Chuck’s Commentary - Trump’s Deadline To End The War? + Chuck Schumer Is Losing His Grip

This is an iHeart podcast.

Guaranteed Human

Support for the show comes from public, the investing platform for those who take it

seriously.

On public, you can build a multi-asset portfolio of stock, bonds, options, crypto, and

now generated assets which allow you to turn any idea into an investable index with

AI.

It all starts with your prompt, from renewable energy companies with high free cash flow

to semiconductor suppliers growing revenue over 20% year over year.

You can literally type any prompt and put the AI to work.

It screens thousands of stocks, builds a one-of-a-kind index, and lets you backtests it against

the S&P 500.

Then, you can invest in a few clicks.

Generated assets are like ETFs with infinite possibilities, completely customizable and

based on your thesis, not someone else's.

Go to public.com slash podcast and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio.

That's public.com slash podcast, paid for by public investing, brokerage services by

open to the public investing ink, member Finra and SIPC.

Advisory services by public advisors LLC, SEC registered advisor.

Generated assets is an interactive analysis tool.

Output is for informational purposes only, and is not an investment recommendation or advice.

Complete disclosures available at public.com slash disclosures.

When you stay in your home, what you love gets to stay too.

From the gardens that grow wild to the grandkids that run wilder.

From the Friday night baseball games to the Sunday morning brunches.

Even the daily crosswords and weekly book clubs.

There's room for it all with help from home instead.

The largest in-home senior care network.

With over 30 years of trusted experience, delivering the peace of mind you deserve.

Visit home instead online for a better what's next.

Lately, my friends keep asking, what I'm doing to my skin.

Honestly, I didn't change my makeup.

I changed my skincare.

It's called Farmhouse Fresh.

This award-winning fresh-grown brand is a 14-year favorite of US spas and beauty magazines.

But celebrities agree.

If you're over 40 and feel like nothing really makes a difference anymore, this does.

My skin looks brighter, smoother, and yes, people notice.

Get the Farmhouse Fresh skincare glow.

Go to farmhousefreshskincare.com.

The next 30 seconds could save you hundreds on your car insurance.

At the Hartford, we're passionate about your protection.

If you're 50 or over AARP auto insurance from the Hartford gives you benefits that really

matter.

And you could save $597 when you switch.

How's that for a little peace of mind?

Visit TrustHeartford.com today.

The Hartford, your protection, is our passion.

The Hartford Insurance Group Inc. Phase Royal TPs to AARP for the use of its intellectual

property.

AARP and its affiliates are not insurers.

Savings vary.

This episode of the Chuck Toddcast is brought to you by Incogni.

You know, one of the things we talk a lot about on this podcast is trust.

Who deserves it and who doesn't?

And lately I've been thinking about how much of our personal information is just floating

around online.

Talking about phone numbers, home addresses, emails, even information about your family.

All sitting on websites you've probably never heard of in the scary part.

That information can be used by scammers and identity thieves to piece together enough details

to impersonate you, target you, or worse.

That's where Incogni comes in.

Incogni works behind the scenes to track down and remove your personal data from hundreds

of websites.

Things like online directories, people search sites, and even commercial databases that

collect and sell your data without your consent.

Process is automated and because data can pop back up again, Incogni keeps monitoring and

removing it for you.

And one feature I really like is custom removals.

If you find something about yourself online that you want eliminated, maybe it's a listing

an old record or something you just don't want publicly available.

You can send Incogni the link and a dedicated privacy expert handles the removal for you.

It's a great way to reduce your digital footprint and protect yourself from scams and identity

theft.

Right now you can get 60% off an annual Incogni plan.

Just go to incogni.com slash chucktodcast and use the code chucktodcast.

Use the code you get a discount.

Again, that's incogni.com slash chucktodcast and use the code chucktodcast to get

60% off and start taking control of your personal data today.

Trust me.

I'm constantly working on this for years myself.

And here's an opportunity for you to take matters into your own hands as well.

Hello there and welcome to the Thursday edition of the chucktodcast.

We got a lot going on this episode.

I've obviously got a lot going on in this feed over the last week.

The launch of Thinastic.

I knew sports history podcast with J.A. Donde.

We are just incredibly moved by the initial response.

Amazing number of downloads already.

Terrific feedback and where it has only made me more motivated to find more nuggets and

stuff you didn't ever know about when it comes to our next topic for Dynastic, which

is the Pittsburgh Steelers.

Obviously, you can find Dynastic and it's in my audio feeds here and you can find it

wherever you find your podcasts or on the iHeartRadio network as well.

A few more headlines that I'm going to get into in this podcast number one, a quick update

where we are on the war.

I think we have a new potential end date and I'll tell you about that in a minute or at

least a a potential goal to try to where I think the president is going to try to wrap

up the Rand War, although his ability to wrap up this war I think is very minimal.

But the biggest news of the week is not has not taken place in Washington, Tehran.

It has taken place in two courtrooms, one in Santa Fe and one in Los Angeles and that

is the first signs that the tobacco effication, if you will, of the social media companies

has begun massive court losses by meta and YouTube meta twice this week, once in New

Mexico, second time in LA, YouTube part of the LA one, this is going to be, I think, an

escalating story, I'm going to get to that in a minute and we also want to, it was a

tale of two parties all within the same party, it was the best of times, it was the worst

of times, that's pretty much a tale of the democratic party that we want to discuss

also in this episode.

And then finally, happy opening day, I'm wearing my washing in that shirt, I'm really open

when we win game one, because if we win game one, it's probably the only time we're going

to have a winning record here in that space ball, I fear we're looking at a hundred losses

or more, this is a disaster, but there's always hope, right?

We've got the upside is rooting for these young kids and getting to know them, whether

it's Brady House, James Wood, so I have a little bit of baseball and a modest proposal

to bring back the fun and the NCAA tournament and satisfy the major powers all at the same

time.

This is a simple solution, folks, but you're going to have to wait until the end of the

episode to hear that solution, but let's get started with the serious stuff.

So I tease the idea that we now have an end date, the new deadline for the president

to wrap up the war, according to my friends at CNBC just before I began taping that the

Chinese and the United States have agreed on a new date for President Trump's visit to

Beijing.

I'll take place May 14th and 15th.

You will see a reciprocal visit, both the first family will host Xi and his wife, Madam

Peng Li Yuan at a yet to be announced date later this year, but the reason I say that

May 14th and 15th, one of the reasons why they delayed the April meeting was this ongoing

war, which means if there is not resolution, if we are not directionally headed to a conclusion

to this war of some sort, one would assume this either gets delayed or we're going to

start normalizing this war and this war has no end in sight.

So the point being is that we now apparently you can in the next 50 days, approximately,

from where we are today to May 14th, somehow we either are going to find out one of two

things.

We're going to have a glide path to figuring out what an uncomfortable ceasefire looks

like, which appears to be politically where the president is feeling the desperation.

You can see it at the same time he's getting pressure not to not to essentially give the

regime a win and anything short of regime change or no control of the straight-of-home

moves is going to give this regime the ability to say they stood down the Americans because

who's begging to stop right now?

It isn't the Iranians, it is the United States and why, why does President Trump desperate

for an exorbitant because this thing is politically out of control for him?

He has hit another all-time low in his weekly average on approval.

He has got more problems with the energy markets.

You've got even the most bullish banks and financial analysts when it came to, I think

Goldman finally flipped and said, no, it is now, even if everything stops today, these

energy markets are going to take months to recover, in fact, in some cases years.

Yes, the United States is going to be in better shape than pretty much every other region

around the world during this heightened energy crisis because we get less of our oil from

this region, but the markets on the markets and everybody's going to be impacted and this

tax on Trump voters.

Remember, this is the biggest problem and frankly, the Iranians are a lot more sophisticated

about our political issues than I think we give them credit for, certainly this administration

gives them credit for.

They're fully aware that the voters that are currently feeling the worst parts of this

war so far, the fallout from this war, are Trump voters.

Again, if you drive more miles than a given day and just by the way, if you live in rural

or exorbitant America, you just drive more.

This is something I learned over the years, living in Florida.

Florida is a place you're driving all the time and I was in Miami and in fact, I just

in a small way, just to understand, I think why sometimes people in DC are totally immune

to the gas price issue is actually how few miles you have to travel if you live in the

DMV.

It is a very compact area.

You could be stuck in, I'm not saying you're not going to, it's not going to take you

an hour to go 15 miles.

Okay.

That is, you know, ditto with New York City.

You can have plenty of ways that it takes you forever, but your actual mileage travels

very minimal.

So you, you think a gas goes far and, you know, I talk to anybody that leases cars, okay?

If you lease a car and I will tell you, I'm a car, I lease a car.

I don't, you know, I own, we don't, I own a car, in some cases, I lease a car, right?

Whatever makes financial sense.

But if you lease a car, you can put your lease payment down.

If you agree to a minimum, you know, like, I'm not going to drive more than 15,000 miles

in a year, 12,000 miles in a year, 10,000 miles in a year.

Well, in Florida, if you lease a car and you would think you're going to drive less than

10,000 miles, you're more on.

It's almost impossible.

You got to drive everywhere.

There's no public transportation, nobody, you're always driving.

So when you lease a car, you're always in the 12,000 to 15,000 range in a year and likely

more, you know, 15 to 20,000 miles in a given year.

Every time I've leased a car in this area, I have, I've always been paranoid to do the

7,500 mark, thinking, oh, now I'm going to, I'm going to go over that.

And I never go over it.

And yes, you could say, well, you have the luxury of living inside the boat, but that's

the point.

It's a very compact area and most of official Washington lives in a compact area.

So the, we here are in a gas bubble, gas price bubble.

We don't feel it the way you will feel it in a Texas, in a Florida, in an Iowa, in

a Kansas, you get my point.

So this is the political pressure, the absolute political pressure that the president is feeling

that is domestic, sort of those, that those of his advisors that are more worried about

the current political environment than they are the geopolitical environment.

All right.

Now, at the same time, the president's getting cross pressures now at the moment from

the, from the Saudis and UAE.

And they are petrified now that this, this is, he is going to retreat too soon.

It's going to keep essentially nothing will change for them, right?

They have not wanted the Iranians to have this leverage over the region, and they will

still have leverage in the region, leverage over the Strait of Hormuz.

Yes, they are a weakened state.

Yes, in theory, what's in America's best interest might turn out to be we might get everything

we want out of this in the medium term, but the region will not.

Which means we are not going to have stability.

We are not going to have peace and you're going to continue to have low grade proxy fights.

And they'll probably be proxy fights that the United States government isn't interested

in.

And that is why I'm not saying I agree with what the Saudis and UAE saying, but I understand

their point of view from this.

And they figure the minute the U.S. bails on this and pulls the plug, they are not coming

back into quote unquote, mode along, right?

This idea that somehow every once in a while the U.S. and Israel will just, whatever military

ramp up the regime in Iran does that they will just mow it down again.

That worked with Saddam for a while, right?

I mean, it was just sort of it, but like we had, you know, we had airstrikes about every

six months against Saddam after the first Gulf War, right?

They had taken it in a bush.

I think it felt like about every three to six months it was probably further gaps than

that, but that you would have, you know, just a consistent degrading of what Iraq was

trying to do.

I'm not sure that there is going to be that kind of appetite for something like that.

So once again, in some ways, nothing has changed in this situation from where, where, when

he got into this war, he's boxed himself in, it's, it's all bad options.

And the question is, what is he going to prioritize?

