Outsider Candidates vs. The Establishment: Who Can Beat Trumpism?
45m 5s
In this mailbag episode of "Raging Moderates," hosts Scott Galloway and Jessica Tarliff field listener questions on politics and personal topics. On the 2028 Democratic nominee, they diverge: Scott predicts a centrist, tall, white, heterosexual male (e.g., Andy Beshear or Gavin Newsom), dismissing outsider or media figures like Jon Stewart, while Jess welcomes a wide-open primary, including business or commentary backgrounds, but values legislative experience. They agree the party will likely avoid a woman candidate due to perceived electability. On election fraud, they dismiss Trump’s claims as baseless, citing 66 rejected court cases and the absurdity of selective cheating, urging coalition-building against such narratives. Regarding institutional damage, Scott warns of geopolitical "superpower suicide" from eroded trust, while Jess argues against restoring normalcy, focusing on rebuilding public trust and systemic change. They also debate capitalism, with Scott proposing progressive taxation and a $25 minimum wage, critiquing unions as outdated, while Jess defends union revitalization. The episode ends on a hopeful note: Jess finds joy in her daughters’ growth, and Scott in public universities like UVA, symbolizing optimism for future generations despite political turmoil.
This episode is brought to you by Nordstrom.
For 125 years, Nordstrom has been part of your story.
The stylist who found the perfect outfit for your big interview.
The first pair of walking shoes for your one-year-old.
The tomato soup you shared with your sister at the cafe.
These are the moments that make Nordstrom, Nordstrom.
Big or small, we're here for all of it.
Celebrating 125 years with new moments still ahead.
Discover it all in Nordstrom stores and at Nordstrom.com.
Hi, it's Kara Swisher.
You know me as co-host of Pivot, but for August, I'm flying solo.
And I've lined up some incredible guest hosts to join me.
Mark Cuban, Chelsea Handler, Caitlin Collins, and a lot more you won't want to miss.
Already out, my conversation with Hillary Clinton.
Among many other things, we get into redistricting fights, reshaping state politics,
and what Trump's golden makeover of the presidency actually means.
And it's not good.
Trust me, you don't want to skip this one.
Find Pivot on YouTube.
Or wherever you listen to podcasts.
Phones, laptops, and video game consoles are all getting way more expensive.
That's because AI data centers are gobbling up all the RAM those devices need to work.
This week on The Vergecast, we begin our Ramageddon survival guide
by chatting with the internet's favorite gadget repair guy, the digital doctor.
And we're looking at the new and more expensive Pixel phone
to decide if it's worth it or not.
to decide if they're worth the upgrade.
That's this week on The Vergecast, wherever you get your podcasts.
A quick programming note.
The Raging Moderates team is taking a little summer break.
So we'll be off this Thursday, and we'll be back with regular episodes on Monday, August 17th.
I'm going to be out for the rest of the month.
So congratulations to you all.
Around here, we call it Scott Free August.
Jess has a bunch of really great guest hosts lined up while I'm away.
It's going to be a nice palate cleanser.
Welcome to Raging Moderates. I'm Scott Galloway.
And I'm Jessica Tarliff.
We're halfway through the year, and the midterms are just around the corner.
It's a good time to check in with our listeners and answer some questions.
You know, because for us, it's all about the fans, Jess.
It is all about the fans.
It's all about the fans.
Even when they say shitty things sometimes, because we read the good and the bad comments.
Oh, get used to it. You don't even know. That was so elitist.
Move on.
All right.
I'm great.
All right.
Enough of that.
Let's jump in.
Here's a question from Jacob Abernathy, who is wondering about 2028 and the possibility of an outsider candidate.
I don't know about Jess, but I have not heard or seen these questions.
Yeah.
Roll tape.
Do you think the Democrats need more of an outside candidate like a Jon Stewart or more of an establishment Democrat who's won previous office before but still has big, bold ideas?
Thanks.
Jess?
So.
I think now there are two denominations of outsiders.
So there's like progressive DSA outsider.
Then there's outsider like Jon Stewart or Mark Cuban or Stephen A.
And then there's more prototypical Democrat.
I really want as someone like more center left in life.
I'd like to get away from calling that establishment because it's so inherently dull and status quo.
But I do know that that's how we're understood out in the wild.
I honestly think that it is so wide open for 2028 and I'm really pumped about it.
I think that right now, obviously, there are certain names that, you know, will be on that stage.
