Ezra Klein: MAGA Is Over

Hey, it's Mario Lopez from the All Mario Lopez Daily Podcast. All right. Quick question. You ever notice how some cars just steal the spotlight? Well, that's the 2026 Toyota RAV4. It's got bold standout style, intuitive tech inside, and now hybrid power standard, which means efficiency without the need to plug in. So whether you care about looks, smarts, or just everyday practicality, RAV4 brings all of it. If you've been holding out for the right SUV, this is your sign. Check out the 2026 Toyota RAV4 at your local Toyota dealer or visit toyota.com. See packages and options at toyota.com for future availability. This is Matt Rogers from Lost Culture East. That's with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang. This is Bowen Yang from Lost Culture East. We've been talking about Kewpie Mayo for a minute now. And wow, so many of you already love this stuff. And if you're thinking, wait, what is Kewpie? Do you not have the internet? It's the OG Japanese mayonnaise. The one with the red. The one with the red cap. What makes it different? Egg yolks. Kewpie is made with egg yolks only, giving it this rich umami flavor that elevates everything. Chefs use it. Restaurants use it. Where chefs work, of course. Food and flavor lovers use it. You haven't tried it yet? Well, find the red cap and see what everyone's talking about, why don't ya? Kewpie. The original Japanese mayonnaise. Kewpie. Kewpie. The original mayonnaise. Kewpie. Kewpie. this week anything different you want a long description of my current where i am currently in my meditations i do yeah all right just a little peek even where are my feelings i mean look like i got a election night was restoring of a certain level of faith that thing it's not just like good things can happen but the things that can happen you can be surprised deeply to the upside. I think that the left side of the divide in America had a national collective healing of trauma as the New York Times needle went like this on South Carolina. It was a real moment of collective effervescence. And only the people on the left side of the country would call it that, a collective healing of trauma. So that's nice. Yeah, right. And then one, it's amazing when you dip into X for two seconds here. And you know, I'm usually not on X, but I allowed myself to go back in there to hook a bit into some vibes. How rapidly the energy there goes to infighting. Just unbelievable. So I realized I was feeling worse as I kept reading there because everybody just immediately moves into factional infighting. But the thing that to me has been really encouraging and the place where I'm excited right now, I mean, I don't know how jazzed the rest of your audience is going to get about the permitting reform bill. But one, there are things actually happening. Good news. Josh Barrows tried to talk about the permitting reform bill about a month ago and then his whole internet went out. And so we left people hanging. I think there's a question of what you can actually do. And then a question of what you can actually build. And the part that from like a feelings perspective, I find the most like wonderful right now is that when people believe they can win, they start trying. And the idea that you can win in Kansas, you can win in Indiana, as Bobai there did for Secretary of State. You can win in Mississippi. You came within two points of Louisiana. I think there are a bunch of places where Democrats have stopped believing they should really try. And what I think opens up here, not just analytically, but analysis is actually not possible without a certain set of feelings. And I think that what becomes possible here, because people suddenly feel these things are possible, is the desire to actually try to have agency to make the decisions necessary to maybe win another Senate seat in Texas, right? Wouldn't it feel nice to see Ted Cruz lose on election night? That possibility is a feeling, and you marry that to actual analysis. You actually could do it, and there are ways to figure out how. And that, to me, is like the new structure of sentiment inside the Democratic Coalition that I find genuinely exciting. I could not think of a more on-brand answer from Ezra Klein to talk to me about your interior life and your feelings, and you get to permitting reform within 42 seconds. I was hoping for. You get the version of me you get, Tim. I was hoping for tears or. The problem is the other answer is too personal. There's not much in the I'm willing to reveal it on the Bulwark podcast. All right. Well, maybe we'll get to the personal at the end. We'll see how it goes. There we go. It's interesting what you said about this kind of feeling of possibly being able to win in Kansas and Indiana. I think it was the last time you're on maybe two times ago we were talking about this and you were expressing some frustration that democrats like weren't willing to make any sacrifices to win in those states that created a little bit of hubbub on x speaking of x the interesting thing to me is um the way in which adam hamilton in particular but we talked scott colombe even like we're able to win these races without like really compromising that much on values and i do wonder do you feel like that's offering false hope? Or do you think it's a new model? You know, like, were they able to be that successful just because Donald Trump stepped on so many rakes? Or did Adam Hamilton tap into something that can be copied? I don't think anything was unusual about that from like a historical perspective of how you run a race in that way. Let me try to answer this in two ways, because there's what it means to win in a wave or tsunami year as the opposition, and then it's going to be what it means to govern and try to hold a seat like that. So in terms of not sacrificing too much in terms of values, one of the arguments I think I was making to you back in that conversation is people underestimate how good winning feels. The fact that Scott Colombe ran as a tough on crime prosecutor who solved more cold cases and put more people behind bars than other people in his position, that he ran as a personally pro-life candidate. People don't feel bad about Scott Colon. They feel thrilled because in values, he is one of theirs. He's like a good person who tries to make his community better, who wants people in his community to have healthcare, who is going to vote for Supreme Court justices who protect choice. That has always been how those kinds of candidates both run and then why they end up as part of the broad Democratic coalition. But the flip, the place where this gets harder over time, and where maybe Adam Hamilton in the future is not going to feel like Adam Hamilton in the present, is what if you're Adam Hamilton, you're running now in 2032 for re-election, and it's not a Democratic wave year. You've got a Democratic president who's maybe at 47% in the polls, or 46%, or 45%. God willing. God willing, right? And you're having to separate yourself. You're having to show Kansans that you're not just a 95 percent or a 90 percent or 87 percent Democratic Party line vote, that you're an independent candidate who is there for them even when they disagree with the Democratic Party. That's where in the future it begins to not feel so good to have these moderates in your party when they are saying you can't have some of what you want in the health care bill or you can't have some of what you want in the environmental bill. And the question then of whether you protect them, we recognize they have to have a different politics maybe than, you know, Adam Schiff does in California. That's where it gets tougher. But the idea that Adam Hamilton or Scott Colom is thrilling right now in election night, of course they are. And it would have been even better to win also in Louisiana, even better to win also in Florida. Winning power, it feels good. Oh, that's true. I think it was just particularly notable to me that they end up both winning, right? Josh Turek and Adam Hamilton. And with about two weeks left, there's one of these controversies that will be lost to history. But I think there's an interesting example of two different approaches, which is the trans kind of sports thing comes up. And Josh Turek puts up an ad talking about he cares about fairness and, you know, he did wheelchair basketball and all this. He doesn't want trans girls in girls' sports. And Adam Hamilton gets asked about that the next day on TV, and he gives kind of a very religious answer about how, you know, he wants everybody to be respected and loved and kind of doesn't