Chapters
Shownotes Transcript
Hey, pull up a chair. It's Hacks on Tap with David Axelrod, Robert Gibbs, and Mike Murphy. You ask me a question, a simple question, I'd like to give it, but I can't talk about it. Because this judge has given me a gag order and said you'll go to jail if you violate it. And frankly, you know what? Our Constitution is much more important than jail. It's not even close.
So, Mike Murphy, there he is fighting for the Constitution as usual. Yeah, it is a gag order. I'm gagging when I listen to him. It gives me a headache. Only witch trial I've ever seen where at the end he grabs a broom and flies away. So, you know, we're talking about the politics of it, and we have exactly the right guests for that, but I don't think it's good for him. He looks like a crazy old man. I don't know. Doug Sosnick, first of all, you are a...
a longtime brilliant hack dating back all the way to the Clinton years and before, and the author of a much-read periodic readout on where the campaign is. I want to get to that in a second. But first of all, welcome. And secondly, you know, I don't know. My sense is looking at the polling,
that this trial hasn't really made much of a dent. And I'm wondering what your observations are on all of this. Well, I mean, look, obviously the impact of the trial, the outcome of it,
We'll go a long way in determining how impactful it is, whether he's convicted or not. But putting that aside for a minute, I mean, I think, you know, Trump has never really understood or used nuance. And I think he's misread. Okay. Understatement of the century. Anyway, I think his approach is
I think he's misread this, and I think it can have an impact on the margins. And while all the trials and how he positioned himself did help him in the primaries, I think on the margins, it'll hurt him in the general election. And I think right now he's got the worst of both worlds in which what he's doing publicly, I think, is undermining his case in the courtroom on the legal side.
But also, I think that, again, this is on the margins. I think that people who don't like Trump and don't want to vote for Trump
A lot of them are so-called double haters who dislike both Biden and Trump. But there's also that 25 percent, roughly, of Republicans who don't like Trump. I think his behavior in the trial reinforces why they don't like him. And I think on the margins, it could harden those silos a little bit on doubt. And ultimately, they're
For a lot of them holding their nose and voting for Biden because they find him less objectionable than Trump. I'm in the same place. I think just as there are kind of two messages out of this. The very linear interpretation at the end. Well, is he guilty or not? And what impact will that have? And I think that we're so polarized, that's kind of muted. But.
You know, if he were to be acquitted, I think it would give him a real boost. And, you know, that would be a problem. But those odds are low. I think his best outcome could be a hung jury. But, well, which he will spin into vindication. Of course. Of course. You know, I was cleared.
But just seeing this every day, it's diminishing him. And you may not see that immediately in the polling. And I'm with Doug. The 25-ish, 20% of Republicans who can't abide him, this is fuel for that, too. So he's in the spotlight. He's not looking good. Every day like that is a better day for Biden than for him. Is that enough to save Biden? We're going to talk about it because I think the fundamental problems of the president's reelect are quite steep. So, Doug—
Run through your latest report. You do it in sections, and you start with the sort of atmospherics, and you started with the economic atmospherics, and the economy as people see it through the prism of their own experiences, very much at the top of concerns of
voters. Just talk about where you think the race is at. Well, ultimately, I think the race is going to be decided, as we all know, in a handful of states. I think it will be decided on, David, you know better than anybody in America, politics, the importance of dominating a campaign's narrative. And I think that the candidate who is able to
to define what this campaign is about and define who they are and define who their opponent is, I think that's going to determine who wins the election. And Trump's narrative, plain and simple, is strength. And as an anecdote, everything about his narrative is to portray Biden as weak.
And if that's what the campaign's about, then Trump will win. I think the challenge for guys like us who've been around forever, you know, there's a little saying that the best airline pilots aren't the ones who've been flying forever and think they know everything. We're not the ones that just started. They don't know what they don't know. It's the ones that have been flying long enough to know what they're doing but haven't been flying so long that they think they know everything.
So now that you've now that you've impeached us all, go ahead and make your point. OK, so I think we're those airline pilots have been flying so long that we think we know everything. And based on our collective well over 100 years experience in American politics under the world that we grew up in and the politics that we know or knew, I think
Under that framework, Trump's going to win, and it's going to win easily because we're used to a world in which an incumbent's re-election is determined by job approval of the president and the right track, wrong track, and the issues that matter most, and which of the two candidates does the best on those issues. So by the old traditional standards of trying to evaluate where the race stands, this should be a landslide out of 1980, 1992 for Trump.
If, on the other hand, we look at American politics since the realignment in 2016, if you look at the last three election cycles, they've all been about Donald Trump.
It's the case in 2018, 2020, 2022, when the Democrats ran the table. And if we look at the run-up to the 2022 election, everyone was using the old traditional standards and evaluating what's going to happen based on the incumbent's job approval, the direction of the track, where a lot of people underestimated the Democrats' ability to
to overcome that because the election, in fact, turned out to be about Trump. So then the question becomes, as you look at the race, through which prison do you look at? The more traditional metrics going back since post-World War II or the last three election cycles? Yeah, listen, this is not a traditional race. We've never seen a race like this. We've never seen two presidents run against each other, at least since 1892. We've never seen two presidents
candidates who are so deeply underwater running against each other. I mean, we've never seen a candidate who was 82 or would be 82. We've never seen a candidate who was on trial for felonies in the middle of the camp. I mean, there's nothing normal about this campaign. But here's my question. And I've been thinking hard about this. I want to ask both you guys this.
There has been a realignment in the base of the Democratic Party has shifted to, as you pointed out many times, Doug, more educated voters, more upscale voters, voters who are more habitual voters.
Uh, and so they turn out and Democrats as a result have dominated elections for the last several years. Many of them, special elections, the midterm elections would turn out is lower than in a presidential race. The question is whether that will hold in a race in which, uh, the turnout is larger and how much it's, it seems to me, you look at these and analyses of data and, uh,
A high turnout actually favors Trump. A lower turnout favors Biden. And I guess the question is, Murphy, who turns out if it you know, I don't know if the sort of the kind of.
people have expressed about the election means it's going to be a lower turnout, you know, and seniors and highly educated people come out for Biden. It all resonates back to Doug's earlier point, which calculus to use. The traditional calculus is they want to fire Biden.
The problem is then they got to get Trump. And we've had this migration of college-educated white voters away from the Republican Party. On the other hand, some blue-collar workers to the Republican Party. So...
