Raging Moderates with Scott Galloway and Jessica Tarlov - AOC’s Egg-Freezing Story Could Launch Her Presidential Run

Episode Date: August 17, 2026

Jessica Tarlov is joined by New York Times national political correspondent Shane Goldmacher, to check in on where the midterms stand with primary season almost wrapped up. With the results from Michigan and Wisconsin, Jess and Shane break down what voters are signaling to the Democratic Party. Is this a Tea Party-style insurgency from the left, or something more complicated? Could Michigan Senate candidate and progressive Abdul El-Sayed be a difference maker or a liability in a state Trump won in 2024? Shane also assesses where Republicans stand amidst low approval ratings for Trump, a tough economic backdrop — but with a significant advantage in terms of cash on hand about to be deployed in ad buys across the country. The Democratic Party has officially announced that South Carolina and Nevada will hold the first primaries of the 2028 presidential election cycle — a deliberate move to prioritize Black voters, who make up roughly two-thirds of South Carolina's Democratic electorate, as well as Latino voters and labor interests with significant sway in Nevada.  Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has gone public sharing her egg-freezing journey. Shane and Jessica discuss why this kind of personal storytelling resonates with voters — and what AOC's political future might actually look like, whether or not that includes a run for President in 2028. How can she navigate the tension she's likely to face from the Democratic establishment?And finally: White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt is stepping down at the end of the month. What legacy does she leave and who should replace her? Taking care of your health just got easier – start here with Zocdoc: https://zocdoc.com/moderates #sponsored For ad-free episodes, exclusive livestreams, and to connect with Scott, Jessica, and the Raging Moderates community, join us at ProfG+ on Substack: https://ragingmoderates.profgmedia.com/ Get The Monday Rage newsletter: https://profgmedia.com/s/monday-rage/ Follow Raging Moderates on IG, Tiktok, and Facebook: https://www.instagram.com/ragingmoderatespod/ https://www.tiktok.com/@ragingmoderates https://www.facebook.com/ragingmoderates Follow Jessica Tarlov on Instagram, Substack, and Bluesky: https://instagram.com/jessicatarlov https://substack.com/@jessietarlov https://bsky.app/profile/jessicatarlov.bsky.social Follow Scott on Instagram, Substack, and Bluesky: https://instagram.com/profgalloway https://substack.com/@profgalloway https://bsky.app/profile/profgalloway.com Subscribe to our YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@RagingModerates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

I'm pretty confident talking into a mic. Hey, I'm doing it right now. But home projects, I second-guess everything. Is that noise normal? Is that water damage? And who should I even call? That's where thumbtack comes in. Upload a photo or voice note,

and their AI-powered search helps diagnose the issue and match you with the right top-rated local pro. Instead of second-guessing or searching for hours, you get clarity and can hire the right pro with confidence. your next home project, try thumbtack. They know homes. Hire the right pro today. Keep for calling the Bombas comfort line.

Bombas make socks, slippers, teas, and underwear, made with the highest quality materials. Press 1 for comfort. 2 for style. 3 for donation. You chose style. Bombas is styles for whatever you enjoy. You can run in bambas, lounge in bambas,

dress them up, dress them down, but always give back in bambas. Because with every item purchased, another is donated. Bombas, comfort worth calling for. Go to bambas.com slash audio and use code audio for 20% off your first purchase. That's b-O-M-B-A-S.com and use code audio. How many third-party vendors does your company use?

20, 200? Thanks to AI, someone on your team probably added three more this week. And your security lead has no idea. Traditional third-party risk management can't keep up. Vanta gives you continuous coverage across every vendor, automatically, so you actually know. what's in your stack and what to do about it. AI on, risk off.

Vanta.com slash TPRM. What about AOC in the 2020 primary? I mean, whether she runs for president or not, she's trying to accomplish things. She is able to spark conversation more than anybody else in the country other than Donald Trump. She can utter a phrase and it drives news coverage. She can do a thing and it drives conversation,

not just among the chattering class, But like actual people, there is no other Democrat in the field who is able to do that. I mean, she's a singular force for driving attention more than anybody else than over in the field right now. I have done basically a 180 on AOC from how I felt about her in 2018. So she's won over the raging moderates? I mean, does she excite me and the people who listen to this podcast? Yeah, I think that she does. Welcome to Raging Moderates.

Jessica Tarlove, and we've been off for a week and a half. I missed you all. I raged privately. I moderated privately, I guess. My husband had to deal with a lot of it. He's sick about talking about politics, so I'm going to talk about politics with you, specifically with Shane Goldmacher, national political correspondent at the New York Times, has been on raging moderates before, and I'm thrilled to have you here, especially for round one back in the saddle. How are you? I'm good. How about yourself? You missed some elections. No, I was literally sitting on a beach in Hawaii being like, okay, how is David Crowley possibly pulling this out? Haley Stevens last minute, it seems like she has a chance, smaller margins than we thought, which is the first topic I want to get into.

