Trump’s Foreign Policy Could Define the Midterms — And He’s Losing

Say you're an aspiring pop star, how do you know if your song's a hit? It's getting harder to tell. I think that something is going on where the machinery of popularity has changed under a feat, and we don't really know why or what it means. This week on Explanage Me, how to avoid being a flop. Find new episodes, Sundays, wherever you get your podcasts. We're talking about one of the pioneers of rock and roll sister Rosetta Thar. She is the coolest. She recorded the very first rock and roll song, inspired everybody from Elvis to the Beatles, and absolutely surrounded on electric guitar. We also got married in a baseball stadium in front of a giant crowd way before Taylor and Travis did. Her story is incredible. So if you're a music geek like me, or even just a casual music fan, check out this week's episode of The Monday Music Club, wherever you listen to podcasts. Oh, and we've got a trade war now with Canada. It's kind of shocking the level of lack of concern that he has for his own politics, like Maine and Michigan, major Senate states. Let's launch a trade war with Canada. In the last two months of the midterms, he might even lose Nebraska. I think it's so absurd. It puts a spotlight on his unwillingness to deal with anything, because he thinks we're all idiots. You're driving down the street and you're seeing that the gas is $4.10 a gallon or whatever. God help you if you need diesel. And then we're doing another trade war, and I feel so horrible for the people whose lives are being upended and businesses are going under for absolutely no reason. Welcome to Raging Moderates, I'm Jessica Tarlov, and I am very excited. This is our final guest of Scott free August, and he's a big one. Actually, I don't know how tall you are. I don't know how big you are technically, but you're a big deal. Bust six one. Oh, okay. All right. Very good size. I'll take it. So yeah, big guest. Ryan Graham, reporter at Joppsight News, co-host of the Breaking Points podcast, it's great to have you. Now it's great to be here. Thanks for having me. One day maybe we'll meet in person when I'm out of this pantry that I'm trapped in. Long Island, but we have tons of news to get to. I want to hop around a lot, but begin with elections, the midterms are like 66 days away, which feels very soon. Despite all the positive polling and all the problems of Republicans, a lot of questions still remain as to whether the Democrats can pull out a win in the House or the Senate. So thus far in Trump two point out, Democrats have flipped 30 state legislative seats in special elections and Republicans have flipped none. As we eye the general election, a little bit of historical context in 2018, Democrats special election over performance started out at around 18 points, but it dropped to two points by November, and they still netted 41 House seats that year. How are you thinking about the midterms at this point and then I want to dig into the civil war question of the mods versus the progressives, but what do you think is going on? Yes. This is the cycle in which I've spent the most time covering kind of US foreign policy. And it also is the cycle where I think it's going to have the biggest influence at least since 2006, when that year, Rahm Emanuel was running the D-Truple C, if you remember, like recruited a whole bunch of kind of veterans and wanted to make Democrats look tough on the Iraq war, but an anti-war wave kind of swept Democrats in and people were just so frustrated with the Iraq war. This time people are frustrated with the Iran war in a different way because while we've I think lost, I think 13 service members, at this point, it's just killing everybody here at home. And for no reason whatsoever, like there was no effort put in by the Trump administration to even lie about why we were doing it. And then you get this thing where he keeps saying that it's over and we've won. So people are like, okay, there was no reason for us to be there that was given to us other than that I wanted to do this. You keep telling us it's over and you've won. Yet I keep saying news about you bombing them and then bombing us back. And gas is over $4 a gallon, diesel is over $6 a gallon, the inputs to the entire economy but particularly food and agriculture are just killing us and we've got a trade war now with Canada when it's kind of shocking the level of lack of concern that he has for his own politics, like Maine and Michigan, major Senate states. Oh, Ohio, let's launch a trade war with Canada, like in the last two months of the midterms, he might even lose Nebraska. So he's like, oh, we're going to let in a whole bunch of beef from Argentina and Brazil and give them a discount because beef prices are killing people. Oh, turns out the ranchers all hate that. I might possibly lose Nebraska. Kansas is that play like there was a poll that had, there was this liberal mega church pastor, one point behind Roger Marshall. Yeah. He's very cool. Yeah. So like when you, when you're talking about Kansas, we're almost in September and you're talking about Kansas as potentially on the board and he just keeps doing things to try to make it more difficult for Republicans to win, like keep, like last night bombing Iran again. Like nobody made him do that. Why did he do that? The hardliners inside Iran were waiting for some excuse to kind of break out of the stasis that was, that is choking them. And so they launched a whole bunch of strikes yesterday. So it makes me really worried about what, what he's got cooking when it comes to the actual election because there's no sense that he seems to care about the electorate checking him in November. It's, it's totally bizarre. Yeah. Like if your plan is to cheat, then what does it really matter? Right. Of the cheat that you have to pull off. Too big to rig. That's what Democrats have been saying. And I think that it is very smart messaging. And I like the comparison to 2006 and it has made the divisions within the Democratic Party or between different ideologies of Democrats a lot easier, frankly, because you can go to a rally for the most progressive candidate to the most conservative Democratic candidate. And they're talking about Donald Trump's war of choice. And they're talking about Donald Trump's culture of corruption and frankly calling out their own side on some of this, right? Just saying, you know, it's the elites versus the little guy. I was in Texas on Saturday for a James Talleriko event with Mark Cuban. And it's the same chat, right? I mean, it's a special story because obviously there's a little bit more God talk when you have James Talleriko, but in general, we're largely on the same page, which gives me hope. And then by extension, it feels like we're also having so many useless fights. And I see this a lot of it