VP Showdown, Harris’s Border Visit, Mayor Adams Indicted, and Hogan on the GOP's Future

Welcome to Raging Moderates.

I'm Scott Galloway.

And I'm Jessica Tarlov.

Jessica, where are you today?

What are you up to?

What are you doing?

I'm at my mom's house, like all good 40-year-old women who need a quiet place.

So they go to their mom's apartment to escape a potty training toddler.

I think the way you're supposed to do it is you have mom come over and watch the kids, and you go to the spa or go to your friend's house and eat ice cream and smoke cigarettes.

I'm making a bunch of gender stereotypes here.

I get it.

I'd like to continue with that, though, to add to it that when my mom started dating again after my dad passed away, when we were going to put her online, the joke was that her tagline should be not that kind of grandma.

So she would not be the one coming over to take care of the toddler

and to do the body training.

No, I mean, she's into it, but she needs assistance.

She's not a solo rider when it comes to that stuff.

I'm appreciative of the apartment.

Today, in today's episode of Raging Moderates, we're previewing the VP debate, Kamala Harris's trip to the border, and her new economic plan.

We're going to talk about it.

We're going to discuss NYC Mayor Eric Adams' indictment.

And to wrap up the episode, former Maryland Governor Larry Hogan joins us for a quick discussion on how the Republican Party feels about the election and what it takes to govern across party lines.

All right.

Let's light this candle.

The VP debate is here.

J.D.

Vance and Tim Walls are going head-to-head with just a month to go before Election Day.

Vance has been reviewing footage of Walls' previous speeches and studying his past policies.

Meanwhile, Wall spent the weekend hunkered down in debate camp in Michigan with Transportation Secretary Pete Budiges playing the role of Vance in mock debates.

Jess, what's your take here?

What should we expect on stage?

And is this really going to move the needle?

Does it matter?

I think that it could matter.

I mean, historically, they don't matter as much,

but there are a few instances where I think people really got the message, including the Joe Biden debate with Paul Ryan, where I feel like really solidified things for the ticket there in 2012.

You think he beat Paul Ryan?

I do.

Yeah.

I think Paul Ryan came off as wonky and detached and Joe Biden was wonky and attached, which made a big difference.

But I think this similarly to the first debate, I think this matters a lot more for the Democratic side than it does for the Republican side.

I think that folks that are dug in and they're voting Trump Vance are voting Trump Vance, and there's a a lot more room to grow on the Democratic side in terms of getting to know this ticket.

And something that I think Politico covered it, but that has just been kind of ruminating in my circle is that one of the main reasons Walls was picked was that he was really good in interviews.

Remember, he was the first guy to say they're just really weird.

I think he was on with Stephanie Ruhl.

And he was constantly on air.

He was on R Air, on Fox, he was on CNN, he was on MSNBC, doing every radio show.

And he's disappeared a bit.

People haven't seen him really since he became the VP in the same way.

And so I think that this is a big opportunity for him to remind people, like, I'm good at this.

I may not be as wonky, but I know my shit.

I can talk to you about my record.

And I don't think he should apologize.

I know that the summer of the Black Lives Matter riots is going to come up and Minneapolis burning, et cetera.

I think he can make a really clear case for why he's been a great governor.

You know, he won re-election in 2022 by an even larger margin.

He can talk about all of that.

But I think that he needs to remind people that we are the normal ones.

He can do the job and that they're ready on day one for this.

And someone smarter than me said to me, if you look at the transcript after the debate, don't be surprised if it looks like J.D.

Vance won, but in reality, Tim Walls did, which I thought was an interesting way of looking at it.

What are you expecting?

And are you going to stay up through the middle of the night to watch?

What time is it?

Is it 9?

nine p.m i don't know why they do this all so late it should be like a 7 30 start but well yeah but there's this terrible thing called california with 35 million people in it so it's 6 p.m and so i think it's the best they can do and i'm not sure they're i'm not sure they're catering to the like angry depressed people that relocated from um delray beach to to london i think small demo yeah i don't i don't know if we're we're that critical here anyways I always go into this a bit.

I think J.D.

Vance is very intelligent.

I also think fundamentally he's a misogynist and also quite strange and has very fucked up views on the relationship or the intersection between government and civil liberties and women.

I think there's something off there.

At the same time, if you've read his book, I think the guy, I just don't think there's anything wrong with it.

I think the guy's brilliant.

I think he's very intelligent.

Also, there's a certain sociopathy.

that he has demonstrated, given just how poorly he's done, given that he's probably the least, I believe he's the the least popular VP pick in history at this point in terms of his negatives, it doesn't seem to have phased him.

