Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Oh for PETE's sake. Hello! Welcome to another part of the weeds on the box media Pike, s network. I met her places who would dare Lynn and Jane Coastal, and I wanted to talk today about just in a marsh who has long been. I think one more interesting members of Congress but who got interesting and very interesting way. We did. This is twenty nineteen. So this is how you do things, but it is a republic and member of Congress from Michigan. He did tweet store a saying that he, read the Mulder Report and he had concluded that Donald Trump committed unimpeachable offences deserves a country
Hence inside there probably Ghak, as it's gonna, Anja all kinds of trouble, but I think you know before we delve into the specifics of that. Just like who is this guy right cause like this is not like a motto Republican, whose holding on to a blue leaning district by the skin of his fingers looking too to save his career. This is this is someone who came in. He is a libertarian conservative. He came to Congress as part of the tea party revolution of twenty ten and if you are member. What the tea party was an originally about. The tea party stated that its purpose was to fight for limited government and lower taxes and is getting the state out of the individual lives in homes of everyday Americans. Though, as just an ambush, said to the Washington Post Ethic yesterday, it turns out that isn't exactly what the tea party being about, but anyway, so he represents a pretty conservative part of western western Michigan Holler at my western Michigan homes, but you
he has long been pretty much of a stalwart on issues of importance to the libertarians, their Eric Ericsson. The conservative pundit proposed yesterday thing like he has been real he's staunch on issues of fires. The reform, issues having to do with drones and drone warfare, I've just across the board, very much of a quota and quote constitutional conservative, a thing that still kind of exists, but it turns out that constitutional conservatives aren't very popular with other conservatives when they things those conservatives. Don't like you. Nothing like you know this. Jane is. Definitely there aren't a lot of Republicans in Congress, we're talking about it bright there, like that's the kind of stuff that Rand Paul has generally been ok on air, like he's ennobling greatest on. Rather I as a member of Congress, but there's the kind of less low hanging fruit for a self identified. Libertarian in Congress is what
you do on the government spending money on things. Conservatives like like the military, like immigration enforcement, like the prison system and on that stuff, about she's been even when there is nobody else saying at the saying no. We should not be spending a lot of money on this. No, we shouldn't be just we shouldn't be enthusiastic about the arm of the state, just when it happens to narrow, be doing things. Conservatives, lake and that's caused him. Some tension with the rest of the Freedom caucus, thee, Endlich, the beginning of this kind. a marsh wet and eight or recently at least much what informed the Liberty caucus it's kind of defend this stuff. From a freedom caucus that has increasingly been not only the people in the House, republican caucus who are pushing for extremely aggressive immigration policies, but also a block of prompt loyalists in a Republican, Caucus that you know in both chambers is not always extra, the most enthusiastic about doing whatever.
Yes, it was. Let's talk about like libertarians, like liquids: do you guys both use to be libertarians or something is that right Super Mealey's Nabi? I feel like there's like a small libertarian, who gets all angry and annoyed sometimes, but then generally has a snack and is okay for a little while I have ever known social connections retiring playing, a poker game of libertarians, so the dear of libertarianism, a gas, is there. The government should do anything. No, I'm intended that's anarchism, but later ok. I think I think it useful to start with lake those working there's a finger in an illiterate, lousy in college. There's, like the kind of John Locke Model of how governance works. Retinas, like individual humans are basically pretty good right and if you can get those like basically pretty good rational people too late,
Collectively, you know figure out their own affairs and like yeah, there's some things you need. The government is a coordinating actor formerly generally give a man some property and allow him to participate meaningfully in the political process and your set shut up. That's so I mean the diminution of property is pretty important here, because there is being an ongoing fight among libertarians. For the last like decade, plus over is the more important thing fighting structure. Of oppression generally, whether that's the state, whether that's like religion, which can often be a restriction on autonomy, whether that's like. Sometimes there are very coercive market practices or is this? Is the core of libertarianism? This idea of property rights and therefore you really shouldn't get exercised about other about things like racism or sexism or other things that
and be coercive to individuals like life outcomes, but that do not involve somebody standing on his left right so ended. There has been kind of this long lasting break within libertarians between libertarians could write, libertarianism, which I think the examples, MS as another thinkers who basically made the argument in the signal and a fifth isn't sixties. Essentially that, like the Civil Rights ACT, was in Currently unlaborious areas because it required private actors to do business in a way that you violated their freedoms, but that in general is not an argument that many libertarians make, because, as Dar was pointing out, look tourism, based on one of the ideas of Frederick Hayek, relies in some senses on their gifts spontaneous. What this idea that people are gentle a good and if you let people just kind of
do their own thing, people will self organized in a way that is advantageous for liberty, like the point of libertarianism to libertarians is the pursuit of liberty, and no occasionally there, those it depends on whose liberty and liberty from what and those are a lot of questions, but that's kind of the under girding intrined debate. among libertarians for libertarians was a rise of lake politics that, like politicians at the national level right there is something of a current there's been. I think the law, A decade is maybe like made this a little bit clearer as the kind of culture war aspects have become were sailing in part as in politics, but lake under the older, like Paul Ryan model of what the Republican Party should be right. The idea that the fundamental fight between Democrats and Republicans is over the size of government in that model, libertarians represented the right wing of the Republican Party, will be