Is he going to prioritize risking pull negative political fallout first party in the midterms

here in this country, or is he going to risk his personal family's business interests with

two of the most important patrons in the Gulf to him, the Saudis and UAE.

I know some people wouldn't put, you know, the whole point of this podcast is to sort of

be straightforward with you, right?

This is, he's got his own personal, they have that, they have, the Saudis and UAE have

personal business leverage over Trump and his family and they want one thing.

The current political climate has its own and the markets have its own version of leverage

over Trump.

Right?

He doesn't want to be a loser and he doesn't want to suddenly lose support.

I know, I know what some of you are thinking.

If he's going to pick a side, he's going to pick them up side on money.

I certainly would make that the three point favorite if you were to make it a point spread.

And, you know, yeah, it's probably 52, 48, he's more likely that he will listen to his

financial patrons and his family's financial patrons more than he's necessarily going to

listen to the polls and to the public.

And I don't think it's a much closer call than even the most cynical sort of person

about Trump being a club, you know, sort of running a club talker see here, right?

Probably, you know, so I once, like I said, he's in a box and he's going to make some

entity and he's trying to, there's no needle to thread here.

There just isn't.

And that's the situation he's in.

So at this point, there's really not a lot more to say about this, but it will be, it

is interesting to see, while Trump talks a big game about trying to have talks and they've

traded absurd proposals for each side, right?

And continue to send ground forces into the region ready to be deployed.

Um, 82nd Airborne now has joined some Marines that are already over there.

So it does feel as if, and I, I, you know, I, I think if he decides he needs to finish

the job, ground troops are inevitable because the only way we can take control, the only

way they can manage a situation is to take control of the straighter hormones and the

only way to take control of the straighter hormones but boots on the ground and the shorelines.

And so it's, you know, either we're accelerating towards either way.

I want to circle back to what I said before, circle May 14th and 15th on your calendar and

figure that that is the window that he is going to, if he can get out of this, he is going

to try to get out of this.

Let's just say I'm mostly skeptical that he can do that in that timeframe.

This episode of the Chuck Todd cast is brought to you by Seoul.

So if you love that end of the day, unwind, but hate the hangover, Seoul's out of office

is for you.

These sparkling THC drinks and gummies give you the same relaxed social feeling without

the alcohol, without the calories and without the crash.

Seoul is a wellness brand that believes feeling good should be fun and easy.

Seoul specializes in delicious hemp derived THC and CBD products designed to boost your

mood and help you unwind.

Their best selling out of office gummies were designed to provide a mild, relaxing buzz,

boost your mood and enhanced creativity and relaxation.

With five different strengths, you can tailor the dose to fit your vibe.

So also has a variety of products specifically designed to help you get a better night's

rest, including their top selling sleepy gummies, a fan favorite for deep,

restorous sleep.

Look, I have made no secret.

I am a believer in this stuff in cannabis and hemp derived.

I do not partake in alcohol for the most part.

I think this stuff is a lot safer than alcohol, a lot less addictive than alcohol.

And yes, I have to say I love these drinks.

It is the glass of wine.

And you know, after work, that's what this is.

So no hangover and no excess calories like this.

I'm a big fan.

So bring on the good vibes and treat yourself to soul today.

Right now, soul is offering my audience.

30% off your entire order.

Go to get soul.com and use the word Toddcast.

That's get soul.com promo code Toddcast for 30% off.

And yes, I too am a customer.

Texting privacy policy in terms of conditions.

Posted a texting terms.

US texting rolls you for a courting automated text marketing.

That's just message.

Data reads me apply or play.

Stopped out visit ISSA online for details.

Tired of the nine to five grind.

Looking for something different that's flexible, fulfilling and pay as well.

How do you like to get paid to work out?

Now you can with ISSA,

the global leader in personal fitness certification.

There's a huge demand for certified personal trainers right now.

And once you get ISSA certified, they guarantee you'll get a job.

Trainers can make as much as $100 an hour.

Yes, I said $100 an hour.

And with ISSA, you can be certified in as little as six weeks.

You do everything at your own pace and 100% online.

Pursue your passion in specializations like yoga,

nutrition or strength training.

Get certified and live your life on your terms.

Work at a gym.

Start your own business or a side hustle.

Whatever works for you.

Just don't wait.

Get your free personal training evaluation kit today.

Get certified in as little as six weeks.

And ISSA guarantees you'll get a job.

Text gym to 323232.

Text gym to 323232.

Gym to 323232.

Honey.

Sorry, I was dreaming about a new kitchen.

Then let's do it.

Renify lets us borrow based on our home's value

after renovations.

Up to $750,000.

And we get to keep our low mortgage rate.

New bathroom.

Yes.

Finished basement.

Yes.

Girls trip to Tuscany.

Oh, uh, Renify doesn't do that.

Visit renify.com to receive a text

to see if you qualify for up to $750,000

to renovate your home with Renify.

That's r-e-n-o-f-i.com.

NMLS number 1802847.

Terms apply.

Not all bars are properties qualify.

Equal opportunity broker.

Support for the show comes from public.

The investing platform for those who take it seriously.

On public, you can build a multi-asset portfolio

of stock spots, options, crypto, and now generated assets

which allow you to turn any idea

into an investable index with AI.

It all starts with your prompt.

From renewable energy companies with high free cash flow

to semiconductor suppliers growing revenue

over 20% year over year,

you can literally type any prompt

and put the AI to work.

It screens thousands of stocks,

builds a one-of-a-kind index

and lets you backtest it against the S&P 500.

Then you can invest in a few clicks.

Generated assets are like ETFs

with infinite possibilities,

completely customizable and based on your thesis,

not someone else's.

Go to public.com slash podcast

and earn an uncapped 1% bonus

when you transfer your portfolio.

That's public.com slash podcast.

Paid for by public investing,

brokerage services by open to the public investing ink,

member Finra and SIPC.

Advisory services by public advisors LLC,

SEC registered advisor.

Generated assets is an interactive analysis tool.

Output is for informational purposes only

and is not an investment recommendation or advice.

Complete disclosures available at public.com slash disclosures.

When you stay in your home,

what you love gets to stay too.

From the gardens that grow wild,

to the grandkids that run wilder.

From the Friday night baseball games,

to the Sunday morning brunches,

even the daily crosswords,

and weekly bookclubs.

There's room for it all with help from home instead.

The largest in-home senior care network,

with over 30 years of trusted experience

delivering the peace of mind you deserve.

Visit home instead online for a better what's next.

So I want to pivot now to sort of my tale of two parties,

and it's really not a tale of two party.

It's a tale of one party with the Democrats.

Things have never been better,

and yet the party feels leaderless,

directionalist,

and the voters don't have a lot of confidence in it.

Even as they're ready to vote for pretty much any Democrat

if they're going up against a MAGA Republican.

Right, the big news from Tuesday night was

the Democrats won a couple more special elections.

30 and 0 right now in flipping state legislative seats

and Trump took office,

meaning the Democrats have flipped 30

across the country, count them,

3-0 state legislative seats held by Republicans.

And the Republicans have flipped exactly 0

Democratic held seats in that same time period.

So that's a pretty impressive,

as my friend Crystal is a point out, 30, you know,

that is, and that is, as he pointed out,

there's a lot of noise and politics right now,

but that is a signal.

And we know this is where this looks like 2018 all over again,

which led to a 40 seat house game.

Obviously with redistricting,

gerrymandering, everything,

you know, 20 seats is the new 40 seats, right?

You know, and any, to me, anything 20 or above

is the definition of a wave in this,

in this reapportionment,

in this era of reapportionment that we have.

So things have never looked better on the opportunity front.

And I will take it a step further.

The Democrats have orchestrated two shutdowns now

of the government, one apart, you know,

one or more, a more larger shutdown over health care.

That started before the 2025 election day

and went through those elections.

And then the one that we're currently in,

with just the partial shutdown of the HS,

which is being felt most acutely at our airports.

And Democrats are winning both shutdowns.

And it's actually very, I mean, to just show you what,

this is a sign of just how unpopular Trump is,

nine times out of 10, 99 times out of 100.

The party that forces a shutdown eventually gets blamed.

And so far in both cases,

Democrats forced the first shutdown.

Not only did they not get blamed,

they got health care from them.

In this second shutdown,

which was arguably triggered by the actions,

the illegal and unconstitutional actions

that I stood in Minneapolis,

the death of two American citizens,

murdered by ICE agents,

certainly I think drove the party to do what they did.

And largely the public has been with them on this.

And we've hit a point in this shutdown,

and I hinted at it a couple,

I hinted at about a week ago, I said, you know,

the Democrats have probably gotten everything they're going to get out of this politically.

They've got the Republicans begging to make a deal.

And you know, at some point,

you know, they're crying uncle, they got to say, okay, let's go.

You got to do.

Because there's a risk where this suddenly,

it just becomes about the pain being inflicted on TSA and travelers and less about ICE.

So I do think the administration and the Republicans did the Democrats a huge favor

by deploying ICE agents in their ports.

I don't think that does what they think it does.

It may make their base happy.

But think about this idea that the White House believes that ICE has become such a

negative that it can be used as leverage to scare travelers and scare Democrats in a cutting a deal.

Like they now know they've created a menacing agency.

Like that's what that's what's so surreal about this decision.

They're accepting the premise that the Democratic Party's description of ICE

is what the public thinks and is what it is and that they can somehow leverage that for their gain.

Oh, they fear ICE.

Wait, will we put ICE at the airports?

You're just like, I mean, it really is.

I know I keep reusing this old movie metaphor, but it blazing saddles

when the sheriff pulls the gun at himself.

He says, don't anybody come near.

I might shoot.

I mean, it reminds me of a version of that.

It is a strange, it was just, I think it's strange tactic.

And I don't think the Republicans any good.

It certainly doesn't help ICE's image at all.

But the bigger thing is the Democrats have accomplished a lot with this shutdown.

When this shutdown began,

Christine Ohm was the Secretary of Homeland Security.

She is no longer the same.

There's already been a confirmed new secretary.

And Mark Wayne Mullin has essentially agreed that there should be body cameras.

He seems to be open to getting rid of the masks beyond essentially unless you're at the border,

which I think was a fair proposal.

If you're dealing with the cartels, they don't want to show their face,

because those cartels do try to assassinate people.

But outside of that, they have to abide by the exact same laws

that all law enforcement agents have to abide by in this country.

Hard stop.

So the point is that it does seem as if the Democrats have gotten a lot out of this shutdown.

The long if they, you know,

and look,

I get that they're not going to get everything they want at ICE.

And there's some things they can, I mean, the problem the Democrats have is they don't have

that much leverage over the ICE funding, right?

Because it was done as part of the Big Beautiful Bill.

That stuff was already leveraged in at best.

And I understand why they're hesitant to

take the deal that's on the table because they want to

codify these changes to ICE protocols without just taking word for it and things like that.

So I understand the hesitance.

But the big picture here.

All of the coverage on this now in whatever's left of legacy media is just focused on

the harm it's doing to TSA agents and the burden it's putting on travelers.

This is no longer about ICE.

So the point is when you get to a situation when you sort of you're playing a little politics here

with the government and you're playing politics with the budget, there's that fine lie.

And, you know, there's some look ultimately I think it's ridiculous that a political dispute

somehow disrupts all travel, right?

Like we've got to figure out how to insulate travel, insulate the public from this nonsense.

You know, this is I am I am more than convinced that a sort of quasi privatization of TSA.

What do I mean by quasi?

That essentially TSA works for these airport authorities period and the airport authorities

get reimbursed for the security from the government.

But essentially they're making payroll.

They're they're keeping consistent.

