Transcript

Democrats' 2027 Priorities: Fight To End Trump's Iran War, Lower Prices & Medicare For All

From Pod Save America · Episode page · Watch on YouTube

· 1 h 43 min · 17,919 words · 148 timestamped sections

This is the full, timestamped transcript of "Democrats' 2027 Priorities: Fight To End Trump's Iran War, Lower Prices & Medicare For All", an episode of Pod Save America published November 10, 2026 (1 h 43 min, about 17,919 words). It mentions 79 people, works and ideas, including Democratic Party, Donald Trump, Iran war (2026), Medicare for All, Senate.

What this episode is about

Democrats aim to end the Iran war, lower prices, and expand Medicare for All, arguing a bold policy shift will reassure voters, cut costs at the pump and grocery store, and deliver universal healthcare. The discussion emphasizes reframing the Democratic brand, appealing to both traditional supporters and new voters with concrete policy commitments.

Key takeaways

  • Democrats must pivot from opposition to offering concrete, cost-cutting, peace-forward priorities—now.
  • Voters rewarded anti-Trump sentiment; the challenge is translating that into a pro-work, pro-peace agenda that lasts.
  • End Iran war and restore healthcare stability quickly—two levers with immediate, tangible benefits at the pump and clinic.
  • Bold policy beats veto fear: force votes on Medicare-for-All and childcare, even without instant bipartisan buy-in.
  • The path to 2028 hinges on a durable map: remake the political landscape with pro-worker, pro-peace fundamentals.

Who speaks in this episode?

What is discussed, and when

  1. – 10:00: Democratic Party, Donald Trump, Iran war (2026), Kenny McBride
  2. – 20:00: SimpliSafe, Democratic Party, Crooked Media, Squarespace
  3. – 30:00: Medicare for All, New Deal, Democratic Party, Elissa Slotkin
  4. – 40:00: Democratic Party, Donald Trump, Senate, Medicare for All
  5. – 50:00: Made In, Pod Save America, Democratic Party, Iran war (2026)
  6. – 1:00:00: Donald Trump, Iran war (2026), Medicaid, Steven Little Miller
  7. – 1:10:00: Democratic Party, Chris Van Hollen, Mitch Landrieu, Steven Little Miller
  8. – 1:20:00: Donald Trump, Bilt Rewards, Made In, Medicaid
  9. – 1:30:00: Democratic Party, Senate, Iran war (2026), Chuck Schumer
  10. – 1:40:00: Israel, Michigan, Benjamin Netanyahu, Democratic Party
  11. – 1:42:33: Washington, Elissa Slotkin, Crooked Media, Pod Save America

Notable quotes from "Democrats' 2027 Priorities: Fight To End Trump's Iran War, Lower Prices & Medicare For All"

  • Hey, it's John. For today's show, we're bringing you a couple of our favorite conversations from Crooked Con this weekend. First up, a conversation I had about the Democratic brand and what.
    about John Favreau · at
  • We can begin to do that right now. So that's the number one deliverable. And look, if Donald Trump wants to tell the country that he is prepared to shut down the government in…
    about Donald Trump · at
  • Wars, fermenting new culture wars, and implementing policies that are increasing costs for people. The modern Democratic Party is built on being proworker and pro peace. And we need policies.
    about Democratic Party · at
  • Surprised me, not because I wasn't working and rooting to make it happen, was the South Carolina Senate race.
    about Senate · at
  • Those costs so that it could be an effective and efficient healthare system. We have to be able to point to something in order for us to be able to make the case in 2032 why we…
    about Medicare for All · at
  • And he'll have to explain it to the American people and as I said to his vice president who recognizes that the Iran war was a critical issue in this election. So, we don't have to wait till January. We should really do that now.
    about Iran war (2026) · at
  • Hey everybody. welcome to Crooked Con. I'm John Love and it is my great privilege to have Michigan Senator Alyssa Slacken here with us.
    about Elissa Slotkin · at
  • Pocketbooks is end the war, cancel many of the really sloppy, stupid tariffs, and figure out what we're going to do about these Medicaid cuts. If you want to help people's…
    about Medicaid · at

Who and what is mentioned in this episode?

People

  • Donald Trump — Person · Referenced political actor · 21 mentions · first at
    Central antagonist in discussion — hosts and guests critique his policies (Iran war, Medicaid cuts, tariffs, ICE) and note his impact on voter behavior.
  • Chris Van Hollen — Person · Panelist / Guest (Senator) · 6 mentions · first at
    Speaker advocating ending the Iran war, reversing economic harms, and proposing tax changes to help working Americans.
    Trump. But the question of course is, okay, now you've got the responsibility of power. What are you going to do? I would say the number one thing we could do right now is end…
  • Elissa Slotkin — Person · Guest (interviewee) · 6 mentions · first at
    Senator interviewed about Michigan campaign, oversight priorities, and Senate leadership decisions.
  • John Favreau — Person · Host · 2 mentions · first at
    Host/moderator of the Crooked Con panel and the Pod Save America episode.
  • Kenny McBride — Person · Panelist / Guest (Congresswoman) · 6 mentions · first at
    Argues Democrats must lead with bold, pro-worker and pro-peace policies including Medicare for All and caregiving/childcare reforms.
    Not bad, right? Yeah. I would say in addition to the senator's point, at the top of our priority list come January has to be reversing the cuts to Medicaid and the ACA tax credits.
  • Chuck Schumer — Person · Referenced political leader (Senate Majority Leader candidate) · 6 mentions · first at
    Discussion about whether Schumer should continue as Senate Majority Leader; some guests seek commitments/agenda before endorsing.
    Senator, you have so far declined to endorse Chuck Schumer for majority leader. you said that Dem you said that Democrats need a plan first. What would Schumer have to.
  • Steven Little Miller — Person · Referenced political appointee · 10 mentions · first at
    Cited as Trump's new chief of staff and symbol of the administration's hardline stance on immigration; used to argue the administration won't moderate.
    As well, right? and so Steven Miller is chief of staff now or is going to be chief of staff. they don't seem to care about whether the government is running and operating in…
  • Mitch Landrieu — Person · Panelist / Guest (former Mayor) · 5 mentions · first at
    Provides political and strategic observations about focusing on economic issues and delivering results to voters.
    Country by making Steven Miller the chief of staff. So that's that's the policy point of it. The politics part of it is please try to remember that we have been here before. 18 months ago, we were in a much worse place.
  • Hakeem Jeffries — Person · Referenced political leader (House leadership) · 2 mentions · first at
    Discussed as prospective House Speaker — guests debate his effectiveness and whether he should commit to a bold agenda to secure support.
    I have had a front row seat to leader Jeffrey's effectiveness in that role, not just internally within our caucus.
  • Benjamin Netanyahu — Person · Referenced foreign leader · 4 mentions · first at
    Referenced as Israeli leader whose government's actions (and funding requests) are under scrutiny; US policy toward Netanyahu discussed.
    And I'll just say one more thing, John, and this started with the Biden administration. We did as a country look the other way. While our taxpayers were used, taxpayer dollars…
  • Melat Kiros — Person · Guest (Congresswoman-elect) · 2 mentions · first at
    Represented the incoming generation and argued for bold agenda items like Medicare for All, data center moratorium, and childcare/elder care programs.
    Yes, I'll speak to what I think voters would like to see since I'm just going to be coming into this. I cosign what both of you have said, right? We are the party of proworker,.
  • Abdul El-Sayed — Person · Referenced candidate/winner (Senate race example) · 2 mentions · first at
    Cited as example of a populist message (money in your pocket, out of politics, Medicare for All) that succeeded in Michigan.
    I think in terms of the Senate race that was most important to speaking to who we are as a country and our ability to overcome hate and overcome fear-mongering was the Michigan Senate.
  • Tommy Vietor — Person · Host (Pod Save America co-host) · 2 mentions · first at
    One of the show's regular hosts; part of the Pod Save America team and Crooked Media
    Our team includes Matt Dro, Ben Heftat, Jordan Caner, Charlotte Landis, Kenny Moffet, Adam Liipper, Joseph Dutra, Desmond Taylor, Dan Farrell, David Tols, Mia Kelman, Ryan Young, and Naomi.
  • John Lovett — Person · Host / Co-host · 1 mention · first at
    Host who conducted the Crooked Con interviews and moderated segments of the show.
    Hey everybody. welcome to Crooked Con. I'm John Love and it is my great privilege to have Michigan Senator Alyssa Slacken here with us.
  • J.D. Vance — Person · Referenced political figure (criticized) · 4 mentions · first at
    Mentioned as an example of MAGA-era intellectualizing; called out for commentary about the war and policy responsibility.
    Iran war is unpopular. People sure are concerned about affordability. and you responded saying, Hey, man, you're the vice president. You're responsible.
  • Joe Biden — Person · Referenced actor (former/current President) · 2 mentions · first at
    Mentioned in critique of past US policy toward Israel and Gaza and failure to prevent civilian destruction.
    And I'll just say one more thing, John, and this started with the Biden administration. We did as a country look the other way. While our taxpayers were used, taxpayer dollars were used by the Netanyahu government to drop bombs that.
  • Pete Hegseth — Person · Referenced media figure / subject of potential House impeachment resolution · 1 mention · first at
    Correct spelling to ensure proper attribution and searchability
    Thomas Massie, who's outgoing, has promised to bring his impeachment resolution to the floor. Is an impeachment trial for Pete Hegsth. does that fit in what you would like to see or do you think it's maybe not the right direction?
  • Bernie Sanders — Person · Referenced Senator/legislative author (context: Medicare for All) · 2 mentions · first at
    Referenced as author of the historic Medicare for All bill used as a comparison point
    A discussion about how to deliver health care as a right is a very important discussion. Medicare for all is a very important part of that and nobody should be afraid of taking…
  • Congresswoman Lauren Boebert — Person · Referenced outgoing Representative · 1 mention · first at
    Mentioned as likely losing her seat to a Democrat in Colorado, illustrating Democratic pickup in red areas
    We're sending seven, which is incredible, knocking on wood, for the last two races to be called. But my own parents district is one that hasn't sent a Democrat to Congress in…
  • Elon Musk — Person · Referenced billionaire/business figure · 1 mention · first at
    Mentioned critically as an example of big money influencing politics and getting federal contracts after heavy spending
    End political corruption. We need to pass the Disclose Act. No more secret money. We need to get rid of what I call the Elon Musk loophole where he spends 450 million bucks in…
  • Annie Andrews — Person · Referenced organizer/advocate · 1 mention · first at
    Mentioned as making the point that Democrats need to show up and fight everywhere (South Carolina reference)
    And Annie Andrews, I think, made the point very clearly that Mitch and all of us would make, which is that Democrats need to show up and fight every single place all over the country. And if we.
  • Milton Friedman — Person · Referenced economist (philosophical contrast) · 1 mention · first at
    Appears in conversation as a shorthand for a certain economic approach that panelists contrast with populist proposals
    A right, it's not a privilege. And I would not respectfully I'm not I'm not a member of Congress or the Senate. Let perfect be the enemy of good. So I think Senator Van…
  • Congressman Thomas Massie — Person · Referenced Representative (incoming action) · 1 mention · first at
    Mentioned as planning to bring an impeachment resolution to the floor (Hakeem) — example of possible House action
    So, there's a potential impeachment vote for Hegsth that's coming in the House.
  • Marjorie Taylor Green — Person · Referenced Representative (example of extreme rhetoric) · 1 mention · first at
    Referenced to illustrate the spectrum of right-wing rhetoric that can produce unexpected alignments or reactions
    There are clearly deep divisions within the White House, within the MAGA movement. we've all had that moment where we've looked at Marjorie Taylor Green's tweet and we're why do I agree with that tweet?
  • Chuck Grassley — Person · Referenced Senator (comparison) · 1 mention · first at
    Mentioned in a quip about age comparing the new younger delegation to long-serving senators
    Corporate pack money which is new for the Senate. and actually on the age thing, we told we just figured this out today that Abdul's age plus my age is still younger than Chuck Grassley.
  • Josh Shapiro — Person · Referenced governor (example) · 1 mention · first at
    Referenced briefly in passing (context unclear) as part of broader political examples
    Governorships and of course you see this in state legislatores Allah Texas. So don't forget that and remember there's always an election next year and the public is very fickle…
  • Brad Lander — Person · Referenced incoming freshman (conversation partner) · 1 mention · first at
    Mentioned as someone panelist spoke with about policy/Israel questions — example of intra-party conversations among incoming members
    How you see your role going forward. I talked about this with Brad Lander who's an incoming freshman. I talked about this with Abdul and what it looks like for Democrats to…