You know, the argument in vogue right now is that the low information, lower turnout voters are going to break for Trump. But I think that also could get swept up a little in those other big factors. Fire Biden or can't abide Trump. Doug's right about the negative referendum on the last couple of elections. So, you know, I don't believe it'll be a low turnout election. Presidential elections always run 25 plus points higher than
And so I think it'll kind of fit normalcy there. And I don't think turnout will be in the indicator. I think it'll be who October is about, who's in the firing line and how the debate defines is Trump's crazy versus Biden's age and where that lands. Crazy versus creaky. I don't agree with that in several ways. First of all,
By middle of October, half the people in this country probably would have already voted. And secondly, I don't think, I don't agree on what Mike just said about turnout. Just to be clear, just going back to the airline violence for a minute, I mean, the fact that Democrats now
outperform Republicans on midterm elections is a new phenomenon. Yeah, it's a reversal. That never happened for 50 years in American politics until recently. So that's part of the realignment. But Doug, don't you get my point, though? That gave Democrats a real advantage in low turnout elections. Absolutely. I'm just saying that's a truism that didn't exist for half a century. Right. Of course, that's a huge shift. And what I've said in the past is that like Trump or hate Trump,
He's done more for civic engagement in this country than any politician in our lifetimes. But what I disagree with Mike is we had a historic turnout in 2020, the highest turnout in 100 years. We had the same in the 2018 midterms.
And the 2022 midterms were as high in competitive areas, but not in its competitive areas. I think turnout's going to be a big issue this election. I don't think you're going to have the same kind of turnout you had in 2020. And so I think turnout is going to be something much more important. It's certainly 2020. Neither party can take it for granted. And in part for the Democrats, they're going to have a challenge on turnout because they're
They may turn out voters. They vote third and fourth in the chance of parting. So if I were running one of these two campaigns right now, I'd be focused on these six states, but I'd be having much more, much more of a focus on turnout in 2024 than I would have had in 2020. So I can make sure I understand your argument, Doug. You're arguing this will be
naturally lower than 2020, kind of so far for presidential. Right. But it won't be as high as we were used to in the last one. So if you can have a turnout advantage, you control the campaign, something I'm normally a skeptic about. You will have an advantage if you can do it because the baseline will be a little lower. We've had three or four election cycles in a row of historically high turnout.
I don't think that's going to be the case in 2020. So this will be sub norm compared to the recent history in your view. That's where we probably disagree. Yeah. And yeah. And you see that in polling. I mean, there's a lot of evidence that, you know, lack that the interest in the election is not what it was. It's interesting because Trump complains that he, that, you know, police are keeping the hordes of supporters away from the courthouse and they're not pouring in there and everything. Uh,
I mean, it may just be that they're not pouring in there because they're just not that interested in pouring in there. And there are lots of signs that and you would think that with two candidates whose favorability, as Doug points out in his presentation, each are at 38 percent, that that that enthusiasm for the election would be would be lost.
low. I think that's... Well, yeah, let me take that assumption because this is interesting. If you believe Doug is right, it'll be subpar. Therefore, if you can materially affect turnout in a presidential election with campaign, it's a big advantage. How does Biden do that? One of the questions is about, you know, we sort of
gloss over this money differential between the campaigns. But I think that that that gives Biden an opportunity to build turnout machines in the states. And he's going to have a head start because Trump has money problems beyond that, Mike. And you know this because you're a Michigander. There are a bunch of Republican state parties that are in rubble
You know, just because of Trump. But they're sort of burned to the ground. And so they're, you know, in Arizona, I think I mentioned this before, they got one-tenth of the people on the ground that they did four years ago. Oh, no, no, there's nothing left. Where I bump on this, but I'm curious for Doug's answer to the original question, just quickly.
wider than the Trump era. And everything's changed. Yeah, I think a lot has changed. But traditionally, the Republican Party has done pretty well. And I know those voters have migrated, those higher educated voters over to the Dems. But I've watched the Democrats in the longer term for 20 years,
try to turn a lot of people out in off-year elections. The internal argument being, well, we do right in the presidential and we lose our younger voters in the off-year, so we're going to pour a lot of money into turnout programs, which until the Trump era have never worked. The dollars equal turnout has been a pretty bad ROI in most places, not every place, every time. So I'm dubious about that formula, dollars equal turnout. But
you know, to the original question, how does Biden do it? Because it is the more casual democratic voters, at least the younger ones who seem to seem to be at least right now, early in the campaign, a stumbling block. What would you tell the Biden guys if they've got to make up the difference and say Georgia is
or even Arizona, where the numbers are a little alarming right now for Biden, let alone the prize of North Carolina. Well, we can talk at some point about the target states, because I think there are patterns between the Rust Belt states and the Sun Belt states and
are the Trump's advantage. But let's be clear. We've had, I believe, a nationalization of our politics. And you see it in terms of, you know, all politics used to be local. Now all politics is national. You look at a Republican primary, Mike, the president, campaigning didn't matter.
And Trump, the dirty little secret is Trump has hardly campaigned at all in the last year and a half. No, that's true. Which is hilarious because he complains that these trials are keeping him from them. And when he got a day off, he went and played golf at Bedminster. Yeah, they're keeping his ego off the trail. So, well, I think they all understand that the candidate that's on the news each day is the candidate who loses.
But if you look at the results from the Republican primary, it didn't matter what the issues were. It didn't matter about campaigning. It mattered by what the composition was of the state. And Trump performed well with non-college voters, and he did less well with swing voters and college-educated. And so there's a nationalization of our politics. He didn't have the traditional campaigning in Iowa or New Hampshire or any of the rest of them. And I think that the nationalization of our camp is in our politics.
So back to your question, and I usually do three things. I can get to the other two that I think are generally historically the press plays up as being important that I think are not important in general elections. One of them is money. I think to answer your question,
Money can be an advantage. He has the money now. Trump doesn't have the money now. And he's not really running a national campaign. He should be spending that money in the six states. And he should be basically running them as if he's running for governor or Senate in those states. And it's all about banking your voters. Yeah. You're saying Trump isn't spending his money that way or Biden isn't spending his money that way? I don't know how. Well, Trump doesn't have the money.
He's banking his money in a bunch of law firms. Look, the fact is Trump has had a few spectacular, beautiful events like that South Carolina small town event. It's the best probably visual event I've seen in decades. But he hasn't campaigned that much.
