Democrats Actually Win Something w/ Chris Hayes & David Plouffe | The Weekly Show with Jon Stewart

CHRIS HAYES: It was as dominating. a night as Democrats have had in almost a generation. JON STEWART: Yeah, it was amazing. And I guess the question next for both of you. is, how will they squander it? How? How will they piss this away? [THEME MUSIC]. Ladies and gentlemen, it is Wednesday, November 5. This is The Weekly Show podcast. My name is Jon Stewart. And are you hearing something in my voice? You may be hearing something in my voice. In my voice may be something called.

hope, a little bit of hope. It hasn't been in there in a while. Last night's election was the kind of election. night that I haven't seen since I was a kid. It hearkened back to those old election nights when. the polls would close at 8:00. And they'd be like, OK, that's it. And-- and I know all the networks. had gotten their election teams and their political pundits. And they'd gotten all the desks set up in the election center, and the magic TV, and all that. And they were ready to go for, you know, the eight to 12 hours.

that they were going to do to try and discern the closeness. And it was just a fucking--. 8:00, it closed. And at 8:30, they're like, yep, we're calling it. Clear, decisive, really, I thought, positive results. all across the board--. Mikie Sherrill, Spanberger, Mamdani, Prop 50, it-- you know, even these races in-- in Georgia. and everywhere else. It turns out-- and again, I am not a political consultant. And by the way, we're going to have.

on a really smart political consultant. and a political analyst. But it may be that, when the president of United States. tweets out a video of him dumping. diarrhea on the American public, they find that slightly dismissive. And maybe that's what all this is. I don't know about the argument of populism. versus security, state Democrats or. moderate Democrats, all that. But I think I do know that the arrogance, and dismissiveness,

and chaos, and incompetence of this administration's. first year has to have a result. It has to. And it seems like it does. It seems like a direct result of-- of those elements. within our society. But other people know better. Let's talk to them. Let's bring out our guests, and dive. right into this sunny day that has been in a sea of monsoons.

So let's-- let's go right in. [THEME MUSIC]. Oh, so on this very historic day here in the tri-state area, we are delighted to be joined by Chris Hayes, host of MSNBC's. All In With Chris Hayes, author of the number-one Times. best-selling book, The Sirens' Call. That's The New York Times best seller. That's no-bullshit times. That's no-- that's no times from around the world. And David Plouffe, campaign manager, White House senior advisor to Barack Obama, last 10-plus years spent time as an executive.

in the corporate and nonprofit worlds-- but he's back. now talking politics with us. Gentlemen, I just-- did--. people are-- I don't know if they're listening to this. or if they can see it on the YouTube. I just lifted out of my chair. [LAUGHTER]. DAVID PLOUFFE: That kind of night. JON STEWART: Last night was a night that--. that Democrats have not had--. even in 2020, it wasn't that--. CHRIS HAYES: No. JON STEWART: Even when it ultimately, days later, it was determined that Biden had won, and then a few people rolled out into the streets.

in San Francisco and danced. Last night was just one of those. crisp, clean, polls closed, they win, more than normal, done. Chris, what was-- what was your impression last night? CHRIS HAYES: That was exactly my feeling, too. And it's funny, because the outcome--. there's the outcome and then the benchmark you. had for the outcome going in. Like, it's funny-- it's funny you mentioned 2020. Because in retrospect, when all was said and done, it was a big-- they won the national popular vote.

by 4.5 points. They won both Houses. It didn't feel that way that night. There was a bunch of polling that. had suggested, like, Sara Gideon is going to beat. Susan Collins by 8 points. And that didn't happen. There was a bunch of House races. So there was this expectation and then reality. Last night, the expectation was, you know, Spanberger wins fairly easily, Sherrill in a neck-and-neck race. You know, we think Mamdani's ahead. And we think Prop 50. And it was just boom, boom, boom, boom--. you know, 15-point victory in Virginia. Sherrill absolutely waxes Ciattarelli.

JON STEWART: Blew my mind. CHRIS HAYES: Mamdani's called it 9:45. California is called at poll closing. JON STEWART: Right! CHRIS HAYES: So that was--. I totally agree that, like, that--. that just emotional experience of the night was--. was something that we haven't had in a while, where it was just, like, clean sweep, Dems win. And they outrun the polls, I would also note. JON STEWART: That was the other thing that did that is--. I don't know if you guys are gambling men. Certainly, I don't recommend it. But in football, man, there's always-- there's-- you know,

you can take the money line. You can go with the spread. They beat the spread last night. CHRIS HAYES: They beat the spread. That's exactly right. JON STEWART: David, when was the last time. you can recall the Democrats beating. the spread in that manner? DAVID PLOUFFE: It's '06/'08. Because even though '18 was a good year, Republicans won a bunch of Senate races that were targets, you know, the Florida governors. You really have to go back to '06 and '08 where it was, you know, won everything, won everything with. massive margins, in some cases, historical, turned around trends. Like, Passaic County, New Jersey is the best example. of this, you know, a county that's been.

reliably Democrat that actually Trump won in '24--. that Sherrill won by, I think, like, 15 points--. and a lot of Hispanic vote there--. and won everywhere. I mean, Supreme Court races in Pennsylvania. won over 60% of the vote. JON STEWART: Georgia! Georgia! DAVID PLOUFFE: Georgia, statewide. And these weren't close, right? And so-- so it was-- it was as dominating. a night as Democrats have had in almost a generation. JON STEWART: Yeah, it was amazing. And I guess the question next for both of you. is, how will they squander it?

[LAUGHTER]. How-- how will it all go to-- how will they piss this away? Chris? CHRIS HAYES: Well, I-- so, look, I. think there's basically three elements to the. victories, right? There's what we call thermostatic public opinion, which is, when one party has a White House, the other party tends to do better. in the off-year elections, right? You know, it's why the-- you know, Chris Christie and Bob McDonnell won in 2009, right? A year into Barack Obama, they won Jersey and Virginia. JON STEWART: Right. Are those thermostatic things? Are there metrics for that?

Is that more-- because they're also-- not to relate it, again, to sports, but there are a lot of correlations. that are not causation. Is there a sense that thermostatic opinion. is also causal? CHRIS HAYES: It's caused. JON STEWART: It is causal. CHRIS HAYES: It's causal. I mean, there's a pretty good political science literature. that suggests, people tend to look at the party. in the White House as the--. you know, doing stuff, doing too much, doing stuff they don't like. It reminds them of why they opposed. them in the first place. So it's a pretty reliable thing.

So you've got that at the base layer. Then you've got, like, Donald Trump is really unpopular. Like, it's not just-- JON STEWART: How dare you. How dare you, sir. CHRIS HAYES: How can I say this? They're going to cancel me. No, it's-- you know, it's-- he's at 39%. You know, the national mood is dyspeptic and disgruntled. And the wrong track numbers are through the roof. And then the third layer is, what. can Democrats control, right? Those first two things, they don't make. The-- the third layer is candidate recruitment, messaging, campaigns. And I think on that-- you know, that's the place you're talking. about how they're going to screw it up. or how they're going to build on it.

That's the place where they can control stuff. And I think they did a lot that was right last night. And I'm curious. David's a professional here--. that-- that meant that Spanberger won by 15 and not. by 8 and that Sherrill won by you know, 12, I think, and not by 6. And then Mamdani got over 50%. They could have won those races--. to the point you're making about being spread by less--. with worse campaigns. And if you look at the attorney general in Virginia who. won by 5 points and had a pretty brutal scandal, it reminds you-- JON STEWART: Yes.

CHRIS HAYES: --that is does matter what. you're doing in that campaign. It doesn't matter who the candidate is. And so that's the place to think about how to build on. or what--. what to avoid if you're the Democrat. JON STEWART: But how much does it matter? You know, to that point, David, when you get a candidate. in Virginia who's, you know, got messages like, I'd like to kill all these people, you know, generally that is--. CHRIS HAYES: That seriously want their child to die. JON STEWART: I seriously want them to die. You know, that's-- I don't want to say box office poison--. but generally, that is not considered. a positive closing message.

But-- but as far as the professionals go, look--. and by the way, I still believe it. I think the Democrats are still a mess. I truly believe they're a mess just because there is--. what this shows to me is, again, there. is this underlying potential energy within the United States. of America that is much larger than I think any of us. could have imagined. And channeling that energy directionally. will be the challenge for whoever wants to harness it.

I still don't believe they're doing that. But tell me why all those things. came together in the manner that Chris was just describing. DAVID PLOUFFE: Well, I think just to build on Chris--. so, you know, this year's a long time. But as we look at '26, I think the atmosphere. should be just as good, if not better, for Democrats. It's not just Trump. It's that they're in complete control, and people are deeply dissatisfied, right? So I think where the campaign comes. in is the quality of the candidate is always. the most important thing. I'll come to that in a minute.

But the piece of messaging-- are you. maximizing the critique against your Republican opponent. as much as you can? So, for instance, all these House Republicans, I guarantee you, by the summer and fall, are going to suggest somehow they oppose some of the stuff. Trump did, and they're independent. So the job of Democrats, writ large, is to make them own their weakness and their fealty. to Trump. And then the big part where I agree with you, Jon, where. the Democrats are still too much of a mess is, the Republican brand is terrible. We kind have a market failure.

