The Daily Beast Podcast - I Know Trump’s Secret Plan to Scare Voters

Episode Date: March 30, 2026

Daily Beast Political Reporter Sarah Ewall-Wice speaks with Alex Bores, a tech insider turned rising star of the Democratic Party, for a deeply pointed conversation on the collision between Big Tech, Trump’s inner circle, and the future of American democracy. Bores, a former tech insider turned candidate for New York's 12th congressional disctrict, sounds the alarm on what he sees as a billionaire-driven AI agenda shaping policy inside Trump’s White House—while also detailing his break with Palantir over its work with ICE. He then zeroes in on what he calls the most urgent threat: the expanding role of ICE under Trump, including warnings of agents being used to intimidate voters at polling places and a parallel push to undermine mail-in voting ahead of the midterms. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

It is a coordinated plan to rig the elections because they can see the same polls weekend. They know that what they're doing is deeply, deeply, deeply unpopular. And the millions or billions that they're going to raise from the corrupt people around them are not going to be enough to save them. And so their only chance is to rig the elections. And we at the state level, but Democrats and Congress need to step up and do everything we can to call this out, point it out, and make sure there are the resources to run free and fair elections, there is no chance that this administration wins if there's actually a real vote.

I'm Sarah Ewal Weiss with the Daily Beast podcast in for host, Joanna Coles. Today on the podcast, we have Alex Boers, a New York State Assemblyman who is currently running for Congress's New York's 12th District. We'll talk about his concerns about AI and the tech oligarchies hold on the Trump White House. We'll get his thoughts on President Donald Trump in which members of his cabinet that he thinks Democrats should move to impeach. We'll also talk about his friendly rivalry with New York's mayor, Zoran Mamdani. But before we get into it, please take a moment and share this podcast with your friends. Invite them to subscribe to the Daily Beast YouTube channel.

We have now reached our 500,000th follower, but we're gunning for a million. And with your help, I think we can get there. So here's my conversation with Alex Boers. Alex, thank you so much for joining me. It's a pleasure to have you on. I know that President Donald Trump in the White House this week, they announced their advisory council on technology and science. It's got a lot of big names on it, like the head of Navidia, the Michael Dell for one.

We've got Larry Ellison of Oracle, Mark Zuckerberg. You talk about being like big AI's number one target, but when it comes to the tech world, when you look at this list of folks who are advising Donald Trump at this given moment in time, who do you find the most disturbing or scary at this stage? This is, it's worse than putting the fox in charge of the henhouse. This is putting arsonists in charge of the fire department. I mean, we can ask industry for advice they should be part of it, but to have a council that is effectively just tech billionaires is a really worrying sign.

and one that shows who is whose thoughts are going to be really leading this and and whose opinions are going to matter. There should be a broad spectrum of people on there. I think the most worrisome are the people who are not just giving technical advice, but also trying to shift elections. So Mark Andreessen is part of this council. He is also the founder of leading the future, the $125 million dollar super PAC that has named me public enemy number one, but is also being used to try to intimidate Congress members throughout the country from touching AI at all. He's a radical, radical activist at this point. It's unclear why he should be even being listened to in terms of policy. When it comes to big AI, you talk about being public enemy number one. I mean,

what are your biggest concerns with this rapidly expanding industry right now? First of all, I am I am with the public, I am oligarchy enemy number one. And I think that's important to point out. These are people who are not listening to the public. They know their views are not popular and they are trying to drown out the public with $125 million. This technology is moving so quickly. And it could bring a lot of really wonderful advances. I use it quite frequently. I'm very excited for what it could do in medical research. But right now, the decisions about it are being made effectively by five billionaires. And the American people want a say in how it develops. I'm really worried about what it means for the labor force. I'm worried for what it means for our children on both how they're

learning. Are we updating our education system, our pedagogy to still teach critical thinking, but also some of the tragic incidents that we've had with chatbots as companies have rolled out this technology and these products without thinking about what the potential impacts could be. I'm worried about how the impact that AI will have on our democracy, not just from the spending hundreds of millions of dollars, but from the role that deep fakes are playing in making it harder to have real conversations. And I'm worried about some of the truly catastrophic risks that could come from really advanced AI development. Most Americans aren't strictly, you know, anti-AI, tear it down, or pro-AI let it rip. they want there to be reasonable guardrails. That's what I'm fighting for. When you talk about Trump being in bed with the tech oligarchy, what are your biggest concerns on what they can do or how