He doesn't have the kind of energy at his events that he used to have. He doesn't have anybody outside the courthouse. His donor base is down. A lot of them have died. The other ones are burnt out. So he doesn't really have that energy. He's still got a movement going, but it's not the same as it was. So he doesn't have the money, or as you say, they're going to his lawyers. I don't know how Biden is spending his money, but to Mike's question,
And my answer would be I'd be spending it in these handful of states and running it like a statewide race. I think if you look at his television and so on, I think that's what he's doing. I mean, it's pretty obvious that I mean, I think this thing's going to come down to three in the main to three big states, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, which are the traditional states.
you know, which had been the traditional battleground states. I think. Are you writing off Georgia and Arizona? Cause those, I'm not writing them off. Yeah. I'm not writing them off, but I'm telling you that I think that his best shot is those Northern tier. They're the most valuable, the big six. I agree with you. The electoral college favors Republicans. It's plus six better now than it was in 2020. Yeah.
So Trump has multiple paths to 270. I think Biden only has really two. And one is through what David said, which I think is the best path, which is the Midwest. And assuming he wins Nebraska too, then that hits him exactly. Let's just explain that Nebraska, because there's a lot of intrigue about this. Nebraska and Maine are two states that choose their delegates by their troublemakers, congressional district delegates.
There's a big push among Republicans to change that in Nebraska so that that second district, which includes Omaha and leans Biden, is not a rogue in what is otherwise a red state. Now Maine is talking about doing the same thing to try and counteract that. But this is important because given the changes in the Electoral College,
Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, if they don't get that extra delegate, that's determinative here. And you could end up in a tie that goes to
uh the house which would favor trump at this point because the house votes by state delegation so there's a lot of intrigue about this these one these single delegates in those states and uh we'll see what these legislatures do so far the nebraska legislature has resisted so let me just uh just to finish and so i do agree david that the best path for biden
is through those three industrial Midwest states, which with Nebraska gives them exactly two sentences.
I think his only other viable path, in my own view, is basically if you can't win Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, I don't know how he can carry any of these other states. Michigan is much more complicated now. So I think his only other path, if he can't win Michigan, is to win Pennsylvania and Wisconsin and win Nevada and Arizona. And that would get him to 272. And the reason I think he has a better chance in those two states than the other Sunbelt states
because they're likely to have an initiative on the ballot on abortion. But the problem for Biden on these Sunbelt states is the voters that enabled him to win those, carry those states narrowly in 2020, and these are states, Joe, I've been supporting Republicans, Mike, as you know, is that he overperformed with young people and people of color. And these are the very groups of people that have defected in the largest numbers. That's why, ultimately, to David's point,
This path remains in the industrial Midwestern states, and with Michigan, I think, it's much more complicated than anyone anticipated.
No, I agree with you on Michigan. I just had one point on the money. The one thing you can do with the money advantage is start an abortion war in Florida. Trump will prevail in Florida again, but he can make it harder and more expensive for Trump. I don't know, David, how you feel. We at least have these fights in the Clinton campaign about spending money in Florida. You can't fake Florida. You're either going to go in there and spend $100, $150 million or you're not. Oh, I disagree.
We're in different places on that one, just because you have the abortion hammer this time. You got a $100 million free issue. You can add money to it and make a lot of trouble, I think. And I think Trump will react to it. So you think Democrats can lynch Lauren? No, I think Trump can bleed money he doesn't have there, which helps defunds.
I think they can. I think it's two to one against. The question is whether the Trump campaign would would take take the bait on that. I suspect they wouldn't. I would I would not take the bait. All right. We're going to leave for a minute to pay the power bill and then we'll be right back.
This podcast is sponsored by The Washington Post. I don't know about you, but every day I begin my day with a couple of or three or four news sites, and one of them is always The Washington Post. They just won three Pulitzer Prizes yesterday.
deservedly so, but just a damn good paper. They, by paper, I mean news organization. They cover the hell out of the news and in a very thoughtful and probing way as the Pulitzers reflect. And I, I figure you, you're the same. Yeah, I do read the post. I'm a subscriber and
I've learned in the fullness of time to forgive them for what they did to our great president, Richard Milhouse Nixon. But seriously, it's a great paper. It's a must read if you want to know what's going on in the country and the world. Great style section two. The Post is one of the three – well, actually the five that I try to at least –
read part of every day because there's a lot happening in the world. You know, there's breaking news, there's world politics. They're one of the last broadsheets that really covers that. So there are no shortage of reasons if you want to be well-informed in public life, you got to read the post. And especially if you're a hack,
Or a hackaroo. Yes. A hackaroo. If you're fascinated by politics, there's no better place to be. So you want to do that. The reporter's deeper than most, too, you know, which is important because you want the clarity and the facts about what's really happening on Capitol Hill, the economy. There's a great piece in it, by the way, in the Washington Post yesterday on EVs.
which I'm quoted in liberally. So I'm not even, I'm going to give whatever payola we took for this ad to charity because I don't need to get paid to say I love the Washington Post. Anytime you're linked with the word liberal, I feel good about it. You know, you probably do. I signed up for the Post's For You newsletter and they send me my very own personalized roundup of stories every night.
based on my interests and my reading history. And their app is great. It makes it easy for you to stay up to date on the latest news. Yeah, isn't it good? Save stories to your reading list, follow your favorite authors and reporters. So yeah.
And they even have a new gimmick. I've just got to brag about this because I know this is the kind of thing that might appeal to you. The Post now has a really cool feature for audio lovers. And we know that people listening to our podcast like to consume content on audio. Well, guess what? You can actually listen to articles in addition to reading them. I mean, you know, you can literally you're on the subway or on a trip in your car, whatever it might be.
You can, it's kind of like a book on tape with the Daily Art. It's great. It's like having your own personal presidential briefer riding along with you there in the rusty Subaru. And you don't even have to share the seat. Yeah, exactly. You don't have to feed them or anything. The Post, the seven newsletters, a quick commute read sent each weekday morning. It's also available as a podcast. And I know David's a big fan, though he won't admit it, of the Carolyn Hax's advice column. It's there every day. Check it out.
A Washington Post subscription makes it easy to access quality, trustworthy journalism and
It's affordable, too. Go to WashingtonPost.com slash hacks to subscribe for just 50 cents per week for your first year. That's 80% better than their typical offer. So this is truly a steal. Yeah. Yeah. See, it pays to listen to Hacks on Tap. So once again, that's WashingtonPost.com backslash hacks to subscribe for just 50 cents per week. Two bucks a month to be smart. Come on. For your first year.
So here's the thing, Doug, on Arizona and Nevada. I spend a lot of time in Arizona these days. You know, the issue is that the problem that we see nationally, which is the erosion among Hispanic voters, that makes it tougher. And they're going to compete hard in those states. They have to. And yes, I think those choice initiatives are going to
By the way, I heard last week that the Arizona legislature is going to now try and put something on the ballot that would codify a Texas-style approach to immigration so that
They that, you know, empowering local authorities to act on immigration and they're doing that to offset the abortion thing and set up an abortion versus border kind of contest. They are both aimed at bringing out immigrants.
