Pod Save America - Why This Democrat Thinks He Can Beat Joe Biden

Episode Date: November 30, 2023

Trump's lawyers preview a new defense strategy, Nikki Haley lands a big new endorsement, and President Biden fights back on the economy—and hits Lauren Boebert in her own district. Then, Minnesota Rep. Dean Phillips visits the studio for a heated conversation about why he's running against Biden in the Democratic primary, what Democrats should be doing differently, what it would take for him to get out of the race, and of course, the difference between ice cream and gelato. NOTE: the interview with Congressman Phillips has been edited for length and clarity. You can watch the full interview at https://www.youtube.com/@podsaveamerica. 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, Donald Trump puts the big lie at the center of his legal defense strategy. Joe Biden makes his case in the economy. And later, Representative Dean Phillips stopped by the studio to talk with me and Lovett about his long-shot campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination. Lively interview, Dan. Lively interview. I heard. I heard it described many ways. I'm excited to hear it.

All right, but first, the battle for second place in the Republican primary just got even more interesting to the hundred or so people paying attention. Nikki Haley has nabbed the endorsement of billionaire Charles Koch's Americans for Prosperity Action. The Koch network's political arm spent half a billion dollars in 2020. political arms spent half a billion dollars in 2020, and they're now making a last-ditch effort to help Republicans move on from Trump by backing Haley with a huge ad campaign and thousands of field organizers. The group said in a memo that their early state polling shows, quote, growing support for Haley and shrinking support for DeSantis. Hate to see it. But both candidates are still 20 to 30 points behind Trump, whose campaign reacted to the news by calling Haley a pro-China, open borders, globalist birdbrain. Meanwhile, Haley just launched the first television ad of her campaign. It's part of a $10 million buy in Iowa and New Hampshire. Here it is. A president must have moral clarity and know the difference between

good and evil. It's time for a new generation of conservative leadership. We have to leave behind the chaos and drama of the past and strengthen our country, our pride, and our purpose. How much do you think the Koch endorsement actually matters at this stage in the primary? First, I want to stipulate that nothing says more about Republican politics right now that she doesn't take a side on whether good or evil is bad. You just have to be able to distinguish between the two of them. Yeah. She wants to leave herself open to those voters who might be evil curious. Yeah. Which actually turns out is a majority of Republican-based voters. Yeah, right, right, right. I will say that it is likely that this Koch endorsement will unlock some additional money for Haley Superpack,

which is great for her consultants, who will make even more money making shitty ads like this one. Because there are a bunch of anti-Trump Republican billionaires who love his tax cuts and cutting regulations, allowing him to pollute and kill people more, but are uncomfortable in having to talk to their grandkids at Thanksgiving about all of his racism and embarrassing stupidity. And a lot of those people back to Santas. And I think Koch is sending a signal to them saying, it's okay to come in and give money to Haley. Haley is our best chance, even if it's not a great chance. But for voters, you have to have been asleep for the last 10 years of Republican

politics to think a billionaire-funded Republican establishment organization endorsement would be anything other than a net negative with actual voters. Yeah. I mean, and also the Koch network, their positions are, you know, it does align with Haley, but it's part of the, you know, pre 2016 Republican Party. They're like for immigration reform right there. And so it's just they don't really represent the MAGA movement in any way. And by that, I mean, like what voters who like Donald Trump really care about is not really aligned with the Koch network. But you're right, she's gonna have a bunch of money now. And I think it means more in terms of like the, again, the race for second place than anything else, because it just shows more people, more money people are moving away from Ron DeSantis. And I do think she's now consolidating the anti-Trump part of the Republican Party, which again is like, you know, a third of the voters

and probably a bunch of the donors. Just one more note on the Koch network is they have been opposing Trump and Trumpism and Trump candidates since 2015. How's that working for them? Yeah. I mean that working for him? I mean, good for them for trying, but... I mean, sort of, yeah. It's not going that well. I'd rather them be doing that than backing Donald Trump, but beyond that. So what's your strategy

if you're Nikki Haley's campaign right now? Are you focusing on Trump, DeSantis, both? What did you think of that ad? I know it's not your cup of tea, but what do you think of the message there? Everything that Nikki Haley is doing, including that ad, is evidence that she is not running to defeat Donald Trump for the Republican nomination. She is running to be the possible nominee in a post-Trump GOP, whether that is because he gets sent to prison before the convention or in a 2028 race. Because the math is very clear that if you really wanted to defeat Donald Trump from Nikki Haley's position, the absolute last thing you would do is attack Ron DeSantis.

The way to – if Nikki Haley is – as you pointed out, the universal potential voters for Nikki Haley is like 33% of the electorate. So what you need DeSantis to do is to split the MAGA vote with Trump. And that is evident in all of the polling. Like NBC did this poll earlier this month where they asked every Republican primary voter their first and second choice. Unsurprisingly, Donald Trump has 71% of first and second vote combined. Ron DeSantis has 54% combined. And Nikki Haley is 28% combined. So what you need for Haley to succeed, she needs some of those people who have Trump won DeSantis 2 to go to DeSantis 1, Trump 2.

But by attacking DeSantis, she's making it easier for Trump to succeed. So what I would do there is I wouldn't say I would go head on against Trump. I would run better versions of this ad. I would try to make myself seem more electable without saying Trump's unelectable. I would try to consolidate that 33% and then potentially have my now super well-funded super PAC run as attacking DeSantis from the left, saying he's been too tough on immigrants. He's been too mean to trans kids, or he's been too tough on free speech or cancel culture or whatever else to be elected. Beef up his MAGA credentials.

Yes. Yeah. I mean, look, this is all a a long shot but what she's doing right stipulated yeah like i mean the longest of long shot right this is like hail mary from the three yard line but what she's doing is clearly not a plan to be to come in first it's a plan to come in second in the hopes that number one goes to jail i so i don't i mean up until now i don't i assumed that she was attacking desantis because i don't know he was in up until now, I don't, I assumed that she was attacking DeSantis because, I don't know, he was in her sights, right? And punchable. He's very punchable. Right, and punchable, and he's second place. Now that she's firmly in second place, I would expect her, if she does want to win, to not attack DeSantis and to sort of go after Trump. I also expect, like, I'm wondering if in this next debate she'll, I would expect her to get a little bit more MAGA

because now she so that NBC poll that you cited you know it shows that her first and second choice voters are disproportionately college educated and moderate so again she's consolidating the anti-Trump wing of the party to the extent that she gained on DeSantis it was mostly moderate to liberal Republican voters or people who call themselves moderate to liberal who are Republican voters and college educated voters so that's what he lost and she gained. But now, if she wants to dip into that, again, there's the 30% that's the hardcore MAGA base, but that 30% in the middle that likes Trump, but is willing to entertain alternatives, if she wants them, she's got to be careful of not appearing too, you know, globalist rhino, which is what the Trump people are now trying to define her as.

And Ron DeSantis is going to try to define her as. So I would bet that in the next debate she tried like you have to imagine DeSantis is going to start attacking her. It's going to be tempting for her to get into a back and forth with DeSantis. But she also probably wants to take on Trump a little bit at that debate. But she also wants to keep the MAGA people happy. So I think this is why this is a bigger structural issue for any of these candidates more than about their individual personality and strategy, because they're just trapped in this party that is in the thrall of Donald Trump. Right. Look, this is nearly impossible under all these ways. And this was always Trump's to lose.

And he tried really hard and still couldn't lose it. But there are better strategies than the one she's employing, which is why I think she's going for second. I think she just doesn't know what she's like. I think she's going to, I think she wants to win. I think she's still thinking like, if I can pass DeSantis in Iowa, then in New Hampshire, maybe the Republican electorate is a little more anti-Trump, moderate, independent, college-educated than in Iowa. So maybe she can win New Hampshire. Maybe she gets just a close second in New Hampshire. And then she bets it all on South Carolina. Also, pull out of Iowa.

Oh, you think pull out of Iowa? I mean, it worked for John McCain. Yeah. And then what happened? So let's talk about South Carolina, because the polls show her trailing trump by double digits in her home state where she served as governor the uh pro-trump super pack tony fabrizio trump's longtime pollster uh so take it for a grain of salt but just did a poll there in south carolina 53 trump 24 haley 11 de santis but then when you do a head-to-head of just Trump versus Haley,

which it could be by the time we get to South Carolina, Trump wins 64-31. So he expands his lead. For the exact DeSantis reason we talked about. Yeah. Do you think it's possible if she wins New Hampshire to turn those numbers around by the time she gets to South Carolina? It is a month that she has in between.

I mean, she'd be much better off if it was 10 days instead of a month. Oh, yeah. Because then bird brain really sticks. Well, you just. Look, that is the sleeping giant in this campaign. The bird. It just you. If she were to defeat Trump in New Hampshire, she would have a huge burst of momentum.

