Alyssa Farah Griffin: National Unity Is Not Where the GOP Is

Hello and welcome to the Bullard Podcast. I'm your host, Tim Miller.
Sorry if it's

out a little late today, but my guest has another job. You might have heard of it.
She's

on a little show called The View, which is on terrestrial network television. She's also

a political commentator for CNN. She was White House communications director during the Trump administration and press secretary for Mike Pence, Alyssa Farah.
What's up, girl? Hello. It's good to see you.
Welcome back to the Bulwark podcast. It's so nice that since I last joined you, the country's on the right track.
We're heading the right way. We've really turned away from our worst instincts.
Just kidding. You know, remember when you thought people were going to follow you out the door of the Trump administration and that everybody is going to be like, yes.
Liz Cheney and I were like, follow us. Follow us.
And then I'm looking behind. It's like nobody's there.
Okay. Interesting.
Well, we've got much to discuss, obviously. And I want to start with J.D.
Vance, who officially became the vice presidential pick for Donald Trump, maybe just because Trump Vance sounds better than the other options, but also maybe for other reasons. Wondering what your initial impressions were of the choice.
So initial impressions, J.D. Vance was a gamble for Donald Trump to pick.
And I think it's a sign that he feels like he's on a glide path to win this election. And I say that because J.D.
Vance has actually a thin resume. He's a freshman senator.
He's an incredibly polarizing figure in American politics. This is, you know, Joe Biden coined the term ultra MAGA.
He is ultra MAGA. You know, the reporting is basically that Don Jr.
and Eric were lobbying for him, but so was Elon Musk and David Sachs and some of these sort of Silicon Valley bros. Then we find out this reporting from the Wall Street Journal that now Elon's giving $45 million a month to a Trump-aligned super PAC, you know, timed that announcement with the Vance decision.
Listen, on the one hand, it's the complete realignment of the Republican Party. This is not our Republican Party.
This is the Donald Trump populist nationalist. This is not Romney, Ryan, Reagan, Republican Party.
And you saw that on display at the convention, if you watched any of it. There are major vulnerabilities with Vance on the ticket.
I think in a lot of ways, he's mini Trump with just as many flaws. So there's some good fodder for Democrats.
But the reality is VPs have only minorly really influenced tickets, generally speaking. And with Trump as far ahead as he is, I don't think he's a big enough vulnerability to, you know, put Biden over the edge.
But it does. It solidifies the MAGA agenda going forward.
One other thing I just want to mention. I'm so fascinated.
J.D. Vance basically did the reverse Elissa Farah.
So he started Never Trump, Donald Trump's, you know, a threat to our institutions. He said things far more extreme than I even believe about Donald Trump.
The America's Hitler. Yeah.
Then I saw his presidency. I saw the Muslim ban.
I saw family separation. I saw January 6th, and that is my guy.
Like, that to me is a remarkable evolution. And it's remarkable to me that someone was able to convince Donald Trump that this man will be totally loyal to him and has actually bought into this.
So it's interesting. I'd be curious your thoughts.
I agree. And I think that it was a pivot to full MAGA, right? And you do that when you have confidence.
I mean, Clyde Path is overstated, but he feels like he's confident enough to do this.

I heard Don Jr. in an interview

say that J.D. Vance will help them

in the Rust Belt states.

So who the hell knows?

Maybe they've deluded themselves

into thinking that J.D. Vance will help them

in the Rust Belt states

because he wrote a book

that white liberals in New York read

about poor white folks

that poor white folks didn't read.

I don't understand what that is. J.D.
Vance performed way worse than Mike DeWine in Ohio in the midterms. It was more of a And Trump and when he was on the ballot with Trump.
So maybe they've convinced themselves of that. I think more likely it is a pick of we feel comfortable with this person.
I think that they feel that J.D. has shown enough loyalty despite all this horrible rhetoric about Trump in 2016 because he's like gone there on all of Trump's worst things.
Right. Marco, little Marco, say what you want about him.
He's sucked up to Trump, but he kind of always does the kind of meta dancing around the 2020 question and the vaccine question. And J.D.
Vance went whole hog on vaccine conspiracies, whole hog on January 6th,

overturning the election.

Thanks, Mike Pence. the 2020 question and the vaccine question like jd vance went whole hog on vaccine conspiracies whole hog on january 6th overturning the election thinks mike pence didn't have the courage whole hog on the ukraine it's joe biden's fault that vladimir putin invaded ukraine right like so on all of these things so i think that that made everybody in the trump family feel like okay he's fully come with us and i.
And I think they like a convert. They like a convert, right? Because it shows, especially, they especially like a convert, by the way.
I know they pretend to not care about the elites. They especially like a convert who went to Yale, which was mentioned twice in the press release that Donald Trump sent out about J.D.
Vance, who had a Hollywood movie, who had a New York Times bestseller. It's like, it's an ego thing.
It's like, oh, yeah, now he is well. So I think that explains it.
And I think that your point about how this marks a permanent shift of the party to this nationalist populist, that's going to be really hard to unravel. I just think that's obvious.
But if you have any pushback to me on that, I'd happy to hear it. No, I think it was evidenced completely by kind of

the, not even the tone, but just the straight-up policies that were advocated for last night. I

mean, I think we all watched the world's least inspiring speech by David Sachs that was basically

blaming Ukraine for Russia's invasion because of NATO expansion. I mean, truly, like, things that

would have gotten you chased out of Republican circles for the last 50 years are now being fully embraced.