Companies & orgs

  • Crooked Media — Company · Producer / network · 10 mentions · first at
    Owner of Pod Save America and organizer of Crooked Con — central production company behind the episode.
    They're news receivers, not necessarily news seekers in the same way that we are. And what's clear in this election is that many of those voters switched overwhelmingly between parties in just.
  • YouTube — Company · Platform referenced (distribution) · 3 mentions · first at
    Podcast/episode is distributed on YouTube; the show references its channel and joining for perks
  • Tennessee Valley Authority — Company · Historical program reference · 1 mention · first at
    Referenced as an example of New Deal-era workforce/infrastructure programs when discussing analogies for modern investments
    The second bucket, the second bucket for the New Deal and the Great Depression were workforce programs that put people to work and helped to build the infrastructure of the future in those days. In the 30s,.
  • Writers Guild of America East — Company · Production union · 1 mention · first at
    Referenced to note that the Pod Save America production staff are unionized with this guild.
    Desmond Taylor, Dan Farrell, David Tols, Mia Kelman, Ryan Young, and Naomi Single. Our staff is proudly unionized with the Writers Guild of America East.
  • Twitter — Company · Platform referenced · 1 mention · first at
    Mentioned as part of Crooked Media's social media links in the episode context (promotion/links).
    So, you're pretty critical of Vance, who wrote this Twitter essay as if he were a pundit. Yeah. About boy, this Iran war is unpopular. People sure are concerned about affordability. and you responded saying, Hey, man, you're.
  • AP Photo Archive — Company · Photo credit · 1 mention · first at
    Credited as the source of photos used in episode materials (episode context).
  • Instagram — Company · Platform referenced · 1 mention · first at
    Mentioned as part of Crooked Media's social links in episode context for promotion.

Concepts & topics

  • Democratic Party — Concept · Institution / political party discussed · 31 mentions · first at
    Central actor — discussion revolves around what Democrats should offer voters, leadership choices, and policy priorities.
  • Medicare for All — Concept · Core topic / policy proposal · 16 mentions · first at
    Repeatedly discussed as a bold agenda item Democrats should push and vote on to force Trump veto and to deliver on healthcare.
  • Senate — Concept · Institutional body discussed · 15 mentions · first at
    The U.S. Senate is the forum for many of the leadership and policy debates referenced (majority leader, votes, reconciliation).
  • Medicaid — Concept · Core policy issue · 14 mentions · first at
    Cuts to Medicaid and ACA tax credits are an urgent priority to reverse; described as a 'ticking time bomb' affecting healthcare access starting January.
  • Populism — Concept · Electoral strategy / framing · 2 mentions · first at
    Framing used to explain cross-ideological Democratic successes — message focused on kitchen-table issues resonated with voters.
    Of mandate for progressives or moderates or centrists. I think populist politics won across the board. And when populist politics wins, that's an indication that when we are…
  • Affordable Care Act — Concept · Policy reference · 3 mentions · first at
    Referenced in context of ACA tax credits which need restoring to prevent health coverage losses starting in January.
    I would say in addition to the senator's point, at the top of our priority list come January has to be reversing the cuts to Medicaid and the ACA tax credits. There is a ticking time bomb in the center of the American health care.
  • MAGA — Concept · Political movement / adversary · 2 mentions · first at
    Used to describe the movement that could persist beyond Trump; guests argue policies like Medicare for All would 'MAGAP-proof' the future.
    That being said, MAGA will not disappear. someone will step into Donald Trump's shoes and they are going to be just as charismatic, just as telegenic, probably a lot smarter and more effective at actually.
  • National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) — Concept · Legislative reference · 1 mention · first at
    Properly categorized as a policy/legislation rather than a book; acronym NDAA acceptable
    There's some also provisions in the National Defense Authorization Bill that need to be pulled out of that bill because what they would do is permanently couple US defense production.
  • Data center — Concept · Policy target · 3 mentions · first at
    Policy target; clarify whether location or concept
    Cuts, restoring the ACA tax credits, raising the federal minimum wage, terminating the tariffs, forcing data centers to pay for their own energy and water, and banning…
  • New Deal — Concept · Historical analogy / policymaking framework · 3 mentions · first at
    Used as a template for how Democrats might respond to current economic inflection points (social programs, workforce programs, regulation).
    Individual workers and families, but poses existential risk for our democracy. And I've been thinking about what have democratic proposals looked like at those previous…
  • Great Society — Concept · Historical analogy · 1 mention · first at
    Referenced alongside the New Deal as past moments of transformative Democratic policy (e.g., Medicare/Medicaid)
    The second bucket, the second bucket for the New Deal and the Great Depression were workforce programs that put people to work and helped to build the infrastructure of the future in those days. In the 30s,.

Places & events

  • Iran war (2026) — Event · Core issue / foreign policy crisis · 16 mentions · first at
    Described as an illegal, senseless war that Democrats should end; linked to rising consumer prices and a key driver of voter anger.
  • Israel — Place · Foreign policy focal point · 13 mentions · first at
    Geopolitical reference; needs accurate categorization when referring to a country as a geopolitical entity
    To the government of Israel. And I think that would be a mistake. My view is we should My view is we should end the open American taxpayer checkbook to the government of Israel given everything that's happening.
  • Iran — Place · Foreign policy adversary / geographic focus · 8 mentions · first at
    Country at center of the 'Iran war' discussion; ending US involvement there is a top Democratic priority in the conversation.
    That would be a mistake. My view is we should My view is we should end the open American taxpayer checkbook to the government of Israel given everything that's happening.
  • Michigan — Place · State case study / political battleground · 10 mentions · first at
    Used as an example of a swing state where races (Senate, etc.) reflected the broader themes of populism, healthcare, and foreign policy; Slotkin represents Michigan.
    There is very real in a very real way growing anti-semitism and I see it every day. the synagogue that I know very well was attacked in Michigan like this year. we've had threats on Jewish institutions in a very real way.
  • Washington — Place · Referenced political center · 5 mentions · first at
    Used as shorthand for the federal political establishment; criticisms about D.C. insiders and culture recur throughout the discussion
    A right, it's not a privilege. And I would not respectfully I'm not I'm not a member of Congress or the Senate. Let perfect be the enemy of good. So I think Senator Van…
  • CrookedCon — Event · Event (source of panel/interviews) · 3 mentions · first at
    Panel and interviews in this episode were recorded live at Crooked Con; provides context for the conversations.
    Hey, it's John. For today's show, we're bringing you a couple of our favorite conversations from Crooked Con this weekend. First up, a conversation I had about the Democratic brand and what.
  • Texas — Place · Referenced state (example of political dynamics) · 3 mentions · first at
    Location reference in political context; ensure accurate usage
    There. I still think this is a massive electoral project that we have to engage in, right? These wins are going to be really fickle unless we actually do something to deliver…
  • Gaza — Place · Referenced territory (policy discussion) · 2 mentions · first at
    Mentioned in the context of Israeli settlement expansion and U.S. leverage on Israel policy
    Illegality of settlement expansions in the West Bank in Israel and actually being willing to leverage the US government's funding and diplomatic efforts to achieve those goals. He is also a historical figure.
  • Michigan Senate race — Event · Case study / electoral example · 1 mention · first at
    Cited as an example where a populist message overcame fear-mongering; used to illustrate how Democrats can win in places written off.
    Who we are as a country and our ability to overcome hate and overcome fear-mongering was the Michigan Senate race with Abdul Elsa.
  • Great Depression — Event · Historical analogy · 2 mentions · first at
    Used as an analogy to frame bold Democratic policy in three buckets, referencing past Democratic policy responses
    What have democratic proposals looked like at those previous inflection points. And the two most analogous examples of bold democratic policym were the New Deal and the Great Depression.
  • Colorado — Place · Referenced state (example of Democratic gains) · 1 mention · first at
    Mentioned as a surprising area of Democratic success (nearly sending eight Democrats to Congress)
    We're sending seven, which is incredible, knocking on wood, for the last two races to be called. But my own parents district is one that hasn't sent a Democrat to Congress in…
  • Rafa — Place · Referenced location (Gaza border area) · 1 mention · first at
    Referenced by a panelist describing destruction observed at the Rafah/Rafa crossing in Gaza as evidence of humanitarian devastation
    Used, taxpayer dollars were used by the Netanyahu government to drop bombs that have devastated Gaza. Just take a look at the pictures. Civilians killed, complete destruction…
  • Iowa — Place · Referenced state (example / campaign stop) · 2 mentions · first at
    Referenced regarding campaign stops and as an example of swing-state dynamics; Des Moines mentioned as well
    Last question. you were in Iowa in De Moines and you were asked about this and you said that you're not so arrogant as to think it has to be you that runs for president. but if it comes to.
  • South Carolina Senate race — Event · Election example · 1 mention · first at
    Cited as a surprising Democratic victory and example of the party winning where it hadn't before
    And Annie Andrews, I think, made the point very clearly that Mitch and all of us would make, which is that Democrats need to show up and fight every single place all over the country. And if we don't show up, you obviously can't win.
  • Kansas — Place · Referenced location · 1 mention · first at
    Mentioned as an example of a state where voters who typically voted Republican shifted in the midterms; used to illustrate geographic electoral change.
    Senator. I do believe that populism was the message. It's not left or right. It is the fact that we have an economy that's rigged in favor of very wealthy people at the expense of working people. And so.
  • South Carolina — Place · Referenced state (election example) · 2 mentions · first at
    Mentioned in connection with surprising Democratic success (Senate race)
    Us would make, which is that Democrats need to show up and fight every single place all over the country. And if we don't show up, you obviously can't win.
  • Laredo — Place · Referenced border city example · 1 mention · first at
    Mentioned as site where panelist witnessed impacts of ICE enforcement and immigration enforcement on local economy
    And they weren't going to vote for him again. And I asked them why. And one of them was, well, these raids are pulling everybody off of all the construction jobs and we can't…
  • Houston — Place · Referenced city (incident example) · 1 mention · first at
    Mentioned as location where an individual was killed in an alleged ICE-related incident used to illustrate public outrage
    In Houston and then another gentleman in Maine who was shot in front of his three-year-old child. And they were enraged as most people because as you may recall, Trump said…
  • El Salvador — Place · Referenced country (example in alleged deportation/abduction) · 1 mention · first at
    Referenced when discussing an alleged US-era abduction that sent someone to El Salvador
    There were a lot of Democrats back then who criticized me for going down to El Salvador and saying we need to bring him back. I expected the push back from the White House. What I did not expect was.
  • New Hampshire — Place · Referenced state (example) · 1 mention · first at
    Referenced in passing in show metadata (Crooked Con mentions New Hampshire as part of events/locations)
    Going to help us win because if you don't have power you can't get anything done and to make the final point focus group New Hampshire white guy 38 years old voted for Trump…
  • Maine — Place · Referenced state (incident example) · 1 mention · first at
    Mentioned as location of another killing used in the argument against ICE's actions
    Also the week, if you remember, where two individuals were killed. One of them in Houston and then another gentleman in Maine who was shot in front of his three-year-old child.…
  • Maryland — Place · Referenced state (example in alleged abduction) · 1 mention · first at
    Possible location reference; ensure coherence with transcript context
    Don't need more of the finger in the wind stuff. We were just talking about immigration. I remember early in the Trump administration when the Trump folks abducted off of the streets of Maryland a guy by the name of Kilmora Brago Garcia.
  • Reflecting Pool — Place · Metaphorical/reference location · 1 mention · first at
    Could be kept as location with metaphor note or dropped if treated as metaphor
    And to do that, we should look at these signature cases, right? You can't make it your whole personality. You have to actually show that you're helping the American people because their.