really answer the question, right? But sort of, you know, retreats to values and avoids it. And it was interesting to me. I think he offered a model of how to represent yourself as independent by talking about caring about your Republican constituents without hippie punching. And I don't know. I think that is going to be an interesting thing to explore, whether that is something that is sustainable. I think something that is also embedded in that is, and you see this with Tallarico, you see it with Adam Hamilton, you see it, I think, in a somewhat connected way with Abdul Sayyed, is a desire and an excitement to see the return of a religious left in American politics. And the recognition that that gives you access to a moral framework and a language of transcendent morality that allows you to sort of pivot out of questions in an interesting way. You know, one thing that Tallarico would do a lot, and I think it would be very hard for him to do it with the same vein. surveillance if he wasn't speaking from within his christianity is he'd get asked about paxton or something and he would first say well he's my brother in christ you know or jd vance he would do this with all the time yeah and it's interesting i wonder if a secular candidate could have gotten away with that right he's my patriotic fellow american if that would have rang the same way to the public but i think that in this moment as a humanist right all humans as a secular humanist i think in this moment of moral collapse that donald trump is ushered in there is a yearning for candidates who speak in a deeper register of values and morality that does not mean in fact it may actually give them more latitude than other candidates have to kind of pivot on issues i'm not sure in the long run you're going to see a significantly more liberal voting record from adam hamilton than josh turk though i guess we'll see yeah but hamilton had this language of christianity and care for the least among us that was the first thing he was able to reach for and i do think this reflects something that is kind of rippling in american politics i'll say john ossoff i thought often uses register two he didn't use it exactly as much from saying you know i'm a jewish american and i you know in my synagogue but he he used a lot of biblical illusion he had a very preacherly southern church influence cadence on the stump his oratory had a lot from that era in it and he spoke very deeply in the language of values so to me this is something big happening in the kind of again like the sentiment structure the the kind of like the deeper moral structure of democratic politics right now i agree with that all right we're gonna stay with feelings for you for just a little bit then we can get into the the nitty-gritty okay the last week feel like the end of something do you like do you feel like the the mega period is over and we're moving on to something else or not quite it felt like it to me let me think about let me let me feel on this for a minute feel i think it is clear that donald trump is not finished as a force-wielding power in american life but he is finished as the structuring organizing cultural principle of american life i think it is clear that jd vance is not tapped into some electric current of post-right new intelligentsia that is going to make him a consolidator and uh ideological like air in a way that works to the trump life and i think it is clear that jd vance is not tapped into some electric current of post-right legacy i think it's clear that who trump is doesn't work and in the end it doesn't get you where you want to go and i think that the other thing that felt different to me about the election is i do think it marks in a way that is important generational turnover in american politics not just in the republican party but then in the democratic party i had this um little riff on my show recently more so the democratic party actually i think exactly well that's what it has a generational change to come but yes it's a question mark a little bit this election to me was the elder millennials taking over the democratic party hell yeah you're looking at finally if you're looking at talarico you're looking at buddha judge you're like i had this like whole list of them you know running down now i don't want to get the i'm gonna understand all the references that they make exactly references but but i do think you know you're seeing a move towards a different generation you know abdul sayyed you know you're seeing a move towards a different generation you know abdul sayyed being the leaders in the democratic party they have a different you know you know it's a joke to say we understand the references but it's actually important right what the cultural structure that they work off of is right the way which are shaped both by obama and by donald trump the way that they're native to both what made social media and algorithmic media the force it is but also give it the toxicity it now has i think all that is going to have a lot of consequence in our politics for a long time and i think it's going to have a lot of consequence in our politics for a long time i agree with you i just want to say i i don't i feel like it's over i mean there's a big fight ahead like so people should not check out like the last two years of donald trump's might end up being the most dangerous two years or he might descend into dementia and just want to go golf and build an arch or anything in between well even if he does descend into dementia and want to golf and build an arch that's not what stephen miller his new chief of staff is going to want to do great point and so i think it's really important to realize donald trump is not just a person he's a staff yeah and what he did is gave he just made stephen miller officially functionally the prime minister and donald trump could be replaced by something dangerous and powerful i don't you know i think that conceivably something from the right could emerge from outside this administration that challenges jd vance effectively there's not really a clear leader of that unless you want to say tucker but like i i don't i don't think it's impossible that that happens so i i doesn't mean we're out of the danger that means that we've turned the chapter but we have turned the chapter but we're out of the danger that means that we're out of the danger that means that we've turned the chapter think about the last expense report you filed the receipt you couldn't find the category you guessed at the email from finance asking who that was that you had coffee with three weeks ago and whether it was really a business expense what if i told you none of that needed to exist anymore i bet you'd be pretty excited if you're anything like me you'd be pretty excited and it's true with ramp with ramp expenses submit themselves finally just text or email your receipt and ramp categorizes codes and submits it for you and that's it for today's episode of the when you book business travel with ramp they find the best flights and hotels that you're actually allowed to book no more finding out a month later that the hotel is only partially covered whatever that means ramp is the only finance platform that employees and finance teams both rave about more than 70 000 organizations from family farms to the largest fortune 100s to here at the bulwark have saved over 12 billion dollars with ramp i gotta tell you i was so anti doing receipts that for years so honestly ramp might have costable work a little bit because now i'm finally getting reimbursed all right so i'm saving and i guess whatever that's all kind of related but i'm saving money and that is huge and so if you're like me you are losing money because you're just like i'm not going to submit this fucking taxi cab receipt i'm just not going to do it i'm not going to take the time to do it i'm going to eat the 28 well now with ramp that doesn't have to happen for you anymore they just do it for you the ramp card the app makes it so easy to do it easy simple if i can do it trust me if i can do it you can do it time is money save both with ramp new customers get 250 off at ramp.com slash bulwark go to ramp.com slash bulwark ramp.com slash bulwark part of the vibe shift the more amusing part of the vibe shift um we saw today we're taping this wednesday afternoon because i'm going to denver tomorrow but uh so who knows what could happen let's see if more could do between now and then but um earlier today alex carpusio of palantir did an interview with politico and um i just i've got great news all he cares about is economic