David Balsox is a billionaire.

I don't understand why he didn't hire a speech coach. So it's just like speech coaches are available.
If you're one of his fellow podcast hosts on the All In podcast, maybe pitch in. Help him hire a speech coach.
No, and I think it's baked in. I think that some of the more normie type Republicans who showed up and

thought they knew the assignment, a Glenn Youngkin calling for national unity, were missing the moment in the sense of, I don't think that's where the party is. I want to note, because coming off of the assassination attempt on the former president, this horrific assassination attempt that has no place in our country, the person who had the single worst response to it was J.D.
Vance. The single worst.
Immediately blaming Joe Biden. And there was this moment,

God bless. the person who had the single worst response to it was jd vance immediately blaming joe biden and there was this moment god bless for 24 hours in our country where we're like let's take down the tone and tenor let's be thoughtful with our words let's think about the fingers we point and then he goes ahead and picks this person who immediately pointed a finger which is it's baseless and it's wrong here's the one thing i'll.
This is my, I guess, defense of him, if you want to call it that. He's incredibly savvy.
He's a chameleon. This is somebody who can go on any mainstream outlet and give an intellectual explanation of MAGA policies.
He can go toe to toe with the best interviewer. As you said, he's Yale law educated.
He's a Marine. But for every time that he's on CNN explaining why this is good for working Americans and we're building the middle class, there's a clip of him on Steve Bannon's war room saying some of the most polarizing stuff that you could imagine a national figure saying.
A lot of vulnerabilities there. I mean, I really do think because there was reporting that Trump was waffling last minute.

I think it's the classic, the last person in his ear won and it was the kids.

And they're going to have to stick with it. There's no reversing it.
They painted the plane. Yeah, no.
And they're kind of stuck with him in a way. I want to save the Biden talk for the end.
But they're stuck in a way that like a lot of the Democratic issues right now are about the fact that Biden picked Kamala, who was a natural successor, but then didn't like believe in her as successor, which is a problem. I mean, as people must know, I'm kind of bullish on Kamala, but they've picked a successor.
So that was another, I think, interesting thing. He's now the successor to MAGA, whether they like it or not, like in two years.
This is a little inside baseball, but having worked for Pence and worked for a vice president in a Trump White House, we actively worked to not let Mike Pence's light shine, to not let him get too good of press, to not let him ever overstep Trump, because we would hear from the West Wing immediately if he got a better headline or more attention. It would like message you and say, get worse press? Oh, we got back from a trip to Southeast Asia, and there was some headline that was actually pretty innocuous.
It was like NBC News, you know, world leaders hope to meet with Pence more on the international stage, favor him over Trump. And we were like getting calls.
We need to get this headline changed. Like I'm going back and forth on it.
I say that and it sounds so ridiculous looking back. Vance is someone who's a much bigger personality and stronger feelings And then a Mike Pence.
And I could see there being real tension, even just on the campaign trail, if he starts to outshine Donald Trump. Pence is very quiet.
Do we know what he's thinking right now? So I've not talked to Pence in quite some time. I talked to Mark Short regularly, former chief of staff.
And the sense is, I generally agree with this and respect it. He said his piece.
He's not supporting him. His disagreements are both on a policy side of things that we're walking away from conservatism on things like Ukraine, reversal on TikTok.
He's obviously feel strongly about kind of the softening on abortion, but then also the substance in his character and his fitness. I think he believes it was his duty to say it, but then let the country decide not to be out there campaigning one way or the other.
But I couldn't shake the thought last night of Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, Mike Pence. None of these people are in this room.
They'd get booed off the stage if they were there. George Bush, Dick Cheney.
Correct. Everyone that was a standard bearer for decades is nowhere to be seen in this Republican Party.
Except Palin. Palin would be, she hasn't been invited, but she would be welcome.
But so Pence is just in Indiana? He's just hanging out? Yeah. And he's got his conservative think tank and he's trying to kind of push back on the national populism.
I actually really appreciate he's been direct and calling out the dangers. He calls out the siren song of national populism.
So I think that's going to be his lane. But I think the cake's baked.
I also respect that. That's needed.
There needs to be people that are not, you know, me, like not MSNBC, full never Trump, former Republican types out there talking about the dangers of the populist shift. I do think that Vance, we talked about how he underperformed in the Senate campaign for a reason.
He still won, but it's Ohio. I want to listen to two clips to kind of show what some vulnerabilities are that Democrats might be able to exploit.
Let's listen to the first one. The last time I checked, President Biden wasn't approving of the chance to hang his vice president and did not call his vice president when their life was in danger on Capitol Hill, something that Mike Pence himself has testified to.
So my question is, does it give you any pause to be his vice president, given how he has treated Mike Pence? Caitlin, I'm extremely skeptical that Mike Pence's life was ever in danger. I think politics and politics people like to really exaggerate things from time to time.
I think Mike Pence would disagree with that, Senator. A lot of folks in the Democratic Party, Caitlin, act as if January the 6th was the scariest moment of their lives.
Man, that was a bad clip before, but boy, after Saturday, like that's a horrific clip. It's disgraceful.
Filed J.D. Vance under those who know better.
This isn't an ignorant person like Marjorie Taylor Greene. It's not Mike Pence who said his life was in danger.
It was United States Secret Service who had to evacuate him and his family, who had to keep him in the basement of the Capitol. It was Mike Pence who didn't want to get in the Secret Service car out of fear that he would be taken from the Capitol and unable to certify the election.
But it's always rich hearing these people who were scared themselves that day just of what was happening around them sort of rewrite history and pretend that it was, you know, oh, it was just a nice demonstration of peaceful patriots.

