Pod Save the World - Zelensky's Plea To Congress

Episode Date: December 13, 2023

Tommy and Ben discuss the dire humanitarian situation on the ground in Gaza and the disconnect between the Biden administration’s words and deeds when it comes to protecting civilians in Gaza, including the veto of a UN Security resolution calling for a ceasefire and additional weapons sales to Israel. They also discuss Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s visit to Washington and plea for more security assistance, and republican efforts to tie Ukraine funding to border security, the mess at the UN’s climate summit, a territorial dispute between Venezuela and Guyana, a masked mystery candidate running for president in Ghana and Elijah Wood’s Russian propaganda blunder on Cameo. Then, Max Fisher joins the show to discuss trends in global elections in 2023, and how 2024 may be the biggest election year in history. 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 Pots Save the World. I'm Tommy Vitor. I'm Ben Rhodes. Welcome home. Thank you. How's the jet lag? It's a little rough. I've been waking up at like 4.30, you know. I thought it might be rough.

So I wanted to read you a motivational speech to get you pumped up for today's episode. I hope that's okay. This is from an article in The Athletic by a reporter named Tyler Dunn about a motivational speech delivered by Buffalo Bill's head coach Sean McDermott, I think, at 2019. This is from the article. McDermott's morning address began innocently enough. He told the entire team they needed to do. come together. But then, sources say, he used a strange model. The terrorist attacks

on September 11th, 2001. He cited the hijackers as a group of people who are all about to get on the same page to orchestrate attacks to perfection. One by one, McDermott started asking specific players in the room questions. What tactics do you think they used to come together? A young

player tried to answer. What do you think their biggest obstacle was? A veteran answered, TSA. I guess he was he before it was the cool thing was he getting into the bin laden fatwa or whatever it was that's a good point he was probably on tic-tok yeah maybe it was like early days you know what you just explain this whole thing that's like a parody of a terrible head coach motivational speech yeah like i i i if someone wrote that in a movie i'm not sure i would believe it i would not believe it yeah yeah

but do you feel pumped up i'm fired up are you ready to go can you be my mohammed ato or whatever no let's do we're not okay uh for the record We didn't go there. We're moving on from that. All right, we're going to cover all the latest from Gaza, the Biden administration's shifting messaging, but maybe not so shifting tactics. President Zelensky's visit to D.C. in the fate of funding for Ukraine, the latest from the UN Climate Change Summit, not great news there, why people are worried about Venezuela,

potentially invading its neighbor Guyana, mass candidates and cameo causing people problems all over the world then. And then Crooked Media's own Max Fisher is going to join to talk about the just absurd number of elections happening in 2024. Yeah, but some of them, I mean, I don't know that the outcome of the Russian election is so much doubt. You don't think Putin's got a strong and better. So it's like, when I hear the statistic, you know, half the world is having elections, it's kind of like, well, they're not all like equally contested. Let's just varying levels of free and fair. Yes. But important nonetheless. So we're excited for that. But let's start with Gaza because, what, we're like two months into the war now,

a little more. And I don't think you can overstate how bad the situation on the ground currently is. So the official casualty estimates are as high as 18,000 dead. The IDF told CNN that they estimate they've killed 7,000 Hamas fighters, which means the majority of the rest killed or the majority of the total killed are civilians. And by the way, there's likely hundreds, if not thousands of people still trapped in the rubble that we just don't know about. The World Health Organization says they've recorded 369,000 cases of infectious diseases. diseases since the war started. And that figure does not include northern Gaza because it's been totally cut off. There are also outbreaks of lice, scabies. The water supply has been polluted by

raw sewage, by dead bodies, by God knows what else. Those who followed orders early on in this conflict and fled their homes are now trying to figure out how to survive in December when it's much colder and they don't have the appropriate clothes. They don't have blankets. There are dire shortages of food and water, even in refugee camps where people were told to go. The World Food Program reported that 83% of households in southern Gaza have an inadequate food consumption and 38% are suffering from severe levels of hunger. And the military campaign is still ongoing. There are still massive airstrikes, the siege of major population centers. Israeli troops were reportedly hunting for Hamas's top leader in Gaza, the alleged mastermind of the October 7th attacks, Yaga Sinwar.

We just saw an article that neither was had time to read yet that the IDF is starting to flood the Hamas tunnel infrastructure with CWR, water, really wonder what that means for hostages if they're in there. And then, Ben, in the past few days, there have been these videos emerging on social media of semi-naked Palestinian men blindfolded in sitting in a row on streets in Gaza or being backed into Israeli army trucks or being essentially just held there by the IDF. The IDF says these are members of Hamas who had surrendered, but news reports identified a number of civilians, including a journalist and a UN worker. So nowhere does it seem like there's enough aid getting in. The list of horribles could go further, but I'll just pause there. The key point here is that, you know, with a brief exception of the ceasefire period, every week,

the humanitarian situation is getting worse and worse. And at some point, experts are warning. It is just going to collapse, and you may see the mass death of civilians from disease or starvation. And it's just, you know, it's an indefensible policy at this point. It doesn't seem like there's any end in sight beyond some sort of capture or killing of Sinwar. Yeah, the brief pause was followed by the kind of full continuation of the military operation like we talked about last week. There wasn't any effort to kind of recalibrate it based on all the U.S. messaging about the need to protect civilians, which I'm sure we'll talk about here. I think the important point that you hit on is that there's like an exponential way in which the situation is deterioration.

though. It's not just the horrific nature of bombs falling on civilians. It's also this increasing factor of food and disease and the kind of thing that could make this a totally unique and unmitigated kind of humanitarian catastrophe in a condensed, incredibly condensed space, keeping in mind that people can't get out. They have nowhere to go. They can't go to Egypt. They can't obviously go into Israel. There's nowhere for the to go. They're trapped in there as this military operation proceeds. To people who've been, you know, questioning the death toll, I'd be very careful about that because I expect that it's higher. I did too. Much higher. There's people in rubble almost certainly. And it's a completely

chaotic situation and the health infrastructure is breaking down. So yeah, you captured it, Tommy, this is a real human catastrophe that we're watching unfold before our eyes. And so, you know, last week we talked about how the Biden administration's rhetoric on Gaza was slowly and incrementally shifting. That included this warning from Lloyd Austin, the Secretary of Defense, that Israel could suffer a strategic defeat if they don't do a better job, protecting civilians. More recently, Biden warned, I think there was a fundraising event the other day, Biden warned that Israel was losing support from Europe and other parts of the world because of quote, indiscriminate bombing. Biden also said there is disagreement about the day after Hamas,

and I hope that we will reach agreement here as well. And he said Netanyahu needs to change up his cabinet and get rid of right-wing ministers like Tamar Ben-Gavir. But of course, like I mentioned, Biden said this at a campaign fundraiser. There's no TV footage that we know of. It wasn't some major speech. There's no coverage of it. But the U.S. actions still are fully supportive of Israel. Last Friday, the U.S. vetoed a U.N. Security Council resolution demanding an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. That vote was 13 to 1, with the U.S. being the only country to vote no and the U.K. abstaining. The Security Council called that meeting after the U.N. Secretary General invoked this rarely used authority he has to warn, quote, there is a high risk of the total collapse of the humanitarian support system in Gaza.