they believed in a smaller government than even other Republicans vehicles. This is where I want to try to look like a threefold distant yea. Three things that that libertarianism can me right. I'm is as a very austere, philosophical doktor right right, in which libertarianism means like less right, like less government spending, less government regulation, excluding scepticism of spending on the military, you know, as I was saying things conservatives like, but also things Democrats like, and it puts you to an extent like almost beyond the scope of partisan political conflict in the United States and in some ways- and this is like I took a seminar that was taught Pipe- but knows that when I was in college, you Know- and this is your your oftener in a lofty planting right second is, I think, a notion of a liberty
as someone who is attitude in the Lee favourable to markets on economic policy, hoard liberalism on social, cultural, top, everybody's taken. The lake fork right right now, but that tends to make you a moderate in politics. Pause is not. exactly the same as philosophical libertarianism, because one thing that socially liberal people tend to Lake is anti discrimination. Laws which, in an austere, philosophical sense, is government action but like in an attitude, no sense like I don't love big government Like I'm. I'm cool right, I'm, unlike in the top right quadrant, you may be more akin to enter somebody Lake Susan Collins rate. As a practical politician argued, that space, and that makes you ate you re, moderate Republican. Typically, if you were in that kind of space,
in some cases. Portugal have you come from a very blue state, a moderate demo right right later, that a height of voter who might have looked at Donald Trump and then voted for Democrats in twenty two, exactly Vinnie different stance of libertarianism- and this is, I think, like the tea party in practice, the Freedom caucus in practice is, you are the right wing of the Republican Party, so you say the Civil Rights ACT is an infringement of liberty. It that's an example of out of control, business regulation right, and then you know you ten toward attitudinal cultural conservatism, necessarily because you want, but because no, he's, saying like there should be government enforced segregation right We're saying that, like existing social hierarchies should be allowed to stay, how they are without
who things- and you were saying when Paul Ryan was president of the rain- was influential leader you're, saying like how we gonna cut everything like no compromise. Obama and the things that you are actually prioritizing cutting our like PBS and RE damps. Not how a bit, but that that's where you get the right word faction of house Republicans it totally reasonable for the there will always be a right most faction of has rather guns. They formed a carcass as I needed a name for themselves and when they came up with was the freedom carcass right like they are the true libertarians. Then, when trumped becomes president that group of people becomes the right most faction of House Republicans meaning the trompe ass. To guess, right and here is aware, a marsh who
existed somewhere between, like freedom, caucus, an austere philosophy, wines up having it doesn't getting his because what the freedom colonized himself great. I mean it's nowhere right like it's. It's it's an interesting thing, because this is the impeachment question. The great has honestly nothing to do with small government or anything. It's a question of personal loyalty to Donald Trump and what would ever, The point of a marsh taken. The senses like he is not a personal loyalist Donald Trump right emulate here too, the obvious is not like the rise libertarian as a way to identify the right most can faction in their public party. You can see the seeds of this in the wrong Paul twenty eight rotten, where there was a lot of kind of surprising, heterodox grassroots energy, a lot of people who had not previously been interesting republican, primary politics and this weird Mick.
of people who really liked RON Paul because they thought that he was going to be like better on ending the war is re Reich there were they were more interested in him as a Republican, because he was an anti war republican than they had been previous resolutions and the well, who were like yes, cut everything so ATO and you might have agreed with the things that randalls Paul's newsletters back in the nineties, around blacks, receive proprietors and there's a quote from congressmen, Tom Massey that I'm always always always gonna bring up in this context, because its extremely illustrative also because mass himself has become one of the veto. He's he's gone the direction of the Freedom caucus and, being now a big trumped defender, but when Rand Paul was running president and really not getting a lot of traction and twenty sixteen Massey said you know, ran, and I and the other key partners we came up and twenty ten and there is always grassroots energy, and I was placed great there's. Some enthusiasm for limited government. They really agree with our philosophy and then
and so many of the same people are now supporting Donald Trump, an aerial as they were, to supporting the craziest guy in the room right which is, you know, a more honest and most politicians our assessment of his own base of supporters, but does kind of speak to the way in which Libertarian has become an attitude and all things you a thing that you identify with as a grass roots republican. If you think that you know, if, if it quality is really important to you and government is really important to you and therefore necessarily predict your stance on either social issues or the personal character of Donald Trump right and it Emmy. I think it's a fascinating over us
beginnings of fracturing. That is taking place among conservatives and libertarians, because I think you're saying you'll have talked a lot about the rise of conservative populism and you're, starting to see on the policy side. Certain US senators MIKE Lee and Josh Hawley. Talking about these issues, Josh Hawley, really focusing on social media and social media regulation, but this idea under girding that that what? If using the government to do things we like is good and But if you're, using the power of government against private enterprises that we don't like is also good, which you, if you're just in a marsh or any libertarian, basically ever except for the occasional liberty.