But that's America's potential future vice president.

There are plenty of examples of J.D. Vance saying disgraceful things about January 6th, but in the fallout of Saturday and following his response, I thought that one is one that is potentially sticky.

Here's another piece of audio that I think is a big vulnerability for J.D. Vance.
Let's listen to that. And this is one of the great tricks that I think the sexual revolution pulled on the American populace, which is this idea that like, well, okay, these marriages were fundamentally, you know, they were maybe even violent, but certainly they were unhappy.
and so getting rid of them

and making it easier for people to shift spouses

like they changed their underwear, that's going to make people happier in the long term. And maybe it worked out for the moms and dads, though I'm skeptical, but it really didn't work out for the kids of those marriages.
Boy, I got to tell you, I think one of the swing groups that is underappreciated in this election is white working class women. Putting J.D.
Vance on this ticket with his comments about rape, with his just absolutist opinion on abortion, even in the case of rape, and then saying that women who are getting beat up in their marriages should be stuck in their marriages. Those feel like the vulnerabilities.
That feels like a loser. That's just such a striking comment.

I think he tried to push back on it on Hannity and the answer didn't work for me. I mean, any woman that's been a victim of domestic abuse will tell you the worst thing you could do is keep your kids in a relationship where there's abuse, where they themselves will witness the behavior or themselves could be victims of it.
It's just an absurdity. There's a reason that when you go to battered women's shelters, I volunteered at them.

Women often are in their pajamas.

They often just left their house with what they had because they had to leave for their lives. So the notion that there's a benefit to the institution of the family to stay with an abusive partner is horrific.
And there's a bigger undercurrent here because we're living in times where policy is being entertained that I thought only existed on literally the most fringe corners of the internet.

But there's a part of this populist MAGA world that wants to end no-fault divorce.

That's something that's actively kind of talked about because it chips away at the family institution.

Well, oftentimes that's the easiest way for somebody in an unsafe marriage to get out of a marriage.