But then later that Friday, the U.S. pushed through the sale of 13,000 rounds of tank ammunition to Israel, valued at about $100 million. The State Department invoked a provision of the Arms Export Control Act that allows them, to bypass Congress in an emergency. Here's a clip of Secretary of State Tony Blinken talking about the transfer of those tank rounds from over the weekend. When it comes to the weapons that we transfer,

there are rules that go along with them. Those rules apply to Israel as they do to any other country, including the way they're used and the need, the imperative of respecting internationally humanitarian law. In the case of these particular weapons that you mentioned, Israel is in combat right now with a monster a group that viciously attacked it on October 7th,

that has said that it, given the opportunity, it will repeat October 7th again and again and again, that continues to launch rockets against Israeli civilians. And we want to make sure that Israel has what it needs to defend itself against Amas. A small portion of what has been requested is going through on an emergency basis, that is moving quickly so that Israel can have what it needs in hand. But virtually everything else is going through the regular order, through Congress. So they're still seeking an additional, I think, $14 billion or so in security systems.

The Washington Post reported that Israel used U.S. supplied white phosphorus munitions in southern Lebanon. This poorly happened back in October, injured nine civilians, the type of shell that basically ejects cloth soaked in white phosphorus that burns, creates lots of smoke to obscure troop movements. But it burns as hot as 1,500 degrees, causing severe injuries in force. fires and misuse of those shells could be a war crime. The White House says they're investigating. So, Ben, I lay all that out because the administration's rhetoric is slowly shifting, but the world is seeing these actions, right? With the world is seeing the veto, the weapon shipment, the white phosphorus reports. They're not, it kind of doesn't matter what Biden says at a closed-door fundraiser. Yeah, there's two reasons, you know, for the shift in tone from the

administration. We've talked before about how they, they themselves describe their approach as kind of hugging BB, hugging Israel and public and delivering this advice in private and then presumably reading out that on background. But there are two reasons that you would calibrate your messaging as the administration has around the need to limit civilian casualties and follow laws of war and Lloyd Austin's warning. One is to try to affect Bibi Netanyahu's behavior. And thus far, I think it's clear that there's been no effect on Bibi Netanyahu's behavior. They've not adjusted their tactics at all. And then the second is to kind of send a message to the world that we don't approve of everything that Israel is doing, that we understand the humanitarian disaster in Gaza.

We're trying to address that. The problem is the world doesn't care that you're saying that if your actions are you're vetoing a ceasefire at the UN and you're expediting the delivery of the weapons that are being used in the military operation. they are behind. They're, they're weeks behind, you know, there's no credit for, you know, reading out that, you know, you'd like them to do something differently. The other challenge I have is that if you're saying that more needs to be done to protect civilians and you're saying that you'll still deliver these weapons and you're saying that you won't put any conditions on those weapons, then what is your leverage? It just, there's a complete discordant. between saying that you don't think they're doing enough to protect civilians, but saying

we're still going to deliver all this and hold them to the same standard that we'd hold others to, because you're not holding them to the same standards that you're holding others to. Because if we were saying about anybody else that we delivered weapons to that we don't think they're doing enough to protect civilians, presumably there'd be a halt on those deliveries and some conditions attached to it. And so there's at some point you have to say publicly what you would like to see differently, not just that we do not agree with X, we do not agree with Y, we'd like to see this instead. And they have to get there because the current situation, it's just not tenable to try to have it both ways to say,

we hug BB, we won't criticize him in public, we won't impose any conditions on things, but we're concerned about these things that we're seeing, you know. And I want to give one example on weapons, too, because, you know, these huge bombs, these thousand and two thousand-and-pound box, These, you'll remember Tommy, this came up at the Obama administration, these so-called bunker buster weapons that Israel wanted. These were meant the case that Israel made for why they wanted, for instance, those weapons was, and this is not a secret. I mean, this is, I think, would just be logic, you know, if there was some contingency around

like a deep underground Iranian nuclear facility or something, you know, it was not intended that this would be dropped on civilian populations. Or hardened military targets against Hezbollah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But to drop this in the middle, a 2,000 pound bomb getting dropped in the middle of a crowded urban center. I mean, remember the attacks we talked about on the refugee camp? Yeah. It's really like a refugee camp that has been built up and built up over decades.

It's one of the most densely populated parts of Gaza City. The idea of dropped two, 2,000 pound bombs on that refugee camp. And I just think the rationalizations that have to be done to justify that kind of destruction on civilians is not healthy. It's not healthy for the United States. It's not healthy for Israel. And it's certainly not going to make it any easier to establish the kind of durable peace that can ultimately secure Israel as well. So I just think at some point, you know, there has to be an acknowledgment of differences with Netanyahu.

And frankly, I think the reality is that, you know, Israel will be better served with the different prime minister. We've talked a lot about how the Israeli people themselves seem to understand that based on BB's approval rating being at historic lows. So I don't, I know this, this paradigm is going to need to change. Something's got to change or else there's just going to be more of the same week after week after week with more and more people dying. And we cannot underestimate, I think, how consequential moment this might be for the United States. I mean, the global south, forget the global south. I mean, Europe, I mean, this is a situation where we are so out of step. And just saying that, you know, the international community is losing patience. No, it's well beyond that.

people are looking at this and think, what is going on here? You know? Yeah, I mean, from an American perspective, we can judge the Biden administration on words, actions, and results on the grounds. Yeah. The words are slowly shifting at the cabinet level, less so from Biden himself. But the actions, like you said, are still just kind of on autopilot. They're just on autopilot.

They're on autopilot, you know, and it's how long is that autopilot stay on, you know, because now it's tank munitions, it's security council, vetoes, then it's, you know, maybe $14 billion in further military assistance. And again, I don't, if you're saying that more needs to be done to protect civilians, but there's no conditions on the military aid we're giving you that has not been used in a way that protects civilians, you know, that becomes an irreconcilable rift between the words and the actions. The mistake I think we sometimes make is that assuming that Joe Biden has total control over Bibi Netanyahu. I don't think that is entirely true. I think the administration could have said

there's a lot of things they're obviously telling them to do that the Israeli government is not listening to, right? But I do think at this point that a little more pressure could go a long way. I do think you could convince the war cabinet two months into this conflict that they have to stop. I mean, there's precedent here of Reagan shouting down the Israeli leadership and demanding an end to bombing runs in the 80s. I mean, it's happened before. Yeah, I think, I mean, you're right to point out, I don't think that this. this is what Joe Biden wants to be happening in Gaza. You know, so like that, and people may disagree.

