Tangle - Election Day Interview

Episode Date: November 5, 2024

First, and most importantly, we want to let you all know that we'll be covering the election live from Tangle HQ in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. We're hosting an election watch party (a handful of tickets are still available) and I'll be doing live interviews with guests all night. In order to tune in, you can go to our YouTube channel right now, subscribe, and turn on notifications. You can also plan to tune in to the channel at 7:00pm ET.NewslettersOur neutral, side-by-side breakdown of Trump and Harris on the issues (part 1; part 2)Our breakdown of the key Senate racesOur final analysis of the pollsMy recent essay about debunking voter fraud10 ballot initiatives that will define the electionMy election predictions, and my final analysis of the raceYes, you should votePodcasts and YouTube videosMy interview with the chair of the Bucks County Republican Committee about voter fraudMy interview with Rep. Auchincloss (D-MA)The full season of our original podcast, “The Undecideds”Tangle in the newsTangle’s feature on the “Question Everything” podcast (featured on “This American Life”)My interview on Slate’s “What Next” podcast about what to watch for in the election resultsMy interview on “A Braver Way” about how to stay sane in a polarized election Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages six months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at flucellvax.ca.

From executive producer Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening, and welcome to the Tangle podcast, a place we get views from across the political spectrum, some independent thinking, and a little bit of my take. I'm your host, Isaac Saul, and today is election day. That means we are doing something a little bit different. We do not have a normal podcast for you today. We have a lot of things to point you to, a lot of things to promote, a lot of things to talk about with regards to our work and how we are covering this election. So first, I'm going to do that. Before we share some of the content that we have coming out for you guys, I do just want to share a personal note to the Tangle community. You can take it or leave it, but I feel like it's important to use my platform for something that I think is

worthwhile. Every four years, I watch leaders from across the political spectrum tell voters that this election, always, miraculously, the one that we are in, is the most important election of our lifetime. This year is no different. In fact, this year's rhetoric is more escalatory than any I've ever heard, and it's breaking through. Nearly eight in ten voters believe this election presents an existential choice. One side is saying a burgeoning fascist dictator ready to jail his opponents and sick the military on civilians is a step away from the White House, while another is claiming the next administration is going to freely invite tens of millions of migrants into

our country who will rape, kill, and murder your family, and then steal your vote. Both are framing today as the last stand against these future realities. There's no doubt, none, that elections have consequences. Joe Biden and Donald Trump are not the same. Kamala Harris and Trump are not either. They are two very different candidates pitching two very different visions with two very different sets of policies, and I think our country will change in notable and important ways depending on who wins this election. I hope our work has helped you better understand these dynamics and make an informed choice with your vote, regardless of whom you cast your ballot for. At the same time, I also implore you to remember that all the noise, what you see on TV, what you see on social media, what you hear from political partisans, it's not always reality.

Reality is the kind and decent neighbor you have who doesn't share your views on abortion. Reality is the local politician from the opposite party you respect but don't vote for. Reality is the dad, the aunt, the niece, the son you fight with about politics but you love unconditionally anyway, and they love you back. We have the capacity, in fact the obligation, to stay attached to that reality in the next few days because regardless of what happens, the outcome will produce some ugly, vitriolic, and rage-filled responses and we'll need decent people around us with level heads to lead us through them. That doesn't mean

you should water down your values or beliefs, but it does mean you can be part of turning the temperature down rather than up. I implore you, this community, to do what you can to be a part of the solution. And please, of course, go vote. All right, with that out of the way, I want to talk a little bit about what is going to happen tonight right here at Tangle HQ. Perhaps most importantly, I want all of you guys to know that tonight we are going to be live streaming throughout the election starting at 7 p.m. If you're interested in tuning into that live stream, you should go subscribe to our YouTube channel, Tangle News on YouTube and set up notifications so you get an email when we start the live stream right around 7 o'clock. We're also

going to send out an email to all our newsletter subscribers. That stream is going to be published on several different platforms, including Instagram and X and probably Facebook as well. And I think it's going to be really interesting. We have an awesome group of bipartisan guests coming on throughout the night. Bill O'Reilly, Mike Peska, Sharon McMahon,