playing out online and Twitter is not real life and you see this over and over again, where you ask an actual person, like who is Hassan Piker and they have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. But for those of us that doomschool for a living, it's reaching a fever pitch. How do you think about the big tent and do you think that we're actually living in it? Well, we are because it's not up to anybody. Like that's what people don't seem to understand is that there are no people at the door kind of checking IDs and letting some people in and letting some people, kicking some people out onto the sidewalk. The center left, the establishment wing of the party is rerunning the kind of same playbook they ran against Jeremy Corbyn when he was head of the labor party in the UK. And the difference is that the UK labor party literally has lists of party members. And you can be kicked out of, you can get kicked off the labor party list, even just a random voter in the middle of nowhere, England. If they say, oh, you know, you posted on Facebook, this thing that we think is anti-Semitic, you are out of the labor party. That's a thing that can be done. And so therefore, the analogy of a tent actually is somewhat useful because a tent is, it's a structure and there's an in and out. Because in the United States, that's not what a party is, like there is no tent. Like it's just the entire park and everybody is allowed into the park. Nobody can keep you out of the park. So then it becomes who can get more people into that park compared to their other faction. And in, in Maine, it was the populist wing of the party and it was, it continued to be the apocalypse wing of the party after they pushed, you know, after a planner, after a planner, left. Troy Jackson ends up, you know, with a nomination, even after a planner, then in Michigan, Abdul Al-Sahead went. So like, the question is not who's allowed in and out of the tent. It's who has more people that are coming into it because Abdul Al-Sahead cannot kick third way out of the tent. Like third way has $15 million that they want to spend attacking the DSA and DSA of the Jason candidates, nobody can stop them from doing that in a parliamentary system or like something in the UK, you can sort of stop them from doing it. You're like a party leader. You can be like, no, you know what? Third-way folks, like you guys are ruining what we're trying to do here. So you're out. Like we are literally excommunicating you from the party. Can't do that here in the US. But what third-way keeps finding out is that they don't have the juice anymore. Like it was effectively their elevation of Hassan Piker in the primary that polarized that campaign around the question of APEC and support for Israel in a way that it had not been before. And when Mallory McMorrah came out so hard against him, it made her appear like she was closer to Hailey Stevens. We had run a poll right around that time that showed that, effectively, Elsaid did not have a path to victory, unless all three stayed in the race. That changed when McMorrah lost to that that kind of middle ground vibe that she had been cultivating so effectively for so long. In our head-to-head polling that we did, he lost to both McMorrah and Stevens head-to-head. But that was right as third-way was jumping into the race. So now they're doing it again. They're trying to polarize the entire race around this question of Hassan Piker. I think it makes them look out of touch. I think it makes them look a little bit crazy. Like we're on week three of this or whatever that makes the media look crazy. It looks like Rodgers look crazy. It makes this democratic establishment look nuts. And as long as he's, and it'll be fascinating to seem curious for you to take on this, if they do this, they throw the entire kitchen sink, everything in the kitchen sink at Hassan Piker and Elsaid and his relationship with Hassan Piker. And he pushes through and maintains his lead and wins anyway. That is a pretty crushing blow to them, because then they'd have to come up with something. They would have to come up with their own ideas and agenda that they want to run on, because they would have tried every possible way to run a negative campaign against the left to say, like, you know, they're bad people, they're toxic and they're political, you know, they're political kryptonite. If they trial that and the populist wing still wins, then the establishment has to say, oh, here's, okay, we have an idea that we would like to pitch to the voters and just vaguely saying affordability doesn't cut it, but because they are so thoroughly funded by corporate interests, like third way is not getting grassroots dollars to come go attack the essay. Anything that people might like is going to run up against the donors who are willing to fund that. And so I think their kind of house of cards collapses at that point. Well, there was a lot there and, you know, and I worked in British politics when I was living abroad and doing my PhD over there and, you know, worked on a campaign against Ken Livingston who was very closely associated with Jeremy Corbin. And I think there are very real accusations of anti-Semitism and anti-Semitic rhetoric. I think that is true also in the American political space, but I think what serves us best at this moment in time when we have an election to win is to understand that respectable whatever a third way is doing, that there are a bunch of voters in Michigan who are apprehensive about Abdul Al-San. And who he has to make the case too. And he obviously understands this, right? He's apologized now to the Jewish community for his comments after the Senegal attack saying, you know, hurt people will hurt people and that it was, you know, certainly poorly timed and kind of undid his condemnation of the event in the first place. And he has very smart people working for him. And now he has a lot of that quote unquote establishment money that's flowing through a section where just authorized a $4.5 million dollar ad buy that will help him a lot. And I'm relieved to see that because we can't make any change unless people are in office. And I wish that we would focus on that. And Abdul Al-San had has a lot more in common with people who are even more of the third way brand than not. I guess you were pulling in that race, which I think is really interesting. And I know that the McMoro people have been defensive of their choice to stay in because she had just received a million dollars in funding and they thought that she had a pathway there. What do you think the odds are at this point? Because I know the map is opening, right? Like you were saying, we're looking at Kansas, we're looking at Mississippi. I was in Texas. I love Josh Turek, Mary Patolla, all of it. But it would be a huge waste, right? To lose this seat that we've held