding people the Republican Party is not some generic party with bad positions on inflation or taxes, that they are a deeply dangerous party. And I think so, how do you square the circle between... Because you do have to talk... The

inflation is in people's lives. You have to talk about it in a way. You have to talk about the pandemic. And I think one way to do it is to frame the Republicans and their extreme positions and that they are a force of division that is blocking progress on issues that the vast majority of Americans care about. Yeah. Minimum wage, dealing with inflation, masks, which we'll talk about later, but common sense vaccines, common sense measures around the pandemic is to frame the Republicans as division. Because if you look at polling, one of the things that has really hurt Biden, I mean, the main things are the conditions on the ground, the pandemic, et cetera. But

he ran on this promise of unity. And you look at America and it doesn't seem very unified right now. And Pew did a battery of issues looking at where people have lost the most confidence in Biden over the last year. And the issue where he is faring the worst is uniting the country. And one way, like he can't, we know he can't unite it, but one thing he can do is point out the people who are dividing it. And I think point out who's dividing it, point out the dangerousness of that division and point out how that division impacts regular people's lives is a way, somewhere in there is a message that could be very compelling for 2022. Yeah. We've talked about this before, but there's a difference between running a campaign where you're saying like, I'm going to unify the country and I have the power to like work with Republicans

and bring them over to my side, which hasn't worked out so well. Don't erase the biff, my friend. Yeah, exactly. Well, no, that is one proof point on that. But many of us knew at the time Biden probably oversold that a little bit because of his Senate past. But I do think the message about, look, most of this country or big majorities in this country agree on X, Y, and Z issues. And there's an extreme faction standing in the way. faction standing in the way, so we have to defeat them and elect people who are going to work together to solve these problems is a powerful message and actually much more realistic than saying, I'm going to get Mitch McConnell to work with me. We often harass Democrats about, don't talk about process, don't talk about polls. But there is some real social science and political theory behind pointing out over and over and over again that what we want is the majority position in this

country. It is social proof, right? We want to use that to bring people on board. And it also helps hive off that other side as being part of this out of touch minority. Where do you think Donald Trump's document retention policy fits into this midterm strategy? The New York Times reported on Wednesday that there was classified information contained in the 15 boxes of official white house documents that trump definitely shouldn't have taken with him to mar-a-lago he has since returned them and just before we started recording according to maggie haberman's soon-to-be-released book he also literally flushed documents down the toilet okay i got a lot of questions. Me too. I don't know.

We should have had Maggie here to answer them. So question one is, was he flushing them down the toilet like a drug dealer in a movie with the cops at the door? Like he knows now. Who was at the door? Like Mueller was outside? The archivist.

They're like, National Archives, let us in. It's like the Mueller bobblehead comes to life and is outside. Was the Supreme Court marshal there in the impeachment eagle ready to take him away? Well, you know, there are all those stories about how he would rip them up and put them in the trash and then staff would have to tape them back together. So maybe he read about that and figured the only way he could end run the archivist was to flush down the toilet. Does he not know that the NSC has shreddersders that there's burn bags that they come around with is he literally wiping his ass with them like that was happening that's terrible i know you

could probably take that in there leave it in but i would the other thing i'd say is like it's easy to laugh about this but it's not like document retention protocols have ever played a large and decisive role in election i I know. I know. But I see all this too. And I'm like, this is infuriating. The hypocrisy is, of course, stunning, as it always is. But it's like a flashing light to me that's like, trap, Democrats, trap. Do not go down the rabbit hole of Donald Trump's document retention policy problems.

Look, should he be investigated for this? Yes, of course. And he is being. Or is it recommended? Well, the archivist told the Justice Department, hey, this is probably not legal. You guys should look into it. It is like what happened to Sandy Berger,

for those of you too young to remember. He was the national security advisor for Bill Clinton. I believe he stuffed some classified information in his socks and walked out of the White House. Was it his socks? Something like that. I think it was socks. Rhodes will know this.

But he got in some trouble. Did he not have pockets? I don't know what was happening. But he knew enough not to, I guess he should have flushed it down the toilet. That's right. But yeah, that's a big no-no. Now, the trouble with Trump is,

as president, of course, you have the power to declassify anything. So it's probably a hard case to bring against him because he could always say, well, I was declassified by my power as Trump. Now, you can't declassify after you've become president. Yeah. So when did those documents leave? Was it before noon? Again, we could all get down.

I do not know how. Look, the relevant committees and jurisdictions should look into this. I do not think this is a lot of this is something that we all should spend a lot of time on. I think we could tuck this under your chaos theory. Yeah. Yeah. Like, is this what we need? Right.