It's also just, if you say you're for freedom and you're for individual liberties, the notion that you shouldn't have a right to terminate your marriages is a fascinating role for the state to play. But that's going to be hard to defend on the campaign trail.
At the convention, I wonder how you kind of take this. Like, there's always been more of like a machismo bro-y element to the Republican side than the Democratic side, at least during our time in politics.
But man, that gap has gotten so wide. I mean, like the weird Charlie Kirk speech last night, you've got like Dana White, the UFC guy who's on video hitting his wife is going to speak before Trump.
There was also Amber Rose, but maybe that's part of bro culture too in a different way. But there was a very bro culture kind of vibe to last night.
And I think that the Republicans think that that is, and maybe it is right now, helping them with like work non-college, maybe black and Latino men. But man, the gender gap feels like it's going to be just wider than ever.
I don't know what your thoughts are on that. Well, I think that's the risk.
I thought it was remarkable that from the outset when when we were talking about the veep stakes, there was not really a real contender who was a woman. There were the second tier Elise Stefanik types, but to me, knowing- I wondered why Elise didn't hit more.
There must be something I don't know. The look? She doesn't have the look for Trump.
I don't know that she has the delivery and charisma for Trump, but it's like an election that we know is going to be about women's reproductive rights, abortion, IVF, you would think you would have somebody who could try to appeal to women and soften them with that. But it's clearly a doubling down on these inroads they've made with white working class men.
I didn't feel like there was a lot in watching things last night for the fence sitting female voter. Listen, the economy stuff does resonate.
I'll give them that. I think that that's going to be their strongest place to be, is you thought you had more money at this point.
But beyond that, there is really just not a huge entree to female voters who aren't already with them. Anything else strike you from last night? Okay, so I have a totally different take on the Amber Rose of it.
Tell people who Amber Rose is. We have some listeners that weren't suffering.
Bullwark is doing a live YouTube, by the way. So if you are a sicko and just want a play-by-play of every speech and every speaker, we are doing YouTube live.
So you can go check that out on the Bullwark's YouTube page. But for those who didn't, tell them about who Amber Rose is.
So she's what my generation would have called a video vixen, but I'm pretty sure Instagram influencer kind of dated Kanye. She's got 23 million Instagram followers.
She's been some hip hop videos. I think dated Wiz Khalifa.
She gave what I thought was honestly one of the better delivered speeches. If you didn't know a damn thing about her, you saw that she's a beautiful woman who looks like she's from, you know, kind of your interpretation of hip hop culture, not something MAGA people are used to seeing on their stage, talking about how her friends, you know, judged her because she had some right of center viewpoints.
And now she came around and decided these are her people. I actually thought it was kind of effective because what Donald Trump and his campaign, I think are doing outside of doubling down on their base base is they're trying to reach some low intensity voters, some voters who don't necessarily tune in national politics.
They don't necessarily turn out. We know only two thirds of Americans vote in national elections.
And if you're on TikTok, I'm personally not, but I monitor what he's doing on there. Trump dominates it.
He is outmaneuvering Biden left and right. And it's the meme wars.
It's the influencers like Amber Rose, who are, you know, putting things out to her followers. It's the 50 cent clips of him, you know, putting his music to Donald Trump after the, the, the attempt this weekend, there's something there that he's tapping into.
This is, this is not something people should sleep on. And it's not because, you know, she's some big star or whatever, but I'm not sure that I think, let's say the Robert De Niro's of the world breakthrough in a particular way, but having someone like her, I think is really interesting because you don't expect to see her at the RNC.
Yeah, I don't disagree with that. My other big takeaway from last night, which is maybe kind of a half compliment, half uh to them is that there wasn't a message really like it was all over the place what david sacks was saying the union guy and amber rose and marshall wager there just wasn't a coherent message like trump actually has a pretty coherent message for the campaign but the first night of the convention didn't really and maybe that's because they really did tone it down a little bit i they did not do the whole Axios thing about how he's going to be a uniter with love and all that.
There wasn't that. And he does come out and they, you know, they show him with the bandage on his ear and they have Lee Greenwood singing God Bless USA.
On Saturday afternoon and evening, like once it kind of sunk in with me that the convention was starting in two days, I was scared, kind of, that there was going to be a very rabid, vengeance-filled convention that was really going to even turn the heat up in our already broiling pit that we're living in right now, even hotter. And they didn't do that, and maybe at the expense of not having that clear of a message.
So I guess that was my other observation about last night. I don't know if you felt that way.

Yeah, if there was a message, it was the economy,

but then you threw in these kind of disjointed things people weren't sure what to do with

that I think could leave people.

But here's what I will say,

and viewers and listeners may hate this.

All right, we love triggering the listeners right now.

I try to put on my, take off the Alyssa biases,

take away my personal feelings about Donald Trump

and what he poses to this nation.

I think there's a lot of people who watched

Thank you. Try to put on my, take off the Alyssa biases, take away my personal feelings about Donald Trump and what he poses to this nation.
I think there's a lot of people who watched Lee Greenwood, him walking out, Don Jr. tearing up, and the whole place erupting two days after a horrific assassination attempt.
And I think people see strength. And I think that there's something in the American DNA, we may not relate to it personally, but that strength may matter more than a lot of other characteristics.
Yeah, that doesn't land with me. Nothing he does lands with me, though I have sympathy, obviously.
Again, even in the strength side of things, he could have come out last night with two blocks and gloves on, with the 50 cent rap video over it, with like, they tried to take me down and now we're gonna fuck them up like like that was an option like that's like and and kind of would be in trump's what i would have thought would have been like his natural instinct and so i was a little bit surprised it was kind of melancholy i thought almost like the plaintive lee greenwood trump john jr kind of Trump was a little bit, was not making the angry face that he makes. I think, to be honest, I think it was smart.
I try not to get inside his head. It's a scary place.
Even if it only lasts until Thursday and we'll see how his speech goes, there's no way you're not going to be shaken by something like what he experienced. I think you saw that on his face.
I think there, I was talking to reporters who were in the room, they said that they felt the power of the moment of him coming out. I do think Susie Wiles, who's kind of running his campaign, is somebody who, from what I've gathered from the outside, tries to be that voice of don't just play to the base, you've got to play to bigger.
And last night to me felt like playing to bigger. I mean, I've got a lot of family that are, you know, Trump interested voters.
They're like, don't want to tell me they're voting for him. And they were loving last night.
They were, this is what America is about. And so I think we have to remember that's how a lot of folks see it.
I know. This is why it's hard.
This is why you can't do focus groups in your life anymore when you're a commentator, because it's like, it's totally self selected, like people that agree with me on a certain thing are so excited to talk to me about

it. And then people that don't like kind of like, Oh, let's talk about football.
So anyway, so it's

hard to know what people that disagree with me are thinking in my personal life, at least we,

we, we luckily have the focus group podcast here to hear from actual real people. I want to talk just about the assassination attempt a little bit before we get to Biden's Lester Holt interview.

