Dolls, Tariffs & Polls
01:10:07 Share

Hey, pull up a chair. It's Hacks on Tap with David Axelrod and Mike Murphy. When does it become the Trump economy? It partially is right now. And I really mean this. I think the good parts of the Trump economy and the bad parts of the Biden economy because he's done a terrible job. He did a terrible job on everything.

So there you have it, John Heilman. The good parts, everything that's good in the world flows from Trump. Everything that's bad flows from Biden. It's easy. Just follow along, brother.

It's easy. It provides a very easy way of understanding everything in the universe. Although I will say two things about that. One, he clearly is telling the truth. He really does mean that. And number two, which is a rarity for Trump telling the truth that straightforwardly. And number two, kind of every president in the early part of their tenure kind of feels that way. They want to like they always want to blame the previous the predecessor for the bad stuff and take credit for the good stuff. So it's like not but not every president unleashes calamity in the first hundred days.

Yes, I'm fully aware he's not like other presidents in those respects. So that voice you heard all the way from Bismarck, North Dakota. The cackle. Did you really say that? Did you really say the cackle, John? Well, it was a guffaw. Wait, let me say her name. Heidi Heitkamp, former Senator Heidi Heitkamp, my pal, the director of the Institute of Politics at the University of Chicago University.

has joined us. Heidi, if you had learned that kind of agile footwork, you'd probably still be in the Senate. If you just learned how to blame your opponents for everything bad and take credit for everything good. I don't think it's saying it nearly as much as having a group of people who will believe it.

So if I said it, people would not have believed it. But if he says it, it's like, oh, yeah, that must be true. It reflects an interesting, you know, we've talked about it before, but you have to note it every once in a while. I mean, he has a fundamental belief, you know, that he can sell anything.

If he says it enough and if he gets other people to say it, I mean, that's the kind of that's the whole philosophy of of Trump. And that's the storyline he wants to sell. But I mean, does it sell?

It's true. But David, here's the thing. And I'd say, and Heidi, I'd point this out too. In this case, there are people obviously who believe Trump when he says stuff like that. But in this case, on this specific thing, A, the polling shows us that people don't think that. People think since Liberation Day that this is the Trump economy. That is like what the voters think.

And even his fellow Republicans aren't buying that. You know, when you see Senator Kennedy, John Kennedy, you know, of Louisiana on TV saying, nope, this is the Trump economy. Like it's a rare, that's another thing. It's kind of interesting that,

that a lot of Republicans who normally just agree with Trump as a matter of course, or are afraid to disagree with him, are actually saying, hey, this economy is Donald Trump's. He owns this now. And I think that's a pretty, it's a little different than it has been in the past, where everybody just nods and says, yes, dear leader, yes, you're right. He, in a similar way, claims credit for the stock market every day it's up and blames Biden every day it's down.

Monday, Tuesday, next week ago, Thursday, Biden stock market. And it's even worse than that. He sits and he says, groceries are down. They're not down. They're actually up. Gasoline prices are almost virtually the same. Now, will they go down? I think they will. But at the same time, his goal of drill, baby, drill, you get $40 oil, which will be great at the pump for consumers. It's not good for drill, baby, drill. And so, you know, Donald Trump,

Trump is meeting a very complicated economy for which he has absolutely no understanding. He has no understanding of supply chains. He has no understanding of how the economy works in this country. The only thing that I think terrified him was when he almost crashed the bond market. And other than that, he has no appreciation for what he's doing.

I will tell you guys driving across country as I have been the last three days from New Mexico to New York, I'll tell you two things. Gas is cheap. Like it's the gas, the gas prices are pretty reasonable right now, but every single place I have been,

There's like an egg surcharge at every restaurant along the road. There's like a dollar egg surcharge, a $2 egg surcharge. Every place you stop, they're charging still extra for eggs everywhere you go. And I just can't help but think that a lot of people notice that when they go to their Blake's Lotta Burger to get their egg-covered green chili cheeseburger. This gas price thing, you know, I'm reminded that during the pandemic, gas prices were

really affordable, which he also claimed credit for at the time. When the economy is slowing, oftentimes these energy prices go down, you know. Yeah. Well, I mean, and David, it's complicated. OPEC has just announced that they're going to pump $411 billion

barrels more a day into the oil market, which is going to be horrible for the American shale industry. And this is something I know a little bit about. And let me tell you, you know, this is going to basically hamper. He's always said we want drill, baby, drill and dollar gas prices. Those two things are completely inconsistent, but it demonstrates his fundamental lack of understanding of the economy. Yeah, but what's interesting is, and we all know this, is

The whole reason the guy is president of the United States is that he got elected in the first place. Or one of the main reasons is this patina of economic mastery that he developed over 14 years on TV. And you still, I mean, maybe you hear it a little bit less, but you hear this in focus groups. People saying, well, I mean, this guy's a master businessman. He knows the economy, which and that was always a myth. He's a master brander.

He's a master marketer. He's a master promoter. And that you can't take away from him. I mean, he is sui generis in that category. But but but so how much time does he have, you guys? How much time you see his economic numbers, Heilman there that, you know, they've sunk into the 30s. How much time does he have before people say, actually, this is Trump's economy and it sucks?

Like I said, I think people now are already, that's what those numbers tell you, is that the economy isn't great. The turmoil in the markets has sunk in for people. And, you know, they had a decent jobs report last week, but they also had the first quarter, the economy shrunk.

And, you know, you're halfway to a recession then, you know, I don't know anybody on Wall Street right now in the Wall Street forecasting world who doesn't think that we are given the combination of the trade war and what was going on in the broader economy that we're not headed for a recession. And we'll officially we're halfway there now.

two quarters negative economic growth is a definitional recession. And there's most people on wall street assume we're going to be in one by the end of June, which will be the end of the second quarter. And when the headlines are the Trump recession and the prices are rising and you've got, and he clearly knows where we're headed all this talk. I think we probably have the sound of him talking about the dolls, you know, let's play that. Cause I want to, I wanted to ask Heidi about that and see how the folks in,

in Bismarck and Mandan and those places. Can I just add to this, David, because I think this is where it's going to turn. When you see massive layoffs in small manufacturing shops, I mean, we're seeing it in Minnesota. We're seeing it in North Dakota. There's an argument that one of our largest manufacturers is going to shut down a plant in rural North Dakota. So you can look at all the macro numbers, but when the people see their neighbors being laid off

That's when Trump's in trouble. Yeah, and you must feel the Canada effect up there. Huge. Yeah. Especially if you're manufacturing any kind of farm equipment. You know, we rely on cheap Canadian steel, and when you tariff it for 25%, that's not good. We can't compete with overseas manufacturers at 25% tariff. I mean, that's the point I'm making. He doesn't understand the supply chain of American manufacturers. If he did, he wouldn't be doing what he's doing.

