The Bulwark Podcast - S2 Ep1052: George Packer: JD, Hollow Man

Episode Date: May 28, 2025

Our VP used to think his path to power was through the ruling class at Yale Law School. But after 2016, he saw that his route was through Trump, so he swapped one set of elites for another. And now as a lord among the MAGA ruling class, he's embracing his true cruel, lying self—and railing against the globalists who nitpick about this silly due process thing. Meanwhile, even Elon doesn't like the bankruptcy-threatening reconciliation bill, even if it's larded with kickbacks just for him. Plus, America: stay and fight. And the biggest theft in the history of the presidency is happening every day right before our eyes. New Mexico congresswoman Melanie Stansbury and The Atlantic's George Packer join Tim Miller. show notes George's profile of the VP, "The Talented Mr. Vance" Rep. Stansbury being featured on Jimmy Kimmel Live! George's piece, "Be A Patriot" George on Ross Douthat Plus, tickets for our live show “Free Andry” on June 6 in DC

Hello and welcome to the Bullard podcast. I'm your host, Tim Miller. We've got a double header today in segment two. It's Congresswoman Melanie Stansbury from New Mexico. I've been digging her lately. So stick around for that. But first, he's a stamp writer at the Atlantic. He wrote a profile recently of JD Vance called The Talented

Mr. Vance. Welcoming back George Packer. How are you doing, George? I'm well. How are you, Tim? I'm doing pretty good, all things considered. Personally, that's how I have to put it these days. I'm personally well. Yeah, personally great. Everything is good. School's out. these days. I'm personally well. Personally, great. Everything is good. School's out, kids happy. I'm in Chicago. We're taping a live show with Adam Kinzinger tonight

that everybody will be able to listen to tomorrow. It's cold as balls in Chicago. So interpersonally, that's my only real complaint right now. Okay, and mine is that the New York City schools don't let out until mid-June. Oh man, well, no, that's a win. I would trade you. I could use two more weeks of school.

I guess it's not me. It's my husband that's doing the parenting. There's wins and losses. Yeah. All right. I guess I'd one more complaint. It's that both these NBA conference finals are looking like they're going to be kind of boring.

So anyway, all right. That's all. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. You mean small market teams because they are really exciting teams to watch. Oh, they're great. They're great to watch. They're kind of corny and shy flops around a lot.

Shea flops around a lot. But I meant more like this Pacers Knicks series is so fun. I wanted seven games. I'm annoyed that it might be ending sooner than I'd wished. But alas, you never know. Maybe the Knicks will do a miracle comeback. It's crazier things have happened. I doubt it, but I'm just excited that Oklahoma and Indiana

look like they're going to be in the finals, which is a very improbable sentence to utter. I guess. I'm not ready to be happy for the Oklahoma people yet, but that's for another day. The talented Mr. Vance, obviously this is a play, untalented Mr. Ripley, the shapeshifter. He's had at least three names.

He's Donald Bowman for a while, James David Hamill, JD Vance. Some of that is not his choice as a childhood, his mother's choices, but changing your name is adult. It's kind of a weird decision and I think maybe reflective. I don't know, talk to us about why you framed it up like that. I don't fault him for changing his name. I think that had to do with who he felt the closest figure to his father was, and there really weren't very many good choices.

It's kind of a gender-affirming change in his name, maybe. Yeah. I mean, there's an obvious analogy to the talented Mr. Ripley because JD Vance has transformed himself before the country's eyes eyes twice, you could say. The first time he went from being the son of a relatively poor and broken family in a declining steel town in Ohio with Appalachian roots, a member of what he would call the hillbilly culture or the white working class to a shining star of the Ivy League, of venture capital, and of number one bestsellerdom with his book, Hillbilly Elegy, which really holds up. I reread it for the piece. It is a really good book.

Really? That hurts me inside that George Packer thinks it still holds up as a really good book. Really? That hurts me inside that George Packer thinks it still holds up as a really good book. I'm sorry. No, you have to... Part of being the bulwark means being able to say a book on the other side of a partisan line is a good book. For sure. I'm happy to give credit where due. Well, as we're about to get into, JD particularly rubs me the wrong way. And so it's not really an ideological point. It's more of, I find him very annoying. It's a cellular point.

Yeah, exactly. Well, look, and then the next transformation, of course, was from thoughtful, sensitive, complex spokesmen about the troubles of the white working class to fire breathing culture warrior, mega knight onto the White House and looking like heir apparent to Trump. And so that's an incredible journey, unbelievably fast and zigzaggy roller coaster like a kind of, to me, almost a literary story.

I kept imagining him as the protagonist of a novel, talented Mr. Ripley or Pip in Great Expectations, just some poor kid from the provinces who keeps rising and rising and rising and does it at some cost to himself and others. Yeah, is the novel a tragedy with the main character? Can you tell me what happens? It's not a tragedy. Is the novel a tragedy with the main character? Can you tell me what happens? Jared No, it's not a tragedy. It's not a tragedy. It's a tragedy maybe for the country.

Pete Yeah. Jared For him, it's been a kind of miracle success story. Although those don't often, they don't always end well, those miracle success stories. So we don't know. It's really the big question of the future is whether he will inherit the crown or whether the crown itself will be so tarnished and the country so sick of it that it'll have been the worst decision of his life to have tied himself to Donald Trump. We don't know. You talked about all the various transitions and we've spent, you know, a million podcast hours at least on JD going from, you know, me basically, the never Trump-er David Frum

to being Donald Trump's butt boy. So I kind of want to set that like transition aside for a second. And since you just read Hillbillology, there's, I think, a less analyzed transition, which is at the heart of that book, it was an ethos of like, this culture has problems, you know, like that folks need to take responsibility, and the opportunity arises for somebody who's able to overcome the cultural issues like himself. Like that's kind of the arc of the story. And that story that he tells now is that these folks are all, the people he grew up with are victims, that they were abused by the globalist society and they have no chance and the meritocracy and these elites have been out to get them. I'm not sure what you make of that arc.

Yeah. At one point when he was outselling the book, he said there's a, in fact, I think this was an interview with Rod Dreher of the American Conservative. He said, there's a tendency in the white working class to blame society and government for all of their ills. And that's a very dangerous tendency. I'm paraphrasing I'm paraphrasing. That in a capsule is what the book says and what you just said. It's a lacerating self-portrait, portrait of his family, portrait of his people. It holds nothing back.

What I admire about it is the honesty and the quality of the prose. But that honesty requires him to say, we've brought a lot of this on ourselves, there's a lot of self-pity, yes there are larger forces, there's globalization, there's trade. He doesn't talk about immigration very much in, if at all, in Hillbilly Elegy for some reason. Yeah, he does talk about the structural forces, but mostly he talks about how those structural forces have produced a culture of defeat, of decline, and of grievance. He thinks that that's very dangerous and wants to tell people like him, young people like

him, I made it out. Here's how I did it. I had some mentors. I had some people looking out for me and I didn't give up because they didn't give up on me and you don't need to give up either. So it's a bit of a, you know, bootstrap story. And now, as you say, the story is globalist elites, childless cat ladies, Haitian immigrants, there are these groups who he demonizes regularly, and everything that he

says, whether it's making up a lie about the Haitian immigrants eating pets or anything else, he justifies in the name of those victims, the working class victims of his world. So how did that happen? Well, I think one reason is Donald Trump was elected president in 2016, and pretty quickly, JD Vance realized that his path to politics was now blocked as long as he was Tim Miller,

because Tim Miller was not gonna become a star of the Republican Party after 2016. You know, I spoke to a close friend of Vance's who said, no, look, this is what happened. He had a legitimate change of view about tariffs and trade, immigration and Trump himself. And this came from having gone back to Ohio. A new friend or an old friend? An old friend.