Rights for Claremont, about how breaking up Facebook, is actually a show of Freedom Europe. This is it's a really weird and fascinating spoke, because I think that you are also seeing some conservatives. You I've spoken to some who have talked about how the libertarian influence on conservatism is bad. The number of conservatives self scribe conservatives who brought up Teddy Roosevelt as their government model and kind of said that yield the libertarian influence in this idea that the framework it will fix everything. The invisible hand will solve our problems, yet that's wrong, which it such a fascinating thinks I make you a lot of people have been saying this for forty fifty years, but it's interesting how that split fracturing is growing, and in the midst of that is just in a marsh who is actually not talking in this context about issues having the two as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? He is talking specifically in these two twitter threads about
the issue of the Mulder Report and impeaching Donald Trump. Why did I think the point is that a marsh has become a friendless, but before this twitter, Redriff beat because a marsh was like not playing. These games had become a pie. Sin with no faction we're hungry, rightly, which I think in some ways has let him see this particular question. The Mulder report more clearly Manderson Republicans, but more clearly than Democrat. So I know that you. That is definitely an indication for us to take a break, but I do think that there is one thing, but it's not that this is totally orthogonal to libertarian views at the federal government. There is like a very strong intellectual strand of libertarianism that has been very sceptical of the rising power of the executive branch and the judicial branch over the legislative branch and so impeachment as something that as a remedy that Congress has to check a
of government that libertarians have been very worried about kind of overwhelming Congress is like theirs, salute the consistency for that, and I ve actually even seen some folks saying I agree that the impeachment should be more frequent. I you know either butter Obama should have been impeach schreyer. You know that, like I agree, just imagine that I just don't agree that Europe is the person to impedes it's been interesting. That is not exactly it's. This is definitely in part. The kind of political island visitation of just an ash, but it is also just an ambush saying, if The correctly apply my principles here. I believe that the balance of of the system of checks and balances requires it to do this. let's take a break in them that I want to talk about the specifics of what he said about Molly would live with a lot of noise. The pink dings the emails labelled urgent that aren't really that urgent, it's hard to cut through the static zero on the things that really matter just like we can train our body.
is to be better running faster and lifting heavier. We could train our minds to stay focused to all the noise. We live with step. One download head space hits bases and have loaded with guide you meditations, designed offering daily doses, Mindful ass, it concessions for every situation like a three minute, ESA West Meditation, when you're of well by the day and even medications, you could do with you, kids, when you're all of run by the day, it has been like a really cool thing to have during these sort of difficult pandemic in quarantine. Cunning times has been held sometimes till I get a little time for yourself a little space for yourself, and this is a great way to create some just like a little like isolation around myself. Do something that is cool that helps get me a little more grounded will more centred a little more ready to face the rest of the day, so it is truly a cut above other meditation haps, because it relies on clinically validated research to help. You feel better, improve sleep, boost, focus, reduce stress, you deserved, feel happier and headset is meditation me simple, good, head space Doc slash weeds for a free one month. Try this had space duck
slash weeds for free month with access to head spaces, full library meditations, for every situation. This is the best deal offered right now had to head space dot com such weeds. Today,. So I would just really strongly recommend emerges second twitter thread on this to people, I'm I'm just gonna we'd, he says people who say they were no underline crimes and therefore the present cannot have intended to illegally obstruct the investigation and therefore cannot be impeached, arresting the argument and several falsehoods. What they say that we're Noah underline crimes. In fact, there are many crimes revealed by the investigation, some of which were charge and we were not but are nonetheless described demolish report too. They saved investors requires and underline crime. In fact, obstruction justice does not require the prosecution of an underlying crime and there's a logical reason for that so you just might not charge of crime precisely because obstruction of justice denied them timely access to evidence actively to a prosecution.
If an underline crime were required and prosecutors could obstructs, could charge obstruction justice only if it were unsuccessful and completely obstructing the investigation. This would make no sense. He says a few other things, but I think that's basically right and clearly right and it's interesting. I mean there's a whole context of like the courage visa, be other Republicans and the primary challenges going to face, but what I think is actually interesting about this is that most from critics are also members of the Democratic Party and they invested in a larger sense in the political success of the Democratic Party, and they have not crazy concerns about pushing forward with, eight seemingly unpopular and doomed in the Senate impeachment inquiry precisely because doesn't care about that. He can sort of throw this on the table, but if he gets, I think it's basically right. You know I mean that like
Would you have here described in the mail report is pretty clearly a situation in which Donald Trump be used and tried to use his powers of office and in appropriate ways to stifle invested, hence we don't know whether he personally could have been shot. It was something had he not screwed around with the man afford thing, but even assuming he's completely innocent. It's like it's not appropriate to meddle with the operation of criminal investigations to help out your friend MIKE Flynn, to help out your ex campaign manager Paul manifest I can be described bear situation in the abstract cry. Like the mayor of MID size, city, eggs fired the police chief, because the police chief was investigating something, and the mayor knew that the investigation would get his buddy locked up in jail legumes.