Media & podcasts

  • Pod Save America — Media · Program / podcast · 5 mentions · first at
    The episode's home platform — hosts and guests are affiliated and use the show to discuss politics and Crooked Con sessions.
    Everybody. That's our show for today. Hope you enjoyed it. Dan and I will be back on Friday with a brand new episode of Podsave America. Talk to everyone soon.
  • Ted Lasso — Character · Cultural reference · 1 mention · first at
    Quoted metaphorically as an example of leadership values — 'be curious and not judgmental'
    Unapologetic in what they believe, and if we have candidates who I think in large part summon the values of my favorite philosopher, Ted Lasso, by being curious and not…
  • Dark Knight — Media · Cultural reference · 1 mention · first at
    Used as a pop-culture metaphor to describe a leader taking arrows/being the one who must bear criticism
    Senate leader is to kind of take the arrows, right? And like at the end of the Dark Knight, like he's not the leader we want, but he's the leader we deserve. how do you separate that? How do you separate the way in which it's a.

Sponsors

  • Made In — Sponsor · Sponsor / promoted brand · 7 mentions · first at
    Sponsor branding in episode; needs standardized sponsor metadata
    This episode is brought to you by Maiden. I love Maiden. I didn't even know that they were a sponsor until I sat down today. I've been a big fan of Maiden for a while. I have one of their.
  • Bilt Rewards — Sponsor · Sponsor · 5 mentions · first at
    Ambiguous sponsor naming; clarify brand identity
    Personal research, I was such a fan of theirs and I definitely love their stuff. If you're considering the pros and cons of different cookware brands, you should know that…
  • Squarespace — Sponsor · Sponsor · 4 mentions · first at
    Episode sponsor; ad read promoting Squarespace website services with a promotional code/link.
    Checkout. It lets them know we sent you and it really helps the show. Simply safe, ahead of crime in real time. This podcast is sponsored by Squarespace.
  • SimpliSafe — Sponsor · Sponsor · 3 mentions · first at
    Episode sponsor; ad read promotes their home security subscription service.
    Vulnerable spots around the house as the seasons change. So, she's very, very happy with it. We've partnered with Simply Safe to offer our listeners the biggest savings of the…
  • International Rescue Committee — Sponsor · Sponsor / charity call-to-action · 3 mentions · first at
    Sponsor message and donation appeal relating to humanitarian crises (Gaza, Sudan, Afghanistan).
    Thanks to all of you for coming. This episode is brought to you by the International Rescue Committee. Imagine a child asking you for water and knowing there's none to give or putting your.
  • Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez — Person · Referenced Representative / supporter · 1 mention · first at
    Mentioned as someone supporting Democratic leadership (AOC supporting Jeffries) and as a model of intra-party unity
    I also think he's put forward positive proposals for I think a necessary shift in US foreign policy including and especially when it comes to the USIsrael relationship. It might not be where.
  • SleepMe — Sponsor · Sponsor / advertiser · 2 mentions · first at
    Listed among sponsors in the episode description and sponsor list; part of ad reads for the episode.
  • Brooke Williamson — Person · Referenced chef (sponsor context) · 1 mention · first at
    Mentioned as one of the professional chefs endorsing Maiden cookware in the sponsor read
    And cons of different cookware brands, you should know that Maiden has more of the pros. Pros like Tom Kikio and Brooke Williamson and many other professional chefs who all…

Full transcript with timestamps

Hey, it's John. For today's show, we're bringing you a couple of our favorite conversations from Crooked Con this weekend. First up, a conversation I had about the Democratic brand and what we're actually for with Democrats from across the spectrum. Senator Chris Van Holland, Congresswoman Sarah McBride, Congresswoman Electros, and former mayor Mitch Landrew. Then you'll hear a love its interview with Senator Alyssa Slacken. Hey everyone, uh welcome to Crooked Con. I'm John Favro.

Uh, I am very pleased to be joined by Senator Chris Van Holland. Thank you, Congresswoman Sarah McBride, Congresswoman Electros, and former Mayor Mitch Landry. Um, so I think we'd all agree that uh one of the big reasons Democrats did so well on Tuesday night um is that they were not Trump. Uh but I want to talk about sort of what Democrats can do going forward to make sure that we uh keep the voters who gave us a chance and bring in voters who didn't um and and looking forward. So the question now is I think what are Democrats going to offer as an alternative? And maybe we can start there. If a friend or a family member says to you, okay, I finally voted Democrat for the first time on Tuesday. What can I expect from you guys? Senator, I'll start with you.

Well, first of all, I think this is of course the right question for this moment because it was a repudiation of Trump. But the question of course is, okay, now you've got the responsibility of power. What are you going to do? I would say the number one thing we could do right now is end the illegal and senseless war in Iran. And and John, that does two things. Number one, it immediately tells the people that we actually don't want to get bogged down in senseless wars around the world and will also have an immediate impact on the prices they're paying at the gas pump or the grocery store. And we can begin to do that right now. So that's the number one deliverable. And look, if Donald Trump wants to tell the country that he is prepared to shut down the government in order to keep his illegal war going, that's something he can do. But we should not decide what we're going to do based on what he might

do. And he should also consult with his vice president about why they lost the election. At least part of why they lost the election.

First of all, the vibes are immaculate. It is wonderful to be here. Not bad, right? Yeah. I

I would say in addition to the senator's point, at the top of our priority list come January has to be reversing the cuts to Medicaid and the ACA tax credits. There is a ticking time bomb in the center of the American health care system that is going off and its biggest explosion is set to go off in January. And this president is going to have to choose whether he is politically going to die on the hill of preserving those cuts to people's healthcare. And so that has to be at the center of our agenda in addition to ending this reckless war in Iran. But I think so many people have either come to the Democratic party for the first time or have returned to the Democratic party because two years ago this president broke his two central promises. that he was going to lower costs for the American people and end forever wars. And in both of those instances, not only has he ignored those issues, in some cases, he's actively

made them worse. Starting new forever wars, fermenting new culture wars, and implementing policies that are increasing costs for people. The modern Democratic Party is built on being proworker and pro peace. And we need policies. We need policies that center those principles and do not make the same mistake that Donald Trump made over the last two years because they voted for us to focus on those two issues to have policies that uphold international human rights and American interests abroad that lower costs for the American people here at home. And we have to make sure that we keep our focus on those two priorities. so that we can not just regain trust but solidify it as we head into 2028 and beyond because we have the opportunity to fundamentally remake the map. That's what we saw on Tuesday and we have the opportunity to ensure that that map is not just remade for one election but for a generation to come.

Yes, I'll speak to what I think voters would like to see since I'm just going to be coming into this. Um, you know, I I cosign what both of you have said, right? We are the party of proworker, pro peace. I also think that we have to be leading with a bold and aggressive agenda. And I think a lot of voters have been hearing from folks that, well, Trump is just going to veto it. like why should we even spend political capital in that direction? I would like to force Donald Trump to veto Medicare for all.

I would like to force him to veto a data center moratorum or child care and elder care for all. All of these are programs that we should be leading with as a vision and the threat of a veto should not stop us from actually still putting that forward.

First of all, congratulations to you guys and thank you everybody. It was it was an awesome it was an awesome day for the country. I would I would say two things. One about policy and the other about politics. Um first of all I I agree um that the reason why Donald Trump got elected is because he promised two things. He said I'm going to reduce costs. I'm going to stop forever wars. he went in the opposite direction and he did three very specific things which is to start the war to dig into the tariffs in an aggressive way and then of course the big beautiful bill and the Medicare cuts. So the first thing you need to do is stop doing the things that are raising cost and I would just say for Congress if I could give some just constructive advice go get rid of those three things as quickly as possible and if you want to add banning stock trading you know that would be helpful as well.

All four of those things from a strategic point of view are important and if the president vetos him, he vetos them. But essentially the American public just told everybody in politics, we want you to focus on us and not on other stuff. And the president did everything he could to make sure that they didn't believe that. And then yesterday he gave a finger to the country by making Steven Miller the chief of staff. So that's that's the policy point of it. The the politics part of it is please try to remember that we have been here before. 18 months ago, we were in a much worse place.

We're in a much better place today. But we're here today because it was an anti-Trump vote. And if you want for them to vote for us next time, we have to secure the gains that we have. We have to start thinking about gaining more. And we have to do things that get the public to say, "Now that I've given you responsibility, you actually delivered for me." Now, that can be a ton of different stuff. And we have an incredible bench to design that not just on the federal level but with governorships and of course you see this in state legislatores Allah Texas. So don't forget that and remember there's always an election next year and the public is very fickle and I would have to say there's a lot of fusion out there. People are not loving the Democratic party just because we hated the Democratic party. But we now have a chance and if we show up in places that we never showed up in before you might

be surprised to know that they'll be for us. and I would just keep the pedal down as far as we could go.

Um, I want to ask each of you, what is one result uh from Tuesday that has challenged something you believed about how Democrats win?

Well, I can say that the race that most surprised me, not because I wasn't working and rooting to make it happen, was the South Carolina Senate race. And Annie Andrews, I think, made the point very clearly that Mitch and all of us would make, which is that Democrats need to show up and fight every single place all over the country. And if we don't show up, you obviously can't win. So, John, that was my biggest surprise. Uh, I think in terms of the Senate race that was most important to speaking to who we are as a country and our ability to overcome hate and overcome fear-mongering was the Michigan Senate race with Abdul Elsa.

I I wasn't surprised because he was somebody who really narrowed down what I think all of us kind of said in a different way up here, which is money in your pocket, out of politics and Medicare for all. But that was a populist message and that overcame all the fear-mongering, including of course the last minute switch of his opponent in the Democratic primary. I am proud to I am proud to have been the first Democratic senator to endorse Abdul Elsed in that election. We were just talking backstage about how the results far exceeded our wildest expectations. I I I had some guesses that were well below where we have come out. And I think to build on the the senator's point, we have won in places that many in our party had permanently written off as permanently uncompetitive for us. And I think it should remind all of us that there are no permanently red places in this country.

And it should also remind us that that also probably means the reverse of that is that there are no permanently blue areas of this country

and that there are sort of two kinds of voters in our society right now. There are the types of voters who are like all of us. We're fairly partisan, certainly negatively polarized against the other party. And then there's a large group of voters who aren't as engaged in following every minutia of politics. They aren't necessarily listening to crooked media yet. They're news receivers, not necessarily news seekers in the same way that we are. And what's clear in this election is that many of those voters switched overwhelmingly between parties in just two years. And so we have to recognize that as sort of negatively polarized as we are in this moment, as rightfully outraged as we are, there is a wide swath of voters who were just trying to make it through the day and whose allegiance to a political party or a politician is not the same as what you see online from either side. And I think the

results of this election really reinforce that. I think the other thing that the results of this election reinforce is that we can and must move past the factionalism that is perpetually seeking to parse every single data point to prove who has a leg up and who doesn't. Let's just have candidates authentically show up as themselves in their values in their districts representing the neighbors that they are seeking to serve. And in some instances that's going to be deeply progressive. In other instances, it's going to be heterodox. It's going to be all over the map. But if we have candidates who are true to themselves, if we have candidates who are unapologetic in what they believe, and if we have candidates who I think in large part summon the values of my favorite philosopher, Ted Lasso, by being curious and not judgmental towards the voters that they are seeking to earn the support of, I think we can solidify

those results. And I think we have a lot of victories on Tuesday that reflect that approach. I I think the biggest things that surprised me about this election were in my own backyard. Colorado nearly sent eight Democrats to Congress. We're sending seven, which is incredible, knocking on wood, for the last two races to be called. But um my own parents district is one that hasn't sent a Democrat to Congress in in decades. And um that race is almost certainly going to be called very soon. And Lauren Boowbert is going to be on her way out, which is going to be amazing.

And I I have to say I I really felt I think a lot of people felt really vindicated with these results. Not because, you know, there was some kind of mandate for progressives or moderates or centrists. I think populist politics won across the board. And when populist politics wins, that's an indication that when we are speaking authentically to the things that voters actually care about, when we are speaking authentically to the fact that the economy is broken, the economy is rigged against working people right now and an honesty about our own party's failure to meaningfully address that in the last couple of decades. that earns you a certain level of trust with voters that they say, "Okay, you can call it like it is and I can trust in you to actually try and fight for it when you get in there." I still think this is a massive electoral project that we have to engage in, right? These wins are going to be

really fickle unless we actually do something to deliver with some meaningful results here. But I do think that this is a mandate from voters that are saying number their number one issue is corruption. their number one concern is that Democrats are actually going to address that corruption within our own party as well and actually deliver some meaningful results. And so it was shocking without question, but I also think it's an indication that there is a very specific path forward here that we really need to, you know, unite on and and work towards. That's corruption, I think. And, you know, we're going to have different ideas about how to do that. I want publicly financed elections. But there's there are ways for us to to go in that direction that can actually speak to the populist politics that won.