I'm sure people, some people do. But I don't think this is like their preferred course of action. I believe that they're saying these things in private. The question is what do you do when BB Netanyahu continues to ignore what you say. And here's the thing. You know, some people will say, well, there's not really any leverage, you know, it's not worth criticizing them in public because, you know, he's going to do what he's going to do anyway. First of all, I think it does matter, like, getting on the record, you know, if there's a difference.

But also, like, there wouldn't be such an effort to try to prevent the administration from, I mean, the, I remember when the U.S. abstained on a security council resolution at the end of the Obama administration, and it was like, you know, it was a huge negative reaction, which indicates that they do care about that kind of international isolation, you know. And so there is meaningful leverage. You know, the U.S. is really the last holdout maybe with the U.K. to some extent. I mean, France is for a ceasefire. You know, like, if you started to shift your public positioning around these issues, it's just a fact that it would be harder for Israel to sustain this scale of military operation over time.

I just, I refuse to believe that's not the case. Kind of announcing that you have no leverage is a self-referralial. fulfilling prophecy. That's exactly right. That's right. And there's still a huge amount of disagreement over what to do the day after this war is over. Netanyai was still saying that Hamas will not be in control, nor will fatah, the Palestinian authorities, you know, the political rivals. There are still these attacks from the Houthi rebels in Yemen on commercial ships. On Monday, the Houthi rebel struck a Norwegian-flagged chemical tanker with a cruise missile. Somehow it was damaged, but no one died. You're starting to see strikes in the West Bank.

and then civil disobedience. And then, Ben, you know, it's not talked about enough. 63 journalists have been killed in Gaza. And you and I, I think, have both noticed the amount of solidarity that journalists who have been detained by the Russian government get from the sort of Western Press Corps compared the amount of coverage and solidarity those 63 journalists get. It's pretty stark. There's really not as much of a conversation about just the unbelievable number of. of journalists who have been killed, mostly Palestinian journalists in this conflict. Yeah. And it runs the gamut, too, because there have been also journalists killed in

southern Lebanon. And it's really striking that there's so much outrage, understandably and rightly on behalf of journalists who are targeted or journalists who are taken as in Russia. what is different here that there's not the similar, you know, and sometimes the messaging is, well, some of these journalists are too cozy with Hamas, but you know what, like, that's, you could adjudicate one by one out of the 63. That is clearly not the case for all these journalists, you know. A lot of these are like well-known journalists, too. Like, these are people that have been around. They're not just people that threw on like a press vest, you know, when this conflict started. And they're, they're suffering a horrific,

whole. And again, people see the hypocrisy from the U.S. government's rhetoric about certain aspects of the international order. I think people also see the hypocrisy in the lack of similar outrage in other sectors in the U.S. society about what's happening to journalists in this case or what's just happening in general inside of Gaza. So, yeah, it's an eye-popping number. Yeah, it really is the massive number of people. Real quick before we go to the break, The second ever episode of our new subscriber series Inside 2024 drops on Wednesday the 20th. This time, Dan and Alyssa are going to dive into the unique nature of the former presidents running against each other, basically of a pseudo-incumbent and incumbent in the challenges of running as an incumbent. Great conversation.

To listen to that, make sure you're part of Crooked's friends of the pod community to do so to join. You can go to crooket.com slash friends to sign up. Also, don't miss Potta of the UK. It is great every week. But this last episode, Ben, stopped by to talk with Nish about everything, all of it. Boris Johnson, I'm not going to spoil it for it. You have to listen to find out what they talked about. But POTTA of the UK is one of my favorite lessons every week. Nish and Coco are smart and funny. Catch POTS of the UK wherever you get your podcast or watch on the POTS of the World YouTube.

So, you know, a lot of the hypocrisy is comparing the U.S. response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine with our response to the Israeli invasion of Gaza. So let's turn to Ukraine. As we're recording this, President Zelensky's in Washington. He met with some Republican leaders in the Senate. And then he's going to be. meet with Speaker Johnson, the new speaker of the House. The Biden administration recently sent a letter to all of all members of Congress saying they're about to be out of funding for Ukraine. So far, Congress has authorized about $111 billion for Ukraine. Biden has asked for another $61 billion. That additional request was bundled into this larger spending package that includes aid to Israel and some changes to immigration policy, some border security funding, et cetera.

Zelensky's visit to the U.S. comes as there's all this reporting about how the Ukrainian counter-defense has failed that we can get into in a bit. But, you know, let's just talk about Ben, the implications of this funding getting caught off first. Because I do think, you know, like, if Congress punts the funding request the next year, but like deals with it in January, people I've talked to suggest they'll be fine. Yeah. But if the funding never gets passed, I do think you will see Ukraine run out of ammo over the next three or four months. They'll have weapons systems breaking down that they can't fix. They will not even be close to be able to match Russia's artillery fire. So you will probably see population centers be less and less well defended from, you know, by missile

defense systems. You will see the Ukrainian side have to give up territory they've taken or retaken Zelensky reportedly told some of the Senate Republicans that they'd have to shift to guerrilla warfare. So it doesn't sound like he's prepared to give up in any way. He just will shift tactics. And then the White House's broader argument is that once Russia takes Ukraine, they'll basically just continue marching west into Poland or some other NATO country and then will get drawn into the war. And I do think that, you know, that can sound a little hyperbolic maybe, but it is worth noting how weak the European defense systems are and the capabilities. The Wall Street Journal had a piece on some of the European military spending. And the UK is the biggest spender on defense

in Europe, but they have only 150 deployable tanks. And it said perhaps a dozen serviceable long-range artillery pieces, so not much. France is the next biggest spender. They have fewer the 90 heavy artillery pieces, which the journal says is equivalent to what Russia loses roughly every month on the battlefield in Ukraine. Germany's army has enough ammunition for two days of battle, says this journal piece. The U.S. accounts for 70% of all NATO spending last year. Military spending among NATO countries fell from 3% of GDP during the Cold War to 1.3% in 2014. In the past decade, it has increased 20%, but over that same period, Russia has increased its defense budget by nearly 300%. So pretty stark contrast there. Ben, what do you think the stakes are of this spending vote and the best way to argue on behalf of them?

Well, I do think that it's existential to the Ukrainians that this assistance continues. And maybe it doesn't have to be the full 60 billion. But look, the U.S. is supplying the bulk of Ukrainian armaments. And what Russia's been able to do is they've been able to create a foundation to rearm. on a regular basis. Number one, because they basically made a third of their spending on defense. And so that's churning out ammunition, shells, the kinds of things that they need to support their war effort supplemented by the assistance that they got from North Korea, which is a lot of these types of smaller, you know, arms. Which is hugely important. Hugely important because, you know, North Korea is now basically this other funnel of weapons

and then the Iranians are this funnel of drones. So Russia has kind of figured out how to rearm itself. They have a bigger population, and Putin doesn't give a shit at how many casualties he takes. And so it's pretty obvious that their strategy is to just grind down the Ukrainian defenses, rearm and wait out like the spigot turning off from the U.S. and Europe. At the same time that the U.S. is held up in Congress, Victor Orban, because the EU has this kind of consensus decision-making, he's blocking and obstructing some of the assistance flowing in from Europe. There are ways around that, but it's kind of interesting that, like, Victor Orban is playing the role

of the House Republican caucus inside of Europe, you know. And he's in D.C. right now, I think. And he's in D.C. right now trying to, like, you know, figure out a way to block, you know, our congressional spending. But by the way, that should tell you a lot. You know, like, the argument I make is that this is a lifeline to Ukrainians. And by the way, given all these things we've already provided to them, why would we want to step back and let that collapse?