That was right like to an extent like it's stupid, to say just ignore the politics and think about the facts, because, like you can't take the politics of politics. That said, you know sometimes it's it's clarifying to read a tweet store that doesn't talk about the politics of the situation. I would actually say that its clarifying, also because the constitution doesn't require Congress to impede the president if the president has required, as committed high Crampton misdemeanours rightly Greece does have a choice. Yes, so in theory, and obviously you would never have this, but in theory could have much Mcconnell come out and say yes, we agree that the president committed impeachable offenses offences, but we the Senate, the body that would be conducting the trial of whether he you know like whether having been impeach cheat, he should be removed from office are ruled republicans and therefore we're gonna keep Donald Trump in office, and therefore how can we want to move forward with the impeachment process like? That is a thing that,
who do anywhere. Not it's not lake, a you know, subpoena or anything else. Wordly, one branch of government compelling the other you know like by a certain set of actions and other rent of government is compelled to do so and then I guess this. This also means I should prowling nuance. My previous point, like I think I said something about a machine like their compelled to do this, need he didn't. He said he actually deliberately. I assume said in peaceable conduct rather than game should be impede. Right as its not necessarily a like. It's just a descriptive acknowledgement of like yes respite, within in ambit that if we chose to Congress, we could do something about inside out like the ball, very much Nancy Policies court as to whether to do anything about it and what I don't particularly understand- and I I have kind of my got Anders GUT Assessment assessment of what
is, but the thing that has been frustrating to a lot of pro impeachment Democrats is that before this weekend, before the Auschwitz form democratic leadership, Jose the reason that we are wary of impeachment is because we don't want it to be a partisan. Thank we wanted to be by partisan. We you know if we, if, if there were, if this, could be abstracted from partisanship? Then we'll go forward with it? And now you have an important like. One of the more important ways you can make something by parties and is to have somebody of the other party sign on track, and it does not appear that that has changed. The calculus democratic leadership at all, like I can understand, and on one level. Yes, if you had been running a betting market, on which member of the Republican Party in Congress would be most likely to call for the impeachment Donald Trump like you would not very get very good odds on just Mamma. She would be by far the most obvious choice for all the reasons that we ve been discussing. But I,
the back and get a little circular when you're Samuel yeah, but it's just Mamma. She doesn't really count at this point that when, in fact he is a republican and generally a lot of things that we call by partisan in DC are really the people who you would expect from the other the signing on right, one parties, priority, which I thought you and I was glad to see. A couple of conservative commentators pointed this out that, like Kevin Mccarthy, was like. Oh just an emotion, just doing this for attention and it's like Kevin Mccarthy. Really. There has been a lot of kind of conversation about how among libertarians, because the libertarian party exists there yo in twenty six June, they nominated Gary Johnson, whose campaign relied really heavily on the on his argument. That he was fifty percent like Hillary Clinton and fifty percent like we'll trump which you now was an argument, but the new chair of the libertarian parties. I knew if a marsh wanted to switch parties because currently ambush is a Republican. But if you want to switch the Libertarian party, they would perhaps be interested in him
during a presidential bit. Well, my guide me both its euro in the could. This thing actually happen. Now is an interesting thing. Yes, this over this overarching idea and a Matias efforts to take the politics out of this and how politics have risk added to his efforts is really interesting, but also I mean to agree with terror. Right, I mean interest, it seems likely tactically, like yes like you, wanna go all end on a totally doomed impeachment, but that it means that when the door starts to open right, leg, select one you have gone out right now is bill World who a long time go was Governor Massachusetts Classic New England Motto Republican. He is running as a primary challenge to Donald Trump. He was that lay Gary Johnson's run on made in twenty sixty, obviously bill. Well, the second of Beet Donald Trump and a primary then become present to the United States, but this is an effort by a
person with some kind of connections, republican party politics, to take a stand against Donald Trump Phil Scott and currently practicing moderate Republican New England, governor of Burma, and he has said that he is endorsing bill wealth. That is his effort to like get out of the chair of the Republican or needs to run in a moderate, oven terrain in a marsh? Who is not a new England moderate but is nonetheless a Republican done from critic? He's saying I want to impeach Donald Trump. This would be for for a democratic. neither was interested in getting rid of Donald Trump, a good opportunity to come back to fill sky right, who clearly feels under pressure to make some kind of gestures towards breaking which are to be like, But do you agree like you're, not the first one like a house member from a much more conservative constituency than you is saying this like like, where you fell sky
we feel Scott, says you're fucking right, I've already thrown from under the brush, but with the wealth endorsement, I'm also for impeachment? how do you plan to kind of duties can be like? Oh, I will forgive you for endorsing my primary islander so that Europe is but now you have a problem for Susan Collins who liked fell. Scott is statewide elected official in New England State but mean is not as left wing as from so Collins is in the classic republican squeeze where she's not gonna, win as a die hard one hundred percent from loyalist, but she's? Also not gonna win going down fighting with Donald. Democrats really really really need to win some Senate races. It looks like digging. It probably not win a main centre race because counts is very popular in man, but like the Democratic Party to govern needs to like make trouble, but Susan Collins, Phil, Scott agreeing with just a marsh about impeachment, would creative power.