they can deal with him? The tech oligarchy are primarily concerned with their own profits. They're not concerned with protecting the American people. And sometimes those incentives will align and lead to innovation, but other times it'll lead to surveillance of the American people. We still don't have a national data privacy law, and I wonder if they're advocating for that. These are also all of the same people that were pushing against the export controls on AI chips. They were the ones who were the loudest cheerleaders for sending advanced technology to China. And so I don't think they fundamentally have Americans' interests at heart. I think they have their own profitability at heart. Doesn't mean they don't have a seat at the table, but they certainly shouldn't have all of

the seats at the table. And there certainly should be people who we know are standing up for Americans who are really pushing forward and being the main drafters of this policy. I want to follow up on that. Do you think President Trump or folks in his administration have the knowledge or experience to push back or contradict these folks that they have in the room when it comes to the industry leaders? No. I think many of the people in the Trump administration don't know the difference between a server and a waiter.

I think these are not experts in technology and are not coming with their own vision of how it could serve people. They're coming with a vision of how it can serve their donors. And as long as you write a big enough check to the campaign, to the inauguration, to the White House ballroom, you then get to write a piece of Trump's AI policy.

I mean, let's be clear. His AI policy is the most distinct from his policy everywhere else. Everywhere else, he's about tariffs and reshoring things in America and restricting trade. And then with AI, he wants to send the most advanced chips to China. This is a policy where they are not being consistent. They are not coming with an ideology. It is about what is best for them and their donors.

I'm curious if you followed the whole breakup between the Pentagon and Anthropic. Basically, this was really about guardrails, essentially, according to the company, specifically with mass surveillance as well as fully autonomous weaponry. And I wanted to find out from you, like, were you surprised that the company actually stood up to the administration or that a massive tech company did stand up to the administration in this type of case? it's certainly not the norm. So it was encouraging to see a company really stand on their grounds. But I think what is sometimes lost in that noise is that companies are not just talking to the administration. They're talking to their employees and they're talking to their other customers. And you want to recruit the best and the brightest to work for you as a company. Engineers want to know that what they're working on is going to be used for good. And so to have a company, if the U.S.

government wants access to that technology, they want the best and brightest developments, then having real conversations with companies about what it will be used for is an important part of that process. Because otherwise, you know, talent can walk across the door or across the street and go work with someone else. If you really want the U.S. government to have the best capabilities, it's important that sometimes you say, yes, we're only going to use it under these circumstances with this democratic control that's important in any administration. It's especially important when we have the most lawless administration we've ever seen. I do want to talk a little bit about your backgrounds in a moment because you do come from this industry.

But before I do, I just want to get your broad take top three maybe on the things that you think are most important to regulate when it comes to AI. How should it be regulated? You know, I put out a plan about a month and a half ago that had eight points. And now you're making me choose my top three on that. But I do think it's... Take it up, okay. I know, I know. I'm trying to choose between my children here.

I think the impact on kids is really first and foremost. I think the impact on the labor force is really important. And then, you know, the... I'm going to give you four. I'm sorry, I can't choose three. But I'm going to say kids, the labor force, the environmental impacts, and the the truly catastrophic risks. The way we're talking about this is an arms race and what could go wrong if we're not putting guardrails on the most extreme uses. All of those really, really

worrying me. I do have a question. You're in your 30s. We're talking about a Congress that's much older than you as the median age. I'm actually going to quote Ted Cruz, maybe not a close ally politically to you, but he did say, quote, to be honest, Congress doesn't know what the hell it's doing in this area. This is an institution. I think the median age of the Senate is 142. This is not the tech savvy group. And I want to get your take on, do you have faith in the elder members of Congress properly regulating AI and technology at this stage as it moves so rapidly? I think I am running for many reasons, but, but one is that we need people that actually do understand this technology in Congress. I am running

