Pod Save America - "Paul Ryan's my dad". (LIVE from Madison)

Episode Date: October 6, 2017

Erin Ryan, Randy "Iron Stache" Bryce, and Rep. Chris Taylor join Jon, Jon, Tommy, and Dan in Madison, Wisconsin to talk about gun safety, Tillerson calling Trump a moron, not draining the swamp, and much more. 

That's the right level. Hey, guys. All right. Hello, Madison. We have a great show for you tonight. The man who could defeat Paul Ryan, Randy Bryce, is here. And we'll be talking also to a member of the Wisconsin State Assembly who's been leading the fight against voter suppression in this state,

Representative Chris Taylor. I'm Jon Favreau I'm Erin Glory Ryan I'm Jon Lovett I'm Tommy Buford I'm Dan Pfeiffer You guys notice that Tommy didn't leave enough space for applause after my name?

What do you think that's about? He's a monster about it's your fault also in case you guys didn't hear cricket media had a few announcements yesterday we have a new website cricket.com we've made a pivot to text with our new editor-in-chief brian boitler we have a new contributor network which includes our our friend Aaron Ryan from The Daily Beef. We have a new podcast you guys can subscribe to called Crooked Conversations. And of course, we have a store with new merch, so enjoy the merch. Commerce.

What's that? They're just applauding for commerce. Should we talk about the news? News. Yeah. Okay about the news? News. Yeah. Okay. Sure. Sounds good.

Yeah, I know. Okay, so let's start with what our friends in Congress may or may not do in response to the worst mass shooting in American history that left 58 dead and more than 500 wounded in Las Vegas. So there was some talk today that Republicans may be open to banning bump stocks, which was the firearm accessory that the Vegas shooter used to essentially transform his rifle into an automatic weapon. Apparently the NRA now has approved this because this is what you need. John Cornyn said they'd explore the issue. Paul Ryan said it. A couple

Republicans said they'd vote for it So Aaron, do you think Congress will finally do the absolute least they can do? And pass this and do you think it would make much of a difference? Well, John, I think Congress has a long and rich history of doing the bare minimum So I actually think that this is an easy political point for them to score Like it's it's a it's a no-brainer that this should an easy political point for them to score. Like it's, it's a, it's a no brainer that this should be banned and this way they're not doing nothing. They're actually doing something. Um, but it shouldn't have been legal in the first place.

Yeah. Like why? I was like reading somebody talking about why they used one and it seemed like a psychological problem. Why would you want to shoot super fast? I don't understand. It's really taxing pulling the trigger sometimes. That's true. Well, unless you get buff fingers. You can go to the gym and work your fingers out. Well, so, Dan, you were in the White House when the last push for real gun safety legislation

happened under Obamaama this was after newtown and i always talk about this because there was there was a bipartisan piece of legislation to uh expand background checks and it was supported by joe mansion who even though he's a democrat like had an ad where he actually shot a copy of the Affordable Care Act. It's the climate bill. Sorry, no, he's for the Affordable Care Act. He likes healthcare, climate, not so much. Shot a copy of the climate bill. He shot a bill, alright? He's a friend of the pod.

Friend of the pod! Friend of the pod now! Look at that. 2017, it's a weird year. It's a big time. And Pat Toomey, a conservative senator from Pennsylvania, and the whole thing went down. So, like, what is politics And Pat Toomey, a conservative senator from Pennsylvania. And the whole thing went down. So what is politics like around guns?

What is the legislative process in trying to pass something like this? Well, we knew that this was going to be very hard. And the policy proposals we put forward, which were universal background checks, some adjustments in the assault weapon bans a couple things were the best possible solutions we come up with that we thought had a chance they had 90 support and we thought we had a chance in the senate but even then in the wake of newtown we knew that paul ryan and the republicans in the house would not we're gonna do that a lot tonight. All night. Hey, guys. It's going to happen. That is Aaron's uncle. No. You show some goddamn respect.

She's going to deny it now because she's embarrassed, but who am I? No, he's not my uncle. He's my dad. No, I am the better Wisconsin Ryan, just in case there was any question. Mary's from Wisconsin. Yeah, I'm from Wisconsin. What's the town? I'm from a town called Frederick.

Frederick. Nobody knows it. Oh. There we go. Wow. See, that's the one person from Frederick. Anyway, Dan, you were talking about gun legislation. And so we knew it was going to be hard even in the wake of Newtown.

Because these Republicans, remember, the Newtown parents got organized. And they went to Congress to meet with members of Congress. And the Republicans refused to even meet with them. Months after their children were slaughtered in one of the most horrific mass shootings in this country. in one of the most horrific mass shootings in this country. And because they didn't want to, they knew what they were about to vote against was the exact opposite. They were unwilling to have the uncomfortable conversation

to try to justify their position because they knew it was unjustifiable. And so when the bill went down in the Senate, so the Republicans, there was a majority of 50 votes, more than 50 votes on the Democratic side, and a majority in the Republicans filibustered it. And so that day,

you know, Obama had a decision to make. Did he, what did he go out and speak? Cause you normally, you would not go out and speak to say we just lost, but he was so angry and it's the most angry I'd ever seen him in the 10 years.

I've known the guy that he had to go out there and just sort of call everyone out on it. Not just the Republicans, but most of the Republicans but also the Democrats who, from the South, who worked with the Republicans to filibuster the bill. I think I remember him saying that was the first time he actually felt disgust as president. He was rightfully livid. What do we think about this? A lot of people say the NRA has a stranglehold around these members of Congress.

Everyone shows all the donations that went to Republican members. Do you think, is it all NRA, or is this an issue that they really care about? Is it their voters? What do you think, Tommy? I was looking at some quotes from some senators who were asked, what can Congress do to prevent mass shootings? I don't know if legislation can prevent mass shootings. We cry that everything is a government problem and a government solution,

but everything is not, Richard Shelby. Johnny Isakson, first of all, you never accept the fact that you can prevent mass shootings, so I'm not even going to address answering that question. I mean, imagine a comment that defeatist about terrorism. It's just so absurd that they would just give up and cry uncle. So I don't know if it's fear of the NRA, because I don't know that these guys really fear the NRA at this point. It's an issue that's been so thoroughly co-opted

that even discussing it in a rational way, we're talking about the possibility that a law or regulation could somehow maybe prevent gun violence is now off the table. It's like it's just beyond screwed up. It's not the money because Republican members of Congress get more money when they pass the cokes in the hall than the NRA gives them. It's the fact that the NRA has been organizing gun owners for 40 years in this country, and the proponents of gun safety have not been doing that. And so it's not the NRA, it's not the NRA, the political pack, it's the NRA members. Well, I think it's also interesting the way that people who are like gun advocates tend to view any

concession as like the beginning of a slippery slope. And I think about it in the context, and I know we're not talking about this right now, but if you compare it and contrast it to like women's health and the abortion debate, like ... Yay, abortion. If you contrast it with that, it's like you see people who are on the women's health side of the issue or the health advocates or the abortion access side of the issue who are willing to give small concessions. And the anti-choice side has, over the course of decades, slowly chipped away. And I feel like people on the pro-gun side see any concession on their part as something that will lead to a like a long-term erosion of

their rights and i don't know if it's right but i feel that like that's their approach to it yeah i mean that's especially it's especially true when you look at what's being proposed and what's inevitably being proposed is a half measure when they know full well the democrats would do much more if we could because going after bum stocks is such a tiny act in the wake of such a massive shooting in the wake of so many dozens of other shootings over the years. Right. Yeah. If he didn't have a bump stock, he could have killed 49 people. It just raises the question, like, what's the acceptable rate of fire? Like, what's the, how many bullets, how many bullets in a minute are you comfortable with?