Ken Buck, the former Colorado representative, Pennsylvania State Rep. Jordan Harris, Henry Olson, Jackie Combs, Dan McLaughlin, Democratic polling strategist Evan Roth Smith, Josh Hammer, who was a guest at one of our live shows, and Janice Armstrong, a Philadelphia Inquirer reporter. So as the night is unfolding, we're going to be interviewing these people, bringing them on for live conversations about the results and what they're expecting. And of course, I'll be sharing some real-time analysis as we see the first batch of numbers come in. I also want to remind you again that yesterday on our YouTube channel,

which you should go check out and subscribe to while you're there, you might enjoy the interview I did with the Bucks County Republican Committee chair about voter fraud. Obviously, in the last week or so, Bucks County has been in the news a lot with allegations of election interference and voter suppression. So I got in my car and drove up there with the Tangle team to interview the chair of the Bucks County Republican Committee to hear a little bit about what was happening on the ground. And I think her answers to some of those questions might actually surprise you guys. Finally, I want to remind you that you should go vote today.

If you are unconvinced about whether you should be voting or not today, I would instruct you to go read my piece, Yes, You Should Vote, which we published a few months ago. And we publish basically every year around election time when there is a big election happening. And I hope it can compel you if you're undecided to get out there and cast the ballot. Now, those are all the different pieces of content and different ways that you might be able to interact

with Tangled today. But of course, we did not want to just leave you with nothing for your car ride or while you're doing your dishes today. So we do actually have an interesting piece of content today. We have an interview with a sitting member of Congress. I sat down with Representative Jake Auchincloss, the Democrat from Massachusetts. Jake represents Massachusetts' fourth congressional district. He was elected in 2021, and he is a very, very interesting member of Congress. He is also, I would like to humble brag, a reader of Tangle,

somebody who's written in actually before to criticize some of my takes in the newsletter. And so I was thrilled to have him on. Now, before I share our interview, I want to say a few things about what we talked about and why I'm sharing this interview with Representative Akincloss today. First of all, we have had several members of Congress on Tangle before, and I was a little bit hesitant to release an interview with somebody who is a member of one political party, the Democratic Party, today on election day. But rest assured, we have a bank and a library of interviews with Republican members of Congress, both former and sitting. Most recently, I sat down with Ken Buck, a former Republican member of Congress. So this is not some kind

of favoritism here. We're not releasing this interview because we are in the tank for one party or the other. In fact, we reached out to a few different members of Congress before election day to try and get them on this podcast and our live stream for the election tonight. And Representative Akincloss was one of the people who accepted and came on to chat with us. So that's why we interviewed him. Second, I actually wanted to have

Representative Akinclas on because I think there's a bit of the tangle spirit in him. I know he is a Democrat and I know in a lot of ways he aligns with the party, but he talks across the political lines and you're going to hear that in our interview. You're going to hear him talk about the ways in which he thinks the Democratic Party

is failing to connect with certain voters. You're going to hear him talk about the ways in which he thinks the Democratic Party is failing to connect with certain voters. You're going to hear him talk about how his district has some political divides and how he connects with voters from across those divides. And you're going to hear him talk about what he thinks is going to happen in the election today and what he expects the aftermath to be for the party going forward. Among the issues that we discussed is the way that the Democratic Party is connecting with young men in America today.

Because one of the things we know about how this election is going to go, though we might not know the results, is that we expect a very big gender gap. And I share the view with Representative Akincloss that the Democratic Party is not doing a good job speaking to and motivating young Democrats. And so we're going to talk about how the party might be able to do that better in the view of Representative Jay Akincloss. We're going to hear from him on some of his policy issues, what he's seeing motivating voters on the ground, how he's feeling about the campaign strengths and weaknesses going into the final stretch,

and of course, what he's seeing about the battle for the House. He spends about 30 minutes with us, which for those of you who don't know, is much more than representatives and members of Congress typically do. It's hard to get most of them for two minutes, let alone 30. So he was extremely generous with his time, and I really appreciated it. I think it is a really interesting interview, regardless of how you feel about his politics. So I hope you guys enjoy this as a little bit of an election day treat. And I hope to see many of you tonight for our election watch party here in Philadelphia or on the live stream, where we have many, many more interviews and fun pieces