I uh thank you for that. In the last three three years or so, I've I've been to 250 towns, counties, or cities in respective capacities. and in the last 18 months with the working-class project did a really deep dive on why folks didn't vote for us that used to vote for us who by the way voted for us this time and I would I would just offer this to to all of you first of all the last 10 years really kind of got in my head about whether or not America was going to be able to catch herself because it sure felt like a couple of times almost irrationally that we were going in a direction that we couldn't go in and so I was overjoyed to really see the country find herself again this this weekend and that gives me great joy and hope. But Sarah Sarah hit this right on the head from u my travels and my discussions most Americans do not see themselves as a Republican, a Democrat or independent or whatever that they

just don't identify as much as all of us do who are in the political realm. These are just regular folks who are trying to go to work every day, make sure they have a roof over their head, can make their rent. Some people are worried about whether they get a flat tire because if they do and they can't fix their car, they're going to lose their job or whether or not they have to choose between eating, paying for health care, or getting their kids the tools they need to to go play soccer, etc., etc. And they're worried about that and they feel left out and they left behind.

And essentially they feel like that the promise that we made to each other, two of them. one that we all come to the table of democracy as equals was now being overtly challenged by the president and the vice president and ick like Steven Miller thinking that some of us are better than others because of how we looked on the day that we were born and whether or not we really meant that and whether the covenant of America which is stated simply is that if you are here you're going to get a job that can pay for what you need and your kids are going to have a better life than you and back around 1980 that promise has began to deteriorate and most people don't think that their kids are going to have a better life than them and they think the system is rigged and they want somebody to change it. They just said to Donald Trump, "You're fired."

But but but you know, cautionary note, yeah, this is just the beginning of the beginning. I guarantee you that if we don't show up real and authentic and right and centered, then we're not going to we're not going to make the day because they will they will fire us, too. However, and this is the thing that excited me the most about it [snorts] with all this hateful rhetoric going on around the country. Um, you know, this anti-Muslim sentiment, the anti-semitism, the racism, the genderism, all of that stuff. If you think about the people that got elected last week, America stood up very proudly and say really out of many, we really are one and we mean it.

Today's presenting sponsor is Simply Safe Home Security. The clocks falling back is all extra sleep and cozy fun and games until the moment you realize you're getting home from work in the pitch dark. When it comes to home security, you need a system that has you covered no matter the time of day or night. That's where Simply Safe comes in. Their live US-based agents don't care what time it is. Someone's always ready to take action and protect what matters to you most. Unlike traditional security systems that only alert you after a break-in is already underway, Simplysafe is built to stop intrusions before they start. Smart AI powered cameras watch for potential threats and alert a live US-based agent ready to intervene. The agent intervenes in under 30 seconds, speaking through the camera to stop an intruder in their tracks and calling for urgent 911 dispatch when it's needed most. our CEO recently got a

Simply Safe and she installed it all on her own just just like we've promised that she can all these all these years. Took a couple hours and uh the app makes arming and disarming the system from her phone really easy. Temperature and water sensors let her keep an eye on vulnerable spots around the house as the seasons change. So, she's very, very happy with it. We've partnered with Simply Safe to offer our listeners the biggest savings of the year. 70% off your new system with professional monitoring when you visit simplysafe.com/crooked.

That's simplysafe.com/crooked. And when you order, type in podsame at checkout. It lets them know we sent you and it really helps the show. Simply safe, ahead of crime in real time. This podcast is sponsored by Squarespace. Squarespace is the all-in-one website platform designed to elevate your online presence and drive your success. Squarespace provides all the tools you need to promote and get paid for your services in one platform. Whether you offer consultations, events, or other experiences, Squarespace can help you grow your business. Squarespace offers a complete library of professionally designed and award-winning website templates with options for every use and category. No matter where you start, your website is flexible to what you need with intuitive drag and drop editing, beautiful styling options, unrivaled visual design effects, onbrand AI content, and more ways to list what

you offer. No experience required. Every dream needs a domain. Squarespace domains make it easy to find the best name for your business at one fair all-inclusive price. No hidden fees or add-ons required. Every Squarespace domain comes with advanced privacy and security tools included to ensure your domain remains online and protected. Squarespace provides everything to bring your vision to life. From custom websites to professional email. Don't wait. Claim your name and invest in your dream domain today. Head to squarespace.com for a free trial. And when you're ready to launch, go to squarespace.com/crooked to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain. That's squarespace.com/crooked.

Congresswoman elect mentioned Medicare for all um and that you [clears throat] would love to see a vote on that and make Donald Trump veto it. Um obviously different Democrats have different beliefs on the way to get to universal healthcare, some for Medicare for all, some aren't. Does anyone have um any anxiety over taking a vote on Medicare for all these next two years? Uh because I know I know some Democrats probably do. What are your thoughts? Well, let me start with an answer and explain why. No, I'm not afraid of taking a vote on Medicare for all. In fact, I think we should take a vote on Medicare for all.

But let me let me back up and say first principle in medicine is do no harm. We need to immediately reverse the cuts that were made to Medicaid, which are going to start to really hurt people badly beginning in January of this year. And by the way, we should pay for those by clawing back the about $200 billion dollars they sucked away for ICE. But we shouldn't stop with simply reversing the damage from the Trump administration. One of the biggest pain points for families all over the country is the fact that medical bills are going up and up and up. Premiums are up.

Co-pays are up. Everything's up. We have a broken health care system and we need to tackle it. And my view is we should get to Medicare for all. But if we can't immediately get a consensus on that, we need at the very least for goodness sakes to create a public option and begin down that road. Uh I'm for Medicare for all and I'm fine having a vote on it. But let's just start with the principle which I think Americans all over the country agree with which is that the health care system is not working for them. It's become a money-making system, not a health care system. It puts profits before patients.

And that is why I'm for Medicare for all. But for God's sakes, we've got to be able to address this issue where hedge funds, insurance companies, and hospitals are all making buckets of money at the expense of health care for the American people. I I personally don't have a a problem voting on that legislation on Medicare for all. I think there's an important conversation that's sort of bubbled up and and I've had this discussion with a number of my colleagues during the course of this election where there has historically been the current bill introduced by Senator Sanders, but then there's some differences among progressive candidates who've been running. Abdul Aliad had a proposal I think that was a little bit different than the current bill. So I think one of the topics for conversation is what does a specific proposal look like that might come before us. But I think there are absolutely opportunities for bold

aggressive economic policy that already have wide consensus across the ideological factions of both the Senate and the House caucus. Uh the leader put me in charge of our caregiving working group for our affordability agenda. And we already have the muscle memory as Democrats of voting in favor of universal paid leave, of universal child care, of historic investments in home care and elder care that make it actually affordable and a reality for that sandwich generation to care for both aging parents and their young kids all at the same time. And I believe that that actually has to be at the center of our economic agenda as well. I I've been thinking about what does our agenda look like, not just over the next two years, but as we hopefully look toward a democratic trifecta in 2029. And I think there is no question that at this moment we are at an economic inflection point for our country that doesn't just pose

real immediate urgent needs for individual workers and families, but poses existential risk for our democracy. And I've been thinking about what have democratic proposals looked like at those previous inflection points. And and the two most analogous examples of bold democratic policym were the New Deal and the Great Depression. And in both of those instances, those proposals fell into essentially three buckets. The first were new social programs that addressed financial insecurity for a population that was increasingly living in poverty. In the 30s that was social security and in the 60s that was the creation of Medicare and Medicaid. I think today those new social programs that we can conceivably adopt through reconciliation achievable with broad support among the Democratic caucus is universal paid leave, universal childare and historic investments in homeare and elder care.

The second bucket, the second bucket for the New Deal and the Great Depression were workforce programs that put people to work and helped to build the infrastructure of the future in those days. In the 30s, that was the Tennessee Valley Authority. It was the Civilian Conservation Corps, the Works Progress Administration. In the 60s, it was Vista and Americaore. Today, I believe that we should make historic investments in building the trades workforce that we need to build the homes of tomorrow to make home ownership within reach. Because even if we have investments and policy change to build new homes, we will not be able to build them at scale and at speed without the workforce necessary. And that is a workforce that will be increasingly immune to the technological revolution that we are about to experience. Which gets me to the third bucket. The New Deal and the Great Society imposed important regulations on industries that

presented existential risk for society. In the 30s, it was banking. In the 60s, it was addressing pollution. Today, it has to be meaningful regulation of big tech, especially AI, to protect the safety, the health of our workforce and our democracy. First of all, I think that whatever differences on the Democratic side we have pale in comparison to what the other sides about to go through. That's number one. That's why I would not get stuck in an ideological battle over the how to. If everybody has the same northstar, which is that healthc care is a right, it's not a privilege. And I would not respectfully I'm not I'm not a member of Congress or the Senate. Let perfect be the enemy of good. So I think Senator Van Holland's point about having a discussion about how to deliver health care as a right is a very important discussion. Medicare for all is a very important part of that and nobody should

be afraid of taking a vote on that. I would simply say that if you have a way to get to that and it takes you a little bit of time. It would seem to me to be counterproductive for people on our side to say I'm not going to do that because it's not exactly what I want. I think that we make the mistake sometime on our side of insisting on ideological purity on all of these issues. I'm just I can promise you I'm a local government guy. I was in the legislature for 16 years. We had all of these issues in Louisiana before. Sometimes you have to grab the ground that you can get, hold on to it, move on to the next thing. Because if you don't respond to what Sarah was saying earlier to the initial concerns of dealing with cost, this is this is the one universal almost unanimous consent of the American people. You have to do something to lower my cost. And if Congress doesn't work on that first, no

matter what else we work on, no matter how much time we spend on whatever issue it is that you think is the most important thing in your life, then they're going to throw us out of power. And if you don't have power, you don't have the ability to do the next thing, which is to get us to 2028, actually have the presidency, too, which you need in order to not have a veto or to override the veto, and then get us at some point in time to where healthc care being a right for the American people is a realization that we always have.

Um, Congresswoman elect, talk to me about the political path in your mind towards Medicare for all because I think um, a lot of progressives who have been advocating for Medicare for all for quite some time. Um, you run into a lot of obstacles even when it's been tried to pass in different states. It's been run into obstacles. Obviously, the votes are are tough to get right now in Congress. like what is what is the path in your mind to ultimately get to that goal?

I think what we're missing when it comes to the conversation about Medicare for all, you know, it it's not about whether or not this is the answer to the healthcare crisis, right? At the end of the day, when you have a health care system where a profit motive exists, you are incentivizing people to make money off of people being sick. in a singlepayer health care system where you have universal health care, your government is now incentivized to keep people as healthy as possible to keep those costs down. And so on a fundamental level, what we are talking about what is necessary to address the healthcare crisis, it has to be a singlepayer healthcare system. Whether or not that's Medicare for all, whether that's, you know, some other kind of form of it, whether it's a transitionary period where a public option is a part of it, that's totally fine for all those things to be discussed. And in fact, I

think we have to have that debate so we can actually get through all of the data to figure out what that transition looks like. But the, like you said, that north star has to be that every single person has access to that healthcare. I think the political path forward is one that has to be centered around where the populace are and they support Medicare for all. And in fact, most of our voters, 80 to 90% of Democratic voters want Medicare for all. And so our job is to not figure out what's doable within the political path as it exists right now. Our job is to chart a path forward to accomplish what the voters are demanding of us to achieve. And so what I will say though as far as what my, you know, pitch has been to a lot of folks that have been nervous about the idea of of really dramatically fighting for Medicare for all, Medicare for all to me is how we trumproof our future.

How we MAGAP proof our future. Donald Trump in some way, shape or form will disappear, right? In some way, shape or form, he will be gone one day, right? That being said, MAGA will not disappear. someone will step into Donald Trump's shoes and they are going to be just as charismatic, just as telegenic, probably a lot smarter and more effective at actually destroying our institutions, which is a terrifying thought to think of right now, but that really it this is not as bad as it could be. It could get worse. And if we take back the House, which we will the the White House in 28, right, we'll have a trifecta in 29 without question. The problem is going to be what kind of trifecta do we have? If it's not a trifecta that is willing to pass Medicare for all, if we have the power to do so, if it's not one that is willing to pass things like housing first and universal childare, what we're missing here is the political will.