Let's play that sound, though, like you said, David, because it's been out. Last week, he had a version of this, and then he updated it again this week, and it's really viral. I mean, it's a thing where this is like one of those clips that has sunk in, people talking about it. It's Trump talking about how many dolls America's children actually need.

I think the tariffs are gonna be great for us because it's gonna make us rich. But you said some dolls are gonna cost more. Isn't that an acknowledgement that some prices will go up? I don't think a beautiful baby girl needs, that's 11 years old,

$30. I think they can have $3 or $4 because what we were doing with China was just unbelievable. We had a trade deficit. There's a joke here about how old you need to be when you finally need $30, but I'm going to leave that to the side. But Heidi, how does that land with your... In Bismarck with the cake eaters. Yeah. Well, number one, they're all shaking their head wondering...

Who has $30? I've never had $30. I mean, maybe his kid could afford $30. I mean, I think it's just a continuation of the kind of ongoing challenges that people have of in their mind kind of justifying their support for someone like Donald Trump, listening to what they hear is absolute nonsense, and then trying to, in their mind, justify why he would say that. And it's kind of like Marie Antoinette, isn't it? Yeah, well,

Well, I don't know. You know, I think that that whole thing's been overplayed, quite honestly. Do you? Yeah, I do. You should have told us that before we played it again. Well, no. I mean, you know, that's why you have us on this show, to disagree. But, you know, I think that the other thing that Donald did when he talked about how farmers were going to get hit and, you know, they were good people. And then at the end of that, he said, have fun.

Have fun not selling soybeans to China. And so there's other things that he has done in tweets that land a lot harder. But let me tell you something. One of the reasons, Heilman, that he ended up losing. I mean, there are a lot of reasons that went into 2020 and the pandemic's at the top of it. But the thing that you heard from people were erratic and just total lack of empathy.

Yeah. And yes. And I, and I think that I'll, I'll, yeah, I think that's right. I do think there's a Marie internet quality to that. And, and it was viral enough that, that people, everybody heard it and it seemed to reflect, you know, a certain, that thing who needs $30. That is the question, right? Like, like who's, what kind of people are cutting back from 30 to two or 30? Honestly, who's the president to tell you how many dollars you should buy your kids?

Yes. The question that Chris and Walker asked him was how many dollars the boys needed. That would have freaked him out. But here's the thing. I think it's a tell, David. This is the other thing. People around Trump would say the fact that he keeps coming back to this. Trump normally takes the point of view, which is that everything is going to be great. My trade war is going to be fine. These tariffs are going to be wonderful. The American economy is going to be bigger and stronger than ever. And what he's saying there is,

We're going to pay a price. He's acknowledging that if he said, you know, fewer dolls and we have to pay more for them. It tells you that he's worried about it and that he's worried about the fact that he's thinking about the fact that this that this is, in fact, going to impose these costs and the notion Americans do not want.

uh, to do with less. That's not our, that's not that way. Then certainly Trump doesn't want to do with less. And I, there are people around him who say that this is an early indicator that it's warmed into his head to the point that he's probably going to end up caving on these tariffs, that he's going to end up basically that this is the, the first sign that Trump's starting to worry about it enough that he's going to look for a way out.

relatively soon. And there are a lot of people on wall street who think within the next three months that the whole tariff thing is going to have gone away by the, whether they're right or not. That's why the market's actually been pretty good last week because they all think Trump's going to bail. Yeah. And it's, I think the word out on the street is that Besant is slowly walking it back. But Heidi, um,

I know you as the Holly math. You are, you put, you have that, uh, you've got that Fargo thing going. You're, uh, you, you, uh, you, you do the, uh, shucks thing. And then all of a sudden you're four steps ahead. Everybody. I'm really nervous now, David, four steps at everybody. But David, you told you didn't tell, you didn't tell how he was going to be math on the show or that someone named Polly was going to show up. But the, uh, uh,

So I want you to listen to this next bite from Trump talking about tariffs and kind of unravel this for people, because this thing comes up all the time and it's a little crazy. But let's hear it. What people don't understand is and this is a lot. The country eats the tariff. The company eats the tariff.

And it's not passed along at all. Well, some CEOs are saying they're going to have to pass it on. So how do you deal with those CEOs? How do you deal with those CEOs? China is eating the tariffs right now. We've been through this a bunch of times. Just explain how tariffs work. Put something on a container. It gets to the dock.

Before you unload it, the customs people say, you have to pay me money. Whoever picks it up, make sure that there's money somewhere in an account to pay for the tariff. Then they move the goods and whoever takes possession of them and sells them to consumers adds the price of the tariffs like you would a sales tax. It's really simple. It's really simple. Let me give you a direct example.

Back when Trump was doing the on-again, off-again 25% tariffs on China, we'd buy a lot of farm equipment in North Dakota. Up in Canada, a guy bought an air seeder. This is really an expensive implement. He goes up to pick it up before spring planting. It's a million-dollar piece of equipment. Gets to the border, and at the border, they say, you cannot take this across until you write us a check or give us $250,000.

I said, you know what that farmer should have done? Said, charge Canada. I heard Canada's paying. I heard the implement, you know, come on. No one believes what Trump's saying except Donald Trump. Now, will this have an impact on China? Sure. Will they sell less to the United States? When people have this really incredibly lack of understanding of what we do with China, our...

imports from China, the things that we take from China are only less than 3% of the Chinese GDP.

And China has told us, look, you know, we've been around for 5000 years. You think Donald Trump's going to intimidate us? No. And so, you know, China's already looking for extra markets. They're shutting down. And when you're an autocratic dictatorial system, you know, and the people come with pitchforks, you turn the army on them. Right. So China has a whole lot of options that Donald Trump doesn't have any ideas here. Right.

Okay. But, you know, this is not, this does not work the way Donald Trump says it works. And people know it. I mean, you think that farmer thinks that Canada was going to pay that $250,000? No, he knows better. He's not wrong that in theory...

producer could end up eating the tariff and could end up taking the hit on their profitability on their products. He's not wrong in theory. What he's wrong is in practice that there's any history. We have a lot of data on what happens when tariffs get imposed. There have been a lot of countries that have imposed a lot of tariffs over a long time. What happens is the prices of them go up. It's just, it's not a, it's at the shelf. It's not a, it's not a thing where you can fight the,

he's making a theoretical point about what could happen, but it's not whatever actually happens when the tariffs get imposed. And so you're kind of like, that's what we're going to see is we're going to see empty shelves and more expensive goods. That's just, that is what's going to happen. You know? Yeah. And, and we're going to see,

reciprocal tariffs. Yes, sure. So those small businesses that Heidi's talking about, they get it coming and going. You take the oil industry, crashing oil prices. Guess what the single largest input beyond labor is in the oil industry? It's steel.

