Post Game: I think this is a 'throw the bums out' election

[0:00] Hi, everyone. Welcome to Post Game. Thanks to all of you for sticking around, Senator Heidkamp, [0:06] Governor McCrory, and Garrett. Garrett, let me start with you, and let's talk about this kind [0:12] of extraordinary moment where we're actually seeing the battleground expand a little bit. [0:18] You have Democrats eyeing the Senate race in South Carolina, in Kansas. You have Republicans [0:24] eyeing the Senate race in Minnesota, New Hampshire. Are these realistic goals? Are they fool's gold? [0:31] What do you think? We're not going to know, but I do think it shows a little bit about the Democratic [0:35] strategy and the degree to which the environment has just so tilted. I mean, a year ago, if you'd [0:40] told me Democrats were spending money seriously in Kansas or South Carolina, I would have thought [0:45] you were insane. But it speaks to just the issue sets that are hurting the president or things that [0:50] hurt him with rural voters especially, and it puts those places in play, or at least in [0:54] theory. I think the other part of it is, and I mentioned this in the show, is just like [0:58] where you're going to spend your money at this point. Like, you cannot buy advertising time in [1:02] Texas anymore. I mean, I talked to Republicans who are trying to figure out ways to like put up [1:06] billboards or like banner planes. I mean, ridiculous stuff in Alaska. Like, some of these places are [1:11] totally saturated. So it's like, all right, well, I've got, if you've got a couple million dollars [1:14] laying around, where might you be able to move some numbers? And it's a lot easier to do that in some [1:18] of these smaller states late in the game than it might be to pour another five or ten million [1:23] dollars into Ohio or something right now. Senator Heidkamp, how do you see this, particularly when [1:27] you're talking about Democrats saying, hey, South Carolina's in play. Kansas is in play. Two different [1:33] races, we should know. But do you think it's realistic? But the same issue. It's about the [1:39] economy. I mean, you've got horrible ratings for the president. You've got the worst ratings in [1:44] decades for consumer sentiment. You've got a huge problem with the economy overall and gas prices. [1:52] And so that creates opportunity. But what you don't think about and what we don't talk enough [1:58] about is candidate quality. And I don't think you compare Hamilton with Roger Marshall. And I think [2:06] there's just, so we recruited, the Democrats recruited really good candidates who are articulating [2:12] a message, don't have a lot of baggage because they've never run before, and they are likable. [2:17] And that is a formula for disaster for the Republicans in these races that you think [2:23] Democrats traditionally don't play. Governor McCrory, how do you see this? Do you think [2:28] these are states, South Carolina, where the demographics might be shifting? Or do you think [2:33] that Democrats are fooling themselves, that it's not worth investing in that? What about the other races? [2:38] That's a great question. One thing we don't know is how the demographic change, especially since COVID, [2:45] has moved Texas, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina into an unknown territory. Because guess [2:54] where the people migrated from? California, New Jersey, New York, Ohio. They moved to the Sunbelt [3:01] states. And then the Sunbelt Democrats, they're playing to them. They're playing a kind of a populist [3:11] liberalism to them. You know, where Trump would make America great again, they're saying, I'm going to [3:17] make your stuff cost less. What a term. Or I think you should be left alone. [3:22] Yeah, I mean, that's an important message. And they're going after the big insurance companies [3:27] and the big utilities. The utilities, for the first time in my political career, have become [3:33] the punching bag. And it's the data center. So what the Democrats and now Mike Rogers, [3:41] he turned to local issues. Yeah. And has nothing to do with the U.S. Senate. The states regulate [3:47] insurance companies and utilities. Yeah. It's amazing. I'm contractually obligated [3:52] to jump in anytime anybody mentions Texas. I'm sorry I have to do it. He's our Texas correspondent. [3:58] There's this dynamic, too, where these people are moving from northern states, [4:01] but they're not moving because they want to turn Texas into New Jersey or California. [4:04] They still want Texas to be Texas. And I think that's, by the way, part of the reason you could [4:07] also see this delta between how Governor Abbott does and the state policies there, which is why [4:12] people are moving there. They want the low taxes just as much as they want the sunshine. And Tallarico, [4:17] who can represent them differently at a federal level. There is an element to that. [4:20] I want to believe what you just said, but I'm not sure. I think some of these New York [4:25] Democrats that are moving to North and South Carolina are moving because they want lower taxes, [4:30] but they continue. They hate to change their vote. I think this is a throw the bums out election. [4:36] Anybody who is an incumbent or represents the incumbent party is at a huge disadvantage, [4:41] probably 10 to 12 percent. Well, that's why I think let's talk about Minnesota, for example, [4:46] for a moment, because you have Lieutenant Governor Peggy Flanagan and there's that big fraud scandal [4:54] that has enveloped a lot of state officials. And that's why Republicans are saying Michelle [4:58] Tafoya might have a shot here. I mean, because it is an election where candidate quality matters and [5:05] where there's an anti-incumbency feel. Right. I get that. But I think if she were running for governor, [5:10] I'd agree with you. But I think this is Minnesota is going to vote for a majority party in the Senate. [5:17] And that helps Peggy. But but the bottom line is you can say all the fraud, but you've got to remember [5:23] what Minnesota went through and especially the cities, the Twin Cities with ice raids. And that is raw [5:29] and that is real. And people want to send a message that that was wrong in Minnesota. [5:34] And that's how different the campaigns are in the messaging in the Sunbelt states versus the [5:40] Midwest state. And it's a different dynamic. Amy Klobuchar is at the top of the ticket, [5:46] and that's a real advantage in Minnesota. Well, that's one of the interesting dynamics, [5:50] Garrett. We'll be watching for our election night. To what extent does the person at the top of the [5:54] ticket rise or drag down these down ballot races? Well, we both we've talked about Iowa before, [6:00] which is a good example of this, where Rob Sand is, I think, the prohibited favorite now to win the [6:05] governor's mansion there. And his win could be determinative of what happens in that Senate race. [6:11] I interviewed Dave Kochel for the midterm podcast that we do. He's a longtime Republican strategist there. [6:16] He said if it's around like the double digit mark, like if Rob Sand wins by like nine or 10 points, [6:21] Ashley Hinson may not be able to overcome that. But anything less than that, [6:23] she might. Again, high candidate quality. But again, having that other, you know, [6:28] big pulled one direction in another race could make a big difference. [6:31] That has huge effects on the house races as well in Iowa, which people are ignoring and they should [6:37] not. I mean, Dempsey could pick up those three house races and they're a majority. I mean, [6:41] that's how narrow this is. And those three could all go together. [6:43] Even though we gerrymandered, my party gerrymandered to make an advantage, it might backfire. [6:49] Yeah, they over gerrymandered. In other places, it might backfire. [6:51] That's what they're seeing. I mean, if I didn't have to cover the president, [6:55] I would go park myself in South Texas for the next week because that could be determinative [6:59] for House and Senate. You've got several of those redrawn districts down there where Dempsey might [7:03] not just not have their incumbents lose, but they might actually pick up some of those districts. [7:07] And this has been the theory of the case since the Better Work campaign, [7:10] that if you really activate South Texas in the Rio Grande Valley, all of a sudden, [7:14] it's a different electorate in Texas. And that's really fascinating. [7:17] So my question is, if there is a blue wave, does Abbott lose in Texas? [7:22] He could. I mean, look, I think it could. I think it's really hard. [7:25] She's a good candidate. [7:25] I mean, she is a good candidate. She's running a campaign. [7:27] She completely backfooted him on the data center issue. [7:30] She's complained the Democrats haven't put enough money. [7:32] They put a million dollars into her race. [7:33] Yeah, but a million dollars in Texas is nothing. [7:35] I mean, you've got multiple top ten media markets. [7:38] Her race will be a turnout race. And so they're putting money in turnout. [7:42] The money people will dump on you in a minute. I mean, believe me, I was two points down. [7:46] Are you speaking