I bet he's thinking this is a chance for me to really kind of go hard and pick apart on arguments.

I think he's going to be a formidable debating opponent.

Now, I would imagine if I had to project or speculate, my guess is a lot of people are going to tune in because they're hoping for a total food fight.

But I just wouldn't.

I think Senator Vance is strange.

I mean, we had Anthony Scaramucci on the Prop GPod, and he described Steve Bannon as one of the smartest people he knows.

And

there's something wrong there.

I think Steve is ⁇ I can't even figure out how he's gotten to the place he's gotten to in terms of what he believes about America and being an apologist for the insurrection.

I think J.D.

Vance is cut from that cloth.

He's one of those people that you know is just so bright, but you can't quite square the circle on why he would decide to say that our country is run by a bunch of people in New York living in $5,000 a month, one-bedroom apartments who are childless and deeply unhappy.

I mean, I'm sure those people exist in New York.

Most of the people I know in New York are loving life, are pretty happy.

And it just, it's like, where does he get this stuff and

what happened?

If there's more of that, Walls will win.

But I think he's more disciplined than that.

I think Walls right out of the gates needs to do what Vice President Harris did and try and put him

on his heels and talk a lot about some of the just ridiculous things he said.

What are your follow-up thoughts?

I think he's taking the culture war too far.

And people who tend to live and die by the culture war, it often doesn't marry up with actually being super smart.

And that's where J.D.

Vance is, right?

The intersection of that.

He's obviously wrong about New York and I grew up here.

And most people here are what you describe.

But

if

he manages to rise rise above the fray, and I feel like Walls will be throwing a lot of this childless cat lady stuff at him, the eating the cats, eating the dogs, they're going to be met with a very different response than Trump, who will, who just starts sputtering whatever he's seen online or what he's seen from his favorite commentators.

And it is a bigger uphill battle, I think, than it would be in a debate with Trump.

And during the vetting process, apparently Walls voiced concern to Harris's team that he's not a great debater.

He did say, you know, I can do it.

I have done it.

I don't believe it's one of my key strengths.

And it'll be interesting to see how nervous he is.

I mean, this is by far and away going to be the biggest night of his political life.

And he's the governor of a major state, right?

The sixth best state in the country to do business.

And tomorrow night is going to be even bigger for him.

So I hope

he just goes ahead with his game plan.

I think Pete Buddha Judge, you know, knowing J.D.

Vance, like he's got his number, right?

He knows exactly who he is.

Both have served, you know, talk about the same kind of values with Pete Buttajudge actually living them versus J.D.

Vance,

you know, purporting to live by them.

And, you know, I think they will talk about really personal stuff like immigrants with J.D.

Vance married to the child of Indian immigrants, talk about religion.

He was out over the weekend with a Christian nationalist

on his tour, the Courage tour, someone who has said that Kamala Harris is possessed by demons.

I think that all of these kinds of themes will be coming up.

And if J.D.

Vance can steer clear of a lot of it, I think his favorability will still be negative 13, but nothing will be hurt.

All the room to gain is really on Wallace's side.

Aaron Powell, Jr.: Yeah, I think the surprise issue here, everyone's expecting them to bring up immigration, kind of the two eyes, immigration, inflation.

I think the third eye is going to play.

perhaps a surprise role here, and that's Israel.

And there's been so many, in my view, really positive developments around debilitating, defenestrating, decapitating, kneecapping, whatever other terms I can come up with for the largest terrorist organization in the world.

And I wonder who's going to bring up Israel.

And I think they're going to try and out-Israel each other.

I think both think, okay, I need to be to show anomalous to the support

or lack thereof or milquetoast language we've heard out of the White House regarding support of Israel.

I think they're both going to be trying to outmacho each other and show even more and more resolute support for Israel.

What are your thoughts?

I wouldn't be surprised.

It probably will be a question as well, just since it's so in the news with

dismantling Hezbollah.

And last night, I went to

Douglas Murray, who's a conservative commentator and journalist, has something called the Save the West tour.

And he was at the Beacon Theater.

And my husband and I went to see what it was all about.

And I disagree with a ton of Douglas Murray's beliefs, especially when it comes to Islam.

But he did go and embed in Israel right after 10-7.

He was embedded with the Ukrainians as well after Putin invaded.

And he's done a lot of really interesting journalistic work.

And I mean, I could do hours on my takeaways from it.

But what really stuck out to me is that this room that was full of Jews and Jewish allies, supporters of the state of Israel,

really

needed to be in a place where they didn't have to

counter their feelings about the Israeli offensive with, of course, any loss of innocent life is a tragedy, or where they wouldn't be called genocidal for supporting Bibi's actions.

