But from your vantage, how does that Senate math look?

Yeah, I think the Senate, as you say, we have to win the Senate.

We have to hold all of our seats, which I'll get to in a second.

We have to win in Maine and North Carolina.

Then we have to win two of.

Iowa, Alaska, Ohio, and Texas, all states that Trump won by at least 11 points.

Yeah.

Yeah.

If he woke up tomorrow and decided I'm gonna throw it all in for the last 75 days here, would that even make a positive difference in these races?

It's hard to imagine this version of Donald Trump doing the things he would need to do to help Republicans, to be disciplined, to talk about affordability, to come up with a plan to show how he's trying to reduce costs for people.

And it, it speaks to how unpopular he is that he's not campaigning because this is not a Senate race that's taking place in, even in swing states, right? The race for the Senate's taking place all in states that Donald Trump won by double digits.

Yet he is in his low 40s or in some cases in the high 30s in these states.

And so he really can't do much other than spend the money that he has been hoarding in his super PACs, you know, north of a half a billion dollars, that I think to, you know, I think Democratic operatives all around the country are shocked they have not yet spent, 'cause every single day they waste, that money becames, becomes less effective and less efficient.

Well, what's that all about?

Yeah, I thought Jon Ossoff is very talented at finding ways to get attention.

He understands the attention economy.

Yeah

... only get 6% of the vote in a primary in the Upper West Side of Manhattan.

And then you have Alex Vindman, w- to, who was the, you know, he was a very, a very, he was a very, very brave person who stood up and testified against Trump in that impeachment, and then he lost.

And so I do think that this is, that we're s- I kinda think Democrats can see the light at the end of the Trump tunnel here and are s- and so fighting Trump is- Necessary to succeed in Democratic politics, but it's insufficient on its own.

But the second point is we are seeing in a number of races where the candidate who is spending significant less money, im- notably, uh, Angie Nixon here in Florida and Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan win despite that.

And there are a couple things going on here.

One, there are ways if you are very, very talented to get your money out, get, to get your message out much cheaper.

Yeah

Yeah

... only get 6% of the vote in a primary in the Upper West Side of Manhattan.

And then you have Alex Vindman, w- to, who was the, you know, he was a ver- uh, he's a very, very brave person who stood up and testified against Trump in that impeachment, and then he lost.

And so I do think that this is the worst.

I kind of think Democrats can see the light at the end of the Trump tunnel here and are s- and so fighting Trump is necessary to succeed in Democratic politics, but it's insufficient on its own.

But the second point is we are seeing in a number of races where the candidate who is spending significant less money, in notably, uh, Angie Nixon here in Florida, and Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan win despite that.

And there are a couple things going on here.

Yeah

i do want to talk about the apac thing um i think it's very important um but you know the fact that there seemed to be sort of this you know non-stop effort from the democratic establishment so we have to you know stop abdul sayed at all costs and you just got and you know rachel maddow i think on ms now was saying it was spicy others were saying it was ugly and nasty and so on i was watching it and i i it sort of reminded me a little bit of the obama hillary battle back in 2008 and i saw i i thought i sort of thought people were getting carried away with this but any your thoughts on that and why the establishment was so pissed

at this I look, I think the there was a belief among from Schumer, the DSCC, a lot of folks in Washington that Abdul Saeed was a uniquely vulnerable candidate because he was more left, had said some things about, you know, in 2020 that could easily demagogued.

He had campaigned with Assange Piker.

They believe that he was vulnerable and that the better candidate was Haley Stevens, who I think there is a real – when you look back on it, I think that it's very possible the DSCC picked the wrong candidate.

Picking Michigan as a state with the largest Arab-American population in the country, it is a state that birthed the uncommitted movement emanating from the Biden policy.

Right.

And so they looked at the Schumer, Kirsten Gillibrand, looked at this race and to decide that the best chance to win the primary, because that's what you have to do because they're trying to stop Abdul, was one of the most pro-Israel Democrats in the Congress.

deal with this

Yeah

... assumed that Abdul would run away with this.

Uh, he had a 10-point lead in the polling average.

He'd been as, up by as many as 19 in a poll that came out the, a few days before the election.

Ended up being a nail-biter.

Just about one point went till early Wednesday morning.

And that kind of is a, infected how people think about it, 'cause it s- because, or the expectation was he wins easy, then he'd, he wins a close race, so it's a disappointment.