An old friend. I want to sit on this for a second. He has old friends? Peter Bregman He does. He does. So, just as I defended Hillbilly Elegy, I will tell you that Vance has remained quite loyal to a handful of men from Ohio and from the Marine Corps. And they were at his inauguration, they've gone to the vice president's residence in Washington.

So he has not cut loose all the people who are no longer useful to him. Just some of them. People like David Frum, he's cut loose. So somebody really told you, I just can't see how you could possibly believe that it's a genuine transition to switch on every single thing to make it the most convenient thing at a moment.

I think a more workable theory that I have is he's really good at mirroring his mentors. You know, Amy Chua, is that how you pronounce it? Chua? Chua. Chua. And I think even more importantly, Peter Thiel. Well, so, but let me just go through the progression, right? Amy Chua was really kind of a bootstraps tiger, like that was the thing, right?

Like tiger mom, right? Like you can do it yourself and your family and you have to take responsibility, right? So that is like kind of a lot of the ethos and hillbilly elegies from a different cultural perspective. And then, he is, he kind of takes after Frum's view, which was, you know, at the time, a little bit different than kind of the in vogue Republican view on some of these issues. It was reformist. It was reformist.

Yeah. Yeah. And so, and then Teal, right? And then it becomes more, you know, and then he slowly starts moving more towards, you know, whatever you'd call the tech utopian Trumpist view. And then that gets him a Senate seat. And then he starts mirroring all of Trump's views on everything. Tucker Carlson, Don Jr., and Trump himself.

So isn't that a more coherent explanation? That's a legitimate story that you just told. And there's a lot of truth to it. I don't know quite how to say this. I feel like as a writer, I need to allow for some degree of good faith in what I hear. I don't want to just assume every word out of his mouth is cynical and opportunistic. I don't think it is. I don't think people are that way. People convince themselves of things. And as I wrote in the piece, ventriloquize long enough and your voice changes. The mask becomes your face. And so if he imitated the

way of speaking he heard from David from Peter Thiel, Tucker Carlson, it has become him. That's who he is. He's not going home and saying to Usha, I can't believe I just used the phrase childless cat ladies. Oh, I agree with that. He's convinced himself that it was a real conversion. He has. But I think there may be one other thing to it, Tim. Okay. Yeah. I'm agreeing mostly with what you say. I think it's possible he's decided tariffs are the way to bring back manufacturing. I think that's quite possible.

I think he's quite possibly decided that the open border was a disaster for the working class. He may well have decided those things. I can't know for sure. But here's one thing that I think has been at work, the new JD Vance, aggressive, vitriolic, combative, getting into Twitter fights with not particularly famous journalists and using a lot of inflammatory language about groups like immigrants. I think it's been a sort of relief because think about what it took to make himself acceptable at Yale Law School.

He writes about this at length in Hillbilly Elegy. His girlfriend, now wife, Usha, became his Yale spirit guide. She taught him how to use the silverware at a fancy dinner party and what seltzer water was for Christ's sake and how to take advantage of office hours and go to the right interviews and behave correctly. I mean, I'm serious. I hear you. I like, we all went away to college. I don't know.

I didn't know fucking shit when I went to GW either. Some of this stuff is a little bit- He may be exaggerating. A little bit dramatizing. He may be dramatizing himself. I didn't know what seltzer water was either. We didn't have it in my house. I don't know where you grew up, Tim.

Did you grow up with an addicted... No, I didn't grow up anywhere like JD Vance. I had a great childhood, but I was a sheltered suburban kid whose parents went to church. I'd never been to New York or any big city when I went to college. And so there were things I didn't know. There were a lot more kids at my university. So you think it's a bit of an exaggeration. And you know what? A little bit.

Some of the witnesses would agree with you. I talked to a friend of his from Yale Law School who said, we all were intrigued by this guy. Not having gone to Yale or Harvard undergrad didn't hurt him at all. He was charismatic. He was confident. So I think he may have overplayed that. But I also think there's something called the ordeal of civility. It's a book by a sociologist, I think in the seventies. And it's really about how people from kind of disadvantaged ethnic groups, racial groups, religious groups, minorities come into the world of the elites, the cosmopolitans, the meritocrats, as we now call them, and have to fit. They have to change a bit, maybe even the way they talk, the way they act, and it costs them something psychologically. And Vance writes about

this, how when he was and talks about this, when he was out thumping Hillbilly Elegy, he would have these fancy dinners with CEOs because he was a star at this point. They would inevitably say something vaguely offensive like, yeah, you just can't get good help anymore in some of these towns. Immigration has helped me because I don't have to pay my workers as much. Things that are going to piss off a son of that world, he probably bit his tongue most of the time.

And this is like he's now back. I thought of calling the piece, it's not up to me what to call it, but my working title was The Return of the Repressed because he repressed that angry combative, you challenge my honor, I'm going to take you on hillbilly culture that he writes about. And now he's been rewarded beyond his dreams for that very same attitude. It's the attitude of MAGA. MAGA and how he describes, I don't want to insult Hillbillies, I'm going on his description, his description of in-group, out-group, you're the enemy, we have to go after you, reminds

me a little bit of MAGA and he's been rewarded with the vice presidency and that might be in some way more satisfying than going around telling rich CEOs about all the pathologies of the white working class. Does that make sense? Does that make sense? Does that make sense? Yeah, it does. I don't mean to pick on you in my responses because I should just, in the interest of transparency, I find JD Vance to be the least appealing person in all of public life. Like if I had to spend the rest of my life with Ted Cruz living in an apartment,

I would rather do that than have to go on like a single road trip with Jay Vance. I think it's all bullshit. I was interested in your piece. I read it. I've watched him and I think he's a sociopath and I think he's mean. He's very condescending. And I listened to that little trajectory that you laid out and I'm like, who doesn't want to be a cunt? I mean, I say that in the British sense., who doesn't want to be a cunt? I mean, I say that in the British sense. Who doesn't want to be Liam Gallagher from Oasis and just say whatever the fuck you want and make fun of people and be a star? Everybody does. Wouldn't that be satisfying for... Doesn't everyone have that inside them a little bit?

Yeah, but my super ego would be crushing me at every step of the way. Okay. So maybe not everybody. So maybe this is why my JD Vance feelings is because I have that. I have that little strain inside of me. I also, again, everything JD Vance wrote in 2015 could have been me. He is a little bit better of a writer than me, so not quite. And he has a little more fake formal than me, so it wouldn't be exactly the same, but mostly it would have been similar. And so maybe there's a personal feeling to it, but you have an obligation when you hit

the lottery like he did and become vice president of the United States to not let your inner hillbilly, not let your worst instincts take over, right? Tim, okay, I have to stop you. I have to stop you. Do not imagine I'm excusing- Oh, I don't imagine you're excusing it at all, but I'm just saying it's like- I do not imagine I find it anything but repulsive and morally cretinous because he is the vice president of all of us and he acts like the vice president of the little Trump circle who have helped him and might continue to help him. And that is unpatriotic. It's, well, Seth Moulton called him a POG. Do you know what a POG is?