And I felt that.

very strongly.

And he made one comment, you know, whether you lean left and no one really said anything or whether you lean right and there was booming applause.

Now, that does not mean New York is going for Trump or that Jews are going for Trump, but you can see a desire on the behalf of people who support Israel

to not have to sugarcoat things, especially in this moment, to just be damn proud of the IDF and what they've been able to pull off.

You know, people wearing t-shirts that say bring them home, saying, I want to talk about the hostages every single day until these people are back with their families.

It was moving in that respect on a very deep level.

And I saw something that I had kind of read about firsthand and was very thankful for the experience.

I do think that what I'll call the precise,

I mean, I would argue what's happened over the last couple of weeks is the most precise anti-terrorist action taken in history.

And I do think that the Gulf nations, the world do respect strength and that kind of expertise and that kind of unapologetic defense.

And I'd like to think that this weird anti-American, anti-Israel sentiment, largely or kind of the tip of the spear has been the zombie apocalypse that's taken place in my industry on campuses or the zombie apocalypse of useful idiots.

I would like to think that it's bottomed, that people see, okay, they are taking out people who were killing Americans and thousands of Syrians and thousands of Lebanese and have just have just invoked and created so much despair and tragedy across Lebanon.

And there were people celebrating in the streets across the Gulf at this guy's death.

So I'm hoping this is a turning point.

And just to bring it back, I'd be shocked if it didn't become a pretty significant piece of content tonight.

Yep, agreed.

And I will say I thought that Kamala's statement on the murder or taking out of Nasrallah was very strong.

She called him a terrorist in the opening line.

And that's exactly the kind of spirit that we need to take to this fight.

And

a crazy couple of weeks, but I think that everyone is moving in the same direction, to your point about what's going on on the campuses, what commentators are saying, et cetera.

And, you know, BB's kind of said, I'm going to do this no matter what.

So are you coming with me?

You know,

I'm going to take out someone that killed two, was it 250 Americans have been murdered by Nasrallah too?

So.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Well, it was a U.S.

ordinance.

It was a U.S.

missile that took out Hezbollah headquarters.

Okay, so anyways, we'll be back after a quick break.

Moving on, Harris made her first trip to the U.S.-Mexico border since becoming her party's presidential nominee.

This was only her second time there as vice president.

During her visit, she criticized Trump's immigration efforts.

Let's have a listen.

He made the challenges at the border worse.

And he is still,

and he is still fanning the flames of fear and division.

The visit comes at a time when polls show voters trust Trump and Republicans more on immigration.

And to no one's surprise, Trump called it a political stunt, saying it's too little, too late.

Jess, is there any truth to that?

Should Harris have made this move earlier, or is this

good campaigning?

I think it's both.

I think that she has missed numerous opportunities to be stronger on the border, to appear stronger.

And we can't change the fact that we're a visual species.

And seeing somebody at the crisis point is different than hearing somebody talk about it in an air-conditioned room in D.C.

or Michigan, wherever else you might.

be campaigning.

So I think there are missed opportunities.

I think it is also good policy for her to do it.

And we're seeing like the latest Quinnipiac poll, Trump's advantage on immigration is down to eight points.

So you're getting closer and closer to a jump ball on the issue.

And I think that what she has been able to do is not only emphasize the bipartisan border deal, which Trump personally destroyed, right?

He said, I want to campaign on this.

And Mitch McConnell said it publicly that he did this, James Lankford, Mitt Romney, but she is also offering people a bit of an off-ramp where we say, It's okay to like some of the things that Trump is supportive of, but you don't need to pick Trump in order to get there.

So I will talk to you about more agents.

I will talk to you about more border wall, something that she used to be very opposed to, if it means that you will take this kind of more humane approach to our immigration policy, like tough but humane, I feel like is the tagline.

What did you think about it?

I couldn't decide if it was a good move or a bad move.

I don't know how many people who believe she's been bad on the border are going to be swayed by her going down to the border or if she's just bringing attention to an issue that she's fairly or unfairly considered weak on.

If I were her, I would just be hammering around inflation at this point.

I think at the end of the day, I think most people, or a lot of people, go into the voting booth and say, who's going to put more money in my pockets?

I'm fed up with government.

I just want to know who's going to keep prices down and get my salary up, what have you.

And I think his weakest, the soft tissue or his Achilles heel is a combination of tariffs.

And this weird anti-immigration policy is just going to absolutely bring inflation roaring back.

I would be doing that 25 25 hours a day.

And it's, I don't know, it just felt to me like I saw her down there and I thought there's going to be

a lot of eye rolls.