If you have any thoughts beyond the discourse, I'd like to hear them.

But I'm also curious about your take about kind of the discourse about the discourse around it. because I did a show on Sunday where I was purposefully muted

and wanting to be reserve judgment here and learn more information,

take down temperature. I'm not saying today, I'm like, we should turn up the temperature as high as possible, but like, we're 72 hours out now.
There's not a lot of evidence that this young man was influenced by political rhetoric. Maybe he was, maybe we're still going to find out.
The latest thing I saw is that neighbors said

that they had a Trump sign in front of his house at one point.

So who the hell knows?

Like, to me, it seems as likely or more likely, frankly,

that this is like a school shooter type model

where it's like a kid that is lonely and bullied,

young man that is lonely and bullied

and wants attention or wants whatever,

wants vengeance, personal or mental health, right? Then that it was a political thing. Maybe that will end up being wrong.
Anyway, in the context of that, I just wonder what you think. I know you guys have been discussing this on the VO, just kind of about that conversation about whether the discourse has gotten too hot.
Thank God that a millisecond and a millimeter happened, that this didn't go very differently. First and foremost, just for his safety, the fact that he survived this and it was an attempt and we're not having a very different conversation today.
And for the country, I don't even want to go down this spiral much, but God forbid, had it gone differently, we think we are torn apart right now. We would be looking at something so, so much worse.
So, you just even even imagine last night in the context of it going the other way? Horrific. That's what should be the sobering moment that we reflect on.
Yeah. I believe strongly that the tone and the words we use need to be taken down, but I fundamentally disagree that we cannot talk about policies, character, fitness and concerns about democracy.
I've done that since the day I started speaking out against Trump. And I believe and if I have ever said something that goes too far, I'll take responsibility.
But I believe I've been able to do it in a way that is never inciting. It is never meant to tear Americans against each other.
It is meant to tell people what he wants to do as president going forward. There's a way to do this.
And I think that there was a bit of a, you know, we had like 24 hours where basically it was suggested if you ever raise that he may be a threat to democratic institutions, a man who genuinely tried to overturn a democratic election, you are contributing to this. And

that's not true. But what I do think, frankly, honestly, took the steam out of that perspective is appointing someone like J.D.
Vance. J.D.
Vance has said far more inflammatory things about Donald Trump than I ever have and ever will. The comparison to Hitler, I wouldn't say that.
I actually find that offensive. That is going too far.
I mean, to be fair to J.D. Vance, he did try to offer just a range.
He thinks that Donald Trump could be anything from corrupt and useful, like Nixon, all the way to Hitler. That's true.
There was a range there. That's a broad range.
There was a range. Not a very positive range, but you know.
But I think my big takeaway, and you may appreciate this because we talked through your book, and I think you've kind of been a friend and a sounding board in my evolution is I was a firebrand earlier in my career. The goal was to own the libs, to spike the football, to get the loudest applause from the echo chamber you live in.
Since then, I have tried to dedicate myself to what can we say that is constructive, that has nuance, that tries to reach the broadest swath of this country, which actually does not often fall into the far right or the far left. That's how I try to speak.
And I try to hold myself to account in doing that. And I also try to not demonize because I think it's fair game to go after politicians on substance.
I think attacking the voters who support them is often a mistake because it probably means we're not listening, we're not understanding, and you're not moving hearts and minds when you just simply tell people you're in a cult if you do this, you're in X, Y, and Z if you do. That's my perspective.
Many people see it differently. I agree with all that.
I just, and going back to the JD clip that we played earlier, it's like, you can't tell me on the one hand that a literal attack on the Capitol incited by the sitting president is not a big deal, but like some panelists on Joy Reid shows overheated comment was, all right, like those two things can't exist together. And that's what they're trying to sell.
I wouldn't say that like, my tone is the most measured of anyone's tone in the political discourse. But like, at the same time, I'm not, you know, look, I'm not trying to, I'm not trying to incite anyone.
And I think it's important to be clear about what the threat is and what is coming. And I also think that it's not useful to try to, you know, like when you look at the problem of that assassination attempt, like there's some things that we know, like easy access to an assault rifle was one of the problems.
And like that, you know, gets totally washed out of the discourse as we talked about the discourse, but the discourse, and then you get into like some ridiculous things like Joe Biden saying in a private conference call that he is going to put Donald Trump in the bullseye, which is maybe not the best word to use. I get that.
But it's obviously a metaphor. It was a private conference call.
Nobody really thinks he was doing that. There's no evidence that the shooter knew about it.
You know what I mean? Which brings us to Lester Holt interview. Yeah.
And that's the first question he got. Well, and he owned it.
And I, that's the thing is I, I respect a politician who can say like, should he use different language? I literally, cause you're constantly on TV too. I was on air last night and I was, as I was speaking about to make a point and use some kind of a language that was like, you know, targeting or something like that, the things that we do in American vernacular.
And I stopped myself because that's worth second guessing in a moment. Like, is there another way to say this that doesn't allude to something or couldn't be misinterpreted? And then if you say something wrong, just own it.
Biden did and I appreciated it. Let's talk about the president last night.
That answer on the stupid bullseye question for Lester holt and i'm happy to wag my finger at lester holt's about that question because it was pretty dumb there are plenty of things to ask biden about like for example nobody seemed to ask him about the fact that his son hunter seems to be in west wing meetings apparently and that question hasn't been asked yet so they're legitimate questions to ask the president i didn't love the bullseye one that said well i won't I won't bias the guest here. What'd you think about the last year old interview? All right.
Here's where I'm really going to piss off some of your listeners and then some will be with me. Honestly, anybody you're going to piss off with this answer isn't listening anymore because I have been losing my fucking mind for like three weeks now.
If I'm in a triangle where it's Tim Miller, the Pod Save America guys, and me all saying the same thing, maybe we're not all secret Trump supporters trying to get him back into office. Maybe not.
It's worth considering. It's like you get people that are like, but you're not going to be the one that is a threat from a Trump administration like I am as a middle class white woman.
And I'm like, what are you talking about? I'm not really like seriously worried about being in the gulag, but I do think I'm higher on the audit list than you. I think it's certainly worth considering.
I feel so strongly that Democrats properly diagnosed the concerns about Trump, things that he's openly talked about that would fundamentally change the American

