This episode of the Chuck Todcast is brought to you by Wild Grain.

Wild Grain is the first bake from frozen subscription box for sour dough breads, artisonal pastries, and fresh pastas, plus all the items conveniently baked in twenty five minutes or less.

Unlike many store brought options, Wild Grain uses some simple ingredients you can pronounce and a slow fermentation process that can be a lot easier on your belly, little gut health there right, and richer in nutrients antioxidants.

There's also no preservatives and no shortcuts.

The Wild Grain boxes are fully customizable.

In addition to their variety box, they have a gluten free box, a vegan box, and a new protein box.

I will tell you I have done the gluten free box.

I have done it a second time.

I have also used the code the todcast code.

You use the promo code toodcast at checkout you get thirty dollars off.

I've already used it as a gift to somebody else who loves this bread.

It is hard to find good gluten free bread.

It is fantastic.

They give you step by step instructions.

I really dig this.

There is nothing like having an artesian bakery in your freezer to chase away the winter chill.

Now is the best time to stay in and enjoy some comforting homemade meals with Wild Grain.

I obviously highly recommend it.

It is worth giving Wild Grain to try.

Right now.

Wildgrain is offering my listeners thirty dollars off your first box plus free croissants for life.

Come on when you go to wildgrain dot com slash podcast to start your subscription today.

That's thirty dollars off your first box and free croissants for life when you visit wildgrain dot com slash podcast, or simply use the promo code podcast at checkout.

This is a sponsor I absolutely embrace, so use that code.

Hello there, Happy Thursday, and welcome to another episode of the Chuck Podcast.

I am coming to you.

I'm traveling.

I just wrapped up a panel that I moderated on behalf of the Harvard Kennedy School.

I'm not a I literally just was an invited moderator.

My panel was a long time Maybec News political reportner Britney Shepherd, former DNC chair Jamie Harrison, and former Republican Congressman from Illinois Rodney Davis and we basically did a mid term preview.

In fact, many of the things I talked about there you've heard me talk about here.

But it is, it is.

It was interesting to hear sort of what people feel like they have to say publicly.

And I say that, and I think that you know you you know, no partisan and I get it right.

Partisans want to be careful and they want to want to be on message.

But needless to say, Rodney Davis, who works the Chamber of Commerce, he sort of acknowledged that there are some there are some concerns that the Republican Party is being remade a party that is not as appealing to the Chamber of Commerce Republicans as it once were.

And Jamie Harrison acknowledged plenty of problems that the Democrats have and speaking to rural America.

But anyway, you won't be surprised by this, but that you know, those Harvard students a pretty smart last time I checked, and they asked some terrific questions in there.

So my thanks to the wonderful hosts at the Harvard Kennedy School and the Institute of Politics.

There are a lot of this is sort of the original IOP and there are a lot of it.

They've been a great model for Institute of Politics all around the country on that.

So my thanks to there.

But that is why I'm not in the home studio.

But it doesn't mean I don't have that.

I have some truncated show for you.

Actually just the opposite.

I have a few things I want to get to and in fact, let's start with the midterms.

I know we've had a lot of crazy stuff happened this week, right the Pam BONDI Epstein hearings.

You know, I'm not going to do what everybody starts does these days, which is say, you know, congressional hearings are all theater.

Yes they're all theater, but the theater can matter if there's a SoundBite that lives or a moment that lingers.

That's why these hearings do.

I wish that more members of Congress figured out how to not make themselves the focus and make the witness and the question that they want the witness to answer, the focal point.

I think, in fact, a great example of this was an Illinois Congressman, Sean Casten and the question that he asked a couple of weeks ago of Scott Bessant asking about some technicalities about what is Treasury's authority when it comes to overseeing the money that comes from the venezula and oil, and you could just see Scott Bessett look like the student in the classroom that got caught not reading, not doing the WHO homework assignment the night before and the teacher called on them.

In some ways, I found it to be more effective then you do the argument back and forth.

But I understand the politics of that.

The members are trying, you know, sometimes it's the only time their constituents know they're doing anything, are at these hearings, And of course we know in the Trump administration, cabinet secretaries have an audience of one.

And it was bizarre to hear Pam Bondi pushed back on one Epstein question by saying, how come we're not talking about the Dow crossing the fifty thousand market.

You're like, what does the Attorney General have anything to do with the Dow Jones industrial average?

So but we do know that's that's a comment that was meant for an audience of what the man over at sixteen hundred Pennsylvania Avenue.

But you know, Bondi's credibility issues are pretty she's accumulating quite a few of them.

It's been a you know, it's not been a good good week for the Justice Department.

Janine Piro tried to get a grand jury.

You know, infamously, grand juries can indict, supposedly can indict a hand sandwich, but they can't seem to indict people that that the public doesn't think deserve to be indicted.

And so they try to get indictment on those members of Congress who made the video that told rank and file soldiers that they do not have to follow illegal orders, which is true.

That's upholding your oath.

So it I think the decision by the grand jury not to bring those indictments, I hope for those of you that are concerned that somehow the government isn't responsive, that people aren't listening, that should be a reminder that, you know, the public public is paying more attention than I think activists and other members of the media think at times, and certainly how elected officials.

The public's paying attention, and ultimately, you're going to have to trust the voters that they're going to do the right thing when it is up to them to do the right thing, and those Grand jurors did the right thing when it was their time to do the right thing.

So I hope those of you that have been losing some faith in the democracy, losing some faith, that you realize, no, when trust the voter, just trust the voter.

Eventually, we always figure it out.

Okay.

The question is how much damage gets done before we as an electorate have to figure it out.

But we do always figure it out.

That's what our history shows.

And I'm confident we're going to figure it out again, and we're going to get to a better place, and we're going to figure out how to be have a democracy that's more responsive to left, right and center, which is part of the conversation I have with Paul Rykoff.

This is not about just TDS, you know.

Here, This is about the system as a whole.

Trust the voter here.

And I think that decision by those Grand jurors not to go along with that indictment, and you know, another embarrassment for the Justice Department.

But remember it was Pam Bondi who gave out those who claimed that she had all these Epstein files on her desk and she was doing all this and then now she's in the role of pay no attention to these Epstein files.

Right when she first got there, it was all about riling up the magabase that cared about the Epstein files.

And now that they've had to put their money where their mouth is and been forced to actually release these files, and now they've been you know, suddenly they want to redact more.

They're afraid of certain things.

There's been a lot of protecting of Donald Trump here, even though again it's it's interesting.

There seems to be plenty of semi exculpatory things for Trump in these files, right, including the FBI notes that he talked to an FBI agent and seemed to think that what Epstein and Dyllene Maxwell are up to was no good.

But he seems to be awfully nervous about it.

Is it to any friends that are caught up in it?

Is it the fact that it is his close friend?

Is it the fact that they are that when they were all when when when Trump and Millennia were a new couple, that the one couple that they interactive with quite a bit was Maxwell and Epstein.

Whatever it is, it is, Trump is behaving like he's got more to hide than what we all have actually seen, right, it's a bit of a head scratcher.

So, needless to say, I think that that BONDI has cemented her legacy is more partisan, frankly partisan warrior sitting there and not you know, I don't think that's going to be her attorney general portrait is going to be one that is hung up very often by successive attorneys general.