Turn out. So but I, you know, I mean, I don't think it's impossible. I talked to a prominent Republican from Arizona last week who basically on the theory that you laid out, Doug, he said, no, no Trump related Republican has been elected here since 2018.
and he doesn't think it's going to happen now. But that runs counter to where the data is right now, so we'll see. Just to be clear, I'm not enthusiastic as a Democrat about Arizona, Nevada. Yeah, yeah. You're just looking for alternative paths. Well, you're also a North Carolinian, right? Isn't that where you're from? It is. So in North Carolina, other than you guys in 2008, your Democrat hadn't carried that state since the 70s.
So I'm not. And if you look at, you know, Nevada. Because that's the other Hail Mary state that you hear. Yeah, it's the current pipe dream. The only thing they've got going is a bad Republican governor race. And Nevada is now for now, while for the last four elections, there's no different Democrat for president. Four election cycles in a row, the Democratic margins in Nevada have gone down.
And if you look at Arizona and Michigan in particular, at the swing state polls, the economic attitudes about the economy in those states is more negative than the others. But the only other thing I'll mention about Arizona is in the 2022 midterms, 40 percent of the people who voted identified as being political independents. And I think that's I think that's a positive potentially for Biden.
It's also 62% of the state is Maricopa County. And it's essentially one big suburb, you know, around Phoenix. And that has been fertile ground, fertile ground for Democrats. So, you know, I think all of these could be razor close. But the one thing about those states, Mike, is,
Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, going back to the organizational edges, it's helpful to have governors. It's helpful to have strong state parties in marginal races. And, you know, Wisconsin has probably the best Democratic state party operation in the country. You got Whitmer has a good organization in Michigan, Shapiro there. And, you know,
This doesn't win races for you on its own, but basically you're talking about field goal teams here.
And if the message can get you down the field, they can win races. And I don't think Trump's going to have a comparable operation. Well, it's even kind of worse than that because, again, I tend to think organizational politics is overrated. You're aware media guys, of course. Right, right. But it's almost more of the—
the negative. In other words, even a mediocre, overrated organization, which is generally the norm, is a hell of a lot better than nothing at all, because basic voter programs just aren't done. And that's the situation in Michigan. You've got people in aluminum foil Minutemen hats running around. So it's almost, you know, you can argue whether Gretchen's got a great or just normal organization. The fact there's nothing
Nothing other than infighting on the Republican side. That's a drag. Now, again, I keep you know, it's back to Doug's original point, which I liked a lot. What theory of the election do you have? The normal metric, which is really bad for Biden or in the Trump special or the Trump election?
Resistance is a lot. And, you know, it's really we're going to have to watch and see because you can make a really strong argument either way. But in Michigan, I have no doubt that there will be a Biden campaign. There will just be the Trump national campaign permeating Michigan.
There won't be an on the ground thing. And that Trump's still got that weird sort of like still comes out and tells people that voting by mail is corrupt. I know it was invented by a California Republican. Don't even get me started on that, though. I do. They're trying to shift on that message. But yeah, he's he's really baked it in.
Yeah, no, and it's stupid and crazy, though. You know, the one thing I hear in announcements all the time is, well, everybody's going to vote by the 10th of October. You know, and we see this in California. In a hot race, people tend to hold their absentee ballots a little bit if there's a competitive race. And so that's why I still think even in the era of mail-in voting, the debate will not be unimportant. I think you could end up there, but not because it's quote-unquote a hot race. I mean, if you look at every metric,
People are turned off to politics. If you look at the enthusiasm in this election compared to the past, it's way lower. You look at cable television ratings. If you look at television, newspaper ratings, people are not...
They're not interested in this campaign. They don't like their choices. So I think this is less about a hot race as it is about people having to pick their poison. I don't know. If there's a Super Bowl debate, I think there will be. Among the persuadable, you know, these days, 4%. I think there'll be some. But we'll find out. We'll have data on that. That's where I think it's not just the persuadables. It's also about turnout. Doug, you work for Bill Clinton, as I mentioned earlier. He said two things today.
You know, the guy was a political savant. He said two things that I think have enduring meaning. One is elections are always about the future.
And the other is strong and wrong beats weak and right. The one thing would be encouraging to me if I were Biden, even though he is older. He can argue that he is fighting for people's future while Trump is consumed by his past and his own grievances. The other one would worry me.
And because that's clearly the Republican message. I've said it here a million times before, which is, you know, the world's out of control and Biden's not in command. So I'm asking you and I'm asking both you guys, the stuff that's been happening in the last few weeks on campuses, you know, even though I think that they are more limited than the coverage of them, has, you know,
lent fuel to that fire in the sense that, you know, anything that has the word chaos or disorder attached to it, you know, abets the Trump message, fairly or unfairly.
No, I have no doubt, at least in my perception, that Biden looks weaker than he did 30 days ago. And that's a big part of the equation. Plus what I think most voters look like is a messy, painful stalemate in the Middle East. So, yeah, I think it's kryptonite for Biden. And the campus stuff, man, that's what people are talking about. First of all, this is the first election of my lifetime that I don't think it's about the future. This is an election about Trump and the
in the past. So I think Clinton was right about elections being about the future, except I don't think he's right in this election. I think this is a referendum on the past. I think that strongly wrong, as I said earlier, I think the single narrative of Trump's entire campaign is about strength versus weakness. And Mike and David, you both know, anytime
you can put a narrative out there, an event out there that reinforces the existing narrative. It makes that attack much more potent. And I think what you just said, David, about the turmoil in the Mideast is exactly right. I tell people this
I can't tell you what kind of impact on election day, what's going on in Gaza is going to, it's going to look at it back to him. I can't, I don't know that right now, but I do know right now that this is reinforcing the narrative of the campaign that Trump wants. And you said it earlier, it's weak and chaos. And in this case, you did both. Yeah. It's kind of hilarious to hear Trump, uh, lecture that, uh,
Biden is allowing lawless, unruly mobs to run wild because my last recollection of him as president was directing a lawless, unruly mob. But maybe...
Maybe he gets credit for directing them. You know, history is dead. It's all... I hear you. I hear you. And then inflation, too, and all that's the problem. It all compounds together. Under Trump, things were better, and now stuff costs more, and the world's a mess. So, you know, that's the problem. All right. So, you guys, spin out for me. We've identified the Trump narrative, and it's pretty simple and easy to understand, and he's being aided.
Fairly or unfairly, I'll say again by events, and we can talk about that in a second. But, Doug, what is, spin out the, as you perceive it, the Biden narrative? First of all, as you know, having been there, the office of the presidency can be big or it can be small. And it depends on how the president acts and whether or not he's able to master and power the office of the billy pulpit.
Back when Reagan was running against Carter in 1980, Carter was so weak that, you know, the whole conversation was between two presidents because the job's too big for one.
And, you know, we struggled in the Clinton White House. It took us almost three years before. The first time Clinton really became president was in Oklahoma City when he rose to the equation, understood the power of the office. The first time he really understood as a world leader what that was is we went to Ireland. So it took him a while to grow into that. But we didn't have a narrative of his presidency that was digestible to people until the end of year three.
And I know you all, I've watched you all struggle in Obama's first term about a narrative coming off of the economic crises and trying to figure out how you can talk about, you know,
green sprouts coming up, but at the same time, things aren't that great. Yeah, well, that was a mistake. Yeah, it was a mistake. So my point, though, about Biden is he's never mastered the power of the office. It's just not his skill set and strength to use the power of the office, the power of the bully pulpit to make it a bigger president rather than a smaller president. And the second thing is there's been no narrative in ThruLine about what the presidency is
his presidency is about and how it's helping people so and so what i would do if i were there and i don't think they've got i don't know what you guys think i don't think they've got the pitch right right now and trying to you know describe to the american public the state of the economy i think they don't they haven't for right so so what i would be saying there is
We came out of the once-in-a-hundred-year Black Swan event. Let's say COVID. We have had to fight back. We have fought back.
We've made a lot of progress, but I'm not satisfied. And we have a lot of more work to do. But the last thing in the world we can do is go back to Donald Trump and its chaos and exhaustion in this country and go back to his deal of the 1950s is the way the world should work. And so my view is we can't turn that back now. We've made progress. We have a lot more work to do. Now, David, you could do that.
100 times better than me. But he's got to come up with a version of that. Yeah, you got to get motive into it, too. You know, I like that we've done the hard work. We've done the suffering. We're turning the boat. The question is, who do you want to land the plane now? Me, who's for you, or him, who's for himself? Right. I think that's really important. I also think, Doug, the pivot on the butt.
Like they're very willing to embrace the first part of the message, which is all the progress that we've made. But, you know, that has antagonized people who look at the economy through the prism of their everyday costs. And you've got to be realistic about that. And I think.
When you pivot to the comparative on Trump, I think you have to pivot on some of these economic issues that actually matter to people. It's tempting to pivot on larger issues that go to democracy and so on. I mean, obviously, abortion is its own case, but.
I think the people who are motivated by the democracy issues, who you can communicate with on a more focused way, I think they're coming. You know, I keep saying that if you're talking about democracy over dinner, it's probably because you don't have to worry about the price of the food you're eating. So he needs to look. He's got a good story to tell about things that he's done to try and fight for working democracy.
people on economics. And he's got one big example of Trump's great economic initiative, which was the tax cut of 2017, which spectacularly did overhelp people like him and underhelped most America and people like you, Murphy. We call it capitalism, David. But anyway, keep going. I don't make you uncomfortable.
No, no, no, no, no. I mean, capitalism, we can have a long discussion about the fiscal conservatives who blow a big hole in the budget in order to give big tax cuts to people who don't need them or weren't even asking for them. That would be a great discussion. But go ahead, Sajid. Here's one thing, though. So if I were on your show 60 days ago, I would have said something different than I would have said today.
So what I'm going to say today, as we're now into May, is we're not going to have the Fed cutting the interest rates before the election. Or if we are, it's not going to have any impact on voters. Remember, in 1992, the country came out of recession by August. Things were actually better in September and October of 1992.
And we're actually on a roll, except nobody in America felt it yet. So Bush lost. So we're not going to have tax cuts, rate cuts that are going to impact people's lives. I were told you 60 days ago we were. And the other thing is, I mean,
consumer confidence is now gone. You had that in your charts down three months in a row. And if you look at, uh, the Wargate is speaking now, if you look at, at McDonald's in their earnings and Starbucks in these markets where people are, are cost sensitive, um,
they're all going down. If you look at the theme parks at Disney, they just came out. So you can clearly see a belt tightening. You know why McDonald's is going down? Because they got Trump tied down in the court. He can't go to McDonald's. He can't get the Big Macs. And it's making a market difference in their profits. Anyways, I think there are more clouds in the sky economically about where we are and where we're headed than I would have
To me, that makes more of an imperative to really have a populist edge to your message and talk about these fights that you're fighting that Trump would tank if he became president because he did it before. So prescription drug prices, health care prices, you know, all to fund his tax cut for the wealthy that Murphy liked so well that...
Blew a huge hole in the budget. Let's stop for a minute and listen to a word from one of our fine sponsors. Mike, we're getting into the holiday season. We're coming up on Memorial Day. Every once in a while, I go to these Memorial Day parties, and I might have a libation or two. And you know what I'm going to have in my pocket? Oh, your magic weapon. I know it well. Z-Biotics.
Yeah. Tell the folks why. Well, Z-Biotics is the maker of the world's first genetically engineered probiotic. Now, knock off the fancy words, Murphy. I can hear what you're thinking. Let me explain how this game-changing product can really help before a night out with a few drinks. So Z-Biotics was invented by PhD scientists to tackle rough mornings after drinking. Here's how it works.
And Axelrod, take notes here because I know this is going to have practical application. Trust me, I'm scribbling away. When you drink, alcohol gets converted into a toxic byproduct in the gut. It's this byproduct, not dehydration, that's to blame for your rough next day. This is the important work done by z-biotic scientists. Z-biotics produces an enzyme to break down that toxic byproduct.
byproduct in your gut. So just do this. Make Z-Biotics your first drink of the night, then always drink responsibly and you'll feel your best tomorrow. As I mentioned, I've tried it and it definitely does help. It's a great thing. I mean, even if no matter how much
you drink. I mean, even if you just drink casually, socially, it's a great thing. Vacations, weddings, birthdays, or reunions. My, there's so much going on. Get the most of your spring plans by stocking up on pre-alcohol now. So go to zbiotics.com slash hacks
To get 15% off your first order when you use Hacks at checkout, ZBiotics is backed with a 100% money-back guarantee. So if you're unsatisfied for any reason, they'll refund your money, no questions asked. Remember to head to zbiotics.com slash hacks and use the code HACKS at checkout for 15% off. Thank you, ZBiotics, for sponsoring this episode and our good times. ♪
I am worried. You know, I've been clear I'm voting for Biden. I can't abide Trump, but I am worried. I'm seeing the case melt away a little bit. I'm seeing Trump get weaker, but I don't see Biden getting any stronger. You're right. 90 days ago, it was all about the economy is going to surge in the end. It'll rescue him. No, it's not. And they're not doing the motive message very well. Biden is still the classic incumbent who wants to grab you by the lapels and tell you you're wrong. It's getting better.