for decades at this point with Michigan. So how do you see the race right now? And do you think that Abdul will stick to his, I'm not campaigning with Hassan Piker line because that's where they are. And I'm sure that Hassan is comfortable with that because he wants to win too. It's a really interesting question. And I think there are a couple different layers to it. One is how big is the margin going to be? Like what is the, you know, elicis lock in one by 20,000 votes in 2024. But that was a pretty Republican year. So let's say elicis lock in is redoing the race with my Rogers and she's looking at a 200, 300, 400,000 in this environment, something like that. In that case, how many votes can his rivalry with the kind of party establishment cost him? Is it tens of thousands? Is it 200,000? That's an open question. And it much depends, I think, on kind of how active the contest is in September and October. Like are the near attendants of the world going to continue? And not just near, but like the, you know, that entire ecosystem. Are they going to continue to gin up as much kind of hostility towards El Said as possible? And if so, can he, can he surmount that? Or do they look at this and say, you know, we have, we, this is too much. Like he hasn't done the full, complete and total capitulation that we've wanted, but he has objectively apologized in this speech. He has said he's not going to campaign with him. He denounced these particular comments. He criticized his own comments. Like we've got a lot. Let's now actually try to win. And I think that it is my understanding. And I realize that I'm doing what I criticize other people for that we're talking about this too much. And there are so many other things to get to. But Nira is supportive of Abdul Al Sayyad's campaign. Like everyone has gotten in line. Nira's support of her of El Said doesn't extend so far beyond saying that she is supportive of him. Every objective action that she takes helps microtures. Like so far, like if she was supportive of him, she would never say his name again between now and November. So she does say it. It's becoming increasingly transparent that this effort is undermining him. So let's, but now we have to see. Like do they continue to push that? The other huge question is Detroit. Like, you know, microtures has asked a pack not to spend in the race, which is utterly fascinating. And it's totally and very undercovered. Also, right, because we've been talking about this non-liker. But yes, exactly. After spending whatever they spent in the primary, 60 million or whatever, they said we're going to spend tens of millions to support microtures in the general. Microtures said, no, don't do that. Instead, you should funnel all your money to me. We'll hire your strategists. Right after he said that, he went out and did three fundraisers in California organized by APAC. Some real questions about the legality of some of this as long as they're not going over the limits. But a lot of APAC's recent power comes from people who are giving 100, 500,000 million dollars to United Depogacy Project. They're super PAC. When you can't give that directly to the campaign, you could give it to the NRSC. You could give it to the party and they coordinate that way because the Supreme Court's loosening those rules. If they spend endless amounts of money in Detroit trying to drive a wedge between him and black voters in Detroit, that could be another 50 to 100,000 votes that he has to then overcome. If there are people in Upper Peninsula who are kind of skeptical of him, that could be another, he could lose out there. So then it depends on how much he's able to juice his own turnout, which I think will be substantial, especially because of Trump's insistence on talking so openly about rigging the election, pushing the mail-in restrictions at the Supreme Court. Nothing galvanizes people to vote more. And this is all the political science data backs us up, then telling them that they can't vote. Like that's the thing. That's the main thing that people out. And it has swamped so many of the voter suppression efforts that Republicans have engaged in in the past because they become public. And then yes, they do end up suppressing some percentage of people by putting up all these hoops, but people who otherwise we'll be back. when devoted, come out and vote, just to say like, how dare you? So whether or not the surge in turnout and the climate can overcome, you know, those kind of three obstacles, I think is going to answer the question of whether or not you can win. Now, people are saying, well, you're taking a risk with him. I think you would have been taking a huge risk with Haley Stevens, too. Because then you're looking at, um, dearborn and young people across the state of Michigan showed in 2024 that, uh, you know, their frustration with, with the positions of the democratic party, particularly as it relates to Israel, can have an influence on, on the overall, uh, turnout. So that would have been its own risk. So I don't know. What do you think? I, I still think the smart money's on outside, but it's going to be a tough race. Yeah. Yes. I'm feeling better about it. I mean, it was the first couple of polls that came out after the primary that had him losing. And since then, it's been better, though, as someone who has worked in polling and research, looking at the disasters, polling wise, that we saw in the Michigan race and in Wisconsin, I'm a little bit like, play like you're a hundred down and, you know, don't count any chickens before they've patched or roasted, whatever you're supposed to, I guess chicken so wrist. Anyway, before they patched, I am feeling more optimistic about it. And that is in large power also due to the flexibility that we have seen from the candidate in that it seems like he is just on board for whatever it takes to win. And I don't mean that in a disingenuous way that he doesn't believe in the things that he says. He seems like somebody who wouldn't actually say things that he didn't believe in. So I'm glad that he's listening to communities that are concerned. I worry about Jewish voters and I worry about black voters. I love how Haley Stevens is managing her loss. She is the most graceful loser I think that we've seen in politics. She is, you know, full throttle. Let's get this done, you know, come to the unity breakfast, going to do whatever she needs to do. And I think that that will have a big impact in Detroit. So I'm optimistic about it. I guess if someone who talks about these issues a lot and also works in conservative media, I'm just exhausted of the same conversation, and I do think, frankly, that reducing the soundpecker or this discourse writ large shoe, like we're just talking about a Twitch streamer is not effective when people have real concerns, so that it's just going to take that much