I think her portrait will likely be in the basement of that Justice Department building for a long, long, long time.

But with that, I want to focus obviously, Look, I'm a campaign guy, I'm a politics guy, and it's an even numbered year, so you know, when when in doubt, I'm going to focus on where we are politically at the moment, and there is Look, I made it clear that you know, it looks like the House has already gone.

The question is is it going to be a small majority for the Democrats or a large majority for the Democrats.

Structurally it's hard to see how it becomes a large majority for the Democrats.

In fact, some of the feedback I got on my substack, I took what I gave to you guys on Monday, and I basically put some charts together as well, and it's in the substack on how you know, essentially saying the cake is basically baked.

You've got you know, we've already crossed the fifty plus open seat list.

There's already thirty Republican retirements that are more than are likely to come.

You've got presidential job ratings sitting in the very low forties.

There's even a handful of polls it shows his approval rating in the high thirties and disapproval rating creeping over sixty.

That is a recipe for a midterm flip.

The question is are there enough congressional districts that Democrats can make competitive to take a Instead of winning ten to fifteen seats, can they win twenty to thirty seats.

I had a few One of the polster that I trust quite a bit, who really is more of an independent these days, but certainly is more familiar with the Republican side of the aisle.

He shared with me some numbers and reminding me that in twenty eighteen, I believe not a single congressional district that Donald Trump got fifty seven percent or more in Democrats were able to flip.

That there is there is a ceiling right, there is a ceiling.

And then even in the twenty twenty five Virginia Assembly races, you know, Democrats were able to win districts that Trump won by five points or less.

They were not able to win districts where he won by more than five points.

And we've seen Democrats are trying to put some double digit Trump districts in play, including one of the Montana seeds with Ryan Zinky, one of the Colorado seats in and around Colorado Springs.

Bill.

That's smart strategy, right, You want to try to stretch the field, make the incumbent party spend more money.

The Republicans have more money than the Democrats right now, so if you're in the challenger position, you want to make them spread dilute their resources a little bit.

But the Republicans have a huge problem on their hands.

They've got a president who is not interested in helping Republicans actually succeed in the midterms.

Right.

The most glaring example is what he's not what he's done in the state of Texas, or what he's not done in the state of Texas.

By staying out of that Texas Senate primary, he is per perhaps going to cost his party a half a billion dollars to try to rescue one of the most flawed, ethically and morally challenged nominees that they could ever have.

You know, only Roy Moore is worse if they end up with Ken Paxton as a nominee, and it's going to cost them an arm and a leg no matter who the Democratic nominees, whether it is Tallerrico or it is Crockett.

Because Paxon himself is not popular.

There are plenty of Bush Republicans and cornn Republicans who are among those who voted to impeach him in the state House, who are not big fans of him.

And because Paxson's been very loyal to Trump, Trump can't bring himself to endorse against Paxton.

He views Corning as somebody that's not been trumpy enough.

He sees Corning, and there's plenty of people that have whispered in Trump's here that Cornyn's really McConnell and a cowboy hat.

And yet if Trump were doing what was in the best interest of the Republican Party, he'd have endorse Cornyn months ago, and that primary field might not have been cleared, but he'd be in a lot better place than where they are now.

Now, maybe he comes in late and he does endorse.

Maybe he is going to wait till the runoff to pick between two.

Right, Wesley Hunt's flown on Air Force one.

Right, he's been sucking up to Trump.

We know Paxton is frankly on issues, has been closer to Trump than anybody else he was.

He was pro Trump before it was cool among some Texas conservatives, and that matters to Trump.

But it was interesting to read the stories about this donor retreat earlier this week among Republicans and they were getting this, they were getting this presentation about the trouble in Texas.

Well, there's one easy way to solve the problem, and Trump won't do it.

It's fascinating to see, Like when you look look at the Senate map for Republicans, Trump has made it harder for them, right.

Trump chased Tom Tillis out of the race, and now they have a harder look.

It is maybe Cooper runs against till Us too, but an incumbent till Us against Cooper is a look.

The races are going to be competitive either way, but Tillos would be starting with a greater advantage than Watley, the former R and C chair, who Trump is endorsed.

So they've made North Carolina tougher thanks to Donald Trump.

Texas is a problem thanks to Donald Trump.

What's fascinating.

And he just actually potentially just screwed his candidate in Michigan, Mike Rodgers, because out of nowhere, and you know, talk about then the under the radar once again, the corrupt lobbying stories of the Trump administration are the stories that gets that go under the radar more than any right, the story I spent a lot of time with last week out the Abu Dhabi investments into the Trump organization four days before the inauguration, which you could you start to line up.

It was filled with quid pro quos that touched the finance, pardon that seemed to launch it seemed to change policy on what chips could be sold to the UAE, which now could potentially backchannel and sell them to China.

Right, all of this that that is to me a story that is as bad as any story in the history of presidential politics and graft, right, worse than Teapot Dome when you when you put it all together, and as Andy McCarthy, the legal the conservative legal analyst, at National Review was put it, you had to add a couple of zeros to Biden, you know, and he was very hard on Biden.

Thought what Biden the Biden's were doing was very corrupt.

And he said, he put the he said, what the Trump family has done, you had to add a couple of zeros to what the Bidens did to get anywhere near the corruption of what the Trump family has done in this specific scenario.

Well, Trump did it again.

So you may have read about the brand new bridge that would connect Detroit to Windsor, Canada.

And Windsor, Canada, is that just across the just across the river there in Michigan, the border of Canada.

When I was younger, I one time did the Windsor Ballet.

And I'll just sit here and say, if you know, you know, and I'd love to hear from those of you that may be familiar with the Windsor Ballet.

And again, I'm not going any further because I don't know how many people will be upset about that, So I will just leave that on the side.

But let's just say Windsor's a lot of fun, it's anyway, but it's a huge you know, it's important business corridor for Michigan's economy and for Canada's economy.

And there's only been one bridge for a long time, and the guy who owns that bridge makes a lot of money being the sort of the most important, you know, transit point between Canada and the United States.

Well, Canada wanted another bridge.

They wanted to be able to you know, essentially, you know, the Loan Bridge was was a lot of congestion, it was slowing down movement between the two countries.

And so Canada agreed to pay for a new bridge connecting Windsor and Detroit.

And it was going to be and it's jointly owned by the State of Michigan and Canada and Canada and Canada paid for it Gordyhowe Bridge.

It is seen as a economic boon for a lot of Michigan companies, very important to the State of Michigan's economy and very important to Canada.

And the owner of the other bridge, or the guy who can basically gets all the all the fees from the use of that bridge.

Lobby's lutnik at the Commerce Department tells him about this, and then within a day Trump's on truth Social manufacturing some outrage saying he's going to shut down this bridge or he's going to take it over and all because a billionaire got access complained about that it was going to cost him money.

Perhaps they've written their sheriff checks to the Trump campaign, so Trump felt like he had be responsive.

Well, it put his senate candidate, Republican Mike Rogers, in a pretty tough spot because this is just good for the Michigan company.

This is not one of those things that is a Democratic bridge or a Republican bridge.

