Elon Gets DOGE'd

Today's presenting sponsor is SimpliSafe Home Security. While you're refreshing your home with a deep clean this spring, it's the perfect opportunity to do the same with your security.
SimpliSafe is the new standard in home security trusted by more than 4 million Americans. And one of them is John Lovett, who set up a SimpliSafe himself years ago and hasn't had to worry about a security system since.
Not a care in the world. Not a care in the world.
He and Pundit and Ari are all very protected. With SimpliSafe, millions of Americans enjoy the new standard in home security and greater peace of mind every time they arm their system, when heading out in the morning or when locking up each night.
Traditional security systems only take action after someone has already broken in. That's too late.
SimpliSafe's active guard outdoor protection can help prevent break-ins before they happen. If someone's lurking around or acting suspiciously, those agents see and talk to them in real time, activate spotlights, and even contact the police, all before they have the chance to get inside your home.
No long-term contracts or cancellation fees. Monitoring plans start affordably at around $1 a day, 60-day satisfaction guarantee, or your money back.
Visit SimpliSafe.com slash Cricut to claim 50% off a new system with a professional monitoring plan and get your first month free. That's SimpliSafe.com slash Crooked.
There's no safe like SimpliSafe. This podcast is supported by Comedy Central's The Daily Show.
Jon Stewart and The Daily Show news team are covering the final week of President Trump's second first 100 days with a different host every night. There's never been a week like this because, well, there's never been a president like this.

Except for the last time he was president.

Comedy Central's The Daily Show.

New weeknights at 11, 10 central on Comedy Central.

And streaming next day on Paramount+. welcome to pod save america i'm john favre i'm dan pfeiffer here we are in dc back home yeah dan's delivering the uh the big speech at the correspondence center andrespondent Center.
And you're the comedian, right? And you're here for a bill signing in the Oval Office, right? I'm here for the E.O. Yeah.
It's really exciting. No, we're just in town for a couple days to catch up with some people.
And I don't know. What do you think of D.C.
since we have... I haven't been here in a year.
Seems more ominous, but maybe that's just my own. I think that's in your head.
It is in my head. You could walk around and not know the democracy is collapsing around you like the Lincoln Mill Royal still standing.
For now. For now.
We haven't left yet. All right.
On today's show, we're going to talk about Elon Musk, who is leaving the White House to spend more time with his ailing car company. We'll talk about what it means for his quest to break all the government services Americans rely on.
We'll also talk about Donald Trump's quest to make America poorer with his big dumb trade war and his quest to make himself richer with a new crypto scheme to literally sell dinners with Trump and White House tours to people who buy his meme coin. Shocking, but not really.
We've also got our hands on some exclusive new polling that lines up with a lot of other recent polls that show just how unpopular Trump's illegal deportations are with the public. And then our good friend Amanda Lippman, the co-founder of Run for Something, comes by to talk about her new book for Crooked Media Reads, When We're in Charge, which is a fantastic guide for young people looking to get into leadership positions.
But first, let's talk about the art of the deal, which hopefully all of you have read by now. It's required reading in America.
It's required reading. Here's how it works.
You win an election based largely on the perception that you'll lower prices and keep the economy growing. Upon taking office, you start a massive trade war with the entire world that panics the markets, sends investors fleeing from the United States, and threatens to plunge the economy into recession.
Then you pause some of the tariffs, raise them on China, promise to make a bunch of deals, make no deals, and for good measure, threaten to fire the Fed chair who you appointed. If any of that sounds confusing, here's a sampling of what it was like to follow the Trump administration's statements on the economy just this week.
On Jerome Powell, you said that the termination of Jerome Powell cannot come fast enough. He says he won't leave it even if you ask him to.
Oh, he'll leave. If I ask him to, he'll be out of there.
No, I have no intention to fire him. According to this source in the room, what the Treasury Secretary said was no one thinks the current status quo is sustainable at 145 and 125 percent in terms of the relationship with tariffs with China.
Let me be clear. There will be no unilateral reduction in tariffs against China.
The president has made it clear China needs to make a deal with the United States of America. I'm not going to say, oh, I'm going to play hardball with China.
I'm going to play hardball with you, President Xi. No, no.
We're going to be very nice. They're going to be very nice.
You got all that, Dan? One last kicker from this morning. A top Chinese official said there had been no talks and that the U.S.
must cancel all of its tariffs if it wants a deal. He quoted a Chinese proverb, the person who tied the bell must untie it.
Nice. Do you think Trump's going to untie the bell? And what do you make of all the back and forth i think they trump was asked again right before we were recording about the chinese official who made those comments and he was like well there was a meeting this morning and maybe i'll reveal who it was at some point but there's a meeting so i think it's it's fake news the fake news the story about the fake news the fake news got it got it got it i have some questions about the chinese proverb yeah how do you tie a bell? Yeah.
Well, I thought it was going to be the person who rings the bell, so unring the bell. But you can't unring a bell, which is the whole point of the original saying.
I think they got to work on that. I think we should jack up the tariff a little more just for that.
It's also possible things have gotten lost in translation here. That's true.
I mean, this is insanity. Yeah.
But it also should be completely expected. Like this is what happens when you put in the white house, a erratic older man who hasn't

had a new idea since cheers was on the air.

And then he surrounds himself with a bunch of yahoos who view their only job is to make

the mad King happy.

Yeah.

And so you end up with this pure chaos and it is like, there is no, there is no

Thank you. king happy.
And so you end up with this pure chaos. And there is no coherent policy.
There is no coherent ideology behind the policy. There is no consistency between on a minute-to-minute basis.
We're recording this on Thursday afternoon, East Coast time. By the time people listen to this on Friday morning, it's very possible and perhaps probable that there will be an entirely new position on tariffs with China by the time you listen to this.
It's a good bet. I mean, there's always been this axiom that the only real constraint on Trump is that he won't do anything that tanks the markets.
But from Liberation Day onward, at least, that hasn't been true. What do we know, if anything, about why he may ultimately back down? Well, he is responding to the markets, right? And he has been since the beginning here.
When he put the first tariffs on Canada and Mexico, market tanked, he took them off. Then he put new tariffs on Canada and Mexico, market tanked, they announced a bunch of exceptions that basically made them hollow shelves himself.
Then he puts a global tariff, then he does the reciprocal tariffs on everyone. Market tanks, takes those off, moves it down to 10%, but keeps them on China.
Market tanks, takes them off, or at least talks about taking them off to make the market go up. Talks about firing Jerome Powell, market tanks, says he's not going to fire Jerome Powell, market gains again.
And so he is responding to it. The problem is he does not, I mean, it's a shocker, but doesn't get it.
He doesn't get that every time he tanks the market and then changes his position, he's making the next time he changes his position less helpful. Like the stock market will come back.
The stock market always comes back. But every time he's inserting more uncertainty into the economy, which is going to depress everything, right? We got reports this morning that new home sales are at their lowest level since 2022, coming right out of the pandemic.
And this is all happening because no one, not a major corporation, not a small business, not a family can make any decisions. They have no idea what's happening.
Are things that we all need about to be exponentially more expensive in a few weeks or not? We don't know. Are we going to be in a recession or not? We don't know.
Is Jerome Powell going to be in charge of monetary policy or will it be someone from Fox Business? We don know and because of that it is doing real damage to the economy that is cannot simply be undone by another truth contradicting what caroline levitt said earlier that day yeah the first reaction from the white house when the start was like oh who cares about the markets and that's just wall street and we're focused on main street and what they missed about that aside from the fact that you know most americans have at least some money in the stock market uh most of their retirement that the the market is just responding to how they believe the economy is going to fare and the economic damage is already begun and we haven't even seen the worst of it yet even if the trade war stops tomorrow. Some of this is priced in because...
But I do think that he met with this week the CEOs of Target and Walmart and Home Depot and they reportedly told him that we are a couple weeks away from empty shelves. Not just higher prices, they said that too, but empty shelves because there'll be such a supply chain issue, which is what we dealt with during the pandemic for reasons that weren't just some idiots trade war.
And IMF, they had originally predicted the inflation rate. The U.S.
was supposed to be 1.9% this year. They've upped that prediction to 3%.
There are truck plants in Maryland and Pennsylvania already laying off hundreds of workers because orders aren't coming in due to a lack of certainty. Manufacturers are already reducing headcount.
Remember this whole thing? One of the rationales, one of the many, is that we're bringing manufacturing back to the United States, but it's actually making things more expensive and manufacturing is going to leave the United States or at least lay off workers. Yes, because they get the parts from other countries.
I mean, it's affecting small businesses. There is a small business that my wife uses to buy name tags for like the small name tags for like kids clothes and lunch boxes stuff like that yeah they went on business because the tariffs they sent an email out to everyone saying uh that they couldn't afford it because the tariffs i assume they get the products from china the other challenge i don't think they've really thought through is that is you you know, doing a full trade war with the Chinese Chinese government.
They've been authoritarian government for a long time. And so they can basically force their people to accept much more pain than maybe Americans are willing to accept.
And so they can I don't know that China is going to be I mean, from that from that wonderful proverb we heard, I don't know that China is going to be backing down anytime soon.

