Podcast Summary
New Developments in Impeachment Trial, Democratic Debate, and Tragic Incident in Iran: The impeachment trial of Donald Trump begins in the Senate next week, the Democratic primary debate took place before the Iowa caucuses, and the shootdown of a civilian airliner in Iran led to protests. Pod Save America is going on tour for 2020 and offering a promotional giveaway for those who preorder their upcoming book.
There have been new developments in the impeachment trial of Donald Trump, with the articles being sent to the Senate for a potential trial starting next week. Additionally, the Democratic primary debate took place, with the last one before the Iowa caucuses. During the podcast, the hosts discussed the tragic shootdown of a civilian airliner in Iran and the protests that followed, with a former Tehran bureau chief of The Washington Post as a guest. They also announced a promotional giveaway for those who preorder their upcoming book, and revealed that Pod Save America is going on tour for 2020. Preorders for the book can be made until Monday, and tickets for the tour go on sale to the public on Saturday. The hosts also joked about their former affiliations with CNN and expressed their excitement for the upcoming events.
House Managers to Lead Impeachment Trial in Senate, Pelosi's Delay Tactics Pay Off: House managers, led by Schiff and Nadler, will prosecute Trump in Senate trial. Pelosi's delay allowed GOP debate on witnesses, potentially leading to Bolton testimony and Trump's SOTU address during trial, benefiting Democrats.
The impeachment trial in the Senate is set to begin with a group of House managers, led by Adam Schiff, Jerry Nadler, Hakim Jeffries, Zoe Lofgren, Val Demings, Sylvia Garcia, and Jason Crow, who will act as prosecutors. Pelosi's decision to withhold the articles of impeachment allowed for a prolonged debate among Republicans about whether to call witnesses, and it seems that a growing number of GOP senators are open to this idea. Key witnesses, such as John Bolton, may testify, which would be a significant win for Democrats. Additionally, Trump may be forced to give his State of the Union address during the trial, which could be another advantage for the opposition. Overall, while the outcome of the trial is uncertain, Democrats have already achieved some victories through Pelosi's strategic delay.
President Trump's Focus on Impeachment Weakened His Position for 2020 Election: Trump's time spent on impeachment instead of economy left him weaker, while Obama focused on economy in similar period, McConnell's promise to call witnesses could harm Biden, new evidence emerges highlighting importance of transparency and accountability.
President Trump missed a valuable opportunity to strengthen his position for the 2020 election by focusing on impeachment instead of the economy. During the critical period between Labor Day 2019 and now, he spent his time having a public tantrum about impeachment rather than making arguments about promises kept or economic achievements. This strategy left him weaker than before, as evidenced by his approval ratings remaining stagnant at around 43%. In contrast, President Obama used the same time frame in 2011 to focus on the economy and exit the year with improved approval ratings. Moreover, the impeachment trial provides an opportunity cost for both parties. McConnell's promise to call witnesses if Democrats request it could potentially harm the Biden campaign, but the potential benefits of calling witnesses, such as John Bolton, outweigh the risks. The emergence of new evidence, such as text messages and notes from indicted associates of Rudy Giuliani, further highlights the importance of transparency and accountability. In conclusion, the impeachment trial represents a pivotal moment in American politics, with significant consequences for both parties. While the outcome remains uncertain, it is clear that the strategy employed by each party during this period will have a lasting impact on the 2020 election.
New concerns about Trump's dealings with Ukraine: Allegations of quid pro quos and involvement of unsavory characters raise concerns about potential threats and corruption in Trump's dealings with Ukraine, adding to ongoing investigations.
The recall of Ambassador Yovanovitch and the alleged involvement of Giuliani associate Lev Parnas in tracking her, along with text messages revealing a quid pro quo, raises serious concerns about potential threats and corruption. These developments, if true, suggest involvement of unsavory characters with possible ties to Russian intelligence or mafia. The scandal surrounding Yovanovitch is just another layer to the ongoing investigations into Trump's dealings with Ukraine. The quality of people brought into American politics by the Trump administration remains a concern. The final debate before the Iowa caucuses saw candidates trying to draw contrasts with their opponents while avoiding seeming nasty. Overall, the debates have not provided clear frontrunners, with the race remaining wide open.