Yeah.

Yeah.

And some of these Republicans will outrun Trump by at least that.

The reason why they're in a bigger pickle than Harris was is that Biden was...

There was v- there was not a ton of strong enthusiasm for Biden among Democratic voters.

She had a freedom to break with him that these Republicans feel like they do not have, because the, the, there are a couple...

Like, when you look at polls, you can cut these in several ways, right? You can do it by education, race, like we're talking about here.

Another way to do it is you get the Republican sample and you say, "Do you consider yourself a member of the MAGA movement or not?" MAGA voters still love Trump.

Yeah

Mm-hmm

... because there, when you do all the paths, you really need Michigan to get there 'cause, uh, otherwise then you have to win three of the four states that were Democrats competitive or that Trump won by double digits.

Who wins the Wisconsin governorship has massive implications for the administration in the 2020 election, and if that person is reelected, that person will be the, in charge of drawing the maps after the 2030 census.

Like, this is incredibly important, so the stakes are very high here.

Democratic establishment folks are applying the, to the selectability question an old model, right, where you look at it and you say, "Candidates further to the left or the right of the electorate in whatever state or district you're in do less well than ones who are more aligned with it." Like, that's what the political science research a- that's what history says.

Is that still true in this environment? That's a really open question.

Will it matter in an environment that is plus six, seven, or eight points Democratic, where Francesca Hong or Abdul El-Sayed, who could outperform Democrats, but if they were to underperform Democrats by five points, are still the next senator and governor of those states? To get to your, your original question, the reason why people are not exploring this question is 'cause they don't wanna know the answers.

Mm-hmm

Yeah.

And some of these Republicans will outrun Trump by at least that.

The reason why they're in a bigger pickle than Harris was is that Biden was...

There was v- there was not a ton of strong enthusiasm for Biden among Democratic voters.

She had a freedom to break with him that these Republicans feel like they do not have because the, the, there are a couple...

Like, when you look at polls, you can cut these in several ways, right? You can do it by education, race, like we're talking about here.

The other way to do it is you get the Republican sample and you say, "Do you consider yourself a member of the MAGA movement or not?" MAGA voters still love Trump.

Yeah

Thank you.

Hello, City Council.

Thanks for hearing our comments.

My name is Daniel Pfeiffer and I live on Ninth Street in Troy.

I used to work at a publication called The Markup, an investigative journalism outlet that specializes in tech and privacy issues.

I now work at ProPublica.

I'm not a reporter.

What was the point of all this, Dan?

There was no point is the problem.

So the way to look at this is not to think about the results of the autopsy.

It's to think about the process that brought us the autopsy, which is Ken Martin ran promising to release the autopsy.

Was quite critical of the post-2016 DNC for not releasing the autopsy, something they should have done, uh, but did not wanna do because it would've been very critical of Hillary Clinton.

Um, and then hired, didn't even hire, asked a political crony of his named Paul Rivera to do the autopsy.

Paul Rivera didn't do the autopsy.

Yes.

Yeah

...

he is the per- There is two people, one of two people is gonna be the next senator from Maine, Grand Platner or Susan Collins.

And so whether you love Janet Mills, you're, you have questions about Grand Platner, he is our choice.

He is who the voters of Maine were overwhelmingly picking by, in some cases by 30 points.

I think that he, his strengths and his weaknesses are intertwined.

He is, I think he's clearly a very talented candidate.

... are you kind of disappointed with the California Democratic Party? I mean, this is it? This is the best we got?

When it comes to dealing with this war I started without any clear goals or strategy or thought about an endgame, I simply do not give a shit about its impact on the financial situation of voters." [laughs]

And it's the, it's the reality that people who voted for Trump, even though they didn't like him, they didn't love all of his policy ideas, but they just wanted him to lower his prices, that's the conclusion they have been coming to over the last 18 months is he doesn't actually give a shit about their lives, the prices, their economic situation, and here he is saying it.

'Cause it's not just about Iran.

Like, the context in this answer is, you know, if you're trying to parse it, is keeping Iran from getting a nuclear weapon is more important than, you know, how much you pay at the gas price.

But it, it fits with everything else.

It fits with his focus on tax cuts for billionaires.

It focuses, fits with his focus on, you know, re- ballrooms and l- and reflecting pools and crypto schemes, all those things he's said.

Yeah.

Exactly.

We're supposed to believe that guy? But I mean, real, real talk, Chris, he should not spend the presidency lining his pockets.

He should be preparing to line his prison cell.

I don't mean that hyperbolically.

He is guaranteed by doing things like this that he'll spend the rest of his days after this administration in courtrooms, in depositions, and potentially incarcerated.

This is a corrupt act.

This is a high crime and misdemeanor, and anyone who's enabling it, I would tell them right now, 'cause I've been in your shoes inside his administration when he asked me to do illegal things, don't bet that this man's gonna pardon you.

I mean, that's his standard line, but you've got to imagine just on just sheer politics that th- that they understand how horrible this would be and look.

But let me just start with the more immediate one, which is where do you-... stand on Democrats' chances of retaking the House th- this November, the challenges and, and what, what the path looks like.

Yeah, I think Democrats were, b- prior to today, and certainly prior to the Supreme Court decision last week, overwhelming favorites to take the House.

Right now, I think they are still favorites to take the House.

It is a, we are, have a larger hurdle to overcome.

It, but we still are well-positioned.

Donald Trump's still incredibly unpopular.

The political environment cannot be better for Democrats.

Mm-hmm

What are your thoughts on the ruling out of Virginia and, and just bigger picture, how big a setback this is as we all look forward to the midterms in '26?

Well, it was about two weeks ago when Jon Favreau and I came on this podcast on a Thursday, and right after the, you know, two days after the Virginia measure passed, we among, along with many Democrats crowed about how even with Florida planning to redraw their maps later that week, the Democrats had essentially brought the redistricting battle to a draw, right? Which was unbelievable considering where we thought we'd be.

A year earlier we thought Trump's gonna rig the midterms.

Since that moment, it's been all bad news.

It began, obviously, with the Florida districts, which we can talk about.

The Supreme Court decision that, uh, gutted the Voting Rights Act, and it's kicked off this mass gerrymandering across the South, and now the Virginia decision.

Jon and I were saying last night that the bigger concern was the Vir- between what the South was doing, the Republicans were doing in the South, and the Virginia decision, the bigger decision was, the concern was the Virginia decision, and here we are.

Dan, where do you think Trump's approval needs to be for the headwinds for him and the Republican Party to be so great that we can start to win some of these even re- e- even gerrymandered districts?

And yet for him to have kind of, um, kind of shied away from overtly embracing it, w- why do you think he did that?

I think it's, it's unpopular.

Um, it's the least popular of the things we'd push for.

The Republicans wanna run on it in 2026.

Trump does this all the time.

"Democrats are gonna put 30 justices on the court." So embracing it now and calling for it now does nothing, 'cause we can do nothing with that power.

Even if we take the House and the Senate, we can't expand the court.

The, the laundry list

But just curious for your reaction to, to kind of this, this angling by JD Vance.

I think it is pretty unsubtle and politically, and pretty politically maladroit to do go about this way.

Look, JD Vance is the overwhelming, overwhelmingly likely next Republican nominee.

Sitting vice presidents almost always get the nomination.

There is no example in modern history of them not getting it.

You basically have to go to prison like Spiro Agnew in order to avoid being the nominee.

Um, now, there is one big thing that could get in Tru- in JD Vance's way, and that is if J- if Trump turns on him.

But I'm curious, you know, a- ha- as we engage deeper into this process and tensions continue to escalate and, uh, emotions continue to run higher and higher, how do you avoid, um, s- getting into a position where we just kind of are at each other's throats and, and these primaries are so bruising that it fractures the very coalition that it requires to win?

Like, it's not like this is a person who has the benefit of the doubt right now.

Yeah, like, I heard you and Spencer talking about the parallels to 2003.

The big difference between now and 2003 is that George Bush's approval rating was in the mid-60s.

He was still riding a wave of national consensus after 9/11.

Donald Trump is a lame duck with a 38% approval rating.

As you mentioned, he's underwater on every issue.

People do not trust him to do just about anything, and it's just notable they're not even trying to sell this to anyone.

[laughing]

Uh, and then, you know, we're in a position where Democrats have control, and all of the things that led them to lose in 2024 rear their heads again because they were never actually rectified.

Yeah, so I think there's a couple of things that are gonna happen on the interim.

I think in the short term, this election victory is gonna put... stiffen some Democrats' spines for, to use the limited leverage they have in these negotiations over ICE guardrails.