We're going to go back. Yeah. We had Hillary's emails for a year. Now we got this guy's document retention policy. He's flushing things down the toilet. He's saying, hey, Mike Pence is just an expression. They're endorsing political violence because they want to get in good with him. Like, this is what you want again for another four years? I do think that's a powerful argument. All right, let's talk about the quickly receding

Omicron wave and what the next stage of pandemic life is starting to look like. Some of the biggest, bluest states and most liberal governors are announcing the end of universal mask mandates, including California, New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Connecticut, Oregon, today Nevada. On Tuesday, Dr. Fauci said that even though he believes we're not going to eradicate this virus, we're, quote, heading out of the full-blown pandemic phase and that he hopes all COVID restrictions will soon be a thing of the past. But CDC Director Rochelle Walensky said on Wednesday that while her agency is working towards new mask guidance and encouraged by the current trends, high hospitalizations and deaths in some parts of the country mean, quote, we are not there yet, which is a message that was echoed by Jen Psaki

during her White House briefing. We are internally discussing, of course, what it looks like to be in the phase of the fight against the COVID pandemic, where it is not disrupting everyone's daily lives, where people are moving on and living lives free of hopefully masks at some point and many of the restrictions that we've all been living through over the past two years. But as the federal government, we have the responsibility to rely on data, on science, on the medical experts. That's something the president committed to during the campaign. They confirmed during this briefing, they're continuing to evaluate, and there's ongoing discussions and work happening internally.

Dan, why do you think all these Democratic governors are lifting the mask mandates right now? Has the virus and the science changed? Has the politics changed? Is it both? It's both, right? I mean, as you point out, cases are receding. They're receding quickly. The states we're talking about are ones with some of the highest vaccination rates in the country.

I think when we're going to talk about the politics, political podcasts, we have to do that. But I think using the term politics somewhat cheapens what's happening here because these are guidelines that are only enforced by broad consent. There are not cops going around enforcing mask mandates. Vaccine mandates and mask mandates indoors are being enforced by baristas, hostesses, store clerks, people who our society won't even pay a liberal wage to. So it's only going to work as long as the vast majority of people think it makes sense. And people's positions on this have changed as Omicron has hit and they've gotten frustrated.

And we have to adjust our rules to create some sort of as safe as humanly possible for as many people as possible release valve to ensure that we can continue to do the smart things and there's not a broad scale rebellion against any and all restrictions, even the ones that still make sense. I also think, let's put the politics entirely aside for a second and just talk about the science on this. So this debate between the Democratic governors that are doing this now and the CDC, which really when you listen to Walensky and especially when you listen to Fauci, like this is sort of a short-term problem right now. Like by March, end of March at the latest, I guarantee CDC will be here as well, partly because the numbers eventually will come down to match the CDC's metrics. But the thing to know about the CDC's metrics is, you know, they qualify a county as low

or moderate transmission, which is what you need to get rid of the mask mandate, just using case numbers and test positivity, two metrics that stopped being really useful predictors of hospitalizations and death when we had variants and then when we had vaccines. So they sort of have old metrics, but now they're trying to figure out new metrics. Like just in LA County, like we still have an indoor mask mandate, even though California is lifting theirs. But our health director already said that like for outdoor events, which if you have big mega events, you have to mask in LA, they're going to change the metrics to hospitalizations over seven days as opposed to cases and test positivity because cases and test positivity don't really tell you a lot anymore about the real danger of the virus since we're in a Omicron world with a lot of vaccination.

So the CDC governor thing, I think it's temporary. But I do think like long term, like people should, I don't think people are going to feel very comforted hearing that like, well, the politics changed. So now I'm not going to be safe anymore. But I don't think you need to feel that way. Like, I get the fear and anxiety that still exists out there. Like, you and I still have unvaccinated children. Like I canceled holiday plans to not put Charlie on a plane. Like, we've been navigating this too. Like, it's tough. But like, the science has changed. And the science has changed because the virus has changed and because we have vaccines. Like, the bad news here is, as Dr. Fauci said this week, like, we will never eradicate this virus. And I think that's something that people skip over now. Like the scientific consensus

right now is that COVID-19 will always be in circulation even after Omicron is over. It will always be a threat. And that's no matter how much vaccinating, masking, testing we do, it will always be here. And like the whole idea about COVID zero, it's like not supported by scientific fact. It's a fantasy. But the good news is, if you are vaccinated and boosted, you are protected against severe disease and death. How protected? The latest CDC data shows that only one out of every one million boosted Americans have died of COVID. One out of a million. What about long COVID, you might ask? The most comprehensive and precise study to date on vaccination and long COVID from researchers in Israel found that, quote,

vaccinated people were no more likely to report symptoms of long COVID than people who've never had COVID at all. I repeat, vaccinated people were no more likely to report symptoms of long COVID than people who'd never caught COVID at all. Now, maybe you're thinking that's all well and good. I still don't want to get sick. Maybe you are immunocompromised. Maybe you live with someone who's immunocompromised or someone who's otherwise vulnerable. Maybe you just don't want to get sick. Getting sick sucks. The good news there is if you wear an N95 or a K95 mask, even if no one else around you is wearing one, you are still protected from COVID. One way masking works, Dr. Joseph Allen, who's a COVID and

ventilation expert at the Harvard School of Public Health, he knows this stuff. This was his quote to The Atlantic, and he said it again in The Washington Post. If you are vaccinated, boosted, and wearing a well-fitted N95 or similar mask indoors, your risk is extremely low. I mean, there's not much else in life that would have as low a risk as that. So that's pretty, now again, that's not a cloth mask. Got to get your N95, your K95, got to make sure it's fitted well. But like, I do think some of this conversation around mask mandates is a conversation that's based on a situation that we had in 2020 when there were no vaccines and when we weren't dealing with the variants that we're

dealing with now. There, there's my piece that I had to say on that. I just, but I, like, I understand the fear and anxiety out there because first of all, there's been a lot of mixed messaging and also partly that's the fault of the CDC, but also the, it's like a whole new pandemic. You know, like once we had vaccines and once Delta hit and then Omicron hit, like things changed pretty rapidly. And I don't think everyone caught up. And that's not the fault of everyone. Like everyone's just been going through it.

But like we should feel some comfort from the science now. And this is where it's going to be different in all different parts of the country, depending on vaccination rates. But it's also where the schools and workplace policies matter a lot. Because even if you say to me, you're vaxxed, you're boosted, if you get COVID, it is overwhelmingly likely to be relatively mild compared to what we feared a year or two ago. But still, the complications, it's not like getting a bad cold. Because if I get a bad cold, my daughter's preschool doesn't shut down, right? Or I don't have to quarantine

away from my family or all these other things. And so we have to right-size everything to where we are now. And look, if we get a new variant a year from now or two years from now, we're going to have to change things again, depending on what it looks like. This is the most important thing, because you can see another variant coming in six months that's, God forbid, but if it's worse than Omicron or it's more virulent like Delta was, then, you know, everyone's going to be like, why did they drop the mask mandates? That was a huge mistake. No. If things change, if the virus changes again, we have to be ready to change with it. But if you're not going to drop a mask mandate when Omicron recedes, and again, we can quibble

over exactly when we're saying that it's fully receded. It's going to happen differently in different parts of the country. But once it fully recedes, if you're not willing to drop a mask mandate then, then you have to answer the question, when are you actually willing to drop the mask mandate? Because it's going to be here forever. You know, like the mask mandate in LA was still in place before Omicron hit, and we had very low levels of virus there, but it wasn't low enough to hit the CDC threshold. So the real question is, are we going to have a mask mandate forever? And if not, what are the metrics for that? And if after a huge wave recedes, where now there's a ton of immunity in the population, both because of vaccines and because unfortunately, a lot of people are infected, like that seems to be the best time. I don't know when else you would lift

the mask mandate. Now, Republicans, many of whom have spent the last few years waging a war against life-saving vaccines and other COVID restrictions, they're now crying hypocrisy, looking to put Democrats in the defensive over this issue. This week, Stacey Abrams came under fire for posing maskless in a photo with masked children. She had only taken off her mask to give a speech, but she apologized nonetheless. Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti got in trouble for taking a maskless photo with Magic Johnson at the NFC Championship, especially because he said that during the picture he was, quote, literally holding his breath for two seconds. Lots of very funny didn't inhale jokes on Twitter after that. What do you think about this? Like, how are Democrats

the ones ending up on the defensive over this? And how do you handle this if you're a Democratic politician? I think there's a simple rule, which is if you are a elected official, you should abide by the guidelines you put in place. It's very simple. No matter what, I mean, it's not even just COVID related, just in general, if you pass a law that says you have to wear a seatbelt, wear a seatbelt, right? And then if you get caught making a mistake, and people do make mistakes, don't come up with a really stupid excuse claiming to not be exhaling or inhaling during that period of time. That is just stupid. More broadly, and these politicians could all use better staff work, I think, but more broadly, we have to go on offense. We are constantly, a defensive crouch is our natural state of being as a Democratic Party.

And we have to go on offense. How is it possible that people like Stacey Abrams are on the defensive when the governor of that fucking state, who is her most likely opponent, has been spreading misinformation about vaccines, lying about the severity of the virus, particularly early on before people were vaccinated, putting in place deeply irresponsible positions not supported by science. We have to go on offense. And I mean, this is not to pick on Stacey Abrams. She went on very aggressive offense when she was on Puts in America last week about this very point. But as a party, we have to call out not the people necessarily who are unvaccinated themselves, the politicians and the media people who are lying to them about the vaccine.

The vaccines are the greatest scientific miracle of our lifetime. And the Biden administration has rolled them out in a really efficient way. And there would be even more people vaccinated right now if it wasn't for the Republicans waging a war against vaccines and spreading so much disinformation or at least cozying up to people who are spreading disinformation about this. And we seem to have forgotten that. These vaccines, the fact that I know that initially before Delta and Omicron, it was like, well, the vaccines protect against all infection. That's great. Very few vaccines actually do that. The flu vaccine certainly doesn't do that. But they have saved hundreds of thousands of lives. And Democrats should be on the offense about that and be proud of that and talk about that all the time and not sit there and be like and get into like a whole argument about masking and testing

and all the other kind of stuff. Like I do think that the Biden administration was on strongest footing. And I know there's like a problem with just calling it the pandemic of the unvaccinated, right? We're all going through this. But when the Biden administration was talking about the life-saving power of the vaccines and how good they were and hitting back against people who were spreading disinformation with the vaccines, that's when they were also on the strongest political footing. And I will say that like not much has changed about the virus. I mean, they can still have that message today. That message is still available to them. And I think that like as we're seeing these universal mask mandates drop, like that's going to be the best political place for

the Democrats to be. OK, when we come back, we will talk to our old friend David Axelrod, about politics. With us today, the director of the University of Chicago Institute of Politics, co-host of Hacks on Tap, former senior advisor to Barack Obama, and our good friend and mentor, David Axelrod. I've got a few more titles. Yeah, I was going to say, this was in your contract. I had to get all of these. What's up? I don't need an introduction, but I demand one.

How are you guys? So good to see you. And it's good to be here with you in Chicago. In person. At the University of Chicago. On an auspicious day. Yeah. I know.

We're going to talk about that too. We were just talking about what's been in the news, specifically the split between the Biden administration and these Democratic governors over lifting mask mandates. What's your take on that whole situation? Well, I'll tell you what, this whole thing has been so hard. I mean, in fairness, I think the administration made it harder because their communications on it has been messed up. And, you know, the CDC is not exactly distinguished

itself as communicators, but- Not going to be taught in any schools. No. Well, maybe it will. Yes. Yeah. Don't do that. Don't look like a deer in the headlights and try and keep your story straight. Those are two big rules. But, you know, Those are two big rules. But, you know, it's the governors are under tremendous political pressure. I just don't think we have gotten our arms around how much of a funk this country's in and just how profoundly we are traumatized by what we've been through. I think years from now, people will look back and say, whoa, that was that was epically catastrophic event. And, you know, people have been so knocked off balance by it. And this these masks have become emblematic that people just want to get on with their lives. And there's enormous pressure on these governors, some of it around the schools.

I think that's a underappreciated issue that Democrats are going to have to deal with. And I think they're responding. And, you know, the CDC and the government is doing what Biden said they do, which is we're going to listen to the scientists who don't have to run for anything. So there and you have the pressure. I mean, I admire them for trying to do what they think is best for the public health. And they should do that. But there are political costs to it. And you see it in the contrast with what the governors are doing. I think it's also challenging now because it doesn't feel like there's a definitive scientific consensus, even if you separated

out the politics. Like, I think the CDC in a couple of weeks is going to be where some of these governors are. And then once again, the Biden administration. That's their modus operandi. They're like the caboose on the train. And the Biden administration will once again feel dragged behind. Yeah. I mean, it's really problematical. And it does contribute to what I think is a larger problem for him, which is, you know, so much seems out of control right now. And he doesn't necessarily seem in command. And this is one of the reasons, because the administration has these mixed messages. They tend to be late on this public health stuff. So,

yeah, I mean, wise people that you and I, all of us know, have said from the beginning there should have been a one person in charge of every single bit of communication on this virus in the administration. They kind of needed a communication czar for just for the virus. And they didn't. And so there's been a lot of zigging and zagging out there, and it's contributed to a sense that, well, maybe they don't have their arms around this thing. As Dan would always say in the White House, it's not a policy problem, it's a communications problem.

If we'd only figured out how to talk about 10% unemployment, we would have kept the house. Yes, exactly. And that is the risk here, right? There is no question the communications have contributed to the problem, but the problem is also the virus. The virus was problematic. I'm not saying that the whole thing was communicated. No, no, the virus, look, the reality of the virus is we don't, we don't really have control of the virus. The virus has control of us. When the virus decides to generate a new, a new strain, then it sends us back again. And, and, you know, it'd be great if the rest of the world were vaccinated. And we, you know, because they all, all these things start in, you know,

Africa where 7% of the people are, are vaccinated and some of the other places where people are unvaccinated, but no, you're right, Dan. I mean, I don't want to be, I mean, I do feel the CDC thing is a little bit, you know, I don't want to be hard on the White House. I mean, the mobilization behind the vaccinations was, I think, an extraordinary effort, frustrated only by politics. But, you know, an extraordinary effort, frustrated only by politics. But, you know, hundreds of millions of Americans are vaccinated now. Otherwise, we'd be we wouldn't be sitting here at the same table talking to each other. So Biden's going to give the State of the Union speech in a couple of weeks. This is a moment to at least try to this is going to end up probably behind these governors. But on his biggest stage, reframe this. Like what advice would you give about how to do that?

That's so interesting that you should say that, because I'm working on something on this. But we learned a lesson in the Obama administration, which is don't claim more progress than people are willing to tolerate. I mean, objectively, we were creating jobs, things were getting better, but people weren't feeling that in their lives. And I do think he has to go in, there is a, you know, it is press conference on January 19th on the anniversary of his inauguration. He was very energetic about saying, you know, 6 million jobs, historic, you know, all this stuff,

claiming all his credit. And then he had a little two-minute interlude where he said, yeah, but, you know, we've been through hell and all of that. And then back to the pushing of his achievements. And you know how it is. You feel that in the White House. You say, God damn it, we've done great. We're doing, you know, in a bad situation, we've produced all this progress. Why don't people appreciate it? And if we just say it more, if we just repeat it. Axe, I feel like you and I, this was like every speech we dealt with this. Yes.

Well, also because I think in our White House, I think oftentimes, at least at the beginning, Rahm wanted to really claim. That's his modus operandi. The accomplishments. And you were always pushing on make sure that we align with how people are feeling. I always wonder, like, should the president be a barometer of how people are doing good or bad at all? Or should he be saying, here's what I believe, here's what I'm fighting against, or here's what I'm fighting for. So then he looks a little more active as opposed to narrating whether the country's doing well, poorly, somewhere in between. No, I understand. But I think it's important to

acknowledge, you know, I do, I still believe what I believed back then, which is you have to link up with people's experience. And I mean, I do think you have to acknowledge what we said a few minutes ago. This was a traumatic experience. This has been a traumatic experience. And there are all kinds of offshoots of it. The mental health challenge. Mental health. Yeah, I think obviously you recognize the lives that have been lost first and foremost, but it goes beyond that. Look, suicides are up. Violence in the home and on the streets are up. Drug overdoses are up. People are stressed. And so, you know, and here's Joe Biden, whose superpower is empathy. Yeah. And I just think he needs to show some of that before he gives people confidence that here are the steps we're taking. And, you know, this is what the future is going to look

like. But, you know, if you're hyperbolic about claiming successes in the wrong way, it can backfire on you. So my big advice to him would be square up with where the country is. Give people their, I mean, Americans have, you know, soldiered through this, and there have been a lot of heroic people, starting with health care workers, by the way. Yeah. I mean, so, you know, give people their props. But resist those who will come to you and say, just tell them everything you've done because no one will tell them unless you tell them.

And if you just, you have a big audience and if you just tell them how good things are, they'll feel better and they'll give you credit. And, you know, come on. It's like I thought my life was pretty shitty, but then I heard Joe Biden say we create a bunch of jobs. I guess I feel a lot better. You know what? You know what that does? You know what that does? It makes him look out of touch.

And the thing that he least can afford is looking out of touch because that's exactly what his opponents want to say about him, that he's, you know, he's a doddering old guy who's out of touch. doddering old guy who's out of touch. I mean, the fact of the matter is Biden does have a kind of, I mean, I always appreciated in the White House that he does have kind of an intuitive sense of how the middle class thinks about how people, everyday people think. And I think it is a function of him having gone home to Wilmington all the time, but he had a better sense of where the country was than most people in Washington. And he just needs to reconnect with that. What advice would you give to House and Senate candidates running in competitive districts in this midterm election? Yeah, well, you know, I noticed when he went to Pennsylvania last week, a lot of people had conflicts on their calendar and didn't meet him at the airport.

week, a lot of people had conflicts on their calendar and didn't meet him at the airport. Always a bad sign. But look, if he's sitting there at 41%, they're not necessarily going to want him around and they're not necessarily going to want to attach themselves to him. The one thing I would tell these Democratic candidates is you can try and separate yourself from the president, but it never works. I mean, what you should try and do as best as possible is help him be a success and raise those numbers. Because if he's at 41%, Democrats are going to get their asses kicked. If he's closer to 50, it'll be a much more competitive election. And right now, he's sitting at 41. Yeah, we all sink or swim together on this one. Yeah, but they never realize they never believe, you know, candidates never believe that. I mean, it does expose politicians for who they are or a lot of them.

I mean, it's like, you know, it's their ass first. And, you know, thanks. Thanks for everything, Mr. President. And boom, I'm pushing you off the side. It's also just so stupid. It's like, I'm not going to get my picture taken with you. Like, are you familiar with Photoshop? Yes.