of content to come. So without further ado, Representative Jake Auchincloss. Thank you so much for being on the podcast. I appreciate it. Long time, first time, Isaac. Thanks for having me on. I want to start with just a temperature check from you. What is it like being in Congress right now in the middle of election season? Tell me a little bit about what your day-to-day is like. I mean, obviously, you guys are on recess right now, but I'm just curious to hear from you about the experience of living through this election. The House is more narrowly divided than it has been in my lifetime, and that is going to persist. I think both parties recognize that regardless of the

outcome for the House, it's going to be five seats either direction. And that makes governing really challenging because it empowers the flanks of both parties to, if they can hold a whip count, which they oftentimes can, to really be the kingmaker for legislation. So I think there is a twofold set of anxieties. The first is, can we win? Can we take back the House? And for the Republicans, can you keep the House? And the second is, can you do so with a margin and a structure that allows you to govern without having veto power vested in a small subset of the members? Now, the Republicans have a much bigger problem than Democrats do in that regard. One, because their flank is much more extreme than the

symmetric version on the Democratic side. And second, because they are keyed into this single-member motion to vacate premise, which allows one member of their conference to basically try to fire the Speaker of the House. Democrats do not subscribe to that approach, which gives us much more coherence. Yeah, I'm curious. I mean, I'd love to hear a little bit about how you feel like Kamala Harris changed the energy of this, the House races that you're living through, but by entering the race. I mean, it felt a bit like Trump had a lot of momentum earlier this summer. And there was a lot of consternation in the Democratic Party about the state of the House race. My read as an outsider was that her coming into the race injected a lot of energy and momentum, brought in a lot of fundraising. What was that difference like for you?

How did her entrance into the race change things on the ground? I think that's a good read. I think it's a confluence of factors. First, she mobilized and energized the base. So one of the defining problems of Biden's campaign this summer before he dropped out was that the base was just depressed and demobilized. And within about 48 hours of Kamala Harris becoming the nominee, the initial polls were demonstrating that the base had become enthused yet again, and that gap had been almost entirely closed. So number one, base got activated. Number two, the economy has been doing well. Inflation is down at 2%. Unemployment has remained low.

Labor force participation has remained high and actually has been getting stronger. Consumer spending has been robust. And consumer sentiment about the economy is slowly beginning to catch up with the reality of a stronger economy. I think that's been super important. And then the third is that House Democrats have just put forward really strong candidates, candidates who outrun the party by five, even 10 to 12 percentage points, which is a significant feat. I'm curious about that, actually. I really want to hear from you because that strikes me as almost unfathomable in this day and age of the partisan divides we're living through that there's still so many split ticket voters out there, people who might feel differently about, you know, a Democratic Senator than the Democratic presidential candidate. And I know they

exist and I know they're real. I wonder as a member of Congress, you know, what does that tell you about the voters, you know, in your district, in your state? Talk to me a little bit about the fact that that is a reality and how you act on that. There aren't many split-ticket voters anymore. Their number has been declining, but their influence has been going up. And frankly, control over Congress really rests upon these split-ticket voters. So somebody like Jared Golden in Maine, he represents a Trump plus six district, I believe. And Jared consistently outperforms the top of his ticket by double digits. And that requires true political skill. He is authentic to his district. He votes with his district. He is the

voice of his district values in ways that are sometimes orthogonal to Democratic Party national messaging. Matt Cartwright in Pennsylvania, Marie Grusin-Gantt-Perez in Washington, Mary Paltola in Alaska. There is a dozen or so examples of members like these, but it requires not just talented candidates, but also for the party to incubate and to afford some latitude to those members so that they can distance themselves from the brand at election time. You're 36 years old, one of the youngest members in Congress. What's it like being in your age bracket in a world where we've seen Congress get a lot older in the last 20, 30, 40 years? How has your age kind of impacted

your experience and some of the things you've seen? The most important way is as a parent. I have a four-year-old, a three-year-old, a one-year-old at home. I'm the youngest parent in the Democratic caucus. And that gives me, I think, a special urgency around issues where the impact on kids is profound. I'll give you three examples. My day one issue joining Congress in 2021 was reopening the schools. In Massachusetts, I looked around when I took office and saw that the majority of school districts still didn't have kids back in the classroom. This was six months after leading public health experts like Ashish Jha, who became Biden's COVID coordinator, had said these kids can and indeed must be back in the classroom. I launched a campaign, frankly, within my district

