Politics Politics Politics

Well, what a night that was.The 2025 off-year election came and went, and I don’t think anybody on the Republican side was quite ready for how hard it hit. I expected Virginia to go blue — I didn’t expect it to be a total decimation. Abigail Spanberger didn’t just win, she boat-raced it, besting Winsome Earle-Seares by a whopping 14 points. That momentum was even enough to carry Jay Jones, dogged by scandal after scandal, to a smaller (but no less impressive) six-point win. That’s despite having an opponent with a compelling ad campaign and a story that, in a different climate, might have turned heads. It didn’t matter. The wave swallows all.What stands out to me the most is how broad this Democratic surge really was. In New Jersey, Mikie Sherrill handed Jack Ciattarelli a 13-point loss, completely rewriting the expectations I had going in. I thought if Republicans were going to find any traction, it would be in the Garden State. It wasn’t. In Latino-heavy areas like Passaic, New Jersey — areas that just barely swung for Trump in 2024 after 2010s results in the D+50 space — saw a reversion back to near-2020 Democratic margins. Republicans had a shot to build a new working-class coalition in those towns, and right now, it looks like they blew it.Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.The real story of the night, though, was New York City. Zohran Mamdani didn’t just win. He crushed. He did it with style, focus, and an eye for narrative. His campaign was slick, and his messaging was clear. He connected with voters who felt left behind — people priced out of housing, worried about jobs, unsure about their future. Mamdani was speaking directly to them. He predicted headlines, embraced viral moments, and even handled scrutiny around some of the more potentially-controversial moments of his name with grace and wit. His vote totals show him cracking 50 percent, a number that Cuomo and Sliwa together couldn’t touch. It’s an out-and-out victory for a campaign that, initially, seemed like a pipe dream for the left.What we’re seeing now is a Democratic Party that knows how to win and a Republican Party still figuring out how to respond. And with the 2026 midterms now less than a year away, it’s only going to get crazier.Chapters00:00 - Intro01:30 - Virginia04:50 - New Jersery09:37 - Prop 50 in California11:36 - Mamdani in NYC18:51 - 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

I’ve seen my fair share of shutdowns over the years. Loud ones, quiet ones, dumb ones, strategic ones. But this one? This is just sad.I spent the day on Capitol Hill talking to anyone who would meet with me, bouncing between offices, looking to understand how close we are to any kind of resolution, and the mood is absolutely lifeless. Nobody knows what they want, and nobody’s talking to each other. The word I keep hearing is “aimless,” and that’s exactly what it feels like to be here.I had the opportunity to attend Speaker Mike Johnson’s press conference earlier today, and what stuck out to me was just how defensive it was. Republicans seem genuinely irritated that Democrats have managed to set the tone on this one, especially with their own base. Johnson spent most of his time pushing back against “false narratives,” but in doing so, he basically confirmed that the narratives are working. And I’ll be honest — if I were him, I don’t know that I would’ve spent that much time sounding frustrated.Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.What did break through, though, was something more interesting. A change in who the Republicans are pointing fingers at. It used to be Schumer and AOC. But now, it’s Zohran Mamdani, and this — Election Eve 2025 — was the day it shifted. You’re going to hear his name a lot more from Republicans. According to them, he’s now the face of the Democratic Party, at least the one pushing for this shutdown. That’s a big change, and it tells you where they think the real energy on the left is coming from.This all traces back to March, when Schumer passed a clean CR and got torched for it by the left flank. The idea now is that Schumer and Jeffries are shutting things down not because they want to, but because they’re scared of losing their jobs. That’s the same vibe I got from conversations on the Hill — they’re being pushed around, and they don’t have the political juice to stop it.Like I said… I’ve seen dumb shutdowns before. But even dumb ones usually make sense if you squint. This one doesn’t. It’s got no internal logic. The Democrats don’t want to own it. The Republicans are scared of their shadows. The base isn’t fully convinced by either side. And while everyone blames everyone else, regular folks — the people running out of ways to pay for groceries, unsure of whether they can afford insurance next year — are the ones dealing with the fallout. Chapters00:00 - Intro01:48 - Shutdown09:10 - Update09:42- Nancy Pelosi10:49- Supreme Court IEEPA Case12:00 - Thomas Massie12:49 - 2025 Polls16:42 - Interview with Andrew Heaton33:08 - 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 and Xi finally sat down for the first in-person meeting of this new administration, and I won’t lie — there was a lot of hype going into this one. There were whispers about a grand bargain, even murmurs of a complete game-changer announcement. Maybe China would distance itself from Russia. Maybe there’d be some kind of century-defining move on Taiwan. Earlier this week, anything seemed possible.What we got was something a lot less dramatic: a truce. Not a full-blown trade deal. A trade truce. And honestly, I was a little disappointed.Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.So here’s what went down. China made a few big concessions. They agreed to immediately buy 12 million metric tons of U.S. soybeans and promised to keep it going at 25 million tons per year for three years. They also agreed to suspend their new rare earth export controls for a year and curb fentanyl precursor production — a big issue in the U.S. Beyond that, China made a surprise move by signaling interest in American energy and even hinted at joining a natural gas pipeline project in Alaska. That last bit came totally out of nowhere.In return, the United States is lowering tariffs on Chinese goods by 10 percentage points, which still leaves them at a hefty 45 percent. We’re also postponing an investigation into Chinese shipping practices, which would have imposed new port taxes. There’s a delay on export restrictions for blacklisted Chinese firms for one year. Now, don’t get too excited — Trump made clear that China won’t be getting its hands on Nvidia’s top-shelf Blackwell chips, though some older GPUs will still be allowed to be sold. There was talk about ending Russia’s war in Ukraine, but nothing about China stopping its oil purchases from Russia. And most notably, no mention of Taiwan at all.Honestly, when I look at this, I think Trump and Xi were made for each other. Normally, trade deals take forever, get wrapped in ceremony, and then quietly fall apart when China decides not to follow through. U.S. leaders usually just shrug and move on, chalking it all up to classic maneuvers on their part. But Trump doesn’t play that game. If he doesn’t like a deal, he changes it. If China doesn’t hold up their end, he goes right back at them. And I have to say, there’s a certain clarity in that approach. It’s not exactly stable, but it’s a little more to-the-point.I’ll admit, I got a little swept up in the pre-meeting hype. I thought maybe we’d see something big, something that could define this administration’s approach to foreign policy. But now that I’ve had time to let it all sink in, here’s what I’m left with: this matters. Maybe not as much as I hoped it would, but it still matters. Because the American economy — and by extension, our elections — are tied so closely to what happens with China. If this truce brings even a little stability, it could have ripple effects that shape 2025 and beyond.Chapters00:00:00 - Intro00:02:18 - US-China Deal00:09:39 - Interview with Gabe Fleisher00:31:10 - Update00:31:27 - Shutdown Progress00:33:59 - Jasmine Crockett00:37:02 - Elise Stefanik00:40:13 - Interview with Gabe Fleisher, con’t01:08:29 - 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’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