We'll skip the plus. I'm good, and I want to talk about those races, basically. Yeah. So you obviously cover this very closely. What were your big takeaways from the Michigan Senate primary and the Wisconsin? gubernatorial primary. I mean, I think that what's interesting is that these results are very different, right? In one case, you had the left candidate, Abdul Al-Said, win in Michigan, which frankly is one of the

biggest wins for the progressive left in a major statewide race in a purple place in a really long time. Like the last time the left dethroned a moderate in a key Senate race, it's like Joe Lieberman. You know, it's been a really long time. since there's been a victory of this importance. But the result was pretty narrow. It was a really close race. And I think it tells you that even in purple places,

the progressive left of the Democratic Party is competing with what has been the solid establishment middle. A week later in Wisconsin, you have a different result, right, which is a real come from behind win from the moderate establishment wing of the party. Crowley does beat Francesca Hong for the governor's race. So the left doesn't get these sort of back-to-back winds that they were really dreaming of in the Midwest. But you have, at the basic level, almost tied races in both places, right? Narrowly

the moderate wins in Wisconsin, narrowly the progressive wins in Michigan. And when it tells us is that these two wings of the party are competitive with each other, not just in the bluest parts of the country, but in the rest of the country as well. So I want to kind of give my theory of the case of why these races split the way that they did. And I definitely thought right before the Michigan election that I'll say, because you were seeing this polling that had him up, you know, 10 to 18 points in some cases. So you thought this is going to be at least a four to six point win. And it ended up being pretty razor thin. And if you took out Mallory McMorrow's votes, and I know there were a lot of people who are kind of crapping on her at this point,

saying she should have gotten out earlier and then Haley Stevens would have won. I don't think that's really fair because she was doing pretty well and had just gotten a couple million dollars in cash for her campaign. But obviously, the polling was very off in both of those cases. But for me, Wisconsin made more sense because they were hiring a chief executive, whereas in Michigan, they're hiring a legislator, you know, someone who they want to go to Washington and, you know, bring out those big, bold ideas and make floor speeches. And I'm curious what you think of that because in general, like a lot of these states do hire a more moderate person to do the brass tax of governing, saying, I need someone to fill my potholes. Is that Francesca Hong or it's David Crowley?

I mean, I think that that's absolutely a factor. It's the same reason why blue states will sometimes elect a Republican governor and red states will elect a Democratic governor that this isn't picking somebody for the big national fights that matter to you as a partisan. They're picking somebody to. manage their state. And people tend to have much more of a relationship with the governor in their state. They know who the governor is. They don't necessarily know who their senator is. So yeah, you can pick in, if you're in Michigan, you can pick El-Said, if you're a Democrat, and say, I want somebody like that pushing my party in a different direction. I think, though, at the basic level, I think candidates incredibly matter in races, and they really mattered in these two races. Francesca Hong had about as bad at two weeks leading up to an election in a primary as you could possibly have.

And so, yes, the polling had her far ahead. But that polling was sometimes outdated when there were different candidates in the field. This race changed who was running at the last minute. The establishment went through three different front runners to challenge her until finally settling on Crowley, who had previously dropped out of the race. I know. I mean, I'm sure we can go through the things that she had. But, like, there was a whole debate about whether she was anti- Thanksgiving.

And then people are dredging up all her social media comments. And it was like she was anti all of the holidays. There was negative comments on everything from Valentine's Day to Halloween to Thanksgiving. So it wasn't just disavowing positions that might be, you know, too politically liberal or making, you know, even people afraid of her electability was sort of like more basic. Like, well, this is the kind of person I want in my state? And that was a lot of the central questions in the final week. And almost in reverse in Michigan where, you know, Haley Stevens really had a long time struggling to, sort of sell herself, especially on the internet. And Abdul Al-Said didn't have that same troubles.

And so you had a case where there's a lot of things that why these results, I think the candidates is one. I think your point about picking an executive versus sort of a spokesperson in the Senate. Voters at this point know the Senate isn't doing a ton, right? They know that it's critically important as a backstop the collection of senators. That's why everyone's picking Democrats in Democratic states and Republicans or Republican states. But the people you pick can kind of, you can pick an arguer versus an executive. And I think that's a factor too, for sure. So Fox News has a slew of new polls out covering the Senate. And it is very rosy for Democrats. The president is mad. He is always mad at our polling, which is the gold standard polling,

I should note. I think my coworkers might quibble with this. Nate Cohn, I love you, too. We can all, can we all be a rated pollsters for today? Sure, sure. I'm just saying it's not like Rasmus. or something like that. It is a, you know, a bipartisan poll. And I'll say that is the only one who's down. So he's down four points to Mike Rogers in the Fox poll. Assoff is up 13. Cooper's up nine. Brown is up eight in Ohio. Turk up four in Iowa. Tala Rico up three in Texas and Jackson up two in Maine. So that stands out. And within the cross tabs, the thing that really stood out to me and concerns me a lot is that 27 percent of non-DSA Democrats are supporting Mike Rogers over El Sajad. Now, it is early. It is the first week since he won the nomination. But that's foreboding for the future. And you wrote a great piece on the kind of civil war within the party and what think tanks like Third Way is doing. You know, they're spending $15 million against the uprising of the socialist wing of the party. How do you think that tussle,

is going. And are we a big, I mean, me, we, not you, we. Like, are we actually a big tent, or we're fighting cousins and someone's got to die? I mean, I think that in the primary, they're fighting cousins, but the hope is to unite for a big tent. I mean, I think speaking of Nate Cohn, he did a smart story recently about really this topic and is El Cayed an outlier, why he's an outlier. Yes. And the truth is that there is a history of more activist left candidates. It's not necessarily sort of mainline progressives, but people who are stridently, purposefully, aggressively, progressive, underperforming relative to their sort of more moderate or even

left of center peers. And so this is the concern that Democrats have. Now, he's making the argument, and Democrats are trying in a lot of places to make the argument that actually you're going to mobilize people. And this is the year to do it because the Republicans are so weak, because Donald Trump is so unpopular, because there's a better chance to. to win North Carolina potentially decisively, that even an underperformance can get somebody like Abdul Al-Said

over the line in Michigan. I mean, I was thinking about when I saw that poll about why this race is so consequential, not just for 2026, which is pretty essential for the Democratic path to winning a Senate majority, but for 2028. You know, Michigan's now going to be one of the early states in the presidential nominating calendar.

This is a place where Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez endorsed El Zayed. She has campaigned physically with him this year. She campaigned with him back in 2018 when she first won her first House primary. And this is a test for the progressive left. Can you not just win the nomination, but can you deliver a senator from a state like this? And it's not to say that there haven't been real progressives in battleground states, but his approach is, you know, fighting, right? And the people who have become real progressives who've won in those places have kind of done it a little quietly and then governed in a real progressive way. One of the good examples people nostalgically in the Democratic Party talk about is John

Tester in Montana, who campaigned. He didn't have five fingers. He had a flat top haircut. He acted the part of Montana. He was a farmer, you know, big dude. And his voting record was pretty progressive. And he pushed his party to the left on a lot of issues. But he didn't campaign that way. And I'll say it is openly as like Medicare for all money out of politics. These are the kind of bread and butter issues of the left. And it's going to be a really interesting race because it's not just going to control 2026, but does it hurt the progressive electability argument in 28? His win or his loss, I think, is the single biggest thing this fall that's going to shape that question. Can a progressive win in 2028? Because

remember, that was a hurdle that Bernie Sanders struggled with both in 2020 and 2016. Yeah, my favorite John Tester story is when he talks about how he knew that his opponent in his last race had AI generated one of his ads. He's like, because I have all of my fingers in that ad. I'd call it a clap back, but that's like inappropriate maybe in this particular instance. Is it? I don't know. He doesn't have all the fingers to clap. You can still clap.

It's just like a little less loud. Yeah, a little less. It is a good clap back. So I think you're completely right about Michigan and it is someone, you know, in the more. center-left versus far-left part of the party. I know a lot of people who actually are willing to lose the Senate over losing Michigan, where they just say, we can't have this because Al-Sahed will birth 10 more Al-Sayads, right? And then this is going, the party is going to shift away from our core principles. And you listed a few of his positions that are very signature to his campaign in Medicare

for All and money out of politics. So I would say there are, some more moderate Democrats like a Ruben Gallego, for instance, who want to swing state on Medicare for all. And money out of politics is basically everybody at this point says that. You know, John Alsop is leading with that as his argument. But Israel and Gaza is also core to his campaign and is showing up in absolutely everybody's races. And that's what brings in all the swirl around Hassan Piker and his role in Al-Saiat's campaign and his role going further. I am personally. exhausted of talking about Hassan Piker, though I did just bring him up. So that is on me, but it's my first day back. So I don't know what's good for me. I'm just talking. But I think it will be very interesting as a referendum on that aspect of democratic politics at this point. And I find it hard to imagine that we are going to sweep the map in this way. is just winning Iowa and Texas and Alaska. I do think, you know, Roy Cooper, obviously,

was the dream candidate and is doing what we needed there and that Jared Brown has a very good chance. But a lot of dominoes would have to fall into place, right, for that to be the case. But here's, can I just jump on the sweeping thing, which is, it counterintuitively, it seems like it would be so hard to sweep all these Senate races for Democrats this year.

You know what's happened recently? A lot of sweeping for both parties, almost every race has broken the same direction. Now, not always enough for every single person to win, but do you think of 2022, every race broke for the Democrats at the Senate, more or less, right? That's how John Federman got elected, you know, places like Georgia they won to. So it is really hard because these are really red states, but it's actually the recent history has been everything breaking one way. In 2014, the Democrats got just annihilated all of their incumbents lost in the Red States. And then Republicans picked up other tougher places. And so when the political climate

gets as bad as it looks like it might be for Republicans, that's when there's a real possibility of just the dominoes all falling. Support for the show comes from Article. The most stylish homes aren't the ones that chase the latest trends. If you think about it, a lot of those weird oblong chairs that were all over mood boards three years ago were probably cheaply made and only meant to last a few years. Truly stylish homes are built slowly, with pieces carefully curated over time. So when the time comes that you do need to replace a piece of furniture in your home, check out article. Every article item is thoughtfully designed to make your space feel cohesive and stylish. Not even kidding, five-star reviews across the border. However as high as you could possibly go, they have interior

design services, which you can sign up for and can do remotely, which I think is really smart. You know, no matter the size of your apartment or what your budget is, it's always nice to have your feng shui and whatever going on properly. Big fan of article. Article is offering our listeners $50 off your first purchase of $100 or more. To claim, visit article.com slash moderates and the discount will be automatically applied at checkout.

That's article.com slash moderates for $50 off your first purchase of $100 or more. Support for the show comes from Seoul. Soul is a wellness brand that makes delicious, hemp-derived CBD and THC products designed to make feeling good simple. Soll's new mood gummies have precise dosing, clean ingredients, and formulations designed for predictable effects, so you can choose how you want to feel while staying in control. If you're looking for a bright, social, and energizing buzz, you can check out

their uplift gummies. Three milligrams of Sativa, THC, and CBG, perfect for daytime plans or beating the afternoon slum. When it's time to relax, the mellow gummies deliver three milligrams of Indica, THC, and CBN, ideal for cozy nights and fully unplugging. And if you're looking for that just right anytime vibe. Soul's balanced gummies blend three milligrams of hybrid THC and CBD for an easy, versatile feel, perfect for when you're listening to your favorite podcast. Make today a good day and get yourself some soul gummies. Right now, Soul is offering our audience 30% off your entire order. Go to getsole.com and use the code moderates. That's getsoul.com promo code moderates for 30% off. Support for the show comes from Zoc Doc. Procrastinating doesn't make you a bad.

person and makes you an ordinary person. But there's a difference between procrastinating on your laundry and procrastinating on that nagging health issue that you're trying to ignore. Finding a new doctor can be frustrating, but that's the problem Zock Doc was designed to solve. Zoc Doc lets you search and compare local in-network doctors. They have more than 150,000 providers with 200-plus specialties across all 50 states. Zoc Doc's website has tons of reviews from real patients and detailed doctor profiles to help you choose the right one. Appointments happen fast. You usually within 24 to 72 hours and you can even score same-day appointments. And the best part, Zock-D-D-D-O-C is free to use.