Whether that's enough or not, we don't know. she would have a huge burst of momentum. Whether that's enough or not, we don't know. But over time, in all Republican politics, for the last, in the era of Trump, it all reverts back to the mean, always. And so a month is an eternity for her. She'd be better off if it was very quick.

Could she do it? We just, there's never been a tested proposition of what happens when Trump loses a race he's supposed to win. Right. When you have, these are not, these are imperfect analogies. I want to win. Right. And when you have, we have, these are not, these are imperfect analogies. I want to state that clearly. But Hillary Clinton in 2008

had a mantle of inevitability until she was no longer inevitable and the bottom fell out very quickly. Could the same thing happen with Trump? Maybe, maybe not. But that's,

that's the only hope Haley has. Yeah. It's also, it depends on how he loses too, because you could imagine him losing the New Hampshire primary, saying that it was rigged, starting to say that the election was stolen again. And suddenly you got a bunch of Republican voters who were like, you know, I like the guy, but we're going to deal with this again. And she just won.

You have to lose by a margin that is big enough that people won't really think it was stolen, but small enough that Trump would still argue it was stolen. Like that's a real sweet spot right there. Yeah, that's right. Well, because the Republican party is totally normal, Haley still can't get any traction against the guy who's currently battling 91 felony charges. This week, Trump's lawyers filed a new defense motion in DC federal court that argues their client had a legitimate good faith basis to question the results of the election he's charged with trying to overturn to prove this they're requesting classified information from the department of justice that they say will help

prove that the election may in fact have been rigged so dan they're going like full whack job on this one they're saying maybe the deep state did it. Maybe there was foreign interference. Ironic. They bring up Hunter Biden's case in this filing. They bring up Mike Pence taking classified documents in that case because they're basically saying, oh, Mike Pence's testimony that is incredibly damning to Donald Trump,

which they are guessing it is. And the reports have suggested that as well, that maybe Mike Pence just lied to investigators because he was trying to curry favor with the DOJ so they wouldn't charge him with the classified documents. That's the bank shot they're taking on Mike Pence. I certainly can't speak to the wisdom of this legal strategy, though I do have my doubts. But what do you think about this? Do you have your doubts?

Well, we can talk about that. What do you think about this as a political strategy? Do you have your doubts? Well, we can talk about that. What do you think about this as a political strategy? As you know, I'm someone who often swims in the dark end of the pool when it comes to optimism. And nothing has made me more hopeful about 2024 than this article. Really?

Well, the idea that Donald Trump would use the most high profile moment of this campaign, because it's arguable that the handful of days of Donald Trump's January 6th trial were to happen on schedule would be as big a news event as the convention speeches and the debates. And that he would use that to argue his insane election conspiracy theory, which is a net negative for him with the overall electorate, is such a gift for Democrats, I can hardly take it. Don't you think that everyone already knows that Trump is an election denier and that it's sort of baked into his approval ratings? And yes, the trial will remind them of that. But either way, the trial was going to remind them of that because the whole trial is about

him trying to overturn the election and denying what happened. I mean, there are two ways that this is argued, right? One is that they can't convict him and he didn't really try to overturn the election. Another one is, I tried to overturn the election because the election was stolen. And here's all my crazy ideas for why the election was stolen, which is what they're essentially saying they're going to do. And then there's one of other two theories of the overall election. One is people have a great memory of what it's like to have Donald Trump as president. They have not forgotten it. They have then compared it to what they think

of Joe Biden as president. They've decided they now like Trump more than ever before. Or there is some sort of amnesia, absence has made the heart grow slightly fonder among some segment of the electorate. If that's the case, this is a great reminder of why everyone turned on Trump. And so I think that matters a lot. And the polling on this is very clear, right? In that New York Times poll that everyone loves to hate, they actually ran this very smart experiment. Not me, not me, Dan. You know how much I love the New York Times polls. I saw someone use this one on our Slack. Are you a conehead? I'm a conehead.

You're a conehead. I'm a conehead. Not being sarcastic. You know how I feel about them. They're great polls. They're not infallible, but they're some of the best there is. I am also a conehead. Put that in the merch store, people. But they ran this experiment where they tested a generic anti-Trump Democrat against two versions of Republican.

One who said the election was stolen and one who said that we should move on from the election was one fair and square and we should move on from 2020. That latter one, the one who accepted the election results, did 12 points better than the election denying Republican. And so Trump is somewhat unique in this. He's not a generic Republican, but anytime he's talking about the election being stolen is good for Democrats. There is a little bit of nuance to the legal strategy that I think is worth talking about when you sort of dig through the filing. What they're trying to persuade the jury of is not necessarily that the election was definitely

stolen, but that Trump at least had reason to question all the people working for him and all the people in the federal government who told him it wasn't stolen and so and they're going to allege political bias and so they're they are doing what trump always likes to do which is just like fuzz up the truth so people don't know what to believe and tell the jury look i'm sure they'll say to the jury you don't have to think that the election was stolen to think that Donald Trump is innocent of what they're charging him. All he was trying to do is say that there were reasons to question the results. And he just wanted to continue questioning them right up to the last minute because he genuinely thought from X report or this report that, you know, there was going to be foreign interference or this or that, that there might be a chance that it was stolen. And, you know, we can all move on from the fact that the election happened and Joe Biden's the president, but at least he had the reason, at least he had good reason to question what

happened. That is a theory. I'm not sure that's a legal theory. It doesn't comport with a law, which does not, if you erroneously think the bank has $10,000 of your money, you can't go to the bank and steal it. Correct. Correct. But I do wonder if – It runs into some speed. Like, yes, I don't think that – I do not believe at the end of the day a man who very much does not want to go to jail is going to have his lawyers go up there and instead of trying to find real ways to defend him, just present, you know, have the cyber ninjas testify, right? I don't think that's going to be what happens here.

The ghost of Hugo Chavez. Yes. I don't think it's going to be, it's not going to be that funny, but if the thrust of it is the election was really stolen, because Trump may insist they make some part of that case, even if it's just sort of on top of the other legal theories. That is for, from a political perspective, like I said, we can't speak to the legal part, although we'd be willing to if people would take it seriously. The, is different than the federal government is persecuting me because of my political views. Well, it's also, that's the political strategy too. And part of the legal strategy here is going to be, they are persecuting me for my political views they uh they know damn well that there was reason to question the election

results but it was all a conspiracy by the deep state and at the biden administration blah blah blah blah that's all they want that's the political strategy and it's also the other part of the legal strategy here is remember they're asking for a bunch of classified information and slow it down so if a judge granted that they could slow it down right and i don't think it presumably she won't grant this crazy request but maybe then they appeal it and the whole game here is to delay delay delay because they know they have now successfully done that in his classified documents case in florida thanks to judge cannon although there was some interesting news on that. ABC reported yesterday that a Trump attorney told prosecutors that she warned him, quote, it's going to be a crime if he refused to comply with the subpoena for the classified

documents. And he said he understood. He is so lucky that he has Judge Cannon in that case, because that that to me, again, not a lawyer, but is the most like legally open and shut case of all of them. Oh, for sure. Like, hey, you're sent a subpoena. You have to comply. Otherwise, you go to jail.

Lawyer tells client. Client says, I get it. No, I'm not complying. And also, you can't take classified documents out of the White House. And you take classified documents out of the White House and they find them in your possession. You're done. God, I hope she does. I mean, we don't know when that trial is going to end up.

We know it's going to probably be pushed from May. But I don't know. Maybe September. Maybe right around the debates. Maybe it's our 2025 plan. We don't know. Trump also launched a national campaign ad this week attacking President Biden on the Afghanistan withdrawal. Let's take a listen.

As commander in chief, he always had his soldiers' backs. Was always there to support them and their families. He kept his promise to keep them out of endless wars and to never forget about them after they served. America learned having a weak leader can tragically lead to American deaths, which is why America needs strength now more than ever. So I have to admit, when I heard the first couple lines of that ad,

I started laughing just because I thought it was like a parody because it was like the service members know that Donald Trump has always had their back. It's like the guy who attacked Gold Star families, who said he didn't want to be photographed with wounded veterans because he was uncomfortable, who attacked John McCain both when he was alive and after he died and attacked specifically his service. I mean, it's ridiculous. And attack specifically his service. I mean, it's ridiculous. But obviously, there was a reason to air that. And it was partly because of, I guess, the Biden part of it. But what did you think of that ad? I think it is one of the least subtle, most explicit and probably

effective ads I've seen in a while. Donald Trump believes he is going to win this race on strength versus weakness. That is how he thinks about everything in life, right? It is power dynamics. And this is largely, sorry, Elijah, an audio medium still. And so most people didn't see the ad, but one of the things is Biden falling, tripping up the stairs of Air Force One, right, too, which is, this has been the strategy for years now. He's checking his watch. Checking his watch. That is an Easter egg for the true mega heads. You have to really know what that is. You have to know where he is, what's happening. But for the real viewers of The Five, they got that and they're proud of it. But for most people, it's to make Biden seem old and weak and Donald Trump strong. I also think it's an acknowledgement that, and we've seen this in polling before, that the stuff Donald Trump did and has said around veterans, particularly in the run-up to the election, the stories that were in The Atlantic about what he said about John Kelly's son who was killed in the war, were damaging. And Trump did worse with voters in veteran

households in 2020 and 2016 by a number sufficient enough to decide the election. And so I do think there is some sort of just trying to address that weakness heading into the general. And then lastly, and this is a very tactical thing that Trump does, is whenever there's a Republican debate, he acts like he's running in the general election against Biden. So he's running a general election national ad the week of the debate to show that he is not thinking at all about Ron DeSantis, Nikki Haley. He's focused on Biden. He's also doing a Hannity Town Hall in Iowa the day before, the night before the debate as well. So I'm sure that'll be mostly focused on Biden there too. No, I mean, it's everyone who rightly gets annoyed that the, we're not talking about Donald Trump's age.