All right, Jeff, so let's pivot to something,

I would say it's less serious, but compelling.

We're going to talk about New York City Mayor Eric Adams.

He's been indicted on federal corruption charges.

The feds are accusing him of taking bribes from Turkish officials to push through permits for their consulate, even though the building didn't pass inspection.

Plus, he allegedly scored massive discounts on business class flights to Turkey.

I mean, it's like, you know, when they say academics, the reason we're so vicious with each other is because there's so little to fight over.

It's like, if you're going to go down, you're going to go down over business class seats.

Anyways,

I'm making light of something.

These are heavy charges because they are, in fact, corruption charges.

What is your read on the situation?

Well, with the amount of buildup, the number of phones that have been seized from his top lieutenants, I think it's up to six people, six aides that they have their phones, and how long we've been talking about this.

I did expect

bigger numbers, I guess, for the scale of corruption.

But clearly, the Southern District wanted to air all of his dirty laundry because they didn't have to put everything in the indictment.

It was 56, 57 pages long, including text messages, you know, note to self.

Obviously, if you're going to be doing crimes, don't text.

Like, let's do a crime now with a smiley face, those kinds of things.

But they, they definitely wanted,

they want him, right?

Like, they think that he is somebody

who has been doing this for a very, very long time.

And I was thinking back to July

when the fire chief randomly resigned.

She'd only been in the job for a couple of years and she just kind of popped up and was like, I'm out.

And I thought, well, that's kind of weird, right?

Because the indictment story had been swirling and they had been looking into people in Adams's orbit, but there was nothing about her.

And now, I mean, maybe it's not a straight line.

I'm not sure between the Turkish building that they wanted the fire assessment to be changed on, right?

That wasn't up to code and this woman saying,

you know, I'm tapping out.

But clearly something sinister was going on.

And I think as a New Yorker, what my main focus is, whether he goes or not, and, you know, Hochul is not doing it as of today.

Like, what does the next iteration of the New York City mayoralty look like?

So if there's a special election, Cuomo is eyeing that.

So then you're going to have someone that a lot of people see as well as a gangster, but an effective one.

And is that the line now?

Like, we're okay with corruption if you're good at your job, but when you're not so good at your job, and you're corrupt, we're not having it.

And I'm curious if you were paying attention to this angle.

You know, Adams had spoken out against the Biden administration for the migrant crisis, and he gave a very stirring speech where he said, like, help us out.

You can't just do this.

You can't saddle us with billions of dollars in resources that we have to spend without giving us the aid that we need and also stopping this crisis.

It's not just on the border.

It's all across the country.

And do you think that that was part of this?

Because a lot of people do think they're linked.

The worst call you can get in the world, other than obviously something regarding the health of loved ones, I think would be from the person who runs the Southern District.

They're just so smart and so fucking scary and so aggressive.

And I think that part of what they do is one of the reasons you prosecute people is obviously justice that uphold the law.

But also, I think the Southern District is really big on sending messages to people in the finance industry.

They go after, they pick a target and they're unafraid, they're unrelenting.

It's just a call you don't want to get.

But when I read through it,

I quite frankly thought it was pretty underwhelming.

And it takes me to a couple places.

One, his mistake,

taking money from a group and then using that to influence government actions that favor them is kind of how the U.S.

government works.

For a small amount of money, you give to a senator, to a representative, you get access.

And if you need help

getting something approved, they're there for you.

It's always struck me with just a little bit of money in Washington, how much access you can get.

Even with foreign influence, though, I feel like that is a lie.

You stole my thunder.

You stole my thunder.

I give it back.

The problem here is you're not allowed to do it from foreign nationals.

That is a bright red line, especially a place like Turkey, where

a lot of people would argue that they're not an ally of the U.S.,

even though he wasn't spying for them or he wasn't influencing, you know, this was fire safety at their consulate.

But nonetheless, you are not supposed to take money from a foreign nation, much less a foreign nation that we're on sort of strange terms with.

So that's where, quite frankly, that's where he really fucked up.

Where it takes me, though, is that this is a guy who grew up, son of a single mother, never, you know, police chief, probably made a good living, but living in Brooklyn, probably never had, you know, a ton of money.

And I think it's very easy for these officials to be seduced and start to rationalize.

I'm not excusing it, but I can see how this happens.

Oh, it's a plain fair.

I get to stay at a nice hotel.

I'm not going to do anything that damages America or the city, but oh my God, fire safety.

Fuck yeah, just get it done, right?

They're going to create jobs or whatever.

We want to be welcoming.

I can see how in his mind he rationalized this.

And I'm not entirely sure.

When I read about about this, corruption charges, southern district, I thought it was going to be a lot worse.