government, the way that he would install loyalists in the federal government. He has

obviously espoused anti-democratic positions. You cannot say he is this once-in-a-lifetime threat

and then put someone up against him who just every measure that we rely on to win elections

is telling us he's not going to win. And extreme times call for extreme measures, and what I mean

And him, who just every measure that we rely on to win elections is telling us he's not going to win. And extreme times call for extreme measures.
And what I mean by that, just to be very clear, is if you feel that the country and the kind of future you want is on the line, then of course you should consider changing candidates. This is democracy as a team sport.
This is not just Joe Biden and his legacy and his ambitions. I've never seen anything like it.
I mean, we're around the same age. There's never been something like this where such a plurality of smart, serious Democrats who know how to win elections are saying, hi, you're risking losing the whole thing.
I think he needs to step aside. I think the debate performance was not a one-off.
I think that he had been shielded quite a bit. And we were, I started to buy into started to buy into like you know actually i think he's i think he's going to do better than we expect it was my jaw was on the floor it was hard to watch i was covering it live on cnn and it was i literally this is how insane i am stayed up and we finished we got off air at 2 a.m i pulled up the reagan mondale debate and watched it in full same i example? We're insane together.
Yeah. Like, I need to know, is this, am I out of my mind? Reagan would have run laps around both candidates on that stage at his worst.
Obama-Romney, that's not even the same universe. Obama on his worst day was miles beyond what we saw.
And then I personally don't think the performances since have been an improvement. Like, NATO, great.
He's worked on the issue for 40 years. He should have a command of foreign policy, but it's still, you know, we had the gaffes that were there.
He's not litigating the case against Trump, which I think is one of the hardest things to watch. Like people like us are watching.
It's like tap me in if you can't do it, like put someone up there who not to run, but like who can actually argue the policies that we're worried about with him. And I think Democrats are playing a really dangerous game.

Yeah, let's, for people who didn't suffer through it, I just want to play one clip

of the Joe Biden-Lester Holt interview last night.

What happens if you have another episode like we saw during the debate?

What happens if you have another performance on that par on that level i don't plan on having another for us on that level so it's like literally the question is what happens if you have another terrible performance the answer is a terrible performance and him saying i don't plan on it it's like did you plan on the june one another thing in that interview last night which hasn't gotten attention which i don't understand why is that lester hold asked him if you would do another debate if they would add a third debate why not traditionally there have been three debates why not if you think you can do it why not do it and he said no it's like you're losing this race i had a text there's private polling in virginia virginia democratic private polling not republican democratic private polling shows the race tied in virginia there's public polling showing him losing in virginia and we're like in a bet on somebody that like is given a hum and a hum and answer that it's going to be better in september when it's too late to change it. That is psychotic to me.
I just cannot even imagine. I guess I understand the position that's like, well, Kamala is risky for various reasons and it has to be Kamala, but I understand that this is risky.
I understand that position, but telling me that this is the safe bet is crazy. That's where I'm lost.
And it's a weird place to be a sort of an exiled Republican, never Trumper, if you want to call us that, which is for the last three years, I've been getting the you have to back Biden or you're complicit. And the God's honest truth, and I've shared this on my show, is I was prepared to back Biden.
I was going to do it quietly. I wasn't going to do some endorsement because I've always thought like my place, the Liz Cheney's of the world, is most effective talking to Republicans who don't know where to be in this current Republican party about the

stakes of this race.

But then after that performance, we're told, oh, and shut your mouth about Joe Biden's

performance and saying we might need to consider someone else.