We're just talking about Joe Biden's age and Donald Trump's only three years younger. It's really not, this ad proves that they're not trying to make Donald Trump's age. We're just talking about Joe Biden's age. And Donald Trump's only three years younger. It's really not. This ad proves that they're not trying to make it necessarily about age. They're trying to make it. They're trying. Frailness and weakness leads to chaos and destruction. That's it. That's like the whole.

It's the whole message from the Trump campaign. Leads to instability at home. At least look at the world's a mess. You're feeling that the world's a mess. You're feeling everything's crazy and it's all chaotic. And because Joe Biden is weak and frail, that's why this is happening. And Donald Trump is a strong man. And so he will fix it all. And it also, you know, as we heard in Nikki Haley's ad, one of the attacks against Trump that does seem to stick is that he leads to chaos. So this is is again, Trump trying to fuzz up his own

weakness and vulnerability by making it Joe Biden's as well. You think I'm chaos, Joe Biden's also chaos, but for him, it's because he's weak and I'm strong. What do you think the Biden people do about that kind of ad? I mean, they don't respond to it, but like what the general message that they're trying to. Is, I mean, it's what the thrust of the entire campaign is. It is Joe Biden has to pass a threshold for voters who are concerned about his age that he has the capacity and the vigor and the strength to do the job, not just right now, but for the next four years. And that's what the campaign is going to be about. That's what the State of the Union is

about. That is what the convention speech is about. That's what the debates are about. I hope that in the ads that Biden campaign runs, you see a lot of Joe Biden talking. And that is not going to be as persuasive to swing voters in terms of messaging as ads that have real people telling stories. But the people who are going to decide the selection, as we talked about a thousand times on this podcast, do not engage with political news. So they never see Joe Biden speaking. So they're going to have to, in their ads, pay to show people that. And so that's all what it's about. It's not like respond to this specific ad. And I also think there's a redefinition of strength, both in how you talk about Trump and

making him seem weak and making him seem like a weak, scared bully who picks on people, who divides people, and defining strength on what he's accomplished, what he's gone through in his life, what he's dealt with, how he's managed his crises, is you're going to have to narrow the gap on that and show that you can be strong and decent, right? And not a bully and an asshole, which is sort of what the contrast is. And that's kind of what it was in 2020. And Biden did it very, very well. He's going to have to redo that with more baggage this time because people have care a lot more about his age now than they did then, according to polls. And because he's an incumbent, not a challenger. And we like

to blame everything on the incumbent president. Speaking of Joe Biden, he hit the road this week to speak about what most voters say is the number one issue most important to them in 2024 the economy uh since most voters also disapprove of the way joe biden's handling the economy and think that donald trump would do a better job the president is stepping up his attempts to make sure people know about his long list of significant economic accomplishments uh he visited a wind turbine manufacturer that's creating 850 jobs thanks to the Inflation Reduction Act. It also happened to be in the Colorado district of avid theatergoer Lauren Boebert, who Biden pointed out voted against these jobs. Let's listen.

The historic investments we're celebrating today is in Congressman Boebert's district. She's one of the leaders of this extreme mega movement. She, along with every single Republican colleague, voted against the law that made these investments in jobs possible. And that's not hyperbole. That's a fact. And then she voted to repeal key parts of this law. And she called this law a massive failure. You all know you're part of a massive failure. Tell that to the 850 Colorados to get new jobs in Pueblo win thanks to this law across colorado excel energy is investing 1.7 billion dollars to improve the state's electric grid and folks none of that

sounds like a massive failure to me how about you he always needs like the first couple seconds to sort of uh warm up in those. Like by the end, he's sounding like, you know, he's like pounding the fist. It sounded like he's fighting at the beginning. It's always like, come on, get there, get there, get there. Honestly, me too. Same as this podcast. Sometimes I just have to have some conversations with Hallie right before this just to kind of get the windpipe moving.

You guys do PSA warm up in your house. this just to kind of get the windpipe moving first. You guys do PSA warm up in your house. So earlier in the week, Biden also went after corporations for using inflation as an excuse to price gouge, which, as you know, is one of my favorite things to do, despite all the nerds. No, attacking corporations. Despite all the fucking nerds, we're like, oh, it's not the price gouging that's leading to inflation that we had to deal with. Anyway, not to get into that. I just can't believe this is like the third podcast in a row. You've somehow turned this into a classic jocks versus nerds battle where you somehow think we're not also nerds. I've never been a jock in my life. Anyway, what did you make of both those events? I love the price gouging argument, right? Let's put

there, we do not have to have a epistemological argument about the origins of inflation, but it is very important. Like one of our advantages, and there aren't that many advantages right now for Democrats in the economy, is the Republicans are seen as being more corporate friendly than Democrats. And those are very suspicious of corporations. So we should lean into that. And this is one way to do that. You don't have to say that price gouging is – Joe Biden does not because he has very able economic staff who would never let him do this. Nerds, if you will, who would let him do this, say that that's the sole reason. Price gouging is clearly happening because the prices went up, the cost of the materials and labor have gone down, but the

price the consumers are paying has not gone down. And so they're profiteering off of this initial rise in goods. So I think that is very good. There is some tension, I think, in the messaging here, which is, I love going to Lauren Boebert's district. That is the right thing to do because that is going to just get more attention from the media than if you went to some other district, right? Some member of Congress no one had ever heard of. And getting attention has to be job number one for every single thing Biden does. There is a little bit of look at all we've done here, which I think is at tension with also acknowledging that people aren't super happy with the way things are. So you have to then make the turn. And there was a

little bit of this in the remarks, but it wasn't in the soundbites that got picked up, is we did these things. Here's what's going to come next if we have four more years. And all this stuff's going to be taken away if the other people get elected, right? That contrast has to be inherent in all of this. Yes. Well, the Washington Post had a piece. We're going to talk about this on offline this week as well. Have me on, because I could talk about this piece for a year.

I have so many thoughts on this. I'm talking to Jeff Stein. What is today? I got a bone to pick with Jeff Stein about this one. Oh God, are you one of those people? One of those people who think that everyone would be entirely happy with their personal financial situation if they didn't watch TikTok? Those people?

Oh, you're one of those other people. That's not what the piece says. I know. I'm just teasing. But anyway. Jeff's sign is great. Jeff's sign is great. Yes.

Yeah. No, they got unfairly maligned for this piece. Anyway, but basically for people who are like, what are they talking about? The piece is about how there is this viral TikTok about the fact that there's a $16 McDonald's order. And if you look at TikTok and you look at social media, there is just all of this real negative information about the economy and some senior democrats and folks in the white house and economists are saying that the the reason that people are upset about the economy is because the vibes are bad and the vibes are bad because of the way that the media covers it what's on social media etc there's a lot of other economists in the piece and other people who are like no no no no the economy people are feeling like the economy is bad because even though there are great economic statistics on GDP growth and

consumer spending and all the rest and inflation has come down, blah, blah, blah. Prices are still high. The cost of living is still high for people, particularly if you're trying to buy a house, rent an apartment. All of these things are weighing on most people in this country. And that is very real. So that's the piece. And then it also reports that Biden's team has been debating whether they should still try to sell his economic accomplishments or focus on drawing contrast with Trump and Republicans. I don't I just don't think this is a debate. I mean, say more. I don't know why. Well, and someone said it wasn't someone in the White House. It was a Democratic strategist, of course, who has been talking to the White House.

