The Daily Beast Podcast - How Trump Could Benefit from Pushing a Debt Default

Episode Date: May 23, 2023

Daily Beast congressional reporter Sam Brodey came on The New Abnormal politics podcast to talk through the ways that Trump’s default talk could screw Republicans, and also to share how this stance of Trump’s could possibly benefit him (or not.) Then, Jonathan Last, editor of The Bulwark, joins the show to talk through a DeSantis election theory and break down his rankings for the possible 2024 Republican presidential nominees most likely to win the election, including a very crass argument for putting Chris Christie dead last. Plus, co-hosts Andy and Danielle can’t believe that Florida is turning into one big “sundown” town. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Hi, I'm Andy Levy, former Fox News and CNN-HLN guy, and current cable news conscientious objector. I'm a former libertarian who now sits pretty comfortably on the left. Hi, I'm Danielle Moody, former educator and recovering lobbyist. But today, I'm an unapologetic, woke commentator on America's threats to democracy. And I'm producer Jesse Cannon, and I'm here to make sure things don't go too far off the rails. We're here to have fun, smart conversations with some of the most knowledgeable and entertaining people in politics, media, and beyond. Our goal is to try and make sense of our current crazy world, our new abnormal, and hopefully even make you laugh through the tears. What an excellent show we have today.

First we'll talk to Bullwork editor Jonathan Last all about his recent ranking of the Republican contenders in this GOP primary. And, well, as he can expect, it's not going so well. Then we'll talk to Daily Beast congressional reporter Sam Brody, all about how Trump's making it a little bit harder on the Republicans to do this debt-sealing negotiation. But first, let's have some fun. So it's another week in America, which means that there is just news that continues to ooze out of Florida like that from a pimple. And the latest, though, want to applaud the NACP who has issued a travel advisory for the entire state of Florida over the weekend. And they have said, quote, that this is an all-out attack on black Americans and other minorities. that basically the state of Florida has become absolutely aggressive to black people,

to LGBTQ people, to women, and so on and so forth. And they are now, I believe, the third organization to come out and issue such a warning. I know that it doesn't come with legal weight, what the NDACP is doing. But we have to really understand that this type of move by, a storied legacy, centuries-old civil rights organization has not happened since the civil rights movement of the 50s and the 60s. That Florida has become such an aggressively, what do I want to say? It is a terrorist state. When you are passing policies, when Ron DeSantis is passing policies that can remove trans children from their homes, not because they are being abused,

not because they are being neglected, but because they are being cared for with dignity and respect and love by their parents. But Ron DeSantis doesn't want those children to exist, fully healthy and actualized in their body. They can be removed from their home. That he can go so far as to say, oh, you know what model minorities history is worth teaching? Asian Americans. Do you know who's not worth teaching and is not deserving of the title of AP? black history, to pin two marginalized communities against each other. It is so sick and twisted what Ron DeSantis is doing.

And so for the NACP to take the extraordinary move to tell black people and other marginalized communities across the country that you know what? Check the laws before you go down to travel to Florida to make sure that you know your rights before you go to this American state to me, Andy, is absolutely. wild, but a sign of the times that we're living in. Ironically, the stuff going on in Florida right now is the kind of stuff that I think a lot of us thought was just for history books. And I say ironically, because it's being erased from those history books in Florida while

it's happening in real time right now. It's so disheartening to watch this and to see the NDibles ACP release a statement that references the sustained, blatant, relentless, and systemic attack on democracy and civil rights that is going on in Florida. And they're absolutely correct to do so. Look, I come at this from a straight white guy, a sissette white guy, however you want to define me. In a lot of ways, I guess you could say, oh, this doesn't affect you. You can go to Florida. But I don't, why would I want to? Why would I want to go to a state that is openly hostile toward African-Americans, people of color and LGBTQ individuals, as the NAACP says in its statement. I wouldn't want to.

This is such a shameful part of America that, again, all of this has happened before. And it is a shameful part of American history. It's a part of American history that everyone needs to know and everyone needs to learn. And again, how it is just, I cannot get over the irony of as they're removing this stuff and making it, if not illegal, but next to impossible to teach in Florida public schools, they are doing it again. And that's not, it's ironic, but it's also not a coincidence. The two things do go hand in hand. The erasure of bad stuff from history goes hand in hand with the propagation of bad stuff in the present. And that's exactly what we're seeing right now. I'm looking at this from my perspective. You know, I would never even pretend to imagine what this must feel like for a

person of color for an LGBTQ person because I can't. The only way I can come close to imagining it is knowing that Jews are always next. You know, if it doesn't include Jews at the beginning, it soon will. So there's that. But even leaving that aside, it is just the idea that this can happen in 2020s America is, again, it's just so disheartening because you would like to so much think that stuff like this, the blatant nature of it is a relic of our past. But it's not. It is a clear and present danger, and we're living through it right now in states like Florida, in states like Texas, and many others. And it is just, it is the shame of our nation. When I saw the warning by the NACP, a couple of things came to my mind. And one of them was the Green Book.

Yep. The Green Book was created during the days of the Jim Crow segregation. And it was a book that you as a black person driving would pick up so that you knew where it was safe to stop as you were driving through the South because people would drive with containers filled with gas with food, everything on them because it could be 30, 40, 50, 60, 100 miles before you were able as a black family or a black person traveling during Jim Crow segregation. to be able to get to a place that was safe enough for you to stop, change your clothes, rest your head, and not have to be worried about being lynched, beaten, raped, or robbed. And I think about that.

And I think about this travel warning being issued in 2023. Just this past few weeks, my girlfriend has been down in South Carolina and in the South with her family. And she was driving them and, you know, running errands and doing all these things. and one of the places that she had to drive to was to Florida. And I kept saying to her, you know, can you make sure that before you leave, you have a full tank of gas and that you guys have everything that you need? Like, I was so scared and paranoid. She got lost, needed to make a U-turn.

I said, please don't go into anybody's driveway. This is, like, it's insane. It's insane that we had made so much progress. And Ron DeSantis, Donald Trump, and the entirety of the Republican white supremacist cult, has taken us back to a place where I fear for the safety of my girlfriend because she is black and queer and traveling in the South in the 21st century. Yeah, I mean, look, you brought up the Green Book, which I absolutely, I thought of that too.