80% of the country doesn't like either option. So if we become stronger, if we have candidates who. seem different, they're good at critiquing Republicans but also. seem that they want to challenge the status. quo and say the Democratic Party has gotten. some things wrong, they come from interesting backgrounds, you know, they're willing to say, like--. I think the strongest Democratic candidates next year. will probably be people who say, listen, if I win my House. or Senate race, I'm not going to vote. for any member of the current Democratic leadership. JON STEWART: Mm-hmm. DAVID PLOUFFE: Like, that says to voters, this is somebody different. So I think that Sherrill and Spanberger, you know,

they've been in Congress for a while. But they ran as outsiders in '18. You know, they were these national security, never ran for office people--. Mamdani obviously very different. So there's a recipe there. The other thing is they were just relentlessly on message. They didn't get distracted by anything. It was all about cost of living. Now they're now executives. So their biggest challenge will actually. be delivering on what they promised as mayor and governor. But I think, Jon, I agree with you.

And for me, I think about the '26 and '28. And I'm most concerned about this. We have five Supreme Court justices that are over 65. So between now and 2040, let's say, 3, 4, 5-- like, the Court could go. back to being more progressive, 5, 4, or it could go 8, 1. And we live in a time where, even if we win the White House. and hold it, which is super hard to do--. I'm sure we'll talk about that later. If the Republicans control the Senate, they will not confirm a replacement. for Alito or Thomas. So where do we have to go?

We have to get to the point where we rely--. reliably gain and maintain power and hold the White. House and the Senate. And we have a long way to go, because Virginia and New Jersey. are not Iowa, and Ohio, and the Sun Belt. So that's where we have to get to as a party-- is--. is, can we maximize Republican weakness, but also maximize Democratic strength, and put those things together? That's how we become more competitive in more. places, which, for the fate of the nation, is what we have to do. JON STEWART: So it feels to me--.

and this is going to be a complete you know, projection or speculation--. that this election was about Democratic--. Republican weakness, for the most part. It turns out, dumping diarrhea on people that are protesting. from a plane or throwing a Great Gatsby. party in the middle of food stamp benefits running out. may not be--. may be viewed as smug and condescending. by much of the electorate.

So there's that. But what I hear on television is, should they go progressive? Or should they go, you know, security, state moderate? And in New York City, it worked in progressive. But in Virginia and New Jersey, there--. those people are more normal. And you're going to want normal people to do normal things. And it all seems like bullshit to me. in the sense of the simplicity of this. A government that very simply says,

we haven't been delivering to what are clearly. the needs of the people. And whatever those needs may be, we must deliver that in a much simpler, more. agile, and fast-moving way. And-- and that's where the Democrats, to me, have failed, whatever they're saying. Whether they're saying I want a government-run grocery store, or I'm going to make sure that I lower your property taxes, it's knowing what the people you purport to represent.

seem to need. And that's where I think they actually. can learn a lot of lessons from Trump, who doesn't. give a shit about the ways. He just looks at it and goes, I'm going to do that. DAVID PLOUFFE: Right. JON STEWART: Now he's done it incompetently, and ham-handedly, and dismissively, and condescendingly. But what-- what do you think of that formulation? David, I'll start with you. DAVID PLOUFFE: Yeah, there's no question that there's--. listen, we should always listen to the voters. And the voters have been very clear. Their sense is the Democratic Party, writ large,

has not been focused enough on the problems. that they care most about. And even when we do pass legislation, that's, like, the easy part in a way. It's like, how do you execute on it? How do you make it timely? Mamdani is a great example of this. I mean, he's talked repeatedly in his campaign. about going after government waste. His-- the video that really propelled his campaign. in the beginning was at the halal truck, where he talked. about cutting regulations. JON STEWART: Right. It was brilliant. DAVID PLOUFFE: But, Jon, I will say this. So I think Spanberger and Sherrill--.

last night, in those states, it wasn't just. about Republican weakness. They were kind of--. they were, not just, like, a safe alternative, but kind. of a good alternative. So that's what we want. But I actually think Democrats--. there's a big opening here. We have fallen into a trap where, there's basically. any kind of attack on government, we feel like we have to defend. And if you go back to, like, Obama and Clinton, two. Democratic presidents, Obama--. I was part of this. We're going to look at every regulation on the books. and get rid of ones that don't make sense anymore. And there were thousands of them. Clinton reorganizing government--. was that good politics?

Yes. But they both understood, hey, we're Democrats. We believe that government can play a constructive force. in people's lives. I think Mamdani gets this. So why don't we be the first person to say when it's. being inefficient or too slow? JON STEWART: Right. DAVID PLOUFFE: We're-- that's not going to-- we're not. going to tolerate that. By the way, Daniel Lurie in San Francisco, the new mayor, is a good example of this. JON STEWART: Great example of this. DAVID PLOUFFE: Just, you know, focusing. on things like crime and homelessness. but also cutting tons of red tape. Like, there's a saying-- JON STEWART: That's right. DAVID PLOUFFE: --that I think is a--. I think it's--. Abner Mikva, the legendary Illinois political figure. I think it's associated with him--.

which is, sometimes Democrats come across as if they--. they-- they love humanity and hate people. And we need Democrats who are like people--. like, their kid's only in first grade one time. They're renting this house one time in their life. They're trying to open a small business. JON STEWART: Right. DAVID PLOUFFE: We should be in an athletic posture, you know, saying that we are going to deliver for you. And there's a huge opportunity there. Because I think the Republicans have not shown skill there. And they don't give a shit about people. So if we care about people--. JON STEWART: Well, nah, they-- they give. a shit about certain people.

So I wouldn't say that. They don't give a-- they love America. They just hate about 52% of the people living there. [LAUGHTER]. It's not-- I don't think it's that they don't. give a shit about anybody. [THEME MUSIC]. Hey, folks, you're probably listening to the podcast here. You might even be watching it. And you're wondering how I decide. on my fashion for the podcast. Or you're not wondering that, because you. realize I pretty much wear the same thing every time. But it's because I like to be comfortable. I like a nice T-shirt, a nice sweatshirt. I like-- that's how I roll.

But you know who has got the really. comfortable and affordable clothes? Quince, Quince. That's why I'm recommending them. I'm the new Oprah recommending clothes. You know, a lot of people tell me, ditch the T-shirts. Try something new. I see you in the comments there. And I might. I might head over to Quince, pick up one of them there $50. Mongolian cashmere sweaters. Although, it's a lot harder to say than just T-shirt--. maybe wool coat, maybe some jeans.

Quince sells everyday comfort at a fraction. of what you'd expect to pay. By partnering directly with ethical factories. and top artisans, Quince cuts out the middleman. and delivers premium quality at half the cost. of other high-end brands, so you. can give luxury quality pieces without the luxury price tag. Look like me but for half the money. Give and get timeless holiday staples that. last this season with Quince. Go to quince.com/tws for free shipping on your order.

and 365-day returns. Now available in Canada, too. That's Q-U-I-N-C-E dot com slash T-W-S--. free shipping, 365-day returns, quince.com/tws. [THEME MUSIC]. DAVID PLOUFFE: So here's my point. I think Democrats have enormous runway on a lot of issues. if we will seize it. And by the way, to your point, not. get caught up into this left versus. right, Democratic Socialists versus right of center.

JON STEWART: Right. DAVID PLOUFFE: If we can say, all comers can come, probably the one thing that unifies. us is those Democrats will all believe, A, we should not be an autocracy. And 2, we should have an economy. that works for working people and should be focused on that. And everything else, to me--. let them be who they are and--. and talk about the stuff they care about. And if we do that and deliver, I think we can really--. I don't want to overstate it, because we. live in a divided country. But is it possible over the next decade we could get back. to being competitive in five or six more places.

than we are today and have a better chance. than we do today about-- of winning 50%. of the vote in those places? It's possible, in part because the Republicans are so weak. And they're trapped with Trump. They are not going to change who. they are until at least 2030. So we've got to fully maximize this moment. JON STEWART: Yeah, opportunity exists. And Chris, to that point, what most encourages me. is the energy that comes from younger. people who seem to understand this on a molecular level. that the--. and the Hakeem Jeffries, Chuck Schumer leadership.

appears to be repping--. representing Democrats right after, you know, the Republicans released their contract for America. Like, they seem to be of a very different. time, style, and purpose. CHRIS HAYES: Yes. JON STEWART: Are you hopeful that they. have the-- the energy, the understanding, maybe not through the National Democratic Committee, but on a grassroots level?

CHRIS HAYES: Yeah, I think it's interesting to look. at the polling last night to the extent we have exit polling. on young voters, right? Because there was-- you know, there. was this story that was told about, you know, the sort of rising tide of the Obama electorate. And this was going to be this kind. of permanent, quasi-permanent majority. And actually, you know, people poo poo that now. But it actually-- it did produce, like, a series of national majorities. The electoral college kind of messed with that. But it-- it was actually a pretty. successful coalition for a pretty long time, in some senses. The last election, famously, young men broke for Trump.