But that's the unavoidable question. Well, so this whole issue of incremental steps and incremental progress, in the New York Times today, everyone's favorite climate denier, Brett Stevens, conservative columnist, he wrote a piece about how he wants to take away your guns, which is great. Brett Stevens is good now

but basically so he talks about he wants to repeal the second amendment he thinks we should but he he goes on to talk about why liberals keep losing the gun control debate and his argument is basically that um what liberals call common sense gun safety measures don't actually work you know the most gun deaths are handguns, not assault weapons, that background checks don't have a huge effect because when police cover weapons, they usually don't belong to the owner. So he goes through all these reasons

why the half measures don't actually work, and he said, if liberals were honest, they would say, we don't believe in the Second Amendment, we want to take away all the guns, and they would make a real argument, and that would be the only effective solution. What do we think about that argument? I think...

Yeah. All right. Applause for Brett Stevens. Be careful. Here on Pod Save America. Be careful. Because we're at the part of the movie The Edge where you fall backwards into a trap.

You know, I don't know. I feel like there's a little bit of a concession there, which I don't know that we should make, which is the idea that the only way we can have a society not overrun by weapons of war on our streets is by repealing the Second Amendment, right? Which is a Herculean task that would become the focal point of our politics,

and we'd be saying all together, this is what we want to fight every election on, that we want to make this so central. And maybe we do, but we'd be saying all together this is what we want to fight every election on that we want to make this so central and maybe we do but we'd be making that decision uh so so i don't know i mean i you know what's happening with the second amendment right is a radical interpretation of the second amendment that says an individual should be allowed to have whatever they want in their house and any regulation is a violation of the second amendment like that is a fundamentally new thing that wasn't the interpretation of the Second Amendment for the majority of our history. Right. Well, I also

take a little bit of an issue with the premise of Stevens' piece, which is that because we can't solve all the problems by passing small laws, then we should just say, like, fuck it and not pass any laws, which is ridiculous. Especially with guns. If we could prevent one death.

Exactly. One death. Yeah, maybe if bump stocks were illegal, then this would have been more difficult, or maybe it wouldn't have happened. I don't think that there's anything wrong with putting forth a lot of effort to prevent some tragedy like this. And then, you know, once the most dangerous and egregious violations

of people's right to live without getting shot. Once those are addressed, then we'll have new ones to address and work down from there. But I think, like, the fact that we're identifying these extreme examples is not a bad thing. I was going to say, I think there's legislative strategy, which is, if there is a chance to pass, to get rid of bump stocks, a thing that is entire purpose is to make a legal weapon illegal, like great, profile and encourage Republicans, but we'll take that. If we could do universal background checks, which would have an impact, but would not solve the problem, we should do that.

But what I think the problem for Democrats is we have adopted the framing of the gun community and the NRA. Every Democrat, no matter who they are, has to begin their statement with, I believe in the Second Amendment and the NRA. Every Democrat, no matter who they are, has to begin their statement with, I believe in the Second Amendment and the rights of sportsmen and hunters and the right to protect yourself, but we should do those things. That's bullshit.

That's not what most Democrats... Most Democrats do not think the Second Amendment means that some guy can go into a store and buy an AR-15. That wasn't the intention. And that's not the legal interpretation of all they believe, but we feel this obligation to say it in order to try to appease the gun-owning voters or to hope the NRA will spare us

when we're running in red states. And if we want to win the actual battle over the course of the long term, we should just argue what we actually believe instead of, we've set entire victory. Like, you would think, if we pass universal background checks and the assault weapon bans,

if you listen to Democrats, you think that would solve all the problems. And so we have to make a political argument to the country for a better position than we're currently making. Yeah. If you're a Democrat who... Yeah.

Yeah. Like, if you're a Democrat who owns guns and does believe in the Second Amendment, then by all means say that. But if you don't, then don't start all of your political rallies like, I believe in guns. Here's a picture and an ad of me shooting a gun. Do you think that John, you're saying, you'd have us believe that John Kerry wearing a camouflage vest to hunt birds was ineffective? That didn't send the right message.

I wasn't going to name names. Name names. I was reading Hillary Clinton's book before we interviewed her, and there's a section on guns, and she goes through a half a page of this standard issue pabulum about her respect for sports. I'm like, you don't have to do this anymore. This is your book. You're not doing this anymore.

I didn't grow up hunting and shooting. I was playing sports and being an idiot in Massachusetts. So I don't really have any affinity for guns, but I agree with Dan. If the middle is here and the extreme is here and we argue about this sort of distance, you never end up in a reasonable place. I think we should fight and say what we think.

This talking about things like in distances is good for a podcast. People get it. Here and then here, so there. Okay, so he represented a spectrum with his arms. That's all he was doing. Lovett, you wrote a piece for

a wonderful website called Cricket.com. There's a great piece called The Death loop about how we sort of get out of this cycle of a gun tragedy happens. We talk about what we're going to do. Nothing happens. And then we move on to the next one. How, how do we get out of the death loop?

Yeah, it's, I think part of it is recognizing the performative aspects of what happens now that we kind of all go through the motions. First, it's reported. Then people start tweeting about it. Then everyone tweets their thoughts and prayers. And then Republicans and the worst of the pundits say, this is not a time for politics.

And then it's finally a time for politics once everybody's forgotten. And I think, you know, look, obviously the biggest source of the problem is intransigence on the part of Republicans who don't want to take steps necessary to prevent mass shootings. But I also think that we as Democrats have allowed a kind of fatalism to creep in because to the point that Tommy was making, and Dan was making, and Aaron and John were making. Who else? Some of you. Many points on many sides. Anyway, so we're in this echo chamber. points on many sides. Anyway, so we're in this echo chamber and what were we talking about? No, so we recognize how difficult the fight is. And so we call for half measures and we talk about the importance of things like background checks and other small bore solutions, because I think we're afraid to really think about this like we would think about healthcare or another issue

where you don't just say like, oh, we have a massive uninsured population uh let's propose a five cent discount on on drugs or something you come up with a plan that you say we'll solve the problem and we demand our politicians try to solve the problem so i think rather than the stock of a gun control and these sort of vague like what is your plan to solve mass shootings right what is your plan that you can say i promise we're going to do these things and and when we do these things, we will see a sharp reduction in the number of times every single year, now about one a day, where multiple people are shot somewhere in America. It's a crisis we've slowly walked ourselves into, and we've accepted it. We really have sort of accepted it as the background noise of life. Like we were talking about the fact that, you know, the Pulse shooting,

right, it's the biggest one we've ever had. 50 people are killed. It's a terrible tragedy. We talk about that for two weeks. The Vegas attack, we talk about a little bit less. And it's this strange equilibrium where the shootings get just enough coverage based on how novel they are. So the more novel the shooting, the more coverage it gets.