They were like, why would we keep banging our head against the wall, doing the same thing and expecting a different result? And I agree. Like, it's just you cannot just keep selling the account. It's people are not going to be like, oh, God, the CHIPS Act. Of course. Of course. Supply chains. Oh, the supply chains have been fixed. Of course. Of course. Supply chains. Oh, the supply chains have been fixed. Of course. The contrasts are the best. And he's at his best when he's talking about the contrasts. And I realize that some of these are official events. But like, hey, guess what? The campaign has started. And Donald Trump's probably going to be the nominee. 98% sure of that therefore we got to start doing more events and have more messaging that's about the like you just said the difference between democrats and republicans i would i'm and i think that they'll probably will but i would make the entire state of the union except for the foreign policy part you got to do uh i would make most of the state of the union about an agenda focused on

bringing down the cost of living you know know, introduce bills if you have to. Hold events. Say that it would pass with the Democratic House. You can say that the economy is growing. Inflation is coming down. But costs are still too high because we have Republicans who would rather let rich tax sheets off the hook than bring costs down for most families. And here's all the reasons why. They want another corporate tax cut. Trump wants to get rid of the Affordable Care Act. They want to gut Medicare and Social

Security. Here's what we want to do. Here's my agenda to bring costs down for people paying for college, for people trying to buy a house, for people trying to rent an apartment, for people trying to care for their children. This is my agenda and this is their agenda. And you just do it like over and over and over again. Yeah, I agree. So three pieces of general advice for Democrats on this. One, we do have to meet people where they are on the economy. I know that we're in this very binary debate where it's either the economy is great and people would only realize it if TikTok and CNN would tell more positive stories about the economy, or those things don't matter. And the truth, what I think, and I think was the actual point of the original Jeff Stein, Taylor Renn's piece that has generated so much controversy, is what's happening in social media

and in the news is making the problem of the economy worse, but it's not the problem. The problem is that people have real economic anxiety having to do with the fact that they feel like their paychecks are not going far enough to make ends meet because costs of things, particularly like groceries, are up. It's very elitist to think that if people would just get off TikTok, they would all of a sudden understand that their bank account is great. People are not stupid. The economy is the most important thing in their life, whether they can put food on the table for their family, save for college, etc. So this idea that they could be tricked into thinking it's bad when it's really good is

the worst, just the worst impulses of Beltway political consultant thinking. Second, stop saying the word inflation. It means nothing to anyone. Don't go around saying inflation is down. People do not understand that inflation is the rate of increase. They think inflation means costs are higher. So if you say inflation is down, yet the costs are still high, they think you're lying to them and full of shit. So we need to reframe our agenda around, as you said, a series of things that lower costs and raise wages, right? Lower costs, higher wages. That should be the centerpiece of the whole thing. That should be what is in the State of the Union. That should be what we talk about. We should frame the Republican agenda, which you can very credibly do with

something that would raise costs. Cost you more. It will cost you more. One of the first things they would do is repeal the Inflation Reduction Act, which would mean that Medicare can no longer negotiate prescription drugs. The price of insulin will go up. They're going to give huge tax cuts to the corporations where they're going to turn around and give it to wealthy investors, and they're going to raise your costs again. They oppose the minimum wage. They oppose allowing workers to organize. That's the agenda we have to assign to them and you are right and for biden again when people like well then why haven't you done that the last

four years send me a democratic house send me democratic senators and we will pass this agenda send me the like just do it that way and this is the short term but you are right like it's does it make sense right now for joe biden to go out and attack donald trump every single event every day at every event. No, but it's also impossible to do when you're president because of the hatchet. And so what do you do instead? You pick a big fight with the Republican House embodied by Mike Johnson, a deeply controversial, largely unpopular figure, people get to know him, that wants to shut down the government to do things that will raise your costs,

right? They want to cut Medicare, all those things. You have a foil, go use that foil until the moment you can dedicate all of your time to Donald Trump. Contrast at every moment. If someone asks you how the economy is, you answer by saying how Republicans will make it worse. Yeah. And I don't think that Biden has to necessarily win on the question of who will handle the economy better, Trump or Biden, right? We know that Obama won reelection in 2012, even though exit polls said people by a few points thought Mitt Romney would be better at handling the economy, but Obama still won. But I think he does need to win in terms of questions like who's on your side,

Donald Trump or Joe Biden? Who's fighting for you, Donald Trump or Joe Biden? Who's fighting for you, Donald Trump or Joe Biden? Who's fighting for the middle class, Donald Trump or Joe Biden? Joe Biden wins on those questions. He has a much better shot at winning the election. There's this sort of school of thought running around that because Democrats outperformed in midterms in 2023, despite a bad economy, that the same thing will happen in 2024. And that is just, there is no precedent for that in history. Reason number one is people do not think they're senators in charge of the economy. They may take their anger out on the party in charge if they're unhappy with the economy, but there were not people sitting there going,

man, I'm worried about inflation. Is John Fetterman going to go vote for the right thing or Dr. Oz? That's not how they think about the Senate and the House in any way, shape, or form. That is how they think about the president. And once again, for you coneheads out there, in that New York Times poll, they asked people, what's more important, social issues? Specifically, they listed guns, democracy, and abortion. And they asked the question that way so that people on both sides would think about it. Because if you could be a right-wing person who cares about guns and abortion, or economic issues like jobs, costs, et cetera, economic issues won

by a huge margin and by a much larger margin among people who did not vote in 2022. That's the key. I'm sure if you did that with the 2022 electorate or people who showed up in special elections, you'd find Democrats caring more about abortion and democracy because these are highly college-educated voters who are probably doing well by and large. And they think about politics all the time. And so they think about the other stuff. This has been true for a long time, but if you are looking at a sliding scale of political engagement, the less engaged voters tend to be with political news, like whether they watch cable news, whether they listen to podcasts like this, how much they think about politics, if they voted midterms, they voted primaries. So the less engaged they are, the more economically

concerned they are, right? Compared to the other issues. That has been true for a very long time. And it's particularly true in the moment we're currently in. All right. Two quick housekeeping notes before we go to break. Hysteria's Erin Ryan sat down with our pal Chrissy Teigen to talk about her personal journey with abortion, the impact of abortion bans, and the importance of reproductive health advocacy. It's a fantastic conversation with Erin and Chrissy. You can watch the full conversation on Hysteria's YouTube page. And also, Pod Save America is down

to our last two live shows of the year. We'll be in El Cajon on December 7th with co-host Sam Sanders and San Jose on December 13th with co-host Adisu Demesi.

Grab your tickets at cricket.com slash events. When we come back, Lovett and I talk to Minnesota representative and Democratic presidential candidate Dean Phillips. Joining me and Lovett in the studio today, he's represented Minnesota's third district since 2019 and is currently running for president in the Democratic primary against incumbent Joe Biden. Representative Dean Phillips, welcome to the pod. Good morning, guys. Good to be with you.

So, just want to start by saying I completely share your anxiety about a Biden-Trump race. I do not dismiss the polls. And I'm not sold on the argument that a primary challenge would necessarily weaken Biden in a general or the argument that Joe Biden is the only person in the country who could be Donald Trump. But you have always been very complimentary and supportive of Joe Biden and his agenda. You voted with him 100% of the time. So is the only reason you're running because you're worried about the polls and otherwise you're basically like a 54 year old Joe Biden? Oh, painful. No. And you know, I, there's this kind of, um, conventional wisdom that if you're running in a race that you somehow are opposing somebody, or you want to defeat them,

or you want to demean them, or you want to ruin them. That's not what this is about. You know, I can, can I start by just telling you a little about my background? Because I think, and here's why this, to answer your question, I think in a way that is more meaningful. I lost my dad in Vietnam when I was six months old and he had no money growing up in St. Paul, Minnesota. His dad, my grandfather died when he was a little boy and he had to earn an ROTC scholarship to go to the University of Minnesota Law School. And he's sent to Vietnam right before I was born. And he was killed in a helicopter crash in Pleiku when I was six months old. And it was a few days after the moon landing. And I think about him looking up at the moon and seeing America at its very, very best and looking down at his boots in Vietnam and seeing

us at our very, very worst. And I think we're still facing those choices right now. Which America do we want to be? And I got very lucky. My mom was 24 and widowed and I had to live with my great grandparents for three years when I was just a kid. And my mom met and remarried a wonderful man who adopted me into a family filled with blessings. and I got lucky. I was a fortunate son, and I've lived on both sides of advantage, and I grew up recognizing how darn lucky I was. And I went into business after a while and had some success. In 2016, I'm watching the election, just like you guys and the whole country, never imagined

in a million years that life would never be the same the next morning. And it was. And I woke up the next morning to my daughter crying in her bedroom. And she had just recovered from Hodgkin's lymphoma. And she's a gay woman. I didn't know that at the time. And she was crying. She was in fear. And I did not ever expect in this country, as a dad to those daughters of mine, that I'd see my daughter so afraid to be an American. And I sat at the breakfast table that morning and I promised them I would do something. that night in 2016 and felt that, you know, my father gave his life to the country. And if I was just going to observe and watch and sit back and entrust others and hand the keys, that I wasn't doing my duty. And I didn't raise my daughters to be observers. I raised them to be participants. And that's what I'm doing again. You know, Donald Trump inspired me to get off the couch, to stand up and resist, but more than resist, to lead. And here he is again, six years later, seven years later, going to return to the White House. At least that's my opinion, supported by the polls. Are they absolute? Absolutely not. I know that. And I know you guys have been a little less than complimentary of me, and I understand that too. But I do want you to know, I know, newsflash.