There is no skipping paid checks because a couple of members of Congress want to want to

stand on ceremony for a variety of reasons.

And you're minimizing the impact on the public.

And I know some of you may argue but no, forcing the public to get irritated and to focus

their iris is part of the problem.

I I hear you on that.

But I don't think at this point the iris going to be a focused irer, right?

And the democrats probably ought to take this deal before the weekend ends.

And I anticipate that a deal is going to get done before the next time you hear me on this.

I kind of think they they have to.

What's interesting here is is is what is how I think one of the reasons why

democrats have yet to take a deal is they don't really have a leader at the moment.

Chuck Schumer has never seemed more unsteady on his feet than he does at the moment.

He does absolutely, you know, at all.

And I don't know how much of it is connected.

But I think a lot of this is connected to a fascinating Wall Street Journal piece from last week

that got went into the weeds on the effort to push Chuck Schumer aside from leadership.

And I encourage you to read the story in full in the Wall Street Journal.

Because it what was amazing about it is how kind of open everybody is about the various

factions now in the senate democratic conference.

And this sort of the reality check, right?

It the piece in the Wall Street Journal opens with an anecdote of Chris Murphy,

Democratic senator from Connecticut at a dinner with a bunch of progressive activists who

you know, they're having this dinner and they're saying, okay,

and they're basically pushing Murphy.

And Murphy is somebody who may run for president more on the progressive side of things.

And they're pushing Murphy.

We got to deal with the elephant in a room.

What about, you know, we got to get rid of Chuck Schumer.

And what surprised apparently folks at that dinner, and of course, what leaked out,

and then Murphy basically owned up to the comments without being overly critical as Schumer,

the person for what it's worth.

What he said was, well, look, a bunch of us have essentially done some vote counting.

And the votes aren't there to get rid of Schumer.

Which doesn't surprise me, and you're certainly not going to see this in an election year.

But what you're starting to see is the fact that this is being talked about openly,

like there's a pressure campaign to get him not to run for leader after November to

he simply accept the premise that this is his last year as leader.

They seem to be hoping against hope that he will decide not to seek real announced that he's

not going to seek reelection in 28, and then he will not stand in essentially just like Mitch

McConnell did, right? Mitch McConnell decided not to seek reelection in 2026, but chose to step

aside as leader at the end of 2024, allowing new leadership to take over. And he would essentially be

there as the, as a, as a, as a godfather, at a meritous of sorts, Allah wouldn't answer Pelosi.

Although she, you know, she, she's been there a few cycles, but essentially similar to how Pelosi

handed over the reins to Jeffries on that front. We've had smoother transitions there than we did,

of course, with what the House Republicans have done. What, look, I think what makes this story

amazing, number one, is how public everything is. And when this leaked out, Murphy certainly seemed to

admit that they've done some nose counts, right? And he's on the side. You've got to Elizabeth

more. What, what this piece did was clarified, who's behind the, it's time for Schumer to go.

So it appears to be Chris Murphy, appears to be Elizabeth Warren, appears to be retiring Senator

Tina Smith from Minnesota that mildly surprised me that she was a part of this. Then you have folks

that are sort of in the category of they don't want to tick Schumer off, but they want to be their

ready to replace him, right, Ryan Shatz is in that column. And in fact, it looks like Shatz has

played his cards so well that according to this piece, Schumer or Schumer's allies are, you know,

if they have a say in who replaces them, they'd like to see Shatz, that might be a kiss of death.

But Shatz went out on a limb and went ahead and defended Schumer. And he said,

Chuck's got broad and deep support, even as detractors would have to admit that we have an

extraordinary class of candidates for the Senate. And that wouldn't have happened without him.

He's referring to Roy Cooper. He's referring to Janet Mills.

But one could argue that in three of the most important and and Mary Petola in Alaska,

and the question is does he get credit for Taloriko? I think he does. He seemed to be on the side

of of those consultant worlds that was trying to get Taloriko in there. So

but there are these huge primaries. There's basically one faction in the Senate wanting to see

the grand plateners of the world win wanting to see a gentleman by the name of Zach Walls,

win in Iowa instead of Schumer's pick of Josh Turek. And of course, you have the Michigan

primary that is a three way race between sort of strong establishment, one that straddles

progressive in establishment and one that is super progressive. And you do have a group of senators

that are basically running against Schumer's candidates and endorsing whoever Schumer's not for,

they seem to be endorsing and vice versa on that front. But the fact that this went public.

And apparently one of the beefs, and I got to share with you this one anecdote because

the story itself and the way Schumer responds to the story in this Wall Street Journal piece,

I think is a is a tell that he is both slightly out of touch a bit stubborn about this

and is probably going to fight and is not going to roll over here. But what we shall see.

Oh, one other, this was, this was really telling. According to the Wall Street Journal story

about Schumer and Schumer agreed to do an interview with here almost as a way to sort of push back

on this narrative that he was two week to lead. The journal points out a number of democratic

senators provided the Wall Street Journal with interviews or statements in support of the leader.

They included Shats, Catherine Cortez-Masto, Sheldon Whitehouse, Kirsten Gillibrand,

she's the current DSCC chair. Chris Coons and Tim Cain, right? Those are sort of everybody's been

there essentially more than a term when you look at these folks, right? These are, this is what

you would expect that it would be more of the establishment types, more that have always run more

center left campaigns. Catherine Cortez, all of these folks, you know, I'm old enough to remember

in Kirsten Gillibrand represented an upstate New York seat and wanted a pretty good NRA rating.

Chris Coons, very middle of the road kind of guy in Delaware always involved with any bipartisan

talks in Tim Cain has always straddled that fence as well. So it's notable who would put their name

on the record and it's of course notable who chose not to do that, right? You didn't see some

others because there's quite a few senators with Schumer's problem is he is, he seems to be at that

moment where he's so paranoid of leaks and he doesn't know who to trust that he doesn't share

information enough and of course that pisses people off.

This episode of the Chuck Toddcast is brought to you by Wildgrain. Wildgrain is the first

bake from frozen subscription box for sourdough breads, artisanal pastries and fresh pastas.

Plus all the items conveniently bake in 25 minutes or less, unlike many store brought options,

Wildgrain uses some simple ingredients you can pronounce and a slow fermentation process that

can be a lot easier on your belly, little gut health there, right? And richer in nutrients

and antioxidants. There's also no preservatives and no shortcuts. The Wildgrain boxes are

fully customizable in addition to their variety box. They have a gluten free box, a vegan box,

and a new protein box. I will tell you I have done the gluten free box. I have done it a second time.

I have also used the code, the Toddcast code. If you use the promo code Toddcast to check out,

you get $30 off. I've already used it as a gift to somebody else who loves this bread. It is

hard to find good gluten free bread. It is fantastic. They give you step-by-step instructions.

I really dig this. There is nothing like having an artesian bakery in your freezer to chase away

the winter chill. Now is the best time to stay in and enjoy some comforting homemade meals with Wildgrain.

I obviously highly recommend it. It is worth giving Wildgrain a try. Right now, Wildgrain is offering

my listeners $30 off your first box. Plus free croissants for life. Come on. When you go to wildgrain.com,

slash Toddcast to start your subscription today. That's $30 off your first box and free croissants

for life. When you visit wildgrain.com slash Toddcast or simply use the promo code Toddcast at checkout.

This is a sponsor I absolutely embrace. So use that code.

Tired of the nine to five grind. Looking for something different that's flexible, fulfilling,

and pay as well. How do you like to get paid to work out? Now you can, with ISSA, the global leader in

personal fitness certification. There's a huge demand for certified personal trainers right now.

And once you get ISSA certified, they guarantee you'll get a job. Trainers can make as much as $100

an hour. Yes, I said $100 an hour. And with ISSA, you can be certified in as little as six weeks.

You do everything at your own pace and 100% online. Pursue your passion in specializations like yoga,

nutrition, or strength training. Get certified and live your life on your terms. Work at a gym.

Start your own business or a side hustle. Whatever works for you. Just don't wait.

Get your free personal training evaluation kit today. Get certified in as little as six weeks.

And ISSA guarantees you'll get a job. Text train to 32 32 32. Text train to 32 32 32. Train to 32 32 32.

On each snap out of it. Oh, sorry. Just dreaming about updating our kitchen.

Well, stop dreaming and let's do it. We can't afford that. And we don't have the equity in our

house yet to do a home equity loan. We can afford it with Renify. It's a new kind of home equity

loan that lets us borrow based on the value of our home after we make our renovations.

Oh, wow. Well, I'm also dreaming of a new bathroom. We can do that too. With Renify,

we can get up to $750,000 and keep our existing low mortgage rate locked in so we can tackle

every project on our list. Finish the basement for the kids. Yes, with Renify. Home office for me.

Let's do it. Girl's trip to Tuscany. Oh, Renify doesn't do that.

Visit Renify.com. That's r-e-n-o-f-i.com to receive a text message to see if you qualify for

up to $750,000 to renovate your home with Renify. Unlock the future value of your home right now to

get the money you need without refinancing. Visit Renify.com or r-e-n-o-f-i.com to get started today.

NMLS number 1802847. Terms apply. Not all borrowers are properties qualify.

California Department of Real Estate License number 02195141 and NMLS number 2412747. Equal

opportunity broker. Support for the show comes from public, the investing platform for those who

take it seriously. On public, you can build a multi-asset portfolio of stock spots, options,

crypto, and now generated assets which allow you to turn any idea into an investable index with

AI. It all starts with your prompt. From renewable energy companies with high free cash flow to

semiconductor suppliers growing revenue over 20 percent year over year, you can literally type

any prompt and put the AI to work. It screens thousands of stocks, builds a one-of-a-kind

index and lets you backtests it against the S&P 500. Then, you can invest in a few clicks.

Generated assets are like ETFs with infinite possibilities, completely customizable and based

on your thesis, not someone else's. Go to public.com slash podcast and earn an uncapped 1 percent

bonus when you transfer your portfolio. That's public.com slash podcast. Paid for by public

investing, brokerage services by open to the public investing ink, member Finra and SIPC,

advisory services by public advisors LLC, SEC registered advisor. Generated assets is an

interactive analysis tool. Output is for informational purposes only and is not an investment

recommendation or advice complete disclosures available at public.com slash disclosures.

When you stay in your home, what you love gets to stay too. From the gardens that grow wild,

to the grandkids that run wilder. From the Friday night baseball games to the Sunday morning

brunches, even the daily crosswords, and weekly book clubs. There's room for it all with help

from home instead. The largest in-home senior care network. With over 30 years of trusted experience,

delivering the peace of mind you deserve. Visit home instead online for a better what's next.

And in fact, they share an anecdote and I'm going to talk about this anecdote here because

it leads into an amazing Trump-esque Chuck Schumer moment. So here it is. I'm going straight

from the article here. Tensions among Senate Democrats over Schumer style reached a tipping point

during the lengthy government shutdown last fall. In a closed door meeting with top Senate

Democrats, the day after the parties, November election wins. You'll remember, right? We're in

the middle of the shutdown. Democrats have a huge November 2025, right? Double the chick victories

in Virginia, New Jersey. Just killed it everywhere, right? The mood wasn't celebratory in this closed

door meeting with top Senate Democrats. Why? Senators Jeff Merckley and Maggie Hassan were arguing

over whether the victories gave Democrats new reason to continue the shutdown.

They're leveraged for extending healthcare subsidies. They believe the election was a chance

to essentially double down. When Senator Gary Peters, who's a retiring Senator from Michigan,

that's the big Michigan primary is the open seat is that is trying to replace him.