And that's a disaster. We've talked about that a lot before. So I'm I'm trying to figure out what the Biden edges he can exploit other than you hate Trump. He's crazy. And when they want to fire the incumbent, that's not enough. I don't think I'm hoping it is, but I'm worried. Look to everybody to simplify it. I mean, I think there are about 40, 44, 45 percent, you know, each candidate can get.
And it's a fight for that remaining group. And I think for Biden, he's done a little bit of progress on this. I think he has to create a permission structure for people that don't like him and don't trust him and think Democrats are big spenders and he's weak and ineffective. I think he has to reassure people enough, like Reagan did in 1980, that it's OK to vote for him. I think he's got to get that done step one.
And if he can get that done, then I think he knows the step two, which is all about Trump. But I think he's got to shore up that deficit on step one and we never get to step two. Yeah, no, I totally agree with that. And that's where I wish he would send more dog whistles like the campus stuff. Be a little tougher on that. He has the right instinct on the cop stuff. He has been better than his party and not getting, you know, in a bad cul-de-sac on the crime issue. But boy, you're not feeling it now. I can give you two truisms.
What about each person? So the big question for Trump, of course, was, well, when's he going to make the pivot? Remember that?
Yeah. Okay. We never made the pivot ever, right? Yeah. Well, crazy doesn't pivot. That was the great lesson of Trump. Well, we're waiting for the pivot and we never got it. So now what we're waiting on, we're three and a half years into it, is our sister soldier moment. We haven't had a sister soldier moment and we're no more likely to have a sister soldier moment than we had a pivot moment with Trump. Then he loses. Yeah. Well, I mean, there's another issue, which is speed. You know, the day that Trump
The day that Trump tanked the agreement on immigration, that would have been the toughest border law we've seen in decades. I don't know why Biden wasn't at the border earlier.
just announcing that he was putting the provisions of it in an executive order and moving forward. It took him weeks to get down to the border. He's promising an executive order. It still hasn't come. He's obviously trying to weigh the politics of all of that on this campus stuff. I mean, he's saying the right things, but he's saying them late. And, you know, being in the moment,
is a big part of this business. And if you don't act in the moment... No, the power melts away. Exactly. Listen, I don't want to... David, you're very familiar with this.
you know, it's an impossible job being in a white house. Yeah, no, I know. I hate, I hate guys like me when I was in the white house. I hated guys like me. I'm just creating a permission structure to do a bot here. So it's really hard though, in the white house and you, you know, I don't care how good a white house you have. It's just, you're just trying to survive every day. But,
I can't think in three and a half years of a Biden White House that is a day ahead of what the debate is. They just don't operate at that kind of speed.
And it can seldom think of examples where they did. Can you, David? No, no, they react. And I think everything flows from the top. I mean, I think that there's a lot of deliberation that goes on in that White House before they do anything. And I think he's right in the middle of those conversations. We should, you know, you say I think you're right about one thing, Murphy. Yeah.
Among his comparative advantages are that he is, I think people give him more credit for decency. They give him more credit for honesty. That shows up in polling. I mean, he's been nicked up a little, but I think that's still a comparative advantage. But I do think economic advocacy is a huge priority.
part of this. It just has to be. I mean, we've said it a million times. This is my other complaint. He has to be Joe from Scranton. He went back to Scranton and did a little hit. They did a few days of economic hits, and then they moved on. In this environment, you have to pound the hell out of something to get it through. You can't just do one-offs.
And think that you've checked the box. Yeah, and say, hey, we set it in Akron. Yeah, yeah. No, I agree with this. You have to get stupid and pound. The other problem is, just to call back to something we were talking about, because I want to really hammer this to your point of hammering. He's got a moment now where Trump optically looks like a weak old man caught in a net, cornered in court, raving and ranting.
He needs a moment of strength. He needs to steal the strength thing away from Trump because Trump is weak on strength now. So go for his throat. But I cannot think of a single big moment that penetrated the national voter consciousness where Biden was tough.
on blank. You know, I don't care if it's a Reagan thing where you shoot down one of Colonel Qaddafi's planes or something, just some moment to define toughness. And Trump's vulnerable on this stuff now. I go to the campus stuff. I want him to be more like Ben Sasse on it because I think there's a lot of votes there for regular Joe. We have that Ben Sasse, former senator, president of the University of Florida. Where does a university president draw a line between free speech concerns and
with the right of every student on campus to feel safe and secure and also, frankly, to enjoy college and graduation? Here, here. Great question. I think the line is between speech and action. I'm a First Amendment zealot, and it's a glorious thing that our First Amendment gives us free speech.
freedom of religion, press, assembly, protest or redress of grievances. There are five glorious freedoms in the First Amendment. And what we tell all of our students, protesters and non, is there are two things we're going to affirm over and over again. We will always defend your right to free speech and free assembly. And also, we have time, place and manner restrictions. And you don't get to take over the whole university. People don't get to spit at cops. You don't get to barricade yourselves in buildings. You don't get to disrupt somebody else's commencement.
I mean, in fairness, that's what Biden said when he finally spoke to this. And I'm sure he's saying it today in this speech at the Holocaust Museum. But it goes back to, I mean, energy and timing.
Right. And a certain sharpness to it to punch through and be the news. And I'm with Doug. I don't have my sister soldier moment betting pool afoot with my own money in it, because you're right. But this is a moment for Biden to take strength away, or at least to make Trump look a little weaker in comparison on a regular dinner table issue people are talking about. One thing that occurs to me in a it's in a perverse way that Trump's
You guys said this whole thing will hurt him. And it certainly helped him in the primaries with the base, these legal problems, these indictments. But, you know, his ability to resist and evade and overcome these legal challenges or kick them off. I wonder to what degree that reflects in people's minds some sort of strength, like he's indomitable.
I wonder if that in a weird way helps him in advancement of the message that we all agree he's writing here. It does help him. But at the end of the day, I mean, let me just make a point to ask conversations ties into this. I think that if I were the writer of the Biden campaign right now, I would think that that we have to play to win.