There's this tendency in political punditry. where we have one dot here, and one dot here, and we draw a line, and we just keep drawing it all the way. Like, well, at this rate, 99% of young men. will vote for Donald Trump in eight years. Like, well, it doesn't work that way, right? So last night, what did we see? We saw young men breaking for the Democrat. by huge amounts, both Sherrill and Spanberger. by double digits, 15, 20 points, Mamdani plus 40. So what does that say? It says that, to me, this sort of anti-establishment.

or, like, distrust of the incumbent-- like, the system's not working for me. It also says to me, young people are some of the most. exposed to higher prices. Like, they are-- they are, almost. definitionally, some of the most price-sensitive voters. JON STEWART: That's right. CHRIS HAYES: I remember when I was 24. Like, I was a lot more price sensitive at 24. than I am at 46. JON STEWART: I hadn't been described as price sensitive. But yes, I have been--. CHRIS HAYES: I was cheap as hell. JON STEWART: Sort of like a shellfish allergy. You're a little pricey-- you're gluten and price sensitive. [LAUGHTER].

CHRIS HAYES: So, like, to David's point, it's, like, the voters have been very clear on this, right? Like, the-- the system, the cost of living, things. are too unaffordable. I can't get ahead. I'm concerned about the economy. That is also the sweet spot of overlap of the. different Democratic factions. It's also the thing that young people are most focused on. Like, and, you know, the last sort of element of this, which I think Mamdani really got-- and this, I think, is a harder thing to kind of spread around--. is just in the way Barack Obama sort of-- the--.

he and the people around him were sort of generally native. to new forms of communication. Mamdani has been that way. And I think that matters a lot. There's a certain kind of charisma and comfort that he. had with particular forms that reach younger people that. was part of that really, genuinely electric thing. that he put together in New York City. That's a little hard to replicate. But you've already seen, like, James Talarico in Texas--.

you know, Jeff Jackson, who's-- who's kind of a much more. centrist figure-- he's the attorney general of North. Carolina-- experimenting with forms. that are similar from different ideological profiles, right? JON STEWART: Right. CHRIS HAYES: But-- but-- but speaking to young people. and to people everywhere in the same way. JON STEWART: So I want to--. I think that's an unbelievable point. And I want to talk about that a little bit. Because sometimes I think we confuse. the medium with the message. And when they talk about, well, he understood TikTok, or he understood Snapchat, or he understood Instagram--.

but what he understood more than anything was how. to connect like a human being with people, whether that-- if--. I feel like, if Mamdani had been. doing fireside radio chats, they. would have been successful. And I do think it reminds me of--. years ago, the news magazine show. 20/20 decided they were going to appeal to young people. And so they did 20/20 Downtown. And 2020 Downtown--. [LAUGHTER]. --was 20/20 with Jon Quinones wearing a black leather.

jacket and standing outside. And the young people were like, who is this whippersnapper. in a black leather jacket? And that gets to, I think, the next part of the conversation, which is, David, it's--. tell me about the consultant class that talks about this. Because I think we make the mistake of confusing. these new forms with what is at the heart of this, which is. politicians that connect with human beings in a real way,

whether it's face to face, or on the radio, or on television, because they love these people, they care about these people, and they are not focus grouped to within an inch of their. lives so as to appear false. DAVID PLOUFFE: Yeah, well, listen, historically--. and I think that's even more true today with--. with the social media world--. the most successful candidates are authentic to who they are, who have a very good idea about why they're. running for the office they're running for, have core beliefs.

And what a good campaign team does is just, OK, let's figure out the best way. to communicate that and then acquire. the votes we need to win. So candidate quality and their message. is always at the top of the pyramid. But Chris's point is important. And obviously, he has spent a lot of time. researching and writing about the attention economy that. So the reality is, a candidate and campaign team who says, we're going to really think about TikTok and YouTube first, but they're a crappy candidate with a poor message, they're going to be unsuccessful. JON STEWART: Yeah. DAVID PLOUFFE: But if you're a good candidate. with a good message, to fully maximize your votes,

you do need to think, what is your campaign? It used to be, if I have something to say, like, what. speech am I going to give? What interview am I going to give? I'm not saying you don't do those things today. The most important thing to do is, what is my TikTok. video and piece of content? What's my YouTube piece of content? What's my content on Instagram Reels, Reddit? And those are not the same. This is what Mamdani understood. And I think it was-- he didn't have to go to school, Chris. He knew this. This is how he lived his life. JON STEWART: But certainly, Mikie Sherrill and Spanberger, in particular, do not.

DAVID PLOUFFE: No, but they had active TikTok. They had active YouTube. JON STEWART: But the content on TikTok. is the content that you generate. It's like The Daily Show. The Daily Show can be on TikTok, or Instagram, or any--. but that's not the content. The content is what we generate on the show and then--. CHRIS HAYES: What you say and how. good you are at communicating. JON STEWART: That's right. DAVID PLOUFFE: Right-- so none of the tactics and sort. of, you know, multi-platform strategy. work without a flawed content strategy or product. But my point is, we do need, as a party. and Democratic candidates, to think more through,

what is my windshield as I think about winning elections? It's everything. It's still TV ads. It's still interviews. But it's TikTok and YouTube first. And I think that, the-- the better we. do that-- because there's about 40% of the electorate, that's the only way they get information. They never seek out information about politics. They encounter it. CHRIS HAYES: Right. Exactly. DAVID PLOUFFE: So we just have to make sure--. and TikTok is particularly challenging, because you. cannot pay for political ads. So it's all organic. It's relying on influencers.

I think one of the thing Mamdani's campaign did well--. you know, they basically understood. that we have to create content every day. across these platforms. Now to your point, Jon, that doesn't. matter if it's not compelling. Like, some of his most compelling content. wasn't a policy. It's how he interacted with people. This is a guy that clearly loves. the city of New York-- that came through-- and loved. the people in New York. And there's no rather--. place he'd rather be. JON STEWART: But his message was really simple--. DAVID PLOUFFE: On affordability, it was great. And he found different ways to bring that. So-- so-- JON STEWART: Let's flip this. DAVID PLOUFFE: Yes. Yeah.

JON STEWART: Because this-- this, I think, is a really interesting discussion. We're talking about how candidates need to exploit. all manner of communication to try and get their message out. and that they have teams that are. there to help them design those messages for each things. Let's look the other way. Can they take really good candidates and ruin them? And that's-- you know, and I want to talk specifically. about Kamala Harris.

Because I spoke with her last week on the podcast. My sense of what happened in that campaign is--. and that's just one example--. is that the strategists, and consultants, and pollsters basically wrung every last bit of light. out of the eyes of what is a compelling and smart person.

and-- and, I think, continue to do a disservice to that. And David, you-- you were there. Has the consultant, strategist, political complex. destroyed in some measure the talent. and potential of many of these really good candidates? And does it continue to do that? DAVID PLOUFFE: Well, I was there. So what I'll say is, you know--. [LAUGHTER]. And you know, was on your show, Jon. She wrote a book. I mean, it's pretty clear she ran the campaign.

she wanted to run, OK? JON STEWART: Uh-huh. DAVID PLOUFFE: And everybody-- and I get it. Like, if this ad, or this tactic, or this line. had been different, she would have won. Let me just tell you. I've worked in politics a long time. I retired. I came back for 100 days. JON STEWART: Right. DAVID PLOUFFE: This was steep headwinds, deeply unpopular. Democratic president--. JON STEWART: No question. DAVID PLOUFFE: --unhappiness about the economy. In every battleground state, voters. gave Trump's first term approval. in the economy 50 plus, OK--. the border out of control.

So-- and this is-- remember, Kamala Harris, she ran for president in 2020 and didn't even get to. Iowa, OK? You know, so my view is, we could have done. a bunch of stuff differently. The biggest thing, I think-- and I don't think Trump would. have bit was-- you know, after the first debate, which was, you know, kind of her best moment--. and I think all that did was get a bunch of voters back. who had left Biden. But it got us in the race. And we-- you said, we'd like to debate again. We probably should have, that night, said, we will debate on October 20 on Fox, make it hard for him to say no. We should have done that.