And the other thing I thought of was sundown towns. And for people, you know, I would assume white people who don't know what that is because I assume people of color are well aware of what sundown towns were. And for all I know, still are in some pockets. Sundown towns were places where it was. is basically illegal to be a person of color after the sun went down. And so if you were driving through them as a person of color, you had to be sure to be out of them before sundown or you could be arrested or worse.

That's what I'm saying. All of this, what's happening now brings to mind all this stuff that I really had hoped were consigned to the dustbin of history, of American history. And it turns out they're not. I don't know where we go from this because the problem is that other states seem to be looking to Florida as a model. Texas certainly is, and I have no doubt that there are other states in the South that are going to do the same thing. And a lot of these states have been so heavily gerrymandered that they have these huge Republican majorities, even if the Republicans don't have

an actual majority of the people in the state, they have the majority of the state houses. And in some cases, a super majority in the state houses. I could not agree more with what the NAACP is doing. And I want to bring up, we see this a lot. This is such a an unbelievable garbage conservative talking point. Ted Cruz responded to the NDACP's travel advisory by tweeting, this is bizarre and utterly dishonest. In the 1950s and 60s, the NDACP did extraordinary good helping lead the civil rights movement.

Today, Dr. King would be ashamed of how profoundly they've lost their ways. Did he tweet that from Cancun? I cannot say this more strongly, even though it's not the segment. Fuck that guy. And this is the classic move that conservatives make to pretend that, A, first of all, they would have supported the NAACP in the 50s and 60s when we all know they wouldn't have. And they would have been the ones cheering on the people with the water cannons, if not the people with the water cannons themselves. And B, they try to co-opt Martin Luther King Jr. to make it seem like he would be appalled by this. And they always do this.

It's always, we know this. It's the one quote content of their character, not by their skin. And it's the one quote they know for Martin Luther King. They don't know the context of it. They haven't bothered to read it or listen to it to figure it out. But boy, they love to latch on to that one quote and use it over and over again completely incorrectly. This has to be called out every time it happens. Again, it's a trope.

They do it all the time. But it demands to be called out every time. I mean, and it just reminds us that racism doesn't die out because people get older. Do you know what I'm saying? that if you do not root out racism, and you do that by teaching and telling the truth of your history, by teaching and telling the truth about the people that actually were oppressed and overcame that oppression and have had great success, but why we still see and experience the very real remnants of racial discrimination, of segregation, and of white domestic terrorism in this country. And so

for Ted Cruz to come out of his mouth and say anything, and I say this every year, that Martin Luther King's birthday comes around. Keep that man's name out of your mouth. He was labeled a terrorist by this country. When he was alive, it is why he is dead. Because of people like those that are actively members of the Republican Party right now, don't miss me with the bullshit that you would be the ones

championing on the NACP every time that they hung out a flag that said a man was lynched today. Because mainstream media and white politicians in government weren't doing a fucking thing about it. So like, let's stop. pretending that you were some arbiter of Martin Luther King's legacy when you were exactly the white people that he was talking about and fighting against. Just as a point, as a reminder, the FBI tried to get Martin Luther King to kill himself. That's the history of this country. So as you said,

just shut up about him. You sound as stupid as it's possible for someone with a functioning brainstem to sound. So, you know, continuing on with just what is happening in Florida and the messaging that is coming out about the dangers of Florida. You know, there's one person currently that seems to be trying to fight back and not pretending that these quote unquote culture wars are not happening and are not destroying and undermining our democracy. And that is Governor Gavin Newsom out of California. And so recently, Gavin Newsom has demanded the records from textbook companies to see which

are caving, this is according to insider, which are caving to Florida's extremist demand. because we have to also understand that this country, we all get our textbooks from only a handful of monopoly publishers. And so if they are rewriting and erasing history, black history, people of color, women, the Holocaust and Frank. I mean, if they are racing these things to contort themselves to the whims, the fascist Ron DeSantis, then this isn't just affecting the education,

of kids that are in Florida. It is going to affect people, children nationwide. This is why I continue to say that if you are not paying attention to what's happening in Florida and Texas, understand that the ramifications, the ripple effects of their hate are meeting you in the blue states that you are currently living in. And this is what Gavin Newsom is bringing to attention. And so according to Inslee, I said that his office sent public records requests to the Florida Department of Education to see which publishers it is asked to change their books.

Florida has rejected folks right now around one third of social studies textbooks proposed for the next school year. It's amazing. To touch on a point that you brought up, which is also something that I said in the previous segment, yes, all this stuff has ripple effects. And there's a really easy way to think about this. Textbook publishers are in it to make money. and what is cheaper to provide the same textbook to all 50 states or to provide a different textbook to Florida and, you know, whatever other states have similar disgusting laws and a different textbook to other states.

It is cheaper to publish one textbook. So you end up with books in all 50 states that meet the requirements of the Florida laws. And I'm not saying that this is what has happened. And I'm saying that is the easiest path. And in a capitalist society, the textbook manufacturer more than likely is going to take the path of the most profit. And it is definitely more profitable to not print two separate editions of a textbook and just print one. So absolutely, I applaud Gavin Newsom for doing this. I'll say as an aside, he is not necessarily my favorite person in the world. But I think he's absolutely right to do this, regardless of his motives, which that's where I get in.

to not loving him so much, because I think a lot of this is about a 2028 presidential run and boosting his spotlight. But let's set that aside, shall we? I do think he's doing the right thing here, regardless of motive. And look, I may be wrong about the motive. His statement said, California will not be complicit in Florida's attempt to whitewash history through laws and backroom deals. Parents have a right to know what's happening in the dark to undermine our children's education. and California deserves to know whether any of these companies designing textbooks for our state's classrooms are the same ones coutowing to Florida's extremist agenda. He is 100% correct in everything he said there.