Like, what do you think it would take to get Gavin Newsom to not run for president?
What do you mean by that?
You think he shouldn't or you think he is?
No, but I'm just saying there are like some people that we know are going to.
Right.
And then there are some people in the maybe are they going to like the John Ossoffs of the world and the Mark Kellys of the world.
But in general, I think that we just need a lot of healthy primary action and we need to see everybody up on stage against each other talking about their records, which could be in the world of business or in commentary as far as Jon Stewart goes.
And then in politics, I I find it easiest to get really excited about people with some legislative background because those are.
There are real deliverables that you can tell people like, oh, you know, you're interested in lowering costs or you want better health care coverage.
These are the things that I did to make that happen for my state.
But I am wide open and I think we need all models on the stage so that voters really get the options that, frankly, the Republicans got when they chose Donald Trump.
What about you?
Look, I I sat next to Jeffrey Katzenberg at this dinner in Cannes and he said and he was he ran fundraising.
For Vice President Harris's campaign.
And he said he doesn't think a Democrat, he thinks anyone in the Democratic Party right now is just qualified from running.
He thinks the Democratic brand is just so bad.
And his ideas were Doug McMillan, the CEO of Walmart.
And who was the other guy?
Jamie Dimon.
Not Jamie.
I think Jamie's too old.
He's 70.
He's had heart surgery, leukemia.
I think he I think he'd be I would like to see Jamie run.
I think and also I think he's sort of semi running already.
If you walk into the J.P. Morgan lobby, they've got a gigantic American flag.
His investor updates are not about banking or the markets.
They're about America.
So I think he's I think most of these guys pretend not to want to run, but they're hoping that that they'll just be such an outcry that they have no choice.
The public service side of them, you know, demands they enter the fray.
I have more respect for expertise, and that is studying something.
You know, I've been in this business for years and participating in it and getting good at it.
I don't like the idea, just generally speaking, of a business person being president.
I do think there is a talent to governing and to understanding the legislative.
I just think it's much different.
I think Doug McMillan is a great guy.
My idea in terms of kind of business people was as a guy named Dave Ricks, who's the CEO of Eli Lilly, kind of at a central casting, tall, handsome, most important company in Indiana, trillion dollar company.
I think he'd be an interesting candidate.
So there's some interesting ideas in the business sector.
But if you look at who came from business, Harry Truman, he owned a men's clothing store.
But then obviously Jimmy Carter, Herbert Hoover and Donald Trump.
I don't know if that lends itself well to drafting someone from the business environment.
And then there's the media candidates because they have a platform and they're compelling, but they're highly produced.
I don't think Jon Stewart or Tucker Carlson really do.
They demonstrate an ability to govern other than they have the platform.
They have name recognition and they understand media, but I don't think there's anything about what they do that says they would necessarily be very good at governing.
I'm more for a candidate.
Now, generally what happens is a guy like Ossoff or a Bashir that we know but don't know bubbles up.
And the great thing about the competitive process and the primary process is it not only produces the right candidate.
It produces the right person, but the right person for the moment.
You know, we hadn't heard of Carter, Clinton, Obama at this point in the election cycle.
I think the party is going to pick a fairly centrist, tall, white, heterosexual male.
I think the Democrats see this as such an existential threat that while the energy is on the far left, I do think that Democrats are going to be more focused on electability and elect a straight white male.
I don't want to call it a safe candidate.
But this is what I know.
It's not going to be a woman.
We're a sexist nation and Democrats are more serious about getting elected, getting someone elected now than advancing the rights of a special interest group or even electing the best person, which I think Secretary Clinton would have been.
I don't think they're going to take any chances.
I love Rahm Emanuel.
I like Josh Shapiro.
I don't think the Democratic Party is going to take a chance on a short Jewish guy.
So I think it's going to be, it sounds boring.
I think it's going to be a Bashir, an Ossoff, maybe a President.
I think it's going to be a Kritsker with that great dad energy.
If I had to pick a candidate right now, it would be Newsom.
I think people hugely underestimate the governor's capabilities to go behind enemy lines, his experience running the fourth largest economy in the world.
I think his comms group, if they do a decent job, can absolutely turn the narrative on California to the center of innovation and economic growth and that it has its problems, but he's addressing many of them.
So I don't, I'm not sure I buy the whole outside.
Side or thing that we're looking for some, someone to come on high from the hill and save us from a non-traditional background.