Because we needed big moments. But at the end of the day, should. she have separated more with Biden. I think in the book, she says, I certainly. thought she should have. But, you know, she's talked about this. She's a loyal person. And the reality of that question. would be, I would have liked her to go as far as she could. I would have liked her to say, I didn't think he should run. CHRIS HAYES: Yeah. DAVID PLOUFFE: And I think he mishandled the border. And I think we didn't pay enough attention to prices. None of that stuff happened. She wasn't going to say that. So I just think we need to live in the world. But-- but here's your point. The best campaigns I have either been part of or.

seen are--. by the way, sometimes they lose, sometimes they win--. are candidates who know exactly who they are, the issues. that they're running on. There may be issues that aren't popular, but they're going to say, I'm going to stick by my values. And basically, the campaign is there to support them. And I thought Kamala Harris ran a great race. under the circumstances. You know, probably, you would have said-- by the way, the thing that struck me about that race. was, in the battleground states, it was closer than the erosion. I wasn't paying much attention in that campaign.

what was happening in New York, or New Jersey, or Connecticut. And when I started to see those numbers, I'm like, we're in deep trouble. And I think why she did a little bit better. in the battlegrounds is they saw. her directly talking about the economy a lot, prices a lot. I'll be a different leader than Joe Biden. But it wasn't enough. So-- so at the end of the day, I think we--. we should-- that was going to be a tough race to win. Could we have won it? Potentially. I think the key thing is, as we think about the House races, Senate races, the White House in '28,

keeping it in '32, the most important thing will be, are we putting forth candidates that. capture people's imagination, that seem authentic, that are. willing to challenge every status quo, Republican, the status quo, and Democrats? Are they offering ideas that people can believe in? And to Chris's point, can they excite people? I mean, the most exciting candidate generally wins. Trump was an exciting candidate. Obama was an exciting candidate, Clinton, Kennedy--. particularly in the presidential race. Because-- this is what's interesting about the moment.

we're in. I spent most of my life in politics, where we did better as a party in high-turnout elections. That's completely changed. CHRIS HAYES: Totally. DAVID PLOUFFE: So--. JON STEWART: Not last night. DAVID PLOUFFE: Not-- well, but-- but if you. look at the turnout in some of these places, it was quite high. JON STEWART: That's what I'm saying, that turnout was high. And they did better. DAVID PLOUFFE: But it was still less than a presidential year. JON STEWART: Right. DAVID PLOUFFE: So our big-- that sort of wave in front. of us that we have to somehow crest is-- in '28, there's going to be a much bigger turnout. It's a presidential year. JON STEWART: Right. DAVID PLOUFFE: And that's going to be harder for us to navigate. unless we have a candidate that is exciting, that people.

believe in, who's saying things that they wouldn't expect. necessarily a Democrat to say. If all those things happen, we can do this. But-- but candidate quality is at the top, Jon. JON STEWART: Right. But the-- the point, David, I'm trying to make--. is the machine that we have designed to create candidates. and their campaigns antithetical to exactly. what David just said? David just said, the most exciting candidate, the most--. but the truth is that the machine that. is around candidate selection, and promotion, and campaigns.

is risk averse. It's the kind of thing that says, OK, you're going. to-- depending on what it is--. candidates that are throwing a Hail Mary. can say whatever they want. That's just why I loved when Al Sharpton would run. DAVID PLOUFFE: Right. JON STEWART: You knew he wasn't winning. DAVID PLOUFFE: Right. JON STEWART: But boy, was he going to make that debate fun. [THEME MUSIC]. Hey, do you guys follow the news? I-- I follow the news. You know why I follow the news? Because I hate myself! And I want to be sad.

We see headlines engineered all day, make us feel a range of emotions, outrage, fear, hope, despair. I just want my coffee! How dare they? Well, good news, folks, this episode. is sponsored by Ground News, an app and website. designed to help you see past the headlines. and past the spin. It allows you to quickly understand why we see so much. division in news coverage. Ground News can pull hundreds of sources. from around the world into one place for any story.

and lets you compare the left, center, and right perspectives. They provide extra context on every story, showing the political bias, factuality, and ownership. of the news outlets. This lets you follow the money and understand why narratives. are shaped the way they are. If you want to move beyond headlines. and start understanding how news really works, Ground News provides the tools for transparency. and comparison. It's the essential first step back towards finding a shared. reality and staying informed. If you want to stay informed, go to groundnews.com/stewart.

for 40% off the vantage plan. This brings it down to $5 a month. That's groundnews.com/stewart. It's $5 a month, less than a coffee, to start understanding how news really works. That's worth it. [THEME MUSIC]. So I want to ask, Chris, to David's. point, which I don't dispute--. I don't dispute the types of candidates.

that he's talking about are being successful. What I'm asking is, is the mechanism, and machine, and factory that we've set up around them--. isn't that designed to actually ring what David's talking. about out of the process? CHRIS HAYES: So I think that there's two distinct points. I think to make here. So one is-- and let me start with the defense. of political consultants, because I'm not one. So I'm not just talking my book. [LAUGHTER].

Which-- which is to say, you know, there's this great line that James Q. Wilson wrote. is his famous book about bureaucracy, right? And he's-- you know, everyone hates bureaucracy, right? But he's like, what is bureaucracy? Well, bureaucracy is the thing that allows. a bunch of 19-year-olds to-- to run an aircraft carrier, right? And the-- the point of bureaucracy, right, is that you-- you have the normal distribution. of talent, OK? You don't get to just be like, well, only the best people are going to run an organization. No, you're going to have some that are good, some that are bad. And what a bureaucracy does is it figures out. how to take the normal distribution of talent inputs.

and try to make a fucking--. functioning institution. So think about--. JON STEWART: Did you just say fucking institution and then--. [LAUGHTER]. CHRIS HAYES: Fucking institution. JON STEWART: Right. CHRIS HAYES: So think about politics at scale, right? Like, yes, you want to recruit good candidates. But also, there'll be some that are good. There'll be some that are amazing. There'll be some that are not so good, right? So you're dropping into a whole bunch of places at scale. Think of all those state races, all those, like, contests. You need some kinds of mechanisms. that are going to work across that distribution. And-- and-- and that's-- that's an inescapable.

part of the enterprise. Now, the place where I think this critique is true. is on this question of risk aversion. And right now, to David's point, Democrats have to look into the-- the void, which is, the Democratic Party brand is unpopular. You are playing from behind at a certain point. If you're playing from ahead, you can be more risk averse--. risk averse. If you're playing from behind, you got. to throw the ball downfield. And so I think the Democratic Party and consultant class has.

to internalize this idea of taking. risks because you are behind. Because the brand is not very good right now. And that means not just conserving what you have. You are not up a few scores with five minutes left. JON STEWART: You're saying, don't play prevent defense. CHRIS HAYES: Don't play prevent defense. And I do think-- and look, there are races where you. should play prevent defense. Like, I would have not told Spanberger, hey, you should do five debates down the stretch. in the last two weeks--. absolutely not. You're up 10 points! Don't do that, right? But generally, I think the risk calculation.

of the Democratic Party--. its leadership generally is too risk averse. And let me just say one last thing. The shutdown's a great-- great example. They have pursued a fairly high-leverage and high-risk. strategy around the shutdown. And I think it has-- it has redounded to their benefit. And I think a more risk-averse strategy, which is, people are going to blame us. We're the party out of power. It's going to be bad, all this stuff these. This-- these elections happened against that backdrop.

I think the-- the higher-risk, higher-leverage strategy they. pursued has been rewarded. And I think that should be a lesson for everyone about what. your general risk profile is. DAVID PLOUFFE: Yeah. Can I just say two things, Jon? So I agree with that. I think, you know, last night, again, couldn't have gone any better for the Democratic Party--. amazing night. I think one of the risks is there. will be a sense that things are better than they are. JON STEWART: Right. DAVID PLOUFFE: So we have to guard against that. CHRIS HAYES: Exactly. So-- so now we can get conservative. DAVID PLOUFFE: Right. So I will say--.

JON STEWART: Oh, man, I'm going to-- oh. All right, you finish up. And then I'm going to yell at both of you. DAVID PLOUFFE: Yeah, OK. But-- but I think that the-- the one. place where I think there--. it is-- I mean, data makes us all smarter, right? We use it in the media business. We use it in the private sector. We use it in politics. I think there has been this movement towards, like, trying to evaluate everything you. do through the cost per vote. And, you know, you do ad testing. So you create 50 different ads you could run, whether they be social media or TV. And, you know, one is a 3.2 out of 5, and one is 3.5.

So should we run the 3.5? And I think we've really fucked ourselves in that regard. And I think that's where some caution comes in. Because I think the other thing about best campaigns are is, you're trying to tell a story here. And the forest is more important than the trees. And you really have to think about, I think, not necessarily-- you kind of got to go a little bit more. with your gut. It's like Luke Skywalker, you know, in the X-wing, you know, basically puts away the technology. and just goes with his gut, right? And I think we could use more of that, right? Because-- and-- but here's the other thing, Jon.

Plenty of consultants-- I've made plenty of mistakes. There's some good consultants, as Chris said, some bad consultants. But the best candidates also don't get bullied around. by their consultant teams. They say, I'm not going to say that, or I want to say that. So your job is to figure out-- like, Barack Obama would. say this to me all the time. I'm going to say the thing don't think I should say, so let's figure out the best way to say it. CHRIS HAYES: Right. JON STEWART: So let me-- here's my visceral reaction to--. to parts of the conversation. One is this idea that, because the Democrats. are in the wilderness, they must take risks.