And where I go, though, is that I think we should adopt Singapore's model.

And that is, I think we should pay our elected officials a million to $2 million a year and have much tighter standards and just say, look, because the bottom line is they don't make a lot of money.

So I believe the mayor makes around $258,000 a year.

Do you think we should increase the compensation for our elected representatives?

I'm worried.

Let me preface this by saying, I'm worried that the mayor of New York and other places is basically going to be these freakishly anomalous, remarkable people focused on public service and millionaires and billionaires.

And there'll be no one in the middle.

Yeah, I think that this is something that you would get, you know, one of those 90% approvals.

for.

And the people who often say that elected officials are not making enough have their own acts to grind.

And it's not really about understanding what the job entails and how important it is.

And I'm always struck by the fact that tons of members of Congress in DC, they have roommates.

They share apartments.

You know, this is one of the most important jobs in the country.

And I'm not saying it isn't fun to have a roomie, but you should be able to afford your own studio apartment near Capitol Hill and also be able to afford to get home to do your constituent work.

And you're totally right.

Like Dan Goldman is my congressman.

He's amazing, speaking of, you know, Southern District prowess, but he's also the heir to Levi's fortune, right?

He can afford to be doing this, whereas a lot of fantastic people can't or simply don't want to because it's not going to have the same kind of remunerative benefits for them, you know, than going to work at a McKinsey.

What do you think?

Do you think he's going to have to resign over this?

Unclear, but he's definitely not out of the woods on it.

I think a lot will matter what Hokul

signals about it.

I mean, she's the only one who can remove him, but certainly if she kind of Nancy Pelosi's him, you know.

Wouldn't she just say, wouldn't she just punt on it and go let the voters decide in two and a half years or whenever it is, two years?

Well, the primary, I think, is in June.

Oh, it's coming up that quickly.

Oh, why would she do that?

Well,

it might be because there's a corruption level and we haven't seen everything that's to come.

I mean, they seize someone else's phones even since this came down.

But I don't know.

Kathy Hoko also probably has a vested interest in keeping Andrew Cuomo away from the mayoral race, and he's kind of chomping at the bit to get back in there.

So you stole my thunder again.

My prediction was

Andrew Cuomo.

So what do you think his prospects would be for winning the mayoral race if, for whatever reason, Mayor Adams decides not to run again in 2025?

I think they'd be pretty good.

I think that there are people who would feel like they want to choose competency and that if it comes with a side of corruption and a little bit of

kissing when you didn't want it,

Italian style, as he put it, like, what was his defense?

I'm just Italian,

that they might be able to look past that.

Because I think, you know, the field will be crowded with a lot of very progressive people, like the Scott Stringers of the world.

And I don't know if that's where New Yorkers want to go.

Mike Bloomberg is the gold standard for a majority.

I'm not saying there weren't problems with the Bloomberg administration or there aren't some lefties who didn't really like him.

But in general, we were, the city was cleaner, it was safer, it was better run.

And I think that if Cuomo can

try to grab that mantle back, that he would have a very viable shot.

And there are also a contingent of people who just don't think that he should have have to, should have had to leave Albany, that this was kind of, you know, trumped up because of what happened with the nursing home deaths, which is regrettable.

And I wish that he would apologize for, you know, just accept some responsibility.

And people wouldn't even personally blame him, say, like, you killed my grandpa, but just to say there's an

accountability for these decisions, and some of these decisions were not correct.

And I think that he would be in a much better position.

We'll be right back to hear from former Maryland Governor Larry Hogan.

Stay with us.

Welcome back.

We're joined by former Maryland Governor Larry Hogan, a politician who has never been afraid to buck the party line.

From leading Maryland through two terms with bipartisan support to his current bid for the U.S.

Senate, Hogan has shown a knack for connecting with voters across the spectrum.

Governor Hogan, welcome to the show.

Well, thank you very much.

Thanks for having me.

We're super excited to have you.

Thank you for joining.

And I paid particular interest to your campaign as someone who is also not a fan of Donald Trump.

You've been a vocal critic and have distanced yourself from much of the national GOP platform, including Project 2025.

Just yesterday, you made some news saying that you won't be voting for Trump.

You haven't in the past, but talking about it again.

So, how do you see the future of the Republican Party and what role do you think moderates like yourself are going to be playing in it?

What a great question.

Yeah, I think I've been probably over the last

eight years or so, one of the leading outspoken critics about the direction of the party and about Donald Trump in particular.

And I've never been afraid to stand up.

I really didn't break much news yesterday because I've said over and over and over again,

this thing,

about once a month, there's a whole bunch of headlines that say Hogan's not going to vote for Trump, which is what I've said for eight years.