I think it's, I think we're going to find a largely establishment candidate.
And then I think that person will probably draft someone from the progressive.
And when I say crazy, I mean, crazy fucking left socialist weirdo who's young and has great energy because that side of the party right now is where all the energy is.
It's where all the Riz is.
So I'm, I'm boring here.
I think we're going to end up with, I think.
I think we're going to end up with one of the people who we think is probably going to be the nominee.
Do you have any closing comments after my word salad?
I mean, I have before floated Andy Beshear AOC ticket would be hard for people to get mad at.
I mean, they would find a way, but the top of the ticket and the VP are an arranged marriage.
Always been that way.
So you'll have to measure what the party needs.
But I think what you're trying to say is we need a politician.
who's a physician,
who talks like a pundit, and we'll find that person.
Yeah, I just wonder in a general election
if AOC is more of a liability than a plus.
I don't, I think they're just-
I mean, she is now compared to the like real core DSA wing,
like the far, far left stuff, like the Daria Liza.
AOC is like a moderate Dem on a comparative basis.
Yeah, that's a fair point.
She's very good, and Republicans, I'm not saying voters,
but her relationships with Republicans on the Hill,
I think is one of her most under-discussed
and most important qualities.
People genuinely like her, and I think it's good.
That's super interesting, I didn't know that.
Yeah, like listen to Tim Burchett, for instance,
like super conservative representative, loves AOC.
You cannot get him to say a bad word about her.
So, you know.
That's really, that's really powerful.
There's no doubt about it.
She's a remarkable talent.
Yeah.
Yeah, she's a remarkable-
She's got it.
All right.
This question comes from Hallie Kappner,
who wants to ask about election fraud
and the logic behind it.
Let's listen.
Don't you think it's time that somebody asks Donald Trump,
or really any Republican for that matter,
to explain how it is that people that they deem so stupid,
meaning the Democrats, of course,
are capable of stealing election after election so slyly
so as to leave no trace at all of their massive fraud?
I mean, if we could do that,
I would think they would try to hire us for their,
for their purposes, right?
The narrative just doesn't make sense,
and no one ever asks him this big question.
I would love to hear your thoughts.
Jess?
They actually do try to ask him,
and he obfuscates,
he just says bullshit,
where he's like,
what are you afraid of?
What are you afraid of looking at?
And it's like, we actually did look at all of this.
I think it was like 60-plus cases for the 2020 election,
and the guy, you know,
is still giving primetime addresses about election fraud
and claiming on the national stage
that he won three elections.
So it is just an impossible task
to reason with people who have left our planet.
And they're out there somewhere orbiting
in the world of Donald Trump,
and we won't be able to reach them.
So it's just our job to build the biggest coalition
of people who know that the earth is round
and that Donald Trump lost the 2020 election
and make sure that we turn them out to vote.
But yeah, I mean, certainly,
when you push and say,
well, why did we only rig one election
on the ballot that time, right?
Like, when Trump's at the top of the ticket,
but Democrats are winning down ballot,
like, how does that work?
That you're like, oh, well, you cheated this way,
but you didn't cheat that way.
And yes, we would be like the ultimate brain
and pinky in the brain if we were that smooth.
Like, I actually wish that we were that good,
but we're not.
We're pretty shitty at the political maneuvers.
We're no Mitch McConnell.
So yeah, I totally agree.
Yeah, I mean, look,
Hallie, you're preaching to the choir here,
and there's just no arguing with them.
There's no, I like, I think the right framing
is just to say, all right, the Republican Party,
let me summarize every acceptance speech
of a Republican nominee.
It's one of two speeches.
It's either we won or the election was rigged.
And it's just,
not only is there no evidence across 66 cases
overseen by judges,
many of whom were appointed by Republicans
or Donald Trump himself,
but there needs to be some sort of pushback
and a word that identifies people
who attack institutions
unless the institutions are working for them.
I don't know if it's sedition,
but it's really unhealthy and destructive to our economy
and that something like 60% of Republicans
believe the election was stolen.
Yeah.
Just fucking insane.
And it's just so funny that,
okay, you've won most of everything.
You won the Senate.
You won the House.
So you're saying that it would,
I mean, what are you saying?
That you won just enough,
but clearly we didn't cheat enough?
And it feels like there needs to be more,
we need to do a better job framing these people
as these types of calls.
And there have been some calls on the left,
too.
I forget the woman who ran for governor in Stacey Abrams.