This goes out? to the country. It's not about that. It's about winning. It's about winning and defeating Donald Trump. And in the absence of a candidate in the Democratic primary, better positioned to do so. By the way, it may be me. It might be somebody else. But my contention is it is not Joe Biden. That's all. And that's why I've been asking so many others to enter the race. I called Gretchen Whitmer. I called J.B. Pritzker. I did a public call for Kamala Harris, for Gavin Newsom, anybody. Enter the race. The water's warm. That's what you do in democracy. But to sit back and sleepwalk into another 2016 when this time we know, and this time I know, I wasn't going to sit down and shush up and get back in line

in an institution that almost requires it. And that's why I'm doing this. If we woke up next month, there's a new New York Times, Sienna poll, a bunch of other polls that suddenly show Joe Biden's numbers have improved and that he's beating Donald Trump. Would you stay in the race? I'm going to stay in the race until early next summer when the polls really matter because the contention is right now, hey, it's a year ahead of the race. They don't really matter now. Well, they do matter because of this. The filing deadlines are passing quickly. California was yesterday, right? You can't get into this race at a certain point. So I think having a reasonable alternative in the Democratic

primary is healthy. It's not about that's all. So to answer your question very directly, no, I'm not going to drop out if there's a poll that showed, by the way, the most recent approval numbers came out this morning, the lowest in his presidency, again, 37%. So do I, first of all, I don't think that hypothetical is going to be a reality, but even if it is, I'm going to hang in there until next summer when the polls, head to head polls come out, the ones that really matter. And then if he is ahead of Donald Trump and I'm behind, my goodness, I'd be goodness, I drop out in a heartbeat and I will do everything I humanly can to ensure that he is reelected. Conversely, I would ask him if he's still in the race then, that if I'm ahead and he's behind, that he consider doing the same thing because that's what this is about. We don't want to be a cult of personality like the other guys. That's the problem right now. We don't want to be a cult of personality like the other guys. That's the problem right now. What are some of the big decisions or actions Biden has taken over the last few years that you disagree with? I wouldn't say there's any actions I've disagreed with. I would say it's,

there's so much more to do. And I'll tell you what is completely unaddressed is affordability. Great economic, by the way, great macroeconomic numbers again today. And I celebrate him for it. But the fact of the matter is that that is not translating to people who are really suffering right now. You know, with the disparities in income and wealth as graphic and wide and growing as any time in our history, which we all know ultimately leads to the demise of democracies. These are existential threats. It's not just Donald Trump. It's the lack of action in certain areas. And again, we can have a long conversation about, I support the president. There are areas that I differ with him. There's no question, but there's nothing that he has done to which I've taken exception. I do think there's a lot more to do and it's going to take a new generation. And by the way- Do you think he could have done more on affordability? I do believe, yes. Like what? What do you think he could have done? First of all, let me start with the tax

code. So I come from Minnesota where we don't tax clothing and groceries. Minnesota progressive, we're blue in a sea of red, you know that. I think starting with the tax code, and by the way, I know the president can't wave a magic wand and get anything done, got to work with the Congress. And as the second most bipartisan member of Congress, I have some credibility in that area. And so to answer your question, a president cannot wave a magic wand. But when Americans are suffering the way they are, red and blue, I do believe there's a way for a president to work with conservatives in this case to do better, starting with the tax code. Why do we afford deductibility benefits to corporations that we do not afford to hardworking families? The necessities, Minnesota, groceries and clothing. Why do we not allow people to deduct

those expenses? The necessities. Obviously, we do mortgage deductibility, mortgage interest, but why not clothing and groceries and childcare, right? Things like that. Donald Trump sent checks directly to Americans. As did Joe Biden. And Biden. And I know you guys were part of that. Yeah. And starting with Trump, of course, I voted for both.

Do I think that's good policy generally? No. But you know what happened? And of course, childhood poverty was decreased by about 50%. Americans had a lot more money in their pockets. Many for the first, more than they'd ever had in their bank accounts ever. Those weren't extended because Republicans didn't go along with extending it. No, of course.

That's my point. My point is we can't continue. That's not great policy. What we do is raise the foundation. Let's start with housing. The fact is we spend a trillion dollars a year almost on our military, which is another conversation. The fact is we've got the resources to produce enough housing to ensure that everybody has a roof over their heads. As I'm in California, it's appalling. I'm in Manchester, New Hampshire, it's sad. We have veterans sleeping in the street.

You know, it's a will. And by the way, that's not a political notion. You know, we could probably create a $20 billion federal housing bank, change some zoning laws, reduce the red tape, and have a all-hands-on-deck national housing mission that wouldn't just provide housing for everybody, would also then reduce the red tape and have a all hands on deck national housing mission that wouldn't just provide housing for everybody, would also then reduce the prices for people who are barely able to afford housing because we don't have enough. That's an example of how you lower costs for people. I guess I'm just saying that I think that Joe Biden is definitely

old. I don't know that his inability to solve the affordability crisis is necessarily related to his age because- I didn't say it was. No, I know that, but you're just talking about new generation. And I just think that the truth is the last couple years, he got a lot done, you guys got a lot done. Sure.

And the only reason Moore wasn't done on affordability is because Republicans in Congress. I think Moore could have been done. And look, I was the vice chair of the Problem Solvers Caucus. Legislation or executive action? I believe more legislation. There are people in Congress, I can count a dozen of them right now in the Problem Solvers Caucus that want to solve these problems.

You know, politics gets in the way. I'm not saying I've got the magic wand myself. What I'm saying is there are people in the next generation that will attack these problems in a different manner that I've worked with already on many of the initiatives, by the way, that Biden, that we helped Biden pass. Dusty Johnson, for example. I worked very closely with him on some of the COVID relief packages. I found that we could work together beautifully if people pushed us together. We could have a long conversation, by the way, about the powers that be in Washington that keep us separate by design so we don't challenge the power structures.

I'm not here. This is an issue of winning, you guys. This is not an issue of policy. It's not an issue of principles. It is an issue of winning right now, primarily. But that's why I've been sort of- How's he going to win? I've been consuming, well, we can get back to that.

I've been consuming a lot of Dean Phillips content. And here's what I think is confusing. Oh, we don't have too much yet, so. No, I feel like I got a good sample. But you talk about this need to pass the torch and you want, there's all these problems that we could solve, we could just come together. Even, you know, you told Scott Galloway, you know, what is the motivating thing for you? It's loss and gratitude, which is exactly what I think. It was remarkable because Joe Biden as a candidate, also motivated by loss and gratitude. You talk about the need for

bipartisanship. I find it hard to argue you could have a more bipartisan figure than Joe Biden, someone who ran, who said to restore the soul of the country and who has, despite, you know, a recalcitrant and a radical Republican turn, gotten things like the chips bill done, got an infrastructure bill done, goes to Kentucky with Mitch McConnell, tries to model best practices for how to talk to people. One of the reasons you voted with him 100% of the time is because you were able to vote for a bunch of bipartisan proposals. So if you want to talk about winning and say, hey, we need somebody younger and we need somebody who won't have as bad a polls, fine. But I feel like you're searching for a policy case because the next question after why are you running is where do you differ from Joe Biden? Let me start then. Let me answer the question. First of all, you're doing exactly what

the Biden administration is doing right now. We're talking about the past. Great accomplishments, you guys. Wonderful accomplishments. I voted for the infrastructure bill. Frankly, I don't think it would have gotten passed without the Problem Solvers Caucus. I'm proud of that work. This is not about that. That's the past. I'm talking about the future. But when you talk about leadership, is there a Republican in the White House at that cabinet table? No, we need a bipartisan cabinet because if we don't, it doesn't matter if we have a Democrat or a Republican in the White House in the future, we're going to have a disaster of division in this country. I mean, we had a bipartisan cabinet in the Obama administration.

Yeah. Love Ray LaHood. Ray LaHood was great. It's great to have a Republican transportation. Bob Gates? Nah. But let me talk about what, you know, by the way, I think the president has led the country ably.

He has not restored the soul of the nation. And I believe that takes a new generation. This is a policy issue. It is a bipartisan cabinet. It is ensuring that every American has their voice represented in their White House. If not, we're going to have worse and worse division. I want to create a youth cabinet. I want to have a common sense czar instead of just black tie affairs that you guys know very well. What's the common sense czar do? Common sense czar is going to look at every single government program agency and expenditure and make propositions to be more efficient.

By the way, if you want to talk about responsibility, when's the last president that we had in the United States that had a balanced budget? We're spending $2 trillion a year more than we're taking in, you guys. We're going to spend $800 billion a year on debt service, all for the past. We have almost no discretionary dollars for the future, and nobody's talking about it. You know how a budget agreement goes. You're going to have to, we're going to demand raising revenues if we're going to do cuts. And Republicans have decided absolutely not on raising revenues. Okay.