to bring that expertise. I have a master's degree in computer science. I have two patents. I worked in the industry for nearly a decade. So I understand both how AI works on a technical level and the incentives that the companies have. Now, not everyone in Congress can be an expert on everything. In fact, it's impossible given all of the things that Congress needs to deal with. But the fact that there is currently only one Democrat in Congress with a degree in computer science. I think only two Republicans with a degree in computer science. I don't know that we have the both broad expertise that is needed there and perhaps more importantly, the willingness to really stand up to these guys, to be able to say, no, you're wrong. You can't just, just because

you're coming from one of the big technology companies doesn't make you an expert, especially when it's the lobbyists who are coming who don't actually have a background in the technology and to be able to call them out on some of the things they say that are not true and be able to advance the conversation forward. We need people willing to do that. And this race is kind of become a test of that because leading the future has said they're going to spend $10 million against me and have publicly said that they want to make an example out of me. Who are they making an example for every other member of Congress to say, you know, if you actually stand up, to us, we are going to come after your job.

I think it's really important to show every member of Congress that you can still win while standing up for people and standing against some of the most extreme people in AI. I know one of the things that has been used against you is your background at Palantir. And I just wanted to ask you, like, what were you doing at that company? What can you share about your time there?

Yeah, the irony is that the people who are funding the SuperPack love Palantir, one of the co-founders of the Super PAC is a co-founder of Palantir itself. So they are just thrown spaghetti at the wall. I joined Palantir during the Obama administration because I thought that tech can and should be a force for good. I worked with the Department of Justice to fight the opioid epidemic and to go after the big banks for their role in the Great Recession. While I was there, we recovered $20 billion for taxpayers from the banks that committed

fraud in order to make more profit. I worked with Veterans Affairs to better staff their hospitals and give veterans the care they deserve and need. I worked with the CDC to track epidemics. And then separate from me, there was a project that Palantir spun up with a section within ICE called HSI, Homeland Security Investigations, that during the Obama administration, the work was about anti-human trafficking, anti-drug trafficking, things that I think everyone would support. And then Trump comes in, takes office in 2017, tries to change the nature of the work everywhere, including at the Department of Justice, where I was leading the work and tried to get us to work on immigration. And I said no. And the structure of our contract was set up where I could do that.

It was three mutually agreed upon case types. Executives of Palantir made a different choice when it came to the work at ICE. They didn't put in the guardrails that would stop us from working on some of the, I mean, awful things then, but compared to what we're seeing now, oh my gosh. But even then, they didn't put it in the guard rails. And when they made that clear to employees that they weren't going to do it, I quit. Are you still in touch with folks over there by any chance? Yeah. Yeah. Fewer and fewer by the day. But yes. Ever run across Peter Thiel in your time there? I think I passed him in the hall once. I don't think we've ever actually had a conversation.

Yeah. Okay. I want to go back to something, a more serious note that you did make at one point, you talk about ICE and its use of AI. And I want to find out from you what you find most concerning about what potentially is happening. How do you think ICE is using AI at this time under the second Trump administration? Well, it's using AI to try to figure out where people are and is making a lot of assumptions on that. In general, you would be worried about understanding and having explainability on how any of those algorithms are working. With this administration that is just setting broad quotas on the number of people to pull off the street and isn't actually concerned with if they're talking about violent criminals or

peaceful neighbors, those mistakes probably aren't even seen as as mistakes. They're just being viewed as more places to send agents. So the use of AI by ICE is concerning. Even more concerning is just ICE's goals right now is just to send these violent thugs into our streets to try to round up our peaceful neighbors. The rot of this agency has gone so, so deep. And we not just need to abolish ICE. We need to completely dismantle this agency. And we need to prosecute agents and those giving them the orders that are violating the law.