This is good for Michigan's economy, hard stop.

Mike Rogers is a what i'd call a pretty conventional Republican, pro business Republican, and here he's got his president putting him in an awkward position where he wants to essentially use the power of the federal government to make it harder for business to do to trade with Canada.

Can't think of anything more less republican than that.

But this is the larger issue that Trump's introduced for a lot of Republicans running for office, and his entire sort of protectionist agenda at times with tariffs and things like this, And I'm going to get to that in a moment with that House vote.

But the point is is that Donald Trump keeps making decisions, making proclamations that actually do tactical harm to the Republican chances of holding the Senate and holding the House.

He's undermining Mike Rodgers' campaign in Michigan with this Gordy how Bridge business.

He has made it harder for his Party's going to cost him literally a half a billion dollars if Cornan's not the nominee in Texas.

And like I said, it's all because people have whispered in Trump's ear that Cornan is McConnell with a cowboy hat.

This episode of the Chuck Podcast is brought to you by American Financing.

Let's be honest, the math just isn't adding up lately.

Between the grocery store and those skyrocketing insurance premiums, even with a steady job, more families are being forced to rely on high interest credit cards to cover expenses.

So if you're a homeowner caught in this cycle carrying balances with interest rates in the twenties, frankly even the thirties, it's time to get some relief.

Right now, mortgage rates are at a three year low, and my friends at American Financing are helping homeowners pay off that high interest debt at rates in the low fives.

Their salary based mortgage consultants don't just push loans on you, They build exit strategies from debts.

On average, they're saving their customers eight hundred dollars a month, so if you start today, you may even delay the next two mortgage payments.

There are no upfront fees or obligations.

To find out how much you can save.

America's Home for home loans is American Financing eight six six eight eight five ten eight that's eight six six eight eight five ten eighty one or American Financing dot net slash the Chuck Toodcast.

Important disclaimer nm LS one A two three three four NMLS Consumer Access dot Org APR for rates in the five start at six point one ninety six percent for well qualified buyers call eight six six eight eight five one zero eight one for details about credit costs and terms, or Americanfinancing dot net slash the Chucktodcast.

Having good life insurance is incredibly important.

I know from personal experience.

I was sixteen when my father passed away.

We didn't have any money.

He didn't leave us in the best shape.

My mother single mother, now widow, myself sixteen, trying to figure out how am I going to pay for college and lo and behold, my dad had one life insurance policy that we found wasn't a lot, but it was important at the time, and it's why I was able to go to college.

Little did he know how important that would be in that moment.

Well, guess what.

That's why I am here to tell you about Ethos Life.

They can provide you with peace of mind knowing your family is protected even if the worst comes to pass.

Ethos is an online platform that makes getting life insurance fast and easy, all designed to protect your family's future in minutes, not months.

There's no complicated process, and it's one hundred percent online.

There's no medical exam require you just answer a few health questions online.

You can get a quote in as little as ten minutes, and you can get same day coverage without ever leaving your home.

You can get up to three million dollars in coverage, and some policies start as low as two dollars a day that would be billed monthly.

As of March twenty twenty five, Business Insider named Ethos the number one no medical exam instant life insurance provider.

So protect your family with life insurance from Ethos.

Get your free quote at ethos dot com slash chuck.

So again that's Ethos dot com slash chuck.

Application times may vary and the rates themselves may vary as well, but trust me, life insurance is something you should really think about it, especially if you've got a growing family.

And then there's the tariff mess where he's divided his own party, and of course you know, Mike Johnson has no control over it.

He is a speaker in name only.

But the reason I call him a spino a speaker in name only, is because he can't even control the floor of the House of Representatives.

You know, normally control of the House of Representatives is absolute right.

You can have a one seat majority, but if you're you're the organizing party.

Because the speaker has his own committee can decide what gets to the floor and what doesn't.

It's called the rules Committee.

But of course the rules committee is how the cranky conservatives that hated Kevin McCarthy and essentially created that drama having to do who the hell was going to be Speaker the last time Republicans, you know, back at the start of at the start of twenty three, the price of Mike Johnson becoming Speaker was to give essentially these cranky conservatives kind of the old Freedom Caucus guys seats on the Rules Committee.

And it is astonishing how often that a handful of Republicans vote with the Democrats and essentially screw the Speaker and leadership on their ability to control the floor, so they couldn't stop this procedural vote on tariff.

So what happened Now You've got more Republicans when the vote comes on the floor to repeal tariffs on Canada, more Republicans have joined Democrats to repeal those tariffs.

All over the Midwest, these tariffs are enormously unpopular.

I mean, it has made the farm economy in Iowa.

Crater right, I shared with you a couple of weeks ago how their GDP has dropped to fiftieth in the state of the Union out of fifty states their statewide GDP.

And it's all due to these tariffs and what it's done to the farm economy, and soybean's essentially sitting there and not being bought by the Chinese in Michigan, none of the the tariffs that they've put on these auto parts.

And then you've got Trump deciding he may pull out of his version of NAFTA that he calls the USMCA.

Just completely pull out now, you know, as I remind people all the time, with Trump, follow what he does.

More than following.

You should follow what he does, not always what he says.

He says a lot of stuff.

He talked about pulling out of the USMCA before, and he ended up signing a new deal.

But that would be yet another gift to Democrats in an election year if he totally up ends both the Texas and Michigan economies and other economies by blowing up the USMCA.

It's a fair question to ask yourself.

Does Donald Trump care about the Republican future of the Republican Party.

I have contended here he does not.

If there is no president, no Republican president elected after him, and while he's alive, he will see that as a victory, not as a disappointment.

If he can make it clear that the only person that can win as a Republican is Donald Trump, he'd rather have that than to see the party grow.

There is a selfishness to him.

He's got this huge financial they wore chest that he's put together, all these different slush funds.

Is he actually going to how much of it is he going to be willing to spend in the midterms.

Is he going to spend it to help elect Republicans or is he going to spend it in order to focus on his grievances?

Right?

I mean, look at all the money he's wasting against Thomas Massing in order to deal with a great events.

Or look what he's done in Louisiana.

Now that's a safer way if he wanted to punish Cassidy.

I politically understand why he does.

But he's lucky that had John Bell Edwards, the last Democrats to win statewide in Louisiana, decided not to run for Senate.

Now, I think it would be a big uphill battle, but that could have thrown that race into itsizzy.

It is already hard enough for elected Republicans, and then the icing on the cake this week.

If you're an elected Republican incumbent member of Congress, House or Senate and you're trying to make the case to voters re elect that because we've got this great agenda.

Donald Trump said no, no, no, no, no, I want no legislation passed this year.

He said no to doing another reconciliation bill, which is an opportunity to use your congressional majorities to get more of your agenda through.

He says, And oh, but I got everything I wanted from the one big, beautiful bill.

Well that's good for Donald Trump.

That's a terrible message of your incumbent member of Congress.

Yeah, okay, you did that.

What else are you gonna do?

How come you didn't do anything this year?

What what are these tariffs doing?

He is making it strategically, forget just take your politics out of it a second.

Strategically, Republicans have an opportunity to put together, you know, a party line bill of some sort.