You know, I mean, we've invested a lot in Ukraine's sovereignty and its survival. And the stakes could not be higher. I think also, look, I'm not one of these people that thinks, you know, Putin is going to march all the way across Europe. But in addition, obviously, the stakes for the Ukrainians. One, I think he would have this platform to just start messing with NATO. And the Baltic countries, for instance, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, you could start to see cyber attacks, some cross-border actions, kind of testing of NATO's red lines, you know, efforts to create, you know, Russian-speaking separatists. in different places, you could see that kind of probing that in ways it could escalate into an outright conflict. You could see him waiting out to see the U.S. election. And if Trump wins,

well, then, yeah. That's right. I mean, if Trump wins, maybe he does move on one. Because he doesn't think, and you rightly would think that Trump wouldn't come to the defense of NATO ally. And I think that's probably true, you know. So there is something to be worried about here. And again, like if the message essentially is, you know, you can wait out the, the, the world that cares about this, which essentially the Democratic allies are supporting Ukraine, that they can sustain interest in something for like a year or two and then, then, you know, get exhausted by it. Well, yeah, then the message to Russia is, I mean, I'm not usually one of these people that's like there's magical thinking and then the Chinese Lombie, Taiwan,

but I do think in this case with at least Putin, the message to Putin is, yeah, you can wait out and then keep pushing and keep pushing. Yeah, push and push. Yeah, the North Korea piece of this is so interesting. I also read that South Korea eventually became a larger supplier of artillery ammunition for Ukraine than all European nations combined because they just had such a stockpile from the war. The U.S. in concert with this visit from Zelensky released a newly declassified intelligence report that said Russia has lost 87 percent of the active duty ground troops that had prior to the invasion and two-thirds of its pre-invasion tanks. However, they've conscripted tons of people in their industrial bases ramping up and creating more tanks. But more specifically,

They said that of the 360,000 troops that entered Ukraine, including contract and conscript personnel, Russia lost 315,000 on the battlefield, according to this assessment. I think that means killed or wounded, not 315,000 killed, but still a staggering number. And, you know, they're currently still occupying 20% of Ukraine. But, you know, the challenge for Biden and Zelensky on this visit politically is they are getting different demands from different parts of the Republican Party, right? You've got the Speaker or the House saying, we need a clear articulation of the strategy for how Ukraine is going to win, which sounds reasonable. But I think he's setting up a scenario where he can say, they didn't give me the information I wanted, you know, so I can't support more funding.

The Senate side is different because Senate Republicans want Ukraine aid to be coupled with border security in some reforms of the asylum process. Those talks are ongoing and serious, but they seem to be stalled. Here's a supercut of Senator Lindsey Graham, James Langford, and Eric Schmidt talking about some of those talks. If you don't use your executive tools or work with us for a statutory solution, none of us who are supportive of Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan can vote on a supplemental because you're making us pick countries abroad over our own homeland security. We understand the threat that President Zelensky's faced and is continues to face. We provided aid for. a year and a half at this point to be able to help them in every way that we possibly can. That aid will continue to be able to come, but we can't just ignore what's happening in our country while we're helping other people with theirs.

President Zelensky, as we're talking about Ukraine and their borders, but Joe Biden, the president of this country, is totally absent in talking about the sovereignty of our border. I saw that Politico reported that some of the Republican senators raised border security questions with Zelensky. Like, what the fuck was he supposed to say? I'm worried about your border too. I'd say, you know, first of all, on the expectation setting, because I think this is important.

You know, Biden said today with Zelenskyy that winning, you know, winning means Ukraine is a sovereign independent nation. And that's a good answer from Joe Biden because I think the way when people were more kind of euphoric and thinking that Russia was about to collapse. All territory. It was all territory. And I don't, I think part of the problem. here is expectations were set too high for this counteroffensive. More by the Ukrainians. The Biden people have actually been quite careful about expectation setting. And that's not, look, obviously, I'd like Russia, I'd be in the territory. But I think part of the problem is if you set

a political objective that is not attainable in any kind of near term future, it's easier for critics to say, wait a second, we're failing. Why do we keep putting more money into this? And it's just prolonging this war. There has to be an effort to kind of shift gears here. It's a the bad holding, the territory Ukraine has, fortifying Ukraine what they have, bringing them closer into Europe, bringing them on a track of the European Union, and yes, maybe giving them some capacity to inflict damage on Russians and Crimea or to take back certain areas if the opportunity presents itself. But it's a different definition than we were at previously. Then I think on this border stuff, what's hard in listening to that beyond having to listen to Lindsey Graham's

voice is it's a very effective political message. But it is a very dangerous. I mean, it's just not the case. It's kind of what they do with the debt ceiling where they try to negotiate something. Whether you, it's just not the case that you say, you know what, in order to do this thing that even I want you to do in foreign policy, you have to make like these massive concessions over here. It sets like a weird precedent, you know. It'd be like Obama saying, like, I'll only fund the war in Afghanistan if you all vote for Obamacare. I mean, I mean, which maybe we should have done.

Hey, it's a manufactured rationale. It's a manufactured rationale. The one thing I will say on the substance of it is like, I think absolutely the Democrats may need to make some pretty significant concessions on border security and funding for border security. And it's when it gets into these structural changes. If someone's watching this, it's like, well, why not just concede to it? Some of the things the Republicans are proposing are like massive structural changes in how immigration works in this country. Like essentially the president giving up certain basic authorities that a president's always has. had or essentially doing away with the asylum system entirely, which is kind of part of our

obligations to, you know, the old international system of migration that breaks down if suddenly that goes away. And so it's, there's just some things that Democrats are not going to be able to concede here. And that that's why the funding for Ukraine may actually very well be in doubt here. Yeah, I'm worried that the Republican Senate demands, even the Mitt Romney's of the world, are looking for some really maximalist changes. There's a version of this, you could imagine, where Biden gets what he wants for Ukraine funding, they make some incremental changes to asylum policy. And Biden decides that's a really good deal for me, because I can say in the campaign, I took care of Ukraine and I worked with Republicans to secure the border. But my concern is more that

like the Mike Johnson's of the world that represent the MAGA wing of the party basically just want to cut the court on Ukraine and will not help out Joe Biden in any way. But we'll, I guess we'll see. Yeah. Yeah. They want to be able to say they'll just keep moving the goalposts on the immigration stuff to where he can't accept it, so that they have the argument that's the alternative of what you said, which is that, hey, we were trying to protect this border and all I cared about is Ukraine. Yeah. Meanwhile, in Russia, the Russian Supreme Court recently labeled the LGBTQ movement as an extremist

organization and bandit, basically effectively outlawed advocacy on behalf of gay, lesbian, or transgender people in Russia. You can now go to jail for up to four years for wearing a rainbow flag. And on top of that, jailed opposition leader, Alexei Navalny, has reportedly gone missing within the Russian prison system. His team has not been able to reach him for a week. He was assumed to be in a penal colony about 150 miles east of Moscow serving out the multiple bullshit sentences he's received on bullshit charges. But it's pretty ominous that they can't find him.