He stepped into note that a breakaway group of Democrats had already initiated a,

quote, secret deal with Republicans to end the shutdown. This was according to people in the

meeting. Apparently, Elizabeth Warren then replies, who's also in this meeting with Merckley and

Hassan. Wait, they didn't negotiate anything. And then she apparently turns to Schumer.

And Elizabeth Warren says, Chuck, you told me no one was negotiating.

Then the leader of this breakaway centrist group of Democrats that did negotiate with the Republicans,

Genie Shaheen, who of course she's retiring from the New Hampshire Open Seat. She responds that they

had kept the leader, meaning Chuck Schumer, abreast of the developments. Warren, one of the Senate,

you know, one of the folks on the side of fighting much harder here and has been pretty critical of Schumer

responded, well, that's not what Chuck told me. And then Merckley admits in an interview with the

journal that he was in shock when he heard that this group was going to strike a deal. He goes,

it was all news to him. Now, they eventually have a all Democratic Senator meeting and

Merckley said he thought eventually Schumer heard him.

But it was clear that Schumer wasn't telling everybody what was happening with the unit, right?

And the incident as the journal points out was seen as a, quote, prime example of the leader trying

to appease all sides by telling senators what they want to hear. And apparently some current and

former Senate staffers are calling it getting shunned, meaning they thought they had one, they thought

they do what was happening and then all of a sudden out of nowhere, Schumer's working with some

other entity has a deal, stories over, oh my god, I've been shunned, right? Now here's my favorite

part of this article. And again, maybe you have to be me covering Schumer for nearly 30 years

to appreciate this moment. But any of you, and I know a bunch of you listening actually used to

work for Schumer, I think you will guys will laugh at this too. Schumer, you know, again, he does

this interview with the journal. Schumer said he wasn't familiar with the current usage of the

term getting shunned. But then Schumer offers up to the journal reporters the following antidote.

He said actually getting shunned originated in New York and it used to refer to Schumer's rush

to be the first to show up at a press conference to tout a new issue to reporters.

Says Schumer to the reporters. I would be ahead of everybody else. Someone would be thinking of

something, but I'd be out there with a press conference. I understand what Schumer was up to,

right? But if you want to, this is like, to me, this is the moment, this is sometimes you,

you got to understand some text when you read these stories. Look, the reporters are, there's

a, they include this anecdote in here. For obvious reasons are like going, yeah, he is not fully plugged

to what people really think of him in the Senate. He has got, there is a loss of trust.

And he is sort of in his own bubble here, right? And there's still a lack of self awareness.

Even in this piece, you offer up an alternative definition of getting shunned because he,

it's very trepest, right? Let me tell you when it was a positive. You're like, is that what this

piece is about at the moment? Really, oh, that you're really smart about getting out in front of

some viral issue, just as it's going viral. So it looks like you're on top of things. These are

these famous Sunday press conferences back when Schumer was a back bench house member, then a back bench

senator. And this is the, you know, this is the part of Schumer when he had his fastball.

And I think now it's clear he is absolutely constantly nervous about, you know, he's looking over

his left shoulder at AOC, he's looking over his shoulder. Apparently now at Chris Van Holland

and Brian Schatz. And you know, now he's orchestrated. He's hoping to at least,

and he heard me my message to Senator Schumer and to anybody that wants to talk to him and to say,

look, you've been an incredibly successful democratic leader. He really has, you know, he is a,

he is not a policy guy, he's a politics guy. And he, you know, starting with 2006, frankly,

starting with his own politics. I mean, he outmaneuvered and outsmarted everybody in his 98

Senate race. You know, he won that race by basically being the only guy to campaign in Buffalo

before anybody else was doing it. And then worked his way down. It was brilliant strategy.

Sort of was the first to come up with the 10 second ad before 10 second ads were harder,

harder to make happen, but he stretched his money. I mean, look, it is, it is, it is like watching

Willie Mays play with the Mets. You're like, I don't want to see him field flyballs, right? You

don't, you don't want to see it, right? You don't want to see Mickey Mantle strike out.

And I think that Schumer is at this moment where he's just, look, part of it is there's nothing

he can do about it. He is sort of the last them standing from the previous era, right? So he is,

he is the stand in for Biden frustrations about Biden. He's the stand in for Clinton frustrations

about Clinton, right? He's just the stand in for the establishment because he's the most familiar

face left. So some of this is not about him and his decision making. Some of this is just simply

it's about that wing of the party, right? The, the sort of what you want to call it the pragmatic wing.

But if he cares about trying and looking, he has a theory of the case, right? He has a theory of

the case and the type of candidates he nominates. He's, you know, and who he's encouraging to run,

right? He wants a Josh Turk to be the nominee in Iowa, rather than his act walls.

Sack walls is a bit more progressive. I think you can make the case. It is interesting.

The NRSC and Republicans all want the progressive to win too. They're all excited about that.

And, you know, Schumer's touting another candidate now progressive activists get frustrated that

he wants to put his thumb on the scale in the primary. Well, guess what? So does Bernie Sanders

want to put his thumb on the scale in the primary? So, so, you know, you know, people that get upset

that somebody's playing favorites are really upset that they're not the ones being favored,

if that makes sense, meaning most people complain that they're not getting the extra help or the

extra attention. They're actually not arguing for fairness. But let's set that aside. If Schumer

cares about that wing of the party, he cannot be seen as essentially fighting the progressives and

then losing. The best way for him to beat the progressives is to stand down and then he has more

saying who replaces him and he might be able to preserve, you know, it's sort of like McConnell,

you know, had he pushed the envelope more than he risked losing to a Rick Scott. And then

suddenly that wing of the party is running the Senate Republican conference. Instead,

he put himself in a he got out just in time where he knew essentially he could hand the reins over

to a Jonathan. And that's the situation Schumer's in right now. He's got to make and this is not

going to be easy for him. Schumer has had success charting his own path. And he is kind of at times

bulldozed his way. And he has overcome skepticism, whether it's from mainstream media,

Washington, the Midwest, you name it. You know, you talk to a Claire McCaskill or John Tester and

they will tell you Schumer always understood their electorates almost as well as they did. I mean,

he in this stuff, you know, I'm not trying to use this as a way to beat up on Schumer.

But it is pretty clear. It is he is past. It is it is time to move on.

And if he wants more say in how this works and if he wants to control this process,

he probably only has a couple more months before he sort of loses that ability to do it.

And I think I think ever you could sort of see, you know, obviously,

maybe it would be a fool's errand if somebody tried to overthrow Schumer now.

There's really not a mechanism the way the Senate works in it. And it would blow up in their face.

But it is clear that you have a chunk of senators worried that Schumer's waiting to see that if

they get the majority, he's going to want it. And that's where this, you know, you don't want to begin

the last thing you want to do if you're the Democrats is right now there is a bunch of infighting.

Well, in some ways, let the infighting happen now. Because if you're infighting after the elections,

after you succeed, then it looks worse. Take Abigail Spamberg, right? She is starting and I think

this has been a nightmare way for her to start. She tried it. She's there's an interview in the

Washington Post this week. You know, she ran as a a bit, you know, as a basically like, look,

she's a Democrat, but she went a partisan, right? That was the vibe she gave off that she was a

pragmatist. And and yet what does she have to do? She starts her gubernatorial term. And she only

gets one having to make the most political fight any governor would have to do, which is this,

which is pushed for this ridiculous redistricting amendment. And I say it's ridiculous because

it runs counter to everything Abigail Spamberg stands for, right? The original concept was fairness

and maps to take politics out of things. That is the that is the Abigail Spamberger

platform, if you will, that she ran on. It's been sort of her political identity from the very

beginning when she ran for Congress. And she's having to make the case just like watching Barack

Obama uses political capital to sell what they're doing that this is a way to make it more fair

compared to Texas, leaving out the part that it makes it incredibly unfair. Essentially to all

voters in Virginia, right? I there is no good argument you can come up with to me to give me to

say that this is a good idea, because I would argue you actually want if Republicans win competitive

districts, then it you're more likely to have a Republican who's more likely to buck the crazy

mega win. And it actually is healthier for democracy if you have it in that way. So the point

being is fair districts will get you a better quality member of Congress period. When you have

unfair districts that are overly partisan, then you get partisan hacks, whether they're on the

left or the right, because all you have to worry about is winning a primary. And then you have

this absurdity where, you know, literally, you know, Don Byer is currently my congressman,

and they're the new map. He will not be because Arlington is going to get divided into two.

And essentially, South Arlington is going to be in Byer's district. And it's going to go all

the way to the northern neck, okay, which is sort of on the where the bay, Chesapeake Bay and

Atlantic Ocean and the northern neck and the river down there all sort of come into one.

As you can see, I'm not that familiar with that area. I've been there a few times.

It is, if we're a slightly shorter drive, that would be an ideal place to have a vacation home.

And I know some people who do. It's, I've chosen to, I've chosen the state of Florida for mine,

but it is a great place. I remember why I looked out there. We enjoyed it. We liked it a lot.

But it is almost nothing in common with Arlington. And yet those communities are all going to be

in the same district. You know, it's basically Virginia is going to turn into this weird sort of

I guess you could call it like a half octopus where the body is all northern Virginia. And then

all of the districts, you know, a tentacle, a tentacle to the west, a tentacle to the southwest,

a tentacle to south, et cetera, et cetera. And then, and then there's this blob, you know,

that will be the one Republican district. It's probably going to pass, but I don't think this

is going to pass like California. And you could just hear Spamberger in this interview.

And, you know, she's, you know, she has been pushing back on the Democratic legislature on

some business taxes and some things like that. So she's still trying to sort of keep her pro-business

credentials, which in, you know, sort of basically in line with what Tim, how Tim Kane was,

his governor, Mark Warner was his governor, Tim McAuliffe, like it's a, it's not unique, you know,

the Democratic governors of the 21st century in Virginia have all been, have all,

all wanted to make sure they Virginia stays in the top five places to do business in the

CNBC rankings, which they have for pretty much all of the 21st century. So, but she's,

she's, she is now having to be the face of the her and Barack Obama or having to be the face of

this ad campaign for redistricting. And, you know, I'll tell you this, like I said, I think they went

but I think the Democrats are giving up something here that they're going to wish they have back.

And I do think one reminder I'm going to leave you with and then we're going to go into my

conversation with Johnny L. The base of the Republican Party is larger than the base of the

Democratic Party. And what does that mean? Democrats need more moderates to get to 50%.

The good news for Democrats is a majority of moderates lean left on some social issues.

And they want, they are, they're, they're un, more uncomfortable siding with the Republicans

and the Democrats. Liberal moderates conservative. This is what I'm referring to when I say

when you have the idea of lot polling ideological service.

But those moderates sort of like actually believe, you know, they've been siding with the Democrats

because they're the, the pragmatic ones, they're the normal ones and they start behaving.

No, you know, ends justifies the means type of politics. I think they, Democrats are endangering

that part of their brand. Right. And now look, they're using two people who I think plenty of

people in the center, politically in this country, see as pragmatists, Barack Obama, Abigail Spamber.

But they're advocating for something that's frankly indefensible.

And it just is going to chip away. It doesn't happen overnight. And, but, but, you know,

Democrats have to realize they're 30 and only special elections. Things are going great for

them on paper. They're on track to win the house with a decent majority. And frankly, it's

probably getting close to a coin flip for Senate control. Because I also believe Lisa Murkowski,

if it's 50, 50, she's going to flip. And again, I have no other evidence. I'm not, you know,

I'm not, I'm no inside knowledge in this. I'm just, that's a tea leaf. Okay. I'm, I am, I am

reading a tea leaf incredibly carefully in this one. But I'm pretty confident of it, especially if

Mary Patelow wins, that's in it. I think it's a gift. If that's it, it's almost a given.