In terms of how Congress has been handling this fight over ICE, as is a, recording, we could have the vote, the House passing legislation to fund DHS without ICE enforcement. What is your take on how Democrats have been navigating this fight over ICE funding so far? The Trump position is so nonsensical and self-defeating, and the Democrats are right to point that out. Ice is now, like, would be one of the largest militaries in the world in terms the amount of funding that has gone into it. And the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress are holding out and shutting down the government in response to requiring even more funding for ICE. I mean, that is a horrific demand. And then as we are, they're not paying TSA workers who are

many of them are obviously walking off the job, taking other jobs. Workers deserve to be paid. And so they try to supplement that by sending ICE agents to airports. I thought, I needed more funding according to the Trump administration, but now they can take on extra jobs. I mean, we should not be giving this agency any more funding. We should have the Trump administration completely owning this, the horror that they are pushing forward. And I think Democrats should be holding the line on that. This is a pit that Trump has dug himself into. And we should continue to point to it and continue to insist that this agency be abolished. You are in state politics in New York. Obviously, the president you mentioned sent ice into airports, including ones in New York City. There's been talk among MAGIFOX, Steve Bannon in particular, about using ICE during the midterms. As a state lawmaker currently, like what is the conversation like in New York amongst you and other state lawmakers about the concerns for the upcoming midterms when it's?

comes to the Trump administration. Oh, we're looking at everything that the Trump administration is saying and realizing that these are all related, right? So sending ICE to the polling places to intimidate people, which is all they would be doing, right? Polling places, you have to be a citizen to vote. There's no reason for even in ice, in any world where ICE should be there. It is just to intimidate voters.

We want to make that clear. We also want to make sure that the polling places are safe and done with state resources. do all we can to be preventing ice from coming there. But when I say we're looking at everything, notice that what another action they're taking is trying to crack down on mail-in voting. So they're saying, we're going to intimidate you at the polling place. And if your response is, well, I'm going to get a mail-in ballot, so I'm not interacting with agents. No, we're going to crack down on that too. It is a coordinated plan to rig the elections because they can see the same polls we can. They know that what they're doing is deeply, deeply, deeply unpopular.

And the millions or billions that they're going to raise from the corrupt people around them are not going to be enough to save them. And so their only chance is to rig the elections. And we at the state level, but Democrats and Congress need to step up and do everything we can to call this out, point it out, and make sure there are the resources to run free and fair elections because there is no chance that this administration wins if there's actually a real vote. You mentioned a vote by mail. Just curious your thoughts when you saw that Donald Trump voted by mail this week in Florida. Trump is a hypocrite, newsflash. He's a hypocrite on almost everything he's ever done. Of course, when it's convenient to him, when it helps him, then it's a good thing that expands democracy.

But if it helps a normal American, well, then he's going to spit on it. So, of course, there's no problem with in his mind giving himself special treatment and and kicking down American people. It's, you know, example number 285 of him doing it just this year. My favorite part is when he was asked about it. His excuse was I'm president of the United States. And that's the reason he could do that while calling it cheating for everybody else. I want to move on, though, and just talk about the midterms big picture.

I don't know if you're a guy who makes predictions or places bets. but I just wanted to find out what are your thoughts on how are you feeling right now about the Democratic Party and its chances in the midterms come November? I don't place bets, especially on political outcomes. And there should be a broader conversation about the legality of placing bets on political outcomes and ones that people control. But to give a fun, no bet prediction, I think we're in a really strong place. as I am talking to obviously voters here in New York have their own thoughts but even talking broadly throughout the country people are seeing with their own two eyes what the reality of this administration means and they're asking why Republicans in Congress have been going along with in the big one big beautiful bill the largest wealth transfer from the poor to the rich that the country has ever done

in the ice raids why they are supporting sending armed thugs into our communities to round up citizens and non-citizens alike and terrorize people just for going about their day. They're wondering why the president who ran on no foreign wars managed to bomb seven countries in a year without getting authorization for any of them. They're realizing that Trump is mostly focusing on his own enrichment and his own corruption and is doing absolutely nothing to make your life or my life better. And they're asking these questions and saying, at what point will your actions match your words?