The more coverage it gets, it seems like it spurs this virus of people deciding to do this kind of thing. So, you know, it's a loop. And I think we break it by demanding of politicians actual answers that we believe will slowly reduce the number of deaths. So just one thing to counter the pessimism. Shannon Watts, who's the founder of Moms Demand Action and also a board member of Everytown. The other day she tweeted out a list of what they've accomplished since Sandy Hook and a lot of it is on the state level.

They've helped pass background check laws in seven states, helped pass laws to keep guns from domestic abusers in 24 states, including red states. Bright spot in 2016, gun safety ballot initiatives passed in Nevada, in Washington, and California, and the groups have also killed hundreds of NRA bills that would have let guns in school and dismantled permitting.

So there is good news out there. It's happening at the local level. If you care about this issue, go check out Everytown, check out Moms Demand Action, and you can make a difference. All right. Let's talk about our friend Rex Tillerson. My guy.

I was just saying. No Rexit. It's a much, you know, just okay. Let's talk about this nonsense. You ready? I really like that his name, you could also spell it W-R-E-C-K-S. Oh, like the rum shaker spelling. I haven't seen enough of those jokes.

Are you serious? I don't know what's wrong with me. That's the only thing I think about. It's like, there's Rex W-R-E-C-K-S Tillerson. Very good. So yesterday, NBC ran a story about how during a Pentagon meeting in July, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson referred to his boss, President Donald Trump, as a moron. John, was that the direct quote?

Well, follow-up reporting discovered that this was not entirely true. And in fact, what Tillerson called Trump was a fucking moron. And in fact, what Tillerson called Trump was a fucking moron. They also reported that Tillerson threatened to resign over the summer. Tillerson then held this press conference where he said he's never considered leaving his job. But pointedly, he did not deny that he called his boss a fucking moron. So my first question, Erin, is Donald Trump in fact a fucking moron? Now you're going to have to think about it for a little bit.

No, I've never found Rex Tillerson more relatable than this week. Up until this point, I really thought, up until this point, I really thought he looked sort of like, the only way that I could connect with him as a human is if I was like imagining him as like

a children's illustration of a badger working at a bank. In the Richard Scarry book. Yes, in the Richard Scarry book. And now I find him pretty relatable.

But one thing I think that's really funny about this whole, this whole ordeal is, you know, on one hand, it's funny. Like, he's like, I didn't say that stuff about Regina George or whatever, like, on a podium. But the second thing is, like, holy shit, middle school girls have the nuclear launch coats.

Tommy, what are some of the reasons that Tillerson might think that Trump is a moron? And this is a serious question. In the area of diplomacy, what are some of the places that Tillerson has disagreed with Trump? And just why do you think Tillerson has been so bad and ineffective as Secretary of State? Sure. So the interesting thing about when he apparently called Trump a fucking moron was after a two-hour meeting in the tank, which is where it's a room in the bowels of the Pentagon where the most important meetings happen. So

usually a new president comes in, and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs walk you through all the threats in the world. And Tillerson's take on Trump's understanding of those threats after that was, he's a fucking moron. So setting the stage here. Obviously. Obviously. You know, so there's a couple like theories of why he might think that. Rex, you know, is used to being the boss and Trump is belittling him like a child. He talked about having a channel open in North Korea and having dialogue.

Trump undercut him via tweet the other day. So like time after time, he is just cutting Rex off at the knees, not taking his advice, not listening to him. In practical terms... Can I ask you a question? Do you think it's possible

Rex Tillerson's just a good judge of character? Yeah. He sounds like a straight shooter, widely respected on all sides. But, I mean... Do it. Does it on the show? Shooter, widely respected on all sides. But, I mean... The problem with this is a couple-fold. One, Rex Tillerson has made the defining piece of his job an effort to gut the State Department,

not hire anyone relevant into the jobs. So no one is home. So all these career officials who are brilliant and non-partisan and apolitical are resigning en masse because no one listens to them or respects them or asks them to meeting so problem um the other problem is when rex tillerson goes to china and tries to sit down with like xi jinping or some of the leadership and trump cuts his balls off via tweet they think this guy's got no juice. I'm not wasting my time with him. The best secretaries of state

are seen as close confidants of the president, so he is banging around out there, giving statements and taking meetings that everyone thinks, eh, who knows what he thinks. The other part of this is, you don't have to like Rex Tillerson,

the guy ran ExxonMobil, which is a real and very big company. Donald Trump is a grifter. He is a world-class grifter. I mean, his kids were almost indicted in 2012 for lying to sell apartment buildings. Like, you don't have to like ExxonMobil, but it's a business. It's a real company. I think on the Trump family crest, there's like two people lying to a potential buyer.

So they steal their envelopes. So these are the four corners, right? There's someone lying to a prospective buyer. There's someone telling a black family that there's no vacancies. And the other two are both Fox and Friends. Steve Ducey, Brian Kilmeade. So the question is, is it a good idea for Tillerson to stick around? The Washington Examiner reported that Tillerson, Defense Secretary James Mattis, and Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin have forged a suicide pact

where if one of them gets fired, or if one of them gets targeted by Trump, that they all go. But they all think that they're there for the good of the country. We've had this conversation many times. Is it time for them to go? Do you think you stay? I don't know.

Do you think Madison Tillerson had this discussion and Mnookin was just overheard them? And they're like, fuck! Exactly right. Yeah.

Like, no one wants Steve fucking Mnookin in their suicide pact. Honestly, I would not trust Steve Mnookin in a suicide pact. I'm quite sure

his gun would not be loaded. Not trustworthy. He made Suicide Squad. To be serious for a second, I think Mnookin is only there because of the debt ceiling. Because he is not, like, Mick Mulvaney, who's the OMB director,

would say, like, let's just blow through the debt ceiling and cause a global financial catastrophe. And Mnookin, because he's, like, a rich guy, he's like, no, no, no, that would ruin the economy. I Mnookin because he's like a rich guy. He's like, no, no, no, that would ruin the economy. I think that's probably why he's there. So Mnookin has a, he has a role. He really likes his private charter plans too.

Yeah, he does. He also likes that. He also likes that. So also, Tommy, there was a report today that Trump will, in fact, next week, decertify the Iran deal. How would that process work? What happens next? What are the consequences? Take us through something else we should be horrified about. I'll try to do a short version.

So the Iran deal is required to be recertified to Congress every 90 days to show that Iran is in compliance with a bunch of technical things that show that they're complying with the letter of the deal. But Trump can basically say they're not complying with the spirit of the deal. It's no longer in our national security interest. So it sounds like that's what he's doing. He'll throw it back to Congress and they'll have 60 days to decide whether to reinstitute sanctions on Iran. What it sounds like the grand plan is, is in that time, he wants to use it to put more pressure on Iran to change certain parts of the deal that he doesn't like. Certain provisions of the deal sunset after a decade, which they believe means that after that time, Iran will have a green light to start enriching uranium

and restart its nuclear program. He wants to get rid of the sunset provisions. Iran will never go for that. There's just no chance in hell. So if he goes to the UN Security Council to try to get more sanctions, it's very unlikely that Russia and China will do it. If he goes to the Europeans, who have already started creating business deals in Iran, it's very unlikely that they'll go along with whatever he's trying to do. So then we'll be stuck and isolated and we will not have the international community united

and our choice will be keep doing as we're doing or to put sanctions back on Iran and then have to like sanction European entities or French companies or German companies. So I don't see how this plays out as a win for him. It seems to be a middle ground that McMaster and the gang tried to forge to give them a way to, even though the entire national security team said keep the Iran deal, Trump hated it because Obama did it. So this is their way of like dealing with his rage. Yeah, just to go, it relates to the Tillerson and Mattis

and Kelly piece of it, which is, you know... Try as they might. Right, right. But it is true that they can't seem to stop him, but I think it is fair to be worried what would be happening

if they weren't there. Yeah. Yeah, I worry about the Bannon wing that's still kind of present in the White House in the form of Stephen Miller. Like I worry of like the isolationist wing of the White House kind of just running amok in the absence of people that are a little bit more sensible. Yeah.