to talk to superintendents and school committee members about getting these schools open. Regrettably, we are now wrestling with the academic and socio-emotional repercussions of keeping the schools closed for too long. We've seen in Massachusetts about 20 years' worth of math and literacy gains have been wiped out. It'll take us about 10 years to recover. It's unacceptable, and we need to have a profound sense of urgency about remediating it. Number two is the social media platforms. These are the wealthiest,

most powerful corporations in the history of the world, and they have become so largely by attention fracking our youth. It has distorted the sense of self and society that our kids have. And because of Section 230 passed in 1996, they're immune from any liability for their malfeasance with our kids. And I've led a bipartisan piece of legislation to carve out their Section 230 immunity so that they're accountable. You serve in Massachusetts' 4th Congressional District. Paint a picture of the district for us. Tell us a little bit about who lives there, what the political makeup of the district is, and then I'd love to talk a little bit about the race and the issues on the ground. cities like Newton and Brookline and Needham and Wellesley that have high median income and a lot of professions in globalized knowledge-based sectors like financial services and medical science and consulting law. And then the cities and towns outside of 495 on the border of Rhode Island, places like Fall River and Taunton and Attleboro, more working class cities have done less well in a globalized economy post-NAFTA

and different sets of concerns. But I will say that less important than geography is demography. And Isaac, you're well tuned into this. What's increasingly true of American politics is that somebody's location is less predictive of their partisan affiliation than their age, their gender, or their possessing or not possessing a college degree. And that's true in my district as well. I'm curious, as a representative who navigates a divide, it sounds like what you're talking about. I mean, a little bit of a geographic divide, but also differences in profession, differences in maybe upbringing wealth. How do you try and speak to all constituents? I mean, what are some of the issues that you find resonate across those lines? Absolutely. So number one is

lower cost of living and the greatest share of wallet in Massachusetts and indeed nationally is housing. Housing is the area where I think we need the most concerted effort. 30, 40, even 50 percent of people's income is going towards rent or mortgage payments. And we are roughly 10 million units short of housing in this country. Massachusetts, the problem I think is exacerbated. We have to lean into land use reform and zoning reform, as well as off-site modular construction so that we can radically cut the costs of housing manufacturing and also maximize the number of units that can be put on a given acre, particularly those acres that are near public transit spots. I would really like to see whole-of-government efforts under a Harris

administration to build those 10 million units of housing and radically cut cost of living and also knit back people's walkable downtowns and improve civic cohesion. Other big issue is healthcare costs. The United States has a $4.5 trillion health care system. It's the size of Germany. We basically have Germany's GDP inside America is just doing health care. Premiums are costing the average American family the cost of a car every single year. Basically, every family buys a car and then drives it off a cliff every year and does it again. And they're inflating faster than incomes are. So health care costs

are slowly eating more and more of our economy. We're hitting a tipping point where employers are throwing up their hands and starting to look at disintermediated ways of providing health care to their employees. And I represent a district with a lot of health care talent. This has been an area I've been very engaged in, particularly with reform to our drug pricing system and taking on the big three pharmacy benefit managers, which are the middlemen of drug pricing, Fortune 20 companies that have been price gouging pharmacists, patients, employers for decades now. One of the issues that I saw a headline about that you have been making sort of central, maybe not so much to your campaign, but to the Democratic memberships campaign is gun violence. I think Punchbowl News published a story about how you have gone big on gun violence this year, talking about it, centering it a bit, fundraising off of it.