You know, they're too busy watching what Republicans are doing to listen to what they're saying. And so in November, I expect strong victories throughout the country. The House, I think, will certainly take back the majority, even with Trump trying to rig it through redistricting. The Senate is a tougher climb. because of the nature of the map, but I think well within our possibilities. And when we take back either one or both houses of Congress, it will be on Democrats to be

standing up to the Trump administration, to be investigating subpoenaing everyone who is doing any of the illegal activity there and really standing up for the American people. I think Democrats on Capitol Hill have a long list and maybe a big stack of subpoenas ready to go should they win in November. am curious, are you on board with on board with the effort to impeach Donald Trump? From a substance of it, 100%. I haven't thought much about the politics of it, but like he has clearly committed impeachable offenses, multiple impeachable offenses. We've impeached him twice, and sometimes that seems like it politically strengthens him. So that's a conversation to have

afterwards. If the question is, does this president deserve to be in office? Has he absolutely not? Has he committed impeachable offenses or what I think broadly are probably crimes? Absolutely, yes. What's the best way to hold him accountable? And what's the best way to protect the American people and make sure we're delivering for that? I'd want to have more conversations. But certainly, certainly he is not fit for office. Any particular offenses you mentioned top of mind at this stage? I mean, the raw corruption is the most obvious. The setting up the fund for foreign governments to buy his crypto coin and 25% of it goes straight into his back pocket and then hosting dinners near government offices based on how much you gave is just like absolute quid pro quo in the most obvious way. We've already talked about what he's done with ICE. And, you know, when, When Renee Good was shot, I gave a speech that night and I said, you know, the agent didn't pull that trigger by himself. Christy Noem's hand was on the gun and Donald Trump's hand was on the gun.

When you tell agents to go into a community to hit a quota, you give them camo and masks and tell them that they are immune from any prosecution and send them into our. cities, you know what could happen. You are setting up the Tinder and lighting the match. And so, yes, I think he bears some responsibility for all of those deaths. So this week, we got a new DHS secretary, Mark Wayne Mullen, former senator from Oklahoma. There were efforts in the House before he was sworn in to impeach his former secretary, Christy Noem. I'm curious, when you look at the Trump cabinet. There's been efforts also, or calls for, I should say, to impeach Robert Kennedy Jr. at HHS. Is there any one specifically in this cabinet who you find to be the most problematic and you would push as a member of Congress to impeach? Oh, my gosh. I mean, I called for

Christy Noem to be impeached. I would, RFK is certainly not fit for it. Pam Bondi seems to be doing just obvious collusion. there is a lot of really, I mean, Pete Hegseth, like, it's just there's so many who are, would never fit for the job. But I think the broader question is, and the broader thing that Democrats need to think about is to realize that Trump can't do this by himself. Like, he does not care about the subpoenas. He has spent long enough finding ways to avoid the judicial system, and he's old enough

now that it's not going to catch up to him. But everyone else around him does. People around Donald Trump have a habit of going to jail. And so it is important that Democrats realize that he cannot do this corruption by himself and be really forceful in holding everyone to account. That's how you start to change the incentives. When the people around Donald Trump know the end of the administration is coming and are getting the subpoenas, are getting the questions, they're going to think.

they're going to think twice about continuing on with his corrupt plans. That's how you start to change the way this administration is functioning and kneecap their ability to hurt the American people. So is Donald Trump just immune at this point? It's everyone around him. Well, I don't think you give up, but I just think he has learned the lessons that it's not going to catch up to him. I'd love to prove him wrong. But I think even just by taking the actions around the people around him, you will see a change of behavior. much more quickly than you will if the only person you're going after is Donald Trump. Fair enough. I want to talk to you about your specific race. It's kind of the Wild West feeling right now. It's a very blue district. It's a very crowded race. And I just wanted to find out what you think is your

path to victory in this large group of folks who are all running to represent that district in Manhattan. I think I've become the overwhelming frontrunner in this race. I started as, you know, I represent about 20% of the district already in the state assembly. And in my coming on three and a half years in that time have passed 29 bills, which is about the same amount that Congress as a whole passed in 2020. And because of that, I was ranked by the Center for Effective Lawmaking as the most effective new legislator from New York City, which is something I'm really proud of. Now, all of us have seen politics enough to know that just doing your job and passing the bills and working for people isn't always enough to win the next election. But this super PAC from leading the future that's come in has shown that of all the candidates, there's, I think, eight of us still running, all of us promising to fight Donald Trump, there's only one candidate that Donald Trump's mega donors are spending millions of dollars against. And so Mark Andresen, who we just discussed, and Ben Horowitz and Greg Brockman, the president of Open AI, who in the second half of 2025 was Donald Trump's single largest mega donor.