It's really ominous because this hasn't happened before. And his team has voiced a lot of concern about not even being able to be in touch with him and suggested he was in poor health. I mean, I do think it's worth pointing out that we talked about all the ways in which time is beginning to work against Ukraine. Indians. Yes, Putin is kind of cracked down on dissent. Yes, Putin has got this kind of pipeline of military assistance, but he's also spending a third of his government spending budget on defense. He's got these record number of casualties. I think it's wrong to assume that like Putin's sitting high, you know, pretty, you know, like he's, there, there should be like a, like an appropriate degree of understanding of what Russia has been able to do to fortify its position

without kind of once again building Putin up into being 100 feet tall. Because if you do that, then it's like, well, you know, then it feels like it's futile to even be standing up to the guy. Yeah, I mean, I think you're right. I think the other side of that argument is that some in the West underestimated the amount of pain Putin was willing to inflict on his own people. and the power of relentless, all-consuming propaganda to smooth over all of it. And if you look at Russia's history, like their bet is always like, you know,

our army may suffer massive casualties, but we grind you down and we each out. And that's what they did in World War II. And that's now that failed in things like Afghanistan in the 80s. So it's not like that's always worked for them. But yeah, they've clearly, there's an infinite threshold for the pain that Vladimir Putin is willing to inflict on his own. people here. Speaking of international meetings and initiatives, Ben, so the COP 28 UN climate change

summit was supposed to be all but wrapped up by now, but unfortunately it basically fell apart on Monday after a draft official statement went around to participants that failed to call for a phase out of fossil fuels. As we record, the climate envoys are still negotiating, they're still trying to get a statement that all participants can agree to. It's not clear that's going to happen. The listeners have probably heard us talk about this COP 28 before. It's in, the United Arab Emirates, a country that is rich solely because of natural gas, the COP 28 president is the CEO of an oil company. There are reports that Saudi Arabia was pressuring the cop leadership to drop mentions of phasing out fossil fuels. So we'll see where this lands. But what do you think

the impact would be if this cop ended without a statement that was calling to phase out fossil fuels? it'd be very bad you know um you know the the the momentum there's been this effort to kind of generate momentum cop to cop you know and then every every five years just meant to be like a big breakthrough like paris was a big breakthrough and glasgow was kind of supposed to be the next big one and it did accomplish a fair amount but that said tommy like i was glad to see john carey and others saying like we we want to see a phase out of fossil fuels in this i would actually rather not have some bullshit warmed over a communique. And there be a clear distinction between the countries that want to protect

the fossil fuels and the countries that care. This may be one where I'd rather take the pain. And they'll probably come up with something. They may even by the time this podcast comes out there, you know, but like some wishy-washy formula about some adjective about phasing out fossil fuels. But that said, I'd kind of rather not have like a bullshit communicate and have a preponderance of countries taking a stand on principle here. Yeah, the problem with getting everyone to agreement is that you all have to defend it. And obviously we don't want to defend an agreement that's not going to do anything.

Spino oil and gas bend. So on Sunday, December 3rd, Venezuela is voted in favor of declaring sovereignty over a place called Essequibo, which is a resource race. part of neighboring Guyana, makes up about two-thirds of Guyana's total territory. Then a few days later, Venezuelan President Nicholas Maduro said he would authorize oil and gas exploration and create a new state that includes Ezekielbo, so it just basically annexed the place. A lot of political observers saw this and got very nervous for a bunch of reasons. It could be about these resources in the territory, but it also could be about Maduro calling a referendum to stir up nationalist ire in advance of the presidential election next year.

the international community has been pushing Maduro to hold free and fair elections, but he's already blocked a popular opposition candidate from running, so it's not clear he's going to hold up to that commitment. It's not totally clear to me if Maduro's plan to rile people up worked that well. The government claims that 10 and a half million people voted for this referendum. It's about half of eligible voters, but election observers seem to doubt the turnout was really that high and they might be full shit. Regardless, this is not a new dispute. Venezuela claims that Ezekiela was stolen from them back in 1890 when an international Tribunal awarded the territory to then British Guyana. Guyana was a British colony until

1966. And then in 2018, Guyana asked the International Court of Justice, the UN Court, to review and settle this dispute, but that process is just going to be, it's going to take a few years. So complicating all of this is that ExxonMobil found massive oil reserves off the coast of Essequibo back in 2015. There's all kinds of precious metals in this territory, so it's very valuable. And in recent years, you've seen Guyana's oil industry take off as Venezuela's cratered. thanks to sanctions and economic mismanagement. On Sunday, Guyana agreed to have talks with Venezuela over the dispute. Brazil had put its military on high alert in case Venezuela did something crazy.

They're going to be an official observer of these talks on the island of St. Vincent. So, Ben, we've talked a lot of times about how broad-based U.S. sanctions on Venezuela have failed to dislodge Maduro or these terrible leaders, but have really hurt average people. Back in October, Biden started to loosen some. some of the sanctions on Venezuela's oil sector in exchange for Maduro agreeing to hold free and fair elections. Now he's backsliding on that commitment and he's threatening to annex Guyana. What the hell do you think you do here? Yeah. It's like, it's like help us help you, man. Yeah. Well, I think first of all, it's important. The Brazilian involvement is important

because part of what you want to do here is you want to have other countries in the Western hemisphere and Latin America, you know, stepping in here to try to deliver their own message to Venezuela. And look, you know, the thing about sanctions is you can always turn them on, turn off, right? But the much better to have a coordinated regional response. So it's not just kind of like the U.S. coming in and be like, oh, we're going to slot these sanctions back on. I think what you want is you want to do the kind of diplomacy that, you know, presses the Venezuelans not just with us in our own sanctions, but in concert with these other countries, you know. And Brazil is stepping up, you know, they don't want to see this kind of power grab in the region.

We, you know, there are other countries, I think, that can be enlisted in this effort as well. And you kind of need that united front to kind of inform Maduro's decision-making here. Yeah. And let's hope these talks go well and he climbs down a little bit. Yeah. Two more lighter things before we get to max. In a story that sheds light on how dumb most political campaigning has become, and how much it's a bunch of marketing stunts.