But,

you know, it's, look, I'm concerned about the direction of both parties, quite frankly, but the Republican Party moving off in this direction of of more of a MAGA party.

I'm kind of a traditional,

I would say, Reagan Republican.

I say I come from the Republican wing of the Republican Party, and I want to see us get back to a more hopeful vision for America and a party that can appeal broadly to more people.

And I want to see us focused on issues and solving problems.

And I know that

some people say, well, it seems as if

you should just give up on that.

And I'm just a guy that doesn't like to give up.

And I've been successful at winning in

arguably one of the bluest states in America by convincing Independents and Democrats to cross over and vote for me because I think most people

really just want to see folks work together and solve problems.

They want to see people reach across the aisle in a bipartisan way and find common ground for the common good.

And I'm not sure that we're seeing a lot of that, actually, out of both parties.

We see a lot of finger-pointing and name-calling and people more interested in

just saying something outrageous on

cable news or

in social media.

And I'm just a, I'm not a, I don't come from the performative arts school of politics.

I just want to try to see if we can find a way to come up with solutions.

It does feel as if there used to be a lot of sort of Reagan Republicans in the Senate.

And it seems one by one are moderates who took pride in reaching across the aisle and were more pragmatists and ideologues.

And it feels as if the Republican Party has said, you're not welcome here.

It just feels like there's fewer and fewer.

And I think it's true on the Democratic side as well.

One, would you agree that it just feels like there's no place for moderates to hang their hats anymore?

And if you agree with that, why do you think that's happened?

Well, I agree that it's happening in both parties.

I mean, if you just look at

the folks that have left and

it's folks on the Senate, right now you have Kirsten Sinema and Joe Manchin and Mitt Romney all leaving, you know, and And

there's not a lot of folks kind of in that center

problem solver caucus, kind of the folks that we're trying to work together across the aisle.

I was co-chairman of No Labels with Joe Lieberman for three and a half years, and our whole focus was on how do we find ways to govern from the middle and get people to talk to one another.

And

those three were a big part of the group in the Senate that was trying to focus on that.

And now they're gone.

And so I feel like there's a huge void

in the Senate for that type of leadership.

And that's one of the reasons why I stepped up to run.

I mean, I really

didn't need a job, and I wasn't looking for a title, but I'm concerned about the direction of the country, and I'm concerned that the Congress continues to just become more divisive and more dysfunctional.

But whether there's a ⁇ I think there's a huge demand among the public, and I've proven that because

I left office last January after eight years in a deep blue state, after getting things done over and over and over again with 70%

Democratic legislature, cutting taxes and cutting the cost of health care and passing criminal justice reform with Democrats and Republicans together.

I left office with a 77% job approval and over 70% with every demographic, 79 with Democrats and 81 with black voters and young voters and old voters.

So there's a demand.

People do like it when you talk about

common sense solutions, and they do like it when you work across the aisle and when you have a different tone and you're willing to just disagree on the issues without demeaning the other side.

I think it's what they desperately want.

However, you're right, that's not what we have.

And so

I think the elected leaders do not really represent where most of the voters are.

You know, 40% of the people in America are now independent.

They're far more than there are Democrats or Republicans.

And it's because they're getting turned off by the divisive rhetoric and

by the more extreme positions.

And they just want us to come together and fix things.

Yeah, I want to pick up on that.

So you're in a competitive race.

I think the Real Clear Politics average is six, seven points lead for Angela Alserbrooks, who you're running against.

We know Maryland is a deep blue state.

What issues are you finding are resonating with your voters most?

And what do you say to people who have anxiety about electing you, who will be part of the Republican infrastructure?

So let's say Donald Trump does win, or even if he doesn't win and majority of the party has been overtaken kind of by the MAGA wing of things, how will you serve as a backstop against some of their more dangerous positions?

Well, that's exactly what I hope to do.

And I do have to convince some voters of that because, you know, my opponent's campaign is basically just talking about red versus blue.

Like, you have to vote Democrat because I'm going to be

somehow empowering the MAGA agenda when I've been one of the leading voices against it.

And I think I can be that key voice in the middle that's willing to stand up.

You know, Joe Manchin didn't empower the far left of the Democratic Party.

He stopped the crazy things from happening and worked with Republicans to get things done.

I think, you know, look at John McCain.

When John McCain called me before he walked out on the Senate floor to give the thumbs down on repealing Obamacare, because he and I shared the same position, and I wanted to continue to cover the people in Maryland.

Sometimes one person can make a difference.

And I believe that I have the ability to do that.