Because Trump looks like an idiot.

It's causing Trump political pain.

And I think they can, like obviously China doesn't want to be in this trade war, but I think that they can probably last longer than Trump thinks they can.

Of course, they absolutely can.

Like there's no political pressure.

Like she's not worrying about the YouGov daily tracking poll and like how it's going to impact impact the generic ballot. That's not a concern of his, so he doesn't have that problem.
But there's a world where a normal, competent president with a coherent economic and foreign policy would be marshalling the world to unite against China in this trade war. He would be working with the EU, but also other Asian countries.

But instead, Trump is pissed off the entire world,

and now these countries are going to be in a position where they're going to be incentivized

to cut specific deals with China.

Well, and already there's reports that Japan is saying

they don't want to be part of any deal

that screws over China because that's a market for them.

China has reached out to the EU and has said, let's form an alliance against the United States. Just as we put it on the whiteboard.
Un-fucking-real. And again, this is like he could climb down from this whole thing tomorrow and pretend it's a big victory and say, we have the, they're talking about now, they're weeks and weeks and maybe months away from actual deals, but maybe there's a memorandum of understanding they can have with India about the contours of a deal.
So they could take something and say, oh, big victory, Trump wins. Already economic damage.
And I think it's going to be very hard to put this back in the box, even if he stops tomorrow. We're also seeing a lot of new polling now on how Americans are looking at all this.
I think you guys talked about that this week on Polarcoaster. Yeah, I spoke with Molly Murphy, who is one of the smartest Democratic pollsters.
She polled for the Harris campaign, but also for Alyssa Slotkin, Josh Stein, and a whole bunch of other candidates. And we talked about the state of politics, public opinion, but also specifically about the polling.
We have a clip. We just did a poll.
We do polling with the Wall Street Journal, and we looked at the tariff policies. We looked at how people think it will affect the economy and their costs.
And a majority of Americans oppose the tariffs. 75% think it will cause their own costs to go up.
And as you said, they voted for him to bring costs down. The nuance here with Trump is that when he messages this, he messages short-term gain.
It's odd that he gets away in some ways with being honest with people by saying short-term pain, long-term gain. We've got some big problems.
And so there's about a third of Americans who are sitting in this, maybe we're going to take on some short-term pain. If we see things get better, it will be worth it.
But I think we all know that this isn't going to result in lower costs for people. It is not going to turn out that way.
And those will be the fissures. And that's really the imperative for Democrats to really take on and not let him get away with the messaging that he's currently putting out there.
Let me expound upon what Molly said there, which is they had three groups of voters. There's a groups who are all pain, right? And that's mostly Democrats, people who don't like Trump.
There is a group of people who are no pain. It's not going to hurt a short term.
It's not going to hurt a long term, right? Enjoy. Enjoy.
Great. Tariffs are great.
And that's Trump's base. And the middle is some pain, but some long term gain.
A lot of these folks are independents. Some of them are soft Republicans, but that's the group that Democrats are going to have to focus on when the medium and long-term gain does not happen.
Yeah. Short-term pain, long-term decline, long-term global economic collapse.
And look, I think that people may say, let's give them some time, weeks, months. It's understandable.
We're almost 100 days in if you're a Trump fan, right? But I don't think people have the patience that they even tell pollsters they have because none of us have patience anymore because of our screens and media and the way the world works. So I don't think in like a couple of weeks if the shelves are empty at fucking Target, people are going to be like, well, it's short-term pain.
I just, I know something better is right around the corner. Well, people are against the tariffs and they're suffering almost no consequences of them yet right a lot of this is if you run a business you're dealing with this but like as a consumer you're not yet paying higher prices in most cases and this and the shelves are not yet empty we're not facing supply chain so when that happens it is truly stunning it takes actual effort to both crash economy and raise prices raise prices.
Normally you raise prices because the economy is running too hot. That's when inflation comes.
And so he's put us in a position where we're going to be potentially in a recession and we're going to have inflation. That is like really impressive stuff from the guy.
And just completely 1000% self-inflicted. He could have just come into office and not done any of this and the economy would be just chugging along great right now.
That is largely what he did in his first term. Like his major economic accomplishment was not fucking up Barack Obama's economy.
Yes, that was it. They passed his tax cut.
It didn't really do anything other than enrich shareholders. Yeah, he did.
One accomplishment was adding to the deficit.

Yes, he definitely added to the deficit.

Making rich people richer.

But in that period from 2017 to before COVID kicked in, basically just kind of chugged along. It was the same economy and didn't do, he didn't try to mess with this.
He tried to mess with it and we're all paying the price, literally. Pod Save America is brought to you by Bombas.
What if I told you the most important part of your spring cleaning routine is your sock drawer? You heard that right. It's time to ditch any mismatched, tired pairs and refresh your collection with some fresh Bombas.
Ready to unlock your new running hobby? Bombas engineers blister-fighting, sweat-wicking athletic socks that will help you go from that first mile to a whole marathon. No thanks on the marathon.
Looking for a nice pair to wear to a wedding? Bombas dress socks are made for loafers, heels, and all your other fancy shoes because you've got to stay comfy on that dance floor. And for all your other spring cleaning chores, Bombas has the cushioned, arch-hugging pairs that will keep you comfy while you spruce up the house and walk the dog.
Do whatever else you do on a normal day. You know what else goes great with new spring socks? Fresh white t-shirts, waterproof slides, and a few pairs of buttery soft underwear.
Quite an adjective to talk about underwear. Buttery.
I know, I don't like it. Bombas makes all that too.
I do love Bombas. I do too.
Best part of all this, for every comfy pair you purchase, Bombas donates another comfy pair to someone facing homelessness. I need some new socks.
I got holes in a bunch of socks. I do too.
I don't know what happened. Yeah, you got to just clean house every year or two.
And I love Bombas because A, you don't get holes in them that fast. And B, there's like so many different colors and patterns and the whole family can, our whole family has them.
They're great. Bombas is going international now.
Enjoy worldwide shipping to over 200 countries. Head over to bombas.com slash crooked and use code crooked for 20% off your first purchase.
That's B-O-M-B-A-S dot com slash crooked. Code crooked for 20% off your first purchase.
Bombas.com slash crooked and use code crooked. With reliable connectivity, enhanced cybersecurity, and advanced fiber solutions,

Comcast Business helps turn today's small businesses into engines of modern business.