A semifor reported that there are billboards all over cities in Ghana, advertising a presidential candidate whose identity is concealed by a mask. And not like one of those fun, you know, like little Zorro ones with the eye holes. We're talking about an elaborate mask that covers this person's entire head and face. So you really can't tell who it is. Ghana is a presidential vote coming up in about a year. The two main political parties get around 95% of the vote. So if it's a new political party being announced,

they will face some structural challenges. But who knows, maybe it'll work. The campaign, the masked campaign, sorry, promises to release the identity of the candidate as soon as possible, along with policy objectives and goals. A lot of people think this is a well-known businessman, known as cheddar. We'll find out, I guess. But obviously, it's stupid. It got us to talk about it. Yeah.

Anybody you want to slap a mask on and run it for president? Taylor Swift. That'd be a good one. Although, I think you want mask off for Taylor Swift, right? Well, but the reveal would be iconic. I mean, imagine the reveal on that, you know? That's a good one. And she is, I mean, you know, she is 35.

Oh, you can run you. On January 20th, 2025. Okay. Look, this is generating attention, you know, like I have to say, Cheddar or whoever it is. Great name, by the way. Maybe making a shortcut here to a little press coverage, you know. The apprentice did basically get Trump elected president. Yeah, yeah.

And there was no mask involved there, so I don't know. Do you remember when Rudy Giuliani was actually on the masked singer? the Fox show, like two years ago? I do, and I remember it being kind of uncomfortable to watch the clips. Horrible. Yeah. He sang bad to the bone, and then Ken Chong walked off in the middle of it because he was offended by it. Yeah.

Yeah, just listen. Real sad for Rudy. It's like everything that Rudy does is just gotten progressively sadder. Yeah, yeah, I'm sure. But, I mean, well, maybe, well, I'm actually not going to make it the joke about what Rudy may do to us if Trump wins. It wouldn't be good. Probably have a couple cocktails, it's about it all due. Yeah.

And lastly, it turns out that Russian propagandists also love the bite-sized celebrity videos being sold by Cameo. According to a new report released by the Microsoft Threat Analysis Center, actors like Elijah Wood, D. Norris of Breaking Dad and Kate Flannery from the office were duped into making videos used for Russian propaganda against Ukraine. Mike Tyson got got too, but I wouldn't, you know, say it to his face. This is a pretty amazing story. And like what was interesting about it is they were like messages to Zelensky. He was like Voldemur, like you should check into alcohol rehab or something, right? Here was the con. So they were told, hey, can you make a video for my buddy Vladimir?

Yeah. Who's suffering from substance abuse. So Elijah Woods' video starts with him saying, hey, Vladimir, Elijah here. And it ends with like, I hope you get the help you need. Then they were doctored and they were put on social media to spread rumors about Zelensky having actual substance abuse problems. A couple of them put fake TMZ logos on the videos themselves to make them more believable. I guess I got two questions here I mean one is like

Wasn't Elijah Wood in like the Harry Potter movies Daniel Radcliffe Oh okay there was somebody in the There was who was the one that was Basically what I'm getting at is Weren't some of these people pretty well compensated Earlier in their careers Because these hits these cameo hits are like

I mean I'm not on cameo here And I have no plans to be but like It's like 300 bucks or something I mean 340 bucks Elijah Wood was in He was Frodo Baggins That's what I'm thinking of Okay

That's a blockbuster series My bad my bad I feel like it's They look similar. Because I actually saw the, I'm thinking about British fantasies here. Yeah, huge fucking role. Like, it must have gotten in the tens of millions. Anyway, that's one is like, what happened to the money?

Two is, does your intent to go up at all if it's like, you know, hey, Vladimir, best of luck with your substance abuse problem? Because like, usually you know, happy birthday, Jenny or something like that. I mean, it just seems like a weird message. It seems like you might think twice about that one, you know. Oh, absolutely. I'm looking up Elijah Wood right now. I didn't know he's from Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Neither did I.

Learned something every day. I wish I'd known that 15 years ago. He was into good. The Good Sun was a good movie. Eternal Sunshine on Spotless Minds. Great movie. Free Willie. Alona says free Willie.

Free Willie, shout out. Really great movie. You're right. I'm just saying, like, where'd the money go, you know? Yeah. Surprising. $340. It just because it's a sad amount of money.

This does make me feel a little guiltier about purchasing myself a video from Mike Flynn. But that was fun. That was, you know. And like multiple people of this company have gotten George Santos videos. Oh, really? Oh, yeah. Oh. Not good.

Huh. So, you know, going right into the Santos legal defense fund there. Tighten it up, everybody. We're all funding property against one way or the other. But it's funny. I mean, I enjoyed watching them. Okay. We're going to take a quick break.

and then we are going to talk with Max Fisher about all the major elections coming up next year. So stick around for that. We are excited to welcome back to the pod. Crooked Media Zone, Max Fisher. Hey, guys. What a pleasure to be back. It's great to see you fresh off a trip to Brazil where I believe you spent some time with your former boss and mentor, Jair, Bolsonaro. Is that right?

Were you on a jet ski with the humpback whale? Yeah, that's right. That's right. We're just, we're plotting some things. I don't want to get too into it, but we'll be wild next year. Was the humpback whale harassment story in the news when you were there? The humpback whale harassment story? Bolsonaro apparently was jet skiing far too close to a humpback whale.

We've now established that Max has not listened to the show. It's okay, Max was on a trip. If I knew that there was humpback whale harassment content. We had a humpback whale content. Well, it's your fault for not putting it in the title. Come on, marketing, guys. That's a really good point. It's like a late show.

There he blows. Anyway, Max, there's a lot of elections coming up next year. Oh, my God. We're excited to learn about them. So I'm just going to hand it over to you. Okay. I want to hear about all of this. Okay.

Do we want to talk about this year or next year? Yeah, well, I mean, I know you felt like there's some global trends at 2023 that might kind of set our course, right? Yeah, that's a right. That's a good way to put it. So like when I think about what changed and what didn't change in 2020, through global elections, which leads into what we're going to talk about 2024, there are a few that I think like really exemplify what was happening globally. And for me, the one that I was kind of most had my eye on the most and was most anticipating going into 2023 was Turkey, which I know we talked a lot about, right?

Ressa-Tyberto-Wan, 20 years in office, becoming increasingly autocratic. But it looks like there's this big moment that like maybe this is our chance to kind of get him out of office. All the opposition parties come together, run against him. The economy is terrible. It looks like this might actually be it for him. And of course, spoiler alert, he stays in office. There's a lot of hope in this room. Yeah.