one for Collins Right- and this is like me- I don't you know I need to explain his but like this is politics is built one step at a time like a far right. house, member deciding that, because he's an idiosyncratic guy who's mad at the Freedom caucus having thrown a lot of their principles under board and now he's going to be for impeachment like that is an opportunity. But instead democrats have been ever since man of Fort backed out of his court asian agreement. Democrats have been running scared. They ve been treated bad news for Trump as bad news for them right, because of their dreams. Scenario was like Paul metaphor, just like hands over reams of documents that, like show Donald Trump like taking cash for boot. Look what you did that there was going to happen. Democrats worrying like smaller says he obstructed justice,
then we're gonna have then they then we're gonna have to impeach him, but we don't want to impeach him, and I I get it actually that, like it's a is a tough tactical situation, but like its politics, you gonna try to get out of the technical situation like a marsh is creating an opportunity. They have all these subpoenas going trumpets stonewalling, all of them, Democrats are mad about that. I, like Let us say it at some point that like what's going on here, is they think this guy's, a crook yeah? I mean, I think, adding scare it is not necessarily wrong. Bide phenomena what's going on is the Chuck Shimmer Nancy Pelosi believe fervently to win in twenty. Twenty Democrats need to be hitting pocket book issues need to be here. The kind of like things that they know, voters, get one government does like education, health care and that kind of thing, and that Dino Vision,
be hitting Donald Trump on that, and you know not because of the Russia stuff so much. He knows which fine. You bet, I mean it certainly makes sense as a strategy. It just means that their action to any given new story can be very weird because it does come off as evasive. If this statement you release in response to any incremental development in the Mullah investigation is, we need to be focused the things that really matter like it's at a certain point. It sounds like you're trying not to talk about it because you are they in there is something of a macro strategic problem for Democrats and kind of the putting pressure on Susan Collins Strategy, because in theory, the moderate Republicans are the ones most likely to agree with individual democratic initiatives. There also the people who are often the highest priorities for Republic for Democrats to pick off so putting pressure on Susan Collins to do something that will make her
popular with moderate in May in me back fire if it helps her win. Reelections like yes, ok, that that is a a strategic calculus. That light can be tricky, but in individual cases, and specifically in this individual, as a Democrat, Sargon amount, a credible challenge to just an ambush in twenty one. like that is how we not it is more like that he's going to get successfully primary tool, which is already coming up. My people, who are now changing their twitter banners to show them and Trump standing together. yeah, I'm sure labour primary areas so that both like it's, not the Democrats or looking at Imagine going g. That was a really winnable seat for us. If we praise what you just did that come on. Let's go, that's not gonna happen at all, and also you know yet Kay come election day, the people who you may lose might be the people who you agree with an individual cases like a lot the seats that Republicans lost twenty eighteen work, people who were moral likely to cross the aisle on certain things so there
lookin minorities, a more conservative one than the republican majority was but lake that doesn't The thoroughly change the calculus of when you send out statements, say in appraisal one member of a party in asking when other members will join him like that the thing you can do even are going to organise against that seem incumbent coming into November twenty twenty. I also just think that, like the pocket book issues and the fact that the president is corrupt, person are not distinct theme right like if you had a politician whose, Haggerty was unimpeachable right like nobody had any hint of scandal about the guy but He was pushing some unpopular health care policy ideas and also he got campaign contributions from health insurance companies. Democrats cannot be like befuddle by doing focus on health care, or do we focus on his ties to industry right like it's not like, do not Eddie it's right. There normal stuff so like. If the president,
is taking shady bribes and also you have these pocketbook issues. You wanna him Emma, like it's all of a piece right like, if he's obstructing justice right to protect his cronies. If he's firing the FBI director make sure the criminal investigations cannot trust his friends and he's also a point. regulators, who are to friendly with businesses and they're, letting the dump toxic chemicals, rightly that's all one thing, you know and, if, like one, even if even a far right republic we can see that there is something wrong with the way trumpets conducting himself like that's, like that's all the better. The figures, though, that lake I often urge people to make the actual argument there attempting to make, and
So there are a lot of Republicans who are well aware that transactions or trumps behaviour is inappropriate, edging on unimpeachable. They just don't care right there enough. There Emmy its we get into like the sun costs argument, which is actually to Lisbon, we back and forth between Josh Hammer and a writer at the bulwark and a cup of other conservatives, if it, but just the idea you. I think it should be very clear that if Republicans responded to a Matias thread by saying like not, we recognise that you feel this way, but we just don't care. That would, I think, be a much more straightforward argument, then attempting to prevent disprove this particular argument, because the understanding here you there has been a lot of your kind of like like we have.