You know, maybe they could put some stuff in there that that creates difficult votes for Democrats, but they don't know how to do politics one on one sometimes, and you have amateur hour speaker, you know, which is why you've seed like it is it is.

You know, if you if you gave John Thune truth serum and ask him what kind of partner Mike Johnson is?

I think he would say, Mike Johnson's a nice guy who's way in over his head and Donald Trump doesn't care.

And the message he's sending by no Reconciliation bill when he said no to doing another bill, which a bunch of Republicans wanted to do, is I really don't care about you.

I don't care.

If you have nothing to run on, you just should just keep running on the one big, beautiful bill.

Okay, look, he got a good job report this week.

By the way, somebody ought to investigate.

There's been some it's really bizarre.

And this is a little bit of an aside, but Peter Navarro went on TV two days ago and said, Hey, this job's report.

You know we're gonna you know, don't be prepared.

This won't This may not be the best first jobs report.

We've had a lot of deportations, it's having some there's some haywire.

And then somebody made a lot of money on Calshi making a prediction that the jobs report was going to be a good job report.

Somebody I'm gonna asked the question, are their administration officials that are saying certain things in public to move the prediction markets one way so they can cash in on them, or their friends can cash in on them another way.

I'm not saying, I'm just saying, first of all, this needs to be looked at.

I mean literally, Peter Navarrow went on TV downplaying that this wasn't going to be a good jobs report, and it did affect the Calshie numbers.

If you watch, if you go back and look at it, go look at the at the line, and then all of a sudden the number to go over the forecasted number to make your bet.

Somebody made some money either hedging Peter Navarro prediction or they knew damn well what was going on.

And this is why, folks, these prediction markets, when somebody knows the answer are extraordinarily corruptible.

They're going to be corruptible.

Whether it's as silly as you know what you know, how long will the Caroline Levitt press briefing be the fact that you're allowed to bet on that seems like something that shouldn't be allowed or excuse me, predict when you when you see something like this with the jobs report, where literally Peter Navarro win on Fox Business to downplay it certainly sounded as if he already knew in fact some of us.

You know, you saw what he said, and you're think, oh, I guess they're trying to get ahead of what they think is going to be a bad jobs report.

Oh, by the way, why is it leaking out?

Now?

Why do this many people know about it.

It's supposed to be embargo, it's supposed to be aft.

You're not supposed to be able to move markets like this, But then it turns out to the exact opposite.

I'm just asking questions.

Let's just say a lot of other people need to be asking questions on this one.

But it was a good job number.

It's a good jobs report.

That's it.

Maybe if it's sustainable, and maybe Republicans then run on more money in people's pockets if it indeed actually gets stay in their pockets.

I think the concern I would have as an incumbent Republican is that when these tax rebates come and their tax refunds are there, that people are frustrated that this incredible new refund all had to go to paying for health care, higher electric bills, and higher food costs, and the refund disappears even faster than the refund they got a year ago.

And how's that going to make them feel by June or July, are they going to love this economy?

Then the point is what Trump has done to congressional Republicans is he's basically said it's either that or the party's doomed.

Either.

The big tax rebates that come to people are cite the electorate so much that it secures that makes people feel better, and that somehow this antagonism against Trump starts to dissipate.

Call me skeptical, but the bottom line is the biggest impediment right now for congressional Republicans to keep their majorities is their own president.

He is standing in the way, and if Democrats win the Senate, they might only have Donald Trump to think considering how he's missed, how he's made the map harder for his own party, it's quite the feat.

But again, if you know Donald Trump, well cares more about Trump than he does the Republican Party.

And it's something all Republicans need to be thinking about because many of these folks are going to get elected and in theory, be in office long after Donald Trump's running the party.

So the point is you see more Republicans willing to vote against him in Congress, more Republicans willing to come out against them, and there's a reason he's making their life harder.

He's making their life a lot harder.

All Right, I'm gonna pivot to Paul Reikoff because you know, he's making a pitch for independence and basically supporting a lot of independent candidates running for state wide office but also running for local office.

And you've heard me say, look, you know you've got to figure out how to win the middle.

But the question is what is the middle?

And can you be of the middle?

And I bring this up because I find it interesting what happened in Japan over the week over last weekend where the new Prime Minister basically she got she she ended up with essentially veto proof majorities in her legislature, and she ended up they her coalition did even better than they thought, right, And what's interesting is that she was able to defeat what was a centrist coalition right that Centris for Form alliance was basically a shotgun wedding in Japan between the Constitutional Democratic Party and the Komu Okay and it was sort of center left center right was trying to trying to be a moderate alternative and we've seen this.

This happened in Israel and for a brief period of time, a sort of mode, a coalition of the others, right, everybody who didn't like Bbie got together and they were able to beat Babe.

But the problem is they couldn't do anything after that.

And it is a reminder, and I vacillate myself on this, right, which is when people call themselves independent, are they also calling themselves centrist or moderate or are they simply saying, hey, no, I'm independent, all right, you can't put me in any box.

It doesn't mean I don't say independent because I'm only in the centrist box.

And the fact is the centrist coalitions who have tried to sort of beat back a populist or beat back up populasty have struggled.

Right, We've seen it in this country.

Right, You've got a coalition of AOC and Liz Cheney wanting to get rid of Donald Trump and trump Ism.

But what the hell does this opposition to Trump stand for other than not being for Trump, right, being anti Trump?

And so I think the real challenge, and Paul and I get into this a little bit.

I think the real challenge for this movement of independence, because, as you know, I like I think the parties are hurting us more than they're helping us right now.

I think the country would be better served either if we had no parties or we had four national parties.

Trying to fit everybody into two parties is quite difficult, right, you know, It's like going to the store T shirt store and finding out the only choices are, you know, extra small and extra large, and you're like, I wear something somewhere in between there.

I absolutely think our politics would be easier to understand and we'd have more successful coalition politics is if we were correctly in our four parties, where there were no party could ever get control on their own, they had to work with one of the other three parties.

But this is the world we're in, and it is and I think that it's a fair debate, and I like I say, I vacillated the political You know, political science will tell you that if you're in the if you're sort of in the mushy middle, you're not going to please anybody.

And yet if you alienate the middle, that's how you lose races.

Right, So the question is is it better to try to appeal to the middle, or to force the middle to come to your side because they just can't stomach the other side.

And what is a more durable governing coalition.

I think we've seen, you know, the Cold War era allowed both parties to be more centrist once and because there was the concern about security and security of the country and nuclear war and war with the Soviets, and so it sort of it it's the public sort of was comfortable sort of staying in between the thirty five yard lines.

Once that threat ended, we saw more of our colorful spectrum of political ideology on display.

And I think it's a fair I think it's a fair debate.

Can you know, so, if you're going to try to win as an independent, you've got to stand for something, not just stand for compromise.

And I think this has been the that was sort of the mistake of twenty twenty and the mistake of the Democrats in the Trump era of assuming what people wanted was was more compromised.

They didn't want that, right, they did.

They didn't like the old way of politics.

They wanted a new way of politics.

And Democrats were doing restoration and Donald Trump was saying no we're going to try something different, and ultimately they want a different not restoration.

And yet Democrats can't win majorities in the House and the Senate without winning over the middle.