Pete Slauson I know the band, the Pogues. Jared Slauson No, it's, I wouldn't call them that because I didn't serve in the Marine Corps. Seth Moulton did. It's personnel other than grunt. And it basically means someone who served but didn't see combat. It's a kind of an insult coming from a fellow Marine. And Moulton called him that after Vance went after Zelensky in the Oval Office. It was such an offensive thing to do. Here is the president of a country under siege from an imperialist power next door. He has been physically brave. He has been morally brave. And Vance, who is JD Vance to feel superior to Volodymyr Zelensky? If anything, his own sense,

perhaps of inferiority might have driven him to get aggressive with Zelensky. Or there's something going on with Maga and Zelensky. Maybe you can explain it. Why do they hate him? It's not just that they don't want to send weapons to Ukraine. They hate Zelensky. Why? Well, he's revealing to them.

You know what I mean? Like he is demonstrating the type of courage that they haven't in the face of Trump. That's part, that's partly it. You have to also, I think I go back to the rationalization you were talking about with JD earlier, how he's convinced himself that, that he believes all this stuff. And I do agree with you on that. If you're going to ostensibly side with Russia, like you have to kind of tell yourself a story

for why you have that position when it would not have been the natural position of most of these Republicans. And so I kind of painting Zelensky as a bad guy helps you tell that story, I guess. Just one more thing, just back in the JD, I guess I'm trying to make a finer point on what I was trying to say. The thing of like he has this inner inferiority complex, he is a hillbilly. And so that kind of explains why he does this, why he lashes out, why he's such a prick. Like that's the part that I just, I'm like, I just, it feels like an excuse. Like it feels like an excuse. And there are a lot of

people who have, who were raised in as challenging situations as JD, who overcame it and did not then use their new-found power to be as mean to people as possible. Like, he's nasty. He's nasty. I agree. I agree. I agree. And that suggests that there's a sort of hollow moral core where power, ambition, he's traded one group of elites for another.

He basically swapped David from, and the reformer cons, and I don't know, maybe Tim Miller, but certainly CEOs who went to his events at Aspen and Sun Valley for another group of elites. Ron Howard. Ron Howard would be one. For another group, Peter Thiel, Tucker Carlson, Donald Trump Jr., David Sachs, who have elevated him way beyond what those CEOs at Sun Valley could do for him. It doesn't strike me as having anything to do with the white working class or any working class. He justifies every policy, every lie, every cruelty,

including cruelty to immigrants who are being sent to gulags on the basis of, well, why don't you care about my people? Why should I listen to you complain about due process when you didn't care about my people when our neighborhoods were being flooded with immigrants? So it's all in the name of his people, the working class, and I find that to be every bit as fake a justification as what you're describing.

He left them. He abandoned them. Honestly, like, let's just be honest. Like, if Hillbilly Elegy, the movie, had been a massive hit and he got recruited to run as a Sherrod Brown-style Democrat in Ohio and that was a path and he saw that as a path toward success, I think he would have done that, right? No, I don't. I don't. And I'll tell you why. I did follow the path very carefully. By that time, by the time the movie came out, he had taken a few small steps that were about to become one giant leap into Magadam,

and there was no going back. He was a Republican. He was never gonna be a Democrat. He had committed himself to the Republican Party, to Ohio, which was becoming a more and more red state, he had to run as a MAGA candidate. And so by the time that movie came out, by the way, the reaction of the movie was interesting because the book was popular, including among liberals. The movie was hated, but it was really, there's no reason for the movie to be hated. It wasn't terrible.

It was just another movie and it was the same story. Basically the same JD Vance is in the book except from the exterior. The reason it was hated was because he was hated because by that time there'd been four years of Donald Trump and it was clear that this guy was moving in that direction. Although, you could change your mind about tariffs and not go on the Jack Murphy show, who's this alt-right rape apologist, and spend 90 minutes talking about

getting rid of the civil service and telling judges to enforce their order or get out of the way. You don't have to become that kind of politician and be for tariffs. I mean, Sherrod Brown, I don't know for sure, but my guess is he isn't completely against tariffs but Sherrod Brown is a decent person. And JD Vance, I do think there is a hollow moral core, which may be what you're getting at.

Yeah. I think that's right. He has been consistent. You wrote an article and I should acknowledge the one thing that he has been consistent is on the wars. And that really did play into the MAGA pivot. That went longer than I thought, but it's worth doing. It's important.

I mean, it's important trying to, because at some level, maybe if he's completely a hollow man, and he's young, maybe the incentives in some way in the future will move his hollowness back towards some kind of decency. I don't know. Maybe that's the best hope. Have you ever wanted to learn more about wine but can't figure out where to start or when you do, it just feels like too much? Our next partner, Naked Wines, has changed the game for learning about wine without having to take a whole class about it. This podcast is sponsored by Naked Wines, a service that directly connects you to the

world's finest independent winemakers so you can get award-winning wine delivered straight to your door. Use our code, theVilwork, for the code and password at nakedwines.com and get their incredible deal of six bottles for just $39.99. I love it. I'm not making enough excuses to go to the wine store I like him a wine around not a big wine man And so the naked wine deal has been perfect for me get six different ones get some different varietals some whites some reds

Some rosé try different things out. See what you like go back to them. Tell them what you like you get some new ones It's a it's a good low-impact deal. You get to try out new wines without being a snobby wino. How do they do it? They connect winemakers and wine drinkers directly, allowing for vineyard to your door delivery at up to 60% off what you would pay in the store. Don't forget you can pause or cancel at any time. Just because you got a trip coming up doesn't mean you can't enjoy Naked Wines before or after that much needed vacation.

Now is the time to join the Naked Wines community. Head to nakedwines.com slash the bulwark, click enter voucher and put in my code, the bulwark for the code and password for six bottles of wine for just $39.99 with shipping included. That's a hundred bucks off your first six bottles at nakedwines.com slash the bulwark and use the code and password, the bulwark for six bottles of wine for $39.99. I suffered through the entire podcast I did with Ross Douthat for about an hour. He was talking about his Catholicism.

He changed his religion a couple of years ago too. He got nothing wrong with converts, but changing his name, changing his religion, all of it as a mid-adult, it's intriguing. Changing his politics. Changing his politics all in mid-adult. It's intriguing. Changing his politics. Changing his politics all in his late 30s. It's intriguing. What did you make of it, his conversation with Ross? Well, I was highly annoyed by it. Ross Douthat knows him well. I think they're old friends. He has a lot of access to him. He did press him on immigration.

He did press him on immigration. He did. On due process. He asked the same questions that I think you or I would ask and he happened, he got to talk to him. I didn't get to talk to him. They never even replied to my request for an interview. But at least say no. Um, that aside, I find the whole phenomenon of this conservative Catholic resurgence, which is going on and which Vance's conversion is part of.