justice i want to play a little clip from it palantir was involved in some of that uh with ice uh well i was really happy to hear the president be honest that you know his words i believe were something like yeah we kind of went too far i have been saying in private like there's always a question what do you say in public what do you say in private i am uh someone who believes in very controlled migration but it has to be humanely done and competently done and americans are a deeply fair people yeah so if you want to do these things and i'm glad he's saying in public now what i've been saying in private and we will see what happens and what have you been saying in private exactly you have to be super competent and it has to be fair and explainable to the average american person people agree with you and people don't agree with you the average american look president obama that we supported also in that context uh did very well and like having a migration policy that people bought into it in private alex carp is just like you know all we should be we should be so much nicer to the migrants that we're tracking currently and putting into concentration camps but i but privately i think it's kind of like a john lennon thing in private almost no borders you know love everybody a profile and courage i mean you know he used to sell himself as a socialist this was for a long time part of the alex carp that that he was peter teal's socialist friend who just happened to run the government data mining contract company and you know jacob weisberg maybe had him on the show around this wrote this book recently called profiles and cowardice and it is a look at some of the people who lit their professed principles on fire to conduct transactionally with donald trump from people in charge of law firms and the government and the government and the government and the government and the government to people in the media and look i'm all for converts i want the largest possible coalition here if if alex carp wants to come in and say in private he thinks that ice has become a dangerous paramilitary force empowered by palantir technology that's great we're just buying on them because we wanted to make sure that they had fresh baked goods you know but you know you're not judging them you're judged by what you say when it's easy you're judged by what you say when it's hard and i didn't want to not a moral argument. I find it worse. I want to say this. I find Alex Karp's behavior worse if in private he was saying this is wrong. It's one thing to have the views that it isn't wrong in private, right? Then I find you immoral, but at least consistent. But if you think it is wrong and you just decided to put your boot on the throat of your morality to not rock the boat in your contracts, I have very little respect for that. Yeah. And his technology was used to identify people that had come into the country, weren't breaking any laws, weren't a danger to the country. Some of them had worked visas. He wasn't writing an opinion column in the San Francisco Chronicle. Right. And it wasn't like he was a government contract was doing the administrative paperwork for the Commerce Department or something like his technology was finding the migrants. It was helping DHS identify people and round them up and shackle them and use them as props and then dump them into internment camps. So I don't know who he was talking to in private. Jason Calacanis. Maybe. But I don't think Christine Ohm. Luckily, we'll probably find out. We'll get to have to testify about that. You can tell us who you talked to. They're going to be interesting hearings in the next couple of years. Here's the good news, though. We can both be really mad at Alex Karp, and he can be the most obnoxious version of the vibe shift. But it is better. It is better. For Virtue Signaling to be back again. I've always been an apologist for Virtue Signaling, and I think I'm ready for Virtue Signaling 2.0. As I said, I want the largest possible coalition in favor of democratic values and humane action. And so, you know, I can have my feelings about what people did over the past couple of years, but we welcome converts with open arms. Most of them. A couple of them might push into the pool. A couple of them might be a fake thing. Like, hey, bro. Well, I think you have to take a lot of it as fake. I mean, and this is the thing with, No, no, no. I meant I was, my open arms might be fake for some of them. But yes, obviously they're fake. I mean, you know, one thing we saw with Trump 2.0 is that there are a lot of CEOs in this country. And Trump won, I think. It looked for a time, you know, you had Jeff Bezos apparently personally agreeing to or even encouraging democracy dies in darkness as the tagline for the Washington Post. Yeah. But I think looking back, what you see with that is that for a lot of them, it wasn't so much that their convictions had held them fast to a resistance posture, but they actually thought Trump was such an aberration that it would be costlier to go along with it, even if it meant short-term contracts, than to be in a public stance of opposition, because surely this is just going to go away. Yeah. And then when it didn't, you saw them, many of them, not all, right, flip into this other posture. Which is to say that they are deeply, deeply, deeply, many of them, transactional and changeable. In some ways, I think the ones who came out better in the second term are the ones who just held to being somewhat normal CEOs and not trying to be influencers at the same time. What did Sundar Pichai think about anything? I don't really know. Whereas some of the other ones who decided they had to get on board with it, look at your face there. Sundar's not really doing much. He's not doing much for me, but okay. Sure. I think the ones who decided they had to go on Rogan and explain how they were part of the vibe shift, that didn't age well. Yeah, I guess. Tim Cook was always a personal hobby horse of mine. With his golden award for Donald Trump. Yeah, we can all do. We can rank our own personal worsts in the old folks' home. It doesn't really do much good. Guys, we are back with the cat update. I'm sure. Many of you pet lovers out there have been wanting to know what's happening with Slinky. How much my life has been tormented. How often he's thrown up. And I've had to clean it up whilst hungover or podcasting. And I've got to tell you, not as much lately. Because our friends with Smalls are back. Most cat foods out there use meat byproducts and cut their food with cheap grains, fillers, and artificial ingredients. Stuff that isn't great for your cat's tummy. Big pet food does this because it's cheaper to make. But what they save on cost, your cat pays for with their health. And you pay for. With getting down on your hands and knees, cleaning up disgusting cat vomit. That's something you don't want to do. Alright? You want your cat to be healthy and have yummy food. And you also don't want to have cat puke on the couch cushions. Slinky's doing well. Just a little update. You know, a daughter is happy. There's no more calls for the other kind of pets. I've had a cat in the house, at least for now. I've survived that. He is, I guess I would say, emotionally codependent with my husband. And we found out that my father, also, and Slinky, they vibed. Me? We're okay. We're kind of coexisting. It's like that roommate that you had right out of college that you found on Craigslist. You know? Every once in a while, you'd meet in the living room to watch a show together. But besides that, you guys are kind of going about your lives. That's me and Slinky. But I've got to tell you, he's happy. And I know how to make him happy with the snack treats from Smalls. Your cat's health and longevity starts with what they eat for a limited time. Because you are a Bulwark daily listener. Get 60% off your first order, plus free shipping and free treats for life, when you head to Smalls.com slash The Bulwark. One last time, that's 60% off your first order, plus free shipping and free treats for life, when you head to Smalls.com slash The Bulwark. Go do it. I want to come back to these guys and the AI stuff at the end. But let's just do the Dems first and kind of what's next. And you can discuss your various reform proposals you're excited about. You, I believe, based on social media. Because you can't interview streamers because they scoop you, right? Because they're streaming everything. I'm all for people hyping up the shows before they have them. Okay, so Hasan Piker. Join Friday to listen to me and Hasan. There