So what is the best way to win the middle, I have to say, And I think that's still an open question, and there are various theories of the case, and I think it's going to be a conversation.

We're going to continue.

This episode of the Chuck Podcast is being brought to you by Quints.

As you know, a well built wardrobe is about the pieces that work together, hold up over time, and frankly allow you to be flexible and sort of business casual to say social casual.

Quins does this really well.

They have premium material, thoughtful design, and some everyday staples that feel easy to wear, easy to rely on even as the weather shifts.

I've got some sweaters from Quints.

I love them.

I can use them for here on the podcast.

I can do a business meeting with them.

They have every day essentials.

I love the quality so far.

It's lasting really well.

I've had it for a while.

They have organic cotton sweaters, polos for every occasion.

They have some nice jackets, including you know lighter jackets as things I hope warm up at some point down here in the mid Atlantic.

The list goes on.

All of it is built to hold up for you to wear this stuff all the time, right, Not just something you pull out once a quarter to look nice at work.

No stuff that you might wear every week.

They only partner with factories that meet some rigorous standards for crashmanship and ethical product.

Bottom line, I wear it, I'm happy.

It's been really good.

It isn't going to break the bank, So refresh your wardrobe with Quints.

Go to quins dot com slash chuck for free shipping on your order and a three hundred and sixty five day opportunity to return it.

Now available in Canada too.

That's qui NC dot com slash chuck, free shipping, three hundred and sixty five day returns quints dot com slash chuck.

Do you hate hangovers, We'll say goodbye to hangovers.

Out of Office gives you the social buzz without the next day regret.

They're best selling.

Out of office Gumanies were designed to provide a mild, relaxing buzz, boost your mood and enhance creativity and relaxation.

With five different strengths.

You can tailor the dose to fit your vibe, from a gentle one point five milligram microdose to their newest fifteen milligram gummy for a more elevated experience.

Their THHC beverages and gummies are a modern, mindful alternative to a glass of wine or a cocktail.

And I'll tell you this, I've given up booze.

I don't like the hangovers.

I prefer the gummy experience.

Soul is a wellness brand that believes feeling good should be fun and easy.

Soul specializes in delicious HEMP derived THHC and CBD products, all designed to boost your mood and simply help you unwine.

So if you struggle to switch off at night, Sol also has a variety of products specifically designed to just simply help you get a better night's sleep, including their top selling sleepy gummies.

It's a fan favorite for deep, restorative sleep.

So bring on the good vibes and treat yourself to Soul today.

Right now, Soul is offering my audience thirty percent off your entire order, So go to getzold dot com use the promo code todcast don't forget that code that's getsold dot com promo code todcast for thirty percent off.

Well, keep track, as you know, I'm going to be keeping track of these independent candidates running, particularly in South Dakota, Montana, Idaho, Mississippi on the Senate level.

Those are the most fascinating to me.

Let's see, you know, can they I don't expect any of it.

And of course Dan Osborne and Nebraska.

Osborne in Nebraska might be the one that could win.

We'll see, since he's been since he's done this before, there's a little more familiarity to him running as sort of as a populist independent.

I think the measure of success for those other independent candidas can he get in the forties, right, and especially if the Democrats aren't going to put a candidate on the ballot, that gives them perhaps a better shot at getting to the low forties in an Idaho or South Dakota.

Probably more likely in a South Dakota than Idaho.

But we shall we shall see on that.

And of course, the most interesting race statewide race featuring an independent I think is the Michigan governor's race with former Democratic mayor Detroit Mike Dougant, but lay, let's do some questions, ask Chuck.

First question comes from Kevin.

He says, hey, I've heard on your podcast and others that Biden quote failed at the border while Trump succeeded.

But that framing feels overly simplistic.

Isn't Congress responsible for immigration policy?

Biden may have made the mistake of trusting Congress to act, only for Republicans to back away once Trump wanted a campaign on the issue.

Appreciate your centrist approach.

There's said centrist word again, right, incrementalist approach is what I would prefer, Kevin, But thank you.

I appreciate your centrist approach.

But I hope future coverage gives more nuanced scrutiny to both sides.

No, it's look what the failure at the border, though, was not allowing Look Congress.

This issue with the with Congress is five five presidential five president presidential administration.

Right.

George W.

Bush tried to do it No.

Five and it blew up in his face.

Barack Obama tried to do it in twenty thirteen, with the Gang of Eight John McCain Marc or Rubio being the two most prominent Republicans a part of that, but John Baynor decided not to put it.

John Bayner has said he regrets not putting that comprehensive immigration reform package on the floor of the House.

Now, the reason he didn't do it then is it he thought it would cost him as speakership well as he ended up finding out just simply trying to govern was going to eventually cost him as speakership.

And that's why he has some regret that he just didn't go for broke.

Back then, we saw a near miss DACA for the wall.

Back in twenty eighteen, Schumer and Trump were I guess, semi negotiating.

Seemed like maybe there'd be some movement, and then there was the pollyannish approach that Biden took.

And I'm sorry I take it as a Pollyannish approach because he was asking for things that we're never going you cannot do.

You're not gonna get immigration reform done unless both parties have skin in the game, and it just it's that was the issue I think with Biden.

But what it really was was the enforcement right, not not you know, you talked to I want to be careful here, but if you talk to people that worked in Biden's DHS.

They will tell you they feel like their hands were tied by the White House in the West Way.

And then there was a new chief of Staff in the last two years, and they realized what a political problem was that the border, that there was the constant surge at the border, that they weren't deporting folks right away the way they did during Obama's second term, where Jay Johnson, you know, and that's how Obama got the nickname to Porter in Chief Jay Johnson and his deputy Alimi Orcus, who would become Biden's DHS secretary.

Working with a guy like Tom Holman.

By the way, we're keeping the border from becoming congested, overwhelmed, whelming, et cetera.

And look, I've always thought Stephen Miller and Trump deserved more blame for the chaos at the border in twenty twenty one when Biden became president, because Miller scoured the public health emergency laws in order to essentially shut the shut the border down completely using the public health emergency over COVID to do it.

You know, as I've said, he basically kinked the hose.

And that's what they handed.

They had no policy and then you know Biden was going to unkink the hose, and it's like, okay, let's reopen the border.

Right, the public health emergency is now mitigated.

Well, what happened was it served as a magnet, and so folks saw it as well, Trump's not letting anybody in.

We better hurry up and get in while Biden's there before somebody else comes back and I let it.

So the point is is that there was a there was less enforcement at the border in that first eighteen months of the Biden presidency.

So yes, it contributed.

It wasn't just a perception that he had a porous border.

That was the policy.

What did they do when they needed to tighten things up?

The point is is that they could tighten things up if they chose to.

Now, this was this was the impact of the interest groups and there were a lot of Look, I understand the empathy that many of these immigration rights groups had on what was happening with kids in cages and everything that happened eighteen and twenty nineteen.

In twenty twenty, so I understand the anger and the empathy that was there, and there was this concern, and certainly you had a Biden West wing led by run and Claim, the first chief of staff, who was very empathetic to the progressive groups, and they didn't want to And that's why I can tell you my sources that were inside of DHS were like, hey, we had our hands tied, and you know, there were things that could have been done that would have had a more humane approach.