I mean, I'm not naive enough to think I can fix everything, but I'm not going there to empower one party or another.

I'm going there to represent all the people of Maryland, and I'm going to do whatever I think is best for the country.

And I think I've proven over and over and over again that I'm willing to stand up to my party and to the other party when I think they're wrong.

I've stood up to the former president, to the current president, and then I'm not going to be afraid to stand up to the next president, whoever that is.

I'll work with them when I agree with them on an issue, and I'm going to stand up and stop them when I don't.

And so the people in Maryland know me.

There are some, my opponent is saying, even if you like Larry Hogan and even if you voted for him twice for governor, that's 79% of Democrats that approved of the job that I'm doing.

I'm not winning all of them because some of them are saying, we really like him.

We wish he was still governor or we wish he had run for president, but we don't want to, and we're afraid of all those other Republicans in the Senate.

And that's the campaign we're having to overcome right now.

And there are Democrats who say, you know, I wish I could vote for you.

Or they say, you know, convince me that you're going to continue to be the same kind of strong independent leader, that you'll continue to stand up.

And so when I talk to them one-on-one, I usually win them over, but it's hard to do that in a 30-second commercial when you're trying to reach millions of people.

Aaron Powell, you sort of read my mind, Governor.

You're literally out of central casting for who moderates want more of

NDC.

I just think there's such a huge base of people who want somebody, even if they don't agree with them on every issue, they say, this is a reasonable person that isn't trying to say inflammatory things and make personal attacks that get a ton of viral distribution on TikTok that then raises a bunch of small dollar money, never actually passed any laws because no one wants to deal with them, and wash, rinse, and repeat.

It feels like there's just so much of that in D.C.

and that we need this solvent called moderates.

At the same time, I think that there's probably some real fear on the Democratic side,

if you say you're center-left, that with SCOTUS going so far right and with the Senate playing such an important role around approving justices, specifically, I think, around issues including bodily autonomy, that they're going to think, yeah, I really like this guy, but I can't risk the Supreme Court going further right and even less representing people in the middle, including moderate Republicans.

What would you say to give some of those people comfort?

Aaron Powell, Jr.: Well, yeah, I think people are concerned about politicizing the court.

And, you know, most people don't want it to be politicized to the right or to the left.

And it seems as if that's the way we've been doing it.

Whoever has the power, we're trying to push through

the most conservative judge or the most progressive judge.

And look, I probably have more experience about.

with judges than most of the people or all the people in the Senate.

I appointed more judges in Maryland than any governor in history, over 190 judges.

I appointed six out of the seven members of our Supreme Court in Maryland.

It was the most diverse, most bipartisan judicial selections ever in history in our state.

I had all of my Supreme Court justices unanimously confirmed by all the Republicans and all the Democrats in our Senate.

And it seems as if in Washington now, we can't even get one person to cross over, to cross over and say, this is a qualified person.

I tried to make the best decisions about did people have the right judicial temperament?

Did they have the right experience?

Were they going to follow the letter of the law?

As opposed to saying, we have to have someone that'll that'll take this position or that position?

They have to stand up for the left or the right.

I think it's gotten out of control.

And I think, look,

I think we need to make sure that we have good judges appointed, whether it's Kamala Harris as the president and she appoints a judge that I believe is a qualified and decent judge.

I'm going to vote for that judge.

Donald Trump happens to get elected, well, I hope he appoints some decent judges that I can support there too.

But,

you know,

I just don't think we ought to continue to try to jam through or change the rules or have it swing back and forth every two years or every four years, depending on who takes over the House or the Senate or who's in the White House.

You know, we're hopelessly divided right now.

And we need, you know,

it's the same thing on everything else we're talking about.

We need

common sense compromise in the middle, not how do we jam through things on an extreme basis to the left or the right.

And we need bipartisan buy-in.

We should have judges.

We should have people that, you know, senators on both sides of the aisle say, this person's obviously qualified to be on the bench.

So just to double-click on that, based on your success and experience appointing judges and betting judges, the three most recent appointments, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett, do you think the three of them, had you been in the Senate at that time, would you have advocated for their approval and appointment to the Supreme Court?

Well, I don't want to go back and look at past history about what would have happened, but I know that

I spoke up when I thought against Mitch McConnell when I thought he was trying to jam through appointments right before the election.

And I also stood up on Justice Kavanaugh and said we ought to have a full hearing of the facts of, so

I, you know, wasn't there in the Senate and didn't see all, wasn't part of all the hearings and didn't have to be in a position to make those decisions.

But in both cases, I stood up and said, I stood up to my party.

I've stood up to my party when it's hard and I'll continue to do that.

I guess Scott led with, you know, people know you, right?