What are the bars for impeachment what're? You does this behaviour fit it does this by hypnotic. None are no one impeachment as a political decision, not so much based on criminal law, but also, if you're, a Republican and you're like ok, trumpeted bad things, but is also done these good things and the good things that way, the bad things. So I just don't care. I think that's a much more straightforward argument than attempting to prove that truck to prove that the emperor is in fact, fully dressed wearing a coats. In fact about this, those like. It is not exactly like what Republicans are afraid of his president. Might pets right if anything, make pence would be A more consistent defend our priority drudges, so we can have my pen psychoanalyze rightly says, though it's not so I want to know is to what extent is this a fear that impeachment purse
say would would harm the parties like electoral prospects, because it would it would make it seem damaged and to what extent is this a fear that Donald Trump is personally really popular with the bay and they are not sure that anybody else's as popular as Donald Trump, as lay I feel like either of those is viable, and I can't tell which it is I'm like was just old enough when Bill Clinton was being impeached till I, Try to remember what was going on the air because, looking back on in retrospect, it's very different but it has a sort of broad structural similarity, which is that the technical question on the table was like. Should Al Gore become president of the United States, but in Democrats heads right, the question they were addressing was: should nuke Gingrich be allowed to successfully?
Persecute Bill Clinton, the unanimity and, unlike their feeling, was no real feeling was, like all things considered. We d like New Gingrich, it's important to us that New Gingrich his love of a lot of charges against Bill Clinton that we think are false. You know like we think it important that this whole thing is undertaken in bad faith, that they were like against him from day. One weeding it's important that we agree with him on important questions of public. see- and you could write like you- could delve back down into be like ok, but like we're just How can that Al Gore becoming President right like it's through? This was done in bad faith. It's true. This was done by President Clinton's enemies, but like because their his enemy? Is they looked into this really really rigorously, and they found thing this I got really pretty bad, and so maybe we should let him get away with it and it's convenient than in our system of government. If you impeach the president, the vice president with similar policy view,
because otherwise, you might really never impeach anyone right if it was like it, I went to a lottery and some total Randolph took over. Then then, how? How could you ever do it, but, like that's? How Democrats saw it at the time and I think for republicans- it's obviously the same. It's like Donald Trump himself has become a symbol in the culture wards right, so it's like political correctness, out of control, or is there a terrifying, rising tide of white supremacy right and like even though whether or not Donald Trump Impeach Committed committee, unimpeachable fences has nothing to do with that, like it has everything to do with fair enough. Should we take a break and talk about letting a housing, but I think we should take a break and talk about the Tina Housing before that. The libertarian within me breaks into your hawks out. Ok,.
So the white paper that we have selected today to art, could I think, collective great enthusiasm has. It is several hobby, so? I think this is called fishing wealth, vanishing votes. Question mark the Tino Homeownership and the twenty sixteen election in Florida, ants written by Jacob Brew. who is a really exciting, youngish sociologist at a premium young, and what Jacob has about professor Who has done is he has records of mortgages and foreclosures but the Orlando Florida area from twenty four to twenty, sixteen and so looking at patterns in who was under water on their mortgages. He was foreclose dine during that period, I raised by what documentation they provided. So you know you're a citizen, and you have a driver's license verses. If your presenting your green card versus for presenting some other form of idea which, like me,
mean that you are an unauthorized immigrant, ah so looking at those patterns and then trying to figure out whether there are connections between VIP all it would between those mortgage outcomes and being in inactive voter on the rules specifically on the twenty sixteen election v. There are a bunch of kind of findings here, primarily that latino Democrats, who got foreclosed on, were a lot less likely to be active voters and twenty sixteen compared to other ethnicities and partisanship like latino Republicans acted like White Republican even if they were in foreclosure, it did not necessarily affect their voting behaviour, but filipino Democrats in particular, be being in for closure and being underwater and mortgages suggested that they were less likely to vote in twenty. Sixteen
furthermore, there is kind of that like creates a change in the composition of the lieutenant vote. Right, though tee no vote is going to get more republican. If you really Tino Democrats are showing up, and so there is a connection between the democratic vote share in the twenty six election and in a housing prices and foreclosure rates, partly because of in a high black foreclosures leading to changes in black turnout, partly because of this like partisan split among the tabs, so The bottom line take away here is a voting is not a natural thing for a lot of people. It is not something that people who are in particularly you know who don't have I have a lot of other things going on in their lives, who, like have trouble, making ends meet, who have trouble. for day to day they are particularly their voting, is fragile right, and that is that is particularly true of groups that are not that don't make a habit of.
