Politics Politics Politics

We’re just about a week out from Election Day, and I have to say, this is what I live for. These are the kind of stories that really scratch the itch for anybody who loves the game of politics as much as I do. We’ve got real contests, real dollars behind them, and actual electoral stakes. Yes, I know it’s not a presidential year, but this is the sandbox where some serious groundwork gets laid. And for as much as I hate the off-off-year calendar, I love election season more than anything. Here’s my breakdown of where I think the chips are going to fall in November.Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Starting in California, we’ve got Prop 50. Gavin Newsom has staked a big chunk of political capital on this one. It’s pitched as a pushback on Republican redistricting, with the messaging ultimately landing on “protecting America from Trump.” What started off messy got refined quickly, and with Newsom’s team sticking the landing, I see a 10 to 15 point win. McCarthy was supposed to pour in $100 million to fight it, but as of now, the actual spending is suspiciously light. All that adds up to a clear Democratic win.Now onto Virginia: Winsome Earl Sears vs. Abigail Spanberger. I’m heading up to D.C. this weekend, and originally thought I’d be bouncing around Virginia to catch campaign stops. But Sears? She’s nowhere to be found. Spanberger, while not the most electrifying candidate, has managed to avoid major blunders post-Jay Jones scandal. The polling tells a consistent story; Spanberger holding a lead that’s grown since the scandal broke. I’m calling it Spanberger by eight. Could be tighter, but it’s hard to see Sears overcoming the fundamentals working against her.As for Jay Jones, man, what a collapse. DUI, community service for his own super PAC, and leaked texts about shooting a rival politician? That’s how you lose an election. Miyares hasn’t trailed since that story broke. Nate Silver might be holding out hope, pointing to early voting and ticket-splitting, but my money’s on Miyares by one. A close one, but still a loss for Jones. This scandal made a difference, period.New Yorkers better get ready for Mayor Zohran Mamdani. He hasn’t been behind at all in public polling, all while Cuomo is clawing for relevance. Meanwhile, Curtis Sliwa isn’t pulling enough Republican support to matter to anyone but Cuomo. The energy just isn’t there for a last-minute surprise. Mamdani by 13.And then there’s New Jersey. The Mikie Sherrill vs. Jack Ciattarelli race is the sleeper of the night. Sherrill has led for most of the race, but recent polling has things tightening. Trafalgar and Coefficient both show her up by one. Republicans are feeling bullish, and if this ends within three points, they’ll have reason to. That would mean New Jersey, at minimum, becomes a fringe battleground in 2028. Not quite Arizona-level swing, but enough to force Democrats to spend real money defending it. I’m predicting Sherrill wins — but just barely.Chapters00:00:00 - Intro00:03:32 - Election Predictions00:23:08 - Update00:24:53 - Trade Deals00:30:58 - Shutdown00:38:10 - Israel00:44:36 - Interview with Austin Padgett01:38:03 - Wrap-up This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe

This Graham Platner saga just keeps delivering. Every time I think we’ve hit the ceiling on oppo drops, the elevator dings and we’re in a whole new suite of controversy. It’s not that the content was entirely new in tone. We’ve already seen him refer to himself as an Antifa supersoldier and admit to having an SS tattoo (which, to his credit, he covered up). But the latest batch of Reddit posts that surfaced added a thick layer of ugly homophobia. Explicit posts. Graphic anecdotes. And not from his teenage years or during some misunderstood youthful rebellion. These posts span several years, even continuing into the Biden administration.I’ve always said that if you’re running as an outsider candidate, having some skeletons in your closet isn’t necessarily a bad thing. It can actually help. Nobody expects a populist outsider to be perfect. The electorate doesn’t want a robot. They want someone who talks like them, even if it means sometimes saying the wrong thing. And even as Platner tests the outer limits of that rule, here’s the twist: the polling. A new University of New Hampshire poll of likely voters in Maine had Platner at 58 percent. That’s not just a lead. That’s a blowout. Janet Mills is at 24 percent. If those numbers hold up, then Chuck Schumer and company are right to be panicking.Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Still, Platner’s campaign has been running scared. Apology videos. Zoom interviews. Carefully worded statements about how he doesn’t think that way anymore. But from where I sit, this guy is doing everything but what he should. If I were advising his campaign, I’d be yelling: go on offense. The proper response to all of this should be simple — I deleted the posts before you ever knew my name. I deleted them because they didn’t reflect who I am anymore. That’s growth. That’s accountability. And that’s all anyone should expect. Instead, we get these soft, hedged statements. You’re not going to convince anyone that you’re the perfect candidate — stop trying.What kills me is how obvious the pressure is from the Democratic establishment. You can feel Chuck Schumer’s fingerprints all over this. They’re running the classic drip-drip-drip strategy, hoping to humiliate Platner into dropping out. But if you’re Platner — and especially if you believe those polling numbers — why would you flinch? Schumer and Mills are the ones who should be sweating. They’ve failed to unseat Susan Collins time and time again. They trot out the same kind of “perfect” candidate every cycle and lose. And now, when someone is actually running strong in the polls, they’re scrambling to blow it all up.I’m not defending what Platner posted. It was gross. And people are right to be upset. But this is a high-stakes game, and the voters of Maine seem willing to give him a shot. The question now is whether Platner will take the opportunity and run with it — or keep playing defense while the party machine steamrolls him. Personally, I’m tired of watching him take these hits and not swing back. I’ve been saying it all week. If you want to win, you have to punch. You can’t win a Senate seat on your heels. So please, for the love of political strategy — say their names, take their power, and act like you’re trying to win this damn thing.Chapters00:00:00 - Intro00:03:19 - Graham Platner00:17:55 - Update00:18:57 - SNAP00:21:40 - White House East Wing00:28:36 - Beef Prices00:31:08 - Interview with Juliegrace Brufke00:59:39 - Wrap-up This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe

It’s not every day that the most interesting story in American politics is a Senate primary in Maine, but here we are. This race, at least for now, has everything: a populist outsider, a messy internal fight, a supposedly safe Democrat, and a very unfortunate tattoo. If the Democrats blow a winnable seat in 2026, you can probably trace it back to this moment, and to one name: Graham Platner.Platner launched his campaign with the kind of fire Democrats usually dream of and then quickly move to kill. He’s ex-military, tattooed, and came out swinging against the party establishment. Think Fetterman with a more overtly socialist bent — and the endorsements to match. Bernie Sanders, Ro Khanna, a digital team built for viral insurgency. His launch video was raw and effective, casting him as the only one who’d fight Collins like it meant something. But before he could define himself, the knives came out. Old Reddit comments. Unpolished statements. And most notably, a chest tattoo that bears an uncomfortable resemblance to an SS death’s head symbol.Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Now, he says the tattoo was a drunk decision made while serving overseas — something picked off the wall at a shop in Croatia. That tracks. Plenty of service members come home with something dumb etched into their skin. But politics isn’t fair. The second it surfaced, it became a narrative — a “secret Nazi” smear that, while ridiculous, is now baked into every conversation about the guy. And that’s not something most voters are willing to fact-check. The perception — not the reality — becomes the problem.Still, the bigger issue isn’t the ink. It’s how Platner handled it. His entire appeal is built on strength and authenticity — and he responded like a nervous staffer trying to keep his job. The apology video was soft. It was long. It was careful. None of that fits the image he’s built. If you’re running on being the guy who doesn’t back down, you can’t fold the first time someone calls you a name. He needed to come out swinging — not just at the press, but at the party that clearly doesn’t want him there.Because make no mistake, they don’t. Janet Mills is the Schumer pick. She’s the “safe” one — a proven fundraiser, a party loyalist, and the kind of candidate who rarely wins a general in a state like Maine but always gets through the primary. That’s why the long knives came out for Platner. And if he doesn’t wake up and fight them like they’re already trying to end his campaign — which they are — then he doesn’t deserve the spot. Not because he’s a bad guy, or because he’s unelectable. But because he misunderstood the moment.This is a fight. Not a conversation. Not a listening tour. A fight. And if he doesn’t start treating it like one, he’s already lost.Chapters00:00:00 - Intro00:02:26 - Graham Platner00:16:10 - Interview with Josh Jennings and Andrew Heaton00:45:58 - Update00:46:13 - Trump-Putin00:49:03 - Israel-Hamas00:52:30 - Shutdown00:56:30 - Interview with Josh Jennings and Andrew Heaton, con’t01:23:09 - Wrap-up This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe

Trump is once again talking about Vladimir Putin — this time setting up a meeting in Budapest to discuss ending the war in Ukraine. That’s according to Trump himself, who said the two agreed on a phone call to meet, and that Secretary of State Marco Rubio and other U.S. officials would begin prep meetings with their Russian counterparts. No date has been set, but Trump described the call as productive.He also mentioned they’d loop in Zelensky during his upcoming White House visit, which adds another layer of complexity. Earlier in the week, Trump floated sending Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine as leverage. Whether that was serious or just bluster is up for debate, but the message was clear — he’s still playing both sides. One thing he did emphasize on Truth Social was how eager Putin seemed to be about post-war trade. According to Trump, that was the real focus — not the war itself, but what comes next.This is the kind of move that makes sense if you assume Putin is trying to preempt whatever message Zelensky hopes to deliver later this week. It’s also a reminder that Trump sees all of this through the lens of dealmaking, not diplomacy. He’s playing to his base — the voters who see “getting a deal” as a win, regardless of what’s actually in it. But as past attempts have shown, any momentum gained by just talking with Putin tends to evaporate as soon as the bombs keep falling.Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.The Shutdown MathSenate Majority Leader John Thune hinted that the White House might walk back some of its shutdown-related moves if Democrats agree to vote for a continuing resolution. He didn’t lay out specifics, but the implication was that things like furloughs or aggressive reduction-in-force orders could be reconsidered. Thune said passing a full-year appropriations package would make more clawbacks unnecessary — but until then, it’s unclear what Democrats would get in return.The rumor mill is working overtime — and the story making the rounds is that Democrats will vote for the CR, then hold a vote on Obamacare subsidies separately. Chuck Schumer says that’s not the plan, but let’s be real: it sounds like a deal in the making. Everyone knows the play here. The question is how quickly the Democrats can make it look like they won.At the end of the day, this is all about messaging. Democrats want to go back to their base and say they got something out of this. And if a CR plus a later vote on subsidies is the path to that — well, they’ll probably take it. Everything else is just noise.John Bolton IndictedJohn Bolton’s been indicted. Eight counts of transmitting and ten counts of retaining national defense information. This case centers around his handling of classified documents tied to his book, which he apparently shared through personal email and notes. The FBI raided his home, and now it’s up to the courts.The Biden administration says politics aren’t involved, but Bolton’s been a vocal Trump critic, which puts this in awkward territory. It comes on the heels of indictments for James Comey and Letitia James — all of them known Trump opponents. In those cases, the Comey case seems flimsy, while the one against Letitia James has more substance. Meanwhile, the Bolton charges had been floating around since before Trump left office in 2021.Here’s where I land: this whole mess reflects the same double standard we’ve seen for years. People working with classified material always say the same thing — if they did what these folks are accused of, they’d be in jail. There has to be a better way to handle these documents. Until then, we’ll keep getting stories like this.Chapters00:00:00 - Intro00:03:04 - Interview with Tom Joseph00:22:23 - Russia-Ukraine00:24:43 - Shutdown00:26:21 - John Bolton00:28:26 - Interview with Ryan McBeth01:13:29 - Wrap-up This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe

We’ve officially entered the phase of the shutdown where things stop being polite and start getting real. Missed paychecks are happening this week for federal employees, and while everyone knows they’ll eventually get paid, it doesn’t matter. Missing a paycheck now still hurts. It gets gritty fast. Both parties are struggling to manage this moment, and honestly, neither of them is very good at what they’re trying to do.On the Democratic side, they’re bad at being the ones who stop the machine for a righteous cause. You can tell because half of them aren’t even taking credit for the cause they’re supposedly fighting for. The public explanation is that this shutdown is about Obamacare subsidies and funding for regional hospitals, but those subsidies don’t expire until the end of the year. That means this fight is more about symbolism than urgency. The Democrats are also trying to repeal parts of what Trump calls the “one big beautiful bill,” though they won’t say that directly. Instead, they’re focused on a message that doesn’t connect cleanly — and that’s showing.Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Then there’s the filibuster angle. Democrats keep saying Republicans can end the shutdown by devolving the filibuster and voting the government open again. That’s dangerous thinking. Republicans don’t want to touch the filibuster because doing so would force them to start passing a lot more legislation — the kind Democrats could easily overturn later. I get the strategy. Democrats want the filibuster gone so Republicans have to own the bills they pass. Then they can campaign against them. But that’s a high-stakes game to play in the middle of a shutdown.Meanwhile, the Republicans aren’t handling this much better. They’re out of practice at playing defense on a shutdown. Their usual posture is that government is bloated anyway, so maybe turning it off isn’t the worst thing in the world. That might play well in theory, but when paychecks stop going out, people stop laughing. The White House hasn’t done much to apply pressure either. No press events. No imagery. No clear sense that anything’s different. To the average voter, it just feels like business as usual — and that’s not how you win a messaging battle.So where does that leave us? Probably in this standoff for a while. I’d bet on this dragging past Halloween, maybe into mid-November. The continuing resolution being floated now would keep funding through November 15, which would only buy about a month before we’re right back here again. The pattern is familiar. You stop one shutdown, swear never to do it again, and then do it again anyway.The most realistic off-ramp is a handful of Democratic senators breaking ranks and agreeing to a handshake deal — reopen the government now, vote on the Obamacare subsidies later. But so far, that hasn’t happened. Instead, we have Chuck Schumer saying every day of this shutdown is “better for Democrats.” That’s the kind of sound bite that will haunt you when paychecks are still missing and airports start slowing down.I thought this would be over already. I really did. A week ago, I said Democrats should have sold high — wrapped it up while they still had good poll numbers and claimed a moral victory. But they didn’t. They thought they had more to gain by holding the line. Maybe they’re right. Maybe they’re wrong. Either way, we’re all about to find out together.Chapters00:00:00 - Intro00:03:12 - Shutdown00:10:35 - Interview with Kirk Bado00:37:30 - Update00:37:59 - Maine00:44:40 - Ukraine00:48:01 - Argentina00:51:58 - Interview with Kirk Bado, con’t01:16:41 - Wrap-up This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe

A conversation with friend of the show Will Harris got my wheels turning. He pointed out something he was seeing in the UK press — Trump getting credit for what many are calling Biden’s Gaza peace deal. And yeah, I had missed that particular discourse, but it didn’t take long to see that the split wasn’t just overseas. It’s right here too. Some are arguing that the framework for this agreement was already in place under Biden, but now it’s Trump stepping in and sealing the deal. That’s not an unusual pattern in politics — one team builds, another finishes — but the way the Biden side is reacting is worth exploring.Let’s be honest: getting a Middle East peace deal done is about the hardest thing you can try to accomplish in diplomacy. Saying you have a plan is one thing — implementing it in a region with as much distrust and complexity as the Middle East is a whole different story. It’s like drafting a diet and fitness routine and assuming the results will match the spreadsheet. Biden’s people floated frameworks, sure, but they couldn’t make the deal happen. I suspect that’s because they thought it would require applying pressure on Israel to end the war — and they didn’t want to be seen doing that. They wanted the outcome without owning the action.Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Then there’s the idea that Biden deserved the credit even if Trump got the win. And this is where I find it all a little rich. Because I remember 2020. The Trump administration rolled out Operation Warp Speed — arguably one of the biggest policy successes of his term — and when Biden took over, they went out of their way to discredit everything Trump did. The narrative was that Biden had to rebuild the whole vaccination effort from scratch, even when it would’ve been politically smart to share credit or even use it to jab Trump from the left on vaccines as that issue started to shift.Now the roles are reversed. The Biden team worked on the peace framework and now wants credit — even though the Trump administration finished the job. It’s not that I think they deserve nothing. There’s a case to be made that this deal, if it holds, spans both administrations. That the effort to find a resolution to an ugly, years-long war included meaningful contributions from both. But if you live by the sword of discrediting your predecessor at every turn, don’t be shocked when you die by it too.I don’t think we’re about to see the Trump team break out the thank-you cards — and if a Nobel Peace Prize comes out of this, it’s going to have Trump’s name on it. Still, if they were smart, they’d acknowledge — maybe off the record — that having a working framework didn’t hurt. But the real lesson here is that a plan is just that — a plan. The deal is what matters. And once again, it turns out being the closer counts more than drawing up the play.Chapters00:00 - Intro03:13 - Gaza Peace Deal11:47 - Update12:04 - NYC Polling13:58 - Letitia James18:18 - Texas21:14 - Interview with Kenneth Vogel54:28- Wrap-up This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe

Ceasefire in GazaPresident Donald Trump announced a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, marking the beginning of a multi-phase peace process. The first phase slated to begin Monday includes the release of 20 hostages, a halt to active fighting, and Israeli withdrawal from parts of Gaza. Hamas is expected to return the remains of deceased hostages as part of the deal.The agreement, brokered with the help of Qatar, Egypt, and Turkey, represents a shift in regional diplomacy. Qatar’s role is especially significant, given its previous support for Hamas. Observers suggest that recent Israeli strikes in Doha (looking more and more like an approved strike by Qatar) indicate a broader effort to isolate Hamas.Key details of the peace plan, which aligns with a Trump proposal presented at the UN, include:1. Gaza will be a deradicalized terror-free zone that does not pose a threat to its neighbors.2. Gaza will be redeveloped for the benefit of the people of Gaza, who have suffered more than enough.3. If both sides agree to this proposal, the war will immediately end. Israeli forces will withdraw to the agreed upon line to prepare for a hostage release. During this time, all military operations, including aerial and artillery bombardment, will be suspended, and battle lines will remain frozen until conditions are met for the complete staged withdrawal.4. Within 72 hours of Israel publicly accepting this agreement, all hostages, alive and deceased, will be returned.5. Once all hostages are released, Israel will release 250 life sentence prisoners plus 1,700 Gazans who were detained after 7 October 2023, including all women and children detained in that context. For every Israeli hostage whose remains are released, Israel will release the remains of 15 deceased Gazans.6. Once all hostages are returned, Hamas members who commit to peaceful co-existence and to decommission their weapons will be given amnesty. Members of Hamas who wish to leave Gaza will be provided safe passage to receiving countries.7. Upon acceptance of this agreement, full aid will be immediately sent into the Gaza Strip. At a minimum, aid quantities will be consistent with what was included in the 19 January 2025 agreement regarding humanitarian aid, including rehabilitation of infrastructure (water, electricity, sewage), rehabilitation of hospitals and bakeries, and entry of necessary equipment to remove rubble and open roads.8. Entry of distribution and aid in the Gaza Strip will proceed without interference from the two parties through the United Nations and its agencies, and the Red Crescent, in addition to other international institutions not associated in any manner with either party. Opening the Rafah crossing in both directions will be subject to the same mechanism implemented under 19 January 2025 agreement.9. Gaza will be governed under the temporary transitional governance of a technocratic, apolitical Palestinian committee, responsible for delivering the day-to-day running of public services and municipalities for the people in Gaza. This committee will be made up of qualified Palestinians and international experts, with oversight and supervision by a new international transitional body, the “Board of Peace,” which will be headed and chaired by President Donald J. Trump, with other members and heads of state to be announced, including Former Prime Minister Tony Blair. This body will set the framework and handle the funding for the redevelopment of Gaza until such time as the Palestinian Authority has completed its reform programme, as outlined in various proposals, including President Trump’s peace plan in 2020 and the Saudi-French proposal, and can securely and effectively take back control of Gaza. This body will call on best international standards to create modern and efficient governance that serves the people of Gaza and is conducive to attracting investment.10. A Trump economic development plan to rebuild and energize Gaza will be created by convening a panel of experts who have helped birth some of the thriving modern miracle cities in the Middle East. Many thoughtful investment proposals and exciting development ideas have been crafted by well-meaning international groups, and will be considered to synthesize the security and governance frameworks to attract and facilitate these investments that will create jobs, opportunity, and hope for future Gaza.11. A special economic zone will be established with preferred tariff and access rates to be negotiated with participating countries.12. No one will be forced to leave Gaza, and those who wish to leave will be free to do so and free to return. We will encourage people to stay and offer them the opportunity to build a better Gaza.13. Hamas and other factions agree to not have any role in the