Can't get any easier than that. Your health matters and taking care of yourself shouldn't be complicated. Find a book the right doctor with Zock-D-D-K-D-C-M-Sash-Moddardes. Head to Zock.com slash moderates to get started and check that appointment off your to-do list. That's Z-C-D-O-C-com slash moderates. How bad is the environment really for Republicans? because I follow the polling very closely. I read a lot of qualitative interviews, watch focus groups.

It looks like a complete nightmare, right? You know, Donald Trump's personal polling at the Bush line at 32% in some of these surveys, the most unpopular war that we've had in American history, and he doesn't seem to care that people are upset about their prices. There is openly this feeling that the government just doesn't care about regular people, whether you're actually focused on his personal enrichment, you know, billions of dollars that he's made, or just this lack of attention to everyday needs and costs of goods,

no health care plan, et cetera. So do you think that that actually holds, and are you bullish on, you know, Nancy Pelosi's, we're going to pick up 30 plus seats? Or do you think that it will be more tempered because partisans do as partisans do? And they'll go to their camps and maybe we'll have a slim majority

the way that Mike Johnson does right now. I mean, those are like a couple different questions. I would start with the political climate. No, the political climate is as bad as you're describing for Republicans. If you look at polling, the top line question is, do you approve of Donald Trump or not? And those numbers are bad. But I think it's the demographics inside those numbers

that are really troubling for the Republican Party, which is the one base, the thing that he's been his floor for the 10 years that he's been in national politics, in between even when he was out of power, is that white working class voters, white voters who did not graduate from college, have basically trusted him forever on the core question of taking care of them economically. They trusted him on fixing the economy, managing the economy, and that trust has eroded. And in a number of polls, he is upside down. So more Republicans no longer approve of him on the economy than disapprove of him. That's a sea change in 2018, his first midterm.

So when Republicans lost in a blue wave, his approval rating on the economy among white working class voters was still two to one. It was like 65% to 30%. Now it's 55, 50% against him. That is just a deep, deep problem for Trump and for Republicans because that's a problem everywhere. It's a demographic shift against the party in their own base. We know that Donald Trump historically has turned off independent voters in these midterm elections. If he has a discouraged base, that's a deeper problem. So that's the looking at the Republican side of the ledger.

It's basically as bleak as you could imagine it being. The problem for Democrats is the Democratic side of the ledger, which is voters don't really like the Democratic Party either. Democrats don't like the Democratic Party. Independence are leery of the Democratic Party, and Republicans still hate the Democratic Party. And so, you know, Democrats are favored because they're likelyer to win the people who say they don't like both parties right now. But what the Democratic Party really needs to do, the sort of the project of maybe not the next 90 days, but maybe the next four years is finding a way to have more people not dislike their party.

And again, that problem that we talk about those primaries is coming from inside the party too, right? Democrats don't, you know, centrist Democrats are frustrated with the left and the left is frustrated with the middle. So the risk for Democrats this fall is that voters vote against some of their candidates. And you can see from James Blair, who's the president's top political advisor overseeing the midterms, he's made some TV appearances. It's really clear what they're running against because Trump is sort of setting the mood music, right, when he talks about communism. But if you listen to his political advisors, especially when they are on TV, they're trying to drive a message that they hope other people pick up. And it is attacking the left of the Democratic Party as out of step, as extremists, and hoping to disqualify the Democrats that they're running against and say, you might not like Trump, you might not like the Republicans, but you're really actually more aligned with us than them. And you hate them too. It's like a you hate them to reminder that's the risk for Democrats at this point. How do you think Democratic leadership has been handling this moment? You know, right now, Hakeem Jeffries is catching a lot of heat.

for not being supportive of Medicare for all when we know what that reason is and that he has frontline Democrats that need to win in these battleground districts. And I think only two frontliners are for Medicare for all. Like people who actually are legitimate swing voters don't support Medicare for all. They don't want to lose their doctor if that's, you know, what's going to happen. And certainly what the Republicans tell you is going to happen with Medicare for all. So what do you think about how leadership is handling this moment? And if there's any, anything that they could be doing to get folks, even within the party, to be less upset about the course that we're on?

You know, I don't know that there's much more they can do to get people less upset because voters are kind of angry at the establishment of the Democratic Party. I mean, this is the difference. You know, I covered Republicans more closely during the era where Trump was rising. And the common theme in 2013, 2014, and 2015 was just how pissed off they were. at their own party, right? Ted Cruz gets elected to the Senate, helps lead a government shutdown. This is sort of ancient history for people at this point.

And the party loved him for it because he was fighting not just the Democrats, not just Barack Obama, but the feckless Republicans and Mitch McConnell. And that energy basically hasn't existed in the Democratic Party. Only the Republicans have used Nancy Pelosi as a boogeyman. Democrats really didn't run against her. A couple tried at times, but it was. It was never a winning strategy. There are Democrats that are running and using Chuck Schumer as a bogey man this year, and they're winning, right?

Peggy Flanagan in a less prominent race in Minnesota just won her primary. And as it said, she's not going to support Chuck Schumer. Abdul Seda said he doesn't want to support Chuck Schumer. And so if you're the leadership, you kind of can't control these candidates. If you need them to win their primaries, there's a cost to being seen as too close to the national party leadership, right? There was money that helped Haley Stevens by being aligned with Chuck Schumer and the DSEC, but it didn't outweigh the sort of talking points that Abdullah Siyadh had. Now, that's not to say that Schumer hasn't been successful in most of the primaries, he cleared the field in a lot

of these races. He got his handpicked person in Alaska. He got his handpick person in Ohio in North Carolina. And in Iowa, where they found a candidate that they backed with a lot of money who won the primary. So it's not that Schumer's not able to manage some of this, but if, If you're Hakeem Jeffries and you're Chuck Schumer, your hands are tied a little bit in that you're increasingly disliked by the voters. And that makes it trickier to manage that. I think about McConnell and his role in that era as a parallel. And Mitch McConnell basically stepped back from trying to directly get involved in these races because it hurt the candidates he wanted to help if he helped them. And Schumer's sort of in that place, too.