you go. Hasan Piker's been on your show. It'll be out on Friday. He tweeted about it. When I texted you to see what you wanted to talk about, you were excited to talk about the synthesis, which I thought was an interesting angle after having talked to Hasan Piker, given that a lot of people, I think, would look at you and Hasan as being on kind of opposite poles of the Democratic coalition. And so I'm wondering where you think the synthesis is and how sustainable it is. So I had Adam Jentleson, who's sort of more centrist-y, Searchlight Institute guy, former deputy chief of staff for Harry Reid, then chief of staff for John Fetterman, before kind of Fetterman went into his full, full current form. And I had Hasan on, that'll come out, Hasan Piker Friday. And one of the things I was sort of exploring there with the two of them, with their different perspectives, is how differently do they understand the election and what the Democratic Party should do, really? And I would say it's not that different. And this is sort of, you were asking about feelings at the beginning, and I was saying that on X, the degree to which everything gets turned up to a thousand factually is really noticeable to me. Because, in fact, you talk to people from different parts of the party, and what do they think happened? They think the Democratic Party focused on affordability, focused on economic populism, either moderated on or downplayed a bunch of cultural topics, moderated on climate in particular in states like Texas and South Carolina and some of the others, you know, you have Tallarico kind of embracing oil and gas. And one of the things I've been interested to see is to what degree, you know, I know some of the centrists are happy about this. Are the leftists happy about this? Are the leftists unhappy about it? And the answer is no, they're not, right? They're thrilled. And one of the things I was talking about with Piker, Israel is a little bit of an exception here, which we can get to if you want, but actually, I would not say a little bit. A lot of foreign policy is an exception. Yeah, a lot of foreign policy is going to be an exception here. Especially until Piker seems to be like pro-China. Yeah, so that's going to be a different thing. So, but let me hold that to the side for a minute. On domestic policy, we are talking about, there is right now this fight on X about, is populism simpler? Is it possibly a thing that the Bernie Sanders wing of the party can claim? Or is that a traditional way of running as a Democrat? And I have all these quotes that I can show you of how similar all this sounds. But I actually think that the idea that there was a lot of what Piker liked to call vulgar Bernieism in the election was really correct. And the particular- Vulgar Bernieism? Yeah, it's a joke on vulgar Marxism. But it's not because you heard a lot of candidates talking about billionaires. I'm still an immigrant, you know? I've been a lib for 10 years now. I don't know inside Marxist jokes. I don't do inside, you know, I don't know any- You'll get it. We'll re-educate you, Tim. Don't worry. Okay. If you go back to the 2012 election, and then Sanders running in 2016, you have this Democratic Party, you know, under Obama in 2012, that is really economics first. Obama runs against Romney as a predatory Bain capital plunderer. You know, I can give you these quotes from- A little meme. A little meme, sure. Just a little meme about it. It works. Obama, 2011 here. The only class warfare I've seen is a battle that's been waged against middle-class folks in this country for a decade now. That's a kind of quote people are grabbing from Tallarico and saying, nobody talked like this before Bernie. But no, in fact, this was totally normal. There's a Pelosi quote, also 2011, quoting actually Warren Buffett saying, you know, there was a class war and his war and his class won. And so you see a lot of this. And but in this period, I think you have a Democratic Party for different reasons that is getting a little fed up with what it can't do. And Bernie runs in 2016 as both a Democratic socialist, but very, very, very, very focused on economic issues, which is somewhat different than Bernie 2020, which is more focused on things like climate and other things as well. And Hillary Clinton runs to Bernie's left on a bunch of these other issues, right? Famously, you know, breaking up the banks won't end systemic racism. And I think when you're talking about what this shift in the party looks like, it's a shift towards really focusing. On pocketbook and affordability and economic issues, you know, different candidates at different in different states are going to do that differently. So there are those who might say Medicare for all. There are those for whom they're not going to be comfortable going that far, right? A bunch of the swing state senators did not endorse Medicare for all, but they are going to endorse increases in the minimum wage, you know, making it easier to form a union, expanding health care in very dramatic ways, all these other things. But the synthesis is much more of an economics first Democratic Party. The difficulty is going to be when Democrats have power and they need to decide between some of the economics questions, some of the affordability questions and some of their other priorities, which are very real priorities like climate, like culture issues, like foreign policy, you know, places where maybe what you want to do for American producers and American consumers might differ. So it's not that you're in a Democratic Party now that agrees on how it will wield all this power. Right. I think it's a Democratic Party that has a fairly coherent view of what it should put first, which part of itself it can put first to win in Kansas versus what if it emphasizes it's going to lose in Texas. Well, there's an example of this. Your colleague Lulu is interviewing Gina Hinojosa and really kind of pressing her because Gina is positioning herself as a populist, an independent populist. And, you know, Lulu is like, well, aren't you really just a progressive? Are we a liberal? And they go back and forth a bunch on it. I want to play it for you. And I'm just curious how you define the difference between populist and progressive. And tell me why you've landed on populist as a label for yourself now. I think populist meets the moment of our time. Again, the one fight, the one fight in this country. And it is about economic power. And populism is about economic power. And whereas I do think in the past we evaluated politics as right versus left, I just don't think those labels apply at this moment in history, not in this moment in political history. We see that things are so stacked against working people in this country. And so, listen, it's just a label. But if I were to pick a label to describe what are my politics? It is economic populism. It happens to be a type of politics that is rooted in our Texas history. Is part of it also that this sort of progressive liberal label could be perceived as pretty toxic by certain members of the state that you're trying to get to vote for you? No, it is not that. Because I, but what I think it is, is that those labels have been associated with culture wars. And I just don't think. I just don't think that the culture wars are the fight of 2026. I'm just trying to sit with it. I'm not trying to be difficult. I'm just trying to understand a little bit. So you're a populist progressive. It's not an either or thing. Well, look, I just think that progressive politics is associated with culture wars. And I have no interest in. In fighting culture wars at this time. I mean, that was pretty clear, a pretty clear example of what you're talking about. I know Governor-elect Gina was essentially saying, look, this fight against the tech oligarchs is the fight right now and giving opportunity to working class people like that is what unifies everybody. That's the fight. And she repeats over and over again, like not the culture war stuff. I don't know how sustainable that is, but I mean, it's coherent. We'll see how sustainable this it's going to become harder, but I don't think it's just become harder for the culture war stuff. As you were putting it. I mean, that's part of it. And, you know, future Republicans will have different issues. They can try to create wedges around. But the big thing that's going to happen here is what most people mean when they are talking about corporate power, when they're talking about billionaire power. Yes, they don't want Elon Musk buying an election. They don't want a data center