And this is a good thing. And I hope more states do this. And I hope more states let these textbook publishers know that we don't want these broke-ass books, you know, that eliminate entire chapters of American history, important chapters of American history from children's education. We don't want them in New York. We don't want them in California. would like to think, you know, I'd like for 48 or 49 states to say that. I know that's not happening, but I would love to see as many states as possible get on board with this and let the textbook

manufacturers know. Because again, if the textbook manufacturers want to make this a purely capitalistic endeavor, then other states need to know that the publishers are going to suffer if they take this path of least resistance and that they better not. So hopefully some good will come out of this. And again, I'm very glad that Gavin Newsom is doing this. Paging Governor Hokel, because would love for, you know, the governor that is presiding over the largest public school system in the country with over a million students to be as vocal and as on point as Gavin Newsom is now, because money does talk to your point, Andy. And if the two largest school districts in the country, the two biggest states housing the biggest school districts in the

country decide that they're not trying to allow Florida with the worst education system, one of the worst, to dictate what the rest of us learn, then they will go where the money is. And that's what, that's what we need to see in terms of these other states uniting. Yeah. And, you know, if you take a look at what has been excised from a lot of these textbooks, I'm looking at the Tampa Bay Times, did a study. Here's what they say, gone from one book were passages about Black Lives Matter and the murder of George Floyd. In another, the state removed a prompt asking students to discuss people who knelt in protest during the national anthem. These are the kinds of things they don't even want in textbooks. You're not even allowed to talk about Black Lives Matter in a textbook in Florida.

Other states cannot allow this to become the norm, is what I'm saying. It would be great. It would be great if they acted the way I would love the Department of Education to be acting, the way I'd love the Department of justice to be acting because what Ron DeSantis is doing and what other states are going to be copycatting is a violation of civil rights. I am not an attorney. I just play one on this show. And I think that it's important for there to be, oh, I don't know, cases brought. Later this week should bring us the official launch of Florida governor Ron DeSantis's bid to be the 2024 Republican presidential nominee. So what better time to check out what the field looks like so far? Joining me now with his take is Bullwark editor, Jonathan

V last. JVL, thanks for being here. Andy, thanks for having me, buddy. Absolutely. So you wrote a piece at the end of last week, ranking the candidates. But before we get to your list, I want to ask you about something you wrote in your intro, you said it's later than you think. First of all, you don't know what I think. So how dare you? But second of all, why do you think it's later than we think? This happens with primary elections. People say like, oh, X is an eternity in politics. And that's true. True at a certain point. Like, that's true two years out. But then the mental model doesn't shift again until people start voting. You know, and so everybody thinks there's an attorney in politics until the week before I. Right. And that's not really how it works. We're now about 40 weeks out from Super Tuesday. Eight of those weeks are July and August, during which nothing typically happens. I mean, maybe something will happen this time. But that puts just like 32 weeks. And that's not a lot of time for narratives to shift. It's not a lot of time for organizations. to take root and people to get registered and stuff, if you're leading somebody by 30 points with 32 weeks to go before what is probably the final nominating contest, that's a pretty significant lead. Right. Okay. All right. So let's talk about your rankings themselves. First of all, it is blatantly obvious that you didn't go to ranking school because you started with number one when even a beginning ranking student knows you end with number one. So that's how we're going to go through them here. I dispute this because I see.

say that your rankings, it depends. Cut his, I paid for this microphone. So here's the deal. Whether you go from bottom to top or top to bottom purely depends on how you're building suspense, right? And it all depends on where is the most unknowable portion of it. And so if you have a prohibitive number one, then you got to start with that. Because otherwise, once you start, you know, at the bottom and building to the bridge,

everybody knows where you're going. There's no suspense. The things that made America great, i.e. Miss America pageants, they don't name the winner and then the runner up. It doesn't work that way. You raise a good point. So we're going to do this the correct way. So you've ranked eight candidates, but because, I guess, spoiler alert, you have two of them in a tie. You only go to seven, another ranking error. But at this point, I just have to believe this is who you are. So let's talk about your number seven, the bottom of your list. And that is former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie. Why is he dead last? for you. I mean, who is Chris Christie's demographic? I don't know. I mean, you look at this. He's this guy who is... Toll booth operators? I mean, maybe. You need guys working the toll booth job. Yeah. Here's the thing. Is there a lane for somebody to go and do a total kamikaze on Donald Trump? Maybe. Maybe that lane exists and could get you all the way to like 7% of the Republican primary vote in the polls. And if somebody like Liz Cheney did that. I bet Liz Cheney might even be able to outperform that and get to 9%. Maybe.

Wow. But Chris Christie is like this compromised version who, by the way, we already see what he's doing. He's already like training his fire on Ronda Santas and Nikki Haley. And if he gets in a debate stage with Donald Trump, he's not going to go after Trump. He's going to go after the other. He's just a big fat pussy. Oh, okay. And so anyway, he's he's a pussy who nobody on either side likes. Right. And that's that's the key of it. He's in the absolute sour spot. You know, even a guy like Mike Pence has a couple people who'd be for him. Let's jump to your number six, who was a very important part of January 6. That's Gallo's humor, I like to call that. So to speak. Yes. As you mentioned, this is Donald Trump's vice president, but I'm guessing not his BFF, Mike Pence. Have you heard the spin on the gallows, by the way, from January 6th? The MAGA spin is that those gallows were not fully functional. Yes. And so, you know,

you got to take them literally, take them seriously, not literally. When they were running around chanting hang Mike Pence with an erected set of gallows outside the Capitol, those gallows were just like shit. They're like the gallows version of home fill, right? It's not a real, it's not a real TV. It's just a little plastic box that looks like a TV. I love that. So here's the thing with Mike Pence.

I think that there are dozens, maybe even scores of Republican donors who would be willing to write checks for him. and maybe even vote for him and possibly even a handful of evangelical Christians. I think Mike Pence could get all the way to three, possibly even 4% in Iowa. Whoa. Problem is that there is like another percentage of Republicans, which is larger than that, who would like to hang him because they believe he's a traitor. So more people would like to kill Mike Pence than vote for him. And then you have the vast, vast majority of Republican voters, probably like 90% of them,

who just think that he's a traitor and a bad guy, not all the way to hanging. They think of him as a metaphorical traitor, not a literal traitor. Right. He's the one I find the most fascinating in all of this because I can't imagine how you don't know it. Right. The lack of self-awareness. And I guess it's all like, you know, he thinks he's on a mission from God or something. And keep in mind, I'm a pretty big Mike Pence Stan just in terms of like it is deeply

important that he did what he did on January 6th. Yes, absolutely. He behaved very honorably. I had thought that while they controlled Congress, Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi should have been passing senses of the Congress resolutions, honoring his heroism, just to make Republicans vote against it. That would have been great. But let's have a Mike Pence Memorial Park Bench somewhere.