Powering the engine of modern business.

Powering possibilities.

Now through April 21st, new customers can get started with 150 megabit internet and security edge for $49.99 a month for 12 months with a two-year agreement.

Plus, ask how to get a $500 prepaid card on a qualifying gig bundle. Call today.
Restrictions apply. Equipment tax and other fees extra and subject to change.
One person who's not concerned about the impact of Donald Trump's trade war on their personal finances, Donald Trump, who's very busy abusing his office to make himself richer.

That's right, Dan.

It's time for another corrupt date.

You think that's going to stick?

I don't know.

I mean, it really will be up to us to make it stick.

Like we would just have to do it a lot.

Then it would be there.

We're in charge, sort of.

If you have any questions or complaints, just direct them to John Lovett.

On Wednesday, a website hyping the Trump meme coin announced that Trump would host an exclusive dinner for the 220 people who own the most tokens to be held at a Trump club in Virginia, followed by a private tour of the White House for the top 25 investors. This caused the coin's price to jump 60%, which is money in Trump's pocket because his family's company owns a majority of the coins.
The website announcing all this, gettrumpmemes.com, says it has a leaderboard going for the people who've bought the most so far. You have to register to see it, which I have not had the time to do yet.
But the copy says, the competition is fierce. Own Trump or watch from the sidelines.
Josh Dossie at the Wall Street Journal reported that even White House aides were surprised by the promotion. And you've got some of the most corrupt goobers in the world in the White House.
And they're like, I don't know about that. Are you in or are you on the sidelines? I could not be further on the sidelines.
I guess you're not going to own Trump. Not in a financial sense, no.
So I know that there's like a lot of people aren't familiar with how meme coins work.

I was one of them until like, I don't know, a couple of months ago last year.

It does seem like this is a case though of like blatant corruption that's not too hard to explain and should make people, most voters, pretty pissed.

Yeah, you do not need to understand what a meme coin is to understand that this is Trump selling access to the White House, pure and simple. And to himself.
Right. It's access to the president.
So whoever spends the most money to put money in, it's quasi-legalized bribery. Whoever spends the most money will get to get to the president to bend his ear for whatever their chosen policy goal is or more likely pardon that they would like.
And I want to just explain this a little bit, which is Trump makes money here in two ways. One, he makes money, his company and his family make money off the sale of every coin.
So every one of these people who is buying one of these coins to meet Trump is paying him when they do it. And then they were inflating the worth of each individual coin.
Trump's family owns a ton of them. So his net worth goes up.
And so whenever he does the rug pull and sell some of his coins, he will make a whole bunch more money because of this. You could not, this is just how gross this is, is if this was a campaign fundraiser, it would be illegal.
You could not do this in the White House. You could not invite, ask people to give money for the specific purpose of getting a White House tour or a meeting with the president of the White House.
You can only- That's the way- And that money doesn't even go to him. And you are not allowed to, and that would be have transparency about who did it.
Obviously, there's transparency here because there's a fucking leaderboard, although it's not, I haven't seen the leaderboard, but I don't think it's giving name, occupation, and state like the FEC does. obviously there's transparency here because there's a fucking leaderboard um although it's not i haven't seen the leaderboard but i don't think it's giving uh name occupation and state like the fec does so there's transparency if it was campaign financing and none of that money could theoretically go to the president himself he can't spend it on his own stuff this is going directly into his bank account we have people auctioning off time with the president in the the White House to make him richer.
It is the most corrupt thing that any president, Richard Nixon included, has ever done. Hands down, it's not even close.
I was just thinking about this, and we should ask one of our strict scrutiny pals, but the Supreme Court decision about how the president is immune from criminal prosecution for acts that could be construed as within his official duties as president feels like this is outside of that i don't know how you i don't know how you can make because i think that one of the one of the examples people brought up was like oh could you just bribe the president for a? And you could say, well, the pardon power is his power as president. But this is like, how is any of this related to any official act of the president? I mean, it's obviously not.
It's clearly not. I think he could be prosecuted for this.
I would love to see the legal brief making the case that this is somehow adjacent to crypto policy, something the president is in charge of.

Yeah, maybe David Sachs is going to get to work on that one. Yeah, this is bad.
This is one that I think people should talk about. And everyone should know about this because it is.
Especially as you go to Target, the shelves are empty. You just lost your job at the manufacturing plant because they had to lay people off because all the uncertainty.
And then you turn on the news and the Trump meme coin just jumped 60% because he's walking around the White House with the top investors. Just absolutely wild.
I don't know. It seems like you could make something out of that.
All right. Speaking of rich assholes, the richest and the biggest made some news this week.
Elon Musk, the shitposting sperm super donor who Trump brought in to wreck the federal government, will be stepping away from his duties here in Washington.

Which is really why we're here for the Illinois party. We were invited.
That's right. I mean, you and he do have an online relationship.
We do, yeah. So it's good to just to see him in person.
Just heartbreaking. Heartbreaking that he's leaving.
Such a loss. We learned this on Tuesday after the news broke that Tesla's net income for the first quarter fell 71% and revenue dropped 9% from the same period last year.
Is that good? I'm not a business guy, but it seems like no. Elon made an appearance on the company's earnings call to offer his best guess as to why that might be and what happens now.
Let's listen. As some people know, there's been some blowback for the time that I've been spending in government with the Department of Government Efficiency or Doge.
The large slug of work necessary to get the Doge team in place and working in the government to get the financial house in order is mostly done. Next month in May my my time allocation to Doge will drop significantly.
I'll have to continue doing it for, I think, the remainder of the president's term, just to make sure that the waste and fraud that we stop does not come roaring back. Trump was then asked about this in the Oval Office on Wednesday night.
Here's what he said. I can't speak more highly about any individual.
He's an incredible guy. He's a brilliant guy.
He's a wonderful person. I've seen him with his family.
I've seen him with a lot of his children. He's got a lot of children.
And he was a tremendous help, both in the campaign and in what he's done with doge i also know that he was treated very unfairly by the i guess you'd call it the public by some of the public not by all of it but i say he makes an incredible car makes everything he does is good but they took it out on tesla and i i just thought it was so unfair poor tesla tesla Tesler. Note the past tense there.
He was a tremendous help. We also learned that Elon and Scott Besant, the Treasury Secretary, apparently got into a shouting match recently outside the Oval about who would run the IRS because Scott Besant wanted a competent, experienced professional to run the IRS.
And Elon wanted the random, quote unquote, whistleblower that yelled something about Hunter Biden and some scandal that I can barely remember at this point. It was just some like mid-level flunky.
He wanted him to run the IRS. So they fought about that outside the Oval.
At one point, Elon called Besant a Soros agent. So welcome.
Welcome to the club, Scott. First of all, how much of Tesla's problems,

sorry, Tesla's problems,

are attributable to the blowback

that Trump was talking about?

And what other factors were in play?

In other words, did we, the woke mob,

just score a big win?

Yes, the big win for the woke mob.

Tesla probably has four problems.

The first is the guy who runs the company

has been doing everything

but run the company for a while now.

Usually a problem.

Two, it's hard to know how much

the political blowback impacted sales,

but just common sense is

the customer base for Tesla

is generally... Maybe they should rename it Tesla.
They could use a brand refresh. Is generally well-to-do climate-conscious liberals.
People who probably aren't super into buying cars from a company run by a guy tweeting about replacement theory at 3 in the morning. Yeah.
These are the people who crawled across glass to vote for Susan Crawford in Wisconsin.

Yes, exactly, exactly.

Three is the tariffs.

They mentioned this in the call.

It's hard to know exactly how much.

That is going to affect them

certainly in the near term here,

but they get a lot of their parts from overseas.