in their backyard. But it's not that kind of power is not for them just an abstraction. It's also, you know, am I getting a raise? Am I getting a raise? Am I feeling better when I go to the gas pump? And so I think the question for Hinojosa, but for lots and lots and lots of candidates across the country and then Democrats nationally when it comes to that, is how do you actually make people feel they got something out of Democrats governing? I mean, an interesting thing, and Matt Iglesias pointed this out about Hinojosa. That's interesting. Have you ever written anything about that before? Yeah, right. How do you make things more affordable? Maybe some supply constraints you're going to have to do something about. In Texas. In Texas, they have just incredibly low income taxation, right? None, in fact. And she's not proposing to change that, right? She's not running as a tax and spend populist either, right? She's not running saying the billionaire should have these huge tax rates in Texas or even the millionaires to say nothing of people making $500,000 and above. And one reason is that I don't think she thinks it would be popular. And so you are still going to be bound in a very deep way by public opinion. Populist is this weird word in American politics that it has somewhat different meanings depending on who's using it and whether or not they're using it as a pejorative or a self-description. You have right-wing populists, you have left-wing populists. But in some, you know, very, very abstracted sense, populism is supposed to be representing the common person against organized and powerful interests. And the thing that that ends up doing to you, right, over time. Is what happens when you disagree with the public? And do you end up going your own way as Donald Trump did, right? Trump ran as a right-wing populist and then did whatever the hell he wanted and became very, very, very unpopular for it. And there's a left-wing version of this, too, where Democrats run and sometimes they say all these things about class warfare and the war on the middle class. And they get in power and they do what they wanted to do, not exactly what they were elected to do. And then they lose support. And so right now, these little clips that are getting back. Added around. This is the easy part, the part where you get to say, no, no, no, I'm a populist. It's the bottom versus the top. The left right binary is dead. But what's going to happen now is you're going to have to govern in a way that, you know, hopefully 60 percent of the public really agrees with. And on some issues, that's going to be really easy, like data centers and on other issues, it's going to get a lot harder. It's interesting. You're using the word synthesis. And I was thinking about this and it made me think of my kind of old people. Which was the fusionists, right? Like, I mean, there's this word that was going around and for a long time, basically, as I was coming up in the Republican Party, like this was a big word to describe the coalition. It was basically social conservatives and economic libertarians. I created a fusionist coalition and an alignment together that gained them a lot of power. And the economic libertarians, you know, this was really more my people within the coalition were like, well, OK, well, you know, would we rather, you know, they're. There not be such strict rules around abortion and gay rights, like, of course, but like, we'll give that away to the social conservatives because they're part of the coalition and the social conservatives that, you know, would we rather have more support for families or whatever? But, OK, we'll not we'll not push for those policies as much because, you know, the Wall Street Journal types, you know, want free market all the way down. And that coalition lasted about 20 years or whatever. And it's hard to tell for me whether. What you're proposing, the synthesis, the Berniecrats that people are talking about, whether that's a real like version of fusionism where it's left economic populism with social moderation or whether it's kind of like a sleight of hand that people are going along with now for the time being. The reason I don't think the fusion example works here is that fusion was the reason you had to call it fusion was it was bolting together or fusing together two things. It seemed. It seemed actually opposite. You were fusing together free market economics and actually very tight constraints on cultural and moral issues enforced by government power. So making it illegal to have an abortion, right, enforced by the government, right, that's the social conservative view, alongside, I don't know, making it legal to pollute a stream. Sure. Because you wanted to and because the market said it was, you know, good for your bottom line to do so. So that didn't make a ton of sense. So here, the fusion here is, I think, a Democratic Party that can see itself on a lot of issues rowing in the same direction. the question is simply how far to go. So for instance, a place where I see this synthesis emerging in a very, very clear way is Medicare for More. Used to have a much more live fight in the party than you do now. I was part of, you know, this for years that had sort of this debate over whether or not you should do healthcare by moving towards a government insurer or whether you should do sort of competitive private insurance markets. And the competitive private insurance market side sort of had two main arguments. One is that competitive private insurance markets would be good. And I think that's not really proven to be true. But the bigger argument, the one that was more politically decisive, was you could get Republican support. Look, Mitt Romney did it in Massachusetts, so we should do it nationally. You know, Max Bacchus, who was Senate finance chair when Obamacare was passing, you know, he thought he could get Chuck Grassley, who is somehow still in the Senate. I think he'll be in his 90s if he runs for re-election in a few years or is in his 90s now. Could be a path to 57. Democratic senators just saying not to be macabre, but Rob Sand might give us an opportunity there. We wish great health on all of our public servants. I'm just looking at possibilities out there. I think that first idea that you can have Republican support, it's gone. Second, the idea that competitive insurance markets actually work that well, that's kind of also gone. But at the same time, I've watched the left climb down from the view that you need to abolish private health insurance, or even that it would be a politically good idea to try to start there or to have a private health insurance. And I think that's a good idea. I think it's a good idea to have a massive middle-class tax increase to ingest Medicare for all in one bite. And so like when I had Abdul Sayyed on my show and we were talking about this, he's got this analogy of climbing Everest and saying, you know, well, you got to get to base camp and you got to, you know, then get to this peak and that peak. And so you're doing this in kind of pieces. I spoke with Ron Wyden today, who's a more, you know, he's a liberal, but he's a somewhat heterodox liberal is what I would describe him from Oregon. He's Senate finance chair in the incoming Congress. So he's going to be very, very important on healthcare. He's got a long history on healthcare. Ryan Wyden deal. I mean, that was hell. Oh, Ryan. Yeah. Paul Ryan, Ron Wyden. Yeah. He did that. He did. I mean, that never passed, but that was a deal for doing kind of competitive markets and Medicare. He told me he's just signed on to Medicare for all. Right. Not because I think that will be his plan, but he has sort of this line about how, well, if I'm going to be the convening Democrat on this, I need like all of the tables in the room. So you can see the Democrats who used to believe in the competitive markets moving towards Medicare, the Democrats who believed in Medicare for all moving towards more Medicare for more. You have Andy Kim from New Jersey with the Medicaid proposal, which I think is going to be something you see Democrats begin to push. You've got Pat Ryan, an upstate New York representative who has a Medicare at 50 proposal. He's sort of been understood more often as a little bit more moderate, but I think that proposal, you could combine the Medicaid and Medicare at 50 and you're beginning to do a pincer movement. So on healthcare, for instance, which I think particularly given how badly Trump is gutting Obamacare, the Medicaid cuts that are about to go into effect, healthcare reform is going to come back to