For 10 years, 15 years. You're going to keep redirecting this to policy and I'd love to talk about it. I'm going to keep redirecting it to winning. And if we don't win, first of all, I don't think if it's a Biden-Harris ticket right now, they will lose if the election's today. I think we lose the Senate and we may well lose the House. I agree that Joe Biden running against Donald Trump is a risky proposition, 2024. Hugely risky. I get it. Why wouldn't we have an alternative? The question is, why are you less risky? Why am I less risky? Is it just your age?

That's what I'm saying. That's why I was looking back at my first question. Is it just your age? I get it. No. Look, I told you my life story. Look, you guys have been unkind to me on the show, and I respect you for it, because this is the first time we've met, right?

Yeah. And I told you my life story. You can think of me what you want. You know, I've tried to live a life of helping people, sharing success. Business is a means to an end. I believe that when money is like manure, if you stack it up, it stinks. And if you spread it out, it fertilizes. That's my ethos. I got lucky. You know, I want to share the same good fortune with every kid in this country right now that doesn't have a damn chance. don't see the people in Washington who have been there for 50 years being able to do it. And I see Donald Trump about to win an election again when we know what we're walking into. And the difference is this. I've led businesses. I've been the board chair of a health system in Minnesota, one of the largest. I've been a regent at a university. I've been the board director of a

charitable foundation. I've served three terms in Congress. I was elected by my peers as a member of house leadership. And I'm the ranking member of the Middle East, North Africa, Central Asia Subcommittee on Foreign Affairs. I have broad experience. Is it as deep in public service as President Biden? Of course not. He's been doing it 50 years. I was three years old when he became a senator. But my life experience, my professional experience, my personal experience is broad. I believe in common sense and I believe in pragmatism. I believe in inclusion and I believe in ending this nonsense. And I believe Washington is just not listening to people. And by the way, anybody who argues that it is a wise strategy to just allow President Biden to be the only one competing in the Democratic primary when

he is losing in every poll to the most dangerous man in our history. It is just a different opinion that I have. I think that is foolish. I think it's delusional. And I think it's asinine considering what's at risk. I don't know why there's so much consternation about practicing democracy. It's as simple as that. You know, we don't have consternation about that. Then what's the consternation? You're the guy to do it. Well, that's it. That's why we're here. Hey, warm you guys where's everybody why won't they jump in i don't

know i don't know either and it is and by the way like i do think that there it is it is honorable to me that you're absolutely right ton of people in private talking about how worried they are they think joe biden seems like he's too old and then in public they they haven't gotten behind you or behind anybody. There's a lot of governors who you've talked to, who you thought should have gotten in that didn't get in. And you're out here doing it. You're making this argument. You think it's important to have that conversation. And we've talked about this, that putting Joe Biden through the paces over the next few months doesn't necessarily weaken him. Anything can prove that he's up to the job. But forget talking about the sort of the broader context of why people didn't jump in or not. You're here. And what would you say to a voter who says, OK, I'm concerned that Joe Biden seems as though he's too old, but I can't take a

chance on someone who's only been elected in a suburban Minneapolis district that leans Democratic. I need to know that I'm going to put my, if the goal here is to win, if the question here is electability, why on earth would I take a chance on someone who's never run outside of this one specific place and is untested on the national stage? How many presidents in recent memory would, did Bill Clinton run anywhere besides Arkansas? Were his numbers even as high as mine right now, just one month into my, I mean, guys, come on, you know the truth about this. This is, first of all, I can put together a coalition that I don't think any Democrat we've

maybe discussed or might be on your minds that can. The independent coalition, the moderate Republican never Trumper coalition. By the way, I flipped a red district that had been in Republican hands since 1958, beat a guy who had won by 14 by 12. I know how to do this. But it was a D plus eight district. I mean, it was a lean democratic race. Guys, you can do all the butts in the world. It was held by Republicans for 60 years. Thank God you flipped it. All I'm telling you is I've won. I've run in three races. I've won them all. I've won in primaries. The president has lost the ability to build a coalition of the people needed to win a general election. That's my contention. I may be wrong. The data says I'm right. But furthermore, that's all I'm saying. Come May, June of next year, let's just see what the head-to-head polls say. If I'm ahead of Donald Trump and President Biden is behind, what would you guys say then? And we're the only two in the race.

Would you say that I'm the better choice or he is still? But answer that. Yeah, no. Well, you're talking about May or June. At that point, most of the delegates will have been awarded. So one of you will be the winner. At that point, I'd say whoever got the most delegates. But just look at it.

It's a reasonable question. If there are polls, if let's say I'm not in the lead with delegates, he is, let's say he's still in the race. And let's say head to head polls come out that show me pretty handily beating Donald Trump and the Biden-Harris ticket losing. Would you say that it's still best to nominate Joe Biden to be the nominee? I mean, I wouldn't say that it's a good idea to upend the will of all the millions of Democratic primary voters who just voted already and said that they

wanted Joe Biden instead of you. I think the way you have to beat Joe Biden is by beating Joe Biden. Yeah. No, that's not my, I'm just asking you guys a simple question. This is because I think, I'd be nervous at that point, but I'd be like, okay, that's, those are the rules that we set in the primary. And therein lies, that is exactly why Democrats are struggling nationally right now. We're not nominating the people who can win. You guys, We're not nominating the people who can win, you guys. You think at that point, though. We're not nominating the people who can win. And if we want to keep coronating, if we want to keep coronating, well, that's what we're doing, guys.

I'm telling you. It's not coronating to award the Democratic nomination to the person who won the most votes and the most delegates. And by the way, John, the reason he will be winning those delegates is because there's an institution that does a pre-coronate. You guys know this. I know you know this. I've discovered this in the last month how this works. I was part of the problem. You guys know how this works.

How does it work? You know how it works. There are people that want to pre-coronate that hand the kind of the keys, if you will. It was true in 2008. Thank goodness Barack Obama entered and thank goodness. We ran against these guys. Thank you. Thank goodness Barack Obama entered. And thank goodness. We ran against these guys. Yeah. Thank you.

But we spent a year figuring out the rules in every single state to make sure that we could win the delegates and not just tell people, I think Barack Obama has a better chance of beating Republicans than Hillary Clinton. So go with him instead of the delegates. What I'm hearing from you guys is that I should have just sat down and stood in line and just let this happen. No. And that's fine. And I respect it. If that's how you feel, I totally respect that. I think we've got to practice democracy. We're here because we're talking to you.

We're here because we want to hear from you. We want to hear your case. And if Joe Biden was here, we'd be like, hey, man, how are you going to win? Well, good luck getting him in front of the oppressor, you guys. Maybe you can talk to him and get him here. I know. Guys, this is not a place I expected to be. It's not a place I had anticipated. I put

together a presidential campaign two weeks before I announced, and I've been at it for a month. I think we need more participation. We have a crisis of participation. I think it's good to have options. There is a primary no matter if I'm in it or not. There's Marianne Williamson. Doesn't get any attention, right? There is going to be a primary. And if something happened to Joe Biden in the next number of months, the only other candidate in the race who would accrue delegates is Marianne Williamson. That's just the truth. Why should we not, especially for a man his age, actuarially alone? Why would we not have another candidate who's able and competent and prepared? That's all. I think it's good, but I think it's great to have another candidate. What we're trying to ask you is,

you have this, and you know this, you have this monumental challenge. Sure. Which is to try to beat a sitting president with like, and we can talk about the rules. I'm in this to beat

the last president who is an unmitigated disaster for America that our current president will not beat. Every single poll is saying the same thing. It could change. And if it does, I will be the first. If he is better positioned, come next

summer, no matter what the delegates say right now, if he's better positioned, I will get behind him a hundred percent. I campaigned for him last time. He has been in my house for a fundraiser that I held for the man in 2011. I mean, guys, this is not adversarial. This is existential. And that's why I'm running. Yeah. And by the way, you keep coming back to saying there should be a race. Why would there not be a race? You're here. You're in it. We're just talking about why you should win. But we're not saying you should drop out today. We're not saying no one. I'm just curious about the strategy. I'm telling you again, telling you again. My strategy is to compete in every state I can. I'll be on 45, I think, to 47 state ballots.

Not an easy task because you guys know as well as anybody. It's hard. There's a system designed to prevent people from getting onto the ballot. And it works really well. It's terribly expensive. I've got to spend millions of dollars and a lot of staff hours doing it. I'm going to compete. But the most important part is those

head-to-head polls. This is about beating Donald Trump and bringing the country to the future. If it's Joe Biden, come next summer, so be it. I will get behind him. But conversely, if those polls and over the next number of months I introduce myself, there is affection, there is growing support, and the polls show me beating Donald Trump, isn't that a good thing for Democrats and for the country? That's my contention and that's my strategy. Donald Trump. Isn't that a good thing for Democrats and for the country? That's my contention and that's my strategy. And I'm going to have a lot of policy propositions, guys, that are going to be, I think, very helpful to all Americans. You're going to see a lot rolling out soon. Everything from social security to affordability,

cannabis and psilocybin. There's so much that we have to do. Just want to touch on maybe the biggest issue everyone's dealing with today, and it's bled into our politics as well, is the war in Gaza. Sure. You said a few weeks ago you're not there yet on conditioning aid to Israel. Are you now, or why not, or where are you on that? Well, I'm Jewish, and I want to be the first Jewish president in the United States of America.