governance of Gaza, directly, indirectly, or in any form. All military, terror, and offensive infrastructure, including tunnels and weapon production facilities, will be destroyed and not rebuilt. There will be a process of demilitarisation of Gaza under the supervision of independent monitors, which will include placing weapons permanently beyond use through an agreed process of decommissioning, and supported by an internationally funded buy back and reintegration programme all verified by the independent monitors. New Gaza will be fully committed to building a prosperous economy and to peaceful coexistence with their neighbours.14. A guarantee will be provided by regional partners to ensure that Hamas, and the factions, comply with their obligations and that New Gaza poses no threat to its neighbors or its people.15. The United States will work with Arab and international partners to develop a temporary International Stabilization Force (ISF) to immediately deploy in Gaza. The ISF will train and provide support to vetted Palestinian police forces in Gaza, and will consult with Jordan and Egypt who have extensive experience in this field. This force will be the long-term internal security solution. The ISF will work with Israel and Egypt to help secure border areas, along with newly trained Palestinian police forces. It is critical to prevent munitions from entering Gaza and to facilitate the rapid and secure flow of goods to rebuild and revitalize Gaza. A deconfliction mechanism will be agreed upon by the parties.16. Israel will not occupy or annex Gaza. As the ISF establishes control and stability, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) will withdraw based on standards, milestones, and timeframes linked to demilitarization that will be agreed upon between the IDF, ISF, the guarantors, and the United States, with the objective of a secure Gaza that no longer poses a threat to Israel, Egypt, or its citizens. Practically, the IDF will progressively hand over the Gaza territory it occupies to the ISF according to an agreement they will make with the transitional authority until they are withdrawn completely from Gaza, save for a security perimeter presence that will remain until Gaza is properly secure from any resurgent terror threat.17. In the event Hamas delays or rejects this proposal, the above, including the scaled-up aid operation, will proceed in the terror-free areas handed over from the IDF to the ISF.18. An interfaith dialogue process will be established based on the values of tolerance and peaceful co-existence to try and change mindsets and narratives of Palestinians and Israelis by emphasizing the benefits that can be derived from peace.19. While Gaza re-development advances and when the PA reform program is faithfully carried out, the conditions may finally be in place for a credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood, which we recognize as the aspiration of the Palestinian people.20. The United States will establish a dialogue between Israel and the Palestinians to agree on a political horizon for peaceful and prosperous co-existence.—The long-term viability of the deal remains uncertain, but initial signs suggest a realignment of regional priorities. This deal has Trump’s fingerprints all over it. As I am typing this I am speaking with friend of the program Wil Harris who is telling me that the UK press is presenting this as Biden’s plan Trump is taking credit for. That’s a bit rich, in my opinion. To paraphrase The Social Network:If Biden was the inventor of the Gaza Peace Plan, he would have implemented the Gaza Peace Plan. Katie Porter’s Viral Meltdown Raises Political StakesCalifornia gubernatorial candidate Katie Porter is under fire following a viral interview where she appeared combative with a reporter. The incident was compounded by resurfaced footage of Porter harshly reprimanding a staffer during the COVID-19 lockdown.Porter’s opponents, including Antonio Villaraigosa and Betty Yee, have seized on the moment to question her temperament and fitness for office. Strategists warn that although her base remains strong, such optics could threaten her standing as the Democratic frontrunner in a crowded 2026 race.Despite the controversy, many believe Porter’s progressive bona fides will carry her through. The Democratic primary electorate, historically more tolerant of combative behavior if aligned with ideological purity, may ultimately overlook the episode.James Comey Arraigned in Politically Charged CaseFormer FBI Director James Comey pleaded not guilty this week to charges of lying to Congress and obstruction, charges filed by the Department of Justice under Trump’s newly appointed U.S. Attorney, Lindsey Halligan. Comey’s legal team is expected to challenge the basis of the prosecution, citing political retaliation.Legal experts widely anticipate the case may be dismissed before trial, but the optics alone are significant. The indictment illustrates the fraught landscape of prosecutorial partisanship in the post-Trump era, where legal actions against political adversaries risk becoming a norm rather than an exception.Chapters and Time Codes* Introduction & Return to Austin — 00:00:41* Gaza Ceasefire Overview — 00:05:10* Trump’s Role and Regional Dynamics — 00:08:18* Implications for Hamas and Israel — 00:14:11* Katie Porter Controversy — 00:20:31* Political Impact of Porter’s Behavior — 00:24:06* James Comey Indictment — 00:29:11* Wrap-up & Preview of Ken Vogel Interview — 00:32:23 This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe

I want to start today by explaining why my audio sounds like garbage. I don’t have my usual mic — or my webcam, or laptop, or clothes — because everything was stolen out of our rental car while we were eating at Burma Superstar in Oakland. I lived in this city for nearly a decade and never once got ‘bipped.’ This time, someone smashed the window, glass flying right over the car seat where my baby had just been sitting, and took every bag they could find. My wife’s stuff, my stuff — all gone. They even took the bag of stuffed animals. Apparently, those don’t fence for much.Now, I don’t bring this up for pity. I know full well that parking a rental car in Oakland is like drawing a target on your back. But that’s exactly what bothers me — this idea that we deserve it. That the cost of living in a beautiful, culturally rich city like Oakland is rampant, normalized crime. And it’s not just Oakland. I don’t buy that this is the price of admission for living in cities like Chicago or New York either. These are cities with strong tax bases, vibrant economies, and in some cases — like here in San Francisco — literal gold rushes. I’m speaking to you now from the Bay Park, right next to the Chase Center, where the Warriors play. OpenAI’s offices are here. And yet one garage over, you’re stepping through fentanyl, addicts, and filth.Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.What really got me was the reaction. When I told friends what happened, no one was surprised — just a shrug and “yeah, rental car.” No outrage. No concern. This isn’t just about me getting my stuff stolen. It’s about the fact that this kind of thing is treated as an unavoidable fact of life. And I get it — people here have empathy. But that empathy’s being weaponized. Because this isn’t just random desperation. If it were, they’d have taken the diaper bag. No, I think what we’re dealing with is organized crime. And no one seems interested in doing anything about it.There’s no political will. I’m not calling for a police state, but I am saying that the city should want to stop this. It’s not just bad for tourists — it’s not good for the locals either. The criminals aren’t the ones getting rich. The neighborhoods that need better-paying jobs aren’t helped by a tourism industry that doesn’t exist because no one wants to visit a city where this is just what happens. I don’t think it’s generous to ignore that — to write this all off as unavoidable.The kicker? When I called 911, they told me to go to a website. That was it. And look, I’ll be fine. My car rental’s covered by Amex we’re going to get home okay. But what does that say about the city — when a middle-class family gets robbed, and no one even pretends to care? There’s something broken here, and it’s not just the window.Chapters00:00 - Intro and Crime Thoughts08:12 - Interview with Bill Scher45:42 - Wrap-up This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe

The Shutdown Senate VoteThe shutdown rolls on, and Senate Majority Leader John Thune has already said it is unlikely the Senate will vote this weekend. That means the government shutdown will extend into next week unless something changes Friday morning. He criticized Democrats for demanding an extension of the Affordable Care Act subsidies in the stopgap bill and insisted negotiations must begin only once the government reopens. Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is predicting GOP unity will falter as the shutdown drags on, but I’m not convinced.From where I sit, the numbers tell the story. Three Democrats voted with Republicans last time. Rand Paul opposes continuing resolutions, so Republicans will need eight Democrats to reach 60 votes because J.D. Vance is the tie breaker. Every time the Senate votes, I’m watching to see if more than three Democrats side with Republicans — that’s the real signal of where this is going.I don’t believe Democrats are built for shutdowns. They’re posturing as if they’re ready to see this through, but the longer it goes the more likely rank and file members will embarrass Chuck Schumer into ending it. The real pain — furloughs, firings, and cuts to the federal workforce — is only going to show up if this lasts into next week. That’s when the Russ Vought part of the story kicks in, and that’s when this gets serious.Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Abigail Spanberger in VirginiaFormer Representative Abigail Spanberger is leading Virginia Lieutenant Governor Winsome Earl Sears by 10 points in the governor’s race, 52 to 42, according to a new Emerson College and Hill survey conducted September 28 and 29. Early voting is already underway with more than 146,000 ballots cast. Among those voters, Spanberger leads 60 to 38 and still holds a 50 to 43 edge among those yet to vote.Her gains have come from independents, men, and younger voters. Independents back her by 19 points, men are evenly split, and voters under 50 favor her by 27 points. History suggests the party that is not in the White House usually wins the Virginia governor’s race. Based on that, I’d bet Spanberger, even though this isn’t exactly an electric matchup.The only real advantage Sears has is the men’s and women’s sports issue — a culture war topic, not a kitchen table one. I don’t think that will be enough, especially in Northern Virginia, which is heavily government dependent and angry at the president. Add on Sears not being a great candidate and Spanberger looks far stronger heading into November.Bailouts are BackTreasury Secretary Scott Bessent says the Trump administration will announce substantial support for U.S. farmers next week, likely funded by tariff revenue. Soybean growers have been hit hard as China has halted U.S. purchases during their trade war. Bessent accused Beijing of using farmers as hostages in negotiations but pledged aid, noting their loyalty to Trump.He discussed the plan with the president and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, but details and costs remain unclear. Argentina’s discounted soybean sales to China have undercut U.S. farmers and stoked tension. Bailouts are back, and this is classic Trump — he’s never been a fiscal hawk and has no problem using the federal government’s pocketbook to shape the world as he sees fit.That’s where things stand. Farmers are hurting, the administration is signaling payouts, and we’ll see next week how big the support really is.Chapters00:00:00 - Intro and Synagogue Shooting00:03:47 - Interview with Gloria Young00:34:28 - Update00:34:44 - Shutdown00:38:08 - Abigail Spanberger00:40:18 - Farmers00:41:49 - Interview with Gloria Young (con’t)01:03:18 - Wrap-up This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe

As I record this episode, we are on the edge — maybe already over it, by the time you read this — of a government shutdown. And I want to give you a bit of the behind-the-scenes intel I picked up that helps explain how we got here. According to one of my sources on the Hill (a Republican, for the record), the read is that Chuck Schumer is locked in. He’s in a “dark place,” unwilling to budge, and if anything’s going to change, it’ll come from other Democrats. That’s been the drumbeat here: Schumer can’t blink. If he does, he opens himself up to a leadership challenge. And that’s the one thing a Senate leader absolutely cannot do.The Democrats are trying to pitch the shutdown as a way to stand up for healthcare — that’s the messaging. But the problem is that if the government shuts down, there are a lot of healthcare extensions and services that begin to expire immediately. I read off a list of them: community health centers, Medicare adjustments, ambulance payment programs, disaster medical systems — the works. The irony is that the parts Democrats hate the most about the Trump administration don’t shut down. ICE doesn’t go anywhere. Deportations still happen. Those are essential — and Trump’s people decide what counts as essential.Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.The fight, according to Democrats, is over Obamacare subsidies and Medicaid cuts in the One Big Beautiful Bill. But those cuts don’t even kick in until after the midterms. Meanwhile, essential Democratic priorities lose funding the moment the lights go out. And that’s the trap. They’re betting that Trump wants to make a deal — that he wants to look like a bipartisan dealmaker. Maybe they believe they can spin this into a win. But let’s remember what happened the last time Trump tried that in 2018: he got nothing.If they’re hoping for Trump to ride in and rescue them, that’s a risky game. The GOP Senate and House leaders — Thune and Johnson — are more than happy to let this ride. Hell, there are people in that party who love a shutdown. It’s a stress test for them, a chance to see what happens when the government turns off. And the data doesn’t look good for Democrats. A New York Times/Siena poll had just 27% of all respondents — and only a slim plurality of Democrats — supporting the idea of a shutdown if demands aren’t met. That’s a brutal place to be when you’re the one pulling the trigger.So here we are: Schumer boxed in, the party divided, and the shutdown clock striking midnight. Maybe there’s a backdoor deal. Maybe Trump throws them a rope. But right now? The only guaranteed outcome is pain.Chapters00:00:00 - Intro00:01:41 - Shutdown00:08:42 - Interview with Evan Scrimshaw00:30:33 - Update00:31:21 - Hegseth’s Meeting00:34:42 - Schweikert for Gov00:36:09 - NYT Polling on Shutdown00:37:06 - Interview with Evan Scrimshaw (con’t)01:15:30 - Wrap-up This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe