I just I think there were too many false positives and maybe the Democrats were never in as bad a shape as they thought they were.

Well, I kind of disagree with that a little bit, because if you listen to voters, you know, our brand is still very, very weak.

Why is that? I think because people are unhappy.

And this can be the challenge.

If the Democrats win one, particularly both chambers back, people are going to expect their lives to improve.

And Donald Trump's not going to play ball with Democrats at all.

I mean, he's going to be the lamest of lame ducks in American history.

We're going to pull middle America in and embrace them and listen to them and be middle America's

Help us understand, like, you know, When did you really understand, you know, the contours of the Tea Party and what was going to happen in that election? Is there anything—if Donald Trump wasn't so intent on running an insane political play here with affordability, was there something he could have done? You know, how much of this is an own goal? What—

Right.

Great question.

Well, I will say it's going to sound a little self-serving, but that we somehow saw it the night of Barack Obama's election in 2008.

So you remember 06 and 08 were the elections of your dream.

If you're a party, we won everything everywhere.

But we didn't want to know six.

It's going to be pretty hard to do that even if Democrats run the table next week, isn't it? I mean, how do you calibrate this question of the public thinks they're voting for accountability or even legislation? How are Democrats going to pass a legislative program to address the visceral rage that's powering the electorate right now?

But as you're looking into the Texas data, are, are they working with any group of voters? Is it something that there should, everybody should be clear-eyed about in terms of how effective these ludicrous attacks are? What are you seeing?

Yeah.

So big caveat, Jen, about polls being accurate.

But let's say at least on aggregate that they're accurate or very close to it.

No, I mean, the, the race has been pretty steady.

Most importantly, Talarico's been up in the high 40s.

There's even, you know, some polling that has him at 50 or 51.

There's that

You know, your job in numerous campaigns has, in part, has been, like, where do we deploy this money, for what, and what are the ads? How are you thinking about the efficacy at this point?

Well, what I've learned is political money can't trump reality, and it's most important where there's a big disparity, so in some of those governors' races, it could make a difference, or when you've got a neutral political environment.

So I think what you're seeing is ...

You know, I was in Texas last week, too, and you just see it's a blizzard.

It's wall-to-wall negative ads.

yearsYeah, 2006 you think is the, the best turnout

So, yeah, I think so.

And so, um, I think it's gonna have limited view.

I

think that One, it captures people's general anger and concern and fear of the health care system, which Republicans have made worse.

But then it puts Marshall front and center as kind of a vulture.

And so, you know, to John's point, could that move the rural vote in Kansas an extra two points, which is probably what he needs, potentially Hamilton needs.

So and I would just say so, yeah, it is the most effective ad possible.

I hope every voter in Kansas sees it.

I'm sure they will.

Talk a little bit about that and talk about what you're seeing around the country.

Those are two stand-ins, but it seems like all the data we have says there's a lot of folks like that out there right now.

Yeah, and all it takes is a few percent of people in districts or states to flip them entirely, and I think it's just the accumulation.

People feel betrayed.

He said no war.

It's probably the one thing everybody believed in, war.

We see prices skyrocketing.

The war is contributing to it, the ICE attacks.

Yeah

Right.

They own the record.

They own the gas prices.

They own the food prices.

They own people being upset about ICE and immigration.

They own the Iran war.

So I think you'll see more of that because people are getting polls back.

I mean, every ad I'm seeing Is, is a lot of it is on the terrain of the Democratic Party.

When you look at that chart and the move, what feels good about it to you? And what do you think people need to kind of be on planet Earth about?

Well, it reflects Donald Trump's, you know, almost historic unpopularity.

He's getting close to where George W. Bush was in 06 and 08.

So that's what it is.

So it's good news if you're a Democrat because you're the only alternative in a two-party system for the most part.

I think the challenges are, one, we have to win in a bunch of deep red territory.

So we've got to keep improving those numbers as good as they are now.

Is this something where it's Elon Musk doing a 2024 playbook? Is this something Democrats in those states need to worry about? What do you think?

[laughs]

Or in Toledo, Ohio? Absolutely not.

And so in those states, you've got Amy Acton, you've got Sherrod Brown, you've got Turek, you've got Sand, just to use those examples, who are defining what the Democratic offering is in this election.

They're not focused on what happened in those states, even though Michigan's close to them, like what happened in the Michigan primary or what's happening in New York City.

They're just not focused on that.

Now, I think our presidential race, not in the general election, but in the primary, yeah, that's gonna be a, a really big piece of it is, is what are people looking for? And I happen to believe it'll probably be more about the person, their biography, their values, their performance than ideology, but that'll be part of it.

So I really do not think...

Hmm.

Most Democratic candidates in swing districts are certainly probably hoping they run with this, but what do you think of it?