This is up to Democrats and the primary voters who voted for him.

I'm like, I feel incredibly disenfranchised on a personal level.

But the other side of this is you're risking everything. I'll put it this way.
People privately admit the Kamala Harris concern. I'm bullish she would outperform Joe Biden.
And even if she didn't beat Trump, I don't believe she'd be in any way a drag on the down ballot Democratic ticket. And that matters too.
Yeah, especially if Trump's in there. Trump having a 56 seat Senate or 55 versus 52 about what they could do on appointments and all that is massive.
Right. I mean, I'm still talking to some folks who are in leadership.
It sounds like there's quiet conversations, but you do get the sense that- Democratic leadership? Democratic leadership, but you get the sense that a lot of the momentum that was there even a week ago kind of has dwindled. It feels very like we've resigned ourselves to Trump's going to win.
I think there's some momentum coming back. You'd know better than me because I.
Well, the private polling is a bloodbath. I mean, it is.
The private polling is really, really bad. In mind, we don't even have post-GOP convention, post the horrible events of this weekend, which there could be a change in public sentiment.
So yeah, it's bleak. You said something in there, though, that I can't let go.
So if you're a Wisconsin voter, you're a New York voter, so I don't really, are you DC? New York. Where are you actually voting? You're a New York voter now, so I don't really actually care who you cast your ballot for personally.
If you're a Wisconsin voter in November, what are you doing? I know I said this on CNN the other day. It's really tough with Biden on the ballot.
I think if I'm in Wayne County, Michigan, you've got to do it. But I have genuine concern about his ability to do the job.
And I fully reject this. There are competent people around him and nameless political advisors who can handle it.
That's not right. That's not how it works.
And by the way, just a technical matter, which you know this. I work for the Secretary of Defense.
The vice president is not in the chain of command. So if there's a military matter that's urgent in the middle of the night, only Joe Biden, the president of the United States, can sign off on the order.
That could be a matter of life and death, of our troop safety, of national security. There are functions of the U.S.
presidency that only the president can do. And you could have the smartest Ron Klains and whoever around him.
It does not change that you need a functioning, awake, alive, ready-to-go president. I think that's a really important point.
I'm glad you mentioned it. And I don't, just to be clear, I've said this before, but I want to always be crystal clear because they're trolls on the internet that want to try to make it seem like I'm trying to hurt Joe Biden, which I'm not.
I think that Joe Biden's fine on that count right now. But I think to dismiss people's legitimate concerns that he would be fine on that count in 2027 is silly.
I think those are legitimate concerns all right last topic our favorite topic alissa subjected herself to a psychoanalysis from me for the book which i really appreciated we didn't even know each other and so i was grateful for that it added a lot uh i think to the narrative um that i was trying to share with people of real talk about how republicans who knew better thought this. You did the right thing in the end, which I will be eternally grateful for.

I do wonder, our main disagreement though, that was never really hashed out,

we never came to an agreement. I guess not every disagreement is supposed to come to an agreement

eventually. So our existing disagreement, even after all of our time together for the book,

even after a couple of post-game podcasts where we reflected on it, was what do you do if Donald Trump is in there? Do good people go in and work for him? I came down on the side that, with the exception of a few national security spots, I don't think so. You came down on the side, yes, I think that people should.
How do you feel about that now? If we're looking at Donald Trump 2.0. Good people need to go into national security.
I do fundamentally believe that. I think of people like Robert O'Brien, I think, who are competent, steady hands.
What this country is capable of and what we do on the world stage and what's done by nameless, faceless bureaucrats behind the scenes to keep us safe, but also to maintain the peaceful world order is not something we can dismiss. Listen, this is a thing I really wrestle with.
I want to root for the American presidency, even if Donald Trump wins. I would rather there be a person I respect and trust and think will put the Constitution over their personal ambition in any level of a role.
But what I keep thinking about when I think of this question is this schedule F. It's an executive order that he had that basically will remake all civil servants into fire at will political appointees.
So think a federal government staffed by political appointees loyal to Donald Trump. That frightens me.
That means you get rid of pandemic preparedness. You get rid of the national security apparatus and the traditional where you replace it with people.
Our friends like Elizabeth Newman and Olivia Troy, this was kind of happening to them at the end. Like it wasn't via Schedule F, but it was via pressure campaigns.
Yeah. I mean, I think of anything from like hurricanes and natural disasters,

the people who've spent their lives knowing how to respond to those things.

There's this fear I have of not just the loyalists and the sycophants, but also just

incompetence, people who don't have the subject matter expertise to do those positions.