And if we don't change the dynamic, we're not going to win. So in other words, I would feel more of a sense of urgency than what I see every day. And what I do think part of that is shored up people's, you know, that permission structure that's OK to vote for Biden. But I do think at the end of the day, and this is where I think this hurts Trump, you know, what happened in 20, it happened in 22, the country ultimately decided they didn't want crazy voters.
And they were exhausted. The thought of four more years of Trump, I think, weighs heavily on a lot of people and will weigh heavily in November. But only if Biden can get up to a to a certain level of them feeling like it's not that bad to have Biden as president. And I I.
And that's where I think the third party stuff comes in, because I think Trump has a hard ceiling. I don't think 50 percent of the country will ever vote for Trump. And, you know, you only got 50 percent or more one time in any of these target states. And that was in 2016 in Georgia. So I think there is a real hard ceiling for Trump.
And I don't think there's a hard ceiling for Biden, but I think there's more of a floor for Biden than Trump. Right. No, we've talked about that before. Trump has a low ceiling and a high floor. And it does implicate what these third party candidates do in this race and whether they become an escape valve. So to that point, I mean, there's a conventional wisdom debate raging, but it's an important one. And I'm not sure where I come down on it. I'm curious what you guys think.
So Kennedy, through kind of a ridiculous method, got on the ballot in critical Michigan. One argument is Kennedy's got a famous Democratic name, alienated young voters that Brand might have appeal, particularly the less they know about him.
But he's also spewing crazy populist crap. So maybe that'll cut into Trump's normally dominant market in the crazy populist crap category. So the new theory is, you know, he may hurt Trump more than Biden. I'm curious. I think that it's unbaked yet. We don't really know. I think it might be more of a wash than people think. But I'm curious. What do you guys say, Doug?
What do you think about that, Kenny? Just in the microcosm of Michigan, which would hold true in other states if he can get on more ballots. Well, just remember in Michigan in 16, Hillary lost it by 10,000 votes and 275,000 people in Michigan voted for third, fourth and fifth parties. She would have overwhelmingly have won those voters if they had not done that. So I think I would say two things. One is the current polling across the board consistently shows that Kennedy hurts Trump more than Biden.
I'm skeptical of that. I think at the end of the day...
At the end of the day, the more it's a two-person race, the better it is for Biden. Yeah. Yeah, no, I agree. I agree. If you give people who can't vote for Trump and aren't crazy about voting for Biden an escape valve, they're going to escape and net that bad for Biden. But he had this wacky fundraiser in Florida last weekend at which he complained that he was the victim of Gestapo tactics, which...
I noted on TV, although nobody seemed to get the fact that I was making a wry reference, that this is a guy who had the volume of Hitler's speeches on his nightstand, according to his biographer. So I didn't know whether he meant that as a compliment or as a...
uh, as a bar, but he, um, you know, he said a number of things and to your point that, uh, he doesn't correct Doug. One of the things that he said that got less attention because the other things were more outrageous was about abortion. And he said, uh,
Mr. Trump laid blame for the slim margin of the House on the issue of abortion after he appointed the Supreme Court Justice to overturn Roe v. Wade, for which he has repeatedly taken credit. We had a rough thing because of, you know, the issue of abortion, largely. I think we would have had 45 seats or more. He is making an adjustment on that, not necessarily very effectively, but he's making an adjustment. Do you think that the die is cast on that?
Well, can you imagine, Mike, you're working for a candidate who's completely unburdened by believing in anything? Yeah, no, it's... He has complete freedom to move on any issue. He doesn't believe in anything. Nothing at all. I think the abortion issue is a mixed bag. It either really helps the Democrats or it's not that important. And it's directly correlated to how threatened people feel in a state by the issue.
And that's where I think, you know, there is some solace of being able for Biden to pick up Nevada because it's front and center. But I think he's just going to mumble around and Kelly and Conway are getting some better words and language. But he's going to end up saying it's basically states should decide. OK, let's take a break right here for a word from our sponsor. We'll be right back. Mike Lerner.
Let me spare you from potential disaster and remind you that Sunday is Mother's Day. I know. I know. And look, we're the same. We're both competitive guys and we like to win. I want to bury the rest of my family with love and victory by winning Mother's Day and cement my reputation as the best gift giver in the family. And how are you going to do that? Well, I have a secret weapon.
and I want to share it with you and our Hacks on Tap listeners. You want to give the moms in your life an aura digital picture frame preloaded with decades of family photos. You know how moms like photos of the family, the grandkids, everybody. Well, this is a fantastic technological device that's like a memory machine that she will love. She'll love looking back on your childhood memories and seeing what you're
Up to today, even better with unlimited storage and an easy to use app, you can keep updating mom's frame with new photos. So it's truly the gift that keeps on giving. Yeah, you use the app to control it so you can constantly upload stuff to the frame. You don't have to be, you know, an MIT postgrad student to work this thing. It's designed for the rest of us.
And it's an easy way to load the photos through your app, on your phone, into the device. And then your mom has basically an always changeable but always heartwarming slideshow of memories going by on the Aura Frame. And boy, for Mother's Day, what a deal. Right now, Aura has a great deal. You're right. For Mother's Day, listeners can save on the perfect gift by visiting auraframes.com to get $30 off plus free shipping on the best-selling frame.
That's A-U-R-A frames dot com. And remember, use code HACKS at checkout to save that 30 bucks off their best-selling frame. Terms and conditions apply. He had 12 candidates for vice president down there. He had four...
On Sunday shows, Rubio and Scott and Doug Burgum and J.D. Vance auditioning on Sunday television, you know, Trump approaches in some ways as a casting director. What's your latest? By the way.
We don't have time. I was going to play Tim Scott trying to answer the question about whether he'd accept the results of the election, and it was just painful. I think the edge will go to whoever on national TV can leap into a submissive puppy position, you know, feet straight up on the—
That's a tough contest. No, no. They're all going to dive for the floor. They're all submissive puppies. I would stay away from – And that, by the way, is my clever transition. I do think the puppy slayer, the governor of South Dakota, is probably out. Though Trump's contrarian and weird enough to think – Get out!