All of us got a little high on our own supply for a few weeks. I don't think we were off base. No, we were hopeful. To quote George Debbie Bush and date myself with this reference, you forgot about Poland. Oh, we're going to get to Poland. Yeah, okay, good. We'll get the bad news out of the way first,

and then we get to the good news. Let's go. And it's, so it's a bummer because he loses. But I think that it's also, there is this silver lining there and that it's so close, 52 to 48, and probably he would have lost if he didn't have all the, like, levers of the state to pull with, like, manipulating state media and stuff like that. So I think it's a nice reminder that even when it seems like someone has been in office for so long, one of these, you know, generation of elected strong men around the world that we're seeing now,

like Trump obviously one of the examples of this, there's, it's still not too late. Even if it's been forever, they really dug in, they really become an authoritarian. And it's still possible to at least get really close. And I think could have happened at least theoretically in Turkey. And I think the other side of that election was Argentina in October where the crazy right-wing populist, like the new guy on the scene who is part of this wave of the like anti-establishment populist right wins out of nowhere. I was out Wolverine muckling. I think we're calling. That's right.

Just kidding. That's right. Don't defamation me. I don't know if he believes in laws. So I don't know if he could sue you for defamation anyway. And I think that's just like, it's seeing those two together was striking because it's a reminder that the like decrepit old Benin office forever version of this is still with us. But also countries are still electing these guys. Even if it is like, I don't think melee is going to be Erdogan.

He's not that bad. And also he's not that competent. But there's still a lot of like disaffected youth vote, like disaffected economic vote that people are still picking these people. But then the two others that I think of was kind of really interesting as a pair is Poland, of course, your favorite in mind, and the Netherlands, which are actually like more similar than they look. So Poland and October, the Law and Justice Party, which has been in office for like eight years now, I think, again, similar to Turkey, where all the opposition parties come together. So we have to get rid of these guys because they become increasingly authoritarian. And law and justice does come in first of the parties, but they can't form a government. because all these other parties have banded together.

So just, I think today they just like swore in the new government or it was like a confidence vote. And then the Netherlands is not that different. Like law and justice got 35% in Poland. And the Netherlands, the far right, Gert Wilders is party for freedom won 24% of the vote. And again, like was the most popular party. But it looks like maybe we'll not have enough to form a coalition. So I think it's like looking at those two is a reminder that number one, like, still kind of around the world, like between a quarter and a third of voters are voting for

the far right. And we're saying that in country over country. Like, are you seeing it in the United States? Yeah, yeah. It's like about the size of Trump space. And then it's just a question of like, what does the political system do with that? We're in Poland, all the parties came together and got of them. You know, in the United States, we see like the Republican Party coalesce around them, so he wins office. And then in Netherlands, we're still, we're still a long way out from them forming a governing coalition. The question is going to be, are the other parties going to come together to keep Girt Wilders out of office or they're going to follow them a moderate Republican temptation and join with him. Yeah. So you got kind of like, we got dusty old autocrats

hanging on for dear life. Right. You got radical, entirely new candidates and parties who sometimes look like Wolverines. And then you've got right-wing populace demagoguing immigration in the Netherlands, Islam. Right. Right. So there's kind of our trends. Yeah. Right. And versions of the Gear Wilders thing in like every country. Yeah. So that's... Including gear. Yeah.

Yeah. I've heard about that. Yeah. Not good. So, 2024, everyone is calling it the biggest election year in history. It's a little silly because the population gets bigger every year. So probably like every third year is the biggest election year in history. Well, that's a good point.

But... Sorry. Oh, that is a good point. Bill, Ben was mocking me earlier for saying it because some of these elections are real. They're not all that contested, you know? He wasn't mocking me. Including India, which. counts for the biggest population share, but any year that India and the U.S. and Indonesia

all have elections, it's going to be the biggest. So it is a lot. It's out of the 10 largest countries in the world by population eight are having elections, all of them except for Nigeria. And I was surprised by this, China, not holding elections next year, which I was, I thought was unusual. Yeah, much being off year for them. But it is 70 countries having national elections, which is a lot. Over half of the world's population lives in a country that will have a national election, and 41% of the world population next year will have votes to select their national leader, although, as you said, varying degrees of freedom. Russia is not going to be that close. No, but I think still an interesting

contest, like presidential elections in authoritarian states like Russia, we know what the result is going to be, but we have seen that, like, how that plays out can tell us a lot about politics in Russia. And of course, like the 2012 election. which Putin, you know, also stole, ended up being a really big moment in Russian politics. I think even the authoritarian elections next year I think are going to be really important, like Russia. I think Belarus maybe has one. And just seeing like, do people turn out, do they not turn out? What, you know, what does the opposition do? How real does it look? I think we'll tell us it's like real test for these leaders. And I kind of think that like autocracy versus democracy

is a really big theme this coming year. I mean, in the United States and India, obviously this feels like a really big make or break moment for popular authoritarianism. The India election, unfortunately, does not look close. It's going to be over April and May, and the polls are just, you know, the BJP is going to run away with it.

Yeah. It looks like, but it does look like they're going to do really poorly in a lot of the southern states, which has been the big trend for them for a while as they're losing a lot of state offices down there. And that is not enough to swing the elections for them, but I think does say something about, like, politics in India changing. Yeah. Well, I think, you know, the question about I have about Modi is we've seen him move, you know, further to the right pretty steadily with time.

And if he is validated and with a pretty significant electoral victory, like at a certain point, does he start to kind of really structurally try to change? I mean, he already has to, you know, there are ways we can look at the metrics of what he's done to kind of consolidate control over the media and intimidate journalists. And so he's run pieces of the authoritarian playbook. But there is kind of a world in which it's almost like we are now a one-party state with the leader, you know. And to me, the U.S. election, which we know, we, but if Trump wins and Modi, then we're kind of in this world of like Trump, Modi, she, Putin, you know, it's, It's kind of on, you know. That's a kind of scary thing to think about. Yeah, the idea of there being this kind of axis of right-wing authorities, which, you know, we saw, we had a little window of that in 2018, 2019, when Bolsonaro was elected.

Yeah. And they're kind of budding up with Netanyahu, too. Yeah. I mean, Modi is, what is he going to do after this election? I think it's an important question. He already has an outright majority in the legislature, which is unusual. And like we've seen in so many countries, all the opposition parties are banning together to try to beat him. And it looks like they're not even going to get close.

It looks like he's actually going to gain seats probably. And there was a recent poll. I think it was by morning consult in a bunch of different countries that found that he has the highest approval or favorability rating of any world leader that they test. It's like plus 60%. Yeah. So that's a mandate for him to do more of what he has been doing, which is bad. At the same time, I feel like the worst authoritarianism comes when leaders feel besieged, right? It's like when Erdogan gets really close to losing or when Orban gets really close to losing.