But once they take those risks and gain a little bit more. of a foothold, they must once again retreat. DAVID PLOUFFE: No, I don't think they should. I'm worried they're going to be tempted to, but they shouldn't. CHRIS HAYES: Yeah, yeah. JON STEWART: OK. But the second part of it is-- is this. Democrats, I think, do really well running. on the audacity of hope. And Democrats fuck things up by governing on the timidity. of what they believe is possible through the rule. change that are the norm--. the American government is complex to the extent.

that, if you want to stop something from happening, there are enough poison pills in whatever Amendment A of 13. You could make it so that we can't do anything. But it's also complex enough that, the truth is, you. can find a way to do anything. You can subvert those very same things, as we see Trump doing with, well, it turns out, in 1803, there was an emergency that they declared.

based on getting a steamboat. And so that's why I'm allowed to send. the Navy wherever I want. Like, it's about imagination and about resilience, but it's about clarity. And my fear is this process that we're talking about, this analytics process that is overly reliant on these teams. that you discuss, that the very nature of that-- you're right. Candidates can ignore it.

But when it-- when there's something there, generally it will be used. DAVID PLOUFFE: Yeah. JON STEWART: And generally, I think it has gotten too big, too expensive. Have you seen-- there is a great. video of Mike Donlin being--. testifying in Congress about what he would have gotten. if Joe Biden had been elected. And they were like, so what did he pay you? And you know, Mike is very thoughtful. And you think, like, is he thinking? Or is he, like, should I even fucking say this?

Like, this is terrible. He's like, well, what did they give you? Well, you know, I got $4 million for that. And you're like, for what? And then he goes, and if they got elected, what would have gotten? And he's like, eh, I don't remember. Maybe another $4 million? And you're like, that can't be real. And so my point is, this thing has its own--. it is a complex that will not cede its own power. And I think it is to the detriment of-- of governance. and good candidates.

DAVID PLOUFFE: Well, I'll take this opportunity to make clear, I volunteered for Kamala Harris's campaign. and had no win bonus, OK? [LAUGHTER]. JON STEWART: Tell it to Congress, bluff! [LAUGHTER]. DAVID PLOUFFE: Yeah, Jon, I will say this. This is actually more about people who've. won office than campaigns. And this is not just about consultants. I do think where the caution has hurt. us is, like, we are not as comfortable. as we need to be about ex--. executing all the levers to gain power,

maintain it, and use it, OK? So even after last night, you're seeing some state. legislators in states, Democrats saying, oh, we don't need to change our lines to respond to what. the Republicans are doing. Because look, we're going to have a great year next year. Like, we have to gain every House seat we can. By the way, that's not popular with the general electorate, necessarily. CHRIS HAYES: No. DAVID PLOUFFE: But it's what's required structurally to make. sure we win the House back. Like, every state, Illinois, Virginia, Maryland,

every one where there's a potential to win 1, 2 or 3 more. House seats, we have to do it. Because the Republicans aren't going to let up. Some of the things around Supreme Court reform. and other challenges that I think. don't necessarily poll well--. but at the end of the day, I think, are required to make the progress we need as-- as. a country. So I think that's where some of the caution. comes in when we acquire power. And-- and I think that's much to our detriment. I think we have to change the way we think about it, which is, you know, we need a lot more Bobby Kennedy. in the party than Teddy Kennedy in the party,

which is we just need a ruthless MF'er who understands, none of it matters, no how-- no matter how good your ideas. are and no matter how strong your values. are if you don't win. Because it's worthless if you don't have the power, and for the time you have it, you try and deliver. for the American people. So I just think that's a place where. we have definitely, if not failed, been far from ideal. I don't know what you think, Chris. CHRIS HAYES: Well, to Jon's point, I think the-- the Trump example is so illuminating, right,

because, at one level, like, I have these moments where. they're like, he does something and I feel, like, a little bit of, like, an illicit thrill, where it's like--. [LAUGHTER]. JON STEWART: 10% of intel, I like it. CHRIS HAYES: Like, I guess you can just do that. Like-- and here's what I would say. I think you're-- you're identifying something. absolutely true in the culture of Democratic Party politics, which I know better than the culture. of Republican Party politics, which.

is a kind of lawyer brain. And I say this, you know, married, and deeply. in love with, and admiring of my wife, who's an incredible lawyer--. JON STEWART: Incredible lawyer-- and by the way, Strict. Scrutiny, a fine podcast. CHRIS HAYES: Thank you very much. I-- I agree wholeheartedly. JON STEWART: We love her very much. CHRIS HAYES: So-- so--. [LAUGHTER]. JON STEWART: Yeah, let the record show that, Chris Hayes--. CHRIS HAYES: Held up my Strict Scrutiny logo. No, but here's-- here's-- here's the point. Two things have-- I think I take away from Trump, right? One is, oh, my God, you need lawyers,

and you need people that respect the law. And it's crazy to have this, like, bulldozer approach. But the second thing is there's some place between what Trump's. doing and no, we can't do that, because it's never been done. that way, or because there's some memo somewhere that says. we can't that allows for more innovation, and creativity, and aggression--. I use that word advisedly--. in pushing the envelope a little more than Democrats. have been comfortable doing.

And that, to me, is one lesson. You do not want the lawlessness of Trump. But what you do, I think, want to copy. is a little bit of this spirit of, like, it's a malevolent creativity in-- in the case. of-- of Stephen Miller-- but a little bit. of innovation and creativity. What-- you know, to what you were saying, David, where-- where Obama said, I'm going to say it, so figure out how to do it. Like, I want to do this. What can we do that is within the law to get there? Now, maybe it's never been done before. Or maybe it might face a legal challenge.

But I want you to tell me how to legally. do what I want to do. JON STEWART: You need a Jon U, somebody that can go in there. and go, just call it enhanced interrogation, and you'll be fine. CHRIS HAYES: Right. Well, that illustrates the perils of it, right? But I do think, like, again, it's not one or the other. But I do think one of the lessons. here is be a little more envelope. pushing on-- on some of this stuff when you do have power. JON STEWART: Right. And the other thing is-- because right now, we're still. talking about, in some respects, the permission structure to do things. CHRIS HAYES: Yeah. JON STEWART: Right?

The second part of that argument--. and it's one I want to get your-- your guys' opinion on--. is what it is you want to do through that. permission structure. And I think that's another area for Democrats. And I'll use the ACA as an example. And it's the one I kind of always go back to-- which is, Democrats at their heart--. I truly believe this. Forget about when-- you know, the platitude of health care. is a right. It's not a right. It's a commodity. And it's a commodity that doesn't serve itself. well in the marketplace, because there's.

too many externalities for it to function properly. So there's got to be a way to deliver. health care to the people. Now, the Democrats go through this incredible process. to get the ACA--. and absolutely got more people insurance. But I think if you asked most Democrats at their heart, is that what was wrong with our health system, they would. say, no. What they would say is it's too complicated.

No matter what, even if I have insurance, if I still get sick, I still go bankrupt. 40% of us are spending too much money on insurance premiums, to the point where we have to make different decisions. about where we're going to eat, or what we're going to drive, or any of those other things--. so not just the permission structure being streamlined. Are Democrats also not audacious enough. in how they fix the problems? Is that something that you would. also put into the equation? Chris, start with you.

CHRIS HAYES: I think the subsidy. fight right now is a perfect illustration of it, right? Because at one level, the Democrats. are on the right side of this, both politically. and substantively, OK? So people's premiums are going to skyrocket. We've all seen. We've heard the interviews. We've seen the screenshots, right, of-- of them. And they want to pass these subsidies to stop that price. spike from happening, right? But then when you take a step back, you're like, wait a second. Wait. Why is this happening? JON STEWART: Right. CHRIS HAYES: Well, emergency subsidy. support was initially a temporary COVID.

piece of legislation. And when Republicans critiqued that, they've got a little point. You're like, wait a second. JON STEWART: They do. CHRIS HAYES: There's something wrong with the structure--. JON STEWART: Mm-hmm. CHRIS HAYES: --such that what's necessary is more subsidies. to keep the cost down, right? JON STEWART: And remember, Chris, though, connect that to why that's in there in the first place. Because the reason it's in there in. the first place is that was--. the program was designed so that insurance. companies wouldn't fight it. It wasn't designed because they thought that was. the right thing to do. CHRIS HAYES: No, right.

JON STEWART: That was the thing they thought. they could get away with. CHRIS HAYES: And I think-- and David was there. So I'll let him speak-- speak on this. JON STEWART: Yes. CHRIS HAYES: But the last thing I'll just say is, one thing that I think you are identifying that I think is. a broader question is-- and you see it in this question about. affordability, right, which shows up everywhere, cost of living--. is a Democratic policy approach that. has been to sort of let the market work, and then do aftermarket transfers-- often subsidies, subsidies for solar, subsidies for electric cars,

subsidies for insurance premiums, right? SNAP is a subsidy, right? These are all different ways of-- and I believe in that. I'm a liberal, right? But like, what would it look like to make policy such. that the prices were lower? [LAUGHTER] Right? Or people had higher wages--. JON STEWART: Hot dog! CHRIS HAYES: --so that you didn't have to do. all the aftermarket transfer? JON STEWART: Ta-da! CHRIS HAYES: Now, easier to say on a podcast than to get. passed, honestly. Because you're right that the--. the thing that killed previous health. reform was the insurance industry.

was dead set against it. This stuff is complicated. But I think the thing you're identifying. and I agree with is the current model. in Democratic policymaking tends to be, we have market distributions, and then. we have aftermarket transfers and subsidies. And that takes the heat off. JON STEWART: With no controls. So as it skyrockets, a great example-- and David, we'll get to your response, as well. CHRIS HAYES: Tuition. Tuition is a great example. JON STEWART: Here was the Democratic plan. on student loan. CHRIS HAYES: Yes. JON STEWART: Student loan plan was, what if we forgive some of it?