And it sounds like Bannon is still calling Trump every once in a while. He calls a lot of people. Yeah. C plus Santa Monica fascist Stephen Miller. One more thing before we bring out Randy Bryce. I wanted to talk about the ProPublica story from yesterday that reported that Ivanka and Donald Trump Jr. were close to being charged with felony fraud a few years back

for lying to prospective condo buyers, which we know is on the crest. Apparently New York prosecutors were preparing a case, but then the DA overruled his staff after a visit from one of his top donors, who happens to be Trump's lawyer. So that's very cool. And I thought about this story in conjunction with the fact

that the inspector general or inspector generals in multiple government agencies are now investigating secretaries, cabinet secretaries, like Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke and others for their private jet issues, the same issues that brought down Tom Price. You have Paul Ryan urging Donald Trump.

There we go. Thank you. I like this a lot. We talked about this. You have Aaron's dad urging Donald Trump not to fire Tom Price to keep him. So I'm wondering, like, should Democrats be talking about the corruption issue more and sort of tying it to a lot of these other issues that we're debating, like tax reform, like health care, as we move into 2018? Do you think this is, do you think we're talking about

it enough? Are we not talking about it enough? Dan, what do you think about this? Well, I think there are two things. One, it will be very important both in people hate establishment politicians right now. And the established politicians are all Republicans. And so we need to tie in the corruption that's happening in the Trump's administration, the sort of moral and economic corruption

that's happening in the tax plan they're trying to pass, which was going to be a giveaways for a bunch of their donors, and tie that all into a story about how the Republicans are not fighting for people, like for average people, we're fighting for their rich donors and trying to make a buck off of it. So it's got to be a coherent story. We're not going to win the House back just because Tom Price and Ryan Zinke take too many private flights. We have to tell a coherence. There has to be a narrative about Trump and his cohorts

in Congress who are doing corrupt things that benefit themselves and people like themselves. I think that's a little bit of a tightrope, though, because on one hand, yes, these people are grifting and terrible people suckling from the teat of the government. But on the other hand, bit of a tightrope though because like on one hand like yes these people are grifting or like terrible people kind of like suckling from the teat of the government but on the other hand i think like part of trump's appeal to some of his base was like look what i have and you should have

this too if these other people hadn't stopped you and i think that the danger of demonizing like people who are in his circle is making them feel like... Telling somebody that they got swindled is not something that's usually received well. And if the left is the messengers of that, I would be wary of being like, you've been had. I think it is.

The argument there is not... People celebrate Trump's wealth. And it always has been. It's why he's famous. He's famous for being rich, and he's rich because he's famous but I do think his message about the swamp in Washington is incredibly powerful

and we have to put Trump and Republicans in Congress in that swamp and Bannon realizes how powerful it is that's like the one insight from the Bannon wing of the party is that they get how toxic the establishment in Washington is and how powerful the drain in the swamp is,

which might be the reason why, of all the fuck-ups in the Trump administration, they actually fired Tom Price. You know, he's the one. So the thing that was interesting to me about the Ivanka-Donald Jr. fleecing story was not the part about the donor, which is, you know, which is bad, but to me it was the part of the New York Times story that said, the part about the donor, which is, you know, which is bad. But to me,

it was the part of the New York Times story that said, as part of the settlement that the Trump family made with the buyers, right, they gave them back their deposits, most of their deposits, they kept a little because they're fucking grifters. We're keeping 10% of your deposits. But negotiating over that, we went a little bit. But but anyway when they gave back the 90 of the money to the people that were grifted part of the deal was they couldn't participate in the investigation and to me that is sort of the two sets of rules that to me ties it back to what's happening with these guys flying around one day and then saying there's not enough money uh for the middle class or for health care the next because you know you're not a lot of rough people up you're not a lot of you're not a lot of uh use you know, you're not a lot of rough people up,

you're not a lot of, you're not a lot of, you know, you're not a lot of kind of intimidate witnesses, but you can buy them and you can say, oh, you're not going to, we're going to interfere legally with an investigation by telling you, by giving you this money. And I just think that two sets of rules thing is what's also happening. It also speaks to how fucking stupid Don Jr. is.

Let's not forget that. Don Jr. in these emails was like, guys, it's cool. We can rob these people. No one knows about it except for the people CC'd here. We are good. Fast forward to the campaign when he's like, hello, Russian. Yes, let's collude. Let's do this.

That guy's so fucking stupid. I would like to commit a crime. Honestly, I've thought this so many times. If he were a character in a script about a stupid son, I would be like, that son is too stupid. Nobody's going to believe how dumb he is. He's writing emails. It's like doing crimes together.

You want to come do a crime with me ASAP? Love, Don. And fingerprints on his face with the day's newspaper. Okay, when we come back, we will have the man who could replace Paul Ryan, Randy Bright. We have an announcement from our friends at Swing Left. For those of you who don't

know, Swing Left is an organization that helps you find and support progressive candidates in the swing district closest to you. So they're currently targeting 64 districts that they believe are winnable for Democrats. This is based on polling, other factors. Tonight, Swing Left has asked us to announce that there will now be 65 swing districts because they are adding the first district of Wisconsin, which is held by Paul Ryan. Yes. How's that for an announcement? So this is the closest race of Paul Ryan's career.

Polling is already showing that he is less popular among Republicans than Donald Trump is in the district. So if you want to tonight, when you leave, whenever, go to swingleft.org slash crooked Madison and you can contribute and the money you can contribute will go to the eventual challenger, the Democratic challenger that will take on Paul Ryan. And that person may be our next guest, Randy Bryce. Thank you for being here. All right. Thanks for coming. Thanks for inviting me. Good evening. It's great to see you guys in person. Yeah, you too. So the crowd is very familiar with you. Huge applause.