I just think it's, did the guy go along with every bad thing in the Trump administration for four years? Yes. Yes. On the other hand, had Mike Pence not done the right thing while under the actual pain of death, we would have been in a much darker place than we were already. I could not agree with you more. I've said, you know, similar things on this. 99.9% of what Mike Pence stands for, I do not like it all.

But in this one instance, he did the right thing when pretty much nobody around him was. And people have argued with me that, well, you don't get credit for doing the right thing. And it's like, yes, you do sometimes. Yeah. Particularly as you said, when people are erecting gallows and chanting that they want to hang you, not 100 feet from where you are or whatever. So had Josh Hawley or Reince Prebus been vice president on January 6th, do you think they would have done what Mike Pence did?

Because I don't. God, no. Right. I mean, it is not a given. I mean, you don't even have to go all the way to my pillow man. Like just, you know, other normal, perfectly mainstream Republicans would not have done what Pence did. No. Okay.

So at number five, you have a tie between two candidates who coincidentally are from the same state. Tim Scott, who declared on. Monday. Yes. But he is running and Nikki Haley, who has high heels and likes to kick people, evidently. So Tim Scott, I understand, right? I mean, so he is a sitting senator in a heavily Republican state. He never has to worry about losing his seat. He can hold it for as long as he wants. He's got Larry Ellison, who is just shooting $100 bills at him through one of those like T-P-USA t-shirt cannons. Right. And so he thinks to himself, well, maybe I become a vice presidential pick, right? And it doesn't cost him anything.

Sure. You know, he's not mortgaging his future. And Nikki Haley, you know, so long as she stays mostly in bounds, maybe she's diluting herself into thinking she's running for vice president. I think that's crazy. Donald Trump has many things. He's a guy who understands what loyalty is. And he knows that she's a squealer.

She's not going to be loyal to him. He would never, never give her the VP slot. But, you know, otherwise, she's a has been. And she does this. Her speaking fees go up. and she gets more board seats and, you know, she just, this is the mode of production for former politicians. You just got to stay relevant in order to keep making money. And this is a freebie way for her to stay relevant.

Okay. So at number four is someone you say people shouldn't sleep on. Yeah. Which I think is definitely is good advice in general. You shouldn't sleep on strangers. They don't like that. No. Well, well, some of them don't like that.

Some of them pay extra for that. Well, true. Vivek Ramoswamy, he gives off these pretty strong Ron Paul vibes to me. People are like, oh, could Republican Normie politician X catch fire? And I look at him like, no, you know who could catch fire? A guy like Vivek Ramoswamy could catch fire. Like he could be our Herman Kane of this cycle. You know, like all of a sudden he's, you know, pops into second place. Is it inconceivable that we could reach a point where Vivek Ramoswamy polls for a week higher than Ronda Santas? Absolutely. I totally. I totally. I totally. I totally. totally think this is possible. Maybe not likely, but possible. He is running as a guy who is, if you want Trump Maga, but you're worried that Trump might have gone a little bit to establishment. And you want, you know, if you want to be the kind of guy who's like, oh, I stopped listening to REM after they got their major label contract. I don't listen to the, I like their early stuff. Then Vivek might be your guy. And especially in a state like New Hampshire,

where you get a bunch of oddballs and where Ron Paul did very well back of the day. I don't know if you remember that. Oh, sure. I do. If I were looking at all this as betting propositions and you could find a way to put five bucks on Ramoswami to finish third or higher in New Hampshire, I'd take that action. Interesting. He does seem to be sort of all over the place. Yeah, he's unlocked the Fox News achievement.

He's figured out how to get booked on Fox. Yeah. And my colleague, Sarah Longwell, does focus groups. She's, she's, like, addicted to focus groups. She does these things like four times a week. And a few months ago, you know, first when she, you know, a year and a half ago when she would ask people who do they want, all they wanted was Trump. You know, she talked to Republican voters and, you know, Trump, Trump, Trump, more Trump.

And then about, you know, eight months ago, that started switching. And there was a lot of, we want DeSantis. And then, like, two months ago, three months ago, people started just volunteering. What about that Vivek Rama-Swami fellow in her focus groups? She was like, oh, clearly he has entered the Fox Bloodstream. Yes. So he's at number four. So number three is someone who hasn't announced he's running.

And I think actually has said he will not be running in 2023. But he did release an ad last week that felt eerily like a presidential campaign ad, didn't it? It was like his version of the Tim Pawlenty Michael Bay ad. Do you remember that? Yeah. So Glenn Yonkin, who first did a lot of teasing. that he was going to run and then said he wasn't going to run. And first it was by telling donors that he wasn't going to run.

And then it was by issuing the weird statement about how he's not going to run in 2023, which is like the non-denial denial. And then out of nowhere, he just drops this campaign ad, which is like, you know, if you, if what you've been wanting is a Republican Party that returns to the great roots of Ronald Reagan, then here's your guy, Mr. TechVest. I'm fascinated by it because he clearly wants a shot at the championship. And because Virginia is a weird state where your term limited for one term is governor, which is insane. And because Virginia runs on off gears, not in a normal cycle, this is it.

He's got to make his move now. Right. It's up and up or out. Virginia is still a very blue state. He is not going to be able to win a senator's seat in Virginia. And so he thinks that what he's going to do is have a good election. in Virginia where Republicans maybe recapture the legislature and that he can then say, I turned Virginia red and then drop into the race in like, I guess, December 15th or something before Christmas.