In fact, his essay about his conversion is called How I Joined the Resistance. What is the resistance? Well, it's obviously the resistance to globalism, to liberalism, classical liberalism. It's the embrace of post-liberalism, of Patrick Deneen, of that whole philosophical school, which Vance is very much a part of and consciously, openly a part of. I find it highly annoying because they are talking about a new approach to Western governance, let's say, that doesn't acknowledge the incredible gifts we've gotten from two centuries of liberalism and from 80 years of American global leadership. Of course, lots to complain about,

including some horrors, Iraq and Vietnam. But to just suddenly say it's run its course, we're a decadent society, I've been disappointed by technology, and therefore, maybe the Constitution, this isn't Ross Douthat talking, this is more JD Vance talking, maybe the Constitution is hemming in the executive

and we need to reinterpret the second article as if it pretty much creates a monarch because the rest of it isn't working and it's in fact getting in our way. I find this dangerous, disingenuous, and the Catholicism is not just a private faith. If it were kept as a private faith, I would say that's your business. But it's a justification, a kind of moral and religious justification for throwing out philosophical liberalism, which is the basis of this republic. So I have a problem with that conversation.

That was annoying. I agree with that. That's totally different than the thing that annoyed me about it, which speaks to the challenges of processing JD in a fair way. The thing that annoyed me about it was he just left Pope Leo, and then he sits down with Ross, and he just lies to Ross's face. And he pretends to say, like, I was struggling, particularly on the immigration stuff. He pretends to say, I have struggled with this.

Because Ross, again, to his credit, pushes him on, you know, maybe aren't you being tempted by political interests here, not by, you know, what your faith would dictate when it comes to treatment of immigrants. And JD says to him, I have struggled with that. But he says it just without any evidence that that's actually true. And then the next thing he says is, and you know what? Your readers of the New York Times, where were they when the border was open and immigrants were, so if they had nothing to

say about that, why should I listen to them about this? So suddenly he's divided the country into the people who agree with him and then the readers of New York Times who he doesn't need to listen to because they disagreed with him about the border. And then the next thing after the New York Times, he goes on and says, on some of these cases that have gone viral with the New York Times and these liberal elites, I've looked into them and I'm sure that they're terrorists. And then he goes on to just give the example of Kilmar-Brigo Garcia. And I just, I watched it and I was like, I don't believe you.

I don't think that that's true. There's not, there is a ton of evidence publicly that several people have been sent to El Salvador wrongly at least. And you haven't provided any evidence to the contrary. No, because it's classified. Classified. So it's a lie.

Right. It's an obvious lie. And then there was the other bit, which I think he also said, I'm not sure, but I think he said was classified about the level of violence in these immigrant communities. As a journalist, shouldn't you go check out those communities? I think probably journalists do have a presence there. I'm sure some reporting has been done, but he made it sound as if it is at the level of like in one of the Mexican provinces at the height of the cartel killings, a kind

of bloodbath going on in American towns along the border. Show me the evidence. Right me, show me the evidence. Right. It's unreported. So he basically says- Because Ross follows up and says, show me the evidence. He's like, well, some of these things, they don't get reported because these are vulnerable communities.

Like, oh right. Yeah. There's all these secret murders happening in the border that nobody reports. Right. I, I, that annoyed me too. I'd forgotten how annoyed I was by that. I was thinking a little bit more intellectually, but let's, let's get down to the level of lies and yeah, very annoying.

Yeah. Well, it's all justified in his mind and his rhetoric by who? His people. Because you and I don't care about Middletown, Ohio. We only care about Abrego Garcia. That's the, his contempt for due process and these nitpickers who keep pointing to the Constitution. Yeah. I got to tell you, if AOC kidnaps a guy who had a heroin addict mom from Middletown,

Ohio, just a normal white guy named Donald Bowman and sends him to an El Salvador gulag, I will be as righteously fucking pissed about that as to what this what these guys have been doing as well You should be All right undoubtedly you wrote a review of his book we don't need to do a whole thing on that But I was I was interested in it. So I'm just curious of a quick side the books called believe it's about religion I have not read the book. I suffered through the podcast I don't think I can do Ross's book, but it seemed to me that it's basically a Middle version of Pascal's wager, but I don't know, maybe I missed something. It is.

Tell me. With a fair amount of neuroscience and physics and cosmology thrown in. Look, I should say I read Doubt That, I listen to Doubt That, I admire and am irritated by him almost simultaneously. So there's a kind of irresistible pull that I always kind of wonder why did I just spend that hour, but I also, I see he's- Are you a Catholic? Were you raised Catholic?

What were you raised? I was raised atheist. Raised atheist, okay. I was raised atheist. So I was going to say that that's the Catholic guilt that made you feel like you needed to spend the hour. It's the liberal guilt. It's the liberal guilt. Okay, it's the Catholic guilt that made you feel like you needed to spend the hour. It's the liberal guilt. Okay, it's the liberal guilt.

Got it. So I need to understand how someone who's kind of sympathetic to Vance and maybe even Trump a little bit thinks. I got to understand that. It's also the journalistic instinct. And I also recognize a thoughtful, smart, well-read, interesting writer when I see one. And so I have to follow up with that too. But this book was designed to piss me off

because the title and subtitle are Believe Why Everyone Should Be Religious. And my answer is to write a book called Nope, Why You Should Leave Everyone Alone. For me, religion is, I understand the impulse, I've felt it, I've sought to believe at hard moments of my life, including one extremely hard moment when I was desperate to believe. It never took, the sky remained empty, the universe remain dark, cold, and random, our life here is all we have and then it ends and so what do we do? We live it, we love, we make the most of it, we do

not expect more, we don't look for the bribe of heaven to justify our conduct on earth. But Ross's book says unbelievers like me are shallow, just want social acceptance in elite circles, are too busy to look up and realize that there's a design to the universe and a designer to the universe. So he brings a lot of reading because he's a very serious guy. He's read a lot of new science about the mind and about the universe. And his argument is all of this science shows it's more likely than you thought that there is a design and a designer. And to which my answer is, I read all of the evidence he brought, to which my answer is, what about the leap of faith? None of this seems to me to have anything to do with religion.

It's not a rational matter. It's not about probability and possibility and weighing the odds. It's about, do I believe? How does that happen? It's a leap into the dark and I can't make that leap. And I accept that other people will. My main concern is that they not make it the basis

for a political ideology that is trashing liberal democracy. That's my main concern. I don't want them doing that. And I see a bit of that going on. And that's why I got my back up a bit when I saw Ross's book. And it's just annoying. The idea that, oh, you're doing what you're doing because of social positioning, and do you want to fit in with the other godless, you know, New York elites?

And I'm not doing what I'm doing for social positioning, even though, like, when I last interviewed Ross, he like explicitly said to me, he's like, well, I'm the conservative Christian columnist at the New York Times. What would you want me to write about? Like when I pushed him on why he wasn't being more critical of Trump. So it's like, he's very conscious of his, I don't, his faith could be legit. His faith is legit. I just mean, he's also very conscious of his social positioning.

It is legit. And he, as with Vance, I want to extend him a modicum of kind of good faith. However, however, do not use it to chip away. He's not trashing anything. Vance is the one doing the trashing, but don't use it to chip away at the basis of liberal democracy because that's, that is my religion. You're taking away my faith, which is this thing we have here. So yeah, it annoyed me, maybe even more than the interview with Vance annoyed me. Okay. Well, then I'm not going to be reading the book.