In the moment she lost,
she started raising doubts about election integrity.
It needs to be called out on both sides.
But it's not, yeah, you know,
we won or the election is rigged
cannot be a campaign speech.
And you have seen on the Republican side,
one of the things I liked about your colleague,
Hilton, who is going to be in the runoff for governor,
the noises he was making was
he did not see any evidence of election.
Fraud in the L.A. elections.
I, you know, I think that's important.
There's less fraud in our elections than there are in any individual's tax returns.
I mean, there's going to be more people tonight who die of bee sting
than there are fake voters.
Support for the show comes from Z Biotics.
When it comes to a night with drinks,
there's always a give and take.
Being in rough shape the next day just comes with the territory.
Well, with
pre-alcohol,
that no longer needs to be the case.
Z Biotics' pre-alcohol probiotic drink
is the world's first genetically engineered probiotic.
It was invented by PhD scientists
to tackle rough mornings after drinking.
Here's how it works.
When you drink,
alcohol gets converted into a toxic byproduct in the gut.
It's a buildup of this byproduct,
not dehydration.
That's to blame for rough days after drinking.
Pre-alcohol produces an enzyme
to break this byproduct down.
Just remember to make pre-alcohol
your first drink of the night.
Drink responsibly,
and you'll feel your best tomorrow.
I began
taking Z Biotics
before they were an advertiser.
I like to drink.
I am cutting down
pretty dramatically as I get older.
But when I do go out,
I start the evening with Z Biotics.
With pre-alcohol,
you don't need to choose
between a great night
and a great next day.
July is packed with barbecues,
fireworks,
and late Saturday nights with friends.
Keep the good times rolling
into the next day.
Drink pre-alcohol
before you go out
and wake up ready
for whatever Sunday brings.
Remember to head to
zbiotics.com
slash
moderates
and use the code
moderates
at checkout
for 15 days.
19% off.
You're not supposed to.
A lot of things can get easier.
Workouts,
energy levels,
even staying lean.
Mars Men doesn't use
any weird stimulants
or synthetic hormones.
It's natural ingredients
that are shown to support
healthy T levels,
weight management,
and exercise performance.
You can check out their website
for more details
and for thousands of reviews
from guys who had
incredible results.
For a limited time,
our listeners get
50% off for life
plus free shipping
and three free gifts
at
mengotomars.com
That's
mengotomars.com
for 50% off
and three free gifts
when you check out.
After your purchase,
they will ask
where you heard about them.
You can support our show
by telling them
we sent you.
These are the moments
that make Nordstrom
Nordstrom.
Discover it all
in Nordstrom stores
and at
nordstrom.com
Here's a question
from Greg
from North Carolina.
He's concerned about
the lasting impacts
of the Trump administration
and the damage it has done.
Here's his question.
Can our current
political system
realistically correct itself
through future elections
and normal democratic process?
Or has the damage
become so deep
and pervasive
that it's not
that some broader period
of disruption
or institutional reset
is unavoidable?
I'd really appreciate
hearing both your perspectives.
Do you think the country
is headed to a much more
turbulent period
before things get better?
I'm an optimist
in the sense that
on an election level,
I do think that
the laws are holding.
All those cases were rejected,
pretty much laughed out of court,
the election fraud cases.
I think people,
if not being tired
of the narrative
of the election fraud cases,
of the stop-the-steal,
they're tired of Trump.
And I'm optimistic
that the country
will bounce back from this
on a democratic level.
We've had threats
to our democracy before,
whether it's 1%
of the nation's citizens
who happen to own slaves
controlling government
or us deciding
that it was legal
to intern people
based on their ancestry,
being born in Japan
while many of them
had children serving
in the European theater,
putting them up
in what were effectively
makeshift concentration camps.
I think that's
And we each time
have managed
to come back stronger
as long as citizens
get very engaged.
So I'm optimistic
that like when our democracy
has faced real challenges before
that it's bounced back stronger.
What I'm less optimistic about
is our power
on the global stage.
I believe like Tim Snyder
we're in the midst
of geopolitically
committing superpower suicide
and that to go from
being the operating system
and the leader
of 60 to 70%
of the world's GDP
in military power
to thinking about
30% because we've alienated 40%.
in Europe and Latin America who just feel like they can't trust us anymore and they have to
build their own defense systems, their own agreements, their own governance. And the fact
that we're getting Europe to pay more for NATO is a good thing, but be careful what you wish for
because, for example, our poor execution in the Middle East where now U.S. military bases are no
longer seen as security but as bullseyes, that's just going to reduce our power around the world.