Murkowski hands the Democrats the Senate majority.

Couldn't be going swimmingly. And yet, what did we see in that Marquette Polarly this week?

The Democratic brand had a lower favorable rating in the Republican party and mega.

So that's, you know, and this, that bill will come due in 28 if they're not careful.

But how 26 goes? How they govern? How they resolve these internal fights? How messy does this get?

Right. All of this is going to be determined, I think, in the next three to six months.

All right. We're going to sneak in a break. And when we come back, my conversation with Johnny

O and what could be the 28th amendment to the US Constitution.

Honey, snap out of it. Oh, sorry. Just dreaming about updating our kitchen.

Well, stop dreaming and let's do it. We can't afford that. And we don't have the equity in our

house yet to do a home equity loan. We can afford it with Renify. It's a new kind of home equity

loan that lets us borrow based on the value of our home after we make our renovations.

Oh, wow. Well, I'm also dreaming of a new bathroom.

We can do that too. With Renify, we can get up to $750,000 and keep our existing low mortgage

rate locked in so we can tackle every project on our list.

Finish the basement for the kids. Yes, with Renify. Home office for me.

Let's do it. Girl's trip to Tuscany. Oh, Renify doesn't do that.

Visit Renify.com. That's r-e-n-o-f-i.com to receive a text message to see if you qualify

for up to $750,000 to renovate your home with Renify.

Unlock the future value of your home right now to get the money you need without refinancing.

Visit renify.com or r-e-n-o-f-i.com to get started today.

NMLS number 1802847. Terms apply. Not all borrowers are properties qualify.

California Department of Real Estate License number 02195141 and NMLS number 2412747.

Equal opportunity broker.

Texting privacy policy in terms of conditions posted at TextingTerms.us.

Texting roles you for a current automated text marketing message.

Message and data reads may apply or play stopped out visit ISSA online for details.

Tired of the 9-5 grind. Looking for something different that's flexible, fulfilling,

and pay as well? How do you like to get paid to work out?

Now you can, with ISSA, the global leader in personal fitness certification.

There's a huge demand for certified personal trainers right now.

And once you get ISSA certified, they guarantee you'll get a job.

Trainers can make as much as $100 an hour.

Yes, I said $100 an hour. And with ISSA, you can be certified in as little as six weeks.

You do everything at your own pace and 100% online.

Pursue your passion in specializations like yoga, nutrition, or strength training.

Get certified and live your life on your terms.

Work at a gym. Start your own business or a side hustle.

Whatever works for you, just don't wait.

Get your free personal training evaluation kit today.

Get certified in as little as six weeks.

And ISSA guarantees you'll get a job.

Text train to 32 32 32.

Text train to 32 32 32.

Train to 32 32 32.

Support for the show comes from public.

The investing platform for those who take it seriously.

On public, you can build a multi-asset portfolio of stocks,

bonds, options, crypto, and now generated assets,

which allow you to turn any idea into an investable index with AI.

It all starts with your prompt.

From renewable energy companies with high free cash flow to semi-conductor suppliers,

growing revenue over 20% year over year,

you can literally type any prompt and put the AI to work.

It screens thousands of stocks, builds a one-of-a-kind index,

and lets you back-test it against the S&P 500.

Then you can invest in a few clicks.

Generated assets are like ETFs with infinite possibilities,

completely customizable and based on your thesis, not someone else's.

Go to public.com slash podcast,

and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio.

That's public.com slash podcast.

Paid for by Public Investing,

brokerage services by Open to the Public Investing Inc,

member FINRA and SIPC, advisory services by Public Advisors LLC,

SEC Registered Advisor.

Generated assets is an interactive analysis tool.

Output is for informational purposes only,

and is not an investment recommendation or advice.

Complete disclosures available at public.com slash disclosures.

Sometimes all we want is more of the same,

like another round of golf,

played from a channel with 24-7 coverage.

Another look at the garden,

and the deer as they pick their way through it.

Another Taco Tuesday,

followed by a whatever's in the fridge Wednesday.

And to get more of the same,

all we need is a little help.

With adaptable care plans from qualified compassionate caregivers

matched to your family's needs,

homestead can help you and your passions stay home,

no matter what's on your horizon.

Visit homestead online for a better what's next.

Hey, it's the weekend.

It's time to turn to the Chuck Todd Sports page here,

if you will.

And I want to start with a modest proposal

for the NCAA basketball tournament.

And by the way, this applies to men and women,

what I'm about to propose here,

but it is more of a reaction to the results of the men's tournament, right?

There's a big, let's call it what it is.

There's kind of a disappointment

that there are no, right,

that it's all major conference teams that are left.

There's no mid-major Cinderella.

We have no FA, Florida Atlantic,

no George Mason, no St. Peters.

Frankly, not even a Gonzaga, although they were a three seed,

but still, you know, they're kind of at least from a non-power

four and a half conference.

I say four and a half.

I'm going to put the Big East in the power side of the conferences,

but I think it's pretty clear that St. John's in Yukon are like power schools.

And I think, you know, and we know Villanova aspires to be,

Georgetown aspires to be, you know, it is,

let's just say the Big East basketball now reminds me of where Big East football was

right before Miami left for the ACC.

I could argue as a GW guy and an A-10 advocate

that the Big East is closer to catch,

the Big East is closer to the A-10 than it is to catching

what would be the fourth best conference this year.

I guess you would put it.

I guess you would say the number four conference was

the ACC given the results of the tournament, right?

I think the Big East is closer to the A-10 than it is to the ACC.

If you're asking, I think I'd go Big 10, Big 12,

SCC ACC this year, just sort of in your power order of the conferences in college basketball.

But there's a huge disappointment, right?

There's just, it's all power for schools, right?

That dark courses are like Iowa, Nebraska,

or an 11-seated Texas that was seen as a top 10, 20 school earlier this year.

And I think there's always been this conundrum about the NCAA tournament.

In that, we love upsets in the first round.

And the last thing we want to see are these schools actually in the final four.

We think we do.

But once they appear in the final four, nobody watches these games, right?

When Butler or Mason or Gensart,

when they, it's not like the Florida Atlantic,

they've not been ratings juggernauts, right?

What we want is we want them to get almost there.

We want them to get to the, we love them in the sweet 16.

We like them in the eight.

And then we want Duke playing UConn in the final, right?

Or you know, fill in your top tier school.

So, you know me, I don't want to sit here and just identify problems,

whether it's in our politics or in our sports fandom.

I am here to propose solutions.

And have I got a solution for you?

And I'm going to begin telling you my bias.

I went to GW.

So in this case, my bias is for the mid majors.

And I mean, I'm going to explain why it's good for everybody involved.

When GW made the sweet 16 in 93,

I know for some of you, maybe listening to his podcast, weren't born then.

Do you know what happened to applications the following year?

Went up like 50%.

And GW went to the NCAA tournament seven out of 10 years in the 90s.

And just making the NCAA tournament one sweet 16 appearance,

couple around to 32s, consistently playing big time schools.

So they were suddenly, they were in the mix and they were in the conversation.

And it had huge implications for GW's status as a top tier university.

One good argue that GW, which is now an AAU school,

R1 university, important distinction in the world of academics,

they didn't want to go out there without that investment in the basketball program.

And there are stories like this all around the country.

Shoot, this happens even with the Power Force School.

University of Miami applications have gone through the roof since Miami made it to the NCAA

title in football.

Georgia and Clemson, the current president in GW, Alan Grandberg,

when I'm a huge fan of. I just think she's brought an energy to the place that

that is that I'm just, I haven't felt it like this since the Tractonburg days for those of you

that really know GW's politics. So I'm a huge, I'm really supportive of her. I'm really

rooting for her. She tells a great story about, she was Provost Clemson during the rise of Dava.

And she said that it wasn't just, you didn't just improve the quality of student you got.

You know, you got, they got applications went up, which meant they got, they got,

they got to, they got to have a higher accept, you know, basically a lower acceptance rate,

which means you're getting a higher quality student. They had more out-of-state students,

so more diversified student body. More out-of-state students means you can give more scholarship,

money, and state. There's all sorts of benefits that come with it. And then she said to one other

thing, it improved, it was a differentiator when doing interviews with professors. And they

just got a better quality of professor who saw the excitement around the football program as a

feature. You know, you sometimes hear, you know, university, you get academic, you'll get the

academic faculty, faculty, senate will fight investments into sports programs because they

think it's being taken away from academics. But I think more and more modern faculties understand

that success in athletics actually indirectly translate to success in academics because it allows,

it creates more interest in the, in the school. You get more applications. That in turn gets more

donor dollars into the school. It just, it is truly rising tide.

So why do I say all this? Before I give you my, this preamble here, before I give you my proposal

to fix the NCAA tournament and to bring back everything that we love about it and keep

what we love about it and have it benefit everybody. It's my proposal to expand the tournament

with the 96 teams because it's clear now with NIL, the situation we're in,

which is, look, it is, it is, it is allowed that all the great mid-major players all are,

and they are all going to end up in power four schools, right? You just have to look,

you look at any of the top programs. I mean, I was a great example, right?

Their coach and point guard started together in division two. They had success at Drake

together. Now they're in Iowa and they knock off Florida. So all the great mid-major players

are, are still having a huge impact in the NCAA tournament. They're just doing it with bigger

brands, a bigger, a bigger brand on their jersey. But there's over 320.

Um, division one basketball programs. And right now, only 68 slots for those 320 basketball

programs. That's actually arguably too small of a cut. And even if you, if so, if you expanded

96, you're still less than one third. Major league baseball has 12 out of 30 teams that make

football has 14 out of 32. Basketball now has 20 out of 30, if you count the playing games.

So having college basketball allow less than a third, but nearly a third of their programs into

their postseason isn't diluting the product. It's probably arguably fair. And more importantly,

by expanding to 96, I'm going to get to the logistics here in a minute because I've solved all

your logistics problems here. Okay, I'm going to, I'm going to, I'm going to borrow a page from my

friend Colin Covert. I'm giving you the answer. Hopefully the NCAA is smart enough to just accept

my proposal as is and just implement it. It is a, it is, it is not going to dilute the product.

It will enhance all of these universities.

It, it, it, this is a good thing to do for students. It is a good thing to do for academics. It is

a good thing to do for recruiting everyday Americans to want to go to school wherever.