I think it will encourage more Democrats to speak out more boldly about what's happening with ICE, although I think for the most part, they've been pretty good since, uh, the killings of Rene Good and Alex Pretty.

Um, not everyone, but for the most part, you're getting less hemming and hawing from Democrats about what is hap- what Trump is doing and what ICE is doing.

So that's good.

So I think it stiffens the spines.

And to, to that end, in terms of, uh, what, what we can hope to accomplish as we head toward midterms, where is your head at? Obviously, I think we're all kind of aligned on the House, but where is your head at on the Senate?

What does that tell you?

Well, it says two things, and I think we should take them separately.

On immigration-...

Trump ran on a mass deportation plan, but if you were just watching the news, watching TV ads, watching the conversation on social media, what you would believe is that Trump was running to secure the border and to get criminals, gang members, and drug traffickers out of our country.

That is not what he is doing.

That's not what people see he's doing.

What he is actually running a mass deportation plan that's getting people who have been in this country for a very long time, who pay taxes, who work out of this country, and voters do not support that.

Why?

(laughs)

Like I thought it... like I almost texted it to the gr- uh, group chat of a bunch of our former coworkers and my s- my Pod Save America hosts, and I was like, "Let me just confirm this is real, 'cause this could be fake news," 'cause it was so bad.

And it tells me a lot of things.

Um, you named a lot of them in your opening, uh, monologue here.

But just the two takeaways that I have is one, just absolute rank incompetence and hubris from Susie Wiles to do 11 on-the-record interviews with Chris Whipple, to not seem to know whether she was on the record or not, to treat not just any reporter, but this reporter, this author as something between a confidant and a therapist as you process the moral conflicts you're dealing with on a daily basis working for Trump.

And the second part is, I think is even bigger than the fallout of this story, it tells us everything we need to know about this White House, about how it's run, why Trump's been able to do all the things he's done, w- and frankly, why he's ending 2025 in his worst political position than at any point since the immediate aftermath of January 6th.

And Susie Wiles, as indicated in the story, bears full responsibility for that.

W- I... that to me felt like they saw this big story and they were like, "Okay, we're gonna do something and change the subject." But I don't know what you thought when you heard that news.

Is it that you don't, the Democrats don't have that this time around, that maybe Schumer is just not the same kind of poker player that Harry Reid was? What do you think?

I think it's a couple of things.

One, I think the Democrats were never truly united on what this shutdown was about, right? They, I think they were more interested in shutting it down, and there were people who wanted to shut it down for these Obamacare tax credits.

Others wanted to shut it down because of the ICE raids or Trump's authoritarianism or things like that.

And, and so there wasn't ever this unanimity around one specific thing that can hold people together.

And, you know, Schumer was not in an easy position here by any stretch of the imagination.

But to let, to lose eight members of your caucus, to have them negotiate directly with John Thune, the Republican leader, and the Trump White House, is a sign of one of two things to me.

Yeah, yeah.

Yeah.

The fact is, and the reason we had this big shift is there is a swath of voters who don't really like Donald Trump.

They told voters at the pollsters they disapproved of him in 2024.

They think he's probably kinda corrupt, a bit of a buffoon, but they did believe that Donald Trump would do a better job of lowering their costs than Kamala Harris did either because they thought Trump was a businessman or they thought Kamala Harris was too associated with the Biden economic record to do something different.

And he's failed those people, and those people voted against him this time.

And so that's the swing, and you, you just...

You can BS your way through a lot of things in life, but you cannot BS your way through high prices 'cause voters see it every single day.

It's, it's solved.

Yeah.

Like, like from the conversations I'm having with Democrats, this is that there are some people who are gung-ho for it, like in that last comment we heard, but a lot of people, like their kind of take is, "We have to fight.

We have to do something.

We have a very, very short menu of things we can actually do, and if we had all the choices in the world, we would not do the shutdown, but this is the one place where we can actually have a fight." I think the politics of the shutdown are probably greatly overstated, right? They tend to have a very short shelf life.

People seem to forget that Donald Trump shut his own government down over the border wall for a very long period of time less than a year from the election in 2020, and then no one talked about it ever again once it was over.

As has been mentioned ad nauseam in this, the Republican Party was basically... was less popular than the Democratic Party is today after the 2013 shutdown over funding of Obamacare, and then they won huge majorities in the 2014 midterms.

So I think it's... they're short-lived.

Sure.