Putting all the time. Lake older voters are older. White voters in particular, is at an end black women extremely reliable, like those are low sensitive to changes, latino on the other hand, are a very there there, not a group that has, in general a typical practice of coming out to vote every. Years, and so something changing your life, especially something as fundamental as like being foreclosed on you may not know where you're living right. Maybe you know you you other things in your life to worry about, and so you may be less likely to turn out to vote, but it turns out that this actually changes the outcome of elections at us at a certain point of closeness such as Florida wasn't twenty sixteen, Also, importantly, I mean, I think, big picture backdrop for this
one of the long standing presumptions of twenty first century american politics had been that if the Republican Party attempted to mobilise anti immigrant demagoguery in a high profile national campaign that that would generate a backlash, right. That is and that their backlash would specifically tamely dual forms of alienating cuban again, who are not directly impacted by immigration, politics, but out of broader sensors, a threat and also that it might change the story low turn out pattern of letting right generally and this continues to be somewhat contested but things are moving really seen, is multiple strands of evidence that that is not the case.
Right that, like one of the reasons trump style, politics worked in one of the reasons why politicians, who are much less like personally, ninety and crazy than Donald Trump clearly are going to take up this boy or is it turns out that, like this fear that had been haunting republicans that they were going to awaken the kind of slumbering giant of lead or non voters is just not really true right and that you looking at a population who is not super engaged with politics, and that you know with all this other stuff happens and can even push engagement levels down ray. I think that if you taken that any kind of broader lake people in lower propensity, groups are less likely to vote when things are going on in their lives. That are bad point. What you end up with is there's a pretty strong
correlation in in lake in swing between twenty eight sixteen and twenty eighteen earth like swing to the Republican Party over the last six or so years, in whether how much how home crisis every about it yet like eight, where home prices have rebounded more voters specifically latina Voters are much more likely to you like in the village. You know It is much more likely to shift to Democrats again, not because people who would otherwise be voting for the Republicans are for Democrats, but because Democrats are more likely to die. devoting so there's Think of a circular parity here right where people for whom Things are going well, who feel that government is responding to their needs, who have have faith in institutions are more likely to turn out to vote, which means pollen, things are more likely to get elected who see themselves as responses to those voters and are going to do things that you know that help them display
for his worrisome to me in kind of the electoral implications, because a world where voter access is being framed as a partisan issue, because everyone knows which kinds of voters are more likely to turn out for which parties, if you abstract that one level further and say: okay, if we pass policies that are going to help this group of people, they are more like to turn out in the next election, which means we are more likely are less likely to get elected. That could create a parties, innovation of you no policy More generally aware, you start hearing people argue we shouldn't do this, because it would make Ex group of voters better, and so they be more willing to turn out next. I like that. That would be an objectively terrible outcome for democracy, but it is something that you know. Papers like this demonstrate would in fact be like real call.
connection. You can draw the other thing that I can. I want to point out here is just looking at the mortgage outcomes as the final point, rather than a starting point. What rue fines is that even controlling for income and like merit? as an educational out of other things. The inner generally predict financial outcomes that Latinos, who had did look neutrinos were more likely to foreclose than other groups and that important we having low equity to begin with- and having like presenting some form of other identification that indicated that they were necessarily citizens or green cardholders were both very important variables, independently. Inner lay controlling for all these other things, which suggests a that Latinos, like African Americans, were particularly hard hit by the mortgage crisis because the already operating from low home equity, whereas white we're underwater on their mortgages. You know, may not have necessarily needed to foreclose and may have
really been more motivated to turn out to vote in one of the interesting side findings here, but also that there he's kind of a legal precarious associated with not being as it is in our green cardholder. That might be. yet more likely Frida, foreclose and, of course, wipe out rang wealth you are building and wipe out your kind of social stability in the? U S as well, and that dynamic is something that is in that ruse previous work, which talks about the relationship between deportations and foreclosures builds on, but is something that I think is really important. about, as in a we continue to live under like a Trump administration Enforcing a lot of social of the lot of social prosperity on people who are legally precarious lake things like trying to regulate social service used so that people are afraid to use it. Are you afraid you, social services, because their way they get green cards
some of the kind of very visible ice enforcement tactics, the people who are who have reason to be afraid of the government be coming less able to participate in public life. More broadly, as like my personal hobbyhorse, and something That findings like this made clear, is a legit concern right and I think that we see that a cross with other non white groups. You saw that with regard to african american turnout in twenty sixteen in cities like Milwaukee, where ill journalists who went there and spoke with african american voters heard from voters and like you, I have really imp there, one I don't feel like either of the people running for president our listening to me, but also you. No, I don't. I'm working three jobs like my life, is very precarious because of a lack of social services and a lack of kind of the safety net necessary to take this, take the time to go, vote or take the time to even take part in a city,
exercises more generally, and then there are some who would argue that that's kind of the points, but I think that that that is something that's reflective. I also think that our understandings of how Non White Americans vote, because I think that you get that a little bit specifically regarding two african american conservatives, this idea of like yet, why would you do that? Is, I think, a falsehood about you? What I'm glad that this paper analyzes kind of different intra group differences among lucky, knows and voting specifically about Euro? How some many Latinos are very socially conservative that bears out in how they vote oh for African Americans, who are who also tend to be more socially conservative. That does not bear out and boy. Isn't that a fascinating historical lesson for us all ones, also late. The paper points out conservative ideology is a more important predictor than skin color or other factors in whether Latinos identify as white or not.