So it has a net positive across the board for higher education. I really believe this. And I

just laid out a couple of examples to reinforce this notion. And I know, look, I understand the

real cynics. Hey, there's, these people that get paid to play college sports aren't even going

to class. Yeah, there's always going to be those examples. But a lot of this still funnels back

to the university and only raises, only raises the everybody's for. All right, so without further

ado, this is the simplest. This is an easy way to implement a 96 team tournament. So let

me give you the structure. It's pretty simple. Four regions, just like we have now. Currently,

you have four reasons with what do we do with 70, essentially 17. What do we have? Every,

not every region. So right now, it's 68 teams. Make it with the first four. But we have four

regions 16 plus two. So I think I guess it's 18. I can't be right. Excuse me. So basically,

we're averaging not each region has has the 18 teams in it. So this current. So I know I'm

confusing things here. So right now we're six four regions 16 teams. And then of course, we have

two round of 16 plans. So we have six 16 seeds and six 11 seeds. My proposal would have four

regions 24 teams in each region giving you your 96 teams. If you have a seed of one through eight,

there's only one team in each of those regions. So eight teams per region. So only so that you'll

have four one seed still four two seeds or eight seeds. Right. Oh, I went through eight four of each

seed. Seeds nine through 16 in each region would have two teams on that line. There'd be two

nine seeds in each region two 10 seeds right 16 teams. Seated nine through 16. All who would play

each other 18s seeded one through eight. The first round the playing games would also be done

on Tuesday Wednesday, just like they are now at the first four right now. There are two games on

Tuesday night two games on Wednesday night. So now in order to have all these nine through 16

plans in the four regions, you'd have to have 32 playing games to instead of what we have now,

which is four. And you would have 16 of them on Tuesday and 16 of them on Wednesday. And still

starts your tournament one through 64 on Thursday and the next first round game set of games on

Friday. So the math is pretty simple. We've already done this. Now know all these games wouldn't

be in Dayton. What you would simply do is whoever the first round host city is instead of hosting

Thursday, Saturday or Friday, Sunday, they host Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday, Wednesday, Friday,

Sunday. So you're cutting down in the travel. Right. And you seed everybody and if you're asking

right, the one through 96. All the nine seeds are ahead of all the 10 seeds. If you're doing the

S curve, all the 10 seeds are ahead of 11 seeds. And look, you might make slight adjustments here

there to maybe prevent playing game rematches. Maybe you can't prevent rematches in the first

in the in the in the round of 64 or the round of 32. But you'd do your best in the round of 96 to do

this. But here's what it would give you. More basketball. We like more basketball, more inventory,

more one and done's 96 teams. Look, we have it now arguably, right. You want to know what the other

32 teams are. Just go to the NIT. Right. And you it would be teams like Auburn. Maybe my GW makes it.

Maybe they don't. I don't think they do. But Dayton probably gets in. But it probably would,

you know, improve, you know, the 810 probably becomes four or five or six Bidley. Yeah, the SEC

maybe becomes a 14 Bidley, 12 Bidley. Who knows, right. But you give a chance to the mid majors.

Yes, the obstacle is higher. There's more inclusivity. There's we have plenty of talent. Right.

The NBA is expanding. While I, while you could argue they have a couple of weak franchises now

that they ought to probably move rather than add teams. But they can they act the reason the NBA is

expanding is there's enough talent around the world to fill it. And we're now learning there's

enough talent to we have there. You absolutely the 96 team is no, it would be the same as what you

see now with the with the 16 seeds. But take the 81st team in that thing. The difference between the

I'll tell you right now. I think it's Nevada is playing Auburn in an NIT game to I think

decide who goes to the to the NIT semis. Nevada is it's probably as competitive as salute there.

They could be, you know, you could put them in a nine seed or you could say they just, you know,

weren't quite good enough to to to get in and be in that and on 11 seed playing. But they're not

that far out of it. You know, and they'd done better in their conference tournament. They may have

ended up as an 11 seed playing. I think when you look at the teams seeded nine through 12. Okay.

In particular, the difference between those 16 teams and the 32 teams that are in the NIT

is negligible. So all you do is expanding that pool. And you know what? You're given shots to

these mid majors to do what they're going to do. It gives the mid majors the exposure and a national

setting. Everybody makes more money. Oh, did I leave that part out? Right? The answer to all your

questions is money. Sometimes your problems is money. Everybody would make more money.

You can still go back to the 64 if you wanted to do that. You have the fun little, there's just

it is only going to be more fan friendly. It will, who cares about the arguments between 97,

98, 99 who's left out, right? Nobody cares about those teams at that point anymore.

You know the best teams are getting a shot at this tournament. This tournament is semi-random.

But it does seem the best does flow to the top. You're still likely going to have the top conferences

dominate the final four when all is said and done. But you're given the mid majors more shots.

And guess what? More shots on goal mean more pucks might go into the goal.

And you're going to have, and it brings back that long shot, it brings back the opportunity of

more Cinderella's. And at the same time, it gives an advantage to the power conferences because

most of them are going to get essentially a first round by. So whoever they face, and yes,

sometimes those teams with fresher legs are going to win a first round game. But guess what?

If you lose a first round game to somebody you're not supposed to lose, you probably weren't going

to win the whole thing anyway. So we've gotten you out of the way. Anyway, this is the

answer. It needs to go to 96. It takes more. Look, my goal in all of sports is to take the subject,

take as much subjectivity out of the situations as you possibly can. Let the committees do seating.

This minimizes how much the committees decide who gets in and who gets out. And you sort of get rid

of all of that issue because once you hit 96, you're just not it's that you can have arguments

about seating and who gets to nine seed, who gets the eight seed becomes really important,

right? Who avoids the first four, first two day, you know, the round of 96 and who doesn't,

that's kind of fun. But I think that this would solve a lot of problems and essentially be

ultimately good for everybody, good for the future of college basketball, good for smaller schools

trying to elevate their brands. Good for basketball players, you don't feel like they have to go

to the super powerful conferences in order to get some attention in the tournament. It might keep

people playing closer to home. And it guarantees that you'll always have the best teams and that they

that I think ultimately making it towards the end. Or at least the hottest teams on that front.

So there's your answer. Give me a 96 team and see double a tournament. I think in some ways

NIL is demanding it in the one nut. Five years ago, I might have our get against it because

the quality in the net and that in that distinction from 64 to 96 was shit. That's not the case

anymore. That's not the case at all. It's just there is a lot more talent out there, a lot more. And

in the entire globe is being recruited now, not just for the pros, but for college. It's

why the NBA can comfortably add two more 15 man rosters. The talent is there to do this.

Now they may not have the right markets. Maybe Memphis needs to be, they move the Memphis team

to Nashville. Maybe New Orleans needs to go to another place. But Seattle and Vegas also are

pretty good places to do this and who knows maybe. And we're getting more awfully close as soon as

we figure out how to speed up air travel. London and Madrid and Paris are coming. So we know this

is going, you know, the talent is there. This isn't difficult to do. There is really no

logistic barrier here. And with so many media partners out there looking for a piece of the

mid march madness action, I promise you there's more money to be made to. So Charlie Baker,

there it is. You don't have to change a thing. There's your proposal. It's all wrapped up in a

nice bow. Let's get it implemented in the next couple of years. Today's opening day.

It's the most hopeful time of the year. No, I have no clue how the hell I'm supposed to watch the

gnats. I know I will figure it out. There's a great article in the athletic that I would love to

tell people about. And they just use the Yankees at an example. If you wanted a guarantee to watch

every single Yankee game is going to be available on TV, it would cost you $800 in subscriptions

between prime cable for the yes network, MLB, peacock, everything that you would have to buy to see

every Yankee game. I thought that was a pretty good exercise that they did. It's essentially about

800 bucks to see everything. Hey, MLB, you need to fix this ASAP. I have no clue how the hell

I'm watching the gnats. I assume I have to pay some fee directly to the gnats of an extra 10

bucks a month, whatever it's going to be, it's really going to irritate me. As a seasoned ticket

holder, I don't think I should have to pay any extra money to watch them on TV. I think that

ought to be a perk of seasoned ticket holders, Mr. Learner, that all access to gnats games should

be available to seasoned ticket holders. And perhaps you already have that somewhere. Maybe

you wait for us to ask, but that should be an obvious perk how this whole thing works.

It certainly should be because right now there's no good reason to have seasoned tickets.

So in some ways, using access to television coverage as adding that in as a perk,

probably makes it will make it a lot easier to still continue to convince people to buy seasoned

ticket packages because those things matter. So look, I've got two fantasy baseball dresses weekend,

so I'm obviously knee deep in baseball. But I did a fun little thing. I've been going through

all the rankings and I thought, so I used AI, I put the top 600 rankings in the clawed and I said,

hey, divide this up by team. So I know which teams have the most, you know, in the top 600.

And I thought it was a fun little exercise. Well, it is the Dodgers one, the Yankees two,

the Cubs three, the Phillies four, and the Mariners five, all of them were playoff teams, right?

Six through 10 or the Braves, Mets, Red Sox, Guardians, and Brewers.

And it's the next five that I'm the most curious about. And these are the teams because I don't have a

team to root for this year that I know is going to be a playoff team. I'm just hoping the

Nationals don't lose 100 games. All right, I am just, you know, please, please, please, please, please,

please win 63 games. It's all I'm asking. They had a couple of 71 win seasons a couple of years

ago. I thought, oh, we're on our way to 80. This point just give me 63. Please don't embarrass us

beyond that. And by the way, my God, right? I think it is funny how Dan Snyder covered up

the inequities of sports owners in DC, but he did, but I digress.

If I were, you know, the dark core, what I'm interested in, we know Dodgers, Yankees,

Blue Jays, Mariners, that feels that feels like, you know, you know, probably Tigers are in

there, right? Those are your, those are your world series contenders. But sort of the under,

you know, somebody's going to come from out of nowhere under the radar, right? Was arguably the

Mariners and the, and the Blue Jays were two of those teams. So the hot under the radar team that

I'm pulling for is the pirates. So I always try to have a young team that I'm pulling for. I just

I love schemes. They have a really young team. I love the history of the pirates. I love

that community. As you know, Dynastic, my new sports history podcast with Jay and Donde,

our first episode about the Dodgers, our second episode is going to be about Pittsburgh Steelers.

But before they were the Steelers, the most successful Pittsburgh franchise was the pirates.

It's been a debacle the last 40 years, but it was, you know, up until Barry Bond's left,

with the pirates were consistently one of the better franchises in baseball.

I certainly hope this is a year that they do, because I think if they can get to the playoffs,

then those owners will finally spend some money. And then maybe the pirates can, can, can behave and

like a major market team. But the teams, they sort of, I'm going to be, look, I'm going to be

sort of, you know, rooting for the Orioles. They're in the region. They have all the talent in the

world. I have way too many Adley Rushman rookie cards that I can't get rid of. So I'd really

love to see him. Get his, get his, get his mojo back. We'll see if he does, because he's got

some motivation. There's a catcher behind him, Sam Bessallo, I believe his name, who, who put

overtake him. But that's sort of the fun to me for this season. We know who the top teams are going

to be. Who's a team we're not expecting that's going to break through, right? And my candidates are

Orioles, Royals, the hated San Francisco Giants, I'm a former Dodger fan, I still hate the Giants.

And I'm going to go with the Sacramento A's. This is their last year in that band box park. So

they're going to have, I mean, I love the A's is at any time you need a fantasy hit or just

grab an A, grab a Sacramento A, because they're going to hit more homers than they should, right?

Last year I was all over Jacob Wilson, one dollar shortstop turned out to be brilliant,

near work of the year. Nick Kurtz is on that team. So those are my dark courses.

But I'm just excited about having baseball back, because there's nothing like

what I love is coming. You've done with the day. You have your relaxation drink, whatever your

choice is. If you're going to get soul, you get soul. If you're going to get glass of red wine,

you do that. And you put on the ball game. Now, of course, we just have to figure out where

the hell we find the ball games this year. But when we find them, that rhythm, the evening rhythm,

nice to an hour and 20 minute game, I love it. So like my big hope, nationals have to go

want to know. So I have one happy day in baseball this year.

John, we can't put off renovating anymore. The kitchen's tiny. The basement's unfinished.

Renovating is expensive. Not with Renify. What's Renify? Renify loans are a new type of home equity

loan just for renovations. No refinancing required. We can get up to $750,000 while keeping our

low mortgage rate. How do we get started? I've already started. Visit Renify.com to receive

a text to see if you qualify for up to $750,000 to renovate your home with Renify. That's

r-e-n-o-f-i.com. NMLS number 1802847. Terms apply. Not all borrowers are properties qualify.