That's not a great endorsement. Sorry, Ross. I don't know if we sold any books. You guys should subscribe to The Atlantic though. I'm always pitching Atlantic subscriptions. Last topic, your other Atlantic article recently was called Be a Patriot. And it was a kind and considered reply to Tim Snyder, Marcy Shore, and Jason Stanley, who wrote that New York Times piece about how they were leaving for

Toronto because fascism is imminent. I want to hear your reply to this, but in particular in the context of, I'm just a little concerned, like I've had several different strangers come up to me at restaurants, at jazz fasts, on the street and say, hey, I'm really worried. I'm thinking about leaving the country. I think that there are certain cases, and I've said this, if your immigration status is questionable, if you're on a student visa, I think there are a lot of people that have very legitimate concerns.

But the folks I was talking to were mostly just a stereotype, college educated, American citizen, bulwark listeners. And I just, I haven't said to all of them, I was like, no, like you need to stay. We are not there yet. We should not give in. You should not be made to be afraid by these people.

And it's early in the game here still. It's later than we'd wish, but it's earlier in the game. And so that's my view. I just wanted to hear you expand on your piece. Well, that's my view as well. When I heard that Snyder, Schor and Stanley were leaving, Schor and Stanley made it clear they were leaving as if this was Germany in 1933. In fact, Stanley made that comparison explicit.

Snyder has said his reasons are personal, they're professional, he's not fleeing Trump, but he's leaving. He's leaving after writing a very important and widely read book called On Tyranny that has a list of recommendations, instructions really. It's a manual on how to fight tyranny. Don't obey in advance. Be courageous. Be patriotic.

Be a patriot. And I felt, how can I take those quite as seriously as I did yesterday, now that I know that these rather prominent voices against the American fascism they see are going to Canada because America's gotten dark and ugly. So it was a little bit of a holding them intellectually responsible for their own ideas. But it was also, as you say, Tim, kind of a plea with people I know, because I hear the same thing.

Should we leave? Maybe we're fools to think it's not too late. Maybe it's already too late. Maybe we should get out while we can. I don't know where to go, but I need to get out. Well, two things. One, it's not too late. The secret police are not coming after you and me in Boston who has just published an op-ed, which is a horror. That image of her being pulled off the street by mass police was for me the signal that we're in a new and more authoritarian world. Is it authoritarianism pure and simple or are we still in some hybrid where the Atlantic can call Trump names

and write critical pieces about JD Vance and no one's raiding our offices? And still, if you have the wrong characteristics, the wrong biography, you can be pulled off the street. That's where we are. What do you do? Do you then run away? Do you say, I'm going to go to New Zealand or Iceland? Or do you say, this has to be fought

in our own little way. You have a podcast, I'm a journalist. We're not changing the world. We're just trying to do a little bit every day to resist this and to do it in my case at least not as the resistance but as someone who cares about democracy and is trying to hold them to what I think are the values of this country. If I go away, if you go away, if everyone who is horrified by this goes away, the country's theirs. So be a patriot. Be a patriot. When have we crossed the line? What is the alarm? What is the signal that it's now it's over? I don't know. I honestly don't know. Do you have an image in your mind? Well, I'll tell you this. I always say, you know, if I'm the first podcaster,

they send us a coat, then I guess I'm willing to be the first podcaster, they send us a coat. And, you know, there'll maybe be a poster about me or on the street corners in New Orleans. And that will be bad, but I'm willing to be that because I think we're far from that. And so to that point, if American citizens start getting taken off the street and put in detention without access to due process, and they're left there,

and the Supreme Court is unable to stop it, then we're in a new world. But like, we're very far from that world. They have been stopped. You know, again, with the horrors of Andre and Neri and the people that are in Sokot right now, I get it's an unimaginable horror and I hope these guys never live it down. And I hope that JD and Ross's Catholic faith is right because I think JD is going to hell then. But no more people have been sent. Why? Because people resisted.

Because the courts, you know, because of the good work by immigration defenders and by other legal entities that have been filing these lawsuits and because of the judges that have filed these injunctions. And they wanted to send more people, but they haven't been able to. They were stopped. OzTurk was let out. So all this stuff is bad, but actually things haven't escalated since they started. In some ways, they've been restrained.

Now, again, that's not a good thing. It's horrible. It's happened. It's not a... There's not a lot of evidence that we're on a slippery slope from Venezuelan refugees to op-ed writers who are American citizens being sent to El Salvador. There's no... If that evidence starts to come, if they start to do that and the courts are not able to stop them, well, then sure. Like we're in a different place and then people... And if people want to get their passports in order for a CYA, there's nothing wrong with that. But I just... I think that's more steps away from here than some of the...

And I'm a catastrophizer, but some real catastrophizers are willing to accept. I agree. And in a way, sitting there in a clench waiting for the secret police to raid your house distracts you from what's going on every day. For example, the biggest grift, the biggest theft in the history of the presidency is on every day. For example, the biggest grift, the biggest theft in the history of the presidency is happening every day. There's a headline about a woman who gave a million

dollars for a dinner with Trump and her son just got pardoned for some Medicare and- 2.5 billion dollar Bitcoin treasuries that they're collecting. Right. So it's open, it's naked, there's no one trying to hide it. There's no one stopping it because they've taken away, the Justice Department is now the personal police of Donald Trump and the Supreme Court just doesn't seem all that interested in corruption, but the American people need to know about it. So thank you, New York Times, for continuing to send your investigative reporters on this stuff.

Thank you, American press, mainstream hated legacy media, the dead legacy media that Elon Musk stomped on the corpse of after the election. No, it's not dead. And if you know about this grift and this corruption, it's because of the legacy media, as well as the best podcasts in America. So that's why we have to- We're ranked 12th, okay, George?

Okay, that's good. That's actually pretty damn good. That's why we can't leave. Amen, brother. I appreciate the time. It's such a delight talking to you. I'm jealous of your writing and, you know, I can just do my best to get better, but I appreciate you and hopefully we can do it again soon.

Well, and likewise, and I'll come back anytime you want to chew the fat. All right. Sounds good. Thanks, George Packer. Up next, Congresswoman Melanie Stansberry. All right. I am here with a Democratic congresswoman from New Mexico in the first congressional district, which includes a bunch of Albuquerque. She's also the ranking member on the Doge subcommittee, which is apparently a thing. It's Melanie Stansberry. How are you doing? Welcome to the Bulwark Podcast. Melanie Sandsberry Morning. I'm good. Thanks so much for having

me on. Pete Slauson I'm pumped to do it. I've been seeing clips of you pop up in hearings or on social media, little selfie videos, and I was liking the cut of your jib. But I knew nothing about your backstory until, you know, I did some Googling before the podcast. But for listeners who are in my boat, why don't you give us a little quick speed dating, tell us about you. Oh, all right. Well, okay, here's my speed dating spiel.

So I'm Melanie Stansbury. I am proud to represent New Mexico's first congressional district. I'm a native born New Mexican and a science nerd. I spent most of my career working in the sciences. I was a water resources manager and I started my career as a science teacher working with middle schoolers and high schoolers, which I always say working with middle

schoolers prepared me well for working in congress. The middle schoolers are more well behaved, I will say that. But yeah, I never thought I'd go into politics and then in, I was working on the Hill as a water staffer in the Senate Energy Committee when Donald Trump won. And I think like many Americans, I was really shaken by that election and what happened in the aftermath. And I moved home and literally the next day got recruited to run for the statehouse. I ran a very unlikely race in a very red district. And one one of the biggest upsets in New Mexico

that year and that's how I ended up in politics. And in 2021, Deb Haaland was named the Secretary of Interior. She was my Congresswoman. She's now running for governor. And I ran for her seat and came back to DC and here I am. Boy, being a high school science teacher in New Mexico, you got to be kind of tired of the Breaking Bad jokes at this point. Well, I'm probably older than I look.