Because if we accomplish that in 29 in that administration, we'll get to 2032. whatever sickopant wants to take Trump Donald Trump's role will try and wage a fight against the Democratic party, but we'll get to a point and say we just delivered universal health care. We'll be able to say that we canceled all medical debt. We'll be able to say that we broke up big medicine and drove down those costs so that it could be an effective and efficient healthare system. We have to be able to point to something in order for us to be able to make the case in 2032 why we need to be able to keep that power or else the pendulum will swing back and we cannot afford another MAGA fascist administration to take power.

Um I want to ask about what the newly empowered Democratic party um will do over the next two years. Uh we talked a little bit about um reversing the Medicaid cuts, the tariffs and the war. Um, Senator, you have so far declined to endorse um Chuck Schumer for majority leader. Uh, you said that Dem you said that Democrats need a plan first. What would uh Schumer have to commit to to get your vote?

So, first of all, I have said that as a Senate Democratic Caucus, before anyone commits to anybody for Democratic leader, we should have a conversation in our caucus. This is not a radical idea that includes the new members who are coming to Washington who are also looking for change. And at the very least, we need commitments as to what direction the Senate Democratic leadership will go. So, number one, use all the power we have at this moment to defund the illegal senseless war in Iran. And there's a debate going on about that.

There's some also provisions in the National Defense Authorization Bill that need to be pulled out of that bill because what they would do is permanently couple US defense production to the government of Israel. And I think that would be a mistake. My view is we should My view is we should end the open American taxpayer checkbook to the government of Israel given everything that's happening.

But then we do need to have a commitment to ambitiously address the kitchen table issues and end political corruption. So end political corruption. We need to pass the Disclose Act. No more secret money. We need to get rid of what I call the Elon Musk loophole where he spends 450 million bucks in this election cycle and gets billions of dollars in federal contracts. I also believe that we need a public a a public finance system. But finally, when it comes to these key kitchen table issues, we need to do something meaningful on health care beyond reversing the damage. And also, John, I would say that we have we haven't talked about taxes here, but we have a tax system that is completely stacked in favor of people who make money off of money and against people who earn a paycheck through hard work.

We need a commitment, that we're going to change that. I have actually proposed something that would provide working Americans with tax relief funded by imposing a sir tax on people who make more than a million dollars every single year. And so I let me just close with this. I I agree with I think there's a consensus here. I think that the current labels that get thrown around in democratic politics and politics are outdated. I mean, it's always are you left or right? Are you progressive, moderate or conservative?

My question is just tell me what you'll do. What do you stand for? And if there was a lesson coming out of these elections, just look at Texas where we have a great new governor and a new senator. I do believe that populism was the message. It's not left or right. It is the fact that we have an economy that's rigged in favor of very wealthy people at the expense of working people. And so it's not left or right. It's this other paradigm that does unite people. Donald Trump has spent his time in office trying to divide people against one another. You know, their economic woes are because of the immigrants or the people of different faiths. That has distracted everybody. We need to unite together and tackle the big issue that didn't start with Donald Trump. It's been made worse by Donald Trump, but people's economic pain is a structural economic problem. We need to go straight at it. That is a populist message. And

that is what we need a commitment to do. The direction to take bold action and not say we're only going to decide what to do based on whether or not we think Donald Trump's going to veto or something. We should do what's right for the American people. He can tell people whether he still stands with the billionaires, which I'm sure he probably does, or whether he stands with the American people. But we should not be calibrating our every move based on what Donald Trump decides he wants to do. He just did give the American people a big finger. He kicked them in the teeth by putting Steve Miller in the cockpit. We should do the right thing. We should listen to the voters and move forward.

That is my real purpose of making sure we have a commitment in the Democratic party in the United States Senate to move in that direction.

Um, Congresswoman, I know you voted for Hakee Jeff in 2025 for uh leader. Um, are you backing him for speaker this time, I assume?

Yes. It's What do you Obviously, there's a lot of um people out there. I've heard it, not just Schumer. People are like, we we don't want Jeffre as leader. Why can't we have someone else? What would you say to people who are um not yet there on um on on Jeffre as speaker?

First of all, I think sometimes the conversation around leadership and Congress sort of combines both House and Senate leadership all into one and I think there are distinctions. Um but look, being the leader of a caucus is an incredibly challenging role of managing different factions, different elements of a caucus. And sometimes the responsibility of leadership is not what always plays best to those of us in this space. That is that is the reality of being in charge of a caucus of 215 people. that will be the reality of being in charge of a caucus with 260ome plus.

I have had a front row seat to leader Jeffrey's effectiveness in that role, not just internally within our caucus. But the reality is over the last two years in a majority party controls institution, the House, House Democrats have successfully taken over the floor and gotten our priorities voted on on the floor. more than any minority in history since the 1930s when the rule that allows that was put into place. I have had conversations with our leader and I am convinced that he is in favor of a bold transformational economic agenda for our country and that he is in favor of our party putting that forward.

I also think he's put forward positive proposals for I think a necessary shift in US foreign policy including and especially when it comes to the USIsrael relationship. It might not be where everyone in this room would like him or others to be, but it has shifted and he's outlined some priorities that I believe our caucus should absolutely vote on in a majority, including ending the violence, the terrorism, and the illegality of settlement expansions in the West Bank in Israel and actually being willing to leverage the US government's funding and and and diplomatic efforts to achieve those goals. He is also a historical figure.

He is the first black leader of our caucus. He would be the first black speaker of the House of Representatives in American history. And he just presided over the single largest landslide for House Democrats since the 1970s. And so we will have all of us will have disagreements and members should absolutely have those conversations with leadership. I have had a front row seat. It's why repres Representative Aassio Cortez is supporting him. It's why our caucus, as far as I can tell, is broadly united because we don't want to start this Congress as well in the same place that Republicans have started their congresses with dysfunction, with chaos, with it looking like despite having a historic majority, at least in recent times, that we can't even turn the lights on. I think let's focus on getting past that vote and beginning in that moment when we have the nation's agenda, fighting for them, fighting for bold policy, not

fighting amongst ourselves for who gets which chair. Um, Congresswoman elect, I know you've met with Jeff, um, with Leader Jeff. Are you are you sold?

You know, I stop it. Um, I'm I I I've heard wonderful things about Leader Jeff and, you know, the hope that a lot of folks have for his speakership and the historicness of it. I'm going to be the first black woman to represent my district. Be my honor for my first vote to be to um elect the first black speaker of the house as well. Um, but it has to mean something for American workers. It has to mean something for the black community. It has to actually turn into tangible things, the speakership. And when I think about the speaker of the house, this is the person who in effect is supposed to speak for the people. And the people have made it clear that they want us to root out corruption. The people have made it clear that they want us to address the healthcare crisis. The people have made it clear that they want us to be the party and the country of peace and and stability. And in order

for us to reach those goals, there has to be a bold agenda that comes with it. I've not been sold just yet that there is a bold agenda on the table. And I'll just add too, I really think it's important that there is some kind of public concession on that front because it is abundantly clear that the American people are unhappy with leadership right now. They are they do not believe that leadership is is poised for this moment to take us in the direction that our party needs to go. Take us take the government in the direction that it needs to go right now.

And I think there's a certain level of trust that you earn from voters by just saying,"I hear you. What we put forward maybe isn't enough. Here's what we're going to do to actually address the concerns that the American voters have." Um I my vote is something that's still up in the air right now because I need to see that agenda and I look forward to having those conversations with leadership. Um because again, we have the mandate of the people right now and we cannot squander this. There has to be a bold agenda that we put forward. Is there an example of something um specific that you would feel was bold enough to to earn your vote?

I mean, it's not just one thing. I want to see Medicare for all voted on. I want to see a data center moratorium voted on. I want to see us ending military sales to Israel. And I want us to end the war in Iran. These are again all popular things. And to be clear, my demand is not that leader Jeffrey specifically supports these things himself, right? My demand is that he lets us vote on it. And and if the other if there are other parts of the party that want to put forward their own proposals, great. Let them vote on it, too. But again, these are populist politics that want us the midterms.

Mitch, I'm so happy because But you're not in Congress. No, no. I have great respect. You know, my sister was a United States senator for 16 years. So, I love senators. I was in the state legislature in Louisiana for four terms and went through speakership fights and then they're really intense things. But the reason I'm so happy is because I want to be able to affirm for you guys, not as a member of Congress, how much unity there is on the stage. If I might just read to you a tweet that Tammy Duckworth just put out. She said, "This is my list. ending the war in Iran, cancelling $1 trillion in Medicaid cuts, restoring the ACA tax credits, raising the federal minimum wage, terminating the tariffs, forcing data centers to pay for their own energy and water, and banning presidential stock trading. That is the same thing everybody up here said. And just just so that you don't think this is just a

magic trick, you don't usually have this level of consensus that's going on. And as I said when I began, I I assure you that the differences on the Democratic side right now are so dimminimous in comparison to what's going on with the other side that we should take notice of that. Secondly, I want to affirm what all of these smart folks have said that when you're out there campaigning, all right, the voters the voters are very fluid right now. They are not loving the Democrats and the Republicans. They gave us a chance and they are absolutely clear that they are not ideologically bent in this regard that it is really not as Chris said because he's very astute left middle and right there's some of that but the world has changed now and if we don't feel this shift then we are going to miss the boat that it's an up versus down thing most Americans that voted the way they voted feel that they have been left behind that the

system is rigged they're getting screwed and nobody's focused on them and that's what they're demanding which is why they're just grabbing everybody's face and saying I told you that I need you to concentrate on the things that are making me worry about whether I can make a living from day to day and I would just say to our team that we have to stay focused on the things that are going to help us win because if you don't have power you can't get anything done and to make the final point focus group New Hampshire white guy 38 years old voted for Trump straight down the line Trump voter until he heard about the big beautiful bill and the Medicaid cuts and he said, "I have a special needs kid." He said, "I cannot believe that somebody that I voted for is going to give a tax cut to a trillionaire and take money out of my pocket so that I cannot care for my kid." And he switched and so did a whole bunch of other people

across the aisle. And I think if again to your point, if we stay focused on that and don't get stuck on the perfect versus the enemy of good and then making sure, by the way, that we earn their votes because they don't trust us right now either. And we have to prove to them that we see them, we heard them, and that we're actually going to take concrete action to make sure that they're seen and we actually get stuff done. Whatever that is, whatever fits into that bucket, I would go run wild and and get there as fast as you can.

Pod of America is brought to you by Built. Here's a question. Are you getting rewarded for paying your rent or mortgage right now? If the answer is no, you need to check out Built. Becoming a Built member means earning points on every housing payment, no matter where you live. Built points can be redeemed for flights, hotels, lift rides, Amazon.com purchases, future housing payments, and more. They also have parking with metropolis, memberonly experiences, a down payment on a home, select restaurants. Build's new AI neighborhood concierge doesn't just answer questions, it executes tasks from paying your rent and hailing a lift to booking dinner reservations across 50,000 plus partners. It handles your to-do list while automatically applying your member benefits. First, download the Built app. Second, link any credit or debit card to the app so purchases at your local spots become even more

rewarding. And third, ask the neighborhood concierge in the app pretty much anything and it'll alert you about exclusive member benefits near your home. Download the Built app and join the membership for where you live at joinbuilt.com/crooked. That's ji nb i lt.com/crooked. Use our link so they know we sent you. Positive America is brought to you by Chili Pad. The news doesn't clock out. Late alerts and midnight screen time make a full night's sleep hard to come by. When your mind stays wound up, your body stays too warm to drop into deep sleep. The good news, that temperature problem is fixable. You could put your phone down, but that's impossible. So, enter Chili Pad 2.0, 0. The water-based mattress topper that actively controls your bed temperature from 55 to 115° all night long. No new mattress if it's right over what you already have. Chili Pad 2.0 actively cools or warms your bed

using water. And water is key here. Fans just move hot air around. Chili Pad uses actively chilled water to pull heat away from your body. It's the difference between standing in front of a fan and jumping into a cold pool. One actually works. And if you and your bedmate can't agree on anything these days, here's one thing you can settle without a debate. Dual zones let each of you dial in your own temperature independently. Bipartisan comfort. I don't know, maybe you should be single. Uh, but you should have a chili pad. It's the best. Uh, I' I've loved having one. Basically, you know, it you can do it from your phone.