the forefront and you can begin to see that there's going to be a little bit of a shift in where the party is less divided than it was even a couple of years ago because the liberals are not like, well, we did Obamacare, let's move on to climate and the left isn't like Medicare for all or nothing. One other place, and we pushed this aside earlier, but just on foreign policy, I think that we're seeing a pretty big synthesis as well as trying to recapture the mantle of being the anti-war party. I think that there's going to be the kind of whatever you want to call it, five to 10% most pro-Israel members of the party in the center and then the 3% of tankies on the left that feel alienated by that. But I think that most parts of the faction for whom being pro-Israel is not their top issue or anti-American foreign policy is their top issue, everybody else is, I think, getting pretty aligned on, I think, a foreign policy that's maybe a couple ticks to the left of what we've seen from the last few nominees. What do you make of that? I agree with this. I think that you could call it Ben Rhodesism. I was going to call it Ben Rhodesism, but I didn't want to hand it to him. I'll give Ben the clap on the back here. So on Israel particularly, I think that there is a place you're going to see the Democratic Party come to a certain amount of common ground fairly quickly, which is an end to arms sales, certainly in the way they've been done, a lot on actually having some kind of political horizon, actual sanctions on what is happening in the West Bank. I think this is the end. I think the Democratic Party's relationship with Israel, where it believes that either the moral thing or even the best thing for Israel is unstinting support, almost no matter what Israel is doing, that is over. I think Joe Biden killed it. And I don't think you're going to see anything like that. And I don't think you're going to see anything like it again. And so there's going to be a question of how far to go in applying pressure. But there is no way to ignore that it is an apartheid state now, a state where you have 7 million Israeli Jews who have functionally full control over roughly 7 million Palestinians split across Israel proper and the West Bank and Gaza. And that in the West Bank, there's a regime of terror. In Gaza, there is Israeli control over most of the territory. And so I think that's going to be a question of how far to go in applying territory. And right now, Israel is having, in its post-election period, this fight over whether or not to even allow some of the Arab-Israeli parties to be part of a governing coalition in any real way. This is not values-aligned behavior, let's put it that way, from an American ally. And then Benjamin Netanyahu, by the way, who's been trying, as far as I can tell, to sever the Democratic Party's relation with Israel for a very long time, if he had listened to Barack Obama, tried to fight him on settlements. And Netanyahu, came to Congress and beat Obama in Congress. And that was the end of that. But Netanyahu's done terrible, terrible, terrible damage to Israel here. And the question of how far people go is going to be divisive. And probably after the Iran war, I think the question of whether or not the relationship needs to be renegotiated in a pretty fundamental way is going to be uniting on the Democratic side. All right. So the synthesis is coming into focus here. Some kind of Medicare for some. Medicare for more, more. Medicare for more, sorry. Medicare for more. Small American funds for others. Yeah. Ben Rhodesism and foreign policy. Two other issues we want to get to. Something that Adam Jentleson brought up on your podcast, that within the kind of Bernie crap construct, we also would allow for spanking. Pro-spanking. I didn't see that moment coming. You didn't? I was just kind of a little, it's going to be Medicaid. I guess here's a better way to put it. It's like, we're going to give the kids Medicare and we're going to give them a little smack on the ass from time to time. So Jentleson brought that up on the show as a way for Democrats to show they're heterodox because a lot of the publicly spanking is fine. Then before that comes out, no, I guess the day that comes out, I'm taping with Piker who comes in and I'm like, well, what should the Democrats do now? And he's like, it's built to ass from the Democrats. And I'm like, man. So there's more synthesis here if you're looking for it. Yes. Everybody's excited about corporal punishment. Yeah. Now for Piker, he was talking about to the Republicans. Yeah, sure. Yeah. Built to ass of Pete Hegseth, some light spanking if you're trouble making child and then Medicaid for the kids, you know, in case there are any issues they run into. This is, we're finding a real synthesis here, I think, from Jentleson. You never know what's going to happen on the Ezra Klein show. This is Troy Millings from Earn Your Leisure. If you want a small business, you know how important it is to stay on top of your numbers. That's why I want to tell you about Xero. That's X-E-R-O. Xero is a platform built for small business owners that brings accounting, payments, payroll, and analytics together in one place. You can access reports, visual dashboards, forecasts, and AI insights to help you better understand your cashflow and make informed decisions about your business. Learn more at Xero.com. Okay. We've been talking about QP Mail for a minute now, Bow, and, wow, the feedback we're getting. I mean, so many of y'all love this stuff. You're stopping us in the street going, I love QP. And if you're thinking, wait, what is QP? Uh, do you not have the internet? The one with the red cap and the little baby on the bottle. Once you know it, you start seeing it everywhere. People ask what makes it different from basic mayo. Well, the answer, egg yolks. QP is made with egg yolks only, giving it this incredibly rich umami flavor. A flavor that elevates everything. Burgers, fries, sandwiches, chicken, noodles. Chefs use it. Restaurants use it. People who really love food and flavor use it. Whatever you're eating, QP it. So if you haven't tried QP yet, find the bottle with the red cap and see what everyone's talking about. You'll understand. QP, the original Japanese mayonnaise. All right. I want to do AI, but I just, we've teased everybody long enough. The permitting reform bill is going through. We're the lame duck right now. The abundancy types, the YIMBYs are very excited about it. There are some environmental groups that aren't as thrilled. People are looking at this as maybe a test of whether everybody can play together in the sandbox. What do you think the state of play is? Yeah, the permitting reform bill. So BHA, um, as people, as it's now gotten acronymed, is this big bill that would make it a lot easier to build energy of all kinds. That, that is the simplest way to put it. And it would do that by making it first, doing a lot to empower the federal government to do interstate transmission, which is really hard to do right now. And it's the same. biggest blocker on clean energy. But then by rolling back the way that bills like the National Environmental Policy Act or the Stroke Preservation Act or the Clean Water Act have become things you can use to block or delay basically anything for all kinds of reasons that maybe have nothing to do with whether or not the bill is good for the environment. And I actually, I will say that as much as I like on net and for the permitting reform bill, I don't think this stuff is easy. And I don't think changing the defaults in the federal government to make it much easier to build is going to go forward without anything ever going wrong. But this is a moment where you can make it possible to build a lot more clean energy faster. I was talking to people in the Biden administration and I was saying, I was asking them, if this bill had been law when you came into power, what would that have meant for the Infrastructure Act and the Inflation Reduction Act and all of these big green energy bills you tried to do? And they said, oh my God, if this is the way it's going to work, then I don't think it's going to work. And I don't think this had been done, had been finished because it takes a couple of years to implement a bill like this. If this had been finished before we got in, we could have gone so much faster. So what I take a bill like this to be is a little bit of a bet on the future. If you believe Democrats are going to win power in 2028, you really want this done because you're going to be able to sort of resubsidize green energy and they