The fact that people are going to try and diversify potentially from the dollar
from trade with us, can't count on us, trade around us as opposed to through us,
I think that's going to hurt our GDP for decades because even if we get someone reasonable in
office, they're going to say, well, we can't risk that a Trump-like figure is going to come back in.
I mean, look at Canada. 70% of their exports into the U.S. And similar to the statement from
Otter and Animal House who bashes the guy's car, parent's car, he's like, you fucked up, you trusted us.
I think there's so many nations in the West that feel like they fucked up,
they trusted us, and based so much of their international trade and their national security
on U.S. military technology, operating systems, and sort of rule of law, freedom of navigation,
and they don't feel like they can trust us. And I think it's going to be hard to put that
egg back in the shell, if you will, or unscramble that egg. So our democracy, I think, is pretty
resilient, and I'm hopeful, and I see a lot of people rising up or getting very engaged that
otherwise haven't been that engaged. In terms of economic power and military power, I think it's
going to take decades to repair what has been superpower suicide. Yeah, I have kind of a different
gut reaction to this, which is I don't want to get back to normal. I actually, I think that if we box
ourselves into this idea of, well, we're going to get back to normal, we're going to get back to normal,
of just restoring things to the way that they were. I think Joe Biden's 2020 campaign, which was the
restoration of normalcy, right? Like, nobody wants to wake up every day nervous about what
the president's going to do, and our alliances matter, etc. Like, I don't think that will ever
win another election. And if it is a normie, you know, more moderate politician who wins in 2028,
they won't be talking like that. They're going to be talking about the systemic challenge,
facing the country, that the status quo isn't good enough. Like, they're going to be a fighter in the
body of a moderate, whatever that might look like. And I think that the biggest challenge that we have
is not fixing the institutions per se, it's rebuilding public trust. And public trust
in every facet of society is down. It's even down in terms of how much we trust fire departments.
Like, the most necessary thing. One of the things that we have in our lives when it comes to public safety are police and fire
departments, right? Like, that you need to know that you can call 911 and someone's going to show
up to save you from your burning building. And it's even down for them. So we need a campaign on
every single level and for everyone in any position of power to kick it into high gear,
to try to rebuild that trust. And that's going to take a ton of work. And then there is the work
of repairing things like our alliances.
And I was thinking a lot about that, too. That the deals that everyone that we used to be close
partners with are making behind our backs, they don't automatically disappear. I really want us
to get away from talking about the future of the country as a restoration of the past. Our
Constitution and our history will always be important. But, like, this moderate knows that
shit isn't working for people. And they don't want businesses used to be closed. And they don't want
equality, mostly because everyone's equally miserable, except the people running the state.
That doesn't work. So I wouldn't even call China communist from an economic standpoint.
I think capitalism that rests on a bed of empathy and has a progressive, a truly progressive tax
structure is absolutely the best model. And I would argue that is what Northern Europe is. I
don't even think they're socialist. We're more socialist in the sense that we've decided that
the current government, the Trump administration, knows better than the private market and should
have a golden share in U.S. steel, take a stake in Intel, considering a stake in open AI, because
Donald Trump has great business instincts, having turned his father fortune into less than if he
just invested in the S&P and leaving a trail of bankruptcies and unpaid subcontractors.
So I don't know if we need a new word. I don't know if we need a modifier to capitalism.
The capitalism is the best, is the worst system in the world, except for all the
rest.
And what we have here is capitalism on the way up and socialism on the way down,
where we privatize the gains and socialize the losses. That's cronyism.
So I think we need someone who can paint a vision of a capitalism that works as it does in Northern
Europe, as it has here for the last 200 years, but recognize that the key to capitalism is you
have really robust markets. And the only way you have a robust, sustainable market is if the three
middle quintiles, the middle middle quintiles, the middle middle quintiles, the middle middle
quintiles, which is the identifier for the middle class, has money and opportunity to buy the
products that the very wealthy people figure out a way to make most appealing to this enormous
entity called the middle class. And the only way you do that is to dispel the myth that the far
right keeps trying to promote that the middle class is a self-healing organism and a self-creating
entity species that naturally bubbles up on its own in free markets. It doesn't.