And so they're getting it and coming and going on the tariffs. Not that we're going to cry for the oil industry. I get it. But I knew when I asked Heidi this, that we would quickly turn into economists on tap. Right. Let's not do that. OK, let's take a break right here for a word from our sponsor. We'll be right back.

Hey, Dave, you know what is right around the corner? A lot of things right around the corner, but the one that I'm focused on right now is Mother's Day. Thanks for reminding me. Yeah, seriously, man. You don't want to just get through Mother's Day. You want to win Mother's Day and cement your reputation.

as the best gift giver in the family. Here's how to do it. You give the moms in your life an Aura digital picture frame preloaded with decades of family photos. Aura frames, man. I know you use them. I use them. It's just the coolest thing. I take a lot of pictures and...

you know, there's always so much room in everybody's house for, for frames. The great thing about our frame is, you know, you can put all those pictures online and then have them be broadcast out through the frames on a rotating basis. So every frame becomes an opportunity to showcase dozens of different pictures. It's a huge upgrade to how frames work in our lives. Yeah. And it's really easy to use. So even a knucklehead like me can do it. Uh,

No memory card required. You just upload videos up to 30 seconds long and your favorite live iPhone photos will play right on the frame. There's an embedded speaker so you can play audio on demand. I have three...

mothers who I love in my life, my wife and my two wonderful daughters-in-law. And so this is, I can tell you, a great, great gift. All of those awesome features are part of the reason why Oriframes was named the best digital photo frame by Wirecutter, which of course is where everybody who has half a brain goes to find out what actually is the best technology out there in the market. And it's easy to see why Wirecutter felt that way. There's unlimited storage on the Oriframes.

You can add as many photos, videos, and funny memes as you can find, and it is fantastic.

So simple, so simple, as David said, to set up. Just plug it in and share away. So Aura has a great deal for Mother's Day. For a limited time, listeners can save on the perfect gift by visiting auraframes.com to get $35 off plus free shipping on their best-selling Carver mat frame. That's Aura, A-U-R-A frames.com. Promo code HACKS.

Support the show by mentioning us at checkout. Don't forget to do it, especially here as Mother's Day is approaching. You can't go wrong. Terms and conditions apply. If people weren't so jaundiced about the economy in 2024, if people didn't feel like they were getting beaten up by inflation, Trump has a much less good chance to win. Period. End of story. That was a big part of what he was selling. That and the border.

Uh, so, um, now he is failing on his major promise and he's making things worse. Shouldn't that be the focus? Uh, shouldn't that and the cuts, the budget cuts that are touching people's lives shouldn't day to day, uh,

Shouldn't these kitchen table issues be the focus of what Democrats are talking about? Absolutely. I mean, I've preached this over and over and over again. Look, you've got to start talking about not just what Trump's failing to do to lower prices, but what you're going to do in reaction. And you see very little economic activity on the floor of the Senate, but

on the floor of the house. And I'll tell you why, because there is so much distraction out there. We're distracted by him tweeting a picture of himself as the Pope. We're distracted by him saying, I'm gonna now tariff movies. And so there's just, he floods the zone and dilutes. The secret to pollution is dilution, right?

I mean, that's an old EPA saying, you know, he has diluted the economic message by basically flooding the zone. And Democrats need to focus. Nobody else I know is full of old EPA aphorisms. Yeah, I was going to say, who do we do with the word EPA aphorisms? Hey, but so here's the question, David, to respond slightly to your, here's the thing. I'm going to play, let's listen to this piece of sound. Here's the challenge for Democrats, right? On the face of it,

It's obvious, right? The economy is always the most important issue. The economy is stupid, right? And in this particular case, that was the whole basis of Trump's success. Of course, Democrats should focus on that. The problem is not just Heidi, though, that he floods the zone with, as Steve Bannon said, floods the zone with shit.

But he also says things like this. Trump with Kristen Walker. Your secretary of state says everyone who's here, citizens and non-citizens, deserve due process. Do you agree, Mr. President? I don't know. I'm not a lawyer. I don't know. Well, the Fifth Amendment said— I don't know. It seems—

It might say that, but if you're talking about that, then we'd have to have a million or two million or three million trials. We have thousands of people that are some murderers and some drug dealers and some of the worst people on earth, some of the worst, most dangerous people on earth. And I was elected to get them the hell out of here. And the courts are holding me from doing it. But even given those numbers that you're talking about, don't you need to uphold the Constitution of the United States as president? I don't know.

I played that for this reason.

Yes, it is true that Democrats often get distracted by things that Trump does, like putting out, tweeting pictures of him as the Pope, etc., etc. But it's also the case that Trump is saying things that are genuinely terrifying to people. Should I uphold the Constitution? I don't know. The man has taken the oath of office twice. It's the central thing the president's supposed to do, uphold and protect the Constitution of the United States. He's doing things on immigration that are terrifying to people who believe in the liberal order. So how do Democrats not believe

Or get that's not a distraction. John, that is a fight that has to be fought. And there and that's it should be fought in every courtroom all the way up to the Supreme Court. The question is really one of messaging. And what is your central thesis here? The central thesis should be, you know, that we're right back to where we were. OK, this is this is a big debate, Heidi, about. Yeah. But let me let me say this, John.

You know what? The Democrats have a huge brand problem. Those same polls that we've been talking about, they tell us that Kamala Harris would still lose to this president despite all this crazy, despite all this crazy, she'd still lose. Guess what? They need to find issues that don't don't support just the status quo of Democratic politics.

but move us beyond. And the economic place is where you can message that. And I agree with David. The courts are going to manage that. You aren't going to do that from Congress. You aren't going to do that from a political party.

So, guys, we don't disagree about the depth of the Democratic brand problem, and we don't disagree about the fact that the economy should be the main focus. I guess my question is a matter of not a nuance, but a central one. How is it? It seems it seems very implausible to me that Democrats confronted with some of the of the challenges to the liberal Democratic order that Trump is posing that are embodied in that clip.

It's very hard for Democrats not to say anything about that. Nobody said they shouldn't say anything about it. What is your central argument? We are right back to where we were before the election when, you know, the big battle was why aren't we talking about democracy more? And and the fact is that, you know, people weren't the people who decided that election were worried about democracy.

fundamental day-to-day costs and ability to get by. And they voted on

On that, here we have a situation, all of these distractions, and there are a few of them we can, you know, the reopening Alcatraz, having a military parade a la Russia on his birthday, which that's North Korea. It's more North Korea than it is Russia, by the way. Flag day. Yeah, North Korea as well. But, you know, all of that stuff.