And I want to be the one that signs documents that helps establish a Palestinian state because more than a Jewish American, I'm a human and I'm sick and disgusted by the cycle of bloodshed perpetuated by the same generations that have been doing it the same way forever. And what I saw on October 7th was the most horrifying, despicable acts of violence against human beings I've seen in my lifetime. The worst pogrom against Jewish people since the Holocaust. And I have to say that as the ranking member of the Middle East subcommittee, I've sat with Bibi Netanyahu twice this year. I've looked him in the eye, and here's what I told him. I said, when I was a boy growing up in America, Israel was the David among Goliaths.

America, Israel was the David among Goliaths. And as a result, you saw this great affection from the progressives in America for Israel, because it was the underdog. We progressives love the underdog. That's our job. That's our ethos. And I said, Mr. Netanyahu, because of your policies over the last 30 years, in no small part, Israel is now perceived as the Goliath next to a David. And he interrupted me. He said, that's just not true. I said, I'm not saying the facts. I'm saying the perception is, is that Israel is now the Goliath next to a David. And you're going to lose progressives. You're going to lose this relationship. You're going to lose support from the world. And as a result, it's going to affect all of us, the diaspora around the world. Little did I know that just some months later, October 7th would happen. And the prime minister of Israel is now putting my children at risk and us at risk. And it's the

first time I remember that feeling of being unsafe in my own country. And the fact that personal security and ballot access are the two biggest line items in my budget right now, in my campaign, is a really sad commentary on democracy. And he has got to go. Israel has got to choose a different government and a different path. The settlement policy is abhorrent. Hamas is far more abhorrent than Netanyahu. They are the enemy of Israel. They're the enemy of Palestinians. Abu Mazen, same thing. I want to see new leadership from the West Bank to the West Wing because he's got to go too. The pay to slay policy is despicable. He is corrupt. I want to see new leadership from the West Bank to the West Wing because he's got to go too. The pay to slay policy is despicable.

He is corrupt. I want to see Palestinians actually choose a government of peace. I want to see Israelis choose a government of peace. And I want to see our generation be the ones that finally affect it. Because until we do there, I won't feel safe. My kids won't feel safe. And the Jewish community around the world won't feel safe. And by the way, my Muslim brothers and sisters are feeling the same pain right now. These three kids of Palestinian descent that were shot in Vermont.

This is a time for not more division. It's a time to actually take each other's hands. My relationship with Rashida Tlaib is one that I'm taking a lot of heat for. But I know in her heart she wants the same things I wish she I wish she said different things about Israel probably the way she wishes I said different things about Palestine but we have an affection and appreciation for one another because if we can't figure this out as human beings there's no way we're going to do it in the Middle East so anyway back to the point about conditioning aid yeah I want to see Hamas eliminated. I want to see a peacekeeping force in Gaza that is not including the US and Israel. And I want to see a unified multinational task force to take out Hamas. We can't entrust Israel to do this anymore. It's not fair,

it's not reasonable, and it won't be effective. I think the Gulf states have to step up. I think we should also be conditioning aid to Egypt, which we are to some degree, but not enough. And at some point, if Netanyahu continues and the policies continue that actually affect peace in the Middle East, and more importantly, if they start affecting Americans, which it is, then yes, at some point we have to condition aid. I'm not there yet, but yes, the answer is I want to represent the United States of America. My job is to get hostages out of Gaza. We have nine Americans still sitting there and my job is to keep Americans safe. We are becoming unsafe because I believe of the circumstances half a world away. So why not? We condition aid to just about every country that we send aid to except israel we have a supplemental request

coming up that you're going to vote on why not say this aid is conditioned on uh israel not committing human rights violations which is just a law that we abide by anyway anyway exactly it's already there no more settler violence right we don't want american weapons in the hands of settlers there's been some reports that's up and And a two-state solution, as you want, because Bibi just yesterday is telling right-wing members of his government, I'm the only one who's going to prevent a two-state solution. So why not condition this next tranche of aid on those? Because Israel has an acute need for support right now.

It's the only Jewish-majority nation in the world. There are 200-majority Christian nations. There are 150 or so-majority Muslim nations. There is one Jewish-majority nation in the world. There are 200 majority Christian nations. There are 150 or so majority Muslim nations. There is one Jewish majority nation in the world. And look, when those boats fleeing the Holocaust came to America 80 years ago, if we had accepted them in the beginning, I might say, you know what?

There's another place that Jews can always take refuge in the United States of America. But the fact of the matter is, as of right now, I think there's only one, and that's Israel. And I'm growing concerned about our nation and its hospitality towards the other. That's true of Muslims and Jews and people of all colors and races and backgrounds and countries of origin. And I think our aid to Israel should continue. And I think Israelis have to make a choice soon for a whole new direction, the same way I think the United States has to but it's important to exist, you believe that for Israel's own security and safety, it needs to make certain changes. Yes, it has to. And yet the U.S. should not use its power

and its aid as a means to extract those changes by making the aid conditional. You would like to give them the money and then put the pressure on separately. And I don't really understand that. Well, I believe that they have an acute need. It's not dissimilar from Ukraine right now. And in an acute need, I don't think that's the time to start conditioning. Yes, do I care deeply about the loss of innocent lives on both sides of this horrible conflict? Yes. Can I stand seeing Gazan babies killed? No, it's horrifying. And I'm sick of it. And I'm disgusted by Hamas. And frankly, I'm deeply troubled by Benjamin Netanyahu. And I think he now has an incentive to continue this war, not to end it for reasons you guys surely know. And I do believe the United States should start using its levers of power economically, diplomatically, kinetically, in ways that we have not done so effectively for many, many, many years. So the question is, I just don't, the focus is on Israel. We are supplying aid to countries all around the world who commit the most atrocious crimes against humanity,

who are corrupt. And I do believe we need to comprehensively assess how we use our foreign aid dollars, not to mention military support. Yes. But I don't think at this very moment, we should condition the aid until we give Israelis a chance to choose a new path. And frankly, equally importantly, Palestinians. And that means investment in civil society. That means an all-hands-on-deck effort to provide security and safety for both Gazans and those who live in the West Bank. They've not had a chance to vote since 2006.

There's a whole generation that has been raised without even the chance to choose their leadership. And Israel chose a man who said he'd keep them safe. And the intelligence and military failures on October 7th are reprehensible. I'm just saying, guys, I'm a Jewish American. I care deeply about my Muslim brothers and sisters. I care deeply about Israel. I'm horrified by Israel's policies. I'm horrified by Jewish terrorism against Palestinians in the West Bank. I'm horrified by a settlement policy that absolutely has inspired this perpetual hatred. But I'm also optimistic about the possibility of working with my colleagues like Rashida Tlaib

and with the Palestinian American community and with my friends and even foes around the world to bring a better future for everybody. And we've got to start by change. The same people doing it the same way you guys is not going to happen. That's how I feel. So, uh, when I was in college, I had a Brita, uh, filter. Um, and what I would do is I would buy the cheapest vodka available and I would put it through the Brita filter and nicer vodka would come out. Are you aware of this? Are you aware that this works? No, it's, and what a brilliant Brita. I'm amazed Brita didn't make that like one of their key marketing campaigns. Take your pop-up vodka and make it into Belvedere. Is, is what you're doing on some level,

like Biden has these liabilities, people perceive him to be a certain way. And what we need to do is find a way to change the brand. And you're trying to find a way to put a better brand on a lot of the kind of policies that Joe Biden would pursue. That's a really good point. The answer is yes. My background is in marketing, there's no question. And that's how I won an election in 2018 against all odds. That's how I intend to win this election. And most of all, yes, I'm so glad you brought it up. Democrats have to repackage. We have to rebuild a brand. What do we stand for? We have to repackage it. We got to choose words that make sense to Americans that aren't so hoity-toity or divisive, or frankly, phrases that simply don't work.

There is an opportunity, I believe, with packaging simply don't work. There is an opportunity, I believe, with packaging and articulation of key principles that, yes, can be invitational, not confrontational. Why is a good man who has accomplished so much losing to the most dangerous man in American history right now? Why? why what how is it another hour how is it possible how is it possible that Democrats right now are not easily winning national elections how is it possible that we I mean we really we wouldn't we won the popular vote in the last however well we don't know and we won but we won by 40 Joe Biden won by about 40,000 some votes and yeah you guys know this no of course you get. My point is this, guys.