They have committed $10 million to stopping my run for Congress. And this is a very educated district. It's a very informed district to include in district. And they realize that's not normal. And when they search and they say, oh, wait, everyone's promising to be Donald Trump's fighter or fighting against Donald Trump, but his mega donors have chosen the person that actually scares them and they've chosen to go this hard against Alex Boris. Probably that's the guy that we should be sending there to fight on our behalf. You represent the district. You're obviously they're engaged with people in your community.

But is it weird to be running against these big names that have been names that Democrats have kind of flocked towards, especially more recently. I mean, we've got the grandson of JFK and then we have a prominent anti-Trumper, though formerly a Republican and George Conway. I mean, is it a strange experience to be in your hometown, in your district, and running against folks like this? Yeah. Yeah. I'm born and raised here. I'm running to represent like my elementary school and middle school and high school and where I've spent nearly my entire life. And there are some people that treat New York 12 as sort of the world's congressional district or the country's congressional district. And there's a lot of local issues around our infrastructure funding, around the subway,

around our housing, around our health care that I'm really excited to engage with people on. But I will say that there's two campaigns in this race that have raised millions with S, plural, of dollars. And those two campaigns are mine and the Trump mega donors who are coming after me. As a through and through New Yorker, I actually recently learned that you have a relationship or had a good relationship with the mayor of New York City. Zoranamandani, I wanted to find out, I hear you played basketball up in Albany together. So I wanted to find out, what is your relationship with the mayor like now that he's no longer obviously headed up to Albany all the time?

Yeah, and he's a little busier in his new job. But we had, we've had a really good relationship. I've worked with him for three years plus in the assembly. He was always very personal, very engaging. There were issues that we agreed upon that we worked really closely on. There were issues we disagreed upon and we did that respectfully, if just as passionately. But he always came across as someone who was really focused on doing what he thought was right and whether or not I always agreed with that vision, I could tell that he was, he was being genuine in it.

You know, politics can be a weird arena. And Tuesday nights up in Albany, we would have a basketball game. Legislators could play. Staff could play. Advocates could play. But the rule was no talking about work. We were just there to play basketball, blow off steam, et cetera. And I played, he played, neither of us were the best on the court, but it was always fun.

And on his election night, I was talking to a reporter about the race, about him, et cetera, and gave a bunch of real conversation about the issues. And then at the end, they said anything else. And I said, well, what he lacks in his jump shot technique, he more than makes up for in defensive hustle. and that ended up being the only quote that they used. And he, like, texted me a few days later. He's like, you're calling out my jump shot now. And I'm like, that was a whole interview, you know. And so then last week when he stepped up to the three with someone from the Knicks and

drained the three-pointer on his first shot, you know, I saw him later. I was like, okay, clearly the jump shot technique's improved. All right. Well, then honest answer only, a one-on-one game, who wins? You or the mayor? Oh, I destroy him. Yeah, I destroy him. Team, he's an asset, you know, a good defense, hustles. But yeah, no, he's got no shot one-on-one. All right. Well, we'll find out about that one. I'll be there if it ever happens. You let me know. With that said, though, I do want to get on a more serious note. He has had an interesting relationship with President Donald Trump since he took office. And I wanted to get your thoughts on how you've seen the mayor of New York, someone.

who you have a relationship with navigating, dealing with President Donald Trump, also a native New Yorker? I'm very confident that Zoran would beat Donald Trump one-on-one in basketball, even given Trump's side advantage there. But, no, I mean, it shows the focus on doing what you have to protect New Yorkers, right? And so when there are times to stand up against opposition, I mean, Zarin called Trump a fascist to his face. When there are times when you can use flattery to get new housing built, great.