It's when those guys get really scary. Yeah. Or when Putin saw in the 2011 parliamentary elections a huge popular uprising against him. Right. Right. Right. That's when it was kind of on with it. It took a bit of a turn. Right. Yeah. I mean, there are a few elections like to feel hopeful about next year that I think are going to be real tests for, I don't see, test for authority.

as much as they are for democracy, like this deal to have elections in Venezuela, which I know they haven't set a date for yet. If that happens, I mean, obviously I'm very hopeful that Maduro would lose, but that's one of a few elections also in Tunisia, also in Pakistan, where like autocracy is kind of on the ballot and voters will hope have some degree of a real chance. It's not clear how real it's going to be to express a real support for democracy and to really help bring it about. Yeah. Yeah. And, you know, Risk, though, for it to go, you know, in the direction of violence or intimidation, but you'd love to see, you know, a positive surprise at any one of those, you know, it's not the odds on favorite, but, you know, a turn in one of those places would be huge. Right. Yeah. I mean, both to see a change in leadership and also to see, you know, voters have a window to make a country more democratic, which is something that used to happen all the time in the world, but I mean, have not seen so much of in the last. Well, I in particular, you know, the challenge of Venezuela is some people left, you know. So the question is like have some of the people that would be the most inclined to oppose Maduro left the country, but we'll see. Right. And so many candidates have been disqualified.

And there's this big question now about whether the U.S. will still sign off on the election. And it's also a question of whether Ukraine will hold an election constitutionally they're supposed to in March. It seems like almost certainly they will not. And I get why. I think they have good reasons, but I'm sure that will be something that, you know, the usual suspects will use to accuse Zelensky of being a dictator. Yeah, I see why. I also think politics is going to, it's already kind of returning a bit to Ukraine. You're seeing some cracks. You're seeing some dissent. You're seeing some complaints. And I mean, that's to be expected and healthy. But holding an election with this many people on the front line, this many people out of the country. And frankly, just not being a safe environment in parts of Ukraine to.

to come out en masse. I mean, talking about creating a target for Russian strikes, you know? Yeah. So, but I do think the return of politics to Ukraine is something to watch. Yeah, that's a good point. And I know that all of the Ukrainian political parties

came together, I think, a few months ago and said, we agree, we don't want to have elections. Next year, we're not, you know, we don't want to contest anything. But if you start to see rumblings about that or, you know, when are we going to start thinking about holding elections? Yeah.

And it will be interesting to watch. Are there any big elections you guys? So there's some prediction. The Taiwan, you know, so Taiwan votes early next year. There's three candidates. The current party in power, the DPP, sighing when the president's term limited out, the guy who's running to replace her,

who is their vice president, William Lai, has generally been seen as more kind of pro-independence. He's moderated that. He's trying to say the right things. The two opposition parties both kind of to some extent, favor, better ties with China. So if William Lye wins, this kind of window opens up where I think, you know, the risk of China doing something exists.

You know, if one of these opposition parties that favors closer ties to mainland China wins, you know, then maybe tensions go down a little bit. But I still think that no Taiwanese political party is going to be able to like make the kinds of deals that were contemplating the past, essentially one country, two systems. But that's worth watching. And then Indonesia, you know, it's just a huge important country with a very popular, I mean, Giacobi, the outgoing president is one of the more popular leaders in the world. You know, he's got a guy, an ex-general who ran against him twice and refused to accept the results. The election is kind of narrowly leading in the polls.

The person running against that ex-general selected Jacoey's son as his running mate. And they had to make, I think, an adjustment in the rules to let that happen. And so on the one end, I think this is probably the better candidate for Indonesian democracy. On the other hand, it suggests a kind of dynastic politics, which Indonesia has always had. And even Jekoa was kind of a beneficiary of that. Yeah. One wildcard I'll throw out there, guys, is Israel. I was going to say that's one election I would love to see.

It would be great to see that happen, yeah. That would be a good one. I am also going to have my eyes in the election in Mexico, which is in June. In June, yes. And it looks like the Moreno incumbent is going to win, which I think is kind of, I don't know. The leftists. Yeah, the leftist, the progressive anti-establishment outsider. I just feel like the story of Mexican democracy is one that we kind of don't pause to appreciate enough.

I mean, this is a country that was a dictatorship 23 years ago. And now the two opposition parties that were opposed to the pro-dictatorship party are in the lead. And there are the two parties that are running to dispute the election. This progressive outsider party that was nowhere 10 years ago now looks like they have kind of a lock on polls. You know, I've been kind of disappointed by Lopez Obrador, the incumbent, who's someone from his party is running. But, you know, they're a real progressive outsider party. They've done well. And I just, I don't know, I think it's worth appreciating that there looks like they're going to have another really nice election.

And they'll have their first woman president. Yeah, Claudia Shinebaum seems very likely to win, right? Yeah. They'll beat us to that too. Yeah. Okay. Well, it's some good ones. I like that. Mexico's a good one to end on. That is a good news story. And a reminder that things can get better.

And they are. In a lot of countries, they are. It's incremental. It's bit by bit, but it's happening. Excellent. Well, Max, thank you. Max always, like, has an optimistic. He does have a... I like to feel good about the world. He does a hope sandwich. I feel bad. We kind of like a pretty dark episode today.

And, like, now I'm feeling, you know... I'm not sure why, but I'm feeling better. Yeah. Because Max, you know. That's what I'm here for. Just the ray of sunshine for you, Ben. Oh, wait, British election. We could have a way, a ray of hope, too.

The Brits have to have an election next year. Labor Party's got like a 20-point lead. That'd be nice to see the Tories out of there. That's a nice one to think about, too. I think it's worth to remember. I always tried to remember this at newspapers is that bad things happen fast and good things happen slowly so we don't appreciate the good things. And like a country like Mexico, getting more democratic.

It happens bit by bit over every election so we don't pause. Or the toy's self-immolating has happened by bad. That's right. Boy, are they. And sometimes very suddenly. Slowly then fast. Well, Max, thank you again. That's it for our show today.

The next episode we got comes out on January 9th. So we had a long time off here. I don't know what I'm going to do. I'm just going to talk to myself. I'm just going to tweet a lot, I think. No, never tweet. Thank you all for listening. Thank you for those ratings and reviews in the iTunes store.

And that's it. Have a great holiday. Whatever your holiday is. Happy New Year. Happy holidays. Merry Christmas. Are we saying Merry Christmas again? We are.

I'm saying it. We can say Happy Hanukkah and everything else. I beat up a Starbucks employee that said, happy holidays. They're the real threat. Well, yeah, if Trump wins, we'll say Merry Christmas. I'll say, yeah. Sure. If you want to get ad-free episodes, exclusive content, and more.

Consider joining our Friends of the Pod subscription community at crooked.com slash friends. Don't forget to follow Crooked Media on Instagram, TikTok, and Twitter for more original content, host takeovers and other community events. Plus, find Pod Save the World on YouTube for access to full-out. episodes, bonus content, and more. And if you're as opinionated as us, consider dropping a review. Pod Save the World is a crooked media production. Our executive producers are me, Tommy Vitor, Ben Rhodes, and Reed Cherlin. Our producer is Alona Minkowski, and Associate Producer is Ashley Mizzuo. It's mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick, audio support by Kyle Seaglin and Charlotte Landis.

Our studio technician is David Tolls. Thanks to our digital team, Elijah Cohn and Phoebe Bradford, who upload our episodes and videos to YouTube.com slash Pod Save the World.