Um, but you know, he is a, he's an arsonist and he's starting fires everywhere because he doesn't want you to know where to put the hose. And he wins on these kind of some of these crazy things. Uh, not on that one necessarily, although I don't think he minds the debate about, you know, if he's persuaded people that, uh, everybody he's shipping away are, uh,

you know, gangbangers who threatened them. Uh, you know, his, what he said is that, you know, it was really interesting. If you dig into that, what he said was, uh,

you know, if we follow the Constitution, we'd have to have two, three million trials. Now, there wouldn't be trials. They'd be short administrative hearings, probably. We'd have to have two to three million trials. The Constitution doesn't have a clause saying unless it's inconvenient. Right. Or unless it was unless it's unless it's unpopular or unless it's. But I think that that what is lacking here is.

as it was in the election what is the central thesis here what is the thing that you're driving toward right and um you know i think you have to fight all these fights but the question is what are you communicating let me ask you let me but let me ask you this is a this is the thing you we we again we don't disagree fundamentally on this but it's easier to say than to do so i ask you to both of you you you strata former elected official uh strategist

What do you suggest Democrats should do in the case of, when a case like Abrego Garcia comes up, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, that it should not, your argument is it shouldn't be central to the Democratic message. Okay, so they should not comment on it. It should be press releases, but don't do advertising on it. Don't make it, what do you do about that as a practical matter? Yes, nothing is 100%. And on that particular case,

drawing attention to it, I think was really, really important.

You know, I think it was overdone in some cases, but it was really, really important. But here's the thing. You know, one of the reasons that Democrats lost was because the perception was that they were more concerned about their ideological agenda than they were about the day-to-day economic concerns of people, that they were more focused on that ideological. Everything's been turned on its head now.

I mean, Donald Trump is he's he's starting a million fires. But the one thing he's not doing is things that will help people in their sort of deal with their day to day costs that, you know, will promote the economic well-being of working people. He's some of these things are going to have the opposite effect.

And so to me, the message is he is off on these crazy and sometimes destructive ideological jacks. And the one thing we wanted him to do, the one thing we elected him to do other than the border, which he did, is...

is get this economy working for working people, get those costs down and said, he's driving them the other way. I just, I put that clause at the end of everything. There are a million things to go after Donald Trump about a million things add up to nothing, nothing. Okay. Let, let, let me, let me, let me make this point. Yeah, please. That, that the whole thing is who you're going to stand with.

and the Democrats by making such a huge issue out of what's happening in Maryland. And I would tell you, be careful, because you don't know all the facts of what this guy has done. I mean, so, I mean, I have an, I agree this should never have happened. He was disappeared, but he may not be the poster child. It may be those three, you know, that mom with the two kids in Oklahoma sitting in the, you know, on the yard in their underwear waiting while ICE raids there. Let's pick a fight that we have sympathetic issues

victims. And I'm not sure the guy in Maryland is sympathetic. But my point is that the Democrats need to pick issues that rebrand the Democratic Party. I hear you. And all you're doing is basically reinforcing what David said.

So just to be clear, your view is that you're expressing some concern that Democrats gave too much attention to the Kilmar Albrecht Garcia case for a variety of reasons, one of which is that it takes them off the central message that you think they should be focused on, and two is that they may be walking into a trap if it turns out that this guy is not the saintly Maryland father that many people have portrayed him to be. That's what you're saying. You would not have made that as big a deal as Democrats made it for the period of time when they did, right? Absolutely.

The honest God truth is, yes, I would have found somebody who was a clear victim. Let me disagree with you on that, because whoever Trump disappears will then be portrayed in the light that he wants to portray them. He's depicted everyone they've sent away.

as dangerous criminals. That's his go-to play. I don't think... He may be exactly... I'm not... I have no...

You know, I don't know this guy. All I know is that if he's the guy that they say he is, then prove it in a freaking court of law. And that's the way the Constitution works. I don't think there's any... I think you can't simply ignore that stuff. I'm not saying ignore it, David. What I am saying is that if he comes back...

and they show a bunch of stuff and they have a bunch of witnesses that show that he's a bad guy, that then legitimizes all the deportations, that then legitimizes everything that Trump says. And so, you know, when you're a prosecutor, you want a victim that is sympathetic. You don't always have that. I get what you're saying, but you want to find the best case that you can find as a politician. And I don't think he was the best case to test Trump.

attitudes towards massive deportation. Well, the reason it came up was because the government acknowledged in court that they sent him away by mistake. So they didn't choose him. The government identified him. But it is the case, David. It is the case. And I'm not taking a side here. But it is the case that once they had found... I think there's an interesting argument to be had politically about how you deal with this kind of problem. Don't give me this bullshit you're not taking a side. It's...

You're taking David's side against me. I know it's two against one, people. You guys are strategists. I'm a journalist. I don't take sides. Don't give me that bullshit. Go ahead. Yeah, well, God knows. God knows that's not really been my problem in the past. I'm just trying to say I think it's very tricky because I think Heidi is right that there's a risk that it's a risk that when they bring him back.

if it turns out that some of the things that the Trump administration has said all along, that he beat his wife, that he did this, that he did that, if those things are shown in process, that it could undermine the Democratic case. I agree with you, David, that it's such a giant, egregious and dangerous abrogation of due process that you have to make it some kind of an issue. But the question is, how much of an issue? Democrats didn't just point out

that a Braygo Garcia was a problem. I did this too. We focused on it. Democrats focused on it and made it very central for a period of time. Like this is our cause. This is going to be at the, there's the main democratic message for the better part of a week or almost two weeks. And I think that that's where Heidi is right. That there's some risk to that, that you are, you are hanging your ass out over the line pretty far when you make it that central.

I think maybe if you roll this tape back about 10 minutes, I said that I thought that the danger was that you get off the thing that... Listen, here's a fundamental principle of politics. I don't think you can not... This guy, when a president of the United States says, I don't know whether... If I should support the Constitution. You can't ignore that. I'm not saying you ignore that. Of course you can't ignore that. But you also can't...

as a fundamental principle of just crass fundamental principle of politics, like talk about the thing that impacts on the largest number of people that is affecting their lives and, and really, really dig into that. In addition to his affronts to the constitution, the things he's doing are doing material damage to the,

To the people he said he was going to fight for. You know what I would be doing right now if I were in the Senate? I would be basically keeping a laundry list of all of the plant shutdowns. All of the people have been laid off and I'd be standing in front. I'd find some some folks who would stand with me and I'd be standing in front of those saying this is what's going to happen to you if we don't stop this guy. And where's your senator and where's your congressman? Because the fight is going to be in the midterms.