When the approach that Jay Johnson used in during Obama's second term to keep the border under control, not to shut the border down, but to bring some order to the border and order to the asylum system.

Yes, ultimately this is all on Congress, but my god, Congress is at the root of all of our problems.

Right.

Congress's inability to take control of the of tariffs are why we're all paying more money at the grocery store.

Congress's inability to do any accountability on the Trump administration is why paid to play is now the only way to do business in Washington.

And yes, Congress's inability to do anything on the border and on the asylum system and to add more and to try to bring some order to modernize our immigration system is why this is essentially thrust upon DHS as sort of the agency of last resort here.

So I totally understand your frustration, Kevin.

But that is why when I say that Biden failed at the border.

Yes, you're right, it is Congress.

It is the ultimate failure.

But Biden's West wing did not did not let DHS do the basics that could have minimized some of that chaos that many of us saw at the boarder.

Next question comes from Scott's c and Placidus, New Mexico.

He goes, Hey, love the podcast.

Really appreciate how you how deep you're able to go on each topic.

Quick question, do you think one reason Christy Nome is still in Trump's orbit is that he has his site set on Mount Rushmore, hasn't set it directly, but would fit his style.

Thanks for all you do well.

I just don't think she has any role over that, but that's an interesting theory, and certainly that's how she used to work her magic into getting him happy with her, which I think she even brought a little model of what Mount Rushmore would look like if they added a fifth profile there.

No, I think it is it is Corey Lewandowski, and I think it's more of there was an old expression.

I think it was attributed to LBJ.

Do you want somebody pissing on your ten or pissing inside your tent?

The point being, you know, I think I'm batching this a little bit.

And my apologies for the terrible visual mom.

I know you don't love when I do some of these more shall we say, visually uncomfortable metaphors.

But the point being is if he cuts Nome loose, that also means he will cut Corey Lewandowski's first campaign manager loose.

And Corey's a knife fighter.

You know he's not going to go down quietly.

And you know, I think it's you know why is Kimberly Gilfoor an ambassador Greece even though she's no longer the fiance of Donald Trump Junior.

Because he doesn't want somebody filling themselves with grievance, perhaps becoming good sources for people like me.

And in the first term, all the firings he did, all those you know, where no staffer ever felt safe, he ended up creating a lot of sources for a lot of reporters.

And so I do think the number one thing that keeps Christy Nome's job safe is her relationship with with her with with Corey Lewandowski, and I'm not when I say relationship or professional relationship.

I know all the rumors that are around and all that stuff, but the point being is I don't think Trump and I think that some in the Trump White House don't want a Corey Lewandowskia Christy Nome available to air dirty laundry.

Next question comes from Alex Why, and he writes, Hey, I just finished listening to your recent podcast on sports betting.

I've been a fan of yours for at least past decade and generally mische me press thank you.

I'd love to hear a deeper conversation on wealthy athletes and actors endorsing industries that often harm people, like gambling, crypto and insurance companies.

My own experience with State Farm after the line of fire showed how some companies actively hurt customers, and it maybe question why high profile figures lend them credibility.

Appreciate all the thoughtful work you do, Go pack, go Alex Why, Well, it's interesting and look at somebody who's wants you know, certainly needs advertisers to support what we're doing.

I want to keep everything free forever, all of you whatever I'm doing, but I do try to make sure that i'm you know, I certainly make sure I'm comfortable with the companies.

I'm a I'm going that you want to associate themselves with me, and vice versa.

I think it's a I wonder if you're going to see some athletes express regret in the next few years, just like you.

I think had some actors quietly realize that, you know, what they did with Crypto and FTX was a bad luck.

Right.

As many of you know, I've not been quiet about my about my interest in the In the TV show Fallout, one of the Walter Groggin's character, he plays you know, sort of two timelines, right, and there's the pre the pre sort of destruction of Earth as we know it and the posts sort of the post apocalyptic Earth.

And in pre apocalyptor Earth, he's the spokesperson for the company selling UH, selling access to these UH to these pods, right that you know, these these pods that you would live in, you know, these whatever they call them, and you can see, you know, that's almost part of the storyline, is it develops you can see as discomfort he's wondering am I am I aligned with the wrong company?

Am I am I misleading people?

Am I a spokesperson for uh, essentially the Evil Doer?

And it turns out, yes, he was the spokesperson for the the Evil Doer.

Look, I think in this day, I believe we're entering a moment where there's going to be you know that this is a it's that the most unpopular figures in America are going to be the corporate CEOs and the and the big companies.

Right now, you know, we're already we're we're already only like our politicians, like people like me and the media.

I think business leaders are next, and and you're starting to see it.

But it's a it's a it's a fair question.

And I do think this conversation on sports gambling, particularly mobile sports gambling, is one that's going to get more traction because I do think the more the the most effective conversation to have with the public about sort of big tech is sort of the harm how big tech is preying on our most are on sort of the most on some of our most vulnerable, right kids, young adults and older adults.

And I think that everything you're describing sort of the success of those industries in many ways is uh is their banking on essentially a lot of people that can't afford to be gambling, to be gambling, and it's you know, it's a bummer because like I said, I enjoy I enjoy gambling, but I can afford to lose I don't.

It was always, you know, you're always taught, don't gamble any don't gamble any money you can't afford to lose.

Uh.

And and I think we all need to do a better job of expressing that to folks, particularly younger people, particularly you know, in your in your family orbit reminding people of that all the time, not just some of the time, and not just you know, uh once or twice at the end.

Thanks to speed up legal legal ease that says call one eight hundred New York Hope or whatever it is, you know, if you've got a gambling problem, perhaps they shouldn't be just I can't tell you how many podcasts where I noticed they put they put all of it now at the very end of the podcast.

They don't do it during the gambling at itself.

The fact that that's allowed is probably it's probably a mistake there, but it's a fair question.

And I wonder if celebrities will start to be a bit more discerning on at least some of them, probably the higher profile celebrities.

Some people, Hey, look, you know, everybody's got a price.

We all do.

Don't think you you know, some of you may say, not me, We all do.

Maybe our price is super high and it takes over, you know, and you know, but everybody's got a price, all right, Jim for Michigan.

With Democrats pulling out record low approval, could the best strategy for holding or flipping seats be for moderates to follow Dan Osborne's lead and run as independence.

As Joe Manchin pointed out, the party label alone can be disqualifying in red states.

Wooden candidates like Shared Brown, Mallory McMorrow, John Asso, James Salarico's stand a better chance this way, especially when party in I think sometimes turns on them unfairly.

Jim from Michigan, Well, it's certainly what I thought in places like it was one of the questions I put to Rob sand when he was on this podcast.

He's the likely Democratic nominee for governor in Iowa.

Uh And I think that, you know, while he's been a Democrat and elected as a Democrat, if he ran as an eye, I think it's a virtue signal that would probably help him in that race, right, But it does get you know, I do think there is a brand issue, and I do think independent can have a halo effect, but it is you know, I think that you know, the biggest challenge in it when it comes to this growing independent movement is so you heard Paul say it, right, You've sort of where twenty seven percent d twenty seven percent are essentially forty five to forty six percent independent.