I mean, I believe in America more deeply than some do right now. And I believe that Trumpers are just waiting to be invited by a party that right now is offensive to them. Offensive to them, guys. And by the way, I have a great deal of animus towards Donald Trump. And I was in the House chamber on January 6th when he subjected us, all of us, to the insurrection. I have animus towards him. I do not have animus towards most of those who support him. They're angry, like a lot of Democrats are angry right now, because they can't afford their lives.

They feel unheard, mistreated, unappreciated. There's a geographic divide where Democrats are not even talking about rural Americans right now. We're not even trying to show up in places where people are actually wanting us to. And by the way, one of the great joys of my campaign is showing up in places where people aren't that thrilled when I walk in. And by the time I leave, they're surprised. Why don't we do that? Why don't we repackage, repromote, rearticulate, reimagine, be that great democratic party that is inclusive, rearticulate, reimagine, be that great Democratic Party that is inclusive literally, not just in our verbalization. And I got to tell you, I think the root of this is money. I think that in Washington, when my members of Congress are spending 10,000 hours per week collectively

raising money, who do we raise it from? The wealthy and well-connected. Who's not being addressed and listened to and approached? Everybody else. And as the only member of Congress who takes no PAC money and no lobbyist money, no member money, and doesn't have a leadership PAC, I find it hard to find colleagues to have dinner with in Washington because they're so busy going to PAC events, getting the white envelopes with the checks. And you've got tens of millions of Americans, Democrats and Republicans saying, what the hell is going on here? What the heck is going on? So this isn't just- It's tough to pass campaign finance reform, thanks to- It is. It is. It is. But I'm just saying that I'm understanding. Yeah. Yeah.

And look, guys, I was part of the problem for years. I was the supporter. I was the enabler. part of the problem for years. I was the supporter. I was the enabler. I was the believer in a system that is working against Americans, ostensibly the Democratic Party that should be promoting debate, promoting participation. Not suppressing is doing just the opposite. Guys, I'm just telling you the truth and I'm frustrated by it. I still have faith we can change it. But look at when you're disenfranchising New Hampshire voters saying their delegates won't be seated. That's suppressing voters. When you make it almost impossible to get on the ballots in states, that's suppressing candidates. And when you say proactively there will be no debates in the Democratic primary, no matter who enters, that's suppressing conversation. That is dangerous. And

to your point, yes, it's time for change. It's time to repackage. It's time to invite and use invitation instead of condemnation. It's not working. Do you think Joe Biden has an age perception problem? It seems to me, my sort of view of this from 30,000 feet is Joe Biden does seem very old, but by all accounts, he is an interlocutor in meetings who is strong. He is fully up to the job mentally and emotionally. On the other hand, Trump seems more energetic, but he's mentally and emotionally unfit. Do you agree with that assessment?

I think that's a totally fair assessment. The sad truth is these images seem fully baked. By the way, how can you talk about President Biden's age and not talk about President Trump's age? It's ridiculous. Yet the media doesn't do it that way, of course. And yes, I've not seen evidence of the president's cognitive decline. The country is telling all of us that they do. And by the way, that is my whole point here, is I've been trying to help this administration. My job on the House Democratic leadership team was to promote the president's agenda and help package

it. And Bidenomics is an unmitigated disaster. You guys know this. We tried, it failed. But to your point, yes, my contention is that American's perception is going to make it impossible for him to win. And we can spend the next number of months talking about why or what he could do. But the fact of the matter is the numbers keep moving in the wrong direction. So that is exactly how I feel. And Donald Trump is cognitively ill-prepared. His character is appalling. He has no empathy. He's a narcissist. He's unable, incompetent, a weak human being and cannot come anywhere near the White House. And we should mobilize to ensure we beat him, period. You asked it rhetorically, you know, why is it that we're so close? Why is

it that someone's so manifestly unfit? And I think what the core of what this conversation is about is some of that can very fairly be laid at the feet of Democrats and that would come for any Democrat anywhere. And the idea that what we need, that you can't have a Democrat run for president without facing the Republican machine, propaganda apparatus, noise and onslaught. And I think sometimes people look for that. Andrew Yang looks for that. They want center left or centrist policies without all the political baggage. But the problem is the political baggage comes once you're within a striking distance of actual power. And it seems to me that at the core of this, you are asking for us to switch from what is one big risk, which is Joe Biden, to another risk, which is you. And I think what, this is not about whether or not you have the right to pursue that, but I think the question is, can you make that case? And right now-

You're saying in the head-to-head matchup against Donald Trump that I i'm a bigger risk than joe biden and tom blair potentially oh wow then that then that is just the fun maybe and by the way i mean we don't know we're all sitting here we're trying to figure it out and that's exactly and that's exactly and that's exact i'm glad we're having that's exactly the root of this whole conversation and that's exactly why i offered myself to be the alternative because my belief is it's just the opposite i believe in 2020 joe b Biden was the only one that probably could have beat Donald Trump and he did by 40,000 votes in a few states. Ronald Reagan, remember his old line was, are you better off now than you were four years ago?

Do you think Joe Biden is better positioned now? Do you think Joe Biden is better positioned now than he was four years ago when he won by 40,000 votes in a few states? Intuitively, I say no. The national polls, the battleground polls- No, I don't think Donald Trump is better positioned either. Neither of them are better positioned. But then why are the numbers saying that he is? Why are the same polls that basically predicted the outcome of the recent elections, why are those suddenly right, but the ones showing that Trump is going to beat Biden? They're not wrong. But back to the point, you guys.

It's just a difference of opinion. If you think that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are better positioned to beat Donald Trump, then I will be by next summer, and time will tell. And by the way, that's all I'm asking for, is come meet me, challenge me, ask me questions, give me a chance to practice democracy. Let me make my case. Let's see what the polls say in summer next year. And then Democrats will ultimately be able to make a choice at the convention about who they believe is best positioned to prevent not just tragedy, but I think an existential threat to the entire democracy. And by the way, I may be wrong. And if I am, I'll admit it. And if the president is wrong, I hope he does too. And that's all I'm asking for. Dean Phillips, thanks for showing up. Thanks for showing up and answering

our questions. And the reason we were digging into the policy stuff is because for what you just said, we wanted to hear you make your case. Well, there's a lot more. If you have me back, I'll talk policy because I'm working on a lot of propositions that I think will be very compelling, not just to Democrats, but to Republicans. And back to your one more thing, packaging. Until Democrats start unifying behind the need to create a brand, what it stands for, articulate it, and start inviting people, we will not succeed in the way that I know we can and we will. And change is coming. You have ideas on that too? I have a few ideas on how to package.

Call ice cream gelato? Is that the plan? No, it's just the opposite. I'm a beer candidate, not a wine candidate. Oh, but gelato? Gelato is a fancy word for ice cream. That's all I wanted to hear. That's all I wanted to hear. Can I tell you a quick story about that quick?

Sure. All right. So you're going to like this story. So Talenti was started by my partner, Josh Hochschuler. He opened a gelato shop in Dallas 20 years ago. It was failing miserably. He gets an order for gelato from his grocery store down the street. He could not afford to make a pint, like a Ben & Jerry's and Haagen-Dazs pint, could not afford the package. So he went to a surplus store and found a thousand

clear plastic jars with a screw-up lid that he could just put a little label on. So the fact that he had no resources literally created one of the most beautiful ice cream brands in the world. He had no money and had to buy the closeout clear jar. And the brand starts doing well. We become his partner in about 2012. And we introduced a product called Dulce de Leche, thinking that gelato had to be fancy. And this gets back to the democratic brand building. We thought a fancy name would be the best, and the brand sold. It was like our 10th best-selling item. It didn't do very well. And then we changed it to sea salt caramel, and it became our number one selling flavor. Get me. You got me there. That's my favorite. So here's the moral of the story.

Democrats have to start talking in sea salt caramel terms. And until we do, I think it's going to be really hard to win elections the way that I think we should be and we will be. And that's the moral of the story. All right. Sea salt caramel. Dean Phillips, thanks for stopping by Pod Save America. Hey guys, thanks for the invitation.

Keep the faith and keep in touch. Alright, take care. Thanks to Dean Phillips for joining and everyone have a great weekend. We'll talk to you next week. Bye everyone. Pod Save America is a Crooked Media production. Our producers are Olivia Martinez and David Toledo.

Our associate producer is Farrah Safari. Writing support from Hallie Kiefer. Reid Cherlin is our executive producer. The show is mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick. Jordan Cantor is our sound engineer, with audio support from Kyle Seglin and Charlotte Landis. Madeline Herringer is our head of news and programming. Matt DeGroat is our head of production.

Andy Taft is our executive assistant. Thanks to our digital team. Thank you. at Pod Save America. Finally, you can join our Friends of the Pod subscription community for ad-free episodes, exclusive content, and a great discussion on Discord. Plus, it's a great way to get involved with Vote Save America. Sign up at crooked.com slash friends.