And so, you know, we have let Donald Trump distract us. And the economic consequences to families across this country is extreme. And we need to focus on those things that help redefine the Democratic Party. Don't just criticize what's happening right now, but reestablish the Democratic Party as the party of people who care about people who live their lives and work hard every day in America. And I don't see that happening. We need to take a break, but we'll be back in just a moment.

in Two Shakes of a Lamb's Tail. Delete me. I've tried many times. I can't do it. Yeah, right there. Delete me is a product, okay? And it's a product that makes it easy, quick, and safe to remove your personal data online at a time when surveillance and data breaches are common enough to make everyone vulnerable, even you. Even you. Apparently this product...

has been used by you directly to solve some problems. Yeah, I had some problems with people trying to steal my identity. And so I turned to Delete.me. It's a great service. It's easier than ever.

to find personal information about people online like me. And so having your address, phone number, family members, names hang out on the Internet can have actual consequences in the real world and make everyone vulnerable. I know that personally. More and more online partisans and nefarious actors will find this data and use it to target political rivals, civil servants, and even outspoken citizens posting their

opinions online, but with Delete Me, you can protect your personal privacy or the privacy of your business from doxing attacks before sensitive information can be exploited. And let me tell you, as someone with an active online presence, privacy is really important to me, and that's why I use Delete Me to keep my personal information personal, not for the public. I mean, I stole your identity for a while, and

the thing that I found, I call it an upgrade, but go ahead. Well, the thing that was problematic about it was every time I'd show up someplace, uh, people would say, you're not David Axelrod. You're not nearly handsome enough to pass for David Axelrod. That was all I heard. They're like, oh, you're like, I'm swimming over here. You've got to leave less hair than Axelrod has. And that's really saying something. Hey, listen, everybody out there, not just for Axe, but for all of you, uh,

You can take control of your data, keep your private life private by signing up for Delete Me. Now at a special discount for our listeners today, get 20% off your Delete Me plan by 20% off, David. That's not nothing. 20% off your Delete Me plan by texting HACKS to 64000. The only way to get 20% off is to text HACKS to 64000. That's HACKS to 64000. Message and data rates may apply.

What they're clearly aiming for is to get a bunch of these bilateral trade agreements really, really fast. You know, now fast is hard to do. Fast may bet that horse may already have left the barn. They keep promising them they don't show up. But, you know, with Britain and Japan and South Korea and some of the smaller countries that need to make a deal to say, OK,

That, you know, this is working and, you know, we've compelled people to make concessions right now. If I were one of those countries, by the way, I'd be thinking this is a hell of a time to negotiate with these guys because they're desperate for a deal. Yep.

These are going to be bad agreements. You guys. So before, before we get too deep into the, into the go off back into economics land again, Heidi just handed us David, a great segue into a more hack friendly territory, which is she mentioned the midterms, right? So Brian Kemp, uh,

uh, who everyone thought was going to run, uh, was getting ready to run against John Ossoff, uh, in the Georgia Senate race announced that he's not going to do that. And, and the question it raises is as we take on board, all of the things that are going on here and what the Trump economy looks like, well, how his approval rating on the economy is going down. Some of the signs of Republicans starting to put a little distance between themselves and Trump on the economy. Uh, you then get Brian Kemp, uh,

taking a pass on the Senate, is the Senate math and the Senate map starting to look a little bit more promising for Democrats? Is that overstating, in your guys' judgment, what this Kemp thing means? I know, you know, certainly it makes a big, big gift to John Ossoff. Yeah, no, it is. Ossoff would have been very...

It would have been a tough race with Brian Kemp. He's a popular governor, very big, good organization there. Clearly, maybe he's thinking about if he's going to run another race, it's for something bigger in 2028. But that was a big break for Democrats. And Heidi, you know, I think as...

As Hegseth unravels, you know, my thoughts turn to Senator Tillis in North Carolina who cast the vote that allowed him to survive against all evidence that he was going to be exactly what we've seen him.

be calm. Susan Collins' numbers in... Now, she's a survivor, but her numbers in Maine are... And she hasn't decided yet. I thought she indicated she is going to run. Has she not? I don't think so. I mean, we need to check that. Sorry. So those are two seats that, you know, it's conceivable that if the... At current course and speed, because things can change, that Democrats could win. I mean, how...

How are your former colleagues thinking? I spoke to a few of them. We were at a place over the weekend with some of them. What's your read on all that? Well, my read is that it's too early to tell and that you never know. So think about when I ran in 12. I wasn't even on the radar for a potential pickup, right?

I mean, no one thought that I was ever going to win that Senate seat in a state that Barack Obama was pulling 20 points down. But yet we're able to overcome it. And so this is about good candidates. So let's take a look at who the candidates are before we start calling races. And that's the point about Kemp. I don't think Kemp wants Kemp.

effectively washed himself from the Trump stink, as I call it. He didn't want to get back into the mud with Donald Trump because I think he's got higher ambitions. And right now he's legitimately not a never Trumper, but he's legitimately kind of washed of what happens with being too close to Donald Trump. And so I think Maine, especially if Susan decides one way or the other, whether she's in it, I think Maine is going to be very, very tough.

I think that North Carolina is probably the best chance for pickup. Especially if Roy Cooper, the former governor, Democratic governor, popular governor, decides to run. And there's some indication that he may. It goes back, David, to tell me who the candidate is and I'll tell you what's going to happen in these midterms. But I tell you, the Democratic Party right now, if they want to help win the midterms and win the Senate back...

They have to start redefining themselves. Well, so that raises two questions. First of all, Susan Collins is on the record as saying she plans to seek re-election. Yeah, that's what I thought. So as of last November, she came out and said that. So she's in. I guess the question then is, to your point, I don't think anybody – nobody really disagrees with this point, right, which is Democrats have lost the plot, especially as a party of working people. Right.

There are lots of targets of opportunity, maybe too many, as David points out. As you guys both look around right now and you look at, you know, I'm just naming things that have happened that have gotten attention. You know, Cory Booker's epic filibuster, Bernie Sanders and AOC flying around the country, various things that Democrats are doing to try to break through. Who impresses you guys? Who's doing something that you're like, they're doing it right in terms of... This is Heilman wanting to be...

the thoughtful journalist. Go ahead. No, you go ahead. Cause I, what's wrong? I'm asking you a question. I'm curious what you guys think. I want to know what you think. I want to know what you think. I think that, I think it's, I think that I got to say that I think for put aside ideology, put aside policy. I think the person who's, who's been most impressive,

In terms of kind of breaking through and charting the course of her future for herself as AOC. And I'm not talking about substance on this. I'm not talking about someone who is a young face of the party, communicates really well, understands social media, and has managed to do it in a way by attaching herself to Bernie Sanders in a way that doesn't look like she's just giving the middle fingers to the older generation of Democrats.