from experience? [7:47] Oh, yeah. There is no loyalty, even to Michael Watley. [7:50] Yeah. [7:51] Do you think Musk is a factor in Texas, though? I mean, Gary, can he turn it around? [7:55] It's a lot of money. [7:56] Positive or negative? [7:57] Well, I mean, that's a great question, because he has spent, [8:00] I think it's more than $150 million is the latest reporting. [8:03] It's just a ton of money. It has a huge impact. They're doing it on television. [8:06] They're doing it with mailers. I mean, he's really using every tool at their disposal. [8:09] But Tallarico, I think, has done a fairly effective job of weaponizing that against [8:13] Ken Paxton, saying Ken Paxton's trying to buy a senator. [8:16] Think about this. [8:16] And if the two issues are corruption and affordability, that hits on both. [8:20] And tech bros. [8:21] Yeah. [8:22] They're not the most favorable class nowadays. [8:24] No, definitely not. [8:24] And so you're going to face your campaign with a guy who [8:28] makes billions of dollars on data centers and basically is part of the corruption and [8:35] Doge. I mean, he's just a bad spokesperson. [8:38] Well, I want to ask and end by talking about, we just had this big surprise happen, [8:44] which is this Vivek Ramaswamy ad targeting the mother of Amy Acton. Just for background [8:50] for folks who are watching, Amy Acton's estranged from her mother. She says she hasn't spoken to her [8:55] in nearly 50 years because she was sexually abused by her stepfather. This is a moment that has [9:01] shifted the contours of that race, potentially some other races in Ohio and beyond. And I just want [9:06] to go around. What surprises are you watching for? Do you think we may see on election day? [9:12] And when we wake up the day after election day, November 4th, what do you think we will be [9:18] surprised? Well, I don't want to make a predictive surprise, but I'll tell you what I'm worried about. [9:23] I'm worried about the idea that the Iran war could pick up again in between now and then, [9:27] or like on that night. There are Israeli elections that are basically happening now that could [9:32] determine what Israel wants to do next. The president's been asked about this more. He's [9:36] been sort of vague at his answers about what he wants to do next. Whether that could be a traditional [9:40] October surprise or slightly thereafter, it's clearly on the president's mind. And I'm not linking [9:46] the two to the election, but all of these things are happening simultaneously in a way that it could, [9:51] you know, impact here at the closing strike. Well, and Americans in the region have been warned. [9:55] That's right. That's right. Just adding to your level. And Iran has a demonstrated history of [10:00] of operating in American politics to their own interests. Ask Jimmy Carter. Yeah. Yeah. Right. [10:05] Exactly. Senator. I think we're going to see either a 50-50 Senate or a 54-40. Look, it all breaks one way. [10:14] Yeah. And I, and, and partly, you know, everybody's worried about the polls, but I went back and looked [10:19] at the New Jersey governor's race and the, uh, Virginia governor's race. The polling there was, [10:26] you know, probably three, four percentage points. It broke big for the Democrats. And I think this is [10:33] going to break big for the Democrats. And I think the Democrats are not only going to win big in the [10:37] House, but I think they're going to also win the Senate. Governor, final point to you. [10:43] Final point. If that happens, two things will happen. Okay. President Trump will blame others. [10:51] You're really going out on a limb. Thank you. But I'm not going out on a limb here. And the Democrats [10:57] will overreact and call it a mandate. Oh, I don't think so. And they always do. Both parties always [11:03] think this is a mandate. When in fact, a lot of these elections are, who do I hate more? [11:07] Yeah. All right. Throw them out. And having a mandate. Politicians always overreact to elections. [11:14] And then they're going to have to start making decisions. Like, what does it mean [11:17] we're going to end the war? Right. I mean, a little specifics might be needed there. [11:22] That's right. Yes. That's a, that's a January problem. Especially. [11:26] Well, and BB's election, that won't be decided. Right. It won't be decided [11:30] before the election because they'll have to form coalitions. Yeah, yeah, yeah. [11:33] Well, this has been a fantastic conversation. Nine days to go. Eat your Wheaties. Thank you so [11:39] much for sticking around for the post game. Appreciate it. Thanks for joining us.