Democratic Debate: Sanders and Warren Discuss Substantive Contrasts: Warren effectively challenged Sanders on electability, emphasizing her ability to unite the party and win elections, while Sanders denied the allegation. The debate highlighted the importance of electability and the need for a unifying candidate.
The Democratic presidential debate between Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren focused on substantive contrasts, particularly on foreign policy and electability. Warren effectively turned the tables on Sanders regarding the controversial 2018 meeting where he reportedly doubted a woman's ability to win the presidency. Warren's response was smart as she emphasized her ability to bring different factions of the Democratic Party together, while Sanders denied the allegation. The exchange highlighted the importance of electability and the need for a candidate who can unite the party. Warren's record of winning elections and her ability to appeal to various Democratic constituencies were her main arguments for her electability. The debate left some feeling emotionless, but the substantive discussions on foreign policy and electability were notable.
Friends and Politicians: When Memories Clash: Friends and politicians, even those with shared values, can have differing recollections of events, leading to disagreements and potential acrimony. Clear communication and factual evidence are crucial in resolving such disputes.
The disagreement between Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren over a conversation that took place between them is a prime example of how memories can be fallible and how people can interpret events differently. Despite their friendship and shared progressive values, they both believe they are telling the truth based on their recollections. The situation has led to acrimony online, with some speculating that Warren's campaign leaked the story to bring up the issue during the debate. However, there is no evidence to support this claim, and it is illogical to suggest that Warren would want to engage in a conversation that could only hurt her and Amy Klobuchar in the final weeks of the campaign. Overall, the incident highlights the importance of clear communication and the potential pitfalls of relying on memory alone. It also serves as a reminder that social media can amplify disagreements and create unnecessary tension.
Gender and electability take center stage in Democratic debate: The debate highlighted the ongoing belief that a woman cannot win the presidency and the need for more women in politics, as well as the achievements of women in recent elections.
During the Democratic debate, the issue of gender and electability came to the forefront. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders had a heated exchange regarding whether a woman can win the presidency. The discussion highlighted the persistent belief among some voters that a woman cannot be elected, which has hung over Warren's campaign since the beginning. While the specifics of the conversation between Warren and Sanders remain unclear, it was agreed that the conversation was necessary and long overdue. The debate brought attention to the achievements of women in politics, such as the record-breaking number of women elected in 2018, and the fact that only two candidates on the stage had defeated Republican incumbents. The moderators could have handled the exchange better by pressing for clarification on exactly what was said between Warren and Sanders. Despite the controversy, the conversation was seen as an important step in addressing the issue of gender and electability head-on.
Challenges women face in politics and authenticity controversy: Despite progress, women continue to face challenges in politics, including being perceived as authentic leaders. Elizabeth Warren's experience with this issue was a major topic, with candidates acknowledging the double standard she faces compared to male counterparts. The debate also touched on foreign policy and electability.
The 2020 Democratic primary has highlighted the persistent challenges women face in politics, particularly in being perceived as authentic leaders. Elizabeth Warren's experience with the "authenticity" controversy and the double standard she faces compared to male candidates was a key topic of discussion. The debate also delved into foreign policy, with Joe Biden acknowledging his mistake in voting for the Iraq war and Bernie Sanders presenting the clearest anti-war stance. Amy Klobuchar made a humorous remark about the lack of electable women in the race, highlighting the ongoing issue of sexism in politics. The concept of electability and its measurement was also brought up, as most candidates lack a long record of electoral wins. Overall, the debate showcased the complexities of the Democratic primary and the various issues that candidates must navigate.
Democratic Debate: Biden and Sanders' Iraq War Vote: Biden and Sanders' past Iraq war votes were a topic during the debate, with Biden struggling to answer and Sanders praised for opposing it. The impact on voters is uncertain, but the conversation emphasized learning from past mistakes and addressing new foreign policy challenges.
That both Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders, who voted in favor of the Iraq war, have had to address their past votes during the Democratic primary debates. While Biden has struggled to answer the question, acknowledging his mistake but emphasizing his growth and experience since then, Sanders has been praised for his bravery in opposing the war at the time. However, it's unclear how much this issue will matter to voters in Iowa or elsewhere, given the political climate and context of the time. The debate also highlighted the evolving nature of foreign policy challenges and the need for candidates to address new threats, such as cyber attacks. Overall, the conversation underscored the importance of learning from past mistakes and the complexities of foreign policy decisions.