And the last thing is,

there's more competition in the EV market.

There are just more companies making better cars.

And so if you have a choice

between two pretty good EVs of similar price, are you really going to pick the one from Elon Musk? Maybe not. Well, and I think especially orders for Tesla from Europe were way down.
Yeah, this is true both at home and abroad. Europeans, you think we're mad at Elon.
They're pretty mad because he goes over there and he's like, hey, what about the Nazis? He did not really say that, but that was a shorthand for one of his many speeches over there in Europe. What do you make of Elon's departure? On the one hand, it was kind of expected.
He was designated a special government employee, which you can only be for a certain amount of time. But if you're longer than that, then it triggers like, you know, disclosure, disclosure, ethics stuff, all the stuff that Elon would want to avoid.
So we knew he was going to leave at some point. But, you know, on the other hand, Trump's cabinet and most Americans have really come to dislike Elon.
So what do you think? It's weird that the American people and Pete Hegseth can agree on something. I think it's a pretty big deal.

First, I think it's worth saying, is he really leaving?

Yeah.

When companies have a very bad quarter, they tend to want to announce something on the earnings call that suggests they have a plan to fix the problem.

And so Elon's saying he's returning, he's getting out of government, coming back, solves the political backlash problem and the problem of the absentee landlord at Tesla. And so that that is a reason to give to minimize the market fallout right after the earnings call.
And it actually, I think in this case, did a little bit solve some of those problems. So is he really leaving? It's not a super honest guy.
I don't know. But if he is leaving, I do think this is the functional end of Doge.
He, I mean, who else is going to have the power to actually do the things he's doing, right? To bully cabinet executives. And so poorly.
Yeah, do it absolutely poorly. Like everything he's doing is, it's incompetent, but it is severe.
And it's very hard to get severe cuts in Washington. And he's able to do those in the worst way possible.
Don't get me wrong, because he is more powerful, both more powerful globally and more influential with Trump than anyone who serves in his cabinet. But if there's someone else running Doge, what flunky is going to be able to end run Scott Besson to Donald Trump? No one.
We should also take a look at a Doge report card here. Elon, he originally set out to, he said he could get, he could find $2 trillion in savings, $2 trillion.
Then he cut that down to $1 trillion. Now, you know what they've saved? About $95 billion.
So much less than what he wanted. And that's not even counting the savings that are being held up in court.
Correct. Right.
And so what do you get for $95 billion in savings? Does that go into the taxpayers saving a lot of money, getting a lot of rebates? No, that means about over 200,000 people lost their jobs from federal government, including cancer researchers, veterans jobs, food inspectors, tax collectors, which is probably going to undo the savings. And that's because now a bunch of rich people are going to get to cheat on their taxes and not pay them to the federal government.
So chaos around the Social Security Administration, which then they had to pull back. A bunch of people died all around the world thanks to him putting USAID in the wood chipper, which he bragged about.
Nick Kristof was tweeting about how he tweeted at Elon this week about how there's a boy in Africa who was born with HIV, was kept alive by medicine that costs 12 cents a day. He's dead now.
And you can look at reports of this all over the world. People have already died because of this.
More people will die because of medicine that we took away and food that we took away that cost pennies a day. Pennies a day.
So this is Elon Musk's Doge legacy. Pretty good, huh? Yeah, not great.
Did you see Steve Bannon was out with a statement on this? Oh no, what'd he say? Elon Musk should be required to submit a certified inventory of all the fraud and waste he found while in government, and there should be full disclosure of any non-governmental entities to have obtained sensitive federal data through Doge. Sounds like a Democratic member of Congress.
That's right. Steve Bannon.
Yeah. I agree.
I agree with Steve Bannon. All right.
Clip that, Elijah. Let's get a certified inventory of all the fraud and waste because it's also supposed to be the most transparent administration in history.
Yes, of course. And they put everything on the Doge website only except when they don't.
So good job at Doge, Elon. We really need an Elon Doge in memoriam.
That's a good idea. God damn it.
That would be good. Let's do a.
Anyone do content around here? I was just posting over here. That's right.
This podcast is sponsored by Squarespace. Squarespace is the all-in-one website platform designed to elevate your online presence and drive your success.
Squarespace provides all the tools you need to promote and get paid for your services in one platform. Create a professional website to showcase your offerings and attract clients.
Whether you offer consultations, events, or other experiences, Squarespace can help you grow your business. Squarespace offers a complete library of professionally designed and award-winning website templates with options for every use and category.
Make smarter business decisions with Squarespace's intuitive built-in analytics tools, review website traffic, learn where to focus engagement, and track revenue from bookings, invoices, or product sales all from one place. Squarespace Domains makes it easy to find the best name for your business at one fair, all-inclusive price.

No hidden fees or add-ons required. Every Squarespace domain comes with advanced privacy and security tools included to ensure your domain remains online and protected.
Head to squarespace.com for a free trial. And when you're ready to launch, go to squarespace.com slash crooked to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain.
That's squarespace.com slash crooked. Good news, We've just made Friends of the Pod subscription even better by adding more ad-free shows.
If you enjoy Crooked Media's content and want to support our work, subscribing to Friends of the Pod is the best way to do it. Now, you can enjoy Offline with Jon Favreau and Love It or Leave It completely ad-free.
Wow. And for the month of April, we're offering a 30-day free trial, no commitment, just pure ad-free joy.
When you subscribe, you'll also unlock ad-free Pod Save America and Pod Save the World, exclusive content like Polar Coaster with Dan Pfeiffer, and gain access to our Discord community where you can connect with other anxious yet civically-minded people who believe a better world is possible. Your subscription helps power everything we do here at Crooked.
Sign up today at crooked.com slash friends or through Apple Podcasts to start your 30-day free trial. Let's talk about deportations.
There's been more churn in the courts on this. On Tuesday, U.S.
District Court Judge Paula Zinnes slammed the DOJ over what she called a, quote, willful and intentional refusal to comply with her order to return Kilmar Abrego Garcia and accuse the government of dishonesty and obstruction. Then on Wednesday, in a totally separate case, a Trump-appointed judge, Stephanie Gallagher, ordered the return of another wrongly deported man.
This time, it was a Venezuelan asylum seeker whose removal violated a court settlement. Another unlawful deportation.
Gallagher cited the Abrego Garcia case in her ruling and called the government's actions, quote, a breach of a contract. But Trump's not just losing in the courts, he's also losing in the court of public opinion.
Multiple polls now have Trump underwater on immigration, which was his best issue, including the latest Fox News poll that Trump was bitching about on Truth Social this morning. A YouGov poll found Americans support bringing Abrego Garcia back by nearly two to one margin and only 27 percent buy into Trump's claim that he's MS-13, a claim that the administration still hasn't even tried to prove in court.
And we were just given right here at Pod Save America, Dan, we were just given an exclusive new poll from the Democratic research firm Tavern Research, which surveyed a huge sample of nearly 13,000 voters over the last few days. A couple of things that they found, the Abrego Garcia case has certainly broke through to most voters.
Voters disapprove of how Trump is handling it by a 14-point margin. Only 25% of voters believe Trump is following the law.
Only 25% believe that it's okay for him to defy the court's orders. Getting down to 25%, usually he's got like 35, 40 with almost anything he does.
So he's down to 25%. And the most effective messages when talking about the case have to do with Trump defying the courts and in doing so, putting the due process rights of all Americans at risk.
Those were the most effective message. What do you make of those numbers? Encouraging as an American.
Yeah. Just that there are like Democrats that we talked about this last week, but Democrats are sort of taught to be afraid of immigration and that here we have not just the moral high ground, but the political high ground and that we, and that Democrats should make the arguments against these illegal deportations with confidence.
You should need a poll to talk about these things, but if you do, you now have the polling to stiffen your spine a bit. Yeah.
I also think it's a good lesson in how polling should be used because usually there's this argument like, should we follow the polls? Should we not follow the polls? And as you know, like polling is just another useful tool to use depending on how you use it, right? And it is still true, probably, that most Americans want a secure border and, you know, want people who are criminals deported. And there's a limit to how many even asylum seekers people want to take in because they saw over the last couple of years that a lot of asylum seekers were sort of stretching public services in cities all across the country.
And those views, I don't think, haven't changed. But that is entirely separate from also believing that we should send people to a gulag or we should deport people without due process or any of the stuff that he's doing.
And there's a nuance there that I think sometimes the intraparty fighting among Democrats doesn't really get, at least online, obviously. But that like two things can be true at once.
And just because immigration is a good issue for Trump doesn't mean that no matter what he does around immigration, it's going to be popular. Yeah.
We all lost our mind on the politics of immigration from like 2022 until now. Yeah.
really like 2016 on. No, I think in the, during the Trump era, all we had to do, in the first Trump 1.0, all we had to do was point out that what Trump was doing was bad and cruel and stupid and counterproductive.
And we're actually quite effective for that. Like I was looking at the polling today, Trump was underwater on immigration for almost every single day of his first term yes just this idea i guess i think i'm sorry i think the reaction the reaction from democrats in the 2020 primary yeah to the prior four years was an example of misreading misreading what the anger about trump on immigration was all about yes 100 100 percent um but for a long time we had a very good message on immigration which was border security keep people safe have a path to citizenship for people who have been here a long time are part of the community have them go to the back of the line pay back taxes whatever like there was a there was a method that tested for that to this day are you saying we're a nation of immigrants and a nation of laws just just brack obama's message well i mean that that position still to this day gets majority support and when we constrain the image only to the way in which trump wants to talk about it like we i think what we did wrong and i think it's still keeping people from do it for a lot of people from talking about this the right way, is we really accepted Trump's premise.
Like he created, this is something the right, Trump and the right-wing media did very successfully, which is they created this image of, they took legitimate issues around chaos at the border of migrants coming here, seekering asylum, and turned it into an invasion by MS-13 in Trenda, Aragua. They turned it into this idea that there was this wave of crime from migrants and undocumented immigrants, that you were unsafe for them because of this.
And that wasn't actually the case. But we accepted that premise in our messaging, right? We were, like we said last week, we're trying to out-tough Trump on the border as opposed to talking about how you do it.
And he is suffering this. And if I was in the White House and if I was in the White House, which is really a hard thing to imagine, but if I were, these numbers would scare the shit out of me, right? Like you have a two-pronged reason why you're president, the economy and immigration.
And you're not underwater on both. And we haven't even hit the 100 day mark.
I think it's also a lesson for Democrats that like if you pick fights about issues where first of all, you think it's wrong and it's urgent to speak out, but also you sort of sense that what the politician is doing, what Trump is doing is unpopular, like you can have these issues break through, right? Like there could have been, when he sent Abrego Garcia to, El Salvador to this prison, when he deported, we could have said, okay, you know what? Since he's so strong on immigration, we just shouldn't talk about this. But if we didn't talk about it, if Democrats all decided not to talk about this and not to make a big deal of it, then he probably still would be very popular on immigration because most people in the country wouldn't know that it happened.
Yes, we have agency here. And the same thing happened, we just talked about Doge, right? At the beginning of Doge, it was like, well, we got to be careful because a lot of Democrats and Republicans and independents, most Americans, they do want government to be more efficient.
And that's what he's doing. So maybe we should just be quiet.
And it's like, okay, yeah, that's true. If Elon Musk was actually going in there and making government more efficient and actually saving money on things that were wasteful, he wasn't doing that.
So we should talk about it. And I just think that like Trump is not as strong as people think he is.
And he still has a lot of power and he's still very dangerous. But the country right now is not particularly happy with him.
And his approval rating continues to fall. I think in the Pew poll this week, it was at 40.
And that's probably an outlier. It's probably around 44, 45.
But it's still, his approval rating is at a lower point right now than almost any president at this point in their first term in recent memory other than him. And it's about to cross that line.
Yeah, he's about to cross the line. I think in the average, he is almost seven points underwater right now.
And he's been dropping a point a week for a while now. And this is not to say, okay, he's getting more unpopular.
Everyone can just be like, whew, relax and just wait for the next election. And where it's thermostatic public opinion and everything's gonna be fine.
It's to say that like, we don't need to be afraid or we shouldn't be afraid because the more we fight, the more unpopular he gets. And so like, you know, courage is contagious here.
You should go speak out. You should go keep fighting because when we do, other people in the country who aren't paying attention realize like, yeah, this is bad.
I don't like this. Which brings us to our last topic before we get to our conversation with Amanda.
On Tuesday, the longtime executive producer of 60 Minutes, Bill Owens, announced that he's stepping down, saying he can't run the show independently anymore. This comes, of course, after Trump called again for CBS to lose its broadcast license over some recent segments on 60 Minutes, and after he filed a $20 billion lawsuit against CBS for the way the show edited its interview with Kamala Harris.

And CBS News' parent company, Paramount, which is trying to close a major merger, is talking about settling. How big of a deal do you think this is? If I was writing a book, which I am not, about the death.
You can announce it here if you want. I mean, you do have a publishing arm, so maybe we should talk.
No. If I was writing a book about the death of the traditional objective media that dominated the 20th century and the first part of the 21st century, the lead anecdote would be what just happened with Bill Owens at 60 Minutes.
60 Minutes is the flagship news show in America. So known for tough accountability journalism that if you worked at a company or a government agency and a 60 minutes producer called you you wet your pants like it meant you were in big trouble and the fact that now even 60 minutes is being brought to heel by the court it's corporate overlords means the entire model of big media owned by big corporations cannot function there is an inherent and irreconcilable tension between companies with business before the federal government owning media companies trying to hold that federal government accountable like this is this is the end of an era where we are right now and And again, it's like, I mean, Sherry Redstone, who runs the Paramount, trying to close a merger, so maybe it's just all about money for her, right? Maybe she just wants a deal.
But I think it is for other media companies that can, for other people in media, for these colleges, for the law firms, people fight because all i think that all of the people that have capitulated so far are going to look they're not gonna be like oh that was smart they got away early it's gonna look bad and and if you and again just we were talking about the polling like some of these media companies if you ask people oh should the government be able to sue media companies into oblivion or threaten them or pull their licenses because they said things that our ruler, Donald Trump, doesn't care for? That's not fucking popular. No one's going to think that's a good idea.
Yeah, there's very explicit polling on colleges and museums. That shows that what Donald Trump is using federal funding as leverage is quite a public even with Republicans but what is going on here is just it's important to understand that because like there was a time in which CBS was a huge part of the revenue at Paramount yeah CBS News in particular see that is not true anymore right CNN is like, which is owned by Warner Brothers Discovery, which is a company that by all reporting very much wants to either merge with another company or buy another company.
In all cases would need approval from the FCC. And so they are not willing to take on water for something that is, even if it still makes money now, they know is in secular decline and is never coming back.
And so the thing about, I don't think you're going to be able to convince these major companies to fight back, like Sherry Redstone or some of these other companies, like even Disney gave in on the George Stephanopoulos defamation suit. The way you fight back here is you support independent media.
Yes. And that can be ideological partisan media, like what we have here, pro-democracy media, like what we have here at Crooked Media.
It could be like ProPublica and nonprofit independent media. But the future of media is going to look very different than it did before, and it's going to be smaller but independent from these big companies.
Yeah, I think that's right. All right.
So as you heard,

a new episode of Polar Coaster just dropped.