Talk to me a little bit about why that has been an issue that you care deeply about and how you feel like it's resonating for other members in the House. This is the third issue I was alluding to as the youngest parent in the Democratic caucus, along with social media companies and reopening the schools and remediating learning loss, has been gun violence. Gun violence is the leading cause of death for children in our country. Now, J.D. Vance has said that's a fact of life. I disagree. It's a fact of policy. We can change that. We can stop having the United States literally off the charts relative to other OECD countries in our gun violence per capita. And it's a series of laws that have been instantiated

at the state level in Massachusetts and have been proven to save tens of thousands of lives annually. That's safe storage laws. You own a gun, you better lock it up. Universal background checks. Can't be a criminal in trying to buy a gun. Red flag laws. If a physician or a judge thinks you're a threat to yourself or others, can't have guns within access. Revoking the immunity from liability that the gun manufacturers have enjoyed since 2005. This is really critical because they have technology that they could adopt right now that would make it so that a non-owner of a firearm could not fire that firearm. And they refuse to adopt it. And in fact, they are pushing assault weapons and other weapons of war onto disaffected young men

and are totally shielded from any litigation for the grief that they have caused thereby. So we have a lot of things that we can do that would meaningfully change the calculus regarding gun violence prevention efforts in this country. But Republicans won't do it because they're bought and paid for by the National Rifle Association. They're all terrified of the gun lobby. It's going to require a Democratic majority in Congress, and I've put a million dollars towards that this cycle alone. We'll be right back after this quick break. Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu a

background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown when he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime Willis begins to unravel a criminal web his family's buried history and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can you do this flu season? Talk to your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages six months and Thank you. you just mentioned something there a little bit offhandedly that i really wanted to speak to you about and i'm going to take the opportunity to use it as a segue which is disaffected young men

in america this is something i've written a bit about in tangle and i found out actually before we came on the show just now that you're a tangle reader, so maybe you caught some of this. And you have been speaking about it, you know, not just on the campaign trail, but throughout your time in Congress, which I'm very appreciative of because I don't think I hear enough about it from members of the Democratic Party, which is that there are a lot of young men in America, especially young white men in America, who are feeling, I think, a bit wayward, politically homeless. I think conservatives and the Republican Party and Donald Trump especially have been speaking to them in ways that connect, that land, that have helped, I guess, further the gender gap that we're seeing in this year's election. And I actually give some credit to Trump and the Republican Party. I mean, I know you and I probably disagree

about some elements of this, but I think there is a vision that they are selling to young men in America about, you know, opportunity and raising a family and being a provider and trying to reinforce these sort of quote unquote stereotypical masculine traits and ideas about being a man in this country. And I think it's working. And I'd love to hear you talk a little bit about how you view some of the issues facing young men in America

and how you think maybe your party could speak more effectively to them? I appreciate the question. I've been thinking a lot about this. It starts with acknowledging that we have a problem. And I don't mean a political problem with young men as the Democratic Party, although we certainly have that too, and the polling bears that out. I mean a more fundamental problem societally. Young men are not doing very well in this country. Young women are outperforming them on almost any metric that you care to look at, whether it's academic achievement or employment or other markers of how we think about establishment from adolescence.

And we're also seeing that young men have borne some psychological wounds from social media that are different and maybe harder to detect than what young women have endured. Young women tend to have body image problems. They tend to have self-harm issues as adolescents because of social media. Young men are a little different. And Jonathan Haidt, in his book, Anxious Generation, has written about this cogently. Young men tend to retreat into themselves. They tend to become less pro-social and rely more on video games, rely more on pornography, rely more on substances to get some of the highs that otherwise might come organically with social engagement. And they're also, as Nick, as Branston has written about in his book, Men Without Work, they're also underemployed

relative to where they could be, depending on how you measure it, somewhere between 5 to 10 million American men probably not fulfilling their maximum employment potential. So we have a real problem. And the parties are approaching it, I think, in two different ways. The Republican Party has been approaching it with what I call the zero-sum mentality, which is to say they look at women's empowerment, both economically and politically and socially, since the 1960s and say, it's a zero-sum game, guys. The women have gone farther.