That's an insane plan. Go ask Mike Bloomberg. And Mike Bloomberg had real money. Right. You know, Glenn Yonkin has like pretend, pretend rich person money. Right. Rich for you and me, but not rich by the standards of actual rich people. Right. You know, he's like the hired help. He was not offensive. or he's not like character at his own money. On the one hand, I think his plan is crazy, sort of as it has been laid out. But on the other hand, he has to be looking at DeSantis's numbers and smelling blood in the water. And if you're going to do that, you probably got to go sooner rather than later. If DeSantis keeps softening, then you got to get in there and gobble

those people up before they give him a second look. And you know, you mentioned earlier Tim Scott as a potential vice presidential person. And could you see Glenn Yunkin in that, role as well. And maybe, you know, you said Virginia is pretty blue right now. But if you pick the governor of that state as your running mate, is there a chance you flip that? He's not real popular in Virginia. I don't, I don't think that that's in the cards. And I also don't know that he is in the cards as a Trump running mate. I mean, when I look at this, I, you know, what does a Trump second term look like? What does a Trump general election look like? I feel like one of his big lessons that he took from the first term was that he can't have the Mike Pence's and Jim Mattis's and John Kelly's of the world around him. He needs button men,

you know, guys who he taps it and they jump to and they do what he wants. That suggests to me that he'll need more of a Carrie Lake type figure. I don't know, right? What do you think? Am I crazy about this? That maybe he doesn't just need more MAGA. Maybe he does try to traditionally balance the ticket or something. Maybe he really thinks he needs to shore up women because he's so weak with Republican women. What is your view on this? It's a tough call because I don't know if he can go with another Mike Pence type after what happened in 2020 on January 6th. He may have to go with, I can't even believe I'm saying this, with a Carrie Lake type person. I'm not even sure she really exists.

Just step down as governor because she is, as you know, she is in her own mind, the acting governor of. Yes, absolutely. Yes. So yes, she would have to vacate that, I guess, to accept. I mean, what Trump obviously wants. is the ability to have an acting vice president, right? Somebody who he could have as his vice president's national nominee for the campaign. Right. And then simply replace without going to any through any sort of approval process once he wins. Right.

I don't know if that works. All right. But let's get to, so your top two candidates, obviously, are Ron DeSantis and Donald Trump. You know, your runner up obviously made it clear that Donald Trump is your number one. Ron DeSantis is your runner up, who I assume will have to assume the duties of the frontrunner, should that person be unable to complete them due to, you know, I don't know, being in jail or whatever. That's almost the definition of his campaign strategy. Yeah.

Right. This is my colleague Amanda Carpenter said this a long time ago. Ron DeSantis isn't running to be the nominee. He is simply the understudy. And I think that's right. When you look at how he's positioned himself, it's incredibly cautious in a way. And the fact that he has decided, you know, he's not going to let Trump get to his right on anything. But he won't even really press his advantages against Trump where he has them.

Like even on the vaccine stuff, right? He's not really going after Trump on that. When he could, right, if he was really going to take a shot at this, he could, you know, go out hammering tongs with Joseph Lidopo or Lepidopo, whatever, whatever his quack surgeon general is down there. He isn't willing to do it. And I think that's part. I mean, there is a burn the boats aspect to it, which he has not done, right? He's changed the Florida resigned to run law so that he

can just stay as Florida governor because of the election cycles entirely possible if this doesn't work out for him so long as he doesn't damage himself with Republican voters in the course of the campaign by like angering them and going after Trump, then he could conceivably be the frontrunner in 2024

regardless of what happens, which is another fantasy, which we can talk about if you want to because Trump will absolutely say he can run in 2024 no matter what happens. Oh, I agree. The slogan make America Florida? You're going to tell that to people in Michigan. That's how you're going to flip Michigan.

You're going to go to people in Michigan and say, I understand all of your blue-collar things and your complaints about unions. And so I would like to take your state and make... And also the weirdest of Florida is where woke goes to die. I don't know if it is struck you, Andy. But there is an actual joke about Florida being a place where old people go to die. Yeah.

The idea that she would highlight that as part of your stump speech. Yeah. It's astonishing to me. And you combine that then with the weird laughing and the interpersonal stuff. I feel like a lot of people haven't heard him speak. Do you remember how old you were when you heard Mike Tyson speak for the first time? I was probably... Probably like 10 years old, right?

I'm old. So it was probably college. I mean, I remember when I, in my youth, Mike Tyson being the baddest man in the world. Of course. I mean, he was the guy who ate Mr. T for breakfast. Right. And then you heard him speak for the first time. You were like, what?

Wait, no, hold on. No, no, no, no, no. That voice doesn't come out of that guy. Yeah. And Ronda Santis has that coming on about him. I know this sounds like such a small and petty thing, but just as a matter of politics and the sort of alpha affect and dominance politics that Republican voters seem to be really hot and heavy for,

I just have a hard time seeing how this work. The other thing is that his campaign is based on this foundational contradiction, which is that, you know, he stipulates that Donald Trump was the greatest president ever. Donald Trump actually won the 2020 election. He would run everything exactly like Donald Trump does if he would be elected. But then vote for me, even though Donald Trump is standing right there. That doesn't work. Right.

No, it's truly bizarre. Yeah. I do want to point out that your list is Asa Hutchinson and Larry Elder erasure. Yeah, that's true. I don't think that either of them would be allowed on a debate stage. I mean, Trump dominates the state parties to such a degree that I really can't imagine that either the RNC or the state parties would not do whatever required to keep those guys off a debate stage, which is too bad for Asa Hutchinson.

Larry Hogan is whatever. I've never bought into that guy. I actually legitimately met Larry Elder because he has declared. Oh, Larry Elder. has declared. Yeah. No kidding. Yeah.

Oh, he's running, baby. Well, maybe he will get in. Maybe he'll be Herman Kane. Right. Yeah. Jonathan, thank you so much for coming on. I love your stuff at the bulwark. I love many of the people at the bulwark, except for you have a film guy.

I don't particularly care for. Oh, yeah. That guy. He's the worst. In general, I think you all do good work. And thanks again for coming on. And hopefully we'll have you back as this election gets only more and more exciting. Thank you, Andy.