Don't miss out on this exclusive series

available only to Friends of the Pod.

You can head to crooket.com slash friends

and sign up today

or subscribe directly through our Apple podcast feed.

If you subscribe by the end of April,

you'll get a 30-day free trial.

When we come back,

we will talk to the founder of Run for Something

and the author of the new book, When We're in Charge, Amanda Lippman. your mom wants from you is to call her.
This Mother's Day, you can give her a call and give her an Aura digital picture frame. Every frame comes packaged in a premium gift box with no price tag.
It only takes about two minutes to set up a frame using the Aura app. Add unlimited photos and videos and invite as many people as you want to a frame.
There are absolutely no hidden fees or subscriptions. Upload videos up to 30 seconds long and your favorite live iPhone photos will play right on the frame.
The embedded speaker can play audio on demand. You have complete control over who has access to your frame, and the Aura app lets you share photos more securely than with email, which many other digital frames require.
If I had not already given my mom an Aura frame for Christmas, I'd be doing it for Mother's Day. I'm sort of annoyed that this idea is off the table.
But you should get one. They are great.
My parents love their AuraFrame. We are constantly uploading pictures of the kids to the frame at any time of day.
It's very easy. You have an app on your phone.
Put the picture in and boom, it's on their frame. It's a great, great gift.
AuraFrames was named the best digital photo frame by Wirecutter and featured in 495 gift guides last year. So the next time you need to call your mom, you can also send her a new pic of you from that trip you're telling her all about right from your phone.
Aura has a great deal for Mother's Day for a limited time. Listeners can save on the perfect gift by visiting AuraFrames.com to get $35 off plus free shipping on their best-selling Carver Matte frame.
That's A-U-R-A frames.com, promo code Crooked. Support the show by mentioning us at checkout.
Terms and conditions apply. Good news, we've just made Friends of the Pod subscription even better by adding more ad-free shows.
If you enjoy Crooked Media's content and want to support our work, subscribing to Friends of the Pod is the best way to do it. Now, you can enjoy Offline with Jon Favreau and Love It or Leave It completely ad-free.
Wow. And for the month of April, we're offering a 30-day free trial, no commitment, just pure ad-free joy.
When you subscribe, you'll also unlock ad-free Pod Save America and Pod Save the World, exclusive content like Polar Coaster with Dan Pfeiffer, and gain access to our Discord community where you can connect with other anxious yet civically minded people who believe a better world is possible. Your subscription helps power everything we do here at Crooked.
Sign up today at crooked.com slash friends or through Apple Podcasts to start your 30 day free trial. Amanda Lipman, good to see you in person.
Nice to see you guys. Welcome back to the pod.
Congrats on the new book. Thank you.
It's called When We're in Charge, The Next Generation's Guide to Leadership. We're also psyched you chose to do it with Crooked Media Reads because we've all been big fans of yours for a long time.
I am so excited to talk about it and it feels so right for this moment. Yes, it does.

Well, so want to spend time in the book. Thought we could start by checking in on Run for Something, which is the organization you launched after the first Trump administration with the goal of recruiting, training, helping younger candidates run for down ballot races all over the country.
I'll admit that I was worried

that after all the despair and

fear that accompanied Trump's second win

um for down ballot races all over the country. I'll admit that I was worried that after all the despair and fear that accompanied Trump's second win, you guys would have a tougher time finding candidates to run.
That hasn't happened. No, and I will admit I shared that concern.
But since Trump won in November, we have had 41,000 young people all across the country raise their hands to say they want to run. Our overall pipeline has exceeded 200,000.
That means 20% of the people who have ever signed up with Run for Something to say they want to run for office have come to us in the last five months. And how does that compare to the first? So in the first two years of Trump's first term, we had 30,000 people sign up.
So we've already exceeded that. It is more people than I ever could have imagined.
Like our goal for 2025 was 50,000. We're going to cross that in like a month.
Are you seeing a different kind of person stepping up, different kind of candidate or, and where are they running? So we are getting people from all 50 states. It's pretty commensurate with population, little more women than men, about 70 to 75% under the age of 40.
So it's mostly young people. And we are seeing people step up for a lot of the issues we've seen over the last eight years, housing, cost of housing, reproductive health, book bans, especially in the last few years.
Opioids continues to be a big thing we hear from people. But especially in the last five months, they are signing up and saying, if my leaders aren't going to fight for me, I am going to fight for me.
And I think that in particular is a really exciting attitude we're seeing new folks bring. That's awesome.
I saw that you were running for something that's hosting an informational session for fired formal federal workers. That's what I was going to say.
Tell me a little bit about what is going on there. Do you think those folks make good candidates and what is sparking their interest to run? So we've seen hundreds of people sign up coming specifically from conversations around former

laid off federal workers or people who've had partners or friends or family, countless more

beyond that. And I think these are folks who are already inclined towards public service.

You know, they have been working in the federal government, not a glamorous job,

all across the country, because as you guys know, and as folks know, the federal government is not just a dc thing it is everywhere and i think for a lot of them this is personal they understand intimately how government works and affects people's lives they're pissed at trump and elon musk for firing them or firing their friend or their family and they've often not been allowed to run for office before like in most places there's some nuance here depending on the type of office you run and what your job is. But generally speaking, federal government employees have not been allowed to run for office before.
There's been some ethics violation rules around that. They are now free to.
And they've got a lot of time on their hands and they got a lot of rage. And they're channeling it into doing something really meaningful with it.
So I think they're going to be great candidates. If even a couple of them end up getting on the ballot in 2026, the stories that they'll be able to tell both about why they're mad and how they've committed to their community are gonna be really powerful.
Are these like former scientists, former all across the board? Park rangers, former scientists, former fellows doing like weather research, you know, former VA people, doctors and healthcare professionals who are working in the government, all kinds of experts who've really done meaningful work and shown how government can make people's lives better, which most people don't get to hear their stories. You touched on this.
Your book is largely about this, but the debate about the generational divide of the Democratic Party has been brewing for a long time. It's obviously picked up pace since this election, since the end of Biden's presidency.
How do you think about generational split? Is it really age or is it style too? We obviously have folks like Bernie Sanders, who is much older, but is very popular with young people and probably campaigns and talks about politics in a way that makes young people excited. So talk to me a little bit about that split and where you think it's going.
Obviously, no generation is a monolith. We have seen older leaders like Senator Sanders rise to the occasion and really prove they can fight and communicate in this moment.
That being said, I don't think it's a coincidence that many of the folks who have risen up, who have shown their backbone, and who have proven they can communicate about that fight in this moment are some of the younger leaders. And I would say it is both age, sort of, you know, millennials and Gen Z folks.
We'll give younger Gen X a little bit of credit here. Thank you, thank you, thank you.
But it is also like people whose political awakening has been since Trump. Like people who first got into politics post-2015, 2016, who have a very clear-eyed understanding of who the Republican Party is, is not George W.
Bush's Republican Party. It's not John McCain's.
It's not Mitt Romney's. It is Trump's.
And they know who the opponent is and that these are not good faith partners in governance. And because they're comfortable online, like I like to joke, these are candidates and electeds who run their own Instagram accounts, which is pretty unusual.
They understand how to express that in this moment. How do you think this next generation of leaders should be responding to Trump 2.0? Like, how do we end what you've called the bad boomer leadership that's taken over the Democratic Party? You know, I think it's a couple things.
I think, again, being clear about who the Republican Party is and who they are not. I think being willing to like channel whatever it is they're really mad about and communicate it.
You know, we have this moment in which authenticity or this perceived authenticity is so important for candidates. And it is especially important for newer candidates who are trying to like prove themselves and build trust with voters.
When we talk about like what messaging we should be on or like what fight should we take on, pick the fight that makes you the maddest and talk about it. Because if you're talking about the thing that you aren't actually that riled up about, it's going to come through and it's not going to connect with people.
The other thing I would say is that especially in this moment, like being unafraid to have the conversation in as many places as possible. This is something I think people who haven't been relatively new to public service and to politics can do a little bit better, not exclusively, but can do a little bit better because they are normal people who just happen to have fallen into public service as opposed to people who've been in office for 20 or 30 years and like don't know what normal people talk about anymore.
So I think that's one of the many distinctions. We haven't talked about this on the pod yet, but I'm sure you've heard about DNC Vice Chair David Hogg pledging $20 million to primary older Democrats in safe seats.
What do you think of the strategy? Any risks? Whether or not David as a DNC leader is the right person to do this is sort of a separate question. That I think the DNC is trying to handle as we speak.
That seems like a them problem. I do think it is worth encouraging open primaries.
Primaries are how we as a party decide what we believe.