But we're going to have a whole bunch of people listening to the podcast who want to know more about you. Where are you from? Why are you running for Congress? Why did they call you the Iron Stash? you're running for Congress, why do they call you the Iron Stash? Well, I'm a lifelong resident of southeast Wisconsin, aside from years I spent in the Army. I've been a union iron worker for the last 20 years. And I'm a father, I'm a son. and who would have thought that doing laps just a couple blocks away would lead to Congress taking away Paul Ryan's job after Scott Walker got involved. So you're running as a working class populist. You've also said that you are very pro-choice, pro-gay marriage. Pro the Paris Climate Accords, pro path to legalization for undocumented immigrants, against the war on drugs. You are running in a fairly conservative district. So what is the

plan to win? Plan is just talking to people. We've had polling that's shown that all we need to do is show somebody that there's somebody running against Paul Ryan. One of them running. You just have to be the other person. I've been told he maintains a residence in the district. That's to be seen. It's been over 700 days since he's had a public town hall. We don't have any representation. It was actually 600 days at the time I went on Mike Gouchet's show, which is a local TV show in Milwaukee, and told him, I said, it's

been over 600 days since Paul Ryan had had a public town hall. And his campaign didn't like that. So they said, we're doing these teleconferences and talking to companies, you know, the captive employees. And so then PolitiFact checked it. So I had to correct myself. It wasn't 600 days. It was 650 days since he's had a public town hall. And that's all that the campaign is, is going around talking to people. And it's like, who's more like you? You know, somebody like me that gets up before the campaign is, is going around talking to people, and it's like, who's more like you?

You know, somebody like me that gets up before the sun does, packs a lunch, goes to work and literally builds a community? Or somebody like Paul Ryan, who's voting, I mean, and now as leader of Congress, he's trying to take away health care from 23 million people in order to benefit multi-billion dollar corporations. The choice is pretty clear. One thing we've seen in some recent races, John Ossoff's race in Georgia, was an effort by Republicans to nationalize the election by running ads about Nancy Pelosi for some reason. Do you support Nancy Pelosi as leader in the House? Do you worry about efforts as leader in the House? Do you worry about

efforts to nationalize this election? Or do you think Paul Ryan, being the apologist for Donald Trump, kind of inoculates this race against that? Well, it's funny watching Paul Ryan try to take a stand on anything. He'll stand up. You never know he was in the crowd. He'll stand up, pop up, oh, there's Paul Ryan. And he'll take a stand. He'll say, I think this. And then it's almost like Donald Trump is waiting for him to pop up someplace and he'll come up with a different position. And he's like, I think this.

And then Paul Ryan is, he's like shocked that somebody else is in the room. It's like, that's what I meant to say. So people are seeing that Paul Ryan doesn't stand for anything, and he pretty much will fall for everything. So when you talk to voters in your district, what are you hearing? What breaks through to them from the Trump freak show in Washington? Because I always wonder this, like, we spend a lot of time talking about politics, what's in the news, there's the DC chattering class, there's all this stuff. And I always wonder what, how much of it breaks through to people in the country and how

much they actually care about, like, are people talking about Russia? Are they talking about Rex Tillerson's latest news? Or what do you hear when you actually talk to people and go campaigning? The big thing in the first district, and I think from what I'm hearing around the rest of the state as well, too, talking to the gubernatorial candidates, is that working people just want to be heard. They want people to pay attention to them and to acknowledge that they exist. And they're the ones responsible. I should say we're the ones responsible for what we have today. People voted for Trump. And I'm getting a lot of people that say they voted for Trump, but they're going to support me. And the thing that happened is they're tired of what's

going on in Washington, D.C. They liked hearing, let's drain the swamp. But now the people are finding out, you know, and Paul Ryan, they see is that establishment. He's the leader of Congress that's responsible for any kind of legislation that's heard in front of the House. But people are seeing that Donald Trump, he never meant to keep any promises that he made. So they're finding out at the bottom of the swamp they don't like what they've seen. And it's more toxic than what they possibly could have imagined. People have had enough of being lied to. And I was telling the guys in our union and women before, I was like, nothing says sticking it to the man like voting for a billionaire, right?

And that's exactly what they got. A guy that made his living not by helping out other people. And that's all people in the district really want. And I would say that goes for the rest of the state, too. We need representation of people that just treat each other like human beings, that are going to be honest. We care about you because because donald trump paul ryan they don't care about us they really don't when you look back at 2016 and see the result that we all obviously hate do you think that the challenge was do you think there's a fundamental problem with like the democratic party's brand or identity or how it's viewed or do you think the challenge was more specific to uh the clinton

kane ticket um there wasn't a lot of excitement in the area um for the last presidential election and i think people everybody was watching tv and saw Donald Trump, and there was just a total, you know, any kind of belief that this guy could really get elected. We knew what he was about. And I think too many people sat at home and didn't go vote, A, because there wasn't a lot of excitement, and B, because there was just, there's no way this guy could get elected. And it was just a shock. I mean, you could hear lack of anything on that morning when I woke up, I turned the TV on. I, I saw what the results were.

I turned the TV back off. I was like, let's try to reset this and turn it back on. And I tried that one too. So people are very cynical about politicians these days, obviously for many good reasons. They promise all kinds of things during the campaign. Then they go to Washington, nothing gets done. I'm sure you must be getting that on the campaign trail. What do you tell people who ask you, like, how are you going to be different? How are you going to get stuff done with all the gridlock and lobbyists and influence in Washington? The thing is, is that the majority of people, influence in Washington? The thing is, is that the majority of people, not just in the first district, but in the country are working people that we bust our rear end and we're proud of what

we do. We like what we do. And you wouldn't have, it's almost like on the verge of a political civil war in the state right now between the Republicans and the Democrats, where it's, if you see a business that had a Republican sign, you're less likely to go there. I mean, that's just the way that it is. And as far as there being gridlock, I just look at being in the military, being in the Army, and that's an issue now. It's one way that you can, like when we had all the big protests around the Capitol, and the Tea Party, you know, the ten Tea Party people were were there and there were hundreds of thousands of us marching around them. I always made it a point to go up and find, there was always one guy that had a, you know, like Vietnam veteran or proud to be a veteran hat. And I made it a point to go up there, shake his hand and say, you know, thank you. It's because of what we did.

And other people standing around saw that, that we had this interaction. It was a peaceful interaction, and people were put more at ease. And that's what we need to do is something, being a veteran, it was like, I don't care if you were a Republican or Democrat, I put on a uniform to protect you. And that's the same thing when I go out to get a job for one of our union members. I go and I talk in front of a city council or a county board, and it's talking about our membership as a whole. Everybody benefits. Whether you vote Democrat or Republican, I don't care. It's about helping you take care of your family.

And it's that mentality that I bring. Randy, thank you so much for joining us. Before we let you go, we did want to play one game here. All right. I think we have. Oh, hello. So you have these. Oh, that's it.

All right. Hi, guys. I was a little worried about that. Now for a game we call, which quote was from our pathetic excuse for a speaker of the house? Let me tell you how the game works. John, Tommy, and the stash each have cards in front of them. Some of those cards have statements by random Republicans.

Some of them have statements by the speaker of the house, who is currently Paul Ryan. Now, here's how it's going to work. I'm going to tell you about something egregious that Donald Trump, currently the president, what something that he said, and then John, Tommy, and Mr. Sash. I know his name. I didn't want to call him Randy. It felt inappropriate. You don't have a microphone. They're each going to read a response. And it will be one of your jobs to figure out which one was the response by Paul Ryan.

Would anybody like to play this game? I see a friend of the pod right there. Look at me! No, no, you're staying down there. You're not coming up here. The mic is in the house. This is close enough. Okay, hi, what's your name?

Oh my God, it's Kelsey. Oh yeah, Kelsey. Oh, Hi, what's your name? Oh, my God. It's Kelsey. Oh, yeah. Kelsey. Oh, hi, Kelsey. We know Kelsey. I didn't meet you earlier. It's fine.