Like nobody, there's not a single race in a primary in this country where Chuck Schumer went out and campaign for one of these same candidates. He's like, send Josh Turk to Washington. He's going to help us. It's like, that didn't happen because that wouldn't have helped. And same for McConnell back in the previous era. And so you're seeing, and my colleagues wrote about this this weekend, is there a Democratic Tea Party moment? And it hasn't been throw all the bums out the way Republicans did. But again, the Republican Tea Party built over multiple cycles of anger and frustration.

And so we will see this is just the first cycle that we're seeing this for the Democrats. And so it might get worse next time. Maybe they gain more power and it doesn't get worse. But in all likelihood, the Democrats are going to be the opposition party for the foreseeable, you know, next three years. And so that energy, that frustration that the Democratic leadership is not doing enough to stop Trump, I think it's likely to keep growing. Yeah, I had Josh Turuk on and I asked him who he wanted to campaign was.

And he said, Iowa, Iowans, he's like Tom Harkin come hang out with me. He said no national figures. He said no. He has had Obama since then. But I think Obama is just, the halo is so big from Obama that it can't hurt you. But he had no interest in affiliating with the national party whatsoever. And obviously it served him well, you know, in winning his primary. And he's been fundraising a ton. There's a huge cash disparity. going on between the parties, at least at the institutional level. The Democratic individual candidates have been going gangbusters. Like James Talleyco is returning money at this point because he has too much. But how do you think Republicans are going to be able to use their cash advantage? I think there's an aspect of it that there's money that they have to spend that they didn't want to. So they're going to have to spend in Texas in a way that they didn't want to. They're going to have to spend in Maine in a way that they didn't want to.

Iowa for Ashley Hinson. But we're talking hundreds of millions of dollars difference. Plus, if Trump puts more money and, you know, he has a fresh few billion dollars off crypto that he could certainly send out there. So what do you think about that? Yeah, I think that money is one of the big concerns that Democrats have. We talked about the message that the Republicans are going to run, which is this Democrat is too extreme.

Don't take the risk of XYC Democrat. that only works if you have enough advertising to tell people that and to scare them. And right now, the institutional, as you described, the institutional Republican Party has more, the Republican super PACs and the party committees. The last report, and I think we'll get another one in the coming days, it was still like $700 million more of the Democratic Party. Now, big asterisk, a big chunk of that is Trump's super PAC money, which has been sitting there for months, which they keep telling everyone,

including many, many Republicans, we're going to spend this. could be a difference maker. They have yet to spend that money. And Trump has a history of not always spending the money that he has on other people. So we will see he's committed to spending it. That goes so far back. He doesn't spend money on contractors from his properties to Republicans in need. Yeah, right.

Like President Trump's loyalty has not extended to anybody, right? The loyalty is a one-way street with him. It has been forever. He demands people's loyalty. And he does help his allies at times. but only if it's helpful for him. And so we'll see. This is one of the X factors.

But even without Trump's $400 million super PAC, which is a big if, the Republicans still have way more money the Democratic Party does right now. And so individual Democratic candidates are raising more on the internet, especially John Ossoff is maybe the best example in Georgia. By the time the next reports roll around, I mean, he's going to have $45, $50 million more than his Republican rival. That's an absurdly large advantage. But to get in the weeds for a second, the Supreme Court.

Court just changed the rules of what the parties can do with their money, the Republican Party, the R&C, has $130 million. And it used to be that when they wanted to buy ads for a candidate, like the one running against John Ossoff, that they would have to route that money in a way that would go through a super pack, and they'd get crappier ad rates. Well, guess what? Now, they should be able to get ads at the same price as Ossoff. So that difference can get offset by big money in a way that it didn't use to.

to be able to get offset. And so it's the biggest concern when you talk to, especially at the House level, people involved for Democrats, it's like, okay, they think that there's maybe 40 seats that are the real playing field, a narrow set that's going to get most of the money. If they just dump $5 million each into 15 of the marginal races,

it's hard to offset that. Because these are not people who are widely known, even in their districts, right? If you are pick a person trying to flip a seat, Page Cognetti is the, you know, the Scranton mayor trying to flip a seat from a Republican. This is in a Republican-leaning district that previously been represented by a Democrat. She's relatively well-known. She's the mayor of the biggest city in this district.

But she's not deeply known in that community, right? $5 million of attack ads can really hurt a mayor. And she's the mayor. There are plenty of people who've never held elected office before because the Democrats have gone out and recruited, in a lot of cases, pretty good candidates who are brand new to politics. and no one's ever voted for them. So the first thing they're going to learn about these people is millions of dollars in attacks

they're calling them extremists. So it's the combination of, yes, Trump is weak, the Republican brand is weak. Voters say they want to change from the Republican Party, but you have to replace something with something else. And so they have the money

to potentially soil those Democrats in these coming months. Yeah, page against the machine. That's her nickname, which I love, as someone with a podcast with rage in the title. Yeah, I think that's the same anxiety also, like for Kate Conley, who I think has higher national name ID than Paige Cognetti maybe just because Mike Lawler is always on TV. But she's also never run for office in that district, right?

So this is a seat that touches the New York City media market. And Trump goes there. I mean, he's been multiple times. And for, you know, nearbyish relative basis for Bruce Blakeman, he's going to get involved in that race. It's going to be a lot of New York emphasis and on crime and policing, which is the only category where Democrats still trail Republicans in who would be best to manage it. Support for the show comes from Mint Mobile. When you were a kid, summer meant freedom. No homework, no teachers, no school.