Like, it is a real pragmatism. And I think that is an important thing in politics of figuring out, ultimately it should be about helping our neighbors. Ultimately, it should be about making their lives better. And I think Zaron so far has done a great job of navigating with Trump the times when flattery will help get results for New Yorkers and the times when we need to stand up and push back. You are running for Congress in New York. The current minority leader in the House is a New York Congressman. The current minority leader in the Senate is a New York Senator. Would you support

or do you support their leadership if you were elected to Congress come November? Well, there's no circumstance where I am in the Senate while Chuck Schumer is there, given that he's from New York. So really the question is about the House. And yes, I plan to vote for Hakeem Jeffries as leader. I think we've had more discharge petitions successful, like the minority actually forcing a vote in the past three, four months than we had in the 30 years before then. That doesn't mean there aren't things that I wish could be improved. And if someone else were to run, I'll have the conversation with them. But no, I think our focus right now should be, less on these internal fights and more on the big flashing warning signs we are getting from

Donald Trump. That needs to be our focus right now. What would you want to see more of, I mean, between now and November even, from the Democratic Party as it is currently in Washington? Yeah, there's the abbreviation about Trump like Taco, Trump always chickens out. we've had a few standoffs recently where it felt like Democrats were the ones that backed down. And I think we've in many cases chosen really good issues to stand up on, protecting health care, protecting our immigrant neighbors, fighting against the one big beautiful bill and fighting for those who need some helping hands for economic assistance. but we've sort of taken a stance and then found an off ramp to it. And the American people are tired of that. They want actual results.

And so I think, you know, making sure that it is Trump that always chickens out and not the Democrats would be a nice change for the next few months. We talked a little bit about how Mamdani has navigated dealing with President Trump, but I actually am curious about your thoughts on how some other prominent names in the Democratic Party have dealt with Trump, one being Governor Gavin Newsom, obviously across the country from you in California, but he's taking a very different approach, a very combative approach and really been breaking through some of the noise with some of his engagement, specifically on social media. And I was curious about what your thoughts were on that approach to dealing with

the president and the administration. I think we should be trying everything. I think Democrats too often say, oh, this is the one right way to do it and then everyone tries to fit into that mold, you know, for some people, it'll be having really serious policy takedowns. For some people, it'll be what you can do with the hearings. For some people, it would be funny tweets. Like, great. The more the merrier. I think that if it gets under Donald Trump's skin to be tweeting in a certain way, but more to the point if it helps Americans see the hypocrisy and the uns seriousness of our, of our president in terms of really trying to help people, then that's a great thing. I don't, I think Democrats, we do a little too much of, like, policing our own message before

we just reach out and talk to voters and see what works and realize that voters are different people. Voters are human and different things will work for different people. So, you know, good on, Gavin, for trying that messaging. And it's certainly given me a chuckle or two. Fair. On the flip side, I am curious if you are elected to Congress. I mean, where do you see yourself or Democrats potentially having a place where you can work with President Donald Trump? I was all geared up for you to say with congressional Republicans and I have a bunch of places. But with Donald Trump. They follow Trump. So, I mean, you could say congressional Republicans. Yeah, although we have seen some bipartisan movement around housing. We've seen some bipartisan movement around tech policy and AI policy. where actually I am excited about what the potentials are to work across the aisle. Trump seems bought and sold for by AI industries,

but actually some of the congressional Republicans have been willing to stand up against him on that regard. For working with Trump, I mean, for me, the big one for this district is infrastructure. Trump envisions himself as a builder. New York 12 is a major infrastructure hub, a major. or transportation hub for the whole eastern seaboard. And we need to complete the gateway project and bring those good jobs to the district and also just make it easier to travel by train. We need to extend the 2nd Avenue subway both up and down the east side along 2nd Avenue. We need to have Penn Station redevelopment, port authority redevelopment and working together

to actually build and develop infrastructure and make the built environment better for people. That is one that will continue to work. It's actually funny you mentioned the Second Avenue subway because the president was asked about that during an event recently at the White House. And it was such a very specific targeted question by a reporter, I presume, was from New York. He was so surprised he was like the Second Avenue subway. He's like, they're still building that. What? And it was actually just a comical moment where also you remember he is from New York through and through originally.