Well, Jen, I agree with you.

I mean, it would appear at first glance and maybe second glance like kinda historical political malpractice.

The only thing worse than being a president when you're presiding over the country when people are very unhappy, you're unpopular, they think you're doing a bad job, is trying to convince people they're wrong and you're right.

So we saw a little bit of this, you know, with Bidenomics in the last administration.

Uh, you remember back in '12 when Barack Obama won re-election in a really tough economic climate, we were very careful not to get too far [laughs] beyond where the voters would accept.

So I think it's a disaster strategy.

Mm-hmm

Are there any late deciders left or do we simply have two sides both hardened in their positions and thus turning out base becomes central to victory? How does this change the conversation around elections?

Well, it's so important.

There is a very dangerous, I think, false choice that's often presented, certainly in my party, which is you've got to think about it's either base voters or voters.

middle persuadable voters and in any battleground state any close congressional district there's not enough of either you need both right you've got to drive up turnout through registration turnout and you've got to win enough of the middle in battleground states in competitive congressional districts that candidate who wins the middle almost always wins the election number one there is this you know a lot of political scientists that i you know admire say there's no such thing as a swing voter anymore but let's just look at the last 14 years okay You and I grew up at a time when it's like there weren't many landslide elections.

Nineteen seventy four right after all Watergate landslide election.

Maybe not ninety four.

Bill Clinton's first off your election landslide.

Is there a remedy out there for the situation, either through regulation or through some changes in technology? Or is it simply an issue that must be governed and managed around enough counter messaging on social media so that the real message drowns out the lies and the misinformation?

But I don't know how you escape from this one and call it a win.

There's zero things you could point to in reality.

He'll try.

On a win.

What is there? They're still gonna have the ability over time to reconstruct their nuclear program.

They are gonna be in power, and as you said, David, with probably more, uh, radical and younger leadership.

By the way, the Israeli image, which was already quite poor all around the world, is now even worse.

Organize, yeah

How did we get here?

Yeah.

So just a second on, on some of what you just said.

I mean, the Times poll is interesting.

I mean, Trump obviously doesn't like it.

He's threatening to sue them on, based on the poll.

But if you look at all of his numbers...

Okay, I wanna hear this

[chuckles]

... it's a, it's a great question, Alex.

I mean, when you, when you work in, in the White House, you, you get to see psychological profiles that are developed for world leaders.

Trump's psychological profile is, like, literally a sentence long, which is just flatter the guy, and you'll get what you want.

So on the one hand, whether you're a business leader, we've seen this a lot in Silicon Valley, you're a world leader, you know, you bend the knee, you say some things nice publicly, and, you know, he is like a dog.

He rolls over.

His belly's been rubbed.

I come down on kinda one side, but I'm wondering what you think, as somebody who, like, both lives in the tech world and in the political strategy world.

Right.

But then they're gonna have stuff they're gonna try and pass, and they'll be successful in some and unsuccessful.

But when they are, they're...

I think one thing we have to do a better job is- is doing the- the same kind of intensive storytelling we do during a campaign when we're in government, which is, "We passed this and now a month from now, this person was able to get their small business open more fast." Or, "This person was actually able to get, you know, free training to become a plumber," or whatever it is.

Uh, and then when that stuff's not working, say it's not working.

But if we fuse these things together, which is, yes, we would like the wealthy to pay more.

I don't think it's really...

Mm-hmm.

Mm-hmm.

... that kind of night.

So, um, great outcome.

I think it shows the depths of peoples' economic, um, anger and despair.

Anger at Trump, both because he hasn't done anything on prices other than make it worse and he seems focused on a bunch of stuff that's unpopular.

Um, but at the end of the day, I think that, you know, winning New Jersey and Virginia by these margins is amazing, and I think some of the county level stuff underneath is even more promising.

But, you know, ultimately for the Democratic Party to get to where it needs to go, we have to reliably be able to compete again in Iowa and Ohio, win the presidential race in the Sun Belt and the South.

Yeah.

Are there any late deciders left or do we simply have two sides both hardened in their positions and thus turning out base becomes central to victory? How does this change the conversation around elections?

Well, it's so important.

There is a very dangerous, I think, false choice that's often presented, certainly in my party, which is you've got to think about it's either base voters or voters.

middle, persuadable voters.

And in any battleground state, any close congressional district, there's not enough of either.

You need both, right? You've got to drive up turnout through registration turnout, and you've got to win enough of the middle.

In battleground states, in competitive congressional districts, the candidate who wins the middle almost always wins the election.

Is there a remedy out there for the situation, either through regulation or through some changes in technology? Or is it simply an issue that must be governed and managed around enough counter messaging on social media so that the real message drowns out the lies and the misinformation?