And as adults, summer can still mean freedom, thanks to Mint Mobile's summer sale. Mint Mobile took what's wrong with wireless and made it right. Right now, all of Mint's plans are $15 per month, even unlimited. it. So free yourself from big wireless and their gimmicks and gotchas and switch to Mint for high speed data and reliable coverage. All plans come with high speed data and unlimited talk and text delivered on the nation's largest 5G network. To get your new wireless plan for just 15 bucks a month, go to mintmobile.com slash moderates. That's mintmobile.com slash moderates. Cut your wireless bill to 15 bucks a month at mintmobile.com slash moderates. That's it. There's no catch.

Up front payment of $45 for three months, $90 for six months. or $180 for 12 months. Plan required. $15 per month equivalent. Taxes and fees extra. Initial plan term only. Greater than 50 gigabytes may slow when network is busy. Includes up to 20 gigabyte hotspot.

Capable device required. Availability, speed, and coverage varies. See mintmobile.com. How many third-party vendors does your company use? 20, 200? Thanks to AI. Someone on your team probably added three more this week. And your security lead?

has no idea. Traditional third-party risk management can't keep up. Vanta gives you continuous coverage across every vendor, automatically, so you actually know what's in your stack and what to do about it. AI on, risk off. Vanta.com slash TPRM. Support for this show comes from Odu. Running a business is hard enough,

so why make it harder with a dozen different apps that don't talk to each other? Introducing Odu. It's the only business software you'll ever need. It's an all-in-one fully integrated platform that makes your work easier, CRM, accounting, inventory, e-commerce, and more. And the best part, O-DU replaces multiple expensive platforms for a fraction of the cost. That's why over thousands of businesses have made the switch. So why not you?

Try O-D-O-4-3 at O-D-O-D-com. That's O-D-O-O-O-O-com. I want to talk primary calendar. You wrote about this. They just came out with it. South Carolina will go first, then Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Michigan, Virginia. I have some stats on, you know, which demo groups are getting a bigger piece of the pie or getting elevated. Obviously, Iowa and New Hampshire are very upset about this.

But for black voters, 4.6 million black people live in the early window states, an increase of 160% from 2020. Latino voters, 4.2 million Latinos live in the early window states. a 140% increase from 2020. 1.4 million Asian American, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander Americans live in the early window states now. That's an 180% increase from 2020. Native American voters getting a 330% increase. Non-college voters, this is something that's really important in the evolution of the Democratic

Party back to working class roots, getting 125% increase from 2020. A lot of that is about elevating Michigan. young voters, 135% increase. Union voters, 170% increase. And veterans and military voters, 130% increase. I got that from John McCarthy, who used to be in the Biden administration. So it's quite clear what the DNC is doing here and that it was time for a change. And people have felt that it was time for a change for a long time. And that emphasizing to very white states upfront was not of where the party is. But what were your takeaway is from the new primary calendar? And do you think there's going to be any sort of rebellion of states? Like New Hampshire has said, well,

we're going to do what we want anyway. I think there will definitely, to the second one first, there will definitely be some rebellion. I think it's possible New Hampshire basically holds a primary. Nobody is on the ballot and it acts as like a write-in race. And all these candidates use it as an organizing test and a show their political muscle by having their people do a writing campaign. They're not technically on the ballot. The DNC put in pretty strict rules to basically penalize people who campaign in states that violate the calendar. But if New Hampshire's third, you're not going to not campaign in New Hampshire. So that's the big one.

And Iowa may also hold a caucus because Republicans are going to hold a caucus there and they don't want to be left behind. But this is the calendar, right? even if there are states that break the rules, this is what it looks like. This can be the formal calendar. And it's a huge change. And I don't yet know how it will play out. I think it's so unpredictable.

You know, Iowa had played this critical role of taking a big expansive field of 20 candidates and basically narrowing it to four, three, maybe five because Joe Biden finished so badly and he still became the nominee. Generally, it was like the top three. There were three tickets out of Iowa. That role is now in South Carolina.

And South Carolina's electorate is half black voters in a Democratic primary. And so black voters had been playing a decisive role previously for like picking the three and said, okay, well, which of them really is going to go on from here? Now they're going to be doing this winnowing role. And so what does that mean? You know, black voters have tended to be a moderating force of the Democratic party. So are they going to be picking one moderate? Are they going to advance two moderates? And then just one progressive emerges from there. Like, who knows? knows, right? Even the voters in how they behave will change, right? Because they're not picking one person to advance. They're really picking probably a handful of them. And the same thing for Nevada, which is moved up in the process. They could have really a pretty critical role on saying, okay, South Carolina picked two or three. Here's the winner, right? The second and third state typically is like sorted through the first ones and then advance through the final person. You know, and yeah, I think the basic answer for the demographics, and those are really interesting statistics is white voters tend to be the most liberal part of the Democratic Party

and college-educated white voters in particular, and those are the folks who were the activists in Iowa and the activists in New Hampshire, you know, look at these first couple states. They're part of those states, but they're not as big a part. And so, you know, when I think about candidates who did well before in those states and might be running in, the answer is like Pete Buttigieg, you know, who was not necessarily. a lefty, but had like really tapped into that community. One Iowa finished strong in New Hampshire, and suddenly those two states are not at the top of the calendar.

In South Carolina, which had been his weakest state when he ran in 2020, is at the front. So where is he going in the coming days or maybe he just went? It's back to South Carolina, right? They get different attention. We're going to have to see a couple of cycles. And maybe they'll change this calendar every cycle. They've left Oakland changing it every single time, which seems like a great deal, extra debate to have every four years. But I just don't know how it's going to play out in this

order of states. I do think by the time we're done, we're looking at six states, it's not going to have more than two candidates in all likelihood, right? Michigan, Virginia, you're not going to send three candidates to Super Tuesday after all six of these states have voted. Yeah, I was thinking about the Pete Buttigieg example, obviously, and he has historically struggled with black voters. I think his numbers have shifted up a little. bit, but it makes me think right away about AOC, who has become the most prominent lefty in the mix. And, you know, she's always out front on social media. She's going through this egg freezing journey, which is creating a lot of conversation. Most of it, I think, hideous and unhelpful.