I think she's been super impressive. I'm not sure. She also is touting a left-wing populist message, which is how Donald Trump got elected. Well, I'm not sure that's exactly true. I don't know. I'm not sure that's exactly true. I disagree with...

I'm not sure that AOC is a presidential candidate in 2028. I don't know. I'm not ready to say that. I actually think, Heidi, that she it wasn't a left wing economic agenda. It wasn't a I mean, they are focused on the economic situation that most working families in this country face.

And if you listen to, you know, I've been listening carefully to what they're doing and saying their critique is the is it is there is the correct critique. The problem is that, you know, you if you drag along a lot of extraneous stuff with that.

That, you know, then it's, you know, I mean, but you go ahead, you go have at it. Well, listen, let me tell you, the reason why we've lost the working class people is we haven't been populist enough.

We haven't been. They're getting something that you should get. You know, we become the party of Wall Street. We become the party of elite. And they're bringing it back to listen to us. This is what we need to do. That is a populist message. That's not a kind of... Wait, wait. Wait a second. So we agree? Yeah. Well, I think...

I think I'm confused why that's a bad thing then. It's not. I'm not saying it's a bad thing. I'm saying that it's a resonant thing. Oh, I thought you just said that's why we lost to Donald Trump. I'm saying it resonated. It resonates because it is just the flip side of what Donald Trump did when he told people, working people, they're out to get you. The system's rigged. They haven't been since NAFTA. They haven't been on your side. Now we're going to bring it

And now you've got two people who have been anti. I mean, look at the trade issue. These are not globalist Democrats. These are people who have been fighting free trade that the messages are similar. And that's what what resonates. That's why the crowds come. That's why people people used to say, you know, I was going to vote for Bernie, but I voted for Trump in 16.

What you were saying is that's why Democrats lost because Trump expropriated that mess. Yes, absolutely. I think we misinterpreted what you were saying. Yeah, no, absolutely. I think it's fair to say that there is a problem. Democrats will have a hard time. If Democrats rebrand the party as being a socialist party, they are not going to win national elections. That's the baggage that comes along with it. That's the challenge. The challenge is how do you do a populist...

working class focused, real lives of real people message on both economy and culture that doesn't get tagged as being a socialist message. Because that, of course, is the danger of Bernie Sanders. Once it gets tagged that way, you got a problem. Do you want a model of somebody who, if he were-

Paul Wellstone. Yes. Think about Paul Wellstone. Yeah. I mean, you know, he, the happy warrior, he was out there fighting, standing in front of factories that were shutting down, fighting for working people, fighting for children, fighting for the disabled. You know, if you want to find somebody whose model we should be emulating, I think it's Paul Wellstone. And we got to quit

the big rallies. We got to go walk in Main Street. We got to be going where people are. And let me tell you, all those people that she's talking to, they're all on our side. Let's find people who aren't. They're also satisfying this hunger, fundamental desire, hunger for, you know,

for Democrats to stand up and fight back and so on. I think that Heidi's right about walking Main Street. But the thing is, you ought to walk Main Street to listen to people and not just tell them what they need. And that's the other part of this. But fundamentally, for 40 years, this economy has shifted in dramatic ways and in ways that have disadvantaged large numbers of working people and working class communities.

And Democrats have to have authentic answers for that. And if they want to be the party of working families, then it can't just be sort of

incremental this program and that program. And so it's the critique that's important to the truth is this economy hasn't worked for a long time for large numbers of people. And it's worked fantastically well for others. That is a real problem for democracy. That's a problem for capitalism. And we got to have an authentic answer to that. No, I just want to, I just want to come back to my question, which was, I asked you guys,

I appreciate the Paul Wellstone answer, although Paul Wellstone is not. I mean, he's dead. He's dead. He's dead. So so I just asked. I like way Jennings, Brian. I name cross of gold. Lincoln was terrific. Which of the two Rosebos do you like better? Yeah.

Hey, don't, Paul Wellstone's actually, you know, he's not that long ago. I ask you both to just, I gave AOC as an example of someone who I think is breaking through and is in a way that is suggestive of a path forward for a Democratic Party as it seeks to redefine itself. Can the two of you name someone who has struck you in the course of this first hundred plus days as AOC?

breaking through, doing it right, pointing the right direction for the party and the Democrats, for Democrats. I really do think it's too early, but do I think anybody did? Does anybody, have I looked at anybody and said, Oh, you know, that's the, uh, that's the answer. No, I, I, I haven't. I mean, I've seen interesting people out there. I mean, like if somebody is saying, he's doing something that you're like, Hey, there's a, that's not bad. I wish that, uh,

Murphy were here to hear me say this, but you know, I've been, now I've been in two sessions with Gina Raimondo. Oh God. No, no, man. I like her. I like her. I like her. It's just be, no, no. But I mean, I mean, I'm not saying she's going to be the candidate in 2028, but she was talking about the economy in ways that were meaningful and,

And partly because she talks about it from the standpoint of her father and uncles who all worked at the Bolivar factory in Rhode Island and all lost their jobs on the same day when the factory picked up and moved to China. And so she offers that family perspective. Yeah. Can I just say this? I, a friend of mine recently said, whoever you guys nominate can't be from Biden world.

Because it will raise all the Biden critique again. Okay, so fine. I don't know that that's necessarily true. But the bottom line is... Well, probably not if you were the VP, probably. Well, the problem that you have in answering your question, John, is that nobody is actually taking it to the street. You've got the governor in the great state of Illinois, basically given a stem winder,

take to the streets. I'm not somebody who says this. He's a billionaire. I'm out there promoting pitchforks. And then you have one of David's favorite people, Gretchen Whitmer, who...

I mean, I don't think she had a choice but to show up. The question is, how do you do that when you maybe have aspirations? So I think that I have seen people try and find some lane in the Democratic Party, and I don't think any of them have found the right message. I mean, it's not enough to stand on the floor of the Senate. It's not enough to give a big speech. You've got to be going out where people are.

Yeah, but this will evolve. I just want to be clear. I wasn't really looking for anybody to endorse a candidate for 2028. I just meant like, hey, have you seen anything in these 100 days where you're like, hey, that guy's doing pretty well. That gal's doing pretty well. We've seen a lot. The question is whether it's effective. The reason I mentioned Raimondo is because she had a big economic critique.