Equal opportunity broker. Texting privacy policy. In terms of conditions posted,

it's texting terms. US. Texting roles you for occurring on a media text marketing message.

You're supposed to get a reason to apply or play. Stopped out. Visit ISSA online for details.

Tired of the nine to five grind. Looking for something different that's flexible, fulfilling,

and paid as well? How do you like to get paid to work out? Now you can, with ISSA,

the global leader in personal fitness certification. There's a huge demand for certified personal

trainers right now. And once you get ISSA certified, they guarantee you'll get a job.

Trainers can make as much as $100 an hour. Yes, I said $100 an hour. And with ISSA,

you can be certified in as little as six weeks. You do everything at your own pace and 100% online.

Pursue your passion in specializations like yoga, nutrition, or strength training.

Get certified and live your life on your terms. Work at a gym. Start your own business,

or a side hustle. Whatever works for you. Just don't wait. Get your free personal training

evaluation kit today. Get certified in as little as six weeks. And ISSA guarantees you'll get a job.

Text Lift to 323232. Text Lift to 323232. Lift to 323232.

Support for the show comes from public. The investing platform for those who take it seriously.

On public, you can build a multi-asset portfolio of stock,

bonds, options, crypto, and now generated assets which allow you to turn any idea into an

investable index with AI. It all starts with your prompt. From renewable energy companies with

high free cash flow to semiconductor suppliers growing revenue over 20% year over year,

you can literally type any prompt and put the AI to work. It screens thousands of stocks,

builds a one-of-a-kind index, and lets you backtest it against the S&P 500. Then you can invest

in a few clicks. Generated assets are like ETFs with infinite possibilities,

completely customizable and based on your thesis, not someone else's. Go to public.com slash podcast

and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio. That's public.com slash podcast.

Paid for by public investing, brokerage services by open to the public investing ink,

member Finra and SIPC. Advisory services by public advisors LLC,

SEC registered advisor. Generated assets is an interactive analysis tool. Output is for

informational purposes only and is not an investment recommendation or advice. Complete

disclosures available at public.com slash disclosures. Sometimes all we want is more of the same,

like another round of golf, played from a channel with 24-7 coverage. Another look at the garden,

and the deer as they pick their way through it. Another taco Tuesday, followed by a whatever's in

the fridge Wednesday. And to get more of the same, all we need is a little help. With adaptable

care plans from qualified compassionate caregivers matched to your family's needs,

homestead can help you and your passions stay home, no matter what's on your horizon.

Visit homestead online for a better what's next.

All right, first question comes from Steve Vernon Hills, Illinois. And he says,

ah, he's writing me in reaction to my top five all-time Illinois statewide campaigns.

And he writes, hey, the 86-gov race with Adelaide III deserves to be on the list as an Adelaide

fan since 1970, I banged on doors for his first set of campaign in high school. It was especially

painful. I suppose the Lincoln Douglas 1858 campaign needs to be number one. You're not the only

one that asked me about 1858. I'll get to it in a minute. Best debates, and it made a a

president love the podcast, but almost too much. Don't have time for Al Franken anymore.

And I'm retired. Oh, hey, Al, I don't know if you still listen. Frank and I were supposed to do a

home and away in our pods. And I think we're going to hopefully get that done soon. But, uh,

no, no, don't make, uh, don't make Al I'm unhappy. But, you know, I appreciate that I'm the lead

pod for you there. Uh, let me tell you why it'd include 1858. And why I just, I, I, I just made

this decision when I put the research together for that book. I told you this was research I did

for a book about 30 years ago. And I just decided not to include any campaigns that were not

resolved by the voters, right? And the 1858 Senate campaign, yes, it's the Lincoln Douglas debate.

So it's, it's, it's iconic. And, and maybe because of that,

it should, if there is an exception, that would be the lone exception. But it was simply because

it's a campaign that the state legislature, right? Because Lincoln won the campaign, but he

didn't, right? You know, I mean, yes, the debates mattered. The, right, that mattered in some

ways more than the result itself, um, but a very, very, very, very fair question to ask. You

weren't the only one. I was glad to get that. So that's why I didn't include it. But you know,

I already made one exception of Illinois to include a presidential where I don't want to include

any presidential, but that one felt iconic because it's been used. It's been so weaponized in our

politics to this day, right? Next question comes from Josh P. He writes, really enjoying your podcast.

Thank you for all the hard work involved. I meet the press this morning, referring to March 22nd,

Treasury Secretary Scott Besson told Kristen Welker, we are energy self-sufficient. We get

no oil from the straight of hormones. If this is true, why have our gas prices risen a dollar or

more since we started bombing Iran? Thank you, Josh P. Well, I think you know the answer, the

markets, the markets and that, and it, and it's, you know, when, when 20% of, you know, yes, where do

we get our oil? We get our oil more from, you know, we are more energy independent than we even

were 30 years ago. But 20% of the world, particularly Asia, gets it from and when you start, right,

it just raises, it's a market, right? When you suddenly deny supply in one part of the world,

then people start looking where there is supply and they start bidding it up because they're

desperate for it. So our, you know, unless we decided to manipulate our market or have state,

you know, this, this is where you would have state controls and stuff. I don't think anybody would

be in favor of that. So it is, all Scott Besson and essentially was making the case for us that

our economy isn't going to crater because we don't get, and that is true. But we're all going to

get taxed on this. And essentially, we're all going to pay an extra fee for the inability of oil

to get through the state of foremost Asia. So it's just, you know, there's, there, you know,

unless we want price controls on this from the government, which I think long-term,

nobody would want to see that happen. Next question comes from Donovan from Maryland. He says,

hey, Chuck, huge fan of the podcast, looking forward to the commanders getting a solid draft

pick next month. Yeah, it's all about Jeremiah love, right? That's all the, all the new draft

experts are going there. If you believe that the commanders don't need it offensive lineman,

I'd love to see Jeremiah love on that team. Anyway, many Americans feel that national politics has

become so dominant that it drowns out the local officials who actually shape our daily lives or

mayors, county executive state legislatures. How do you think constituents can actively work to

rebalance that power dynamics so that Washington handles the big picture issues like defense,

trade, and foreign policy while local leaders are empowered to address the issues that directly

affect our communities? Well, look, I think this is, this is a incredible, great question.

What I love about it is that it's going to allow me to rant about the loss of local media

because ultimately that's the issue. So I think this is a couple of things have happened,

right? You got rid of, right? A man named Craig decided classifieds ought to be free,

yada yada yada. We suddenly had no more localness. And when what happens is when you don't have

anybody covering locally, when local residents are upset about something happening locally,

they're not familiar with who their local officials are because there's nothing to follow locally,

so they're more likely to know who the national officials are or who their congressional officials are.

So they end up gravitating towards the federal office holders, towards the names they know,

towards their senators or congressmen, because I hear this, you know, you get, I teach these,

these, you know, I usually have these students that I teach at USC. A lot of them are interns on

the Hill and they're basically, they're the first line of defense, meaning they're ants on the

phones. And they'll get a lot of questions sometimes that have nothing to do with congressional

with federal policy, but they're complaints about something happening locally that they didn't know

how to call. So you have that issue, right? You got out local news and it, and it, and you have

an a less informed local community who doesn't know why certain things are happening. There was a

great academic study, by the way. I believe it came out of Stanford. That noted that,

that when local news organizations disappear, essentially within a couple of years,

the low, that community tax bill goes up. Essentially, when you get rid of the local watchdog,

government, fisiated death, and they can sneak in stuff because nobody notices. All of a sudden,

you're like, huh, there's now a fee to do what? They just added a new recycling fee to my bill here.

They did this to my water bill. They did all these little things and you're like, and you know,

it's a 5% surcharge here, 3% surcharge there. Things that, if somebody knew about it, there might

be enough people upset about it. There'd be enough of a ground swell that the local politician,

the local city councilman, the local mayor, etc., would say, oh, better not do this.

But there is a direct correlation between the lack of local news and government, essentially

abusing its residents with more tax and fee hikes. And I think that is the, and that, and that gets

it to the core of the, of the, what your folks, what you're right, I think that it is, I, I guess,

my diagnosis is when you lose local news, you, you deny the population, essentially,

access to who all of their government officials are. And the irony is that a local elected

official has more direct impact on the cost of you, of your life financially than a member of

Congress does, or US Senator does, or frankly even a president. And, you know, because, you know,

one of your biggest bills that you pay every year is your property tax bill. Well, that's usually

decided by a county official, a county executive or sometimes a city. That's a big deal, right? Your

state income tax, your state fees, you know, all the things, all the little things, you know,

whether it's to register your dog, whether it's to, you know, get a permit to put up a fence,

right? All of this is money you pay to your local government directly.

So you interact more with government that are impacted by people that are elected within

county districts or city districts than you are with government that's elected between

congressional districts or statewide. And I think that that, unfortunately, I think, look,

have we always over indexed on covering federal and national politics, at least this century we have?

I think that was the biggest 9-11 effect. I know this is a weird way of invoking that, but,

you know, 9-11 really also was an accelerant to nationalizing all news, including local

news, became sort of the rivet of national news, because it was like we were in the shared,

you know, the shared environment. So it's just the nationalization of news consumption really sort

of arguably really accelerated right after 9-11. And, you know, I think that we need to really

sort of, that's where my, that's where the efforts I've been trying to make, remember local

news days, April 9th, basically an awareness day is the more people get back to following

finding ways to follow local news, the more they're going to realize how much more their

lives are impacted by these local officials as you point out on them. So terrific question. Thank

you for it. Next question comes from Sean Kane, Colorado, Sean asked, now with Christy Nome being

kicked to the curb, I was wondering if she has or had ambitions to run for president in 2028,

I got the impression that with all her ads, the DHS and taxpayers paid for it was more than just

educating people on immigration and airport security, but positioning herself so that she could

draw interest as a candidate. I mean, seeing her wear DHS caps, cowboy hats and riding horses during

her commercial struck me that she was trying to brand herself as a bad ass woman.

Did you get that impression? And do you think that now she's out of Trump's orbit? She may have

squandered her chances. Love your podcast, Keith and coming. Man, a thousand percent. I mean, there's

no doubt, you know, Cory Lewandowski, who was her chief political aid and some would argue more

than just a chief political aid was absolutely somebody who was the first campaign manager for Donald

Trump. You know, he was also the chief advocate of Christy Nome to be Donald Trump's running

made in 2024. In fact, he made no secret. He had gotten polling done and he shared it with me and

he shared it with a lot of reporters in 2024 that showed he had polling that showed Christy Nome

adding more a Trump Nome ticket performing better against Harris than a Trump bands ticket.

So he would be there. Absolutely. This was always about that. There was some chatter that maybe

she'd primary Mike Rounds, who's up for reelection this cycle in 2026. I believe that's not going to

happen. And especially the way she was kicked to the curb and it's all, you know, he gave her a

job. Remember, he moved her technically. She's got some made up job that he created about the Western

hemisphere. I think that was just designed to not have her wandering around unemployed,

talking trash about the Trump administration or Stephen Miller or others to reporters.

So I do think her presidential ambitions are derailed, but I will tell you this, if John Thune

decides not to seek reelection in 2028. And I will say this, I have no reason to think that he's

not going to seek reelection. But if the Democrats won the Senate and Thunes and it's somehow

cost Thune his leadership post after the 26 midterms, then I don't think he seeks election 28.