Parties are where candidates get a chance to prove their mettle in sort of safe territory,

especially in all these safe blue districts.

That's where we get our Democratic leaders from.

It's not a coincidence that much of the Democratic leadership is from New York, California, and Illinois.

Those are safe seats.

So the people who can rise there tend to be both the cream of the crop, ideally,

and can really ideally model what the party is standing for in this moment. I think if you're an incumbent who's doing a good job, you've got a pretty high chance of winning a primary.
Incumbents have something like a 95% re-election rate. If you are doing a good job of meeting your constituents where they are, you should have nothing to worry about.
I think it's telling that some of these incumbents are a little spooked because they know they're not quite where their voters want them to be. Yeah, I'm very torn about this.
I very much agree open primaries are good. We 100% need a new generation of leadership.
And in a world in which most incumbents are going to win their election, then the only way you're going to, they're just going to be there until they leave. Like if you went, like Adam Schiff can be Senator from California for the rest of his life if he wants.
Right? Like that is going to be- He could literally die in office as previous senators in California have done. I mean, there might be some past precedent there.
But I guess- Either leave on your own or in a college. Yes.
Cool slogan for the United Senate. Absent a primary, I guess is the question.
But I guess one question I have is, and maybe things have changed recently, but a lot of the conversations I've had with various groups and people trying to fund efforts since election is it has been a tough environment to raise money. A lot of our donors are not necessarily the grassroots donors, but sort of the bigger folks who fund the larger progressive infrastructure are tapped out.
They're frustrated. They're not giving money.
And so just in a world where we need run for something, we need Indivisible, we need Swing Left, we need more progressive media, more content, what do you think about $20 million to this effort? I think it's a drop in the bucket compared to what we spend in a lot of federal races. I also think most of these primary candidates are going to be funded by grassroots donors.
They're not going to get a lot of institutional money. And I will say run for something's budget this year is only $7.5 million.
And we're expecting to work with about 300 candidates in every state there's an election. We've already won, I think, 20 some odd races this year.
There's a lot of ways that we could spend money in politics and there will always be more money, even when I wish there were different rules around it. So if your goal is to get new leaders in that particular space, that's certainly one way you could do it.
I think my way is also really exciting. Another option would be to donate to Run for Something.

Yes, I'll say it for you.

Thank you.

Run for something.net slash donate.

$5 goes a long way.

I kind of think we should all be consistent on it.

If you're for primaries and competitive primaries,

that's true for if you're worried about what the result may be. It's true if you want the result to be a different way.

And I think we're probably stronger as a party,

especially the democracy party, if we're allowing this to happen. And it's really scary to trust voters.
But like if we're empowering candidates to run good campaigns, then we should. And I think that's like the key here is we should give candidates, and this is what Run for Something does, is empower candidates to make the best possible argument to their voters and then let voters decide.
Even if voters sometimes make decisions I wouldn't agree with, that's voters call. Which has happened recently.
Let's talk about your wonderful book, which isn't just advice for young people running for office. It's for young people who are stepping into leadership roles or planning to step into leadership roles across business, nonprofits.
What made you want to broaden the focus? So I know politics. I've worked now with thousands of candidates running for office.
I knew I didn't know enough about what leadership looked like outside of this space. So when I was going in to write the book, I put out a call to interview as many people from as many different kinds of spaces as I could.
And I ended up having in-depth conversations with more than 135 different leaders from a variety of sectors. I talked to faith leaders and doctors and teachers.
I talked to tech CEOs. I talked to the CEO of Snapchat, Evan Spiegel.
I also talked to the editor-in-chief of Teen Vogue. I also talked to Maxwell Frost, member of Congress.
And I heard so many themes echo across those conversations. You know, the partner in the law firm in Chicago had a slightly different take on the 80-year-old partner who she had to do notes in the dictaphone for, as opposed to the rabbi who said the person she replaced in Wisconsin had never taken a day off in 30 years behind the pulpit.
And she was like, I'm a mom of two kids. I can't do that.
But the themes were the same. And I think that to me was emblematic of the fact that across different sectors, across different spaces, really across the country, and even I talked to a few folks in Europe and in England, details are a little different there, they have better healthcare.
The challenges that next-gen leaders, what I would collectively call next-gen leaders, millennials, and Gen Z are facing are the same and that we didn't have a playbook on how to solve them. So that's what I tried to write was the guide that honestly I wish I had had when I started Run for Something eight and a half years ago of like, how do you do this in a way that is better than every boss I've ever had before? I was going to say, how did your own experience with leadership roles at Run for Something and other places inspire what you wrote? You know, when I started Run for Something, I was 26, about to turn 27.
I was single. I was having a good time.
I had never run a company before. I'd never written a budget before.
I'd managed people. I'd managed teams a few times.
But I knew that if this was going to last, if I was going to build an organization that was sustainable and that would do this work for a long time, because it was important that I thought this work needed a long runway to succeed, that I built a team and ran my company in a way that reflected that. So that was everything from how we could provide the best possible healthcare to people, how we could pay people as well as possible, how we could have work-life integration and work-rest integration.
I didn't want to work campaign hours for eight or 10 years. Now, eight and a half years later, I have two kids, a two and a half-year-old and a seven-month-old.
I don't have the time to work 100-hour weeks anymore, and I don't want to. But the work is still really important.
So I write a ton in When We're in Charge about my experience creating this organization that functions a little differently than any other political organization, although some now have come our way, including things like a four-day work week, really good health care, really good benefits, things like a sabbatical policy, but also transparency policies internally that allow us to really communicate with people in a way that brings them in and helps guide where we're going. And the challenges that I faced, you know, when I went to take maternity leave with my first daughter, and I googled, how do I take maternity leave as the boss, all I could find was how to ask your boss for maternity leave, which one damning indictment of the United States, but two, you know, really telling of like what kind of resources there are for leaders who want to model the values we put into practice.
You and I have talked about this before, since we've both had similar experiences here, but can you get into some of the challenges you faced being a millennial at the top of an organization with a lot of Gen Zers? It's so hard. And, you know, it wasn't just things that I faced.
I heard this from all of the people I talked to. The similar kinds of demands for transparency that in the same way you can Google something or get a Yelp review on something.
We want that at work. We want to be able to get every answer we want whenever we want it.
I heard this from folks about things that they wanted work to provide something that work is not the right space to hold. And I write about this in the book of work cannot be your only source of identity, your only source of friendship, your only source of your physical or mental health, your well-being.
It is first and foremost an economic relationship. And ideally, as the leader, you are creating space where people have the time and resources to be full people outside of it.
One of the challenges that basically every millennial and Gen Z leader I talked to named was that they're managing millennials and Gen Z. And that is both a blessing and a curse.
Yes. Yes.
We could do a whole other episode on that. Love our Gen Z for me and myers.
Love you all. Great lesson in the book, We Don't Dream of Labor.
Can you unpack that a little bit and how it applies to what we're all going through right now? Okay, so the internet says this is a James Baldwin quote, but I cannot find any proof of that. So make of that what you will.
The full quote here is that I do not have a dream job because I do not dream of labor. I think that is so important, especially in this moment where we are looking to do so much more than our work, that your job just cannot be everything.
And a nightmare is a kind of dream too. Sometimes your dream job could actually be horrific.
I think it is really on the shoulders of the person in charge of the leader. And I write on how to do this to make it clear that you should have a place at work where you can do your job and know what success looks like and that you don't have to be miserable every day doing it, but it also doesn't need to be the only place you find fulfillment.
It's hard. It's hard, especially in the business that we're all in, in politics, right? Because it is a mission and you do care, but you've got to separate it at some point.
I talked to a pastor who really spoke to this Marshall Hatch in Chicago who told me, I feel like my work is a calling, but also there could be lots of calls. There could be lots of different ringtones in this call.
It can look different. And that doesn't mean that there's a wrong way to love your job, but it can also be really dangerous when you love your job so much that it eats you up and spits you out.
You talked about being a working mom now. What have you learned about rest, not just for yourself, but as something leaders need to model for their teams? You know, so Run for Something has a four-day work week, which is the only way I was able to write this book, run the organization.
At the time I had a one-year-old and I was pregnant. I did that because we had Fridays.
So all through 2024, I would spend Fridays, not resting, but working on this in a way that was also really creatively fulfilling and gave me like a different kind of joy than my day job. I think a lot about what it means as the boss to model rest for my team.
Like we really do take Fridays off. We don't have emails.
We don't have meetings. When we're done with the day at around 530, 6 o'clock, we log off.
On weekends, yeah, like sometimes you might have to work on a weekend, like any job. Sometimes you have to go to the event or like, you know, there's the emergency, whatever.
But generally speaking, you can count on weekends to be your own. And I think about the way that the four-day work week, the clear boundaries about our time have made me a better boss, a better leader, but also such a better parent and a better partner.
Like I am so much better at going into a full 48 hours of parenting after I got to spend Friday, yeah, maybe doing some book stuff or some writing, but also going to yoga class, get my nails done, see a friend, lounge on the couch and watch Grey's Anatomy for three hours. Like whatever it is, I'm a better parent and a better partner because of that.
Like in politics, right? The culture, it is the worst version of like quote unquote hustle culture, right? Like you were supposed to be working all the time. And if you're not working all the time, like in the way it's understood by so many people, if you're not working all the time, then either you're doing something wrong or you're not important enough to be working all the time.
So everyone's trying to work all the time. How have you been able to run a political organization, not on that sort of 24 seven treadmill that so much of politics and media seems to operate on?