You've been around Republic Figure a long time.

What is something that you want to communicate to your potential voters that you don't think they know about you or how you would govern if you were able to win this seat?

Well, I think that what I'd like to communicate is I'm running for the right reasons.

I only stepped up because I'm very concerned about the country.

I'm concerned about, you know, making sure I get my party back on track, that we have a healthy and competitive two-party system.

And I want them to to know that I'm going to be the exact kind of leader that I was for eight years as governor.

And I think we've developed a better track record than almost anyone in America for centrist common sense bipartisan governing,

for reaching across the aisle, and that I'm going to be the exact it's a different job a senator is, and I know I've got to work with 99 other people, but I'm going to continue to stand up for whatever I think is right for the people of my state and for the country.

And I'm not going to be towing the line or being a rubber stamp for one party or another.

Are you going to vote for Kamala?

No, I've said I wasn't.

Neither one of them has really earned my vote.

But,

you know, I certainly am very pleased that we have a lot of Harris-Hogan,

you know, split ticket folks across the state of Maryland.

We currently have about 30% of them.

And we, interestingly, you'll see sometimes a Harrison-Hogan yard sign in front of somebody's house.

So

I have to try to earn the support of people on both sides of the aisle, from the right and the left.

And that's what I've always been able to do.

Yeah, we should point out that polling shows that a significant percentage of Harris voters are backing you for the Senate.

And I think that speaks to your reputation as a

moderate.

Well, I need a few more of them, so we're still working hard

over the next several weeks.

My sense is that's why you're here.

So, look, you've been in this game a while.

You obviously have really strong political instincts.

Handicapped, we've been talking about the debate tonight, the state of the election.

It feels like the polls are almost meaningless noise at this point.

Any observations or insight you have about the current state of the race or anything that surprised you or you think the media is not covering?

I'm just hoping on the vice presidential debate that we'll finally hear some honest discussion of the issues.

I think that's been lacking in the campaign, quite frankly, from the presidential candidates and from the vice presidential candidates.

And I'm hoping it's not just a food fight and

talking about crazy things, but we'll actually hear what each person has to say about what their positions are.

On the race, I think it's very close.

Just, you know, I'm not a pundit

or a political expert, but I think the presidential race is going to go down to the wire.

And, you know, I think that people are really going to have to get out there and make their decision.

And,

you know, I have no idea what's going to happen in November.

I'm hoping that we're going to be able to get in there and try to make a difference in the Senate.

And I'll work with whoever

is elected president.

I was governor through three presidents, and I worked with President Obama, with the Trump administration for four years, and then with President Biden.

And

whether it's Donald Trump or Kamala Harris, I'll try to work with them when I agree and help them get things done.

And when I disagree, I don't think there's any, nobody doubts that I'll stand up and push back and

do what I think is right.

Governor, you're part of a rare species we hardly see anymore, and we would like to see repopulate the earth.

We really appreciate that.

Well,

I thought we were extinct, but you know,

there's one left, I guess.

You know, I'm a unicorn, but I'm going to try to find some more people to come hang out with me.

And I really do believe that sometimes one person can make a difference.

And there are at least a handful on both sides of the aisle that kind of agree with me.

Maybe they're not always speaking out quite as much, but I'm hoping I can get a centrist caucus in the United States Senate that's willing to work together.

Great.

Thanks, Governor, and stay safe on the trail.

All right, last thing, prediction on tonight?

Everybody will get to say that their guy won and that it matters more for the Democratic side, that we need this more for Walls than we do necessarily for Vance, who will be continue to be reviled to some degree.

You?

I'm going to punt and just read funny jokes about Tim Walls.

My real concern with Governor Tim Walls is that he seems like the kind of guy, if you leave your car unlocked in the summer, he's going to leave you six zucchinis on your front seat.

That looks pretty good.

Walls has the vibes of a man who makes short, helpful videos on how to fix garbage disposals in his spare time.

I like that one.

Last one, Tim Walls is the kind of guy who tells you to watch for deer and call us when you get home before you depart his house.

I like that one.

That's my favorite.

I love that guy.

Like the guy who's like, cares if you got home.

One more.

Tim Walls 1,000% says, what's the damage when the waiter hands him the check?

I like that one too.

Yeah.

Okay, good stuff.

Very cute.

That's all for this episode.

Thank you for listening to Raging Moderates.

Our producers are Caroline Chagren and David Toledo.

Our technical producers, Drew Burroughs.

You can find Raging Moderates on the Prop GPod every Tuesday.

Please subscribe.

Right now we're in the Prop G feed, but soon we're going to be going to our own feed.

So please subscribe and download.