more work, right, for Abdul to represent his beliefs as distinct from the narrative that has been created around him, or at least that's what I sat up Friday on the five or Thursday and it went over pretty well. It's like, yes, he's a Twitch streamer, but also this is a prevalent way of thinking on the progressive left and you got to deal with it. You're trying to win a swing state. So cautiously optimistic about the situation. And I think that his race also has a lot of impact on races around the country that are going to be close. You see other candidates, especially more moderate ones that are trying to win in red states, not just in purple states, having to figure out how they're going to talk about those issues. So like, I know why they're hunkering down. Like I love Rob Sand out there saying, no thanks, Joe Biden, no thanks, Kamala Harris, really living this, turned the page thing. Like I said, I was with Talleriko, John Ossoff, you know, someone who I think would fit into that mold that you would traditionally call a third way mold, he's found his way to do that. And the fact that so many moderates have swung against the idea of sending money for offensive weapons to Israel, I think shows where even the base of the party is, no matter, you know, what kind of state you're representing. So I'm in a good mood about it. I would say generally, support for the show comes from ground news. I'm going to read you two headlines pertaining to the recent story about Amazon drone deliveries. From UPI, Amazon to expand drone delivery to nearly 500 cities, towns this year. And from digital trends, Amazon really, really wants to make drone deliveries normal as it expands to 500 cities. Same story, different takes. You can find these using ground news app and website, the go to solution for getting down to the facts of important stories, rather than getting lost in the hype of the headlines. Ground news is basically the Spotify of news, telling you who owns each outlet where it leans politically and whether you're reading original reporting or recycled messaging. From that Amazon drone delivery story, ground news sites 92 separate sources and a blind spot feed surfaces stories that your algorithm might be preventing you from seeing. Go to groundnews.com/rage to get 40% off their unlimited access vantage subscription. That's g-r-o-u-n-d-n-e-w-s.com/rage for 40% off the vantage subscription. Whether you subscribe yourself or send it as a gift. If you're listening to our show, I think you'll like their mission. Use groundnews.com/rage so they know we sent you. Support for the show comes from HomeServe. You want things to work, don't we all? But sometimes things just happen that are out of your control, and no one knows this better than homeowners when something can go wrong in a moment's notice. And those costs can hit hard and fast. That's where HomeServe comes in. Regular homeowners and churns usually doesn't cover a lot of the day-to-day wear and tear. The plumbing failures, HVAC breakdowns, or electrical issues. When those happen, you're often on your own. But HomeServe can let you get help fast. You simply choose a plan for your needs and budget. And when something on your plan goes wrong, you can just call their 24/7 hotline to start the repair process for as little as 499 per month. It's how HomeServe has helped homeowners like you for over 20 years with a trusted national network of 2600 local contractors. Join the millions of customers who trust HomeServe. For 50% less your first year, go to HomeServe.com/moderates, that's HomeServe.com/moderates for 50% less. Savings compared to a new old price, void, and Florida. Support for the show comes from AG1. With fall on its way, you might be looking back at all the fun you had during the summer. But you might also notice all the things that you let slip a little, like your diet. Not to worry, because you can get things back on track with the help of AG1. AG1 is a daily health drink with a multivitamin, pre- and probiotics, superfoods, and antioxidants. It helps you maintain energy, support God health, and support immune health. Even though summer is your license to chill, AG1 helps you keep one thing consistent. High quality, nutritional support every single day, no matter where you start your morning. Our producer Eric has tried AG1, and here's what he thinks. Just drinking AG1 in the morning makes me feel healthier, less hungry, and more alert even before coffee. It's got lots of vitamins, but also things like shiitake mushrooms and other vegetables inside. And in their welcome kit, they give you the perfect bottle to mix it all up in and drink it from. It's tough building good habits, but AG1 is making it a lot easier. So if you're looking to make some changes with the fall approaching, AG1 can help you make them. For a limited time, save 20% on your first subscription order of AG1 next gen, or AG1 pro, at drinkag1.com/moderates. We have just one big primary left, Massachusetts, Ed Markey and Seth Moulton. It's a generational warfare question, not so much a politics question. Obviously, Markey is to the left of Seth Moulton, but polling shows Markey far ahead and Calchey currently has the odds of Markey winning at 99%. I've been surprised that Congressman Moulton is down 30 points to Markey. Do you think that that actually bears out on election day, or there'll be a bit of a surprise in this primary? No, I think that, I mean, maybe I'll be embarrassed on election night, but I do think the lead is serious. And I think that we're kind of, Markey is an interesting window into the shallowness of the kind of generational analysis, because, you know, six years ago, he was an old man. He's been old for a long time. Old for a very long time. Yeah. Now, he's older, but he spoke to young Kennedy six years ago. And Seth Moulton, I think he's such a perfect 2000s candidate, veteran, sensible centrist, well-spoken, good-looking, like-- He sets. Yeah, everything Ramamanya would have wanted it in a 2006 or 2008 house. House recruit, willing to challenge his own party, tried to go up against Nancy Pelosi back when she was speaker. But when you peel it a little bit, you're like, well, what does he stand for? With that Markey, you know, he was fighting for the Green New Deal. He was fighting-- he's kind of a bold progressive, like you kind of know where he is. With Seth Moulton, you're like, what is he-- what is he really-- what's his thing? And if you're in Massachusetts, just triangulating to be a Republican isn't on voters' minds in the same way. So I think there are so many young people in Massachusetts that respect Ed Markey. And that's going to be enough. And then the older people who are-- and also the kind of like lower information voters, they just, you know, he's been-- Ed Markey's been there, guys, since 1972 or something. But that was supposed