Then I would say that's the most likely landing spot for her would be the US Senate and an open seat

if John Thune chose not to run in 28. But look, I think she wants to run for president. I think she has

that ambition. I just think that the realistic paths are blocked for her. And I think if she is,

if she wins office in 2028, it's more likely to be an open US Senate seat in South Dakota.

Then it is an open presidential seat in a national election.

All right, next question, Robert R. He says, like your podcast and the new one as well,

excellent, dynastic. Check it out with Jay. Also, we tried Wildgrain and are now going to

subscribe. Man, hey, Wildgrain, look at that. Use the code, people. Product is great. Appreciate

your comments on it. You're like, Shaq endorsed things, endorsed things you use,

endorsed things you use. Question, do you think Trump will invade Iran, Robert R?

Yes, you're right. I am more comfortable. It has always been,

you know, look, I am not naive to how the business of independent media works. I am not shy.

I'm a capitalist. I am there. You know, I am not going to let crook sponsor me. I'm not going

to let unethical people sponsor me. But, you know, I hope, you know, I'm not going to guarantee

that every sponsor I have is a sponsor I use is a product I use. But we do, we do our best event

these folks. That's for sure. Well, Trump made Iran well. That was, I guess in some ways,

you're asking a question that I left you an open answer at the start of this podcast, right?

I think it's a, I think it's more likely that there are some boots on the ground to deal with

the straight-of-hormose than him completely pulling out. If you were to ask me, which is more likely?

Now, I think we will, we will having debates whether what he does is an invasion or not.

Is it boots on the ground or is it simply boots on the straight-of-coast line on the

straight-of-hormose, right? Like that sort of business. I think that's, it is, do I think we're going

to be marching on the streets of Tehran? I do not. But I think the likelihood that there are

American boots in Iranian territory is pretty high. So I guess if I could draw that distinction,

no one Tehran, yes, on the coast near the straight-of-hormose. Next question comes from Mike

and Honolulu. He says, really appreciate the comments on how the Iran war continues to unravel and

demonstrate strained, if not damage relationships with allies, and what feels like a low attention

of decades to decades of scenario planning in the region. Also saw Wall Street Journal coverage

of the American board citizen Juan Carlos Valencia Gonzalez taking over Mexico's most powerful drug

cartel and so wondering how degraded our intelligence community is and who is advising the

administration on probable outcomes that have a far-reaching impact, thanks for your work, Mike Honolulu.

Well, Mike, I have a bigger problem in the intel community and I'm not going to, I don't want to be

careful. I don't want to get any of my sources in trouble on this. But it's pretty clear to me that

we have two things simultaneously happening in the intelligence community at the moment.

Number one is they do not paint the full picture for this president.

Whether it's because they don't want to tell them things he doesn't want to hear,

I think that's most likely the reason when you look at it. It's also Gavart, John Ratcliffe,

Ratcliffe's at the CIA, Gavart's at DNI. These are two people who do not want to be in it,

you know, who are more accustomed to telling that they got to where they got because they tell Trump

what he wants to hear. So you have that issue. Issue two within the IC, meaning the intelligence

community, is you have professionals who've been there for decades, work sources for decades.

We don't trust the political leaders in charge of their departments.

I think that they follow the law and they report what they believe they need to report to their

superiors. But I think that if you told me that they're not getting the best work because of

the lack of trust, because they're fear that their sources will get exposed for the wrong reason.

So I just, my concern, and I have more than just speculative concern about this,

I'm just going to leave it at that. My concern is that we've had the following impact on

intelligence, gathering. It's clear Trump is seen as an irresponsible

actor when it comes to intelligence. He shares it with everybody. He doesn't respect classifications,

right? He is a, he is a, and he uses no secure phones. He's just a, he is just a walking

target. You know, every single major intelligence agency that is semi-adversarial and some who are

friendly have access or ties to Trump both electronically or literally bought people off inside

his circle. You know, it is, it is, so you, so you have that issue. So what does that mean?

What it means is the strength of the American intelligence community has been its sources

in other countries and its relationships. We have the best intelligence agencies in the globe.

And in part of it is because we work in tandem with so many other excellent intelligence agencies,

whether it's with the UK, we have the Five Eyes program, Canada, UK, New Zealand, Australia.

You've got Masad, you know, but, you know, these other intelligence agencies that we rely on

for a lot of our work, you know, it's not just what we do. It's some shared with Kiali.

They're well aware that Donald Trump's a leaker. They're well aware that there are way too many

rogue actors who have classified security clearances who can't be trusted. And so

it's just what you, what you have is a slow, it's sort of a slow motion train rack, right?

It starts with our own rank and file being skeptical, right? First it starts with like,

the cycle, right? You have the, you have the people in charge who briefed the president

were a slightly sick of panic. And already are curating. I mean, my God, they have to make a video

of him every day to show the Iran War. They can't give him a verbal briefing. They have to show him

pictures. I'll let you make your joke about that. So it begins there, right? Gabbard and Radcliffe

aren't going to tell him bad news. Radcliffe and Gabbard aren't going to get the professional,

they're getting a limited view from their rank and file because their rank and file want to

protect their sources. And so there's some limitations of what's making its way to them.

Then our professional rank and file, their counterparts are also withholding from them.

Maybe not because they don't trust their American counterpart, but they don't trust what

happens once that intelligence makes it into the American system.

So you tell me I am, you know, if of course we're missing things left and right in this administration

because I don't believe the intelligence community. Do I believe we still have the ability

to have world-class intelligence and know exactly what the hell is going on all over the world?

Yeah, Goddamn right, I do. But when you look at all the different choke points that likely limit

important information getting to the commander in chief, sometimes intentionally, other times

unintentionally, you see where this becomes a problem. So is it a shock to me that we're kind of

blindsided? Whether it's about an American taking over a cartel, we're not 100% sure of that,

or, you know, us not knowing, you know, the fact that she's family members have family members

that live in the United States and seems to be something our intelligence community is not that

interested in. Anyway, I throw all this out there. It's a terrific question, but it's something

that really concerns me. And if you told me we're going into the likelihood that we get

blindsided by some attack somewhere has never been higher. And it's because we've alienated

allies, we've created distrust and there's sort of built-in skepticism. And we know this

president doesn't trust the intelligence community anyway. So you throw, I mean, they could give

them all the briefings in the world and he may not accept the premise because he thinks they're

all secretly out to get him anyway. So put all that together and you draw your conclusions. Do you

think the president's getting the best intelligence briefings? That are to be gotten? I think we know

the answer. Next question comes from Brandon C. I'm on and up for remember the 1994 midterms and

the Republican contract with America. And since then, control of Congress is one back and forth

quite a bit, given the lack of a clear Democratic policy alternative to mega-style conservatism right

now, do you think Democrats could benefit from putting forward a similar platform ahead of an

election? And if so, what kinds of policies would actually be most politically effective to include?

You know, Brandon, I hope you listen to the Johnny O interview. He basically

offered up something like this that he, you know, I said, when, you know, that there needs to be

some tangible ways, you know, and he seems to be somebody that doesn't want to just make it all

about Trump if they get power back. That instead, it's, you know, it's sort of an agenda that is

bills you could pass in the moment that maybe Trump signs and then bills that you're essentially

setting up to be the 2028 platform to take through the American people for, for, I don't know,

call it project, 2029, right? If Democrats think they're going to get the trifecta by that.

Um, but I do think some sort of clear agenda. Um, but I don't know if it's going to be possible

because I think you're going to have some Democrats running hard on Trump, hard on accountability of

Trump, hard on we're going to, you know, beat the fire, all that business and peach Bondi and

peach Trump and each this and peach that. I do think you're going to have some Democrats. They're

not a majority of the candidates running, but, but enough that it kind of gums up the messaging.

Like I don't think you're going to have. And I might argue that this party, because it goes back

to my opening monologue in today's episode, that I think you have a party that, that, you know,

the establishment's not trusted. So if they put out some sort of contract, would it be embraced

or would it be seen as why is Washington trying to tell us what to do with the voters these days?

Right. So I just don't know if it's, if it's organizational. I mean, do I think it would be smart to

have, you know, 26, you know, here's 26 is probably too many. I remember Democrats are telling

six and oh, six, you know, you know, you could do eight and 18, right? I guess you could do six and

26 or you could do 26 bills if you wanted. But some sort of tangible pledge, maybe it's a,

maybe it's on social media, something on social media and tech, on jobs, something on cost of living,

something on accountability, maybe, you know, he's obviously wanting to see a vote on the

pardon amendment, right? You know, an accountability that's more institutional rather than personal.

So I think, you know, a combination of ethics, cost of living and democratic infrastructure,

you know, have sort of a pledge, pledge on that. It, it certainly wouldn't hurt. But I guess I'm

skeptical. This party's organizable right now around something like that. I think what

Graham Platner wants to see who may be the nominee in Maine is different than what Taloriko wants

to see is different than what, say, Zach Walls or Josh Terkel in Iowa want to see. So I think that,

I think that would be too difficult. All right, I'm going to stop here. I went along on this

episode. If you're listening to it, soup the nuts. It's a long one, but it's the weekend episode.

So you have an extra day or two to listen to it. Enjoy the opening, enjoy it. And we are spoiled

right now. We got great basketball and opening weekend and baseball. Enjoy. Hope the weather cooperates.

Sometimes all we want is more of the same, like another round of golf played from a channel with

24 seven coverage. Another look at the garden and the deer as they pick their way through it.

Another taco Tuesday followed by a whatever's in the fridge Wednesday. And to get more of the same,

all we need is a little help with adaptable care plans from qualified compassionate caregivers

matched to your family's needs. Homestead can help you and your passions stay home no matter what's

on your horizon. Visit homestead online for a better what's next. This is David Eagleman from

the inner cosmos podcast. As a neuroscientist, I think a lot about how our brains shape our

experience of reality and how easily we get pulled into mental habits that we don't even notice.

This plays out every day and how we respond to stress and information overload and the constant

demands of our attention. That's why I use the waking up app from Sam Harris. It brings together

meditation and neuroscience and philosophy to help you see what your mind is doing in real time.

We can't escape our thoughts, but we can understand them to respond with more patience and clarity.

The practices in the app are easy to fit into a busy routine and they support a

steadier, healthier mind. If you're ready to train the mind that's behind everything you do,

you can unlock waking up free for 30 days at wakingup.com slash inner cosmos.

Have you heard about Clarna? Clarna is an app designed to make every day spending simpler

and more transparent. It gives you flexibility to decide how you want to pay,

whether that's paying right away, paying later, or spreading payments over time,

depending on what works best for you. Everything is managed in the Clarna app,

so you can keep track of purchases and stay organized. You can also discover deals and even earn

cash back when you shop through the Clarna app with participating brands. It's all about flexibility

and staying in control of how and when you pay. Download the Clarna app today or visit

clarna.com to learn more, Terms Apply. California resident loans made or arranged

pursuant to a California finance law license. NMLS number 1353190,

Clarna balance account required to be eligible for cash back points, limitations,

terms, and conditions apply. You see it instantly, it's cold water

creek, the mark of exceptional workmanship, and signature touches inspired by a mountain

west heritage. Distinctive styles created from quality fabrics, silhouettes perfected with

just the right drape, feel good fits, offering ease of movement, and thoughtful details to elevate

your look. For a wardrobe you can count on season after season, visit coldwatercreak.com.

Shop the new spring collection at 20% off $75 or more with code iHeart20.

This is an iHeart podcast. Guaranteed Human