Okay. I did. I totally did. I'll see you at Love It or Leave It. Great. I'll go up there. Are you from Madison, Kelsey? I'm from Minneapolis.

I'm so sorry. Oh, that's right.? I'm from Minneapolis. I'm so sorry. Oh, that's right. Kelsey from Minneapolis. I also love Iron Sash from the day he had his first commercial. Kelsey, we don't want your life story. Let's play the game. Kelsey, let's play the game.

In response to Donald Trump asking FBI Director James Comey to drop an investigation into Michael Flynn, Republicans offered this response. John, you're first. Okay. This Republican said, these serious allegations affect our national security and they carry very real consequences. It's time for Comey to testify before Congress. Could have been Paul Ryan, maybe somebody else. Tommy, you're up. Okay. I would say it's very inappropriate. Could have been Paul Ryan, could have been someone else. Okay.

The president's new at this. He's new to government. He's just new to this. Kelsey, who do you believe was Speaker of the House Paul Ryan? Okay, super hard, but I'm going to go with Iron Satch's quote. You're one for one. These were the comments offered by various Republicans in response to Donald Trump's first announced ban of Muslims

entering the United States. John, you're up. I urge the administration to halt enforcement of this order until a more thoughtful and deliberate policy can be instated. Wow, that's so sensible. Tommy, you're up. Ultimately, we fear this executive order will become a self-inflicted wound in the fight against terrorism and may do more to help terrorist recruitment than improve our security. What a cogent response. Randy Bryce.

President Trump is right to make sure we are doing everything possible to know exactly who is entering our country. Oh, that's a shame. Kelsey, where's your head at? Okay, that's kind of hard because I want to say number three. You got it. You got it. You said it. I know why it was hard because he said something else during the campaign, so we flip-flopped.

Okay, awesome. Great. Thank you. I got you. Kelsey. Attitude. I like it. Your next question.

On Trump's racist response to what took place in Charlottesville. No, not the same. One side is racist, bigoted Nazi. The other opposes racism and bigotry. Morally different universes. Tommy? My person. This is pathetic.

This is terrible. The President of the United States needs to condemn these kinds of hate groups. Randy Bryce. He's learning. I know his heart isn't in the right place. Kelsey. Kelsey. Kelsey, it is time for you to answer. Which one of those

was offered by the current Speaker of the House, a job meant to check the executive branch? Three. It is three. You got it. Cool, cool. Wait, because let's make it a robe.

Next, in response to Trump's decision to end DACA, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, people who came here as children. That's going to kick them out of the country. John, what was one response? We as Americans do not hold children legally accountable for the actions of their parents. Sensible. Tommy? It would be wrong to go back on our word

and subject these individuals to deportation. Randy Bryce? President Trump was right in his decision. He made the right call. Kelsey? Again, another tough question. What do you think? You know what? It was really hard, but I'm going to go with number three.

Four for four. Last one. This is your last question. These were responses on Donald Trump's leadership, generally speaking. John, you're up. I'm worried. Tommy, you're up. The president has not yet been able to demonstrate the stability nor some of the confidence that he needs to demonstrate in order to be successful.

And now, and finally, to the Iron Stash. I'm starting to notice something here. I think the president is giving us the leadership we need to get the country back on the right track. And whoever said that one said it last fucking week. Kelsey. You know what? That was really fucking hard,

but sorry I didn't mean to say that. I'm going to go with Iron Stache's quote. You are correct. Kelsey, you are five for five. Now, unfortunately, this is Love It or Leave It. There is no prize for you at Pod Tours America.

Good thing I'll see you in first row of Love It or Leave It. Okay. Kelsey. Kelsey, Kelsey, if I knew I was going to call on you twice, it still may happen. Guys, give it up for Randy Bryce,

Tommy and John. We'll be right back. We'll be right back. We'll be right back. Great. Thank you. Well, we know that Paul Ryan is terrible, but we cannot forget he may not even be the worst person in Wisconsin. Because you also have Scott Walker, who is... And our next guest is the state rep from this district right here in Madison who's been a leading progressive voice fighting back against Scott Walker and the Wisconsin Republican Party. Please welcome Chris Taylor. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. experiment to try to deny people's voting rights. What's happening here, and what can we do about it? Well, first of all, welcome to Madison! She's a good politician. And the 76th Assembly District, right here. So, look, this started after, really, 2010. There was, unfortunately, a Tea Party wave for the first time in 40 years.

We had Republicans take control completely of government. I wasn't in government then. They actually did inspire me to run for government because I was so disgusted. So, you know, the first thing was the gerrymandering. And even though in this last election it was pretty much split statewide in the assembly, Republicans got 64% of the seats. What are the odds of that? So it was not, yes, it was very much rigged. And so, you know, this week, how many of you listened to any of the U.S. Supreme Court arguments?

Gil v. Whitford, super important case. So we will see what happens. But, you know, we have the worst gerrymandered assembly districts in 40 years of any state. And so we know, you know, it was done in secret. The legislators, they came into the map room, they signed their secrecy pledges back in 2011. They actually redistricted me before I was even elected. Right before my election, I ran a special election. I'm lucky they didn't put me in Mars. That is coming if they get to do this again.

Just to kind of review a little bit, this case is in the Supreme Court, and arguments were heard this week. And Neil Gorsuch was a real dick about it. Well, we weren't that surprised. He talked about his steak rub for barbecues for an extended period of time, which was very odd. But what I wanted to say is I would like you to walk people through, in case they're not super familiar. It's totally cloak and dagger.

2010 was a census year, and after census years, they redistrict. So what happened in 2011? There was a secret map room where? There was a secret map room where? There was a secret map room over at Michael Best, which is a law firm. So boo his. So they hired this law firm and, you know, they basically used some state-of-the-art social science in drawing maps that they knew were designed, regardless of the statewide turnout, really regardless of the turnout,

to keep them in a permanent majority. And they picked kind of the worst, most evil map that they went with. And so after that, you know, we sued. There was lots of lawsuits. And finally, the plaintiffs, they're Democrats, 14 Democrats, working with some social scientists out of the University of Chicago who developed finally a method to actually measure the effects

of these gerrymandered maps so if you listen to the arguments you know, you know, it was Justice Kennedy, Justice Kennedy, Justice Kennedy that was totally the focus to make the case but, you know, we're hopeful. We'll see. The problem, though, is if they say, yes, these are horribly gerrymandered, which would be the first time ever the U.S. Supreme Court came to that conclusion, it goes back to the people who

made the evil maps in the first place. So we really need, we have a bill that we're pushing in the legislature. We need a nonpartisan process to make the maps in the first place. So we really need, we have a bill that we're pushing in the legislature. We need a nonpartisan process to make the maps in the first place. So in addition to gerrymandering, one of the other voter suppression tactics in Florida State is voter ID. Can you talk about what's being done on that? Sure. The evil voter ID.

Well, so many of you know, if you're from Wisconsin, you know, we are so proud. We have typically very high voter turnout. We had very permissive laws. You could do, you know, you could early vote, you go on the weekends, you could go at night. And essentially what the Republicans did was adopt a very strict voter ID law, one of the strictest in the whole entire nation. And what we know now is we have lots of studies that have been done. We just had a study come out this week that showed the voter suppression that happened just in Dane County, Milwaukee County,

by about 17,000 voters who didn't show up, who should have. You know, they either had the ID and they didn't know, they thought they didn't, or they didn't have the ID. So, you know, what we're doing bit by bit is trying to obviously turn back that voter ID law. It was, again, thank goodness we do have some courts left who actually care about people's constitutional rights. And, again, a lawsuit, thankfully, was brought by the League of Women Voters and some other one, Wisconsin Now. And we did get a court right before this last election to kind of ease some of those restrictions a little bit on early voting. But look, why wouldn't you want people to vote? I mean, this is a democracy. Well, I think that brings up a really important point. How many

votes did Trump win Wisconsin by? About 22,700. And how many people did they estimate weren't able to vote? Well, it's interesting. So there was, in just two counties, 17,000 people in just two counties. There was another Priorities USA study, now that is, you know, Progressive PAC, that found about 200,000 people did not, were not able to vote because of voter ID. 200,000 is bigger then. It's bigger. We do know that. It's much bigger. So we had actually, this was the first time since 2000, our voter turnout declined by about 3.3%.

That's not, you know, we love to vote here in the Badger State. So very, very very unusual we usually have some of the highest voter turnout in the nation um well i have a question for you as and this is a little bit not necessarily about issues just more about like generally carrying on um so i i'm from wisconsin i was born here lived here until i was 18 and uh since 2010 since you were spurred to to run there have been, like the Republicans in charge have gutted the amazing public education system we have. They've taken away access to abortion services for women, especially rural women. They have targeted

public sector employee unions. That, to somebody who works alongside it every day, has to be extremely demoralizing. And yet, here you are. So what makes you carry on? Well, we don't quit here in the state of Wisconsin. We don't. And, you know, I am in this amazing community and incredible work is going on every single day locally. So that is super sustaining. But look, the people want an advocate. They want someone who has their back. And the problem with all the rigged elections is you get rigged policy that nobody's asking for. Nobody was asking to take away collective bargaining rights for public employees. Nobody's asking.

Well, the Kochs were. Well, the Koch brothers, but they're not Wisconsinites. You know, the people in the state, they want a pay raise. I mean, middle-income people haven't had a pay increase in the state really in decades. And low income people, their wages have gone down. People are really quite similar in a lot of ways. They want a chance. They want a chance to succeed. And so I'm totally committed to that. I think everybody here is. And you know, I think most people in the state, they want government to work for them. They want people to have their back. And that's not happening. And so we will fight this out until we win. And the people are represented once more in the state.

So that's what I'm committed to doing. Can I ask my weird question? Yes, you can ask your question. So I have one final question for you. Before you were in politics, you worked with Planned Parenthood as an advocate. And one of the things that you fought for was comprehensive sex ed in schools in Wisconsin. So my question for you, so on my first day of 8th grade in Frederick,

Wisconsin, we went into human growth and development class, and we had to go around the room with a vocabulary list, and all of us had to read the definitions of anatomically correct sexual terms. Is that your fault? It's not my fault. I promise. No, I did not do that. I absolutely did not. No, but I do want kids to get medically accurate, age-appropriate, comprehensive sex ed. That is super important. Do you feel better now? I do. I feel much better.

Yeah. Great. Well, thank you so much for joining us and for everything you're doing. My pleasure. Thank you. Thanks for having me. Thank you. When we come back, we're going to do some Q&A.

So people line up on the right if you want to ask a question. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you so much. All right, we have time for a few questions. Hey, first up, thanks for coming to Madison. Thanks for having me. I had a question about something you were talking with Randy Bryce about, which is after the Ossoff race, we saw that a lot of these special elections and upcoming elections in 2018 are getting nationalized. And there's another candidate in the race to replace Paul Ryan, Kathy Myers, who's a local school board member who has a lot of local endorsements, and I was wondering, are we reaching a point where only the candidates who kind of get that viral national attention

are going to be able to run for races like the House, or do you think that there's still a chance for local grassroots campaigns to take hold? I think the best candidates are going to be local grassroots candidates. I think this is probably a unique race because it's against Paul Ryan. He's a national figure, and he's a national figure that has become the single most depressing, embarrassing

apologist for Donald Trump of anyone on the national stage. He's bad. He makes Marco Rubio look like a hero. Whoa, whoa, whoa. Let's not do that. It makes this unique. But I do think people that are going to win congressional

seats are from the community with strong ties who go door to door and win that way. Thank you. Hey. That's Elijah. He does the content. Hi.

Thank you for being here. I think it's really great. What I'm wondering is, like, your platform is so big and so impactful. How can you use this platform to combat racism, which is so important in this community. I just joined a two-day conference for racial justice, and I'm just wondering how you can use that platform that you have to combat this. There's just so much something bigger than us, and I just want to know how you plan on using your platform sorry it's a really good question I love you John love it

now it's the best question you are the smartest person in the room Everyone meet Lovett's cousin. He needed a win. He needed a win. But to your perfect question, yeah, I mean, look, we've talked about the ways in which Donald Trump

is exploiting racism all the time. I think we should keep doing that. I think all the different shows have touched on this in one way or another and will continue to do it. I think it's pointing it out when it happens.

It's pointing out when it's subtle, you know, when it's a dog whistle. I mean, Donald Trump has done something which relative, you know, he has brought back an old style of racism into our politics, right? Saying that they're very fine people. His refusal to condemn white nationalists, except when Saying that they're very fine people, his refusal to condemn

white nationalists, except when he's like drag kicking and screaming when he jumps on black NFL players, because it's obvious why. So pointing that out, but also not being afraid to point out the racist outcome of policies, like the refusal to expand Medicaid, and examples like that, which are the kind of more underlying, subtle, systemic forms of racism that are still also happening every single day. I also have to say, as a new addition to the Crooked Media Contributors Group, I'm really stoked about the group of people that you have and the perspectives that they're bringing. And I think a lot of people that are coming to the group are coming with specific perspectives that are looking to combat racism specifically.

Thank you. Good question except for the love it part. Smartest guy in the room. Okay. Hi, my name is Chad. Hi, Tommy. How are you doing? Thanks for the tickets, by the way. I got a question about when the podcast started earlier today,

we talked about gun control and how it's mostly about the actual weapon itself and not so much the ammunition that is going into the guns. Is there a way that we could actually, through legislation, stop people that are mass murderers from getting and gaining ammunition? And more or less, the hunters, the ones that actually hunt deer and such, can we give them a certain amount of ammunitions just for hunting, perhaps, instead of giving them access to thousands of rounds? Yeah. I mean, I know that

one of the proposals that had been batted around, I don't know how many years ago now, was banning high-capacity magazine clips. And, again, it meant defeat, like so many of the other gun safety measures that we've tried to push. But that is one of the proposals

that would be out there. Thanks, guys. You guys are amazing. I think a big, I mean, someone was saying that, like, just registering people who have guns and having a database and a national registry, you know, the killer in Las Vegas

had bought, purchased 14 rifles in under a year, and if you had that person registered... Was he perhaps at an NRA conference at the same place? What's that? How do you get the weapons into... Was he perchance there and bought them at a conference? No, I think he just bought them at his local gun dealership.