I want to talk about New York just more generally because you're running in a district, in an iconic city. I mean, we have a national audience. What do you think is maybe the misconceptions about New York and Manhattan that you'd like to share with the people watching as you're out on the ground in this district right now? Oh, my gosh, misperceptions about New York. I think people throughout the country should realize that we may not always be nice, but we are kind. We are in a rush to get places. We are trying to do a lot of things. We might speak brusquely,

but we actually really look out for each other. And I think you'll find, you ask a New Yorker for directions, you'll actually get real directions. We want people coming and visiting the city and seeing, you know, share. I love nothing more than being able to share my love of the city with people that come and visit.

I will yell at you if you walk five across on the sidewalk. But, but please come. please experience it. We are so proud of of this city and that it really is the world city. So come visit. We're in a rush. We don't mean to be, you know, to brusk, but we do really care. It's interesting. You mentioned that. So I'm also a native New Yorker, and I will say I always tell people when they go to New York, I was like, no one's going to stop for you and like say anything to you when you're getting out of the subway. But if they see you struggling without communicating, they will help you get up out of the subway and then just keep going like they're like on a mission

but they will like do the work and bring people along which I always thought was a funny like anecdote that explains it so well they're they're in a rush but they're kind human beings and they might they might curse you out under their breath as they do it but they are going to help you get that they're going to help you lift up that stroller they're going to help you lift the box or the couch if you're trying to move a couch through the subway it's it is kind of comical that I think people actually see that when they visit New York. Curious, I feel like you're going to have trouble answering this one as you're out and about. I mean, East Side versus West Side, they put the district together. How challenging is it for you to be campaigning on what used to be two separate

districts on the west side of Central Park? You're obviously East Side of Central Park. But what has been your experience there? What can you say about East Side versus West Side and campaigning on the ground? I think they're both sides have a deep, and throughout the entire district, I'd say, goes down to like, you know, 12th Street, you know, and so it's not just Upper East and Upper West. The entire district has real pride of place. And it is so densely packed that it's actually the smallest geographic district in the country, but it feels so large because all of these small little micro neighborhoods have their local bodega or their local institution or their local park. And so recognizing that they feel very distinct and sometimes the issues are quite distinct,

but what binds them all together is this deep pride of place has been really fun. And getting to, you know, I've been all over Manhattan, obviously growing up here, being born and raised here, but also even in elected office, I've spent a lot of time throughout the district because I work with colleagues on issues throughout. I mean, one of my big initiatives in the state legislature was an amendment to the New York State Constitution that would allow lots of regions, but especially Manhattan, to be able to get more judges. And so I've been in all parts of Manhattan talking about that issue. So it's fun. It's, you know, the same way we all have pride in New York City, the people in Chelsea have pride of Chelsea. and of, you know, the Upper West Side and of Yorkville and of Turtle Bay.

And, you know, it has been, it's been great to experience all these micro neighborhoods. I'm going to put you on the spot with my last question. But for those visiting your district that you want to represent, recommendations on where they got to stop for food. Oh, man. Yeah. So I will say that, Everywhere you go is going to be great, and I mean that. New York is a culinary city.

You should find, like my description of New York, let alone my district, is you can get whatever you want, wherever you are at any time of day. And you should take advantage of that and really enjoy. I'm going to defer on any specific recommendations. I told you I was putting on the spot with this last one. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, but I will, I will stand by the food you're going to have here is excellent. And please come try it all. All right.

Alex Bors is a pleasure speaking with you. Good luck on your race. And thank you. Thank you. It was a pleasure speaking with you as well. Thanks for having me. And that is our podcast today. I think one thing I will say is Mr. Mayor, Mr. Zoran Mandani.

If you're going to have a one-on-one basketball game, I would very much love to be there. I think the challenge is set and we're all ready to go for that one. But with that, I want to remind our viewers to subscribe to our YouTube channel, share this podcast with your friends, and we love to hear from you. So please feel free to chime in online, follow us on social media, be it Twitter, TikTok, Blue Sky, Instagram. We love to get your thoughts and we will try to incorporate them into future conversations. With that, I'm Sarah Ewal Weiss, with that. The Daily Beast. So the good news is we have so many Bee Beast tier members now.

There are too many names to read out and we really appreciate your support. Thanks to our production team, Devin Rodgerino, Ryan Murray, Rachel Passer, Heather Pissaro, Neil Rosenhaus.