That means you have gone less far. And the only way for you to get ahead is for us to restore this traditional conception of gender roles. I reject that. I don't think that that is healthy for our country. I don't think it's ultimately something that men are going to subscribe to either. But the Democratic Party, I think, has had what I think of as like a zero difference approach, where I think Democrats have been way too recalcitrant to just acknowledge that men and women are different and have different types of agency and are going to approach things differently. It's what I think of as like the preschool

teacher test. Like ask any preschool teacher, are boys and girls different? And you're going to get a laugh. And like, of course they are. But somewhere along the political way, I think that that gets drowned out. So it starts by just saying, yes, they're different. And then I think it becomes, well, what are the different veins in which, they're different. And then I think it becomes, well, what are the different veins in which we have to give men agency? I think there's fundamentally three. Men want to be providers. Men want to be protectors. Men want to be procreators. And we have to give them a vision of healthy masculinity across all three. What does it mean to have a family and to take care of your kids? What does it mean to protect your family? What does it mean to provide for your family? And we got to talk, I think, in authentic and substantive ways about all three of those things. I'm curious. I mean, one of the questions

I struggle with on this issue is how much of this is a cultural problem to solve and how much of this is something the government can participate in solving or the Democratic Party or Republican Party can solve or Representative Akenkloss can solve. I mean, like, talk to me about how you think about that because I don't really know. I mean, in some ways, I'm like, you and the rest of Congress are not going to have a meaningful impact here. And I don't really see how the government could change, you know,

this dynamic that you and I are both identifying. And this is something that has to happen culturally, grassroots level. There needs to be some sort of like social movement around it. But then I also understand that the government can change people's, I mean, genuine lived experiences there, you know, whether they can provide for people or not, their government programs, jobs programs, tax cuts, whatever, all this stuff that you might be able to do. So where do you draw that line and how do you think about that? I agree with you. I do not think government's the prime mover on solutions here. And I actually take that approach with most problems. I think civil society and entrepreneurs tend to solve problems better than government can. Let me, though, peel out a couple of threads of action. One, I do think, is social media. I think that this idea that we have enveloped the social media platforms with Section 230 protections has allowed them to sell our children's eyeballs off to the highest advertising bidders and to do so without any concern for the negative externalities that creates with their social psychology. And that's had real damage.

And like I said, it's had different kinds of damage with men versus women, but it's had damage on both. And we've got to rein these companies in. This is not a First Amendment issue. People can post whatever they want about politicians. It's a Section 230 issue. It's distinct. We've had journalists and newspaper publishers and TV stations for decades

do hard-hitting journalism without Section 230 protections. There's no reason that the platforms need them to. And they need to have a duty of care to individuals under 18 in particular. The other one, I think, has to do with education. I do think we want to recruit more male teachers. I think there's pretty strong evidence that having more male teachers really can help young men with a healthy conception of masculinity and seeing strong male role models. And then the third thing is how do we think about tapping into the latent energy of males 16 to 25. And every society across all time and place has had that 16 to 25-year-old male problem. What I mean by that is like 95% or something like that of violent crime is committed by males 16 to 25. This has always been a challenge for every society. Every society struggles with how to channel those predilections in a productive dimension. Obviously, the military is one. Obviously, law enforcement is another. I think we need new and different kinds of channels. And it's not just manufacturing jobs. This is what politicians do too much, is that they fetishize manufacturing jobs, which are a relatively small portion of all employment opportunities. We have to be able to show that you can build things and be a provider for your family in ways outside of a narrow factory job lens.

This is a little bit tangential, but I'll just add to inject my own opinion a little bit here. One of the things that I talk about with friends and family and have written a little bit about is sports playing a role in this too. I mean, I see some of the kind of the limits that we put on the way young men can express themselves, playing football or basketball or whatever. And I'm just like, this is one of the safest, most consistent outlets we've had throughout society is competition, where it doesn't end with someone being beheaded like it used to in medieval times. And it's a good outlet for kids.

And it's something that as programs here in Philadelphia where I live, I support a lot of local sports programs because I think it's a really great place for kids to go. I guess one question I have looking forward, let's imagine a world. I mean, we're recording this now on Monday, November 4th, so the election is tomorrow. Kamala Harris wins this lot of the polling shows that Donald Trump is dominating among men and especially young men. What does the Democratic Party do? Will it look to sort of close this gender gap and forward-looking think about how to win back a lot of young men and male voters? Will it just say, okay, our new base is made up of predominantly female voters? How does the party react? How should it react? I mean, how do you actually go about winning back some of these voters in the future?