And everyone's like, sure, I guess? But are we going to-- that's-- the problem isn't that. That's the Band-Aid. CHRIS HAYES: Yep. JON STEWART: That doesn't in any way--. CHRIS HAYES: The costs need to come down. This is the key thing. JON STEWART: That's right. CHRIS HAYES: How's-- the-- the three pillars of middle. class life, which are education, housing, and health care, right? JON STEWART: There you go. CHRIS HAYES: Can you go to the doctor? JON STEWART: Child care and elder care. CHRIS HAYES: Can you live in a place? And can you get your kids educated, OK? And child care and that. The cost of all those things are too high. Now, you can subsidize against them. You could-- and that's important.

But some question of, how do we get the costs down, how do we keep the cost down, I think. is-- is key at a policy level. JON STEWART: David, jump in. DAVID PLOUFFE: Well, first of all, I agree with that. I think, as a party, we have rightly spent, I think, most of our economic time talking about, not just the creation of jobs, but growth of wages. We should keep doing that. But from a math standpoint, if you're a family, there's-- you wage growth. But obviously, you want costs to rise either less. or ideally come down. So I think, for the Democrats to view that as a Manhattan.

Project, writ large-- and that works across ideology-- which. is, I'm going to basically be on that wall trying to bring. down every cost I can for you. At the same time, we try and grow wages-- is great. I would say, first, on the ACA, there is just--. no one wants to talk about political reality. But the political reality is that's all that could pass, even though we had Democrats--. JON STEWART: See, I've--. I've got to disagree with that and say, you make political reality. And the reason I say that is I was--. we did the PACT Act. And we did Zadroga. And I was told over and over again what.

the political realities were. And we bent the political realities. We did. DAVID PLOUFFE: Well, you did heroic work, right? So--. JON STEWART: No, no, no, it wasn't heroic work. DAVID PLOUFFE: It was. And it was effective. And it was against the odds. JON STEWART: It was shitty work in the trenches--. DAVID PLOUFFE: No. Yes. JON STEWART: --with-- with groups. that, day in and day out, were relentless. And so when I'm told--. and I can tell you, when we were writing that bill, how many times we were in a room with VSOs, Veterans.

Service Organizations, and--. and representatives of veterans within Congress. who would negotiate against themselves. in the bill based on what they thought they could get done. And the hardest part of us working with them was. convincing them to fight for what they thought. would fix the problem. That was the hardest part. DAVID PLOUFFE: Right. Well-- Jon, so here's what I would say. I mean--. JON STEWART: Yeah.

DAVID PLOUFFE: One, that was a time where, while we had. Democratic majorities, we had four. Democratic senators in the Dakotas, Georgia, Louisiana, blue dog districts. Like, yeah, maybe there would have been a better. way to sell a public option. But I refuse to trash the fucking ACA, which has delivered 20 or 25 million people health care. JON STEWART: That's my job. DAVID PLOUFFE: It-- it didn't fix the system, OK? [LAUGHTER] But-- but let me tell you. This is important. You want to get back to polling and consultants? JON STEWART: Yeah. Yeah. DAVID PLOUFFE: Obama takes office in the financial crisis,

has to bail out the auto industry, do more with the banks. Support for health care reform was in the toilet. And that wasn't because of bad storytelling. Because the American people were saying, you know what? We-- we sort of want this sort of notionally. But like, this has nothing to do with me losing my job. And he and a lot of Democrats-- who almost all those Democrats. then lost their seats--. took a tough vote. So I disagree with you that the public option. could have been passed if we had been. smarter or more effective. Maybe I'm wrong about that.

But it got all we can. And I think it's paid big dividends. I do think, given not just general election voters, young voters, everyone's dissatisfied. with the status quo, too. So I think you raise a really important question. I think whether it's our health care system, our education system, how we're going to do with AI, an aging. population, the climate crisis, deficits out of control, I think there's more opening for Democrats to be more bold. JON STEWART: No question. DAVID PLOUFFE: Right? I really do agree with that. And so I hope we see some people. running for president who are willing to tackle these things.

And by the way, the other thing is, I think. our politics is too small. Like, we should win every election we can. And sometimes that's just because we want to cut taxes. for the middle class, and they want. to cut them for the wealthy. Or we want to give people health care, we don't. That's very, very important. It's the lives people are living right now. We have to win those debates. I also think people are hungry for, like-- there's some scary shit happening out there. And kind of what your view as a potential president. about how to deal with it--. I think there's an opening for that. So I think that this is-- back to your point about caution. I'd like to see more Democrats let it rip and say,

this is the world we ought to live in, even though there's. complexities along the way. I think we would be well served as a country and a party. if we did that. [THEME MUSIC]. JON STEWART: You know, I--. I don't know what you guys are doing. out there in the internet, to be honest with you. I don't want to know. I have an idea, actually. And I still don't want to. But I know-- not that I actually know. But, you know, keep it to yourself. And Surfshark helps you do that. Surfshark is a modern VPN designed with the user in mind,

powered by robust security mechanisms, but also designed to be simple and intuitive to use. It's not complicated to keep your internet activities. quiet and safe. Surfshark is a VPN that encrypts all data sent. via the internet, protecting your passwords, private messages, photos, videos, and other sensitive data, whatever that may be. It ensures you stay safe on public Wi-Fi.

by encrypting your data, making it useless for people who steal. it-- not like useful data for those other idiots who are. just out there surfing away. Go to surfshark.com/stewart. And use code stewart at checkout. to get four extra months of Surfshark VPN. That's surfshark.com/stewart to get four months of the VPN. [THEME MUSIC].

CHRIS HAYES: That thing that-- that David just. said about the country we want to live in, like, I think. about this a lot-- about the notion of the American dream, and how animating it is, and how sort of distant. it seems from our politics. But I think a lot-- like, OK, let's just start. from, like, total blank slate. Like, what do you want out of your life, OK? JON STEWART: CHRIS HAYES: Right. And you know, a certain percentage of people. want to be, you know, famous, and wealthy, and-- and--. and end up in sort of top, you know, percent of the distribution. But I think most people, it's like--. I heard Lula give a speech in Brazil. once about this, where he basically talked about,

like, you want a weekend barbecue with your friends. and family where you--. [LAUGHTER]. --where you crack a beer-- no, literally. JON STEWART: Well, that's Brazil. CHRIS HAYES: Right. But he talked about, like, a little bit of space. where you can crack a beer. And your-- and your family's friends are over. JON STEWART: You want to be able to breathe. CHRIS HAYES: And like, I think about, like, well, let's get back to the most basics. What do we want to-- what is the thing we want. to be achievable, which is, like, a little bit of space. for my family, a good education, health care,

a job that I don't hate, and a sense that I have. a little space, like, take a vacation, and have people over for a barbecue. The thing we think of, like, The American Dream, like--. this certain level of comfort, not, like, luxury. You know, that really feels out of touch. It really feels like we have a sorting hat in America. And-- you-- you-- it sorts you into, like, drudgery and brutal--. brutal trying to make ends meet.

Or like, a few people end up at the very top. There's a kind of class in between them. who are always fearful of falling down. But I do think that it's useful for both policy and politics. to start with that project of, like, what do. we want to provide to people--. JON STEWART: Yes! Boy, that's a nice point. I love that. CHRIS HAYES: --as the thing at the end of all this? JON STEWART: Yes! CHRIS HAYES: And doesn't have to be a yacht. It's, I want to have a barbecue, and crack a beer, and have a little bit of space, and, like, that-- you know, the-- these basic things. DAVID PLOUFFE: Yeah.

JON STEWART: I think that's an excellent point. And it speaks to maybe something-- right now, I think we are in a cycle that's a little bit. of a lazy Susan of populism. And it's either going to be coming around--. you know, and Bannon understood this very, very well--. which, you know, if I can take my nativist shit. and fuse it with populism that brings in, I'm going to be able to peel away enough working. class people in a variety of minorities. that I'm going to get my--. you know, my anti-woke project and-- and be. able to work that through. And the Democrats, I think, were slow to recognize.

They-- they used the language of populism but without, in some respects, the understanding of--. so I'll give you an example. And Dave, you speak to this. Let's tax the billionaires. We shouldn't have billionaires. And people are like, oh, OK. What are you going to use the money for? [LAUGHTER]. Like, if they don't believe, well, we're going to do-- we're going to forgive student loans. You're like, right. But if-- to my point, if you don't tie. money to value for people--.

and that's the missing piece. And it's so frustrating to watch. Like, going back to the Kamala thing, 107 days was not enough time. OK, it's been a year. Where's the non-incremental policies that aren't platitudes. that tie money to value? Why is it so hard to develop nationally for the Democrats? DAVID PLOUFFE: Well, I think it's. not going to come nationally. I think it's going to come from individual candidates, right? Mamdani had his flavor of that. JON STEWART: Interesting. Yeah, yeah.