to be the problem. And all of these leaders were supposed to be cognizant of the fact that passing the torch is something important. I mean, think how much rightful criticism Biden got for marketing himself as a bridge candidate that could beat Donald Trump and then pass it to the next generation, whether that's Kamala Harris or a Buddhist. you know, whoever would have emerged from an open primary in 2024. Although if he could have kept stringing sentences together, I think it would have been better. Yeah, coherence is a big deal. And Edmarky is coherent. But and I, I understand for Massachusetts voters, it might be in the back of their mind that they don't have a real Republican opposition to make this complicated, but the actuarial tables are undefeated. If Scott were here, he would be talking about this, right? And Edmarky will be 86 years old. That's yeah, but that seems too old. And if if he were running for president, I think that that would be a bigger deal. I think, you know, the Democrats in Pennsylvania voted for Federman after he had his stroke unsure if he could even speak basically. But they knew that he was going to vote the way that they wanted compared to they don't see that happy with that. They thought yes, and vote is voting record has been his vote isn't record is fine. It's always funny to me when people freak out. I used to say this about Joe Manchin, like, please just calm down about him a little bit because his voting record is just fine. It's better than Dr. Oz would be if he were in there. Yeah. And so I think if I Yana Presley had decided to run against him, I think she cooks him this cycle. Okay. Like she should have done that. Like I don't, I know she wants to be Senator. She's eyeing that seat. She's doing the Massachusetts thing of waiting until there's an opening and it's your turn. But I think if she had run the combination of young people supporting her and also wanting some generational change, would have been enough to power her past him. But I think generational change is not enough. If you, if the voters think they're going to get something weaker, politically speaking. So especially if it's just a Senate, where people are like, yeah, what's the job? Like physically show up and just vote. I think people have pretty low expectations at this point of what they can ask for out of their, their senators and reps. Well, that's a bummer and it's on right. But I do think you're right. I also imagine if I and oppress Lee had signaled that she would be willing to jump the line that Markey might have retired, like my feeling in New York. I'm a New Yorker is that if AOC tell Schumer, she wants to do this, that he will retire versus having some ugly generation hole and ideological fight, you know, with the next generation. So yeah, I think you're probably right. I don't know. I was just surprised by the size of the lead. I guess I expect it, Markey, to win. But I'm thinking maybe like 10, 15 points, not seeing a 30 point chasm and maybe that will maybe it will be exaggerated. Yeah. Yeah. And so you mentioned when we first started talking about, you know, this is your first cycle covering foreign policy. So closely and the connections to what's going on here, we have some new, pretty crazy stories out of the Washington Post. The first that they're reporting that senior US military leaders in the Army, Navy and Air Force chiefs, plus combat and commanders over Europe, Asia and Latin America have warned Pete Hegseth that sustaining current operations against Iran isn't feasible long term. And this is a per classified August 14th Pentagon planning document. We know that the stockpiles are dwindling and I'm being generous and just using dwindling as the term. I, where do you think things stand and how, from your reporting, just, you know, your perspective on this, how is Hegseth ignoring all of this? It feels like at a certain point, I'm not saying you'd really have like a mutiny or coup or whatever, but that like there are enough solid guys and gals in these positions who would be like, we have to go to the top or make this public in some way because it's going to be disastrous and we're going to have more American lives lost and all the bad things. And what's, what's so fascinating about this is this is one of the moments where kind of the American political conversations and, and kind of just general thinking about how the world operates is colliding so thoroughly with like real material reality. The US, because of its global power, you know, we can, we can, we can print money. We've got the Federal Reserve of, you know, operates in a way that no other central bank in world history has ever really been able to, to operate our, our, our raw soft power is enough such that when our presidents speak, like it, it moves entire nations. And so we have lost touch with the idea that underneath that, there is a material reality. And that's being exposed now. And in particular, you know, they don't, they don't need to launch a coup or launch a mutiny because the stockpiles are what they are. And that's the fascinating moment. Like, you know, Hegseth can reject the advice of these admirals and generals. And it, and say, you know, what we're pushing forward anyway, but at some point, you just physically run out of the ability to do the thing. So it's like, you can believe these guys are not. But like if you are expending two to four patriot missiles for every ballistic missile that Iran is firing at Jordan, or Israel, or Qatar, or Bahrain. And you started with a particular amount, which is a public amount of ballistic missile interceptors. And we can count them down. And we know you've drawn them in from Korea. We know you've reduced the amount going to Ukraine. We know that over drops, they reported that Israel's own ballistic missile, a defense stockpile, is down into the double digits. They're relying almost exclusively on the US Navy to intercept. They're not getting targeted right now. But as they were at the end of this last war and if Iran starts striking them again, they're going to be, they're going to be relying almost exclusively on the US to try to intercept these missiles. So those, these are just facts. Like these things cost millions of dollars a piece. They take years to produce and we're running out of them. The other fact is that the 15 plus bases that we had been operating for decades are in ruins and particularly NSA Bahrain, which, you know, how's the fifth fleet can no longer serve as the logistics and supply hub for the Lincoln aircraft carrier strike group that is there. It's leaving. It's being replaced by the George Washington. But but bringing in the George Washington aircraft carrier strike group does not change the underlying fact that you can no longer supply from Bahrain, that you now have to go to Diego Garcia, 2,200 kilometers away, takes 