A genuine split — 8 shows land on three different arguments, with no consensus in the arena.
Move forward. And I would just say that um if we are looking for salvation in the Democratic party that we will be uh massively disappointed that will not happen. Right? Our political system right now, our duopoly, the political duopoly that we have is not structured for full and complete representation or happiness in the political process. We need different ways of reform. Rank choice voting is one example of that where which would allow for more voters to have their voices be reflected in the candidate that ultimately gets elected. What we're seeing is that the where where a candidate earns the majority of voters AC and there's multiple candidates in the field does not necessarily mean that the standardbearers are therefore um fully representative of the the voting electorate. Right? So we need to new ways to think about and conceive of electoral reform. These are very common sense mechanisms as well that are available to us. And ultimately I would say we need to come together as a country and there are indications of divisiveness in the New York race in particular um that I think that we can overcome. um that most Americans want a politics that is normal um that is not show right I'm not talking about New York specifically I'm talking about in general right they want
Well, we're we're only targeting gerrymander districts. This is not a complete election. This is a strategic plan to take out the two-party system to go run this system as favorable in gerrymander district. Quite frankly, it probably won't work as well in a swing district or a naturally uncompetitive district. You want to go into a district where there are opposition votes that are buried that you can swing like in a red district to elect a pink non-affiliated conservative and not affiliated with the party and and to do the opposite in a in a blue district is that you know you basically give voice to the opposition party that's been buried through gerrymandering. So that our contest does that and they do it by weighing in on these issues. they can at least get a few of their issues out of these representatives and push the representation pink or baby blue. So, we want to create two factions, not a third party, two moneyless factions in Congress um that aren't influenced by party whips. That's how you break the bind of money. So, let's say that this main street party works and now you've got, let's say, 30 or, you know, 90 people in Congress that are part of the main street party. Are they just free to vote on their own? Is there going to be any kind of party leadership? What happens then? I mean, we're really talking about restoring the way Congress worked back in the 50s and 60s when you had liberal Republicans and conservative Democrats and you'd four factions within Congress. We're looking
Every single day with people coming to the Morgan Morgan Clinic >> Mhm. >> for medical care. That's that's their whole deal. There's a lot of those people out there and we could do over and over again. So, I believe what's going to happen in America is I believe the progressive movement is going to get bigger and bigger and bigger. >> Is that why you got your uh the party that you're trying to put together, the common ground party? >> So, you about to So, politics is where you about to go next. Then, it sounds like >> common ground. I had a contest to have I I think we need a third party because you can't compromise. I had a friend in Florida. He he did a constitution amendment to restore felons rights. Listen, man. If you do your time, you should be able to vote >> absolutely >> in this country. And guess what, my friend? He did it in Florida. And guess what? They passed that constitutional new cuz most people agree on most things when you take the D and the R down. So, what I believe is all this gerrymandering. I mean, look, you got you you know, look at South Carolina where you're from. I mean, it's it's just locked and loaded. Red, red, red, red, red. But there's no compromise. So what I'm thinking about this party common ground is a party in the middle. Yeah, we like some of this stuff on the left. Yeah, we like some of this stuff on the right. Let us be the tiebreaker. Let us be Cuz look, here's >> true moderates again. There's no true moderates anymore. >> There's no true moderates. >> Yeah. Bill Clinton was a true moderate. >> True. Yes. And and listen, believe it or not, so was Barack Obama
Prominent Democrats in the state is doing what she's doing uh on behalf of big tech. But at the same time, it gives me an opening to people who vote differently than me or are independent or are looking for something different because they see that I'm absolutely willing to call that BS out on both sides. It's a it's a bridge issue in that way because I think really what people are tired of is party loyalty at a time when both parties seem to be primarily loyal to their donors. There's there's a bit of a catch22 when it comes to running as an independent in this country. Like if if you run as an independent, but there's also a somewhat credible Democrat on the ballot and they cleave off like, you know, 15 20% of the vote, then it's going to be enough for the other major party candidate to get, you know, move first past the post. The way that Bernie Sanders handled that in Vermont, so what he does is he runs in the Democratic primary, he wins it, and then he rejects the nomination. And so then the Democrats can't put somebody on the ballot. I wonder what have you looked into what Michigan's law is around this question? Like would you be able to win the nomination and then reject it and say, you know what, I'm actually going to run as an independent because I imagine in your in the upper peninsula there, there are a lot of people who would agree with your politics, but are but the brand of the Democratic party is just so toxic that it's going to be hard for them to overcome it. really the the election law here in Michigan is uh such that you have to have um more petition signatures if you're running on an independent line