Folks, I am very happy to welcome to the new abnormal Sam Brody, our very own deputy politics editor at The Daily Beast, to discuss his recent article and basically one of Donald Trump's many tantrums, entitled How Trump's Call for Dept Default Could Bite GOP in the Ass. I like the subtlety, Sam. So let's jump right in. I feel like we have this showdown between Democrats, and Republicans, it feels like we have it every year. The debt ceiling, even my mother, said to me,

I literally do not want to hear the term debt ceiling anymore. It is terrorist tactics by the Republicans. The rich people get richer because they get all the breaks. The Democrats cower because they don't want to default and look bad in front of the world. Republicans could give a shit. And so here we are. Am I wrong? Is my mother wrong? Break it down for us. Yeah, I mean, this was something that was forever in Congress and in the federal government, something that was done without controversy or incident. Raising the debt limit just, you know, is an acknowledgement that the United States federal government is going to continue paying its debts and can therefore continue to borrow. So it's often talked about as like an authorization of future spending, but in reality,

it's just an acknowledgement that the U.S. is going to pay what it owes on past spending. And so for a long time, this was not super controversial until, you know, around 20. you tend the Tea Party era where, you know, Republicans realize that they could sort of hold this hostage in order to extract concessions on spending and link to sort of the increased sort of like hardline fiscal conservatism and all that. And so, you know, it's interesting being in Washington and hearing everybody say, you know, well, nobody wants to default. You know, President Biden says that. Speaker McCarthy says that. Mitch McConnell says that. Chuck Schumer, everybody says it. But what's inherent in the Republican approach and what gives them credibility at the negotiating table is there has to be a credible threat that they would accept default if they didn't get what they want.

And I think for a long time, Democrats in the last kind of months leading up to this standoff, Democrats thought that, you know, they could sort of hold firm and Republicans would collapse on themselves and that they wouldn't be able to stick to that position. And instead, I think the Republicans have held together more tightly than expected. And now President Biden is sort of doing what he said he wouldn't do, which is negotiate with them about the debt ceiling. I mean, I think that what frustrates me as many people, I think, with just basic common sense, is that this is continued terrorist attacks by the Republican Party to disrupt our economy, to give to their biggest donors at the expense of everyone else. that rather than providing, oh, I don't know, free and reduced lunch to underprivileged children, they would rather cut those programs so that their biggest donors and friends can receive even more tax breaks to buy their fifth, sixth, and seventh home. And so I'm always confused about why that messaging doesn't seem to come out of the mouth of Democrats. Because what they are negotiating on are things that we don't have the ability,

and particularly now that people are a living paycheck to paycheck, that the future for our young people is worse off than it was 10 years ago and years prior that this is going to be the first generation, probably not to own homes, not to get married, because they're saddled with debt. So why don't Democrats have their messaging down about what it is that Republicans are doing here? You know, I think they have and they haven't. You know, Republicans got on the same page by passing this legislation

out of the house that, you know, essentially was their opening bid. And obviously it wasn't realistic because that thing is never going to become law. But it had in there, you know, basically specific areas that they would cut. And this was after months of them being unable to indicate specific areas that they be cut. And, you know, Democrats have seized on some of those areas in particular, like food assistance, veterans benefits, really hammered those things that would receive cuts under the Republican plan. And so I think part of that is there. But I think the difficulty is once you start negotiating, it becomes very hard to kind of maintain that level of messaging that you're describing.

And it's sort of, you know, you see it from the president who is like had such a long career in politics that Republicans are really able to use his past kind of policy legacy for, for lack of a better word. Against him, they say, well, you know, President Biden was for work requirements. and he was for this and that. And he has kind of had a fiscal responsibility tone in the past. And all these things are true, even if the president has definitely moved in a more progressive direction in recent years. But once you sit down at the negotiating table, I think it sort of legitimizes the like, all right, we're having a debate about fiscal responsibility.

And that's not to say that these debates have no place. It's that Democrat stance was that there was no place for that debate in the context of the debt limit, that you cannot hold the economy and the full faith and credit. of the U.S. government hostage in order to have that discussion. You have the discussion when you make the federal budget every year. There's a annual process for this. And if they don't come to an agreement, they either kick the can down the road further. There's a shutdown. These things happen from time to time. But there's not a default that could cause a recession. And so I think that's a critical thing here that is the White House is sort of trying to thread that needle. They've actually said, well,

we're negotiating the budget at the same time that the debt limit is happening, which I don't think anyone buys that bit of hair splitting that's happening. But my thing, thing too is this. So under the Trump administration, four years that he served as president, the debt ceiling was raised three times. Donald Trump added what? Roughly three trillion dollars in debt in three years to our overall economy. That every year, every term that Republicans have had in the executive branch, they have added trillions of dollars worth of debt. So I'm confused about why they're able to still walk the line that they are the party of fiscal conservatism when that is far from the truth. It's one of the biggest features in this situation right now

because when you acknowledge that the debt limit is not about authorizing future spending, it's about acknowledging that the U.S. will pay its debt on past spending. You have to get in to how much was spent during the Trump years and just how fiscal responsibility, quote, unquote, really went out the window when you had Trump in office. It's something that I think I do hear Democrats talk about. And to your point about messaging, it's tough because you have to point out if you're Democrats, what the Republican plans going forward would do to all these important programs. But there's also like, you have to try and underscore the point that it's not Democrats solely who led us into this position, right? It's, it's, this has been, this has been a bipartisan thing. And in recent years,

Republicans have been as prolific as Democrats have found more so in some respects than others. And that's why you see in this. There's like really not much of a conversation being had about the Pentagon budget, for instance, right? You know, there's little changes on that over the years in the Republican Party where some or more were open to defense cuts. But that's not really on the table at all. And so, yeah, it's this debate about who's the actual fiscal responsibility parties is incredibly muddled.

But it gets lost. But I find that like, again, not right. rocket science to me. Yes, both parties are responsible for the debt that we have currently accrued as a nation. However, largely Republicans' debt is about paying out their donors, while Democrats' debt is having our tax dollars actually go towards the programs that better the lives of Americans. Am I wrong here? Debt is going to happen. It's going to, like, I don't remember the last time we had a balanced budget in this country. And so when I'm looking at how money is being spent,

you have one party that wants to spend to continue to inflate the wealth of the ultra-rich. And then you have another party that is trying in some regard to show at least some sense of equity in terms of how tax dollars are allocated across agencies and systems that are needed. Yeah, I mean, Republicans have, you know, basically run up deficits to do tax cuts that have, you know, largely benefited the wealthy,