The other issue that I have with people saying that, oh, you're doing this too late, you should have done this a long time ago. Don't you think a lot of people would have? This costs the amount of a used car. When you are young, you are broke. How can you even tell someone or chastise someone about the timing in which they do this when health insurance doesn't even cover it? It's not even a financial option for people at a younger age. I'm doing this at 36 because I can afford it and I have saved for it and my biology is compatible with it and I want to. So be mad. But she's right now at 17% odds to be the nominee on Cal She. She's been going up and up and up. How do you think someone like AOC plays in South Carolina, for instance, going first? Do you think she is the difference

maker from more traditional progressive standard bearers who frankly were white, right? Like Bernie Sanders, Pippoo to Judge, Elizabeth Warren. You have a Latina. Now you have a young woman, someone who is very social media savvy, but who also has a ton of respect for the elders in the party. And they like her back. I mean, I'm sure you saw that interview with Nancy Pelosi where she was perhaps most glowing about AOC, besides Hakeem Jeffries, who she adores, obviously, and wanted him

to take the gavel from her. Like, she loves AOC now. and it's a far cry from the early days. Protesting her office. Yeah, exactly. Or where Pelosi basically was like, when you want to grow up, you call me. And I can make this work out for you.

So what do you, well, what do you think about the egg freezing journey? And also, what about AOC in the 2020 primary? I mean, Nancy Pelosi gave one of her highest compliments to AOC in that interview is she called her operational.

And, you know, this is a person who's operating in politics to accomplish things. And that's what Nancy Pelosi was throughout her entire career. That's how she became the first woman speaker. She was operational inside the House of Representatives. And AOC has been operational inside the house and outside the house. I think about how she's handled the primary endorsements this year.

She went to Michigan. She campaigned for El-Sayed, helped him when it appeared in his television ads, had a joint event. But they also had an event with another candidate who was running for Congress, who is named Will Lawrence, who has gotten unhappy comments from the Congressional Black Caucus because of some of his old comments. He's a younger lefty. He won his primary, but at the event, she left the stage before he came on.

She did not appear on the stage with him. So she has been picky and savvy about who she will campaign with. And no Platner, no Francesca Hong, notably. Yes. The dogs that didn't bark have been noteworthy for her, right? has not gotten involved in every single race. She's picked it. She's been operational. She's been picking and choosing. And so, you know, I see a person, whether she runs for

a president or not, who is not just the person who came in and protested in Nancy Pelosi's office because protesting was the way to do it. She's trying to accomplish things. I don't think that that's the reason or anything to do with the egg freezing. I think the egg free might take from the egg freezing conversation that she has sparked is that she's she is able to spark conversation more than anybody else in the country other than Donald Trump. You know, she does an Instagram live, does a national television interview. She makes a comment about what one was crazy. It has sparked two weeks of think pieces and debate inside the Democratic Party.

What does that mean? She can utter a phrase, and it drives news coverage. She can do a thing, and it drives conversation, not just among the chattering class and the Beltway, but like actual people are talking about these things. There is no other Democrat in the field who is able to do that. Even Kamala Harris, right? And maybe it's because AOC is out there in a way that is making more news. And it's that the Kamala Harris couldn't drive news.

But she gave a speech the other day, you know, offering a little bit of a break from Biden and his approach and whether it was, you know, past looking and whether the Republicans were going to have an epiphany in the future. And like, okay, right, but that didn't drive a long conversation the way Acacia Cortez can, whether it's a comment she's doing on the hill, on the, you know, with reporters or the Instagram life. I mean, she's a singular force for driving attention. And if we've learned anything in the last few years of how our politics work, it's attention's really, really, really, really a valuable commodity.

It helps breakthrough to voters who are otherwise not paying attention. And guess what? especially in general elections, those are the most important voters. The most important people are people not listening to this podcast, not reading anything that I write. They only see it because, like, their friend of a friend happened to, like, clip 10 seconds or show them some highlight, right? Or some, like, Facebook posts from someone's grandmother. Yes. Yes.

The people deciding the elections are people looking at AI memes on Facebook, right? And they're actively trying not to pay attention. And that's fine because people have jobs and lives and, like, are struggling financially and don't have time. You know, I get paid to spend all of my time doing this. But if you didn't, right, like, you got to go make a living. And so I think both parties are coming to terms and, you know, the whole is podcasting the future for Trump. It wasn't that podcasting was the future was that this was a way that people could be reached who didn't necessarily want political news. It wasn't just who's going on political podcasts.

He was going on non-political podcasts that reached normal. humans. And she has a distinct ability to do that more than anybody else in the field right now. 100%. I have done basically a 180 on AOC from how I felt about her in 2018. You know, and I think her turn at the DNC, it will be an incredible case study. That speech that she gave that was just an economic populist speech from a working class woman that wants Democrats to win so that people have a better quality of life. I mean, she, left woke one a long time ago. So she's won over the raging moderates.

I mean, like in the Democratic primary field, there are going to be candidates who I think are more aligned with me on a policy level, but does she excite me and the people who listen to this podcast? Yeah, I think that she does. And she played this primary season so well, especially with Graham Platner, who, you know, We said maybe it's because she's a bartender, was a bartender that she had this spidey sense about this guy. But I think that for people who felt like the left just rubber stamps anyone who yells Medicare for all and there's a genocide in Gaza, she showed herself to be different and even different from Bernie Sanders. Because Bernie, even he's been pushed about Platner since he called on him to drop out.