will be able to move very, very, very fast on the build out. Maybe you guys will get your trains. It'll make it easier to build public transit. You know, libs love trains. Yeah, makes it easier to build public transit. Now, if you told me Ron DeSantis is going to be president, it may not go as well, right? So, but it does, what a bill like this does is it moves the contest out of suing people and suing administrative agencies over whether or not they considered every possible esoteric outcome in their impact report and moves it into a fight over who can win power, who politically, and also over markets, right? Is green energy actually ready and capable in the way people think it is? And I think that's a really good point. I think that's a really good point. How has that played out, the kind of abundance TSA fusionism of the Mamdani mayorship? I think it's really interesting because you also see – weirdly, this comes up in the Piker conversation too. But look at Nithya Raman who just won for the LA mayoralty running on a kind of build, build, build socialism. It was always my view that abundance should basically be understood as a fairly leftist project because you're trying to make a government capable of delivering big policy change fast. And to do that, you need a very strong government. You need a government that isn't hampered by all kinds of regulations on the government itself. And so it makes a lot of sense that if you are a democratic socialist who wants to run the government in a democratic socialist direction, that you first have a very strong agenda to restore public faith in government, and second, have an agenda to unleash government to do big things pretty fast. Now, the question of how, you know, you're just talking about outputs. It is still early, even in New York. I mean, Zoran has been mayor less than a year here. To say, well, are we building housing faster? Is New York becoming more affordable in a significant way? He's doing a lot of great stuff on red tape. He's appointed a lot of people I really like to, you know, key commissions and offices. And so there's a lot for me to like in it. But, you know, there is still this question of, do we actually know how to turn a city that is in a more low growth equilibrium into something more high growth? you know, in San Francisco, where Daniel Lurie is mayor, and he's from the more moderate wing of the party, but also like very abundance-billed, very, you know, build, build, build. It's not like you have seen a giant unleash in buildings. So one thing I always try to be a little careful on, because it's all nice for me to run around celebrating people getting in on, you know, the rhetoric that I believe in. But this only matters. This is only meaningful if you actually build more homes, if you actually build more energy, if you actually build more public infrastructure, if people actually benefit from it. And that requires sometimes doing things that are hard and actually painful. That's why, to me, the permitting bill, which is a very big deal. This is a bigger bill by a lot on things like the Environmental Policy Act than I thought we would see for a long time. This would not have been on my bingo card for this year. And that's why you see it splitting the Democrats. I think you see it being painful. There are parts of this bill I don't like, right? That's just like the reality of a big bipartisan bill. I mean, first, I just don't want to see a lot, like, I worry about more fossil fuel infrastructure being built. You know, I believe green tech is going to outcompete it. And I am fairly confident Democrats can make smart decisions and win and then further accelerate green tech. But it's a bet. It's not a thing that I feel 100% certain on. A lot more Democratic governors in those states has to make you feel a little bit better about that. The Democratic governors do make me feel better on that. But the other thing I worry about is Trump doing a lot of damage on public lands in the next two years. And, you know, this is a fight about how the bill is actually described and what you think he can do versus what he can do now. You know, Cory Booker is worried that you can get this sort of permit protection for permits that were functionally illegal. You know, and whether or not that's true is, I think, a technical question that I'm having trouble myself adjudicating at the moment. But when you do this, you're taking a bet. And right now Democrats don't have full power and Trump himself is a very, very lawless figure who has a lot of protection and corrupt and has a lot of protection from the courts. And so it's this tough thing. If you wait for the future, then you're going to be waiting years before you can actually get these rules in place under a Democrat if you're ever able to get it. And on the other hand, if you do it now, you have a period of time where Trump is still in office, even though he's a lame duck. So again, the democratic governors, the Democrats having power of the person Congress, I think you should be able to navigate this. And I think net net, it's a good idea, but you know, it's really trying to set up a system in which you can build as opposed to it assures right now that only the things you want will get built. This is LeVar Arrington from two pros and a cup of Joe running a small business means keeping track of a lot but your finances shouldn't feel complicated. Let me tell you about Xero. That's X-E-R-O. Xero brings accounting, payments, payroll and analytics together giving you one clear view of your business. With easy to read dashboards you can see your cash flow and understand exactly what's coming in and what's going out. Xero's AI can save you time and provide insights to help you make smarter decisions while keeping everything simple and accessible. It's powerful enough for an accountant, but simple enough for you. Xero is the all-in-one to get business done. Okay, we've been talking about QB Mail for a minute now, Bow, and wow, the feedback we're getting. You're stopping us in the street going, I love Kewpie. Well, the answer? Egg yolks. Kewpie is made with egg yolks only, giving it this incredibly rich umami flavor that elevates everything. Burgers, fries, sandwiches, chicken, noodles Chefs use it, restaurants use it People who really love food and flavor use it Whatever you're eating, Kewpie it So if you haven't tried Kewpie yet Find the bottle with the red cap And see what everyone's talking about You'll understand Kewpie, the original Japanese mayonnaise I want to do AI really quick You know, some people right now Are worried about Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries and how they'll manage their conferences. That's not me, I'm built different than them. I'm worried that while I was looking at the precinct returns in Seward County, Kansas, the frontier AI models advanced exponentially. And, you know, we are gonna have robot overlords by the time that Adam Hamilton's up for reelect again in 2032. Oh, no, they'll just rule us from within the digital realm. Making robots is very complicated. Hmm, okay. - Yeah. - Look, you should be, fucking worried man i mean i did this big video essay a little bit ago about why we should ban recursive self-improvement yeah uh which is where the ai begins accelerating in an at an accelerating rate building other ais and then anthropic comes out pretty recently says yeah we're really accelerating on the path to rsi uh and there are some pretty alarming you know social media posts going around this week again and not from just anthropic world and effective altruism safety world like from people who are pro-ai and want ai advancement who have said over the past few months that they are concerned that it's it's accelerating much faster than they had anticipated the ai horseshoe never ceases to amaze me the two people who want you to just stop ai development like blue sky liberals who hate ai and then people who work at the labs and have stock options and it's just very strange but it is very real thing people you know suggest that it's not actually true but i know a lot of these people the labs and they're terrified they're genuinely terrified ai regulation seems to be one of the few places where there is bipartisan interest the issue is trump and his belief that whoever wins on ai wins you know my model of ai regulation is that what you have are moments where something goes wrong and that expands you over 10 window in terms of what you can do and so the hugging face incident dramatically expanded the number of people who took seriously that there are loss of control