When you have totally free markets, the middle class gets devoured by the wealthiest. So
capitalism, free markets, full body contact, violence amongst corporations, but solid regulation
where we redistribute income from the most successful organizations and people back into
infrastructure, back into technology, back into education that creates a really robust middle
class. If you want to talk about expenditures, our biggest,
biggest expenditures aren't the military. They aren't the interest on the debt.
They isn't social security. The biggest expenditures in the United States are the
$2.3 trillion we spend on loopholes and givebacks to the wealthiest corporations and people.
So we have gone oligarchy. We have gone cronyist. Capitalism still works,
but it has to rest on a bed of empathy and it has to have a progressive tax structure
that recognizes the importance and the key to great capitalism and producing
big capital.
Billionaires, which we want to produce the most of, is to have the greatest consumer in the world
and that is a thriving middle class. And what does that mean? It means guys like me and people
who make really good money should be paying a minimum of 40, 50 or 60 percent of their income
in a progressive tax structure and get rid of the 3,600 pages that have been added to the tax code,
which are there to fuck the middle class and transfer $50 trillion from the bottom 90 to the
top.
Which is what has exactly has happened in the last four decades. Any closing thoughts on this, Jess?
I would just add to your TED talk, which I would listen to in full, but I would add that
strengthening unions is a critical piece in strengthening the middle class or rebuilding
the middle class. That doesn't mean union bosses aren't often corrupt, but we need those kinds of
protections and ability to negotiate.
And, you know, to guarantee some decent quality of life for people that are doing some of the most
important jobs in the country. And there has been a full-on assault on unions by our government for
a long time. So.
I can't, I can't not take the bait there. I think you're absolutely correct. If you look at the air
traffic controller strike and the defenestration, neutering of unions in America, it's directly
correlated to income inequality. The fact that the president decided,
to basically gut a union and that sort of set the tone for now only about 9% of workers are under
the, whatever you want to call it, belong to a union. When a state is really strong for union,
it effectively starts to lose corporations and they go to a quote unquote more labor friendly
state where they can transfer more capital to shareholders. So while unions, I think were
absolutely an extraordinary vehicle for income equality and their decline can be directly
correlated to inequality. The question is, what do we do?
We do from here. And I would argue unions have proven themselves ineffective in this age. 45 of the 46
nations that have unions have lost massive membership in those unions. I believe in unions. I
just think there should be one union and it should be the federal government. And I think we should
have minimum wage of $25 an hour. And I think you get rid of the inefficiency, administration,
corporations relocating from one state to the other, the massive corruption that affects
these unions.
One union, the federal government, minimum wage of $25 an hour, minimum wage that says if you work
full time, you can at least be above the poverty line. Unions as they're currently constructed are
just not effective in this age. And it needs to stop being a litmus test for whether you're a
Democrat or not. This is a construct that is outdated and it's not working. I commented on
your comment. Do you want to say anything about what I just said there?
I do a little bit, but I don't want to turn the mailbag episode into a union debate.
You know, $25 as a baseline for those kinds of jobs. Sure, it's going to be a lot more,
for instance, you know, with auto workers or teachers, for instance. I wonder about the
ability of the federal government writ large to be able to operate as a quote unquote union boss
or whatever with the level of specificity that these kinds of workers need. So like a nurse's
union, for instance, for hospital workers, et cetera. So maybe we're on to something. And if
you're thinking of a way to game this out, but there needs to be, and I understand, you know,
people put people in positions of power who do things like turn their states into a right to
work state. And obviously that chips away at the power of these unions. And you see people
leaving them, leaving states where it might be compulsory to join, et cetera. But there has to
be a way to re-envision or remodel the unions that built the middle class of the United States.
And I think that's a really important part of this country. Like it is so core to how we became great
that I don't want to give up on it completely to just say, like, let's transfer this over
to the federal government, which like we've seen what can happen when you have bad people in charge
of the federal government. Like what if they all get dozed? Right. Like what, you know,
what if they go the way of whoever Elon Musk wakes up and says, like, we don't really need
anyone who knows anything about, you know, tornadoes or national parks or anything. So
but great question. I think I think it's a fair point. And I read an article this morning,
I think, in The Economist, basically saying that company specific unions don't work as the company
smarter and more nimble than them and kind of was threatened to leave the state. But sector unions
like a union for all nurses across all health systems. I'm down. But there definitely needs
to be a series of bold actions that restore or reverse the flow of capital from consumer rents,
from labor to shareholders. It's gotten absolutely
out of control.