defense spending. And the real one exception to that is all the COVID aid money that did go out under the Trump administration. Now, that was bipartisan and, you know, was regarded as like an emergency at the time. And, you know, people debate about all that stuff now, but there wasn't much of any controversy. But yeah, I mean, you know, that is what Republicans have emphasized is tax cuts and defensemen. And Democrats have emphasized social programs. I think what Republicans bank on is the sort of short memories that people tend to have when it comes to this stuff and then like the public. And just how things are coded politically. Tax cuts obviously are a huge contributor to deficits because they massively reduce the amount of revenue that the federal government gets. But people kind of

code that as like, oh, that's, you know, tax cuts are good. You know, even if they don't benefit me, right? Like, who doesn't love tax cuts? Whereas Democrats are more easily turd as like, oh, these big spenders because of they're putting dollar amounts on programs that they want to fund, even though tax cuts have a huge impact on the federal deficit as well. So let's talk about Donald Trump, which your piece is largely about and his effect on this process right now. And thanks to the town hall that CNN so graciously provided him 3.1 million people to lie to over and over and again. In that conversation, he was asked about the debt ceiling. And in that conversation, he said, well, you know, here, Donald Trump, you said that the debt ceiling should never be used as a negotiating point because that shows bad faith. He said, oh, well, it only mattered when I was president.

And so now that you're not president, well, now I don't care. They should be able to negotiate and use the debt ceiling. Talk to us really about how Donald Trump's, one, continued flip-flop and lie and ability to just, you know, know, manipulate the party can really harm them in these longer conversations? Yeah, no, it was pretty remarkable to hear. And then he's continued to sort of harp on this point on social media. When he was president, of course, he did not want the debt ceiling to be weaponized because it was going to be on him.

And now, and he's even candidly said this. He's like, well, I'm not president anymore. So my calculation about this is different. So you have to appreciate at least amid the deflections and lies. when he is kind of says the quiet part out loud. But, you know, he basically said that if Republicans don't get everything they want, they should default. That defaulting is better than not even getting like an okay deal. He's literally said defaulting is better than a deal in which they don't get literally, quote, everything that they want. And, you know, I spent the week asking Republican

members of Congress about this. And of course, none of them are going to say, yeah, you know, Donald Trump has a really good point. We should default. But like I said earlier, I mean, like, It's sort of important in that he is voicing this sort of logical conclusion of their negotiating position, that if they don't get the deal that they want, that they'll default. I think why it kind of, you know, why we have the headlight that we do, it kind of is something that boxes in Republicans and could come back to haunt them later. If you have the leader, the de facto leader of the Republican Party who remains very, very influential, not just among voters, but among members of Congress on Capitol Hill, if you have

him saying stuff like this and a default does happen, it just makes it a lot easier to blame Republicans when you have the leader of the party sort of openly cheering or cheerleading for a default to happen. And that's kind of, I think, something that's important to harp on because for Republicans, I think privately, I don't know this for a fact, but I think privately some might admit, like, look, if a default does happen, the public is going to blame the president and we're not the president, even if it's just complicated, blah, blah, blah, whatever, that. ultimately it's just the president that's going to get blamed. They could be right. They could be wrong, but it's going to be a lot harder for the president, the current president, to get blamed

if the standard bearer of the Republican Party is openly cheering on something that leads to a recession that could have just like catastrophic impacts on just about everyone in the country. I'm going to ask you a crazy question, which is to give us some logic coming out of the mouth of Donald Trump. But what do you think he believes is the benefit here to that, to saying to Republicans, if you don't get everything that you want, including the kitchen sink, which is what you lay down in your piece, then you need to default. And like, as if their hands are going to be clean. So if you're Donald Trump and you're inside that tiny, tiny brain of his, how does this end up making the Republicans look good? It's a really good question. And I think something that

I didn't quite have the ability to get at in this because what's in it for Trump, right? Right. Yeah. I explored sort of what this means for Republicans who are sort of stuck with him, whether they like it or not. But what does this do for Trump? And, you know, I think maybe he believes that this is somehow putting pressure on Biden. I mean, there's plenty of Democrats who believe, you know, that like Trump would actually personally like a default. Oh, absolutely. And I think it's weird because his own remarks cheering on a default complicate his logic. Because the logic is if a default happens, President Biden is blamed and that helps Trump if he's running against Biden. But if he's out there cheering for default to happen, and this is maybe where you get into the

territory of, huh, Donald Trump might have miscalculated here. Fancy that, you know, by openly cheering for something that he wants to happen, he is making it more likely that he's linked to that. And I think it's been interesting to watch him not only like double down on this, but like triple down. He's continued to say stuff like this. Even, you know, on Friday when or Saturday, I think when the two sides were meeting, Trump, you know, had some truth social post or whatever talking about how they needed to default if they didn't get a deal. And like, I think this was more coincidence than anything else. But the talks between the two sides

broke down, you know, an hour later. And, you know, it made more real the threat that this could, this could really happen. And I think something that's striking is when you ask to Republican lawmakers about Trump, they talk about him as if he's like this, this kind of, he's like this sort of cloud that hangs over them, but doesn't actually, like, affect the weather. He's just kind of that's a wonderful analogy. That is fantastic. Yeah. And it's like, guys, you know, this is, this is still an incredibly influential person and they'll write him off by saying, oh, you know, he says this kind of stuff or he's running for president. So he has to say these sorts of things. I think privately they acknowledge that this is not good for him to be out here, sort of saying

the quiet part out loud. And I don't know how much he's personally affecting negotiations right now, but I think if you're a Republican, the more that Donald Trump gets involved, the worse is going to be free. I mean, I would just argue that Donald Trump is going to continue to get louder and louder. That every time that he's given an opportunity to course correct,

he decides to double and triple down to your point. And he likes the attention. So he's going to be in the headlines talking about the fact that the Republicans need to default. My last question for you is with regard to Kevin McCarthy, who I refer to as the Fisher Prize speaker. The man has absolutely no power is given it all away piece by piece by piece

to the extremists within his wing. They worship at the ground of Donald Trump. And so while he may be holding together with chewing gum and a prayer, the Republican caucus right now, if Donald Trump's rhetoric gets louder around the default and he's puffing up his chest, how likely do you think that it is that Kevin McCarthy

is able to hold this rabid party together? This is the really important thing to watch as these talks continue. Should they continue? Because at some point, if they proceed, Kevin McCarthy will have to go back to his party with a deal that has at least some sign off from Democrats. It is not going to have, quote, unquote, everything that they want. That is the nature of a compromise. And that's what happens when you negotiate. I think there is a

number of Republicans, certainly enough of them to sink any deal, who I don't think are super prepared to accept the kind of compromise that's going to result from this. So if you're in a situation where McCarthy is trying to win over these members with something that they don't like that they think doesn't go far enough that, you know, it's a concession to the Democrats, all that. And Donald Trump is out there every day, every other day talking about how they can't compromise with Sleepy Joe and that they should default and that's way better than accepting this deal. Yeah, that's going to complicate things. And we've seen a lot of unity from from Republicans so far.