And she and and and and recognize the notion that we've got to be about big things, not small things here, because the problem is persistent. It's structural and it's conspiring against working people. And I think that is an important place to start. We need to take a quick break, but we'll be right back.

This episode is sponsored by Better Health. These are tough times and there's, you know, there's a lot of anxiety and a lot of pressure on folks out there. And sometimes it's really good to sit down with a mental health professional and work through these things.

And we've reached a time where we're talking more openly about that. I have, you have, I think it's really important. And that's why BetterHelp is so important. Yeah, David, you and I are both old enough to remember a time when people were like a little bit ashamed

to acknowledge that they'd seen a therapist. And so you wouldn't kind of come out and say that. Now, one of the great things, a real advance, I think, is that mental health awareness is growing and that people now are much, much, much more open about their needing help. That therapy has become a kind of much more normal part of American life, but there's still progress to be made. 26% of Americans who participated in a recent survey say they've avoided seeking mental health support due to fear of judgment. And when people hesitate to get help, it doesn't just affect

them. It impacts their families, their workplaces, and entire communities. This Mental Health Awareness Month, let's encourage everyone to take care of their well-being and break the stigma. Whatever the stigma still exists, we got to break it down. The world is better when people are happy and healthy, including being mentally healthy and better help. It can be part of that process. It's a fully online solution that makes therapy affordable and convenient, serves over 5 million people.

people worldwide.

In my life, I've had challenges and I've benefited from therapy. And I'm happy to talk about it because I've lost people in my life who didn't take advantage of that. And it was tragic. So I really urge you to take advantage of the opportunity. We're all better with help. So visit BetterHelp.com slash hacks to get 10% off your first month. That's BetterHelp, H-E-L-P dot com slash hacks. ♪

Listener Mail. Do you guys have, uh...

queries for the hacks, send them to hacksontap at gmail.com and we will do our best to answer your questions. If you have, if you want to leave a voicemail for us, we love to hear your voices and this is how you can do that. Dial 773-389-4471. I'll repeat it because who can remember that? 773-389-4471.

And thanks, as always, to Mike Murphy for his dulcet tones, even if they're recorded. So, Heidi, you have a bird's eye view on this thing. Mary says, how about Mark Kelly in 2028? He's a candidate my husband, who leans slightly right, Indy, and I, who lean slightly left, all agree on.

Kelly has presence, experience, knowledge, and wisdom. He's smart, strong, core values, caring, and compassionate. Gabby Giffords, his wife, is great too. I'd rather sit down for a beer with Kelly than hoity-toity East or West Coast elite. Take that, Heilman. Does he have a shot? Big fan of the show. Even the corny ads you put out for your sponsors. Hey, hey, hey, corny. Anyway,

Go ahead, Heidi. Amen. I think that he checks all the boxes. And so I'm a huge Mark Kelly fan. And I think that he's geared up. He saw that world a little bit when he was on the shortlist for VP for Harris. I think that he comes from the West, which I like.

I have to say a great military background. So completely agree with her. I think Mark Kelly will be in the mix for a nominee. He's going to have to prove his metal. And David and I both know. Right. Well, you and I talk about this all the time that unless you've been on that stage, you don't really know what it is. And so like DeSantis blaming out, of course he was going to flame out. He was like, he had no real appreciation for how tough it is. I think Kelly does.

Heilman, what do you think? So you're talking about a guy, son of police officers, naval airman, astronaut, husband of Gabby Giffords, etc.

And, you know, a noted sort of defense expert in the United States Senate, tough on the border and so on. You see prospects in Kelly? I see ambition in Kelly and I see on paper a candidate who and in the flesh, a candidate who will win.

assuming that he vets. Let's put it that way. Assuming that he vets, he could be a serious candidate in 2028. I still have questions about why he didn't get... For a lot of people, it was the odds on candidate to be the vice presidential pick for Harris in 2024, and he didn't. He got looked at, but in the end, he wasn't the guy, and I wonder why. Maybe he just got lucky.

Can I mention, he's got an identical twin brother. Yeah, you can double his campaign time. We had a couple of aldermen in the city council named Shaw. And one was a state senator and the other was an alderman. But if one guy couldn't show up, the other guy sometimes would.

Uh, so, uh, maybe you could work that out, but listen, uh, my thing is I want everybody in, I want everybody to show their stuff. I want, uh, I think Mark Kelly's a great guy. I'd love to see him in and, uh, Raimondo, everybody get in the pool. Let's see what you got. And, uh, somebody is going to emerge and define the party. Uh, how many, what do we, what else do we got? David, you, we've got a question here. Uh,

Apparently it's been raised previously on this podcast, but we can go a little deeper here. We can go a little deeper here. This is from Mark, not Mark Kelly, but another Mark who wrote at the end of a previous podcast, the hacks briefly discussed potential candidates to replace Dick Durbin. As you know, Durbin and his predecessor, Paul Simon, were both downstate Democrats. Yet the names you mentioned, apparently you and Murphy are both from Chicago, right?

Are there no qualified candidates from central or southern Illinois? If not, is this due to the fact that the GOP practically owns rural Illinois? David, this is a state you know something about, apparently. I do. Yeah, listen, I started my political career. I left journalism and went to work for Paul Simon, who was a splendid guy, a congressman from downstate Illinois. And this is how different the times were. Also a great songwriter. Great songwriter. I mean, you know, I mean... Not that bad.

Paul Simon. Sounds of silence. We're talking about the bow tie. In 1984, that Paul Simon came and campaigned for my Paul Simon. And my Paul Simon was not a very tall man, but he towered over the other Paul Simon. So he loved it. He loved being called Big Paul Simon. But anyway, Paul Simon won in 1984 in the midst of the Reagan landslide. Reagan won by 500,000 votes. Simon won

by 88,000 votes against a three-term incumbent Republican. And he won substantial votes downstate. He won a quarter of the self-professed

conservative vote. That's not the times in which we live anymore. The bulk of the vote is in the Chicago metropolitan area, and you get elected in party primaries, and the party primaries are determined largely by what happens in Chicago and in Byron. So it's not surprising that

most of the candidates come out of there. There are some really good people from downstate, but none of them are signing up for this. The primary is interesting, though. The governor has endorsed Governor Pritzker,

who apparently will be on the ballot even though he's considering running for president, is endorsed as Lieutenant Governor Julianna Stratton, who's an African-American woman for the Senate. Another African-American woman, Congresswoman Robin Kelly, who is at odds with the governor, has just said she's going to run. Raja Christian-Morthy, another congressman from the Western suburbs who's raised $20 million dollars

And it's more of a center-left Republican. Democrat is running in the...

primary. Uh, and there may be a Lauren Underwood, another Congresswoman who also happens to be an African-American woman is running. I don't know who else is going to jump. If anybody else is going to jump into this race, you know, there was talk of Rahm Emanuel getting this race. I don't think that's going to happen. So, um, you know, if the field is what the field looks like, it's shaping up to be, I think, uh,

Christian Morthy has an advantage, but the field is not set. So we will see. Awesome. Well, whoever wins the primary will likely win the general election. I think it's going to be more of a Democratic year and and it's a Democratic state. So this primary is very consequential. That'll happen in March.