10 days or something to make a round trip. And so everything just falls apart. So that is the reality that we're living in. We did so much to ignore that when we launched the war. The, you know, even it, I, and I'm sure you saw this because I've noticed that like on, on the five, you're the only one that seems to like have any idea what's going on in reality. And I remember at one point you were like, well, people are saying, yeah, you can read, you can read Dropslight or not, but like if you don't, you're just going to be lied to. But like reading it going into the war, you would not have been surprised because Iran was saying very publicly, if you attack us, we are going to turn this into a regional war. We're going to attack all of your bases in all of these Gulf countries. And we're going to attack Israel. This is not going to be the tit for tat thing that we did during the 12, they were, they even wrote a letter to like the UN where they laid off his stuff out. They told, they told it to us to Jeremy scale and interviews. They said it publicly like it was not a surprise to anybody who was listening. And that was another example of our kind of ideal, idealized view of the world, clashing and like smashing headlong into reality. So like, oh, we're going to want, we're going to kill the ayatollah and we're going to do all this. And then, and then their curves are going to come in and yada, yada, yada. We're going to democracy in Iran or whatever is going to happen. Instead, yeah, all of our bases are lying in ruins. And we're almost out of ballistic missile interceptors and are two of our aircraft carrier groups have been chased away. Well, it's also a story about a hard-headed leadership. And I'm not even talking about the really powerful people trying to like the top one to three people because there has been also extensive reporting on how many people whose opinions should matter. Like Secretary Rubio, CIA director Rackliffe, for saying this is batshit insane, right? I think that that was the quote from Maggie Heyberman and Jonathan Swan on it. And I, because you brought it up, I, I, and I didn't want to ask you about this. So I read Dropsite and on this particular issue, I think you guys have been, you know, leagues ahead of a lot of press rooms that are much better funded and certainly enormous on a comparative basis, you know, the scoop over the MOU, I think was particularly impressive. And I mentioned that and obviously credited you guys with that when I talked about it on the five. How are you managing to do this, first of all? And what do you think about the balance between being independent media and also a newsroom in this way? Because usually it's bifurcated. And, you know, the rise of independent media, which I think is really important. And like, listen, I love having a podcast. I think this is, you know, such a great way for me to be long form and to talk to different people. Then my, you know, I'm on a show that's cast with the same five people every day. And you think of independent media a lot more in that sense, right? People who are able to go out in a podcast, but drop site is doing something different. Right. Yeah, the immediate answer to that is Jeremy, Jeremy Scayhill's reporting on the Gaza genocide then had produced enough sources. So that when they expanded the war over to Iran, you know, he was, he was better positioned than pretty much any Western reporter to be able to report accurately on what, on what their thinking was and how they were planning to respond to these attacks. But to your, to your broader point, yes, we were very, Jeremy and Oscar, and our, and our, and she were very kind of deliberate about how we did not want to be, you know, just kind of sub stackers because we felt like institutions new and kind of newsrooms were not the problem. Like the idea of collectively gathering news and reporting it accurately, there's nothing wrong with that idea. What was wrong is the way that so many newsrooms are doing it and deliberately cutting off huge parts of the world where they just refuse to listen to what other people are saying. And so we really believed that even if it was going to be a very small one to start, that we needed to create an institution, not just, not just us as individuals kind of popping off or, or even doing our own kind of, you know, one off in, you know, investigative pieces, we also have a pretty big team now that is able to read and listen to news from all over the world and from, and from the region. And so that, so you can get leads from telegram channels that, that the rest of the kind of Western press is, is not covering. So it's a very simple concept, the idea that you should be talking to everybody who's involved in the situation, like it's every, I think everyone in journalism, any journalism professor that you would talk to would say, yeah, that's, we'll teach that in the first day of class, yet when you actually do it, people start to freak out, like, well, those are terrorists. How can you, how can you talk to them? And so because of their, their, their reticence around that, they just left the entire field open for a news organization to come in and be like, no, we're gonna, we, we don't care one way or the other. We're, we're just going to talk to the people who were involved in this situation, whether they're in Oman, Pakistan, Iran, the United States, Qatar, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, or wherever, like if they're involved, and they have access to information, we're gonna try to get that information and share it with the public, and then the public can do with it what they want. Yeah, I mean, I definitely, I think I fall in the, the public can do with it what they want because they're, you know, some perspectives that drops, I believe in or, or brings forward that I don't necessarily share, especially on the, Israel, Palestine conflict and, you know, genocide, that's not a term that I used to discuss it, but there are, you know, sources that you have and perspectives that I think are valuable in shaping this complete picture of what's going on, and it has been very useful to me and to a lot of people. So I'm glad that you guys are out there doing that. Support for the show comes from HMS. If you have weight loss goals, you know, it takes time to actually reach them and weight loss by HMS is designed to support you every step of the way. HMS is the first ever GLP1 pill for weight loss, so there are no needles involved. With Wagovi at HMS, they say you can lose up to 20 percent of your body weight when combined with diet and exercise. It helps you regulate your appetite, eat less, and keep the weight off. Through HMS, everything happens online. You'll connect with the licensed provider who will determine if treatment is right for you. If prescribed, your medication is delivered right