So Breaking Bad wasn't a thing back then. Yeah. You do look great. No questions about the blue meth or anything. That's not something that's been coming up for you. More people ask us about that from out of town. New Mexicans are deeply proud of our culture and our heritage, but it's, you know, Breaking Bad's just a TV show.

That's a good point. I know I did drive by it. I love New Mexico. There's a good reason to be proud of your heritage. The green chili. Oh yeah. The food is great. Taos, beautiful. Yeah. So, a lot to love about New Mexico. Do you have any New Mexico tourist tips for people? Why don't you do a little New Mexico sad? Oh, yeah. That would be a good business. Oh my gosh. Well, I always say, if this whole politics thing doesn't work out, I'll definitely go be a tour guide. And in fact, after I did science for many years, I went back to school and got a degree in sociology and spent much of my graduate years working on issues around land and water rights issues in the history of New Mexico. So I love me some New Mexico history. But yeah, a lot of people probably don't know this if you're not from here, but for example,

many of our tribal communities are welcoming for people who want to come visit. We have Pueblo communities that have been around for over a thousand years and you can actually go visit them. And so I highly recommend that if anyone comes to New Mexico to go visit Taos Pueblo or Acoma Pueblo, you have to eat the chili. The chili is our staple. We put it on everything hot, sweet, savory. Here in Albuquerque, where I live, we have a tram that goes up to 10,000 feet and gorgeous

hiking trails. Oh man, there's just so much to do, whitewater rafting, go in the Chama, just come visit. People, go to New Mexico. All right, we got to do less fun stuff though. The Doge subcommittee, so tell us about that. What's happening with that? Yeah, I thought your introduction was great. Apparently, it's a thing. So, we're not sure what kind of thing it is at this point. So as I'm sure everybody knows, you know, Donald Trump came into office mid January, his best buddy came into the Oval Office with him with this crazy idea.

And you know, I think on its face, everybody agrees with the idea that government efficiency and making the government run better and more modern is a good idea. And in fact, I had a moment where I was like, okay, you know, let's give these folks some time to figure this out because they come out of the tech world. If you've ever worked for the federal government, we've all got lists of things that need to be modernized. All you have to do is go on a 1990s webpage and know that we need to modernize the government. But then they came in and, you know, Elon Musk,

of course, that image of him with the chainsaw with the Argentinian president is like, I mean, these guys, the thing that's crazy to me is that if they had just followed the law, they would have been okay, right? Like they could have come up with a plan, spend a few months to talk to civil servants, submitted it to Congress, Some of it would have gotten through and some of it wouldn't. But instead, they just let Elon Musk do whatever he wanted inside the government. And he brought a bunch of his tech friends with him. They started hacking government data systems. They illegally fired all these federal employees.

Now there's over 200 court cases and 170 court injunctions against them because they did it totally lawlessly. And in conjunction with the Doge effort in the White House, the Republicans in the House set up a Doge subcommittee under the Oversight Committee. And the Oversight Committee has jurisdiction over the government, so government operations. So it made sense. And I was chosen to be the lead Democrat because you have Democrats and Republicans and the lead Republican is Marjorie Taylor Greene.

And I think, you know, many of us were highly skeptical of her tenure in this role. And it has played out to be as strange as you would expect it to be. We just had a hearing two weeks ago that was totally bizarre and off the rails and we're expecting they will probably call another hearing next week and who knows what they're going to do. But the thing that's interesting to me is that because Elon Musk has become such a toxic figure for Republicans that they won't even say his name or say doge anymore, even though they have a committee dedicated to him. So it's like they flipped 180 even though he's back there pulling the strings, hanging out with Donald Trump still. Like the Doge subcommittee has become this like weird defunct political

arm for Marjorie Taylor Greene now. Well, when you're, when you're being serious about government efficiency, you know, just wanting to make sure you're cutting the red tape and, you know, doing things right, going through things with a fine tooth comb. That's the kind of project you put Marjorie Taylor Greene in charge of. She's going through things with a fine-tooth comb. That's the kind of project you put Marjorie Taylor Green in charge of. She's shown a lot of skills with that.

So they haven't really been codifying a lot of what, as you mentioned, they did it lawlessly through the executive branch, a lot of these cuts. I find it interesting that there is not a ton of the Doge stuff in the reconciliation bill. I don't mean the reconciliation bill broadly next, but I think it's telling about how unpopular they feel like it's going to be. But so having been on the inside of the committee, what do you have any perspective on that? Like how much of the stuff are they even trying

to get codified through Congress? And what's your perception on how they've been going about that? Yeah. I mean, you don't even have to take my word for it. Elon Musk said it himself yesterday. He was on Sunday morning, he said himself, he was disappointed that the reconciliation bill ran counter to his vision for Doge because it actually increases the deficit, not decreases it and actually increases spending on all this crazy stuff. I mean, at the end of the day,

the way I've been looking at this, and I think many people agree is like, even if Elon Musk came in with the best of intentions, we'll give him that as a thought experiment. I don't believe that, okay? Right? To come in and cut government waste, what he actually did was pilfer the most valuable data sets of the American people on planet Earth. And he is, you know, trying to consolidate an AI empire. And he now has access to all that data. And he gave himself billions of dollars in federal contract. He converted a bunch of communications contracts to Starlink, and he's trying to land SpaceX contracts

and DOD, et cetera. And when you look at the reconciliation bill, even though he may be on its face saying, oh, it doesn't codify Doge, it's still going to give him billions of dollars in new contracts. It's got a half billion dollars in there for AI contracts. It's got this golden dome project that he wants to bid on. And so even though the reconciliation bill may not be the codification of Doge, it still

has tons of kickbacks for people like Elon Musk, not to mention that the whole thing is in service of giving tax breaks to billionaires. But, you know, the Republicans, I think their plan is to try to codify the Doge cuts starting this week with the regular FY26 budget process. And, you know, one of the things I've been trying to help people keep track of, I'm a former OMB employee during the Obama administration, I was a civil servant there, is that when you look at the budget that Trump and specifically Russell bought his OMB director delivered to Congress about three weeks ago, and they're going to start marking that up this week, that is project 2025. That is the Doge cuts. I mean, these guys are talking about eviscerating

like half of EPA. And you know, they've zeroed out like USAID in the budget. So they're planning to use the regular budget process to do that. That's a good flag. And we'll be monitoring that. Do the quote you referenced. Elon said, I think a bill can be big or it could be beautiful, but I don't know if it could be both. Credit or due, Elon, that's pretty good. That's pretty good turn of phrase. Okay. So the reconciliation bill broadly, you mentioned how it is expanding the deficit, NADET. Also a ton of cuts to services. New Mexico in particular, as a state, is going to get hit by snap cuts, Medicaid cuts. So talk about what...