You think those very high integrity Republican consultants are not going to put your pictures next to each other? And they don't even need Photoshop because most of them appeared with him when things were better. Right. You know, so I don't know. I don't have a lot of sympathy for those guys. I mean, you know, it's a tough spot. And this is, I mean, you know, Mike Murphy, my hacks on tap partner, said, you know, it turns out that COVID kills presidents. very, very likely that Donald Trump gets reelected, but for COVID. And Joe Biden benefited from that during the election. He's now paying a price for COVID because everything, including inflation, is an offshoot of the virus. And as you guys point out, I mean, you can spin it,

you can do whatever you want, but the virus is the virus and the virus will do what the virus wants to do. Dan, I've been talking a lot about how to frame the Republicans in the midterm. Like, do you talk about them as extremists? Are they out of touch? Are they in it for themselves? Like, what's your what would your frame be about the Republican Party in the midterm? Well, the question is, what is what is it that is most concerning of concerning people? I do think that I think there's a general sense that things are kind of out of control.

And I think that lack of control and lack of order is is bothering people. And now you have Kevin McCarthy saying, okay, I'll tell you what our platform is. We're going to reinstate Paul Gosar. We're going to reinstate MGT, or is it MTG? And we're going to throw Adam Schiff off of his committees. And we're going to wreak vengeance on everyone who is on Donald Trump's hit list, and essentially bring more chaos and less cooperation to the Congress. And I don't know whether this is a winning argument, but I certainly would test it if I were Democrats. Is this really, this is what they're offering.

Is that going to make you feel better? Will that be good? That's where I would be looking. I mean, you know, I know there are people who believe that you just run flat out at Trump. Saul Schor, who's, you know, I respect a lot and has been in the trenches for years, brilliant media consultant. He and Mandy Grunwald have this pack, and it's all about going right at Trump. I think it's an untested theory as to whether you can go at Trump in an election where he's not on the ballot and have the effect that you want, but you can tangentially weave him into it if you say these guys are in his thrall and they want to bring Trumpian politics into the Congress so that we'll have more chaos, more disruption, more vengeance.

Yeah. You know. It requires a bit of nuance, which oftentimes. You don't think that's the. Oftentimes Democratic campaign strategists don't have. Yeah. Well, I mean, look. You're saying calling him Glenn Trumpkin was not the nuance you're looking for. Well, I mean, look. You're saying calling him Glenn Trumpkin

was not the nuance you were looking for? Well, I think it is the difference. I think it's the difference between the way McAuliffe handled it and the way Newsom handled it. And Newsom did not, was a little more deft in California. In the recall.

In the recall. He also had a guy running who was the leading Republican candidate, Larry Elder, who, in fact, was. Right. He didn't need to call him a Trump clone because all of his positions. Right. Now, Youngkin, you know, had an advantage because he didn't have a real primary there and

he only had to kowtow to Trump minimally. And he did a smart thing. He focused on close to the ground issues that touch people's lives. You know, everybody focuses on the critical race theory thing. But you guys are young and you have kids, I mean, probably so young, are either of them in school yet? Preschool. Preschool. But I mean, I just don't think you can overestimate the frustration that parents have felt, you know, about having their kids home, missing a year of school, and then not knowing when they could go back and what will the rules be when they go back and all of that stuff. I mean, there's so many things that were really bugging people. And of course, McAuliffe stepped into it when he said parents shouldn't be. So let me ask you guys,

it keeps occurring to me that the right answer on all of this stuff, the school-related stuff, is yeah, parents obviously should be involved in the education of their kids, but politicians shouldn't. Right. No, it's funny. We tested this. There was a change research poll that we did, and we tested an argument about- I forgot you guys are like a machine. We're a machine now. And this was before the Virginia election. We tested this at the beginning. It was in September. It was in September. August or September, yeah. And we tested a frame that was, we don't want Republican politicians dictating

what our classrooms teach our kids in Washington, just as much as we don't. And it was the best testing frame. I'll tell you what, man. I still think I would be pursuing this. I mean, you have politicians deciding what books kids can and can't read. Politicians who very likely haven't read any of them.

Right. And don't live in your community. Right. I mean, I think I would definitely go there. They have way overstepped. Yeah. This one. Yeah.

So, I mean, you know, there's things to work with. But, I mean, you know, I'd love, I mean, I always am conscious of the fact that we all think we're so freaking smart. And then you test something and it's like, you know, I'd love I mean, I always am conscious of the fact that we all think we're so freaking smart. And then you test something and it's like, you know what? That's I don't I don't think that people just fool you. I mean, they're counterintuitive. So you really got to find out. But I think there are some pretty good theories to pursue. I mean, it does for me.

I think it has to start with what's really bothering people. And then why are we different than Republicans on those issues? Right. I mean, we want to turn it into a choice. They wanted to make it a referendum. I mean, that's sort of the basics. And then, of course, up to fill in all the details. I mean, there is, you know, I mean, they have stuff. They're very good at setting up straw men and creating caricatures to run against. Like, I don't really know. I mean, there is,

you know, um, um, the representative from St. Corey, uh, Bush. And there are some people who are just emphatically for defunding police.