But if you put those forty six percent of independence on an ideological spectrum, you'd have about half of them would call themselves would probably be self described moderates, but about a quarter would call themselves conservative, and about a quarter would call themselves liberal.

And so, you know, would I like to see an independent candidate run more as a constitutionalist and saying, look, this is more about restoring congressional authority, restoring the representative part of the representative democracy.

You know, it's now sometimes it's hard to motivate voters on process right, voters at the end of the day, we're all, you know, one of the other things that I say I've learned all the time, is what is this little thing taught me?

We're all a little bit narcissistic because we all think what's happening around us is important enough to share.

But it also means we're all sort of looking what's the benefit to us, And it's been hard to translate how a function in Congress will eventually be a benefit to you.

And so running is the person that's going to pledge to actually restore Article one in the Constitution.

It's not the sexiest message.

And at the end of the day, people, you know, it's like it's like when when Kamala Harris closed on the democracy message, right rather than an affordability message at the end of her presidential campaign.

You know, I remember talking with some voters who said, look, I care about the democracy, but you know, I don't have the luxury to worry about it.

In addition to worrying about paying the paying the grocery bill.

You know, I've got the luxury to be frustrated and outraged about the current situation we're in because I don't have a trauma at my house that I'm dealing with, or or an unexpected healthcare bill or something like that, And I think that that's what's made I think that's what makes appealing as an independent very difficult, because you almost feel the need you've got to criticize both parties.

Then you come across as both sides are and it's just it's, you know, I think it's more doable for governors.

And I say it in that I do think that I think you'll when you hear this, you'll have already heard my little rant about how I do think that you'll see in a South Dakota.

Yeah, an independent center candidate is going to be more appealing than a Democratic Senate candidate.

You know, the question is can Democrats expand their brand to in such a way that it's perfectly normal for them to have guys like Joe Manchin.

Look, the Democratic Party of the eighties and nineties was that way, and you know, arguably they're even and you know there was both parties were a little more ideologically diverse when I was younger, and that lack of perceived ideological diversity is what's driven so many people to say, you know what, I'm an independent.

I can't associate with them with the Democrats because they've both been defined.

Their brains have been defined by their extremes.

Right, the Republican Party has been defined by MAGA and Trump.

Democratic Party is more defined right now by its progressives than it is by its moderates.

And so I think that that's you know, can can a party successfully rebrand itself as ideologically diverse without coming accus across as a mush or a squash?

And I think that's been a huge challenge.

Last question comes from Dakota.

He goes, hey, I always appreciate your thought takes.

What about my unthoughtful takes?

The coda?

All right, I don't always share the unthoughtful ones.

Utah Republicans recently passed a lot to expand the state Supreme Court, already filled with chop appointees to protect jerrymandered maps.

Doesn't that class with Governor Spencer Cotts and disagree?

Better image and he just another politician playing a centrist?

Could this open the door for Democrats to make their own moves on court packing?

The fact of the matter is the answer to what you're saying is yes, right, which is what opened the door for Democrats to go harder on jerrymandering.

Texas decided to open the door in jerrymandering.

I mean, this is this is where I as sort of somebody who sees himselves more as a political reformer than anything else.

If you're going to try to force me to sort of saying, what activist role would you want to play outside of journalists, and it would be political reformer.

Right, We've got and you've heard me rant about these various reforms.

I think, you know, we should truly have a judiciary that is filled with referees, So we should probably you know, Spring Court justice probably should need seventy five votes to get confirmation.

If you truly want a justice that is not that is as neutral as you can possibly find, make them get seventy five votes and you're and you're likely to have something like that.

So yes, if they do this and a Spencer Cox right who sort of then you're going to see others try to do But this is not healthy for our democracy.

And yeah, I think Look, I look forward to speaking with Governor Cox pretty soon.

I'm hopeful to get him on one of my shows, either the podcast or a new sphere in the fairly near future.

I'm gonna ask him about this because I think you're right.

I think it's it's sort of like, do we have anybody that wants to you know, look, I'll take an ideologue left or right if you still will put the Constitution first.

And I think that that's let's just say, I expect better out of Spencer Cox.

I need to learn more about this, about this idea of expanding their state Supreme Court.

But I think one thing we've learned in politics is that both parties are copycatters, and when one does it, the other is going to do it.

And that's been you know, one of my big concerns that Democrats decide, if you can't beat Trump, join them, and it's like, okay, they'll do They'll find their own billionaires and they'll find their own pay to players, and we're going to have this like, okay, you purged everybody from this board.

We're going to purge everybody from this board.

And you did that.

You know, eventually it's going to make government even more dysfunctional than it appears now if we continue down this road.

So you know, like I said, I'm trying to be realistic.

I know, trying to create a campaign message that's about political reform and fairness ain't sexy but it is something we need, which is why I think.

Fine, that's the role I'll play.

That's what you know, that's what I will continue to use my podcast to do.

All Right, that's good this week for questions on this front.

Oh, I got to take this next question because it's from Bloomington, Illinois.

And I'll tell you why I have to take the question from Bloomington, Illinois, because that's where my mother was born.

In Bloomington, Illinois.

I've my grandfather had a family business that he started in Bloomington, Illinois, clothing store there.

So Bloomington, So this next question comes.

It's greetings from Bloomington, Illinois.

It's very smart by Lucas to lead with the Bloomington Illinois so it ended up sneaking a sixth questionnaire.

He says, Hey, as a public school teacher and proud Army veteran, I'm increasingly concerned that too many schools are failing our students and that's a real threat to our democracy.

What can be done to modernize education for today's world?

Also, why isn't there more momentum around creating some form of mandatory national service to help American see each other as fellow citizens and not strangers.

Thanks Lucas well.

I hope you've heard the conversation I had with rom Emmanuel earlier this week, because we we went deep on education.

I think I was at a an off the record setting with a former cabinet secretary and a former governor, a Democrat who said, you know who was talking about all the different things that Democrats need to sort of speak a little more truth to power, and one of them was lamenting the fact that we've not really done We've not you know, the public the basic design of America's public school system hasn't changed in one hundred years.

That we've not modernized it.

We've not you know, you know, when I was just finished in college, I think most people thought we were going to have, you know, that the public school system was going to expand from K through twelve to K through fourteen, meaning that there was going to be some form of a thirteenth and fourteenth grade.

Maybe we would call it the first two years of communities, maybe be community college, whatever it was, but that there was going to be a that we were going to essentially add two years to the public education system.

Maybe it's college credits, technical credits, and we never did right, We never got full.

But I think that, you know, I look at the school system I grew up in in Miami Dade and I think Miami Dade County, and it is turned into a four tiered school system that is as follow as you got the private schools and you have the wealthy have access to that, you have charter schools and magnet schools, and that takes parents to know how to navigate and how to figure out which one works best for their kid, and the application process and how to get into a magnet or how to you know, how to qualify for a magnet, or how to get accepted into a charter, which is a quasi application process.

And then the fourth tier is just if you if you can't get into a magnet or a charter or a private, you're just stuck with whatever schools left.

And those schools what I've never understood.

And my old high schools turned into one of these where they didn't become a magnet, and it just sort of deteriorated over time.