to your door. HMS makes hitting your goals seamless by offering 24/7 messaging with your care team, plus lifestyle and nutrition support in their app. Ready to reach your goals? Visit HMS.com/moderates to get a personalized affordable plan that gets you. Spelled H-I-M-S.com/moderates, HMS.com/moderates. Weightless by HMS is not available in all 50 states. Wagovi is the registered trademark of NOVO Nordisk AS. To get started and learn more, including important safety information, Wagovi Clinical Study information, and restrictions, visit HMS.com. So like any good millennial, I have a love-hate relationship with Gen Z. It's the phenomenon rattling millennials. They just look at you. They want something bigger themselves, lifestyle's a priority, motivation is being inspired. But regardless of how you feel about Gen Z, it's undeniable that they're changing national politics. Gen Z is increasingly showing less loyalty to traditional political parties, many now more likely to identify as independent. So what is going on with the kids? I think the biggest misconception about Gen Z's politics right now is that all of a sudden they're all socialists. That is just not the case. Yeah, yeah. They are embracing candidates who are offering new bold ideas in the absence of those ideas from establishment Democrats. This week on America, actually, Gen Z researcher Rachel Jenfaza joins us to separate Gen Z fact versus fiction. It's not rocket science, and this is, you know, I keep saying like young voters aren't that complicated after all. It's pretty simple. Catch us every Saturday on YouTube, or wherever you get your podcast. You know the Washington Post piece about the conservative influencers that are actually being paid according to the reporting, and I know the administration's pushing back, but they push back on everything, and then they only bring lawsuits about, you know, Jimmy Kimmel. So the idea is that there are former, there are veterans that have big platforms that are getting, you know, some semblance of marching orders from the Pentagon at folks like Kirch Likters, one of the ones that they name in it, who writes for Town Hall, you know, and this is a larger question going on in media right now, the New York Times had a huge piece about liberal influencers that are being paid by politicians or causes for their perspectives. How do you see this? I imagine that you're not surprised by the Washington Post's reporting by, you know, how do you look at that landscape, and how do you think about that in reference to doing good journalism yourself when you're doing a piece? I actually, maybe I'm not cynical enough, but I was even a little surprised by that. Like, I mean, first of all, it doesn't seem necessary. Hi, the military ones or the Democratic influencers. Okay. Yeah. Well, I mean, the Democratic influencers, that one didn't surprise me because Democrats are doing that. That's the business. Yeah. They've got their thing, chorus. It's a, it's a very old idea that where Democrats and Republicans too, if they're running a campaign, they're like, what, how do we reach the young people? Let's get some TikTokers and Instagram people and hire them like that. Yeah. Or was it a wash with this on both sides? Yeah. Right. The actual Pentagon putting, you know, so, so-called journalists on its payroll. That was like, that one struck me as, wow, also, like, I don't understand why they need to even do that. Like typically, both parties when they're in control of the White House will do this. They'll, they'll, they'll have sympathetic journalists that they'll send out talking points to. Why is that not sufficient? Like, you also have to pay them to do this for you. That, that part struck me as, as quite odd. And deeply disturbing when it comes to how this current Pentagon understands its relationship to the press because it also follows that very famous revolution that they did where they threw out basically the Pentagon press corps. Throw them out of the- All the rule reporters. Yeah. And they put them with these total clowns that we all kind of had fun, kind of making fun of and who had no idea what they were doing. Like, if you remember, in the very beginning, you'd have several of them were saying, hey, so we just got out of an off the record briefing. It's off the record, so I can't tell you what was discussed, but here's what was discussed. And they, like, didn't even understand- They weren't breaking norms that they thought were unfair and undemocratic and in principle. They just had no idea what they were doing. They thought maybe it just meant they couldn't say the name of the person who had given them the brief us all this off the record stuff is spilling out. And then most recently, this data Republican woman who turns out to be on the payroll of the Pentagon was given a leak and didn't understand how leaks worked and thought she was being set up to go to prison. It just demonstrated a real skills gap in just journalism and just understanding how the world works and then to find out that not only are these the best you've got, you're even paying them was kind of shocking to me. Well, I think, you know, putting it side by side with the realities of how the war is going, I think it's the part that makes it worse for me, because I do, you know, everybody's got to earn a living, I guess, and being in journalism is not the highest paying job. you could have. So I get it, right? If, you know, get that packing on bag, but you're totally, but when you think about this, being a cadre of veterans, right, who are talking about something as important as war when other veterans or service members could lose their lives as a consequence of this, because the longer that we're there, right, the higher the likelihood, that's what really jolted me about it, right? This isn't like, you know, doing a, a Tom style or dance or whatever you're saying, like, you know, he's the one good billionaire or whatever, you know, this, it felt heavier to me. And it'll be interesting to see where it goes. I'm fearful of where they go with this stuff, like, you know, attributed to Washington Post, this is their reporting. Everyone has been pretty buttoned up because they know how litigious the Trump administration is. So I want to be buttoned up too. Washington Post said it, I didn't say it, but it did shock me too. I like, I guess these influencers better hurry up and get the bag because pretty soon, they'll just be able to make AI influencers that look like real people in those fake people can go out and say, he's the only good billionaire. So I guess, yeah, they better cash those checks while they still can. It's just such an ugly landscape. I, in general, I, before we go, I want to talk a little Canada. I can't believe, does Google maps have to do this that they already have renamed it the lake of America? It feels like