DAVID PLOUFFE: It's not going to come from Washington. It's not going to come from the DNC. It comes from candidates. And ultimately, our party will be. defined by our next nominee--. but until then, by these candidates in '26. So, Jon, I'm glad you raised this, because there's this--. I find it frustrating--. debate, which is, is it populism, or is it abundance? And, you know, the truth is, they swim together. So to your point, people would like. to see the wealthy pay more. Some of that-- a lot of that might even be. punitive, which is not fair. It's not as strong as it should be, because people don't.

believe that the proceeds will be spent in a way that delivers. results for them, right? JON STEWART: Mm-hmm. DAVID PLOUFFE: So this is where, as a party, if we can be. much more focused about that--. and even being transparent when it's not working, right? So if we ask the wealthy to pay more, we can both begin to pay down our deficit, but also invest in things that are working. Right now, people aren't sure that the stuff. we want to invest in is going to pay dividends. And so if you look at a Mamdani, or Sherrill, or Spanberger, just to use them as examples, they're going to try and do some things. Now they're executives, which means. half their job is just dealing with bad shit.

that happens on my watch. [LAUGHTER]. JON STEWART: Exactly. DAVID PLOUFFE: But then they're going to have stuff. they're going to try and pass. And they'll be successful in some and unsuccessful. But when they are, they're--. I think one thing we have to do a better job. is-- is doing the same kind of intensive storytelling. we do during a campaign when we're in government, which is, we pass this. And now-- a month from now, this person. was able to get their small business open more fast. Or this person was actually able to get, you know, free training to become a plumber--. or whatever it is. And then when that stuff's not working, say it's not working.

But if we fuse these things together-- which is, yes, we would like the wealthy to pay more. I don't think it's really--. we're still a country, by the way, people want to be wealthy. They want to be successful. So I'm not sure we should malign it. But say it's just fair for people to pay more so that--. and I think Democrats should say, A, we're going to use some. of that to pay down the deficit, which has gotten dangerously too high. But we're also going to invest in things. And it shouldn't be invest in 20 things. It shouldn't be invest in amorphous things. Be very specific about what you're asking people to pay.

I also think, Jon, we, as a party, should be better--. I think there's a sense from voters--. I've seen this in research-- where they're like, Democrats just seem to want the tax money. And you know, like, it's hard for us to pay the taxes. Like, I'd like to see Democrats-- again, I think Obama and Clinton were good about this-- which. is, hey, if we're going to ask you to pay any taxes, we're going to be, like, so watchful of that. We're going to make it pay off. We're going to ask you to pay as little as--. JON STEWART: Respect for the tax payer. DAVID PLOUFFE: Yes! JON STEWART: That's right. DAVID PLOUFFE: Right? Which is, we get--. JON STEWART: Not be flippant about it.

Yeah. DAVID PLOUFFE: To Chris's point, if you pay taxes, you know, you want to go on vacation. You don't want to be in debt. You know, you'd like to be able to big holiday and birthday. gifts for your families. You know, any kind of taxes that you pay. makes, you know, that a little bit harder. And so I think we need to be seen as much more watchful. But I do think that, if you put together the populist side. of the wealthy and big businesses paying more, if we strengthen the other side of that to what end, and people believe it a little bit more strongly, and clearly, and we do good storytelling about that,

we will be stronger. But I agree with you. It's not as strong as it should be. Because people question, OK, I'd. like the wealthy to pay more, but I'm not sure. that that-- what am I going to get out of it, other than I'm. happy they're paying more? JON STEWART: We-- we don't connect it to their lives--. DAVID PLOUFFE: Yes. Yes. JON STEWART: --in a way that is-- that is meaningful. Well, it's even-- I don't know if you've ever seen this. And-- and unfortunately, I can't remember. the site that we went on. We once went on a site that basically. breaks down your tax bill. And it's, like, 10 different--. CHRIS HAYES: Taxpayer receipt, yeah. JON STEWART: Taxpayer receipt-- 10 different tranches.

Well, the first five tranches, unless you're. very old or very, very poor, you don't see any of it. It's military, Medicare, Medicaid, service of the debt, and something else that has really. no bearing on the overwhelming majority of people's lives. So it's there in stark relief, that. disconnect that-- that you're talking about. CHRIS HAYES: Yeah, I mean, the-- most of it is--. I mean, 70% of the budget is social insurance,

Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and defense, right? That's-- that-- that is what, you know--. JON STEWART: That's kind of it. CHRIS HAYES: Paul Krugman is like, you know, the federal government is an insurance corporation. with-- with an army. JON STEWART: Right. CHRIS HAYES: And that's-- and then everything. else comes after it. JON STEWART: And it spends too much of it on middlemen. to deliver those services that it doesn't. ever use its capacity as the largest. customer of those things. It's like, do you guys remember, you know, when the Biden administration came out and said, hey, everybody, great news, the pharmaceuticals.

are going to let us negotiate the price for 10 drugs. CHRIS HAYES: 10 drugs, right, yeah. JON STEWART: And-- and well, not all 10, like, six of them. But then a couple of years from now, we're going to add these other two. And you're like-- CHRIS HAYES: Which they have. JON STEWART: Right. But how many billions do we spend--. CHRIS HAYES: Right. Right. JON STEWART: --subsidizing these companies? And now, like, that's the worst shark tail--. Shark, uh, uh, Tank deal in history. Like, you know, we're going to give you $100 billion. And what do we get? Maybe we'll negotiate 10. CHRIS HAYES: Well, that's also just--. I mean, part of that, right, is like a-- a camel is a horse. designed by committee, right? It's like--.

JON STEWART: Right. CHRIS HAYES: --the thing that you. get at the end of the process after being in the room. and that-- you know, those were brutal negotiations--. is something that's not as clean and straightforward. I think, to-- to-- to David's point, one of the things that's interesting in the New York. City mayor's race, right--. these promises that Mamdani's made are very--. like, one of them, which is freeze the rent, OK? Now this is really interesting because, A, memorable, B, 2 million people are in rent-regulated apartments. in New York. That's a lot of people. JON STEWART: Right. Yes. CHRIS HAYES: That's not like-- it's. not like some little subsection of people.

And 3, they have the power to do it--. hilariously, because of a law signed by Andrew Cuomo. as governor-- which no one brought this up in the race, but it is really funny. Like, they did actually expand rent regulation, which the governor said. [LAUGHTER]. Now that-- that kind of thing doesn't-- there's a--. that's a little bit of a unicorn, OK? But the reason I bring it up is, to David's point. there about, like, it's direct. It's memorable. It applies to a lot of people, right? Like, this is the kind of thing that. is a use-- is useful both in policy and in governing.

JON STEWART: And simple. CHRIS HAYES: Right now, Eric Adams. is trying to stack the rent boards. so that he sabotages him on the way out. And we'll see if he-- you know, the--. the governing part of it is hard. But when you're looking for things. that you can say to people of like, this is tangible. It's going to affect a bunch of people. And it's-- I can say it in a sentence, you know? That's three words, freeze the rent. And-- and everyone knew--. whether they liked it or not. If you-- some people oppose it. JON STEWART: Sure. CHRIS HAYES: Some of it might work, some of it might not. And that's fine.

JON STEWART: But at least he's fucking trying. CHRIS HAYES: But they know, right? They know it's-- what-- what you're doing. JON STEWART: And it does seem like, look, the argument for government is not. that it does everything great. It's that something's got to be there. to offset the power of corporations. or fill in the gaps on things that corporations won't take on. or can't take on efficiently. And specifically, David, is that--. so this-- let's tie it all together, because I know you guys got to go, and we're going to get to thing-- and you have jobs, and I don't. [LAUGHTER].

So here's where I think it-- it ties it together. We talk about what's needed, which is this really. imaginative new rethink about the government's relationship. to its citizens, and to creating policy, and to being specific, and to being efficient, and to being honest brokers with the taxpayers. about the value that they're getting out of the money.

And that seems like a really important, large project. But if you think about our political world, where's the money? The money is in the consultant strategy pollster class. And this wraps us around to the whole thing. If our priority is the one side of it, why do we spend so much money, and so much time, and-- and--.

on the other side of it to the neglect of the part that we. think will deliver better results for people. and better electoral results? How-- how has that happened? DAVID PLOUFFE: Well, I think, Jon, you know, New York's a good example of this, where I think Mamdani is charting an important course. Daniel Lurie is doing the same thing in San Francisco. I think Spanberger and Sherrill will, as well. So I think that that reimagination that is still. deeply progressive, that believes there's.

some things only government can do, or there some things only government can start, and we're going to invest in that, and we're going to be transparent about what's. working, that should be core to who we are. And I think you're going to see more candidates emerge. I do think what is interesting, the more we see--. whether it's an Osborne or a Plattner on one end, you know, people like Sherrill and Spanberger. who come out of the national security, Mamdani, these are all different flavors of Democrats. And what I think is exciting about that--. I think those people can be successful. But it means more people like them will come out.