The stylist who found the perfect outfit for your big interview, the first pair of walking
shoes for your one year old, the tomato soup you shared with your sister at the cafe.
Big or small. We're here for all of it.
Celebrating 125 years with new moments still add.
Are you stuck in a job working hard but feel like no matter what you do,
you just can't seem to get ahead financially? Or maybe you've always felt like sales is something
other people do, not you? Well, this week on Net Worth and Chill, I'm chatting with Shelby Sapp,
the internet's queen of sales, who teaches women how to pitch, close and get paid. Whether you're
gunning for a promotion, building your own business or just trying to get a seat at the table,
Shelby breaks down everything you need to know, the rich,
closer mindset, the biggest sales myths holding you back, and why learning how to sell is actually
the fastest path to financial freedom. Listen wherever you get your podcasts or watch on
youtube.com slash your rich BFF. Okay, a listener from Sandusky,
Ohio has an urgent question, not necessarily about politics. Thank God.
If Scott had a hotel room for one night in Midtown Manhattan and $2,500,
what would he do for the night? Brother, I do it every night.
Or every weeknight I'm in New York, or not every night. I'll do it tonight. I'm going to go to
Bond Street Sushi downstairs. I'm going to eat, you know, $300 or $400 in sushi with one or two
friends. And then I'm going to go to Chez Margot or Zero Bond. And I won't spend $2,500, but I'll
spend another $400 or $500. And then about the time I start thinking I'm really fucked up and
get talked into going to the box, this great place downtown and spending one or two grand,
my age will kick in and I'll go home and take an edible and crash.
So, what would I do? I'd do it every night.
not every night. I'm, I'm, my favorite thing is to eat and drink with friends and go to great,
amazing places in New York and enjoy, be social, be with friends and, you know, just be, get a
front row seat that is the freak show of ridiculously strange and hot people that infect
this city and just the most wonderful collision of capitalism, culture, art in the history of
humanity. I, I think we're going to look back on New York and say, this is a golden age. Now you
said Midtown. I don't know. I don't like to go above 14th street. I don't think anything
interesting happens. Broadway. He didn't ask my answer, but Broadway, Jesus Christ. Are you going
to say Broadway? Go ahead. I don't mean to bias you. Yeah. Theater is great. What show have you
seen recently that you enjoyed? I don't think that. Oh, I'm calling you out. You're a fake
culture person. No, no, no. At least I'm honest. No, no. I'm trying to remember the name.
And I like went to Chicago, but it's the German one. Like the, that's very specific. In other words,
you pretend to like theater and you don't, don't do this. Um, you don't remember the name of the
play you absolutely adored. Oh, stop it. When I went to see cabaret with Eddie Redmayne,
that was the coolest thing that I've seen in a very long time and how they
recreated the club. And it was like in a round, you know, where you sit around the whole thing
and you could be like in the back or the front of it anyway. And Eric and David and Ness and
whatever are going to cut out me having to Google that. So like it didn't happen.
I do get dragged to Broadway or into the theater in London every once in a while. I did see the
coolest. I am a big fan of the whole IRL trend. The coolest thing I have seen
in years in terms of a live event that was so incredibly moving with something called
bum bum train. Have you heard of this? No. Oh God. You sign an NDA. So I can't speak specifically to
what it is. Yeah. Don't do it on a podcast. Tons of people listen to. But you go through a
where you
and I was blown away like nothing I've ever experienced before.
You got older at the Cherry Lane Theater. That was also what I was trying to think of,
which was awesome. And I went with Brian and it was full of, I think, women who miss their dads.
And he warned me.
He's like, I'm about to take you to something that is going to make you really miss your dad.
And we were just all sobbing. Brian is so dreamy. He's so thoughtful.
I mean, I did well for my arranged marriage. Yeah.
But by the way, if I had not $2,500, but $25,000, I'd be in Atlanta right now with two great seats
to the England versus Argentina. And unfortunately,
this is airing at a later date. So I'm trusting that England won.
Anyways, let's end on a lighter note. Patrick from New Jersey wants to know.
That hasn't exactly been the best year so far between the war and corruption in the White House
and Democratic Party being a little lost. I'd love to know, Scott and Jess, what's given you hope
right now? Jess? It's lame and very estrogen driven. But my girls are sublime.