The schools in that were that became magnet schools for something, maybe for the arts, maybe for stem, maybe for they've even had one for like you know, meteorology and coding, all sorts of things.

Having those magnet schools rose the success rate of the entire school system, of the that entire school And I do think the magnet system, of all the different experiments has been was the one that was open to everybody.

Right.

It wasn't fully gaming the system, but it was a reminder every school should be a magnet for something.

Every school should have a specialty in something.

There's also this issue of age, right, which is you know, there's there's a lot more there's a lot more research that indicates everybody learns at different paces, and some people need fifteen years to get through twelve years of school and some people maybe need ten years to get through twelve years of school.

But we've not, you know, we continue and certainly the socialization matters a lot, and there's plenty of studies that indicate that you know, that's that also can be stunting, right if you if people aren't with their peers every step of the way, But we created you know, I think it's held us back into figuring out how to you know, if the goal is like what's the best way to teach kids hard stop?

Right, and you know whether it's Look, Rom Emmanuel I thought put it pretty well, and he said, you know, the Republican answer in education has simply been gout the public school system and just go vouchers and let people decide on their own, you know, essentially, let a market sort of decide which are the good schools and which are the bad schools.

And he said, and the Democrats gave up on accountability, right, They pushed back against teacher testing, push back against student testing.

And now you're starting to see maybe student testing is back.

That Rom sounded like he missed No Child Left Behind, which was a famous Bush initiative that he passed with Ted Kennedy.

But for whatever reason, education has fallen off the national conversation.

And I know that obviously, in education is one of those issues that are yes, we all know it's locally controlled, but it is an important issue.

It's one of the top three issues for most people under the age of fifty they got kids in school.

Usually in that matters.

In fact, I think one of the reasons why Republicans have made inroads with Latinos is you do any poll of Latinos and usually the top two issues are the economy and education in some order, and Democrats basically for the last fifteen years have just stopped talking about education nationally.

Rob and I talked about this on my podcast earlier this week.

Republicans are the ones talking about it, you know, And I think it explains why you've seen Latinos be open to supporting Republicans, because Latinos have been more open to school choice.

They want good education, whatever it takes.

And I think it's sort of like, what's the best energy policy all of the above, what's the best education policy all of the above.

And I think ultimately that's what we all want to hear.

Now.

As for your national service, and count me in, I've you know, I think mandatory national service.

I think when you look at the incredible devotion Israelis have for their citizenship, they all have to serve, right for two years, they basically have a mandatory national service.

It and look, they have messy politics, but it does create an identity.

And I think when we had the draft, uh sort of forced national military service if you will, for many basically for you know, my generation is the first one that didn't get didn't have to deal with a mandatory draft.

Essentially, my father did my grandfather did, my grandfather's, my great grandfather all ended up drafted or eligibly drafted.

Now, no one's saying we should go back to a military draft, although I do think that sharing that, but mandatory national service where you have Right America and Blue America kids and from both of those areas working together, maybe in a rural school, maybe in an urban school, maybe cleaning up a river, maybe helping to build housing, maybe to work at a food kitchen, whatever it is, but service to the country.

Look, I think citizenship when you go to Israel, When you visit Israel.

Remember the first time I went to Israel, it really hit me that citizenship was active there.

Whatever you whatever your opinion is about the Israeli government, Israeli citizens, they take their citizenship seriously because you know, they got to keep their head on a swivel.

I do think national service would help us collectively value our citizenship more citizenship.

There's a little bit of work that comes with it, not a lot, but a little bit.

And if you know, ultimately, you know, it's like I say this to if you don't like what you know, it's on you.

Ultimately, everybody plays a role here.

You can't hope some politician bails, you know, fixes this problem, or some celebrity or some member of the press.

It's going to do your job.

You gotta do do the job.

And I do think national service.

It's interesting to see who's who are the big advocates for national service.

George W.

Bush was I don't think Trump thinks about it.

Wes Moore is doing a pilot state, basically a National service like project.

You know, essentially in exchange for National service, you get two years of free college something like that.

Right, you do what you do.

You know, that's you give to the country, country gets back to you, sort of almost a GI bill for the country.

And yeah, I think it would lessen polarization.

It's not a full depolarization, but I think it would lessen polarization.

But here's the most important thing, Lucas.

My favorite question of the day came from somebody from Bloomington, Illinois.

It's going to make my family very happy.

Smart question, pro very patriotic question, very important question, touching a lot of nerves.

And I looked, there's no This is why I'm always an advocate of military veterans running for office, because I think they understand the importance of the first hand they've gotten, They've seen the importance of just and chip.

They've also they they serve with people that are liberal, conservative, red, blue, rural, urban, black, white, Hispanic, jew Christian, Muslim.

You get my point, and all of them have each other's back, and if they don't, they all get hurt.

Right, So you know it better than most being an Army veteran, Lucas, so you get it.

But we all need to get it better.

And I think national service, you know, it is is a I think it's something we need now more than ever because of this, you know, sort of the lost faith we've had in each other, lost faith we have in our democracy, and maybe this is a way to a way to take a step to try to repair it.

Well with that, I think that's a much better note to end on.

Look, it's the big light sports weekend.

I will just say here I am I'm I love the Olympics.

My friends at the Gold Zone.

I love the Gold Zone.

This is the you know, man, I love when the Olympics are in Europe because you get up in the morning on the East Coast Saturday morning, by the way, you know, I get up early, no matter what, because I've got dogs that are going to get up no matter what.

Right, So I'm getting up early, get that coffee going, and the Olympics are off and there's active stuff going on.

And what I love about the Gold Zone is, look, I you know, the sappy stories are nice and all of this, and I know some people love the sort of the soap opera of the Olympics.

I like the competition.

And what's great about the Gold Zone is they go to competition and it's not always just follow the Americans.

They just wherever there's a gold medal competition happening, they take it to it.

So you end up getting to see a variety of sports.

So look, I know there's no football and we're all pining.

You know, some of us are going to be bummed out about that.

But you know what, the Olympics are terrific.

And the technology, I mean, the ability to follow these skiers now and all of this stuff and all the different camera angles that you have and the GoPros, it's unbelievable.

It's an incredible experience to watch on TV these days.

In fact, it's scary that it is.

The Olympics are much better to see, and I think on TV than they are in person, unless you have a family member competing, it's that good.

And hey, we're two weeks from March Madness beginning, so you got to start thinking about those brackets.

You got to if you want to try to do well, you got to start watching some of these.

And we're getting We're in the heart of conference season, and there's nothing more fun than watching a ranked team go on the road try to win a conference road game.

Because the toughest thing in sports, I think the toughest thing at all of college sports is to win a conference road game.

And I don't care how good you are and how bad the team is, it is there's nothing like going into an enemy arena.

The crowd gets fired up, students just want to storm the court.

I do think my friends at the University of Miami didn't need to be storming a court after beating North Carolina.

You should expect to beat North Carolina at home.

So I do think we're court storming a bit too much.

But I know I've got plenty to watch this weekend, So whether it's a couple of great college basketball games or the Gold Zone, that's how I'm going to be spending my sports weekend.

Yes, I'll miss a little bit of football, but you know I've got my side house of lun sports cards to keep me busy as well.

So with that, I'll see in seventy two hours