And we'll see more Democratic candidates emerge. who, hopefully, start with--. obviously, I deeply oppose what Trump and the Republicans. are doing. But I also think we've not done a good enough job. as the Democratic Party of meeting the moment, either. politically or substantively. And I think the rubber really hits. the road in executive offices. And legislators, for the most part, can just gasbag their way through their career, right? But executives have to make decisions. And that's why I'm excited about a Lurie in San Francisco, or a Mamdani in New York-- philosophically.

seem very different. But they seem very focused on just making. their cities work better for working people. and for small businesses. JON STEWART: And be livable. DAVID PLOUFFE: And I think that can really show the way-- yeah, and livable. Because that's important. I think that's another place where, you know, there's a lot of people who thought. that the Democratic Party-- and I'm not saying all Democrats. But we weren't as focused on the people that. are living their lives today. And they deserve to feel safe, and go to a good school, and you know, be able to open a business. without it taking four years and, you know, 50 lawyers.

And like, Mamdani talked-- even though he's. a Democratic socialist, as-- as well about government. working for people and changing as any Democrat. I've seen in recent times. And so I have a lot of hope there. CHRIS HAYES: I'll throw one more name into this--. which I think is really a useful model-- is Michelle Wu. up in Boston, who-- who is--. is progressive, has-- has governed as a progressive. and has also been, I think, incredibly effective. Her approval ratings are through the roof. She didn't even have a challenger.

She's one of the most popular mayors in America. And again, this is, like, proof is in the pudding stuff, right? Like, you know, you don't-- if it doesn't go well, you-- people are not happy at that level of governance. And I think a lot of the stuff that she's done in Boston is--. is really interesting and shows that, like, this-- this transition from campaign to government, which is really hard, is also not insurmountable. Like, you can do a good job and then be rewarded. by the voters who say-- [LAUGHTER].

No, I'm serious. Like--. JON STEWART: No, that's-- CHRIS HAYES: --we like this. Like, this is good. JON STEWART: Of course. CHRIS HAYES: Like, thank you. DAVID PLOUFFE: Well, and one other example--. and he's not the only one-- but Josh Shapiro in Pennsylvania. JON STEWART: Yeah, right. DAVID PLOUFFE: I mean, one of the things he's worked on is--. let me look at all the jobs that. people in Pennsylvania are--. would like to have. And where are we making the licensing. requirements too burdensome in terms of time or money? How do we make it easier for somebody. to achieve their dream? JON STEWART: Yeah. DAVID PLOUFFE: That's an example of great governance, which is connected to, like, progressive values, which is, we want working people to have more.

economic stability and the ability. to grow and build wealth. But it's connected to, like, what's in their way? And what's in their way isn't always. just the Republican Party. Sometime, it's just regulation or laws that might. have made sense 40 years ago. JON STEWART: It's sometimes the Democratic Party, too, that--. DAVID PLOUFFE: Right. JON STEWART: --to solve one problem, you have to solve every problem within that. We need more housing, but it also has to be carbon neutral, and it also has to blah, blah, blah. [LAUGHTER]. And there also have to be LGBTQ--. you know, it's all that stuff. Because if you think about Trump, you know, foreign authoritarian,

he's really unpop--. like, when authoritarians generally take over countries. and do things by executive fiat, they generally become quite popular quite quickly. It wanes over time. But even guys like Duterte, and Sisi, and all these other--. CHRIS HAYES: He's doing a weird backwards version of it. I've never seen-- it's truly bizarre. Yes. JON STEWART: It's-- to see a guy. go in and go, I'm just going to do it the way I want to do it. And that's-- normally, that brings. a certain order to people that have been feeling chaotic. This is the opposite. But to get back to the original point of-- of that,

for all those things that you say, can the Democratic Party pivot and spend the money that. we're talking about more wisely in terms of governance. on the very things that we're talking about, rather than the things that--. rather-- can we make their analytics departments smaller. caller and make their connecting to voter.

departments larger? Will that happen? Or do you think it doesn't need to? DAVID PLOUFFE: No, of course, it does. And I actually think-- another--. connected to this is, I think there is--. you know, there are some Democratic politicians, those. seeking office and those who have attained it, who would like to do something, but they're. worried that some part of their base or a group. will be opposed. Housing is a great example of this, right? I mean, some of the people who've opposed housing. in some states, like, build more housing. and public transportation, are environmentalists--.

love environmentalists. But like-- like, housing is a great example where, if I'm a governor or a mayor, like--. and some of our-- like, Newsom's really, I think, pulled a lot of the red tape out. But like, it's a mathematical. Like, we need in North Carolina a million and a half houses. Or we need 2 million in New York, or 5 million. in the Southwest. And just say, you know what? Nothing matters to me, except reaching that goal. Why? Because our economy will be stronger. People will be safer, people to build wealth. People will have shelter if we have housing. And so a good Democratic candidate, I think,

would say, you know, we're going to make. it a lot easier to build. We're going to make it a lot cheaper to build. By the way, things like modular housing, which, you know, there's obviously some controversy around that, because that doesn't create as many union jobs. But like, that's part of the solution. Like, I think, Jon, part of this is, like, there's always reasons not to do things. But if you're faithful to your central goal--. so in housing, it would be, I need to build this many units. over the next five years. You're not going to get to let anything. get in the way of that goal.

And you're also going to narrate your progress. and your setbacks along the way so people know that, like, the thing you campaigned on, the thing that was important. is-- you're working on it every day. This is basic stuff, but it's really important. CHRIS HAYES: And to the last point on-- just to-- to finish. this here-- on the analytics, you also have to understand, you're going to go through, like, a Valley of Death in public opinion when you're doing. it, often--. which is, sometimes people voted for you to do this thing. They want to do this thing. And while you're doing it, they're like, I don't know about this. And you have to-- [LAUGHTER].

No, I mean this is-- JON STEWART: Yeah. CHRIS HAYES: --congestion pricing. JON STEWART: Hold. CHRIS HAYES: Congestion pricing is a great example. The ACA is a great example. That's where this question of the analytics. and the polls versus your gut and your North Star. really come to play. DAVID PLOUFFE: Yeah, great point. CHRIS HAYES: Because you have to say, I campaigned on this. I know this is going to be good on the other side. I understand why people are not happy right now. They're having second thoughts. And I'm going to do it, anyway. Because I'm betting on what I promised. And if they don't like it at the end of it, then I'm out. Then they get rid of me because I was wrong. JON STEWART: Then they lose. CHRIS HAYES: But that's that really key place,

where you cannot-- you cannot let the analytics. push you off course. DAVID PLOUFFE: That's a great point. And-- and you know, what it tells us is--. I always-- working in the West Wing, the thing that was furthest from The West Wing show. was actually working in the West Wing. But what Chris just described doesn't have to be--. [LAUGHTER]. It doesn't have to be just an Aaron Sorkin screenplay. That can be--. JON STEWART: Like, the president. doesn't just walk in and go, we believe. that all people are equal. DAVID PLOUFFE: Yeah, if only. But I do think that doesn't have to be fantasy.

I think that's a great point. And let the chips fall where they may. JON STEWART: Right. And in this moment of a rare, good day. for the Democratic Party, and for progressives, and for liberals around the country, important to remember for all of us, this can be done. It is not beyond our capabilities. DAVID PLOUFFE: Yeah, you can do stuff. CHRIS HAYES: Yeah. JON STEWART: It can absolutely be done. Guys, I thank you so much for the conversation. Chris Hayes, host of--. MSNBC still? Or what are-- CHRIS HAYES: MS Now as of--.

JON STEWART: MS Now. Is that-- has the change already taken place? CHRIS HAYES: It's, like, in a week, I think. JON STEWART: Is it like setting your clocks back? Are you going to feel weird for, like, a day? And then you'll be fine. [LAUGHTER]. CHRIS HAYES: No, it's fine. I don't-- you know? JON STEWART: Yeah, who cares? Exactly. I'm the same way. CHRIS HAYES: I'm still doing the show. JON STEWART: I worked on Comedy Central. [LAUGHTER] CHRIS HAYES: Right. Exactly. JON STEWART: A name's a name. All In with Chris Hayes, author of the number-one Times best. seller, The Sirens' Call, and David Plouffe, campaign manager, White House senior. advisor to Barack Obama--. guys, thanks very much for the conversation. I really appreciate it. CHRIS HAYES: Thanks, Jon. DAVID PLOUFFE: Thanks, Jon.

[THEME MUSIC]. JON STEWART: There you have it--. very appreciative of-- of their insights. We are short a little bit on time because of the lateness. of when we're producing. So we're just going to go to the thank yous for God's sakes, because, damn, do I have a good staff--. lead producer Lauren Walker, producer Brittany Mehmedovic, producer Gillian Spear, video editor and engineer. Rob Vitola, audio editor and engineer Nicole Boyce, executive producers Chris McShane, Katie Gray--. can't do it without you guys. Thanks again so much.

And we'll see you next time. [THEME MUSIC]. The Weekly Show with Jon Stewart. is a Comedy Central podcast--. is produced by Paramount Audio and Busboy productions. [THEME MUSIC].