A lot of my people are dog shooters. But no, so I think she's done. He'll want a supplicant who's not a threat, who, quote, looks the part. But because Trump's core calculus, to the extent there is one, is Queens in 1963, he'll be somewhat seduced by the theory, hey, I nominate the black guy, the blacks will vote for me. Ha ha. So I think Scott's got a real shot here. And he's done a great job debasing himself from a senator with some
some character early on to a total supplicant. And J.D. Vance, though feral, Trump will smell the ambition on Vance. The last time I talked to J.D., he called me to talk about running for Senate as an anti-Trump Republican. So I think that cynicism Trump has kind of a preternatural
animal instinct to smell out. But, you know, it's a hard one for me to handicap because he's Trump. He's nuts. But it'll be a supplicant who's non-threatening. I have no idea, first of all, who will pick. I would just say, and I alluded to this earlier, when I, for the last several decades, would be giving a speech around now, I would say the three most overrated aspects of presidential general elections are
And they're not really that important. One is money, two is VP, and three are the conventions. And I think in all three cases,
these could be very important this year. I think in the VP thing, I think Harris will be, is already an issue for Democrats. But I think that if Trump could pick someone who sends signals to people of reassurance that this person is VP might be an in-house guardrail, I think that could help him. And I think that money we talked about, but I do think, you know, running these statewide campaigns with Biden's advantage right now can help him. And the last thing is,
And David, you know more about this having been from Chicago. I do think that the Democrats have a huge risk this summer. And if things don't go well there, it's going to reinforce that narrative of chaos. Totally. Huge, huge, huge problem. By the way, Mike, if you're waiting for the president to have his moment of strength, his sister soldier moment, they should play this podcast for him and he could direct all his ire at us. Yeah.
Well, I think they've got some practice. Mr. President, I'm for you, damn it. We're trying to help. Help. I think, David, they've had some practice on that. Yeah. No, no. You're already off. Yeah, you better be careful in Chicago. You're going to be on the little picture all the cops carry around. No troublemaker.
And, of course, I've been voting there for 100 years, so I might have to go. On the Republican VP thing, I want to say I've held my Tim Scott stock for a very long time here for the reasons that you suggest. I have shifted based on just the scuttlebutt, but also what I see to two people, Marco Rubio
And Doug Burgum, the governor of North Dakota. Yeah, I think Burgum... You had him as the nominee at one point. Yes, because, you know, again, you can buy a soul in the Republican Party for five bucks and a ticket to Mar-a-Lago. It's unbelievable. Burgum knows better. But Burgum is back to the...
To Doug's point about send a dog whistle to the knife and fork eaters that there's a grown up somewhere near it. On the other hand, he's a haplessly bad campaigner. His presidential campaign was a disaster. Marco, you know, yet again, Marco sliding under a closed door, which is his weird sci fi monster trick.
I've seen it before. Somehow he can liquefy. But I think Trump has a long memory. But I do think Trump will do his Stalin thing, which is he will tease Marco. He will build it, build it, build it. Marco will think, my God, this might happen. And then he'll crush him like a bug just to torture the guy. But I agree on Burgum. If I'm Burgum, I make sure that...
I'll make sure that Trump hears this little reminder of Marco 2016.
Here's what happens in many countries around the world. You have a leader that emerges and basically says, "Forget, don't put your faith in yourselves, don't put your faith in society, put your faith in me. I'm a strong leader and I'm going to make things better by all by myself." This is very typical. You see it in the third world. You see it a lot in Latin America for decades. It's basically the argument he's making that he single-handedly is going to turn the country around. We've never been that kind of country. We have a president.
The president is an American citizen who serves for a period of time constrained by the constitutions and the powers vested in that office. The president works for the people, not the people for the president. And if you listen to the way he describes himself and what he's going to do, he's going to single handedly do this and do that without regard for whether it's legal or not.
I think people have to make up their mind. I can tell you this. No matter what happens in this election for years to come, there are many people on the right in the media and voters at large that are going to be having to explain and justify how they fell into this trap of supporting Donald Trump, because this is not going to end well one way or the other. There you go, Doug. That's your future vice president.
First of all, he's got to say, as well, I was wrong and I saw the four years as president. That's what he will say, of course. I think he's got to eat. I would just say two things about Rubio. One is I think he would be a real positive addition for Trump on the ticket. And I think he would be a really positive, have a positive potential impact on the results. That's the first point. The second point, I don't think Rubio's problem with Trump is that recording and display. I think Rubio's problem with Trump
is that Trump thinks he is weak and he doesn't respect him. And I think there's nothing that is worse in Trump's eyes than his sort of John Wayne, 1950s kind of man and someone who's weak. Yeah, I know. I, you know, I don't know about that. I think that he
I agree that Rubio would be an asset in many ways, particularly when you look at some of the constituencies that they're fighting over. I'm not sure Trump is looking for a strong VP. I don't think, I think Trump had a VP who he thought wasn't going to be particularly strong and he got strong just when Trump wanted him to be weak.
So I think loyalty is going to be really, really important here. Yeah, but Trump will know that Rubio will stab him in the neck the minute it's in Rubio's interest. Trump will ask how many food testers he has before picking Rubio. Rubio is a threat because he knows Rubio is as cynical as he is.
And so I get them on paper, but I think Trump's, again, kind of feral instincts will. There's a great old noir movie from the UK made in 1980, a John McKinsey film called The Long Good Friday. Great gangster movie. And there's a great moment where Bob Hoskins in the role that really made him a star, the London crime boss, grabs his young accolade who's betrayed him. I can smell your greed and ambitions.
And that's Rubio's problem. He reeks of greed and ambition. Well, most of these people do. That's a threat. Yeah, but Rubio's a special, special cat. Well, Bergen can, the thing he has going for him is he's a superb fundraiser. It's just a trip to his cell phone and a few keystrokes and it's a couple hundred million dollars more in the Trump coffers. And that might be really appealing. Now, that's a language Trump understands. Listen, we burn through
All the time. I know. A couple of chatterboxes here. And we skipped the mailbag last week, too. So, dear listeners, we will do a double mailbag next week with two questions from each of us to make it up to you. We do apologize. If you have questions, don't forget.
Just send them to us at hacksontap at gmail.com. Or we have in some off-track betting parlor that Axelrod owns in Chicago, we have a number you can call. 773-389-4471. I'll repeat it because who can remember that? 773-389-4471.
Our thanks to the people at OpenAI for providing that very lifelike voice of Mike Murphy. In the last four years, I haven't actually been here. Again, just leave. Keep it short there, like 25 seconds, and tell us your name, and good questions will get on the air. We'll do a big jamboree full of mailbag next week. Sosnick, people pay a lot of money to hear your advice, and we got it for free, and we're really grateful, and you got to come back.
Well, I appreciate that, David. I don't have to say it. I just say my rate card is a little lower than yours. We'll talk. Well, if Axelrod you get the big ukulele finish, though, this land is your land. You ought to see it. Doug, thank you for coming on. Okay, guys. See you. Nice to see you.