You can make your bed really cold if you're hot. You can make your bed really warm when you're sleeping. It's the best. And you can each have different temperatures if you want to if you run a little hotter. It is great. Visit sleep.me/crooked to get up to $640 off your Chiliad 2.0 with code crooked as an added holiday offer. for Chiliad is including a three-year protection plan for free. This increases your Chili Pad 2.0 value up to $1,38. This special offer is available for Podsave America listeners and only for a limited time. Order today with free shipping and enjoy an extended holiday return window. You can return it for free if you don't like it with their sleep trial. That's www.sleepsle.me/crooked.

The headlines will still be there in the morning. You might as well wake up ready for them. to your point on sort of the unity around um what Democrats in Congress should try to do in these first couple weeks, this first month. Um one thing I see coming down the road is a potential shutdown because um we're talking about defunding um the Iran war. We're talking about forcing a reversal of the Medicaid cuts. Oh, and um I heard Governor Pritsker say the other day that um he would be willing to or he thinks that Congress should shut down the government if um Donald Trump doesn't make changes to ICE and ICE enforcement as well, right? Um and so Steven Miller is chief of staff now or is going to be chief of staff. Um they don't seem to care about whether the government is running and operating in the White House. They didn't before. They certainly don't seem like they would now because they're not facing any more

politics. At least Trump isn't. Miller doesn't care about politics. Um, how are you all feeling about, you know, the next time I mean, I know there's a a CR in December 11th, but like let's kick it down the road to the new year when there's a new Congress. How are you all feeling about a a showdown with the Trump administration where the government shuts potentially shuts down for a while and voters are like, "Okay, I we sent Democrats to Congress and they're fighting, but also now they're fighting with Republicans and the government's not working and it's shut down and are they going to get anything?" And what are they actually fighting for? You could say we shut it down over Medicaid cuts. We shut it down over the Iran war. We shut it down over ICE. This this seems like it's the first moment where um Democrats are united now, but what's the message to the voters going to be when that comes to a

head? Well, John, I I don't think we should skip over December 11th, which is when the current continuing resolution expires because, as I think we've all said, Donald Trump told the country two things.

He said he would keep us out of war and he said he would bring down prices day one. So he starts an illegal senseless war that is driving up prices as we speak. And so my view is that when that CR expires on December 11th, Democrats should not vote for any appropriation bills that has any money in it for the illegal war in Iran. Period. And if Donald Trump wants to tell the country that he is going to shut down the United States government in order to keep the war in Iran going, which he said he would never start, and that would also bring down prices, which he said he would do. if he wants to shut down the United States government to keep his war going, that is his choice and he'll have to explain it to the American people and as I said to his vice president who recognizes that the Iran war was a critical issue in this election. So, we don't have to wait till January. We should really do that now.

I agree and I I think going back to something that Malot mentioned earlier around passing bold policies whether it's undoing the harm of the Medicaid cuts or the ACA tax credits or ending the war or other proactive policies to actually move the country forward. I think in this moment it's going to be very interesting to see how Donald Trump engages. Obviously, the appointment of Steven Miller is a big FU to the country and a demonstration that perhaps this president hasn't learned any of the lessons that he should learn after Tuesday. But this president has no ideological core, right? The only commitment this man has is to self-enrichment and seeing his name in lights. And I I think as he enters a lame duck period, final two years of his presidency with large Democratic majorities in both Congress, in both caucuses or in both chambers, the reality is he doesn't need the sort of Milton Freriedman carcass of the Republican

party that he had used as a vehicle to win the White House. he's going to be a free agent. And for instance, on the Medicaid cuts, he was warning congressional Republicans that they were going to be incredibly unpopular when they were pushing them forward. But he knew he needed to include them to get the votes of the Freedom Caucus to get what he really wanted, which were tax breaks for billionaires and ICE funding. So there are a lot of things where he's not really committed ideologically or personally to harms that congressional Republicans inflicted on the country. I don't think he cares about the harms, but I don't think he's going to be willing to die on some of those political hills to defend them. And so I think there is a lot of opportunity over the next several months to extract concessions, to reverse those cuts, to put forward really bold policy. I mean, does the president want to veto paid

family and medical leave, which is supported by like 80% of voters? Maybe he does. Maybe he doesn't, cuz he just doesn't care. And he'd love to see his name on a policy that would afford every worker in this nation paid family a medical leave for the inevitable challenges of life. Like, we don't know how he is going to respond and engage. And so, let's just do what we want to do and fight for what we want to fight and let the chips fall where they may. Yeah. Um, I will say I think I could get myself to a place where I imagine the president wanting to wind down the war. Uh, Vance is there. I apparently Miller pitched himself for the job by saying he also wanted to wind down the war. Uh, Congresswoman McBride, to your point, maybe on Medicaid cuts as well. I think my biggest fear is that the ICE raids and the way that ICE is behaving, um, which never really ramped down that much, just kind of went into the

shadows, is going to ramp back up because Steven Miller does not care. They don't care about the politics and that is his only passion project. And so I do wonder what those of you in Congress think about handling that. How you think about handling that over the next year or two? Cuz to me that is one of the the scarier things as we head into the last two years.

Congresswoman, I think we should hold the line on a government shutdown if it means, you know, ramping down what's happening with ICE right now. I think ultimately we have to be working towards abolishing this agency. We had immigration enforcement long before ICE was created. we'll have it long after we we abolish it. And you know, I I think part of the conversation has to also be in order to maintain the public support for a government shutdown in the way that we had the last time around, right? Um the American public was, to put it bluntly, pissed off when um we we stopped holding the line on that front. And I think the same would be the case here with ICE. And and I think part of it also has to be about presenting our own vision. For too long, immigration has been used as a political football between both of the parties despite the fact that there are so many common sense um proposals and reforms

that are on the table for us to address the immigration crisis that I think there could be some serious bipartisan support here for us to get it across the line. And like Sarah said, we have to try. We have to actually put these things forward and force the Republicans to say whether or not they're on board with these things. But when it comes to ending the paramilitary rogue just blatant violence that is being inflicted on the American people right now by this agency. Um I would absolutely be in favor of of um supporting a government shutdown in order for us to hold the line there.

Yeah. Um, the American people expect that the government's going to stay open and do what it's supposed to do, but not necessarily at all cost. Um, it should always be a last resort and unless and until you're staring it in the face, you're really not going to know whether to pull the trigger or not. And I would I obviously defer, but I would I would just mention a couple of things um about this. I was in Laredo, Texas, uh at a Taler Rico rally a couple of months ago and I ran into two uh folks, young men from Macallen, Texas, who were in the construction business who said that they had voted for Donald Trump three times and they weren't going to vote for him again. And I asked them why. And one of them was, well, these raids are pulling everybody off of all the construction jobs and we can't build houses, so people's costs are going up. But it was also the week, if you remember, where two individuals were killed. One of them

in Houston and then another gentleman in Maine who was shot in front of his three-year-old child. And they were enraged as most people because as you may recall, Trump said, "We're going to close the border and then we're just going to get rid of the worst of the worst." They forgot to tell everybody they were just going to kill American citizens and that Steven Miller was going to go on the south lawn of the White House and say, "You actually have immunity for doing whatever that you want." Nor did they tell you, for example, that they were going to pull grandmothers off of their lawns when they were gardening and throw them into a van with mass men and put them in a hole and not give them due process. And so these fluid voters who were foreclosing the border were not for inhumane treatment. and they saw themselves in a way that they went that is not what we voted for. ICE is out of control. ICE is a paramilitary

organization. It has got to be reigned in and it has got to be changed. ICE now has more money than almost every other agency. And by the way, ICE is new. ISIS has not been with us forever. I mean, ICE wasn't around before 2001. So, this idea that it's some kind of sacred institution, they're hiring people that are not qualified. They're hiring people that are not trained. They are supervising people in a way that they supervision doesn't matter because they have been given free reign to do things that are extra constitutional. And that organization, however it is that you find a way to do it, it needs to be changed. We can be tough and smart. Now, I'll end with this. On Sunday, what's today? Two days ago, I thought to myself, wouldn't it be wonderful that Trump got the message because there actually is some really wonderful things we could do with immigration reform and housing. two things that you could just

roll off on the same thing on universal care, especially if you put Trump's name on it. And wouldn't it be great if he got religion and heard the American people and decided that he was actually going to work through, as Sarah has said, trying to get to a good place and then he appointed Steven Miller. I'm just going to tell you, it's like Lucy with the football with Charlie Brown. Every time you think this guy maybe has a has an iota of humanity, he comes and reminds you that no, he does not. And so I just don't think you can bring a knife to a gun battle. And I think it's going to be very, very difficult to negotiate how to go forward. And we're just going to have to figure out the best pathway and still stay true to our principles and be strong about it.

I think this president just wanted someone even more unlikable than him in the cuck chair in the Oval Office after their historic loss in on Tuesday. La

last question. I'll I'll let you all go. Um Mitch and Senator Van Holland, um I know you have publicly talked about considering running for president in 2028. Um I assume you have chosen this panel at this moment to announce your intentions. Um but look, I having been on a few of these campaigns myself, I've always thought that the the most important question you can ask yourself uh two questions when you're running for president or if you're going to run for president is why me and why now? Um, so talk about your thought process, your decision-making process as you kick the tires or whatever the cliche is that everyone says about maybe running for president. Um, how are you thinking about it and and why do you think um that you might have the unique abilities to lead the country in 2028?

Sure. And I will say this, John, and the vote from the American people that we witnessed just on Tuesday was an affirmation of my belief in our democracy. And I believe that it was also a vote of hope in what Congress and Democrats will do. And the conversation as to what the next Democratic president will do will kick off very shortly. And it's my belief that we need to change the way we look at how we tackle the biggest issues in our country, political corruption and the broken economic system that flows for it from it. And I am someone who fundamentally believes we need to change the structure of our economic system which is stacked in favor of people who make money off of money and against people who earn a paycheck for hard work. We do need Medicare for all. And I'm going to close with this point. We don't need more of the finger in the wind stuff. We were just talking about immigration. I remember early in the

Trump administration when the Trump folks abducted off of the streets of Maryland a guy by the name of Kilmora Brago Garcia in complete violation of his constitutional rights. Went down sent him down to a gulag in El Salvador. There were a lot of Democrats back then who criticized me for going down to El Salvador and saying we need to bring him back. I expected the push back from the White House. What I did not expect was the pundits who were essentially sniping from the sidelines. And I think the American people stood with standing up for our Constitution in that instance.

And I I'll just say one more thing, John, and this started with the Biden administration. We did as a country look the other way. While our taxpayers were used, taxpayer dollars were used by the Netanyahu government to drop bombs that have devastated Gaza. Just take a look at the pictures. Civilians killed, complete destruction of Gaza. We've allowed our taxpayer dollars to be used to deepen the occupation of the West Bank. I've been to the border of Egypt and Gaza twice. The first time I went in, the city of Rafa was still standing.

The second time, after President Biden said he's going to draw a red line and prevent the destruction of Rafa, when I looked in, it was gone. I have been fighting from day one to make sure that US foreign policy aligns with our values. We've had a lot of votes in the United States Senate, in Congress on this. It was very lonely. There are only a very few of us who are willing to stand up for principle early on. Now the country is clearly in a different place. But I will conclude with this John, I do think to the point we've made, people will disagree with us. They may not like our ideas, but they want people who are going to level with them. And they want people who are true to their values and convictions, not people waiting for the next pundits or next poll or next Washington lobbyist to come up with an alternative idea. I trust the American people and this election was a reason for us to believe

in our democracy and that's why I'm kicking the tires and I will make a decision uh sometime in early January.