there should be some sort of standard right where you just say, until I get a court order that this has to happen. I do know they have to get along with the administration and big tech companies. That was a piece. I guess it didn't surprise me, but I was paying attention to when all of them are now courting the Democrats too, because they know odds are that we're going to be in power the next time Republican lawmakers are speaking out against Trump's escalation. You mentioned this when we first started, especially in those swing states, as well as this decision to allow 300,000 tons of the beef to get in, even though some has been recalled. I saw someone post this and I don't remember who it was. So I'm sorry that I'm not crediting you, though I don't think it was like a reporter. I think it was just a hot take. But that lake of America is working perfectly for Trump, because he doesn't want to talk about anything real at this point because the real stuff is so abysmal for him. So even if it elevates someone like Mark Carney, and he's the guy who looks like the leader of the free world by comparison, that he's fine with that. If he doesn't have to talk about the war and he doesn't have to talk about healthcare or any of the things that will actually be important to people when they vote. And it's deeply unpopular. Even Republicans aren't into this lake of America thing. It's minus four with them minus 42 overall. The idea that we're we should be relay renaming a 400 year old name that would predated Canada, even. Yes, right, at least at least Gulf of Mexico, like you understood, okay, the name Mexico is in there. So that's why we're it's why I agree. Mexico and why we're angry and why we're trying, it's like Ontario, like that's there's nothing to your point. Yeah, it's a Native American name. We have cities called Ontario and the United States. Canada is in North America also. So the new name is not even an own. We don't care about the rest of the continent. And what about the other lakes? Like so Canada get now gets the name for them, wheeling it one or whatever. I think that while the decision itself is underwater and it does let him talk about something other than all the things that he's screwing up, I think it's so absurd that it highlights, it puts a spotlight on his unwillingness to deal with anything. Like it, because when people hear it, they're like, oh, that's the idiotic stuff that he's focusing on, because he thinks we're all idiots. I don't think it works as the distraction that he might think it does. You're driving down the street and you're seeing the gases $4.10 a gallon or whatever. And God help you if you need diesel. You're seeing the, you know, you're hearing about the unemployment numbers, job, job losses. And then you're, and then you're hearing that the wars were back in the war again, thought this was over. Like what's what's going on here? And the and the care of seemed over because of all the payouts. Right, but they're still going and then we're doing a trade war. Yeah, they just know ones. Yeah. Yeah. And Canada is targeting, you know, Trump voting areas. So, you know, they can't really buckle the entire American economy, but they can cause immense amount of damage in very specific places by going after particular products. And I feel so horrible for people whose lives are being upended and businesses are going under for absolutely no reason. And it sounds like Howard Lutnik played a significant role in blowing this up, because he can't stop running his mouth and offending people and lobbying for God only knows what interests that he and or his friends and or sons are involved in. So you've got the James and Greer, the US trade representative negotiating with the Canadians. And then in the last minute, you have Howard Lutnik coming in and blowing things up. And I think it's like, why is this why? Like, why is Howard Lutnik involved in this at all? Like, who is like what? What kind of administration is this? It just is just such an insult to everybody involved, including the American people. And meanwhile, you're engaged in a hot war with Iran, a trade war with Canada, laying all like laying this beef in, everything's getting recalled. Like, there's this cyclospora thing going everywhere because your HHS secretary believes in voodoo, the entire country is getting put at risk by this incompetence. And then like, every day, it's like, Oh, now avocados, you know, guacamole has been recalled. The you name it every single day. The biggest lesson for me, if the recalls has been how much more I'm paying to go to Whole Foods for the same products that you could get at Walmart or Target, that killed me. Like, you know, when they when they said, Oh, it's like, the Walnut Moli ad Whole Foods. And I was like, this is another Taylor firms, I am eating the same shit. I'm just paying six times more. I want to and just full circle on this. Mike Rogers has decided inexplicably to support Trump wholesale on the tariffs. And that is also working and up to all sides favor. It seems like a lot of these Republicans are just doing everything that they can to make it easier for challengers, even in red states, Ken Pax in this weekend was so embarrassing at his little gaggle that had 10 people at it, just waiting for dad to send a Venmo essentially. That's how I think of Maga Inc at this point that Trump's just sitting there is like, Oh, okay, go ahead and give him $10 million dollars. Perfect example of that is Pete Ricketts, the Nebraska Republican, whose dad like started Ameritrade and basically, you know, owns the Cubs and basically bought his boy Pete a Senate seat. And now he's up against this independent. I love Dan Osborne. Yeah. He's great. I also, I don't talk about Annie Andrews enough in South Carolina. That's my last question. Do you think there is any chance or the Graham even though it's Nordone is too much? I think it's possible. I mean, Darlene barely squeaked past Ralph Norman. She only won with, you know, a huge lift from Trump. So could there be a reject, like it has to be a multi-layered rejection, like rejecting the idea of this entitlement to the seat, being mad at Trump, Norman and Freedom Caucus and Maga voters who are upset that Norman lost combined with Annie's being a very inoffensive Democrat who, like, I'm sure you noticed in her, like, launch ad, she definitely did not mention she was a Democrat and said, like, her only policy that she was, she said, I'm going to work with Republicans to cut taxes. What's the thing? And I'm a doctor. And I'm a doctor. Because no one asks your politics when you take your kid in to see the pediatrician. I guess now in a weird vacuum. Now they do. Now it's a polarizing. Another fucked up aspect of Trump 2.0. Ryan Grimm, it was so great to have you. Thank you for your time. Yes, thank you for having me. [BLANK_AUDIO]