Yeah. I mean, it's such a huge bill. It's hard to put it in one phrase. So I've been doing the ABCs of this bill, but to encapsulate the essence of this bill in service of giving the largest tax breaks in American history to billionaires and corporations, this bill makes the largest cuts in Medicaid, Medicare, food assistance and educational assistance in American history, and makes the largest deficits spend in American history. But the ABCs are essentially gives a huge tax break to billionaires and large corporations that expand some of the

tax breaks that were in the 2017 tax bill. It gives billions and kickbacks, as I just mentioned, to all these different industries and donors of the republicans. It cuts royalty rates for oil and gas. That's all about kickbacks to the oil and gas industry and making them wealthier. Has these huge defense contracts, AI contracts. It probably won't surprise you to learn that there's billions of dollars in there for private prisons, for private detention.

We're claiming that's for immigration, but I think it's important to understand that the DHS advisors forald trump used to be lobbyists For the largest private prisons that do detention. So it's got kickbacks for them cuts medicaid medicare food assistance pelgrants Um all these basic social safety net supports for low-income people millions of americans are going to be impacted D decimates the environment for low income people, millions of Americans are gonna be impacted.

D, it decimates the environment. It actually undermines federal worker protections by making them at will so they can be fired anytime. And it eviscerates the federal budget. And so, one of the things that I just find so laughable at the Republicans right now, is that they all paraded around last week. They went to the White House and said, oh, we can't sign on to this bill because it increases the deficit. And then they

came back and spent three straight days because they kept this up for two nights in a row, claiming that it doesn't include any deficit spending or impact the debt. And this is the largest increase in the deficit ever. They're talking $37 trillion over the next 30 years. That is going to put the United States on a course to bankruptcy, essentially. I love that you mentioned the private prisons. It's a hobby horse of mine too, these guys. It's like a golden age for the private prison industry here. And some of that stuff does get lost. And that's a pretty kind of dystopian view of the world. On the deficit thing, I was asking people to judge about this yesterday. You guys are all kind of sending the throw up my leg as a former Republican with all

the deficit talk coming from the Democratic guest. Do we feel like that has gotten so out of hand now that the amount of focus on this among Democrats might change? Because in the past, obviously, in the Clinton years, Democrats were very responsible on debt and deficit, not quite as much during the Biden years and recently. So I'm wondering what you think about that. I mean, that's why I say I think it's laughable in terms

of the Republicans have branded themselves for decades as the party of fiscal responsibility. And I think that the party has clearly become the party of Donald Trump and whatever he says. And so I think, you know, in some ways I feel for my colleagues across the aisle, because I see the mental and psychological gymnastics that they have to do on a daily basis to try to conform their real political convictions with what they're being asked to do by Donald Trump. And I think that's why we have a lot of people who are conservatives who are defecting from the Republican Party right now, because they're disgusted by what they see. And if you're not in the Washington mindset of like, you know, we've got to appease

the great master, how do you square being a fiscal conservative as a Republican with the party that's about to do the largest emphasis spending in American history? It just, it's not logical anymore, but you know, I'm a fiscal conservative. I worked at OMB. I come from a very low income family. You do not survive if you are not a fiscal conservative and watch your pocketbook. And so, you know, they say a budget reflects your values. And so, if your value is that you're going to spend $7 trillion of taxpayer dollars to give tax breaks

to billionaires so they don't have to pay estate taxes on their $22 million dollar mansions and you're going to cut Medicaid in the process and let people die. Where are your values? I don't, I don't understand that. You're a former teacher, so in education, I see you're posting about, you know, uh, how what part of this project 2025 effort is on the, on the Republican side, on the MAGA Republican side at least, is getting rid of the Department of Education, you know, and tons of cuts to education at every level. I saw a news story this morning that has me a little bit concerned about some of the education priorities on the bar left too.

There's a report out of San Francisco today. They have a new equity grading system where homework and tests don't count your grades and all F's become C's and B's become A's. That's what sounded nice to me when I was a little troublemaker in high school. I feel like we've really lost our way. There was a time in the early 2000's where you might have disagreed with the policies, but W was really focused on it trying to make schools better.

Maybe his policies weren't the right way to do it if you're a progressive, then Obama really with Race to the Top was really, I felt like both sides are really focused on how to make education better. And now I think it's really kind of a lost issue. I'm wondering as a teacher what your perspective is on what you're seeing from MAGA and also at a local level. My background is in the sciences, so I follow the science. And what the science tells us is that there are really two keys to student success.

One is the quality of student-teacher interaction. And that means that you have highly qualified educators in the classroom and the ability for those teachers to really invest in their students. And the second is that students have a stable home environment where they've got food in their bellies, they are getting help if they're struggling emotionally or socially or academically, and that you know if there are issues at home or in the community that they have a stable network around them. And so what that tells us is that we need

to be investing in getting more teachers in the classroom, that's recruitment, retention, and education and teachers. And that tells us that we need community school models where we're investing in the entire wraparound services, especially around students. And none of what's happening in the educational space at the national level is that what the Trump administration is doing, I had the opportunity about a month ago, to actually meet with the current cabinet secretary who comes out of the world wrestling world is that they're they're viewing what they're doing to Department of Ed through this

lens of like a corporate restructuring. And that's not how you address educational needs of students, but there's a more insidious side to what they're doing, which is very project 2025. The guy who is in charge of their civil rights division is actually very much like the brain trust behind the attacks on Harvard and these big Ivy League schools, these memos that are going to K through 12 schools telling them they have to comply with doing away with diversity, equity and inclusion. And it's really, I mean, you have to understand the origin of Department of Education comes

out of the civil rights movement. You know, we didn't have school integration, kids of color being able to go to schools until the 1960s in places and the federal government had to step in to make that possible And so part of the core job of the federal government is to make sure that all kids have access to education And they are actively trying to dismantle that in fact if you read some of these memos They are directly going after the Civil Rights Act and trying to redefine it. So I think it's important to understand that like, what they're doing isn't in service of trying to improve education. It's the actual dismantling of the

federal role in making sure that there's equitable access to education. So I agree with you. There's lots of different worldviews about how to improve education. But this administration doesn't even appear to have that they just appear to be in the in the business of dismantling schools and access to education. A couple quick politics questions. Yeah, there's this conversation happening around, I guess, the gerontocracy in the Democratic Party, that three of your colleagues have

passed away already during this Congress, which is, it's not without precedent. There's, I forget, there was a Congress that had a similar level of people dying a couple decades ago. But like, I mean, that's a big problem. I mean, obviously, all our sympathies go out to their families, but, you know, showing up to vote is kind of the key part of, you know, I mean, obviously, all our sympathies go out to their families, but, you know, showing up to vote is kind of the key part of, you know, being in Congress. And you know, we just went through this with Biden and now there's all the discussion about it with the Tapper book that is out and the DNC, the David Hogg controversy about

whether they should be primaring older members. I just wonder where you kind of come down on all that. Yeah. Well, you know, first, obviously, I think all of us are still feeling the tragedy and loss of our colleagues, including ranking member Connolly, whose services were just yesterday and a mentor of mine was ranking member Grahalva who just passed away. But you know, I think, first of all, the United States in general is in a big demographic shift. With all these baby boomers who came into government

at the height of their careers or aging, that's just a thing that's happening everywhere. It's happening in governments, happening in corporate America. And if you're able to serve, it doesn't matter, right? You should be able to serve if that is what your heart is called to and the people elect you to do that But there is a huge demographic shift happening and you have all this amazing young talent Who's been elected especially since 2018?