One, I think it's about what we stop doing. And this is a feature I think too often of the Democratic Party, is that we can lecture voters, we can condescend to voters. That tone is, I think, especially abrasive to young men, and we need to stop doing that. Voters don't want to be lectured. Voters want to be enlisted into a positive agenda. And that's a rhetorical change much more so than a policy one. And I certainly try to do that in how I communicate. And I think as a party, we all need to think critically about that. And by the way, I actually think Kamala Harris has done a really nice job of that in the few months that she's had. Kamala Harris does not lecture people. Kamala Harris talks about our future in contrast to Donald Trump's past. She wants an economy where everyone can participate. I actually have found it quite refreshing, and I hope that that

starts to mark the new approach to the Democratic Party's tone. I think there's also knowing who we can't reach. And this is always a controversial thing to put forward in politics, because the idea is you want to start every new election cycle with 100% potential voters. I don't think that's a realistic or good use of resources. If you are a voter who identifies guns as your number one issue and rejection of any kind of gun safety policies as a litmus test, we're not going to reach you as a party. And that's all right. Knowing who our voters are not allows us to better target and talk to who our voters might be. And that may have a disproportionate gender impact if we take

those voters off the board. Again, that's okay. That's knowing who our voters might be as opposed to who our voters are not. And so dialing in on that, I think helps us focus. We'll be right back after this quick break. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can you do this flu season? Talk to your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages six months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at FluCellVax.ca. province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur and 100% protection is not guaranteed.

Learn more at flucellvax.ca. Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. All right, we are, of course, a day before the election. So I'd be remiss not to talk a little bit about the campaigns and some of what we've seen and where we are in the final stretch. So I want to chat a little bit about that before I let you go. First of all, I'm curious, I mean, you strike me as somebody who is very much attempting to speak to people outside just

the Democratic base. I mean, following your time in Congress a little bit, the way you're campaigning, even this conversation right now, I hear a lot of inklings of the way I might approach a political campaign if I were running a sort of, you know, bipartisan use of language and framing to kind of talk to people who may not agree with you politically. You have a D next to your name. So, you know, a lot of people in this country are going to make a lot of assumptions about you. Talk to me a little bit about how you are talking to someone who says, I'm casting a ballot for Donald Trump tomorrow, but, you know, I'm maybe open-minded about switching that vote. What's your pitch to voters to come to the Democratic Party, to come to Kamala Harris right

now? And I do this frequently. I'm on Fox News and other channels to try to reach these kinds of voters. To me, it's a one-two punch. So the first is recognizing that voters are not going to listen to you about your policy prescriptions until they feel heard about their values. until they feel heard about their values. And the values I think we need to sync up on are respect for social order broadly, law and order, patriotism, meritocracy, tenants where two-thirds of Americans can rally towards. And so much of that is just by explicitly acknowledging these things are important. Border security is important. Public safety is important. America is an exceptional nation that is founded on the idea that with hard work and fair play, any individual should be able to get ahead. These are ideas that

are compelling and compelling to both sides, but that unless you explicitly crystallize them and demonstrate that we share these values, it's hard for voters to then hear you on the second set. So first is connect on these underlying values. And the second is now let's talk about the economy. And to me, what we are driving towards is an economy that works like Legos, not Monopoly. We want an economy of builders and doers, not an economy of NIMBYs and middlemen. We should have an audacious agenda about building 10 million units of housing and

1,000 nuclear power plants and more ships in the Chinese Navy and more small businesses in the rest of the world combined, a top 10 education system for graduates in science and math and literacy. Audacious goals that talk about the U.S. economy as a place of productivity and energy and pride. How do you connect with this block of voters that we're seeing right now in a lot of polling and sentiment gauging that are showing up who just aren't happy with the economy and don't feel optimistic about the future. I mean, the reality is the economy and immigration are two of Kamala Harris's and the Democratic Party's weakest issues going into this election. And, you know, I think there's the obvious data element of this, you know, unemployment is low and has been historically

low for several years now. And we're seeing jobs added every month. And I get that inflation is coming down. But, you know, I also I look around, I feel the same thing a lot of other voters feel that it just feels worse than it did in some ways in 2019, 2018, 2017. So what do you talk to voters about with that framework in place that the party has to operate in? First, you never want to tell voters that they're wrong in what they're feeling. You can describe the narrative of what happened, right? We had the COVID closures and everybody wanted to buy goods instead of services, and that caused a spike in inflation for goods.