Highlighting the importance of vision, heart, and humanity in foreign policy discussions: Candidates should go beyond superficial policy debates and bring a greater sense of vision, heart, and humanity to their responses. Consider the substance of policies, not just their comparison to past deals, and ensure a coherent and inclusive trade policy.
Learning from the foreign policy debate among Democratic presidential candidates is the need for candidates to go beyond superficial policy discussions and bring a greater sense of vision, heart, and humanity to their responses. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders had a policy difference regarding the USMCA trade deal, with Warren supporting it and Sanders opposing it. Warren argued that it would provide relief to farmers and workers, while Sanders believed it would set us back and that a better deal could be negotiated. Sanders also criticized the lack of inclusion of stakeholders like farmers, workers, and the environment in the negotiation process. The debate highlighted the importance of considering the substance of policies, not just their comparison to past deals, and the need for a coherent and inclusive trade policy.
Warren and Sanders Discuss Trade Policies: Near Term vs Long-Term Approaches: Warren and Sanders debated trade policies, with Warren focusing on near term benefits and Sanders advocating for long-term change. Warren highlighted her record, Sanders emphasized ambition, and the candidates acknowledged the issue's complexities.
During the Democratic debate, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders discussed their approaches to trade policies, with Warren focusing on delivering tangible benefits to Americans in the near term, while Sanders emphasized the importance of fighting for larger, long-term changes. Warren highlighted her record of implementing progressive policies, while Sanders argued for the significance of moving the debate and setting ambitious goals. The nuanced politics of the primary were acknowledged, with both candidates recognizing the difficulty of the issue and avoiding major fights. Warren effectively framed her opposition to the USMCA as a climate concern, while Klobuchar and Buttigieg effectively brought the discussion back to Trump's negative impact on real people. The debate highlighted the distinct approaches of the candidates and the complexities of the trade issue.
Democratic Candidates Discuss Electability during Debate: Joe Biden emphasized his electability based on support from African American community and working class people, while his consistent performance and focus on middle class issues kept him in a strong position during the debate
During the Democratic debate, candidates were asked about their electability in facing off against President Trump. Joe Biden, the current front-runner, responded by acknowledging Trump's tactics and expressing confidence in his ability to handle him, emphasizing his support from the African American community and working class people. Overall, Biden's debate performance was seen as a continuation of his previous showings, with strengths lying in his passion for the middle and working class and weaknesses in the delivery of his answers. Despite the lack of significant challenges to his record or electability during the debate, Biden's consistent performance and focus on issues important to his base are likely to keep him in a strong position going into the Iowa caucus.
Democratic Debate: Biden's Defensiveness vs Sanders' Confidence: Joe Biden's usual defensiveness during the debate allowed him to avoid major damage, while Bernie Sanders confidently defended his democratic socialist label, highlighting their policy differences and visions for America.
During the Democratic debate, there was a notable absence of the joyful warrior persona from Joe Biden's presentation, leaving some commentators feeling that he came out unscathed due to his usual defensiveness when attacked. Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, confidently defended his democratic socialist label, arguing that it aligns with the values of the American people and will help him defeat Donald Trump. The debate highlighted the stark contrast between the two candidates' policies and visions for America. While some voters may be hesitant about socialism, Sanders believes that exposing Trump's corruption and advocating for universal healthcare, a living wage, and environmental initiatives will ultimately win over voters.
Navigating electability concerns for socialist candidates: Socialist candidates like Bernie Sanders must address electability concerns and explain the differences between democratic socialism and other forms to various voter groups to win over voters and build a new coalition.
The possibility of an African American or a socialist winning the White House is an untested proposition, and the electability concerns surrounding these candidates make many nervous. During a recent conversation, it was noted that Bernie Sanders identifies as a democratic socialist, but his definition and argument for democratic socialism could help him navigate potential criticism from the right. However, it is essential for candidates to address electability concerns and present plans for navigating potential challenges. The lack of discussion on this issue in the primary is concerning, and it is hoped that it will be addressed in a more significant way. Sanders is betting on bringing in new voters and building a new coalition, but ultimately, he will need to prove it by winning. The term "socialism" carries a negative connotation in the US due to historical reasons, and it is crucial to explain the differences between democratic socialism and other forms of socialism to various voter groups.