Hey, I'm John. John, love it. You said something once that I thought was really profound. It wasn't the first time. I can never tell, but it's just quiet enough that I'm not sure if I'm being insulted or complimented. Oh, no, no. Definitely not insulting you. You were talking about the Hillary-Bernie divide

and you were saying one of the things that keeps happening is we have these big idea politicians and it gets put through this machinery, and it comes out the other end with something that's not inspiring. And I just put into words what I think I was feeling during the whole 2016 election, so thank you for that. But my question is actually for Tommy. It's related. It's related. I promise. I cannot believe that works

it's related okay Tommy your podcast on Venezuela scared the daylights out of all of us I think and one of the things that was so scary about it was that Hugo Chavez seemed like one of those big idea politicians that was like hey we're gonna actually look out for the poor and we're gonna do all these things and that country went to hell in a handbasket, basically. And so in 2020, if we manage to get another one of these big idea politicians, they're going to say, well, look at Venezuela, that's what happens. What would be our response to that? Chavez, I mean, his big idea was, you know,

having enormous amounts of oil reserves and selling them and then sort of subsidizing the entire population with that funding that works great when oil is at 120 barrel hundred dollars barrel not so well when it's at 30 especially when you completely mismanage the economy there's corruption up and down and you've failed to diversify and you no longer grow anything in your own country like food or you know things you're importing everything right so that's i think a pretty specific economic example that said like buffoon nationalists like chavez um i think it there's a bit of familiarity with the tone and tenor of the

rhetoric from trump uh and it's something that i think worries me. It worries people that I'd spoken to who are living in Venezuela because things change slowly, slowly, slowly, slowly, slowly. Then you look back a year and you can't believe how fucked up things are compared to a year ago. So that is something that like is in the back of my head when I do interviews with people who live there, like Hannah Dreyer, who was in the Venezuela episode, like you mentioned. So, you know, I don't think it's an apples to apples comparison per se but it's good to learn from these things.

They're instructive. Trump is our Chavez. Which would piss off Trump because Chavez not white. Also dead. Thank you very much. Thank you. But that's a secondary concern. Dead white guy, cool. Thank you for coming to Madison.

I'm concerned about the insidious, creeping credibility of Donald Trump when people sit around and give him credit for, say, for example, thinking about or his ideas about DACA when he doesn't know a fucking thing about DACA. And as wordsmiths, as speechwriters,

I'm serious about the thing we have to do when his name comes up. And we have to say that he's a belligerent, ignorant, incoherent, fool, malevolent toddler who needs to be condemned and dismissed and discounteded on a regular reaction. You have to end this with a question mark. And the question mark is, what is the shorthand rhetorical propaganda to say he is a vandal of the Constitution, a vandal of democracy?

Hey, you know what? He just became president right now. This is the day that you became president. I'll do it, man. Listen, I'm partial to dotty old racists. Yeah. But I say this as a speechwriter, as someone who's written a lot of words. I do not think our problem with Donald Trump or why we couldn't beat Donald Trump is because we didn't have the right words to convince people what a liar he was and I and I I do like we we call him names all the time

we do we do it twice a week all the time um and look at all the progress we made and look yeah look how much progress we've made but I just I think when someone the people who either are with Trump or the people who didn't vote and don't think that their vote matters or that they don't have another candidate that they want to vote for instead of Trump or that they voted for him because they just wanted to say, fuck you to Washington or whatever else. I think, yes, we have to remind people of all the falsehoods and all the times he lied and what his character's like. Of course we have to do all that. But I think what's going to tip the next election is to actually persuade people why we have a better vision and that why the alternative that we're offering is better than what Donald Trump's giving us. I think that's, and we have to figure

out, like, words are important there, but we have to figure out the words to describe what we believe in. And that has to be the first task as opposed to yelling about Trump. And I agree with you, but when he says Crooked Hillary and Lion Ted and that bullshit, that gets the headlines. Yeah, let's call him out. We've got to come up with the coin terms in order to nail him whenever that name comes up. No, we've got to break through the club. I feel like we got your passion and we agree with you.

I think your heart, yes, we'll do it. Thank you. I don't know how I followed that up. Lady, gentlemen, and love it. I did it. I like where this is going. I love you, John. I love you. Do you have a question? I don't live in Dade County anymore. This is a wonderful place, but I live in a county now that votes mostly Republican, a rural Wisconsin county. And most of my friends, while they wouldn't call themselves Republican, have always voted for Republicans.

words, we'd get a beer and we'd talk and the exchange of information was wonderful and generally fairly honest. About June of last year, none of them will talk with me at all anymore ever about politics and this has continued for more than a year now. How do we fix that? I think that's the most important thing

right now, personally. How do we fix that? Can we get the rural Wisconsin to answer? Yeah, well, my advice is I like to take a boombox, stand outside of their house, hold it over my head, and I like to play Pod Save America on the boombox. No, I mean, I think that's honestly something that I've encountered

because I still am in touch with a lot of people from home. My parents still live in the area, and, you know, it's like a tough thing. But I think because I'm a journalist, if reach out to people people and I'm like I want to ask you this question because they know me they'll talk to me um I don't know how I would handle it if I wasn't working in a in a like information brokerage like conversational type job but I think like couching it at like let's just have a conversation like hey we haven't caught up in a while like let's just go get a drink and have a conversation and promise neither

of us is going to get mad when we leave like I don't I don't see how that is like a lose-lose situation especially if you offer to buy that always works here thank you I guess we had the Wisconsin Union protests here, and it was a similar vibe to what I see going on right now, in that a lot of people were really excited about politics for the first time. We had people live-tweeting Senate floor sessions who previously didn't know who their senator was. It was pretty awesome. And Scott Walker is like weak right now he has low poll numbers um he kind of got pushed around during the budget fights that ended recently um and my question is basically when the gubernatorial candidates um are kind of basic for lack of a better word um or the

campaigns are kind of shitty like what can you what can we as like voters and citizens do to like get other people excited and like hold on to that energy? If what you're saying is how do you get people excited to vote in an election that's really important but they're not excited about the candidate on their side, is that what you're asking. It's a hypothetical we'll probably never experience. Let's say, so I know a few things that don't work. Starting a podcast. It's really hard hard but I think

I mean you guys have anything? I mean I don't know I think that we all have this fresh example of what happens when you don't vote or when people don't vote and I think a lot of people who didn't vote probably feel bad about the fact that they didn't vote it literally just happened

like we can just be like hey remember that in November when that happened and how much you hated it? Let's make it not happen. We are personality obsessed when it comes to politics, and so all the stories are about the candidates and the presidents and the politicians and all the dramas around them, and it is at the expense of talking about the issues.

And I think what you'd find if you talk to people and talk to your friends and talk to voters, what they care about is not the drama between the players and the game, but like the issues that are actually going to affect their lives. And so I think we need to figure out a way to have the issues break through in the conversation and to talk about that. And if you can get someone excited about stopping climate change and affording college and healthcare, that can get them to the polls. More than anything about the pandemic. Scott Walker is fucking terrible and we should get rid of him. That too.

I'm in with that. That's a good one. And just enthusiasm is also contagious. And if you care and you can get someone near you to care and the two of you care, you can go take that out there and make people passionate too so you have to stay invested in the fight and you have to care

a lot about how this fight ends Thank you guys so much, this was great you've been an awesome crowd, appreciate it Thank you. Bye.