It is so cool to see them learn about themselves and learn about the world. And they're at ages
where you can like go out and sit in a restaurant with them and kind of have a conversation. Now,
there's a bit of a breakdown and a need for crayons or the travel magnet tiles
and some screaming for an iPad or an iPhone, which I don't want to give them and Brian does.
And then we fight. But I am very hopeful for the next generation.
And just how cool it is to be on this parental journey. So that's my kind of lame one.
But I knew you were going to say that. And I have something similar, but it's at a different age
group. I dropped off or went to orientation with my son, who doesn't want to disclose where he's
going to school. Like, who the fuck cares? You've taken pictures all over the campus. We all know.
Yeah, whatever. I'm outing him. I, you know, it rhymes with UVA.
And when I think about America's ability to create institutions like that,
where all we want to do is strain the muscle in between a kid's ears,
such that it grows back stronger, such that they can make better decisions
around our government, our military, our business, our nonprofits. And that we have
institutions and organizations like that that were envisioned hundreds of years ago by one of the
framers, Thomas Jefferson, and just the collision of architecture and young people and hopefulness
and seeing all these parents from different nations dropping off their kids who couldn't wait for their
parents to leave. You wouldn't know who's president. And that's a good thing. All this is,
is a bunch of nervous parents trying to make themselves obsolete to their kids as a means
of victory and recognizing and all these mixed emotions of, you know, realizing you've done
something great with your kid, but really being sad that you're, you know, that you want your boy
or your girl back. But it is, when you do walk away from it, very majestic, very sentimental,
sad even.
But very, very hopeful that we live in a society where our youngest get to experience something
like that. And anyways, UVA and our great public schools across, whether it's, you know,
CUNY or University of Illinois or Cal State System, our great junior colleges,
I'm very involved with the University of California. Every time I'm on campus at a
public university, I feel very hopeful. Love that. Okay, let's leave it there. Thanks to everyone who
sent in questions. And sorry, we couldn't get to more of them.
Yep.
All right.
Podcast Summary
Key Points:
Democrat 2028 candidates
Election fraud
Political damage
Capitalism and unions
Personal hope
Summary:
In this mailbag episode of "Raging Moderates," hosts Scott Galloway and Jessica Tarliff field listener questions on politics and personal topics. , Andy Beshear or Gavin Newsom), dismissing outsider or media figures like Jon Stewart, while Jess welcomes a wide-open primary, including business or commentary backgrounds, but values legislative experience. They agree the party will likely avoid a woman candidate due to perceived electability.
On election fraud, they dismiss Trump’s claims as baseless, citing 66 rejected court cases and the absurdity of selective cheating, urging coalition-building against such narratives. Regarding institutional damage, Scott warns of geopolitical "superpower suicide" from eroded trust, while Jess argues against restoring normalcy, focusing on rebuilding public trust and systemic change. They also debate capitalism, with Scott proposing progressive taxation and a $25 minimum wage, critiquing unions as outdated, while Jess defends union revitalization.
The episode ends on a hopeful note: Jess finds joy in her daughters’ growth, and Scott in public universities like UVA, symbolizing optimism for future generations despite political turmoil.
FAQs
The Democrats could consider progressive DSA outsiders, media figures like Jon Stewart or Mark Cuban, or more establishment politicians with legislative backgrounds. The hosts believe the party will likely pick a centrist, tall, white, heterosexual male with experience.
The hosts argue that these claims persist because Trump and others obfuscate and repeat baseless narratives, making it impossible to reason with those who believe them. They note that over 60 court cases found no evidence of widespread fraud, but the claims continue.
Scott is optimistic about democracy, citing past recoveries, but pessimistic about global power due to eroded trust. Jess wants to rebuild public trust rather than return to normal, focusing on systemic challenges and alliances.
They believe capitalism needs a progressive tax structure and regulation to support the middle class, as free markets alone devour it. They criticize cronyism and propose redistributing wealth through infrastructure, education, and technology.
Scott suggests a federal minimum wage of $25/hour and a single federal union, arguing current unions are ineffective. Jess prefers sector-based unions, like for all nurses, to rebuild the middle class.
He would eat sushi at Bond Street, visit Chez Margot or Zero Bond, and possibly go to The Box, spending around $2,500 on food, drinks, and socializing with friends. He avoids going above 14th Street.
Chat with AI
Loading...
Pro features
Go deeper with this episode
Unlock creator-grade tools that turn any transcript into show notes and subtitle files.