And you know, like for example, if you look at all the 2018ers, I call them people like aoc People like you know, even the last couple of classes in Congress Jasmine Crockett Robert Garcia, I mean just incredible talent and and you know people we're not such young fry ourselves We're in our 40s. We're like the babies in Congress, but we're in our 40s Many of them are coming up and I think you're going to see that shift Reflected in the leadership in the coming years. And it's exciting. When I look at the current leadership in the house, you know, Hakeem Jeffries and Catherine Clark, like the energy

and the youth, but we're also fortunate in that we do have the guidance of people like Nancy Pelosi and represent Clyburn who are still there who are still helping to provide that institutional knowledge and political guidance. So yeah, it's a big shift. I know that people are totally freaked out right now for a good reason, because like we have a scary autocrat in the White House and Democrats, it feels like are in the wilderness. But I really strongly believe that you're going to see the Democratic Party emerge in the coming months with new strength and vigor.

And I think going back to basics and understanding the assignment and getting out there. And the one thing I said this last night, we had a town hall here in Albuquerque myself and Senator Lujan, I get asked every day, what are you the Democrats gonna do to save this country? And listen, there's 200 plus of us working our hearts out every single day, fighting on the front lines.

What we need is the American people to help guide us out of the wilderness. So it's not just leaders in the Democratic Party. This is all hands on deck emergency and we need everyone in the fight. I just wanna push back on this a little bit. I hear you and I, you know, if your heart is calling you to serve, you should serve. But sometimes maybe it's your ego calling you to serve.

I think we've suffered like some really serious consequences from RBG's death before the she was able to be replaced, losing a Supreme Court seat, the Biden election. And now, you know, that reconciliation bill probably passes still, even if all the Democrats are there, but maybe not. It becomes a lot more tenuous. So there have been like real consequences to, I mean, they only got it by one vote. A couple of guys in Republicans didn't show up, but you know, if Massey doesn't vote for it, it's hard to game it out. But like, there have been serious consequences to Democrats staying along longer than they should have. Right. Well, first of all, I mean, the Republicans have the majority.

They control the House. There is no chance that Democrats are going to win any vote. Now, see, that's not true. Massey was not going to vote for this bill. Thomas Massey isn't. If all the Democrats are there, there would have been 217 votes against it, against the bill. Let me correct the record here. Every Democrat was there. Two Republicans didn't even show up to vote. And one of them apparently was drunk and asleep in the back.

So this is not about age. You know, I mean- Well, there were three Democrats that weren't there because they were dead. I'm not trying to be like rude about it. That's just reality. Like had all of the Democrats been there, you know, in Corpus Mentis, that was, would have been 2217 votes against the bill.

They had 215 for, you know, one was drunk. So maybe they shake him awake. You get to 216. I don't think that's true, actually, that it's guaranteed they would have jammed this through. I think that the premise that you're putting out there is false in this sense, because the Republicans will find a way to whip their votes, right? Like if they had really needed Massey, if they had, you know, whoever drunk dude in the cloakroom, like, they probably

would have dragged him out and put his finger on the cloak room, like they probably would have dragged him out and put his finger on the thing. I mean, they would have found a way. They have the majority. I mean, there's a just reality, a real reality to being in the minority. It doesn't matter what time and space it is. There's also no guarantees in life that even a young person is going to survive. So I don't know. I think that right now we're in a self-flagellation era in the Democratic Party because we're in the wilderness without a major candidate. We just lost the race and there's lots of reasons for that and we're in a really scary time, but there's like just realities and

structural constraints about the institution right now Until we win back the house that we're gonna be in a hard place democratically All right last question. I'm gonna give you a chance to self-flagellate or not. Um, but uh, let's just at least be clear-eyed I'm here for it. Let's do it. Let's do it new mexico Kamala harris only one by six points in new mexico biden won by 11 Kamala Harris only won by six points in New Mexico. Biden won by 11. So New Mexico was closer for the Republicans than Ohio, Iowa, Florida,

former swing states were for the Democrats. Hispanic vote went down significantly. That's like not a great trajectory. It's not like New Mexico is a swing state per se, but that's a bad sign, right? I don't know. Do you look at that? And like, what do you attribute that to? Is there something that Democrats could be doing differently to kind of reverse that

trend in your state? Again, go back to the data. It's true everywhere in the United States where you had Democrats down ballot from Trump, the Democrats outperformed Trump. So I hate to talk about Trump in a positive light, but let me just say this. I do agree with people who say that he is sort of a unique and singular figure politically. I think he is a very unique political figure and he has really figured out whether it's a combination of big spending by his billionaire friends, their use of very advanced data,

micro-targeting and communication, their total dominance of the communication sphere, and his unique and insane way of communicating, I think with working people, delivered a clear message, which was, he said to the American people, it was a lie, that I'm gonna fight for you to make things cheaper and make your life better. Who couldn't vote for that? Right? But where you look at the actual data, Democrats outperformed him. In fact, outperformed him down ballot. And what I attribute that to

is in New Mexico, for example, we're very practical people. I think even myself, I did not consider myself like a very political person until I ran for office. And I hold some views that are probably, for example, fiscally conservative. I definitely grew up like working the land. I have some, you know, views that may not be considered more progressive in some ways, but very socially progressive. And I think that's how New Mexicans are across the board. So if you are a person that saw Donald Trump making this promise about making life better and easier and it sounded good to you, you're like, yeah, okay, cool, I'll vote for that. But then you had this awesome member of Congress who you know, who you know is fighting for you,

you're also going to vote for that person. I think Americans are very practical in that sense. And I think that the part of the self-flagellation that we have not been effective in sort of evaluating and what we lost this last election is that there hasn't been a lot of focus on our lack of ground game. And, you know, that's what wins elections. When I ran in 2018 for my state house race, I ran in a district that was red. It was a Republican district. And the number of statewide knocks and calls per house district that campaign season was about 10,000 knocks and calls. We did 40,000 knocks and calls in my district and I won by seven points in a Republican district. and calls in my district and I won by seven points in a Republican district. And I remember the newspaper asking me the next day, oh my god, how did you win? What did you do? What did you say? It wasn't messaging. It was that we knocked and called 40,000 people. And I think that one of the things that people don't realize is that, you know, we were behind the ball as Democrats on our field program. We didn't have, um, really robustly staffed field programs in every state and we switched candidates mid season. I mean, it was structurally not a good

place to start from regardless of all of the other factors. And so I think that if we get organized, we mobilize people, we register people to vote, we have really good candidates. I think we're gonna blow it out of the water this year. Thank you so much for coming on Melanie Stansberry. Good to meet you. Thanks to meet you. Let's try to steer clear of Marjorie Taylor Greene's

arm reach, you know, on that subcommittee, you know, keep a nice healthy distance from her. All right. And we'll be keeping an eye on you, all right? All right, sounds good. Thanks so much. All right. Thanks so much to George Packer and Melanie Stansbury. Appreciate y'all. We'll see some of you tonight in Chicago, some of you in Nashville on Thursday, and we'll be back tomorrow with Adam Kinzinger. Hope y'all enjoy it. Peace. Well they say that Santa Fe is less than 90 miles away

And I got time to roll a number at Randolph Park And ran the car Oh, I'm the Kirkney I've been flying down the road that I've known I'm the queen The Bulldog Podcast is produced by Katie Cooper with audio engineering and editing by Jason Brown.