But I think when things get hard, that unity is going to. going to be challenged. And like, you know, not to sound like a broken record, but Trump remains as influential as ever with these members. I mean, many of them, you can go look online. Many of them who are going to be in a position to vote on this deal have already endorsed him for president in 2024. That's probably because a lot of them like him. And that's definitely because for all of these folks, their voters, their supporters, hang on his words, care about what he says. And if he's breaking through every day saying that they've got a default, you better bet that there are offices, their phones are going to be blown up from constituents saying, well,

Trump's saying these should default. So what's Congressman's own is open to do? Yeah. Well, Sam, we will keep our eyes on your column and how this continues. Folks, the piece is how Trump's call for debt default could bite GOP in the ass up now at the Daily Beast. Sam Brody, thank you so much for making the time for the new abnormal. We appreciate you. Yeah, thanks so much for having me. Andy Levy. Moodie. Andy, how are we starting out this good, good week? Well, since we're all in agreement about Ted Cruz and we covered him in the Maine, I'm going to go with another senator, and it's not for something he's done yet, although he fully would qualify as a fuck that guy for many, many

things that he's done already. But it's for something that he is potentially going to do. And I'm talking about West Virginia's Joe Mansion and the various sort of rumors that are swelling around out there that he may run for president on a no labels ticket in 2024. Oh, I got a label for him. Yeah. I mean, so no labels for people who don't know is this quote unquote bipartisan political group that is talking about pushing forward a unity ticket in 2024. Because, Because as we know, Joe Biden and Donald Trump slash Ron DeSantis are equally bad. One of the people that they are looking very strongly at, as Trump would say, is Senator Joe Manchin. And he hasn't shut it down.

He hasn't said he's going to do it. But I just want to get out in front of this and give him my fuck that guy because we all know that a no labels third party unity ticket does nothing. but hurt Joe Biden. The group itself can claim that that's not their goal, and they may even be honest about that. But if they are being honest about that, then they are extremely stupid. So they're either stupid or liars,

and I'll let them decide which one they want to be. But my fuck-that guy for today is Joe Manchin, and I'll throw out anyone else who agrees to run on this ticket. There are other names that have come up like Hirston Cinema, Larry Hogan, the former governor of Maryland. Any of y'all that do this? You are getting a preemptive fuck that guy right now from me, and that should be enough to make you think twice about this.

A hundred percent. And also, you named three people that no one fucking likes. I just want, like, everyone to know that. Right? Like, so it's not like you're picking the cool kids from the front of the class that everyone is bollying and vying to, like, want to be friends with. Kirsten Cinema, what do we get? Denim vests that say,

Cinema 2024. I don't want that. Right? Like Joe Mansion, do we all get a ride in his Maserati to show us the poorest areas of his state? Come on. We get yacht parties. Yacht parties, Daniel. We get yacht parties. Yeah, you're right. No labels of yacht parties. I love to see it. Love to see it. So who is your fuck that guy for today, Daniel? Well, you know, I always like to start the week off strong. I know. And, you know, the pickings are always really abundant when you're looking at the Republican Party. But, you know, this one kind of takes the cake and maybe signals where we're headed this week. So according to the Hill, South Carolina Democrats are currently demanding an apology from Republican Governor Henry McMaster. Why you ask? Well,

let me tell you. Because he was at the South Carolina GOP convention and said the following, because this is what we do in a democracy. He said, quote, I look forward. I look forward. forward to the day that Democrats are so rare, we have to hunt them with dogs. God. I just want that to sit with everybody for a moment, that a sitting Republican governor in a state, in a country that is founded on democracy, government foreign by the people, where we live inside of currently a two-party system, but we all who listen to this show, know that we actually only have one viable party and then a white supremacist fascist cult.

But to say what they normally would say behind closed doors, but now their hoods are off and their microphones are on, that they don't want folks. They have no desire for America to continue on its experiment as being a government for and by the people. They have no desire for a two-party system. They see Democrats, their political opponents. not as political opponents, but as enemies of the state. People that they're hoping to hunt down. Ron DeSantis is expelling people, creating policy so draconian that people are needing to flee the state

and become refugees of the state of Florida. This is what these Republicans want, and they're telling you. So I don't know why we continue to believe that there is a coming to the table with people that are either literally putting crosshairs, on your faces, creating anime, as they did with AOC, to create entertainment out of your potential death, to make jokes like they did about Gretchen Whitmer, about her kidnappers, who were then charged later on, about, oh, look at her, crying about getting kidnapped, possibly. And now you have McMaster saying, I look forward to the day that Democrats are so rare, we have to hunt them with dogs. This is not a viable political party.

It needs to be labeled as what it is, which is a domestic terrorist organization. And folks need to wake up to that fact. So for that reason, starting off the Week Strong with Henry McMaster and all the Republicans who think like this and who have done said things that represent this ideal, fuck you and fuck that guy. Yeah, the only thing I have to add to this is if Master is part of your name, Don't talk about hunting people with dogs. Oh, damn.

I mean, come on, man. Hope you enjoy checking out this episode of The New Abnormal. We're back every Tuesday, Friday, and Sunday. If you enjoyed it, please share it with a friend and keep the conversation going. This podcast is a Daily Beast production with production by Jesse Cannon and Seamus Calder. Want more great listens? Check out our comedy podcast, The Last Laugh, and our star-studded The Daily Beast podcast at thedailybeast.com slash podcasts. If you enjoyed this episode, consider becoming a Daily Beast subscriber.

Subscribing is the best way to feed the beast and support all of your podcasts as we cover what might become the darkest timeline. Head to the DailyBeast.com slash membership slash podcast and sign up today.