That is a deep dive and a well-sourced deep dive. Plus, a good Paul Simon and double Paul Simon anecdote. That's a cherry on the sundae. So, Heilman, Eric, am I wrong? This is Eric speaking. I know you always like to say, I'm wrong. But this is Eric saying, am I wrong or is Trump's press corps really that much more over the top in representing the president than in prior administrations? By press corps, I think he means...

their spokespeople because he goes that's what he means trump's spokespersons can't seem to answer a question without throwing a hyperbole into hyperbolic praise of the president or blaming the radical left or both is this normal i can't recall obama's staff doing the same this feels like a

I think you may be, Eric. This seems like a leading question. It's a very leading question. I would say, again, what do I know? But I do remember the Obama administration pretty well, maybe not as well as David does. But I don't really remember anything like, I don't remember Gibbs, for example, or Jake Carney, or Eric Schultz, or any of those press secretaries behaving the way Carolyn Leavitt does. I don't remember that. And I certainly don't remember cabinet meetings, David.

in which the kind of Kim Jong-un vibes are quite as strong as they are in Trump's. We just didn't know that you could do that. Right. There are a variety of things that are different from Trump 1.0 and Trump 2.0. And one of the things is that the people in Trump 2.0 have studied Trump.

Trump 1.0 and realized like, okay, this is how it should be done. And, and, and my God, those cabinet meetings are, are hilarious for their over the top praise from every, everybody comes tripping over each other to be more unctuous and more well,

Let's just say more fallacious than fallacious. Let's put it that way. It's like the old joke. He goes around the room. It's like that old joke. Well, enough about me. What do you think of me? Think of me, right. But I will say the other thing is, I think for people in the press, Carolyn Leavitt is, you know, she is not just...

she not only, not only just praises Trump fulsomely, but she's just been an aggressive attack dog from that, from that podium and has done this job in a way, even previous Trump press secretaries going, think back to Sarah Huckabee Sanders and others who were pretty barbed up there. She is full. She is full on,

in attack mode and, you know, attacks members of the press in a really egregious way. And yet she is, I think, by common consensus, people will cringe when I say this, but she is clearly one of the stars of Trump 2.0. And when people think about who has shown, who is the apple of Trump's eye, who is bound for greater things in this MAGA Republican Party and in Trump's administration, she's the top of everybody's list as someone who is going places. Do we say next Secretary of Defense?

Can I just mention, I don't know if you guys saw the clip, but who she's let into the briefing room. Oh, I know. Honest to God, I watched it and the guy with the white hair, I

I thought, is this like Saturday Night Live? It was like comedy. And then when I found out it was real, I went, oh, my God, that's who now is questioning. And so she's kind of rigged the system a little bit for herself. No, no, no shit. I mean, I think that's the idea. And I will say just to have one small note of criticism for my colleagues. I do think, you know, the treatment of the Associated Press is

the attempt to, to, to bar the utopian press, despite the fact that the, that the courts have now ruled in its favor in the APS favor. The fact that the, that the white house is now basically taking over control of who is on the pool and who answers. Yeah. And who's in the pool and who asked questions. And, and as, as Heidi talks about the bringing in of the, the idea of bringing in some alternative Sean Spicer, bring in some alternative outlets is a good idea. Bring in some, but bringing in crazy conspiracy theory outlets in, in,

in the way that is, is outrageous. And I, and I would just say that I think that the white house correspondence association has done a terrible job in standing up to, uh, to that, those efforts on the part of the white house. And there needs to be, the press needs to show more solidarity, uh, unless it's going to be completely have all of its, its institutional prerogatives taken over by the Trump administration. And I agree, but I also think, uh,

that the media has done a valiant job here of playing their role, and he doesn't like it. I mean, the whole...

gist of this administration has been to shoot out all the lights and cameras so they can do whatever the hell they want. And that means the media. That means, you know, higher institutions of higher learning. That means lawyers. That means anyone who can serve as an independent person

source of information and accountability, they are uncomfortable with. And what they're doing in the press room is fundamentally wrong. I'm going to take the other side of that, David. Okay. He just did an interview with ABC. He just did an interview with NBC. So even if they hear us, we know that's inside baseball, what's actually happening. But by

all visual kind of people out there. He, he, he'll take questions going up to, I mean, that is very, very fair, Heidi. I think that's good commentary. It doesn't obviate the fact that, um, in the day-to-day coverage of this administration, they are throwing wrenches into the works. And he, he does that because he thinks that he can spin, uh,

as well as as anybody but two things can be true at the same time here one is that donald trump is is is i i give him all the credit in the world for taking for sitting down way more than joe biden did mainstream with mainstream outlets for that well there was a reason for it but still you still have to hold these guys accountable i think it was you know the reality is that trump deserves credit for sitting down with kristen welker and with terry moran and all those interviews it's

also true that they are trying to control the White House press corps inside that building in a way that is, as David said, just wrong. So those two things can exist side by side. You know what else is wrong? We've run out of time. I wish we could continue, but we can't.

But Heidi Heitkamp, you're my pal. I can't wait to see you later this week here in Chicago. I learned the one thing you can't call it. You don't want to call Heidi Heitkamp. Call her a cake eater. Call her a Bismarck cake eater. That's like basically like the equivalent of, you know, calling her a member of the East Coast elitist demographic.

Would you live in Bismarck now? No, I live in Mandan. That's the point. I thought you had abandoned your hometown. I told an old joke, David, which is, what does Bismarck have that Mandan doesn't? A beautiful city across the river. That's all.

All right. Okay. A little North Dakota humor to bring things to a pause. We've got a lot of listeners there. Okay. All right. We've got to get your brother Joel on here, too. You do. You do. He's one of the great radio...

Talk show hosts in America right there. Well, he's doing it every day. He's talking to people every day in America, in rural America. And here's a guy and I just want to put a plug in. Here's a guy who's more liberal than I am. And how does he connect every day and have the talk top talk radio show in the region talking to 100,000 people every day? Guess what? By understanding the audience. And let me tell you, he does a great job.

So there's my plug. You'll have nice things to say at Thanksgiving for you. Anyway. All right, guys. See you soon. Okay. Bye. Take care.