You know, do you regret endorsing him? And he says that he doesn't. Whereas I would probably say, of course, I do. should have been better vetting. That's on us, and we will do better next time. His agenda is where the country should be going, and, you know, and then roll on from that. So I think you're right in the assessment, certainly about the attention, but her picker is very good. She has an incredible sense about it. And, you know, I mean, I could do a whole show with you about TMZ being on the political beat. But every time that she gets, you know, asked a question on the steps of the capital,

especially from like a TMZ. It's days of coverage. Same with John Ossoff and his BDE. I want to press secretary. So you're based in New York, not in Washington. You're not in the briefing room all the time. But Caroline Levitt is leaving. Reporting has been that the president was shocked and upset by this

and has really loved having her as a press secretary. Right now, Calciah, it's 37% that it's going to be Alina Haba to replace her. I don't think that Alina Haba. is in the running for this job or will be. What's your sense of how Caroline Levitt did the job? And is there anyone who sticks out to you as who could replace her? I think what she brought to the public-facing part of the job was like just speaking Trump fluently, his combativeness, his approach.

And look, she's the youngest person to ever have the job, the youngest woman to ever have the job. and, you know, the reason that the press secretary job is so tough is that you're facing a roomful people who are going to ask you harder questions, and you're going to get mostly judged on your screw-ups. And she doesn't have, like, a signature screw-up in the role as press secretary, which is pretty impressive for anybody. And so, look, she drove his coverage the way she wanted, and she followed people publicly, and she worked with people behind the scenes a little bit.

You know, I haven't covered the White House. I covered the 2024 campaign. I certainly worked with her extensively in 2024. You know, she had a distinct ability to carry Trump's message and maintain his trust. And he hates the people mostly who represent him because he thinks he's his own best spokesperson, always has and probably always will. But by all accounts, he had less complaints about her that he has about most people. And so certainly seems like unhappy to, and I have no idea who's in the first.

front running to replace her. Yeah, it'll be interesting. Usually it's whoever you're talking about right now is not who ends up doing it. And I do think Scott Jennings would be an interesting pick. I don't know if he can afford to go and take that pay cut and what comes along with it. But I thought for sure that she would at least stay through the midterms. Because if you are looking at the glass half full or certainly how the administration looked at how Caroline Levitt did that job. She was gold standard of doing his bidding. And she obfuscated and pushed back and demeaned, frankly, in very much the same way as him. It was like weird to see a 28-year-old outward-facing body with like an 80-year-old mean man inside of her, right?

that just spewed this venom at reporters, especially ones like Caitlin Collins. But I wonder if he does go in a different kind of direction because having a woman do that job, I think is very good for him. I think having these women in high profile positions in his administration, you know, Kelly Ann from the first round, certainly Susie Wiles, Caroline Levitt, you know, RIP Pam Bondi as AG and Christy, no, but it is supposed to signal. a softness to him, right, for someone who is so inherently coarse. And I don't know if having a man do it, frankly, when you are going into a tough election, will be as useful for his purposes or for the image of the Republican Party. I mean, I certainly think he wants a combative

presence. And there's a reason, like, by the way, at the end of his first administration, it basically disappeared, right? It stopped being a public-facing. job because he didn't think anybody else could represent him and he did it himself right at the beginning of COVID. Yeah. He was out there every day doing it himself. So, you know, we'll see what happens. She went on leave and it was filled in and Rubio did a little turn. I loved Rubio doing it. I thought that was really interesting. Yeah, I think there would be a lot of people who will cycle through, but I think the common thread is Donald Trump does not like the press and he's going to want somebody who is going to express that it publicly and on camera and performatively.

Stephen Chung, I am ready for you when that decision gets made. I feel like, I mean, they're not going to make Stephen Chung the person, but he does have that hatred in him. Can you imagine a Stephen Miller press secretary? I mean, you know, these are people who are likely to, you know, Stephen Miller could go take a term, right, and certainly express that same sentiment. And he does it on television on a regular basis.

I know. Yeah, I see him with my colleagues, and I want to cry. Shane Goldmacher, this was super interesting. Thank you for joining me. Thank you. Support for this show comes from Odu. Running a business is hard enough. So why make it harder with a dozen different apps that don't talk to each other?

Introducing Odu. It's the only business software you'll ever need. It's an all-in-one fully integrated platform that makes your work easier, CRM, accounting, inventory, e-commerce, and more. And the best part, O-DU replaces multiple expensive platforms for a fraction of the cost. That's why over thousands of businesses have made the switch. So why not you? Try O-D-O-4-free at O-D-O-O-O-D-com. That's O-D-O-O-O-O-com.

Are you a pet owner? Every six seconds, a pet owner in the U.S. gets hit with a vet bill over $1,000. Always an unwelcome surprise. That's where Fetch comes in. Fetch is the most complete pet insurance for dogs and cats, according to consumer advocate.org. You get paid back up to 90% of vet bills at any vet in the U.S. in Canada,

with claims paid back in as a little as two days. Go to fetchpet.com slash save right now for your free quote. That's fetchpet.com slash save. Hi, Ryan Reynolds here for Mint Mobile. Are you looking for a beach read this summer? May I suggest your big wireless bill? It's got suspense, mystery, a slightly flat, emotional arc, and a shocking twist where you realize you've been overpaying the entire time.

Fortunately, though, Mint's story is better. Every plan, $15 a month, even unlimited. That's it. Happy ending, zero tears. Give it a try at mintmobile.com slash switch. Up-front payment of $45 for three months, $90 for $1.80 for $12-month plan required, $15 per month equivalent to taxes and fees extra. Initial term only greater than 50 gigabytes, and slow when network is busy. See, see terms.