But man, I sure don't know a whole lot of Democrats who, who get, who, who say that. And, uh, and yet they're, the Republicans are very disciplined about, I mean,

it is something that they're good at. They're good at sort of enforcing a party line on the negative attack. You know, what they're bad at is, you know, how to figure out how to keep Trump from pulling them back into constant conversations about 2020 and January 6th. I mean, that's their curse. I mean, that's their Faustian bargain, right? They, you know, they have to pledge fealty to Trump to survive in their own primary. And they in turn, you know, are incinerating themselves relative to general elections. And you can see, you can see McConnell clearly gets that. Yeah, we were just talking about that.

It looks like he's got, every time he talks about this, it looks like he's got agita, but he always looks like that. So I don't know what to make of it. That's his permanent expression. So we're sitting here on the 15th anniversary of Barack Obama's presidential announcement. It took place a few hours from here in Springfield. I was rewatching the speech since I hadn't heard it in years.

And it seems like it's not just from a different political era, but like from a different universe. Do you have any reflections about that? You did? Okay. Both of you go on that. No, I don't want to get in the middle of a family fight. I guess a few things struck me. Some of the same frustrations that he articulated, there are exactly the same frustrations that people feel today about the things that motivate

Washington, about the inability to deal with big things. I think those things, you know, are consistent. And, you know, people say, well, how could people vote for Barack Obama and Donald Trump? You know, both of them were in some ways assailing the status quo in Washington. I mean, I don't want to draw this too tightly because, you know, Trump's was rated, was based in, you know, xenophobia and racism and all of that. But, you know, this is, so there's a through line between that. I mean, the idea that we can overcome these things and we can bring about change and the idea of hope. I mean, somehow hope, which seems like such a wholesome and good word, has been tarnished. It's like, hope, what kind of idiot are you? You know, so I, you know, that part seems a little sepia colored, you know, and you find yourself saying, gee, were we foolish

to feel that way? But I'll tell you guys something. I was over, this won't surprise you, but I was over yesterday at my favorite deli, Manny's, here in Chicago. Yes. And a guy comes up to me. I really want you guys to hear this because I hope you feel as good about it as I did. A guy comes up to me, this part you shouldn't feel good about. He was a photographer who I'd known, and he's dealing with cancer. But he said, you know, I've been dealing with this for nine years, and I just want to come over and tell you, and I hope you share this with the president,

I would be dead without the Affordable Care Act. And I have these conversations often, people come up to me about that. And it's really bracing because it kind of reminds you what this really is all about. We get so wrapped up in the red team versus the blue team shit. And then you realize every once in a while you break through and you have a chance to do something that really will impact on people's lives in a positive way. And you know, you guys lived through it, how unbelievably hard that was, that fight. And, you know, how he was- And how close we were to losing it. And it was his determination, along with Nancy Pelosi, but his determination.

I mean, I'll always remember, I don't know if either of you were in the Oval when someone whose name I won't mention, but you... I've gotten in trouble for doing it before, so you go ahead. No, said, you know, maybe we should throw our, you know, go for something smaller or throw the two. And the president says to Phil Cholero, our legislative director, Phil, what do you think the chances are of passing this thing? And Phil says, well, it depends how lucky you feel, Mr. President. And the president just breaks out laughing. And he says, Phil, I'm a black guy named Barack Hussein Obama, and I'm president of the United States.

He said, I feel lucky every day. But, you know, I feel lucky every day. But, you know, he refused to give in. He refused. Even knowing that it might cost him reelection. And he said it. He said, hey, this may cost me reelection. And of course, that's why, you know, my standard speech joke is I loved him so much because he listened to me so little. But that made you want to run through a wall for the guy because he basically said there are bigger things than winning an election and it's what you do once you win. In fact, when we passed the Affordable Care Act, you guys may remember he

had that party on the balcony largely because Michelle was out out of town he thought he could get away with it entirely and he uh and he had he allowed himself a few martinis which was usually a weekend thing for him and he came into my office the next day and he was like the worst for wear and we started talking and he said uh and he said that was the the best night of my, that was the best night of my whole career. And I said, really? More than winning the election night? And he said, no, no, no. That just gets you into the game. But this is what it's really about.

And he really believed that. And then you see that guy in Manny's and you realize, yeah, this is what's satisfying. This is what's real. So, yeah, there is a kind of sepia-colored quality to his almost naive-sounding. But on the other hand, he paid off on it. Yeah, he did for sure. No, I mean, I guess I had that reaction just because of sort of the extremism of the Republican Party today. And, you know, you can argue we've had these fights forever, but it does seem like something has shifted politically, even though

so much of what he said still, so much of what he said then still rings true today about the need for the country to come together. Yeah. I mean, well, let's repeat his off-stated King quote about the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice. It's long. And right now, it's not bending, but you got to play the long game. And we have to survive this period. But we're sitting here at the University of Chicago. I work with young people all the time. And they give me hope. And I just feel like the next turn of the wheel is going to be better. What you're seeing, and Obama, I think, you know, people always ask me, like, well, is this a backlash to him because he was a black man? I think that's, yes, race is an element of this, but it's more than that.