All right. Mr. Landrew, first of all, I love Chris and I think you should run. I think you'd be a great president. So, good luck to you. Um, I Let me see if I can answer it this way. I feel like in the last 50 years, America has has lost its way um across Democratic and Republican uh administrations. And when it became clear that our children were not likely to have a better life than us, I think things started fraying. And whether it was free trade or open trade and the hollowing out of, you know, our neighborhoods in the country, people started feeling disassociated and alienated from each other. And because of September 11th and the forever wars and then the Wall Street debacle that we had and then the election the conditions that elected Donald Trump, American people turned on each other and two things happened. One um it gave rise congresswoman as you said to this MAGA extreme which by the way had existed in

the south for a long long time. This is not anything new to us, but it's the first time that it actually made it in the halls of Congress with a Confederate flag on January 6th and into the White House. And now Stephen Miller being the chief of staff is the epitome of putting power in the hands of an individual that does not believe in the promise of America. JD Vance gave a speech not long ago talking about this nation not being a credle nation. In other words, we're not here because of the idea of America. That is exactly why we're here. Because America is the greatest idea that has ever had, which is simply stated that we're all created equal and that we come to the table of democracy as equals with equal opportunity and equal responsibility. That very notion is being challenged by the greatest powers that ever were right now. And if we lose that, we do not have a country that we all say that we know and we love. And I

think that we can't let that stand. I think that that has to be the fight of the future. The second thing is that the American dream, the covenant that we made with each other is that if you really work hard, your kids are going to have a better life than you. You're going to be able to support your family. That American dream is gone because the system is in fact rigged. And if we don't relitigate those two things, then I think we're going to have a challenge. What yesterday or the other day demonstrated to us is that the hope and the dreams of America are still alive.

The seeds of freedom are still there. And in 2028, we are going to all of us, irrespective of who runs, however many people do, think about how America is going to recapture winning the 21st century because we're behind now. We have been given a chance to govern. We have the responsibility to do it well. And that's why so many people are thinking about now lending their voice. And from my perspective, the more the marrier, the better. Because it seems to me that if we get it right, nothing but blue skies ahead of us. Thank you,

Mitch Landrew. Ladro, Sarah McBride, Chris Van Holland. Thank you so much. Thanks to all of you for coming. This episode is brought to you by the International Rescue Committee. Imagine a child asking you for water and knowing there's none to give or putting your hand on a hot little forehead without any medicine to cure the ailing or at the very least ease their suffering. That's the reality right now in conflict zones like Sudan, Gaza, and Afghanistan. Children are suffering without access to enough food, clean water, or basic medical care. You can help. The International Rescue Committee is on the ground in over 40 countries around the world, delivering urgently needed nutrition, health care, clean water, and other emergency supplies where they're needed most. And for a limited time, your gift can make an even greater impact. Today, every donation to the IRC will be matched to rush even more

critical aid to children and families trying to survive the world's worst humanitarian crisis. Your support helps make a life-saving difference for children in need. Give now at rescue.org/rebuild. That's rescue.org/rebuild. This episode is brought to you by Maiden. I love Maiden. I didn't even know that they were a sponsor until I sat down today. I've been a big fan of Maiden for a while. I have one of their uh knives that I use all the time. I have a bunch of their plates that I use all the time. I actually got it because I did a ton of research when I was buying things for my kitchen. They were like the best stuff at a good price.

That was my genuine like from my own personal research, I was such a fan of theirs and I definitely love their stuff. If you're considering the pros and cons of different cookware brands, you should know that Maiden has more of the pros. Pros like Tom Kikio and Brooke Williamson and many other professional chefs who all trust their cooking to Maiden cookware. Fact is, Maiden has a long-standing relationship with professional chefs. The company evolved from a 100-year-old kitchen supply business and works with multigenerational craftsmen to make each piece. They make exactly what demanding chefs are looking for, including a wide selection of curated products from carbon steel to stainless clad, plus plate, glassware, and more. But perhaps the biggest pro is that made is sold online and delivered to your door. If you want to take your cooking to the next level, invest in maiden cookwware.

Once you try it, you'll be promade, too. For full details, visit maidenookwear.com. That's m a d i ncookwear.com. Like made in m a d i ncookwear.com. Hey everybody. Uh, welcome to Crooked Con. I'm John Love and it is my great privilege to have Michigan Senator Alyssa Slacken here with us.

What a week. So, you were a CIA analyst uh before you went into politics. If you and you worked on the presidential daily brief.

Yeah. If you were in a role as a int as an intelligence analyst for a foreign leader for a Mark Carneer European leader and you were going to brief a leader on what's happening in American politics post-election, what is the dynamics? How would you uh brief that leader?

I mean, well, first of all, hello everyone. Um, first of all, I would have a headline that would just say Donald Trump: Shellact. Um, and then, um, I think the the next kind of, um, section would be that the American public said two or three things really clearly. one, um they are desperate in their economic dreams for themselves and their kids that they not be um forgotten and they were willing to vote with their feet. And number two, they want a new generation of leaders that looks different and works harder. And then lastly, they want big and bold ideas to support those economic dreams.

So somewhere in there with some much more anodine boring language I would brief uh a foreign leader. So, just before the election, uh, right-wing media was circulating a damning, uh, video of you in which you said something that I found quite reassuring, uh, which was basically how you were thinking about an approach to investigations and oversight given the sheer breadth of breadth of topics that you could be uh, looking at. And I'm curious how you're thinking about that today.

Yeah. So, let's talk about I mean, because we're all still kind of on on this high from the election and I was talking to some of the incoming freshman senators today and they're just like riding on adrenaline at this point, right? I mean, they have done incredible work across the country. Um, but the work really begins now that we have this kind of majority. So, what do you do with that majority? Um, I think it's three things. Number one, absolutely first and foremost is we have to actually pass legislation that helps Americans lives. I would start with health care and prescription drugs personally, but and then if the president wants to veto those things, let him in front of the American people as a populist go ahead and veto.

Number two, we need to have accountability for violations of the law and abuses of taxpayer dollars. And to do that, we should look at these signature cases, right? You can't um make it your whole personality. You have to actually show that you're helping the American people because their pocketbooks is just such an obsession for people rightly right now. But these signature cases, these, think about um the reflecting pool, think about the abuse of taxpayer dollars to enrich people, things that violate the law. You have to have these signature cases. And then third, um much less sexy, you have a group of folks who are focused on how do we trump the government so no other president, Democrat or Republican, can ever do what this man did. So those are the three things.

So, uh, there's a potential impeachment vote for Hegsth that's coming in the House. Thomas Massie, who's outgoing, has promised to bring his impeachment resolution to the floor. Is an impeachment trial for Pete Hegsth. Uh, does that fit in what you would like to see or do you think it's maybe not the right direction?

Look, I just don't think that is enough, right? Because I think the the and I've voted to impeach Donald Trump twice and we're still here dealing with him. I think you have to demonstrate that we will uphold the law and there are people around this president that have put themselves and their support of the president above the law and those people there there needs to be accountability for that and I you know they've literally threatened again to have the department just of justice investigate me for that sentence. Okay. And um but you no one is above the law. And so it's not just about going after the cabinet level officials or the president. It is also about saying if you're going to abuse taxpayer dollars and violate the law on behalf of this president, you too are going to be held accountable.

So the two ways in which I think you've drawn this eye from the administration, one was around saying that officials in the military that that members of the military have an obligation to follow the law and not follow illegal orders. Uh for that Trump said that you should be killed, right? That you should be executed. Uh you also said that uh that you want there to be an understanding that in the future if someone does uh violate the law on behalf of the administration going into the administration and then doing that people should be deterred from doing that which again is eminently reasonable point for which they are trying to investigate you. That's the sentence. Uh Donald Trump said on election night something to the effect of wanting to work with Democrats. Then the next day he appoints Steven Miller uh or the next few days Steven Miller to be chief of staff. Uh Medicaid cuts are coming on

January 1st. Government shutdown looms. I think when Trump says he wants to work with Democrats, I think he'd like to show Hakeem Jeff the ballroom. Uh there is a tension right between investigation and the potential of Donald Trump's signature being on say an a repeal of Medicaid cuts. How do you think about that tension? I don't see it as as stark attention because my job as a senator and all these folks who just got elected around the country, their job is to make the lives of their constituents better. So, I have always said, especially coming from Michigan, um I'm going to work across the aisle if on a veterans bill or an agriculture bill or something that will help the lives of my people any day of the week, right? even if I can't stand, you know, some of the things that my co-sponsor has said because my obligation is to the people that I represent. So, I don't I don't feel this strong that strong of

attention. And if you're from a swing state, if you're from the middle of the country, we live that, right? I I've never won my town. I've never won my precinct. I've never won my neighbors. I live in a rural red town. Um, but I still work with my town supervisor. He was my plus one at Trump's inauguration because I couldn't get any Democrat to go with me and he's a fanboy. And so, you see what I'm saying? Like, we live with that tension, but it has to be about helping the people you represent.

What would you like to see a Democratic Congress do to use this power to end the Iran war? Well, look, I mean, the I think the president um has to have seen that so much of what just happened was again because of people's pocketbooks, which he very specifically hurt with his war, with his tariffs, and with his just general chaos. And but I I if he's not thinking about this is why it would [clears throat] be a perfect time to fire Pete Higgsef. Perfect time. Um and Um, so I think look, the mop-up job, right, the mop-up job to help people's pocketbooks is end the war, cancel many of the really sloppy, stupid tariffs, um, and figure out what we're going to do about these Medicaid cuts. If you want to help people's pocketbooks, those are the three things in the mop-up job portion of the work that we need to do.

So, you're pretty critical of of Vance, who wrote this Twitter essay as if he were a pundit. Yeah. About uh boy, this Iran war is unpopular. People sure are concerned about affordability. Uh and you responded saying, "Hey, man, you're the vice president. You're responsible." Uh but beyond just the kind of I don't know the the glib kind of politicization that he's doing there, what does it tell you about the levers to put pressure on the administration to make changes whether it's on tariffs or on the Iran war? Well, look, I I took deep offense to that because um maybe it's because I worked at the Pentagon and the CIA, but a lot of people in my community, my friends are people who are currently deployed right now because of this war.

We've got 50,000 US forces activated and in the Middle East. And he's talking about like, I'm the vice president and uh this war is bad, right? It's like, you got us to this place. There are people in harm's way. There are people who have died because of your decisions, right? So, you don't get to slip out of it. You don't get to say, "Well, I was this voice of descent that I don't have agency." You're the vice president of the United States. Um, and you made this decision to go to war. Own it. Okay? And either you couldn't stop it because you're so weak and have no voice with the president, or you supported it.

Those are your two choices. Um, but you don't get to write some sort of speech afterwards to try to save your own future presidency. um while you've sent men and women to die um on behalf of this country. So I took offense to it at just a sort of a primordial level um as someone who's did three tours in Iraq. Um and I I think um but what it says is there are clearly deep divisions within the White House, within the MAGA movement. I mean, you know, we've all had that moment where we've looked at Marjorie Taylor Green's tweet and we're like, why do I agree with that tweet?

like we've you know the the so like I think it's fair to say things are shifting um but I I think what it you know at the end of the day if these people are truly populists they have to have heard the message that was sent on Tuesday night. They have to understand that the American people are so fearful about their ability to like see their kids do better than them. That it is driving them in some cases in places like Kansas and Iowa to vote for people that that they've ne they've never voted for Democrats, some of these people. So, we need to hear that. And by the way, not over interpret the results that somehow people love Democrats again.

Okay, let's not make that mistake. Yeah. I feel like there's some three-time Trump voters who like woke up Wednesday morning like they were on a bender and they're like, "What happened last night? Who did I vote for? Oh my god, that's crazy." Uh, so you talked about divides on the right. Uh, in this there's obviously it's a great moment for Democrats, but there are there remains divisions within our party, believe it or not. Uh, there's about to be a question about who the Senate leadership should be. Uh, are you planning to vote for Chuck Schumer to be the Senate Majority Leader?

Well, look, I um I've been very vocal um that I think we need a new generation of leadership

and and I think we couldn't have gotten a clearer signal of that than what happened on Tuesday night. And I think we need to hear that. And for me, um, we have to have the American people understand that we have absorbed their confidence and and like their vote and we're doing something about it. That for me means like look, if he if he wants to be a majority leader, what is your plan for the first 100 days? How are you going to do things differently so that Democrats get their together? And if you can't produce that, I'm not voting for you. And he needs a quorum um to hold a vote, even if he's the only person who runs. Um and I personally am I I don't think people should be giving him that quorum. If he hasn't had to come to the caucus and say, "Look, I've heard what happened.

Here's what I'm going to do differently." And if you can't do that, you don't deserve someone's vote. So, it is remarkable, right? We've just had the most extraordinary 50-year wave victory, and we're in a room full of enthusiastic Democrats, and the leader of the Democratic Party in the Senate gets booed in a room like this. And I think some of that is earned, right? Some of that is based on feeling as though he is not putting up the level of fight or strategy that he's not uh uh meeting where Democrats expect a leader to be. But also part of the job of a Senate leader is to kind of take the arrows, right? And uh like at the end of the Dark Knight, like he's not the leader we want, but he's the leader we deserve. Uh how do you separate that? How do you separate the way in which it's a thankless job and the ways in which he has not done the job you want him to do?