Which really does indicate lake helps, I think, explain. The republican shift your time, you're right, you're right, we're like latino Republicans are like I'm not Do you know I'm republican to a certain extent right leg? Now I mean it's not like and ain't none not literally what they're saying, but there is an extent to which their kind of their political filiation is driving a racial IDA. occasionally actually interpret that ok backward cake, which is that I think that Our skin reasonably well assimilated Latinos may be like white people, basically, maybe more likely if their democrats to decide ideological, real yeah, silly grade suicide. You gotta make a choice right, it's like I'm. I like it just another white dude rate
like no, no, no I'm latina right and that's a I think, like left ethnic forgive me, but you really looking at Florida right. You lot of cuban people, you know he could sort of go either way right, pay, someone how do you judge them? Quantum quote racially right and it's like Democrats actually have a reason to like insist on their people of colouring this because of the internal politics of democratic party coalitions, whereas I think more conservative people you know like who pass are like a like I'm I'm in here I mean the kind of one level more abstract waited Tucker like something I have said on the progress before an came from somebody else- and I do not remember who was is- is the fundamental divide in american racial politics. White versus non way of black versus not get rightly. Democrats are now All in on the divide is white
non way and non white people are unwelcome in the Republican Party, but welcome in our party. The republican party isn't explicitly taking a position on this, but the idea that Latino Americans and Asian Americans, like you know, because they are because they believe in hard work. And you know some of them have mostly conservative views that, like that, implies a of assimilation that, like that they are becoming that that is going to trump any kind of no need to establish an ethnic identity, first and foremost, the lines more with the black versus non black side of that exactly, I mean I think you know we talked about reparation. Several upsets go but like I think we're with love that they would like to have a reparations debate with White Americans. But they would love to have it with asian and latino. I mean, I beg you to actually that's where the affirmative action in New York the end at Harvard
the debate over affirmative action is largely taking place visa asian american groups, because, even though the people who are heading up the effort in court with regard to Harvard specifically, is a white guy- tying it back to get to the paper, something that I you don't think is interesting here and you see a lot of research and they can get get lost in these things. Is you don't wash? We take it for granted that, like what why writers and intellectuals think is not reflective of the overall, I population but like the same, is true of bike, but Tino intellectuals, and also that, like you know, I mean this is obvious, but like like an latino, people have economic interests not just like Rachel, grew identity, type interests and you know it's, it can be very salient that, like Donald Trump is running around saying racist stuff, Does it mean that that's what actually matters most to peep right even to the
so called at the national level. Victims of that kind of rhetoric wages. if you're losing your house, like that, just a really big deal right, unlike what people might want to hear. From politicians who are saying like I support you, you should support me. Is it then? engaged with you on this level of your house and its laws rather than this? I met a textual issue about who are we as Americans? I mean like Ebay, but it is also possible that leg, while that might be a nice thing to hear her a politician, you're still can be more likely to spend election day. Trying to kid, your house than writing for that politicians. Do you mean I don't think Think it's wrong to see. There's as like, literally, you are too encumbered by problems too, it's a is it voting is like pro social activity right there, indeed, that you engage in when you have a pro social mentality right and it just if you feel,
your forgotten. Unlike people, don't care about you and your problems, you not bother to do it and that means a politicians have to be talking about the stuff. That's on the top of your mind, right in there always making gases as too like well, but to people care about, and we know like their multiple kinds of people and also people care about multiple things but we will only really care about a couple of strike and Yemen, so the Meda, hard gas that might write like what Latinos cared about like a lot was gonna, be immigration and download from saying racist stuff- and maybe not I mean possibly- but it's also true- that it like it looked more true in time this than it did in Florida right would suggest that maybe what is going on is not the Democrats made a strategic error, but that lake there are structural problem like vote,
It's too hard in America and should be made easier right and that it is, you know, just just as a matter of democracy, because you want people who are most affected by policies who are able to vote to have a say right, and I think that its its clear us. I think we don't talk enough about intra group differences when it comes to race, but I think it's also clear here that the structural barriers are different in different states. How people respond to those barriers is different and you, if you are an individual and which your voting decision is based largely on, can I get the three buses I need to get to my polling place
Then it's entirely understandable that perhaps your decision making may not be resting on whether or not Donald Trump said something racist, but again or whether or not you can get somewhere to vote, because I think I know I've seen it before but like. I think, the overarching story of twenty sixteen is not necessarily who voted but who didn't who dropped out of the voting population, and I think that we saw in numerous places and not necessarily it was not necessarily a conscious decision of. I am not going to vote it was. I am in line to vote, but I've been here for three hours. I I can't get out to vote because I have to do with this housing issue and so its entry, seeing how politics can itself beat the barrier to people taking part in politics. A great thing to do. My you're waiting on many buses was invokes media Punkahs network Pakistan, this allowed out their slotted get ones. Thank you all for frivolous, and here I think, as always to our producer, Jeffrey Count and the weeds we'll be back on track,
Transcript generated on 2021-09-10.