incidents that can happen with rogue ai or just out of control ai it wasn't quite enough to force real regulation because nothing really happened that affected normal people it's you know they the ai's hacked another ai company to try to cheat on a test they didn't hack wells fargo they didn't hack a chinese manufacturer or it wasn't a chinese ai that hacked us but if you believe that you're on this path to more powerful systems that we have less and less legibility into and less control over then you have to assume you're going to have more loss of control incidents and they're going to get more serious and more cyber security incidents and they're going to get more serious and eventually you know geopolitical and interstate incidents are going to get serious and each one of these is going to offer an opportunity to act in a more aggressive way than we have before and i think the question is what does the incident look like and whether we take it if we there's some people who are what's called a fast takeoff believer where it's like just overnight one night the ai becomes super intelligent then takes everything over and we never get another shot i don't really buy that so i think there are going to be moments where you can see this has gotten out of control and will we do anything my fear more would be that the open you know that the open source models start improving just as fast as like our big frontier companies so i mean isn't there going to be a lot of people that are going to be able to limit on you know what regulation can do there will be eventually i don't think we're there yet the i think the open source models remain about a year behind it's very hard to tell this because one way the open source models get better is by distilling or in other ways copying or building off of what the frontier models are doing so regulating down the frontier models is actually a larger lever than i think people give it credit for you know for folks who listen to this are worried about it want to be informed aren't experts like what kind of material has most informed your view on this it was noted that you did i believe six straight ai podcasts i think eight middle to midterms was it something like that eight straight ai podcasts and and maybe it's just because you felt so confident about scott colombe you really didn't need to cover it i don't know but um obviously you're kind of deep in the sauce on this so what what would you recommend to i mean i read a lot of x um transformer ai is very good understanding ai is very good casey newton's platformer is very good it's hard because there's no one place to keep up with ai um is v moskovitz's uh don't worry about the vase the vase is very good but i'm i'm it's like all this is a very diffuse area you know you're reading reports from meter there are shows that are really really worth keeping up with i think we have done good coverage of air and my uh my show hard fork at the times is doing a lot of of course machine god which is kevin um ruse and casey newton's new show is great uh you should follow jasmine's son uh who's um you know her work is really really good so there's a lot of people doing good work here the problem is there's no one place to to hold attention on it in the way that i genuinely wish there was there's no one-stop shop on ai when a democratic 2028er calls you and says ezra what do you think i should be saying about this on the campaign trail what's your advice to people who might be interested in what they should be saying about this on the campaign trail i think we need to retain control over ai that means they need to retain visibility and understanding of what ai is doing and that requires us to not press a button on certain things and even though it will speed you up in the race against other corporations or even in the race against china it is better to retain control and move a little bit more slowly and focus more on diffusion in economically useful ways than to be in this all-out rush to beat everybody else to the front line and to be in this all-out rush to beat everybody else to the front line and to the frontier model that is completely out of control and so i think there's a lot you have to do within that that's not a full policy agenda but i think at a principles level the key thing is maintaining human control and comprehension of what these systems are and what they're doing and the ways which are being improved by the way it also means we need to be have confidence that when we are testing and auditing them they're not just telling us what we want to hear one of the most worrying things to me coming out of the various ai companies right now is a sense that the ai systems are getting better at understanding when they're being tested and so they are lying you're like will you cheat and they're like no i would never cheat you know and so you know there is increasing evidence that they have something called chain of thought where they try to where they kind of write down what they're doing they might be lying or admitting things on chain of thought so when you start to get into the realms of deceptive behavior from ai and also you get into ai agent swarm dynamics which we really don't understand at all i'm not a big fan of the language of pacing the frontier because if you pace things and you don't do anything useful with the time then you're just slightly more slowly running off of a cliff so the question for me is what what is required for us to really be certain we have control and comprehension in these systems all right we discussed the end times spanking you know fusionism we've done so much do you have any other feeling like at this point are you more comfortable are there any other private feelings from the past week you want to share with us or we're we're going to do this next time next time we'll start with a a meditation little therapy and we'll talk about we'll talk about the texture of awareness it's going to be great um i'm feeling very aware right now okay are you i'm feeling very aware i can how are you in your body tim um i'm centered i'm extremely centered in my body right now and um i think that i can identify the ways in which my internal being is trying to deceive me and so i feel like i have myself in a way that i'm not sure we have control over ai at least at this point i'm gonna see you later buddy appreciate you very much uh everybody else we're gonna have more soft boy pods for you tomorrow i'm sorry i'm gonna fix it next week but tomorrow we got another soft boy coming we'll see you all then peace it's good the bulwark daily is brought to you thanks to the work of lead producer katie cooper associate producer ansley skipper and with video editing by dante de chico and audio engineering and editing by jason brown this is dr laurie santos here's what the research actually shows about connection it's not about how many people you know it's about the quality of time you spend together and true quality social time requires getting more present noticing the table you set being grateful for the care you put into it and savoring the gifts you get to share when you gather together that's why i've been using the escutney double old-fashioned glass from simon pierce pick it up and feel its weight and character turn it over and you'll find the pontil mark an impression left by the iron and a reminder of the hand that was behind that work this is the kind of intention that makes it easier to be present and savor a drink together and that's what simon pierce has been doing for the nearly 50 years making glass and pottery by hand in the united states for moments that matter pieces designed to be used passed down and shared with the people you love if you're shopping for someone who loves to host or you like setting your own table it's worth starting with simon pierce see my favorite designs for hosting and holidays at simonpierce.com that's s-i-m-o-n-p-e-a-r-c-e.com simon pierce made by hand one at a time you can find me on instagram at simon pierce and i'll see you next time it's ryan seacrest for albertsons and tom thumb fall is here which means it's time to stock up on vitamins for the season now through december 1st buy more participating vitamin products and save more save on items like nature made magnesium nature made vitamin c gummies nature's truth elderberry gummies nature made b12 tablets nature's truth vitamin k nature made multivitamins and nature's truth ashwagandha gummies and save more when you buy more offer ends december 1st restrictions apply offers may vary visit albertsons or tomthumb.com for details you