I guess I just don't believe that there'd be some massive boycott of like all good people in America would refuse to go in and therefore we would bring the presidency to a screeching halt. I think that's kind of where I disagree, but I'm closer to where you are in that I would never advise someone to go in.
If a friend called and I was like, hey, because I got one of these one time. I got a friend that called back in 2016.
They're like, hey, I got a call from, I guess I don't want to out them. I got a call from a secretary in a national security space.
And they want me to come be the spokesperson for this national security thing. Oh, yeah.
You know, I said to them, I don't, why? Like, why? I mean, sure, if you're advising them on national security, that's one thing. But, like, why spin for the bad stuff you don't know is going to come? Well, and that's important for Macau.
Like, and by the way, to be clear, I would never go back in under any circumstances, nor would I advise someone I care about to. I think the spokespeople role, that's, that's especially hard to justify because that's where you're forced into the positions of, are you just going to go out and defend this? One thing that I ran into, not even that if I wasn't saying something that was wrong, I had information withheld from me and then went out and briefed the public without all information.
What comes to mind is I never knew Trump tested positive for COVID before the debate. I was told he tested negative.
So I went out and briefed the press corps. You're lying by being part of something that is lying and withholding information from you.
And that's untenable. Technical positions, I don't know.
I do think there's a value in having good people go in. Yeah.
Okay. Last thing.
I know that was last thing, but you sparked something. Esper, do we think Esper's going to be for Biden? Do we think Esper is a convention role, potentially, person? You don't need to reveal any private convos, but he's spoken out pretty clearly.
I keep up with him. Yeah.
I saw him very recently um if i had to guess i don't want to speak for him i don't think he'll do anything super publicly i think he sees it similar to how myself and liz and others do talk about the threat posed by trump um for him it's sort of the place i think mark general mark milley is as well where they don't want to seem like they're politicizing the military by being too deliberate. I do wish, I wish the John Kellys and others maybe were coming out more, but I think he'll continue to say what he has about.
Another downside effect people don't realize about the terrible Biden debate is like all the CYA now. I didn't want to say it.
Thank you for saying it. Okay.
To me, it's less that Esper's not going to do it because of that. And more it's like

Biden isn't up for like calling these people and saying, hey, Mark Esper, please come see

you at my convention. It might be a different thought if that was happening.
I don't think

it's happening.

And I should mention that the Biden campaign had reached out to me. They've started reaching out

to some Republicans. They're doing the work, but I think that the performance changes it in some

folks' minds. I also think there's a lot of kind of holding and seeing what happens.

Yeah, no, I didn't mean that to be talking on the campaign i know they're trying i what i'm saying is like the candidate isn't up for it like is again is he up for being president right now yeah but like is he doing what he would have done in 2008 campaign working the phones but hey mark how you doing buddy like i saw that crystal conversation that you did and like we need hey Jack we need to get you out there and like that stuff matters that stuff works that's politics that's doing politics and he's like not doing politics anymore. By the way I mean it wasn't lost on me I was featured in a Biden campaign ad with Mark Esper with General Milley that aired the night of the debate and I was like would have appreciated a heads up at powerful and those are my public words that you can put out.
But then to have that out there, which it does, it offers, it puts a target on you. And then to give that performance, I'm like, rise to the occasion, litigate the case, talk about your forward looking vision.
We got none of it. And don't blame the moderators.
It's not their job to fact check Donald Trump. It's your job.
I was a debater. You do it on the stage there.
You don't drop points. You challenge your competitor.
All right. Alyssa Farah.
This is so good. Come back and do it again soon.
Thank you. We've got, if I had to pick on Lester Holt, I do have to pick on myself.
That was a stupid question, Lester Holt. We played a clip of Mark Robinson, who's a total lunatic, yesterday, talking about how people need killing.
And we cut down the clip. He's very an ineloquent man, but he's trying to talk about foreign affairs.
And so I don't want to imply anything about somebody. So we'll put the whole YouTube if you want to watch Mark Robinson.
Doesn't still make him look great, but it makes clear that he's not calling for domestic killing over political opponents. And at this moment, it's important to be absolutely clear about all that Alyssa come back soon

thanks so much we'll be back tomorrow with more

RNC convention coverage

you can check us out on YouTube we'll see you all there

peace

Humble as a mumble in the jungle, so shout and screams That's the way the cracker crumbles, so I guess I've got to be found my dreams

Humble as a mumble in the jungle, so shout and screams

That's the way the cracker crumbles, so I guess I've got to beat out my dreams Too democratic, republic bucket, we chicken nugget We dip in the sauce like mopping buckets Blue collar scholars who take your dollar and wipe my ass with it You're living for the lotto, never hit it I met a critic, I made that shit a draw She said she thought hip hop was only guns and alcohol I said oh hell naw, but yeah this debt too You can't discrim a head cause you done read a book or two

Or the fall looked at you in a microscope

Saw all the dirty organisms living in your closet

Would I stop and would I pause it?

To put that bitch in slow motion

Got the potion and the antidote

And I quote, a legendary decision is

If you wanna live or wanna exist

The game changes everyday so obsolete

It's the fist and marches

Speeches only reaches those who already know about it

This is how we go about it

Convos after mumble in the jungle Don't stop and freeze That's the way to crack and poke and poke The Bdog Podcast is produced by Katie Cooper

with audio engineering and editing by Jason Brown.