Look, leadership is often thankless and I feel lucky that I um worked alongside the military my whole life and like talk about a place that thinks about leadership, right? Um um so there's no way around it. Being at the the top of the food chain um or the commander of the team, you're going to take those arrows. part of the gig. That's what you need to accept when you get the big job. That's part of it. Um, and I have worked under all different kinds of leaders. What I think we we need to sort of process um is that what the what Tuesday night told us is that the country is interested in different ways of using power, different ways of pushing back.

We're in a new era now. It is not the era of 30 years ago in the Senate when the strongly worded letter meant something in this town. And so I am interested in working with people and working as a team across ideological lines working as a team to exert power in different ways to exert a message in different ways. And I want a leader who can do that, who can say, "Look, I've seen I've read the I've read the room, and we need to think differently about the voices we push forward, the things we go for. We can't just have it like, you know, 56 different CEOs who are all doing their different thing. We need to play as a team. And I'm interested in anyone, especially my freshman colleagues, my sophomore colleagues with me who are interested in a different way of exerting power.

Senator Slankin, here's something interesting. There's never been a woman majority leader in the history of the Senate.

As of right now, part of the challenge is nobody has said they'd be willing to run other than Chuck Schumer. Uh certainly sounds like Chris Van Holland has his eyes set on a different kind of campaign. Uh, you sure sound like you have ideas about what a majority leader to do. Why don't you run for Senate majority leader?

Well, look, I think we're we're quite literally on text chains right now still counting the votes in Alaska and Mississippi. But I think this is like it's an open field and I think those conversations are happening um rapidly um between uh Democrats I mean new Democrats who just won, Democrats in the sophomore class, the freshman class. I think there's a quite a bit of of upward pressure. I don't have any big announcements to make, but those conversations are happening right now.

Wow. So, I I'm not I don't want to press you to say more than what you're willing to say, but it does that's not a no. It sounds like you're saying you're not saying no, I won't run for majority leader. Look, like I want um uh I I think that it is important that we have people who are looking and look, we just had to live this in Michigan, right? That people who have different views on different issues can still work together for the betterment of the country. That is who I what I am here for. I'm not ruling anything out.

Wow. Yeah. So you were on Pod Save America in 2024 when we were in Ann Arbor and I remember when you were uh uh there talking about first of all you were warning people about what you were seeing in Michigan and this was before uh the election obviously uh and you talked about the unique dynamic between Muslim and Arab Americans and Jewish Americans and the way that those communities were very integrated going to the same schools living in the same neighborhood hoods at the time your father was ill and his doctors were Arab and Muslim American.

And so before we get to the politics, I I'm curious what the impact of what had been a very contentious campaign, a campaign in which you'd had both Republicans and outside groups like Apac running incredibly divisive ads. Uh and what it felt like on the ground in Michigan, the impact of that.

I mean, I think for most of us, this election cycle was very stressful. um very intense and I think most Michiganers are deeply happy it's over right now. We're a swing state. That happens in every election cycle. Our TVs are full of crazy ads and um and that kind of thing. But I think this one in particular got really nasty. Um and um so I think there's a sense of relief. Um I think for um many people there's a sense of pride that um I mean Abdul and I represent the youngest Senate delegation. Um we um um we are the first delegation where neither of us have has ever taken corporate pack money which is new for the Senate. Um and um actually on the age thing, we told we just figured this out today that um Abdul's age plus my age is still younger than Chuck Grassley.

Um so um there's a div, you know, there's a there's a different tone, a different vibe, but I think

but but you we all agree that Chuck Grassley is young and spry and should remain in his job right now and not consider stepping down before there's a Democratic governor. Um, I will leave that to Iowa. But I I think um I think the the thing that I hope um not that it's always easy, but I also hope that in in addition to being fighters for Michigan that um I think it is important for my state and maybe beyond my state to see a senior Jewish woman and Muslim man working out their differences, debating each other, but working together and um in our best moments in Michigan. Um that is how we all grew up. I mean quite literally. And so I I think the um there's a lot of interest I think in both of us in making that a reality um coming off of a very divisive and difficult election cycle.

So, you were among the majority of Democrats who voted yes on a resolution in April that was about uh ending a subset of of military aid to Israel. Uh there were two resolutions. You were a yes on both. Some of your colleagues were a yes on one. Uh the number that have been supporting resolutions like that has grown, including uh your vote, right? you had the previous April you had been a no. So I'm curious what changed for you uh and how you see your role going forward. I talked about this with Brad Lander who's an incoming uh uh freshman. I talked about this with Abdul and what it looks like for Democrats to shape a policy that's not just about stopping what is clearly not working, but shaping something that is a positive view of how to use our leverage with Israel towards both a solution, but also the dignity and and and human rights of Palestinians.

Yeah. I mean, I think I I would just say that the resetting of the relationship is happening in real time. I mean it was the day before the election but the president of the United States said BBB Netanyahu asked me to not send more money. I mean the there there is meaning over $3 billion. So I think there's um uh a real conversation especially with the Israeli elections as well that's how what is the future of the USIsrael relationship look like and how do we graduate from this model of financial dependence and US taxpayer dollars um funding huge portions of their defense budget. How do we change that to rightsize it for a very different moment in our history and a very different moment in their history? And there's um you know BB gave a speech about this. I mean this is it's interesting to me that it's happening on both sides of the ocean. Um and I think that that is right. I think that that um for me what

was different um last April or two April ago maybe um was um the the literally weaponizing of um [snorts and clears throat] humanitarian aid. And as someone who served three tours in Iraq, who watched the US military up close and personal, I understand what is a violation of the law of war. What is the use um of military force, excessive use of force in a way that the United States would never be able to do um in a war zone. So that to me um kind of broke me and um that's why I I voted the way I did and have since then. Um but I think the um the the kind of overall message um is the country wants something different um and we need to hear that um and need to use that leverage appropriately.

the the contentiousness of the debate in Michigan in those final weeks, I think, uh, for me led to a lot of conversations about this issue with with Jewish friends who had concerns with, uh, people that didn't understand where uh, each other were coming from. And one of the things I realized in that discussion was there's a lot of I think pro-Israel uh voices. There's a lot of Jewish people that have from a very young age associated uh uh supporting Israel with what it means to be proud of being Jewish [snorts] and they see a lot of rising antipathy towards Israel. There has also been anti-semitism on the left and that makes them really anxious. it it it it hits something really personal and and and deep. Uh and then I think, well, what's causing all of this? And I think, well, there's this big missing piece, right? that should the the concern be directed at people with criticisms at Israel or should it be

directed at pro-Israel politicians and organizations that are just banking on some old assumptions that don't apply anymore that America's always been an ally to Israel when there's a whole generation of people that have only known Israel as a wealthy and powerful country that have never heard anyone make a case for why we have this relationship especially in the wake of the Iran war and It does seem like there's been an absence of leadership of people that claim to be pro-Israel explaining what a moral righteous version of that policy could ever be. Joe Biden was incomprehensible by the end of his administration to be honest and was so locked with BB that people found it enraging and incomprehensible in the policy. And so I'm curious how you see your role going forward as someone who has tried to, you know, build a relationship with uh uh communities that have deep concerns about Israel

correctly and with the Jewish community. Uh what you see your role is going forward in finding that new kind of a consensus. Yeah, I would say there are plenty of people in the Jewish community who have concerns about the

and of course and and that's the right this is it gets at this inherent tension um and which is many many people in the Jewish community feel um that there's no distinction between um the the threats against Israel and the threats against them. There is very real in a very real way growing anti-semitism and I see it every day. the synagogue that I know very very well was attacked um in Michigan like this year. I mean, we've had threats on Jewish institutions in a very real way. That's not made up. That's not hyperbole. Um, and I think that the the um certainly in the Jewish community, there's so much fear that people are um approaching uh discussions about Israel and BB Netanyahu and the the um bad behavior of the military. um they're approaching it from like a crouch, a defensive crouch, and they don't want to say publicly anything negative because they're they're worried that that will

reverberate. And they're so worried about their own security that they don't want to let in any crack um of criticism um to add to that pile. And I think um that's that that just is um something we're trying to work through. And I I think that this is, you know, our Muslim communities um are struggling with threats on their institutions and worried about um what's happening in their communities. And so I I'm trying to see how as a leader um I can try and bring those conversations together. And you have to reassure people that at first and foremost we're going to do everything for their security at home in Michigan. Um, but we need to be able to have an honest conversation about the behavior of BB Netanyahu um, and the military in Gaza. You can have those two separate conversations.

Last question. Uh, you were in Iowa in De Moines and you were asked about this and you said that you're not so arrogant as to think it has to be you that runs for president. Uh, but if it comes to the point after the midterms that you think there's not anyone else who's on the right path, you wouldn't say no forever. Is it a relief to know that every single other person on earth is going to run

and therefore you can kind of forget about it? Is that is that what you're thinking?

Right. I'm going to I'm going to watch the buffet um and see what's there. And look, I mean the the

But you'll be busy as majority leader, right? I I think I think look um we're all trying to absorb the lessons of what just happened on Tuesday. We're all trying to say to ourselves um how do we take what we've gotten and do something with it and demonstrate that once we actually get the majority, we can do something thoughtful and smart that actually helps people. Um and then um we need people who are going to be able to carry that energy in the next election cycle. And my experience with um in general with elected leaders in Washington is that a lot of them are like running the like circa 1997 presidential play, right?

Like you write a book and then you go to this and then you do and and a time of choices,

right? I think I think what this last um week told us is that the public is looking for something different. There isn't just this well-worn path of one way to do things that the public is so desperate for that new generation and big and bold ideas that they will they think bigger than I think a lot of the kind of old political hands in Washington think. So I'm excited about that. You just need to step outside Washington to feel it. Um, and I'm excited that that's going to mean we should have a busy, robust primary. We should accept it, people, right? How many years have we been told like we need to winnow it down like it's going to be big and messy and that's fine and that's fine and just we should demand of people. We should demand of people like what are you going to do? I don't it can't just be a vibes election. What are you going to do? Tell us those big and bold ideas and how you're going to lead.

Senator Alyssa Slaken, thank you so much. Great talking to you. Thanks everybody.

That's our show for today. Hope you enjoyed it. Dan and I will be back on Friday with a brand new episode of Podsave America. Talk to everyone soon. Pod America is a crooked media production. Our show is produced by Austin Fischer, Saul Rubin, McKenna Roberts, and Michael Goldsmith with Reed Cherlin, Elijah Conn, and Adrien Hill. Our team includes Matt Dro, Ben Heftat, Jordan Caner, Charlotte Landis, Kenny Moffet, Adam Liipper, Joseph Dutra, Desmond Taylor, Dan Farrell, David Tols, Mia Kelman, Ryan Young, and Naomi Single. Our staff is proudly unionized with the Writers Guild of America East.

Questions about this episode

Who speaks in "Democrats' 2027 Priorities: Fight To End Trump's Iran War, Lower Prices & Medicare For All"?

John Favro (Host), Chris Van Holland (Guest), Sarah McBride (Guest), Electros (Guest), Mitch Landrew (Guest), Alyssa Slacken (Guest).

What is "Democrats' 2027 Priorities: Fight To End Trump's Iran War, Lower Prices & Medicare For All" about?

Democrats aim to end the Iran war, lower prices, and expand Medicare for All, arguing a bold policy shift will reassure voters, cut costs at the pump and grocery store, and deliver universal healthcare. The discussion emphasizes reframing the Democratic brand, appealing to both traditional supporters and new voters with concrete policy commitments.

What is mentioned in this Pod Save America episode?

79 people, works and ideas are mentioned, including Democratic Party, Donald Trump, Iran war (2026), Medicare for All, Senate, Medicaid. Each one on this page links to its own page with every episode that mentions it.

How long is "Democrats' 2027 Priorities: Fight To End Trump's Iran War, Lower Prices & Medicare For All"?

The episode runs 1 h 43 min; the transcript is about 17,919 words in 148 timestamped sections.

More from Pod Save America

About this transcript: the episode's spoken words as captioned on YouTube, split into timestamped sections. Reclip.Me locates every person, work and idea in the text, keeps the time it is first named, and quotes the words around it verbatim. Last updated November 10, 2026.