Democratic Debate: Electability and Unity: Warren emphasizes anti-corruption stance for electability, Buttigieg discusses struggles with black voter support
During the recent Democratic primary debate, the issue of electability came up, specifically in relation to Bernie Sanders and his ability to win over swing voters. Elizabeth Warren addressed this concern, emphasizing her anti-corruption stance and her ability to unite people across party lines. Warren believes that her focus on fighting corruption makes her the best candidate to take on a corrupt president like Donald Trump. Additionally, Mayor Pete Buttigieg discussed his struggles earning the support of black voters despite his long campaign, a demographic he will need to win over to secure the nomination. Overall, the debate highlighted the importance of electability and the unique selling points of each candidate.
Buttigieg discusses importance of black voter support and his record: Buttigieg emphasized his ability to represent change and contrast Trump, and discussed his record of addressing community issues on the ground, while acknowledging the importance of black voter support.
Pete Buttigieg acknowledged the importance of black voter support and emphasized his record of addressing community issues on the ground. He also emphasized his unique ability to represent change and contrast Trump, rather than focusing solely on his electability as a moderate candidate. The discussion also touched upon the different ways candidates present their electability arguments, with some opting for more rhetorical approaches and others focusing on demographics and policy proposals. Buttigieg's performance was noted for his well-thought-out answers, although some perceived him as appearing younger and more practiced than usual. Overall, the conversation highlighted the nuanced strategies candidates employ to address questions about electability and connect with diverse voter groups.
Amy Klobuchar's Iowa-focused performance and pragmatic approach stand out in Democratic debate: Klobuchar impressed with Iowa pitches and pragmatism, Buttigieg faced criticism for rehearsed tone, Biden faced tough questions, Sanders reiterated progressive message, Authenticity and connection with voters important, Candidates need to differentiate themselves
The Democratic primary debates continue to showcase the unique styles and strategies of each candidate. Last night, Amy Klobuchar stood out with her Iowa-specific pitches and pragmatic approach, while Pete Buttigieg faced criticism for feeling rehearsed. Joe Biden faced questions about his past and his ability to connect with voters, while Bernie Sanders reiterated his progressive message. Klobuchar's performance was seen as a strong one, but she may need to make a bigger impact to gain significant support in the upcoming caucuses. The debates also highlighted the importance of authenticity and connection with voters, as well as the need for candidates to differentiate themselves from their competitors. Overall, the debates continue to shape the race and provide insight into the strengths and weaknesses of each candidate.
Strong debate performances don't always translate to poll numbers: Tom Steyer, despite spending heavily on ads and performing well in debates, struggles to gain traction due to Biden's grip on moderate votes. Steyer's international business experience is his selling point for the economy, but his lack of political experience shows.
Despite strong performances in debates by candidates like Amy Klobuchar and Tom Steyer, their poll numbers have not matched those of Joe Biden due to his tight hold on the moderate vote. Tom Steyer, in particular, has spent a significant amount of money on ads but faces the challenge of proving himself to be more than just his wealth. The economy will likely be a major point of contention in the upcoming election, and Steyer believes his international business experience gives him an edge over Trump in this area. However, Steyer's lack of political experience showed in certain moments during the debate, and some critics suggest he could have focused more on personal stories to connect with voters. Overall, the race for the Democratic nomination remains a tight one, with Biden maintaining a strong lead.
Tom Steyer's Confusion at Democratic Debate: Tom Steyer missed a crucial exchange between Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders during the debate, sparking jokes about a president's hearing abilities, despite widespread speculation and lack of clarity on the issue.
Learning from the latest episode of Pod Save America is the confusion surrounding Tom Steyer's inability to repeat what Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders said to each other during the Democratic debate. Steyer drew attention for not making eye contact with either candidate and later admitted he didn't hear their exchange. This led to widespread speculation and jokes about a president's ability to hear important conversations. Despite the lack of a Thursday podcast, the team will return on Tuesday for their regular episode. The production team includes Michael Martinez (senior producer), Jordan Waller (assistant producer), Andrew Chadwick (mixer and editor), Kyle Seglen (sound engineer), and a digital team consisting of Elijah Cohn, Nar Melkonian, Yelfried, and Milo Kim.