Your rule may not be constitutional. My rule may not be constitutional either. I like your rule, by the way. I'm just not sure it would pass muster. Depends on the court. Takes us to another problem. But I'll tell you what you should do. There should be a rule that political parties cannot control primaries. Now the Supreme Court has ruled on this and they have said yeah they can they get to determine who's in their club just like any other club. Ah yes but there is no country club running my democracy and that's what makes this different and it wasn't argued in that case. What was argued in the case was Brian doesn't get to tell Chris who's allowed to be in his club. Chris gets to say who gets to be in his club. Okay, we agree on that. Okay. Yeah, that's not the issue. Congress should pass a law. Democrats should push that the primaries cannot be closed. They have to be open. Or you do a top two, top four. Some type of rank choice has to be involved. If >> you do that, I think that the American people win. >> I also think your party wins, by the way. But let's say it doesn't. Let's say it's neutral. That would be a huge fix for the problem we have right now, which is what onethird of the population has over 50% of the representation. And I think that other than changing the Senate, which we can't do, you're not going to change the electoral college. Need a constitutional amendment unless >> Well, no, you need the national popular vote uh the national popular vote interstate compact. That could that
Signature matching and witness requirements for absentee ballots, and redrawn their districts in ways that, on any reasonable read of historical record, did exactly what preclearance had been designed to they are bringing back Jim Crow. You can call it Trump and now they're trying to reconstruct the southern autocracy and the one party state that existed for most of this country's existence. and I know all of this, it's not exactly inspiring, but I think that everyone should also understand how politics works in a one party authoritarian state like the American Southern autocracy. Well, you still have time to stop the thing about autocracy is operating inside of a constitutional system is that it still holds elections, it still passes budgets, and it still produces idealistic young people who want to do good in the world and find out very quickly what doing good is actually going to cost them. And then life still goes and right now, we get to be kind of picky about who we align ourselves with and who we denounce and exile from our coalition. But if we do not win, and when I say we, I do not mean the Democratic Party. Though many are using the Democratic Party as a vehicle. it's just really anyone who would not consider themselves a Trump if we do not win in November and in 2028, exercising such a luxury is basically committing suicide because the political map is going to be so radically different. what is a red line today that becomes a bargaining chip tomorrow if we do not national opposition parties in one party states, they have to reshape themselves in order to survive. And ultimately they become complicit in the impression that they want to the Southern Democratic Party was the only party that northern liberals could operate inside of if they wanted any federal power at all, and it produced hideous compromises. the northern liberals knew that they were hideous, but they made them anyway because there was no other game in town. And the alternative was doing FDR, arguably the most progressive president we've ever had, was a Democrat, and so was Mr. Segregation, Strom and FDR was only able to pass the New Deal reforms
Think it was back when Ross Perot ran uh for president yeah as uh I think he was an independent if I'm not mistaken and he was beating Bill Clinton in the polls um you know both parties saw that as a direct threat to themselves and got together and rigged the system to to um practically speaking shut out a third option well they shot him out the commission for presidential debates which is a privately funded institution yeah which most people don't know yeah which is kind of crazy that that is they change the standards for the debates for the debates yeah they did and then also they uh they changed the Electoral College to make it so that if you have a viable third option basically none of none of the parties will get the number the minimum number of electoral votes through this winner-take-all system uh needed to actually win and then it goes to Congress and then Congress will make that selection and uh so so the electoral college system itself also needs to be reformed to one that is uh proportional so if you know if I were to run for president and win 60 percent of Texas I would get 60 percent of Texas's um electoral votes rather than if you win a state you get all of them all of them right that makes sense um when you say they changed the presidential elections and they changed the Electoral College like who's they the the leadership of both parties if we are threatened by a legitimate
During the last election cycle. We saw during the previous election cycle where Democrats who Americans increasingly do not trust on social issues are expecting the Democrats to moderate on social issues and then offer kind of a pendulum swing to Trump on the economy towards honestly a more corporate is that fact. A technocratic affect is what Americans are looking for. The average American in the economy is looking for a more technocratic approach to the economy. Does that mean that's necessarily the answer? No, just because people want something doesn't mean that's necessarily the answer. However, in this instance it gets a little bit rough for the left. Why? Because right now Democrats should be gaining massive record numbers of people signing up to join the party. And every time a party is in power. So for example, during the entire Joe Biden the term of office, Republican registration surged because the party who is not in power always surges in registration numbers while the other party is in power. It's very easy to be the opposition. It is. So easy to be the opposition, governing's harder. So right now, we should be seeing Democrat registration skyrocket. Are we seeing that? >> Nope. >> And here's why. According to the Morning Consult poll, the ABC and YouGov poll, and then just the straight-up data, more independent voters are being created right now than at any other time in recent history. Instead of Democrats gaining, people are just not registering for any party or registering as independents. You say, "Well, how are Republicans doing?" About normal when it comes to a party who is in power. Meaning that people are saying, "Yeah,
AI-generated from each show's transcript. Tap any timestamp to verify at the source.
One email. The moments worth hearing from 369 shows — timestamped.