He was in so many ways a symbol of change, of a changing country, of change, of a changing country, and became an easy kind of target as a result of that. But change is coming. Change is coming. So... And also, the entire history of America has been the story of backlash to progress, whether it's been racial progress or any kind of progress in this country. Right. There's progress, there's backlash, and then people keep fighting.

I think you wrote speeches like that. Now you're quoting yourself. He's quoting Barack Obama using words he wrote. I think watching that speech, it's easy to look and see all those people there and this incredibly diverse crowd and it feels so hopeful and think, how is that even possible in this day and age?

But it's also, watching that, I also sort of take you back to how cynical politics was at that time. We were coming out of Bush and the Iraq war. Yes, that was a backlash to that. And everything that was going on with the scandals and with the Republicans in Washington, Tom DeLay and Abramoff and all of that. And then Obama was specifically pushing against that system. And obviously, the make Washington work better and work with Republican stuff would not does not play now and does not age well. Wouldn't put Dick Lugar in the speech. That's right. Mitt Romney is now Dick Lugar. But I do like I do think that there is still a maybe even more of an appetite for that sort of hopeful, unifying message coming out of what we're in right now. Yeah. But yes, it is going to have to, it will have to adjust to the

circumstances and it'll have to, the language may be, but the concept, look, I think democracy is forever a battle between cynicism and hope. Right now, cynicism is on the march. But I think there are a lot of people who want to be, you know, in the secret councils, you know, of their home and stuff. They're like, man, it'd be nice not to hate everybody. It'd be nice not to, you know, It'd be nice to believe we can get together. I mean, I still believe that we do share a common humanity. I still believe, you know, if you don't talk about politics

with someone who you know you disagree with, and you talk about family, or you talk about football, or you talk about any number of things, it's a whole different experience, you know, and then everybody gets tribal when you talk about politics. But at the end of the day, we share experiences as humans. And yeah, we just but you know, we should also acknowledge that Barack Obama We should also acknowledge that Barack Obama won. I mean, you look back at that day, it was fucking crazy what we were doing. Crazy. I mean, we were a bunch of insurgents.

And, you know, one of the most—we're going to see some of the folks who were there that day who we worked with on that campaign. I can't wait later today. But one of the things that was so gratifying to me, I always say it was like Ocean's Eleven. We just went around and said, are you in or are you out? And everybody knew there was a risk in this because I don't think the Clintons would have been that forgiving if the thing had gone the wrong way. I don't think we would have had jobs in that administration. Let me just say you would have been writing Hallmark cards, my friend.

And yet people came, and they came because as skilled as they were with the tools of politics and in the art of politics, they also believe that it meant something. Yeah. And, you know, I mean, we had a great group. I'll probably say this later, but, you know, I've been watching. Did you watch that three parts? You guys are probably too young to think about the Beatles.

I did. Did you? Yeah, it was fantastic. Yeah. So this was this documentary that was filmed on their – Get back. guys are probably too too young to think about the beatles but i did did you yeah that's fantastic yeah so this was this documentary that was filmed on their really their last their last sort of album and you know they were sort of splintering off and they are all going off in their own ways but when they sat down and made music it was it was special it beautiful. And they all kind of knew that we're better together in some ways. And they were. And so we had this tremendous band.

And everybody played their role. And everybody knew. I had such confidence in the people around me. And I knew that if I did what confidence in the people around me. And I knew that if I did what I was supposed to do and they did what they were supposed to do, and of course we had the great instrument in Barack Obama, that we could be the greatest band ever. And we were. And so I want to thank everybody tonight for taking a chance.

Yeah. Because we all could have been working for Hallmark. David Axelrod, it's always good talking politics with you. Yeah. We haven't done it in a while. It's been fun. Yeah. Well, it's nice. Thanks for doing this.

You know, you guys are an industry, so. We're just a couple of talking heads now. We're all a bunch of talking heads. I'm plotting along with my tiny little podcasts and just admiring General Motors over here. But honestly, I am so thrilled for all your success, both of you guys and all you guys. And I read you and I listen to you and you're even smarter than when I ignored you in the past. Well, thank you. You have been a wonderful friend and mentor. Thank you.

It's good to be here with you. Thanks, Axe. Thanks again to David Axelrod for joining us. And have a great weekend, everyone. We'll see you next week. Bye, everyone. We'll see you next week. Bye everyone. Hot Save America is a Crooked Media production. The executive producer is Michael Martinez.

Our senior producer is Andy Gardner Bernstein. Our producer is Haley Muse and Olivia Martinez is our associate producer. It's mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick. Kyle Seglin is our sound engineer. Thanks to Tanya Somanator, Sandy Gerard, Hallie Kiefer, Madison Holman, Thank you.