And then the economy reopened. Everyone wanted to buy services instead of goods, and that caused a spike for inflation for goods. And then the economy reopened. Everyone would buy services instead of goods and that caused a spike for services. And we had inflation. The whole developed economy across the world had inflation. The United States licked our inflation fastest and with the least impact on unemployment. We're at 2% now. But it has been demoralizing and alienating

for a huge number of Americans. We have to acknowledge that. But then we have to have a pointed agenda for how we are going to reduce cost of living going forward. And I look at it as just share of wallet. What are people spending money on? And it's housing and it is health care are the two areas where I believe government has the biggest potential impact. You can look at energy and child care as well. and we can talk about those policies, but a 1%, 2% change in housing costs

or a 1%, 2% change in healthcare costs have a lot of leverage for how much of the share of wallet gets taken out. So as I said, let's build 10 million units of housing. It's a supply problem, full stop. And then second, on healthcare, we have got to radically disintermediate our healthcare system. One of the biggest challenges we have in healthcare is a lack of competition and choice and too many intermediaries who are, one, adding cost to create their own margin, but two, preventing market mechanisms from working, from having competition and choice drive down prices.

That's hospitals, that's drug companies, etc. And both of those things have a lot of sensitivity to government policy. And we have to drive those policies into place. The economy is, cost of living, I should say, it's kind of like air pollution. You really, you can't hand wave around it. People know whether things are going well or not, and they're not going to be BS'd about it. So instead of, I think, getting too deep into the rhetoric around cost of living, let's actually reduce cost of living. And that is sensitive to policies we can put in place.

All right. 24 hours to go. Maybe 36 before we start getting some election results. I'm going to ask you to put on your punditry cap a little bit here. How are you feeling? What's giving you confidence? What's making you nervous about the state of the House race and the presidential race right now? What's giving me confidence is I believe in the fundamental decency of the American people. And they have witnessed Donald Trump in action now for a decade. And I don't think Americans want their future to be bound up with his grievances about his past. And so I think Kamala Harris is going to win. I don't think it's going to be a blowout, but I think she's going to win. I think she's largely going to win, as you said, Isaac,

on the backs of women voters. And that's going to be an issue that the Democratic Party is going to have to wrestle with going forward, is how do we make sure we don't become a genderized political landscape? I don't think that's healthy for the country. And I think Democrats are going to take back the House as well. You look at New York and California and Pennsylvania, and there's pickup opportunities there. And we've got candidates who are really defying gravity in a lot of respects and are, I think, going to put up Ws. All right, I got to press a little bit here. What's making you nervous? What keeps you up at night on the data, some of what you're seeing on the ground headed into the final stretch? Well, what makes me nervous is that the diploma has become the defining bifurcation in the

American political landscape. Whether or not you have a college diploma is the most predictive factor, at least by my analysis of which party you're in. I don't think that, one, that is good for the country. That is, I think, opens up a lot of unhealthy cleavages in our discourse. But two, it's also just not a good electoral strategy, right? It's a recipe for Democrats to win a bunch of House seats by 70-30 margins, but then to lose a bunch of narrowly contested House seats by 52-48 margins, and thereby end up with a situation where we may be winning the popular vote overall nationally, but we may be structurally vested in a minority in

the House. So that's concerning to me. We have got to widen the tent of the Democratic Party beyond college-educated voters. And like I said, that to me is one, starting off with respect for social order, for meritocracy, for law and order, for patriotism, and then leaning into a discussion not about economic populism, but about economic productivity, about how we're going to be an economy that works like Legos, not monopoly. Representative Jake Arkincloss, I appreciate the time. I know you're a busy guy. Thanks for sitting down with us. And yeah, let's keep in touch. I'd love to do this again sometime. It's a pleasure. Our podcast is written by me, Isaac Saul,

and edited and engineered by Tim Thomas. Our script is edited by Ari Weitzman, Will K. Back, Bailey Saul, and Sean Brady. The logo for our podcast was made by Magdalena Bokova, who is also our social media manager. The music for the podcast was produced by Diet75. And if you're looking for more from Tangle, please go check out our website at readtangle.com. That's readtangle.com.