You can be very discerning here.

My mission is urgent and important.

Not every task in service of that mission

is urgent or important.

And so being really thoughtful and rigorous

about prioritization,

about how we're spending time in meetings or together, knowing, like, yeah, a couple of weeks before election day, you might have to work a little bit more, but you cannot do this work year in, year out if you are burning the candle at both ends. You will hate yourself and you won't be as good at it.
I don't think anyone who's working 100 hour weeks is doing that because those hours 60 to 100 are their best hours. Like you're not getting your best stuff.
I think it is so necessary for leaders to model those boundaries and also to staff in such a way that you don't have to ask that for people. Like I reject the premise that you have to be working around the clock to be getting the most possible things done.

Like efficacy and humane, compassionate leadership are not mutually exclusive. Yeah.
Last question. You talked to more than 100 young leaders for the book.
Was there a moment or a conversation that surprised you or changed how you thought about leadership? Oh, that's such a good question. I was surprised at how many things I heard in common.
I was surprised, and maybe not, in retrospect, it's not surprising at all, how many people would tell me, I want to be myself in my role. I want to be authentic.
I want to bring my real self, but not my full self, but my real self to work, because I I don't think work is the right place for my full self. I want to be this.
And then I would ask them, great. Do you think like you can be yourself with your team? And I memorably remember somebody like, oh fuck no, absolutely not.
And I think that tension, like that's the point of the book is how do you navigate that tension? How do you perform yourself authentically while still not performing yourself at all? And like, how do you post on social media when your team follows you there? And how do you be transparent? But also if you open the books too much, people are going to see things they're actually not prepared or able to see. And how do you think about your career? Like when the ladders that we have climbed no longer exist and the path that our parents or grandparents took has just been like blown up how do you do that like those tensions like i hearing that from so many people and in the last couple weeks i've been going back to all the folks i talked to for the book to be like hey so excited this is coming out can't wait to send you a copy and so many of them wrote back to me like that conversation stuck with me no one had ever really asked, like how does it feel to do this hard thing? And I'll say the final thing that really stuck with me and has been like sort of my mantra for much of honestly the last eight years was how many people would tell me, I feel like I am doing a hard thing and it is hard not because I'm personally failing, but because like it is fundamentally a hard thing.
like I is hard, not because I'm personally failing, but because it is fundamentally a hard thing. I am trying to push a rock up a mountain.
And no matter how strong you are, how high the mountain is, it's going to be hard. And we tell this to candidates when they're running for office, running for office is hard.
No matter how good you are, our job is to make it a little bit easier, like around the logistics. Leading in this moment in a way that treats people right, but also gets the job done is difficult.
It is also like running for office, so worth it. It's so worth it, both for me and for you and for all of us as leaders, but also for the people you lead.
I'm sure that's why one of the reasons that people appreciated the conversations with you and the questions so much, because just being asked, how are you feeling? How are you doing it? What does it mean to you? Like you don't ever get that question. Well, especially when you're in charge of folks, like it's not their job to ask you that question.
And like your partner or your therapist has probably heard it all more than that. So I think it's really important to take a step back and really reflect like what kind of leader am I? Am I living up to the values I've laid out? Am I prepared to deal with the criticism that I will inevitably get? And am I doing this in a way that I can feel good about? Well, all the answers to all those questions are right in the book.
It comes out May 13th. The book is When We're in Charge, The Next Generation's Guide to Leadership.
It's a fantastic book. You can preorder it now at crooked..com books or anywhere you like to get books amanda litman good seeing you thanks for having me guys good to talk to you that's our show for today before we go there was one quick breaking news development that we got that we should know what happened well we learned the full chinese proverb which we did we did not apparently have no it is whoever ties the bell on the tiger's neck has to untie it okay i rescind everything i said that makes complete sense that there's a reason that's a proverb and it's it was dumb of me to even question something that was i assume thousands of years old i mean i could do a five minute thing on who the fuck is tying bells on tigers next but you know what we're not going to do it you know what if we keep talking someone's going to tell us why that is we have to do another correction so let's get out of here fast all right uh thanks to amanda litman for joining us everyone have a great weekend uh we'll have a new show in your feeds on tuesday bye everyone if you want to listen to pod save america-free or get access to our subscriber Discord and exclusive podcasts, consider joining our Friends of the Pod community at crooked.com slash friends or subscribe on Apple Podcasts directly from the Pod Save America feed.
Also, be sure to follow Pod Save America on TikTok, Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube for full episodes, bonus content, and more. And before you hit that next button, you can help boost this episode by leaving us a review and by sharing it with friends and family.
The show is mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick. Jordan Cantor is our sound engineer, with audio support from Kyle Seglin and Charlotte Landis.

Madeline Herringer is our head of news and programming.

Matt DeGroat is our head of production.

Naomi Sengel is our executive assistant.

Thanks to our digital team, Elijah Cohn, Haley Jones, Ben Hethcote, Mia Kelman, Molly Lobel, Kirill Pellaviv, and David Tolles.

Our production staff is proudly unionized with the Writers Guild of America East.