Transcript: Trump, Israel, and the Future of Liberal Democracy — with Ezra Klein

But because of that, because it’s not leavened by Trump’s own sense of who he is, they actually lean further into just cruelty oftentimes than he does. There’s nothing else there because it is for them an act that has become real.

Trump’s Popularity and Democratic Response

SCOTT GALLOWAY: So Trump’s popularity is at an all time low for a president in this stage of his presidency. But at the same time, the Democrats are even less popular. And there’s polls showing that if the election were held again today, he would still win. Is this lack of decency working?

EZRA KLEIN: I don’t think when you have watched popularity drop as fast as President Trump’s has, you can say it’s working. What’s not working is the Democratic Party being leaderless and rudderless. I’m not shocked that at the moment, if you ask people in a poll who they’d vote for, they don’t really know what to say, which Democrat, what do they know about them?

But the Democratic Party is in a pretty shattered place. I’ve had a little bit of more trouble than other people do, or let me put it differently, I’m a little bit less confident than other people seem to be in interpreting those polls, because one of the structural characteristics of the past couple decades is people’s dislike of the parties is getting higher and higher and higher, and it doesn’t drive their voting decisions in quite the way it has at other times.

Nevertheless, they do not like the parties. And so one of the reasons Democratic Party is very unpopular right now is Democrats do not like it. Now, those people are not going to vote Republican, but they are pissed off at the Democratic Party, which has to them been unable to stop the worst of what Trump is doing, which is to them not come up with a message or come up with a set of leaders.

It’s going to have to be a process of – first it’s going to be the midterms and they’re going to figure out how to be in opposition in a way that coheres, but there’s going to be a process of having to find leaders again. This is the first time the Democratic Party has been leaderless in a very long time.

Even if you go back to something like 2008, you had Hillary Clinton as the heir apparent for some time, and that obviously ended up being Obama. So you had the assumed leader. You had real rising talent. This is the most open field for leadership in the Democratic Party probably in my lifetime, at least since 92.

At a time when in a way that is very different from 92, the other side, the Trumpian side, is completely coherent around a single leader and is a much more dangerous and very different force. The difference between not having an unbelievably clear opposition leader to George H.W. Bush and not having one to Donald Trump – those are fairly different scenarios to be in.

The Search for Democratic Leadership

SCOTT GALLOWAY: Yeah, it really is striking. I agree with you. It feels like this is the biggest vacuum I’ve ever observed on either side.

EZRA KLEIN: Do you feel anybody stepping up into it?

SCOTT GALLOWAY: I get a lot – and as I’m sure you do – who do you see emerging? Who do you see as the next leader or leaders of the Democratic Party? And we can have that conversation. And my guess is a lot of the Venn overlap will be about 90% right now.

Everyone loves Andy Beshear because no one knows him that well. Everyone’s hoping for some phoenix to rise. It’s amazing. So they want someone they’ve heard of, but they don’t really know yet. And I think that’s Andy Beshear.

But the question that was presented to me that I want to present to you that I thought was really interesting is what do you think the profile is of the person who will likely emerge as the new leader of the Democratic Party? I don’t think it’s Leader Jeffries. I know it’s not Senator Schumer, but I thought that was an interesting question. What does this person potentially look, smell, and feel like? What are your thoughts?

EZRA KLEIN: Congressional leadership has not served as a public face of the parties for a long time. To what the profile is, the truth is, I don’t know. We tend to get the profile wrong at this stage in an electoral cycle because we tend to be trying to refight the last election.

So I always talk about this, but after the 04 election, which was the last loss that was truly shattering for Democrats, there was a period of time when what they wanted to do was find somebody they felt was tough enough and Christian enough to win back the heartland. You had these sort of booms around people like John Edwards, who’s a Southerner, or maybe it’d be the governor of Montana, and he wore a bolo tie and seemed very tough talking. Maybe they needed a general of some sort. Eventually it’s Barack Obama.

And then in 2012, after Mitt Romney loses, there’s the famed Republican autopsy. And they need to moderate themselves on immigration. And maybe it’s somebody like Marco Rubio. Or Jeb Bush in Florida. Of course it ends up being Donald Trump, which is not on anybody’s mind.

The person who will fit the next moment is not the person who will fit the particular set of problems Democrats faced in the last election. So I think you have to be looking for somebody who seems organic to whatever is coming. I don’t think we’ve seen that person yet. I’m not saying that when we do see it, we won’t know that they won’t have been known by now, but I don’t think anybody has emerged as so right for where we are going with such a command of what seems to be where the country wants to be in a couple of years that I would put them or their profile strongly at the front.

SCOTT GALLOWAY: Yeah. And to be fair to the field out there, at this point, we hadn’t heard of Clinton or Obama. It’s still pretty early.

EZRA KLEIN: I mean, we knew by this point in 05, we probably – the assumption was Hillary Clinton was going to run, but the assumption was Barack Obama would not run yet. I mean, it seemed crazy he had just been elected.

SCOTT GALLOWAY: Well, just to date myself, I had a Paul Tsongas sign in my window in graduate school.

EZRA KLEIN: There you go.

SCOTT GALLOWAY: I remember him.

EZRA KLEIN: I got excited about Gary Hart in 2004.

The Profile of Future Democratic Leadership

SCOTT GALLOWAY: There you go. I’ll put forward a thesis and you push back or validate it. When I was asked that question, I said, I know who’s not going to be. And that is nobody under 5 foot 10. I think the Democrats are not going to take a chance a third time on nominating a woman, despite the fact that some of the stronger candidates are female.

And two, it’s not going to be anyone under the height of 5 foot 10, which is an uncomfortable thing to say out loud. I think America’s highly sexist that what I was comfortable saying was I thought it was an 80 or 90% chance it was going to be a straight white male over the height of 6 foot. Because Democrats would be looking to basically just have no excuses this time.

The Future of Democratic Leadership

EZRA KLEIN: Your thoughts I don’t really buy might be true, just in the sense that plenty of politicians who are going to be significant figures in 2028 are white men over 5 foot 10. I would not count, say, Pete Buttigieg out if you were asking me who’s well positioned. He’s very well positioned and he’s very politically talented. And political talent counts for a lot. And I believe he’s under five’10. I guess I could be wrong about that, but I think that’s right.

So again, it’s often candidates who almost look like everything you would not want from the moment of the last election who end up dominating in the next election. You know, Barack Obama wins after this election. It’s all about flag pins and national security. And here we have this neophyte guy with the middle name Hussein and funny ears from Chicago. Donald Trump at the time when Republicans need to moderate on immigration is coming down saying “Mexico is sending us their murderers and their rapists.”

I’m very careful with any predictions that draw a straight line from how the party is feeling, how it is conceptualized, its loss now to the next. The version of that I would do is the next leader of the Democratic Party will be somebody who is an absolute apex communicator.

I think the thing that happened with Biden, in a different way with Harris, is the party went to these figures who were coalitionally unifying for it, but who were never strong communicators or at least Biden, by the time he was running for president was not a strong communicator in 2020 and definitely in 2024.

And if the party has come, I think, to any view about itself, it’s that it is losing the battle for attention. So if you cannot be a politician who conceptually, whether or not you actually get invited, can go on Flagrant, can go on Theo Vaughn, can go on Pivot, can go on these places where you have to speak extemporaneously.

SCOTT GALLOWAY: And go on Hannity.

EZRA KLEIN: Go on Hannity. Right. So one of the reasons Buttigieg is a fascinating candidate is that he has proven to the party that he more than clears a communications bar. He is considered by most to be the best communicator in the party right now. He’s not the only one. I think a lot of them can do this and some of them are trying. Ro Khanna was just on Flagrant. Wes Moore is going to, I think, be very good on this.

For all that there’s weirdnesses around the way he chose to do it, the fact that Gavin Newsom is sitting down with people he doesn’t agree with week after week and learning how they think and learning how to do that is going to make him stronger. By the time if he decides to run in 2028, he’s getting training. The other ones are not.

So in some ways, the ones I think are going to have a harder time are the ones who are operating under the old communication rules for what is rewarded as caution and not making mistakes. What you’re going to need are people capable of being omnipresent in a way that Joe Biden wasn’t, in a way that Kamala Harris wasn’t willing to do.

The sense that you need somebody authentic to this era of communication, which may even have changed, and I think even has changed from 2024. You’re going to have to have somebody who people feel is capable of winning the communication wars of this moment in these mediums.

Pete Buttigieg and America’s Readiness

SCOTT GALLOWAY: Just to talk about Secretary Buttigieg for a second, do you think America is ready for a gay president? Or more specifically, do you think the black community in South Carolina is ready for a gay president?

EZRA KLEIN: I think that when people ask about which person and how are they able to navigate the concerns and fears people have, here are a couple things I can tell you. When people were doing polling in the period when Joe Biden was, when it seemed like he might step down and it wasn’t yet a complete fait accompli that it would just move to Harris, Buttigieg was, in some of the polls I saw, the best polling Democrat anybody could find. It wasn’t by a ton, just by a couple points, but it was still. He was beating the others. So that’s one thing.

The other thing about Buttigieg is he is capable. He did this in his convention speech, but I’ve seen him do it a lot because I think for him, being married and having a family was something he grew up not knowing if it would be there for him. He is able to do something that some politicians, particularly when they’re sort of firsts in a way can sometimes do, which is that he is able to speak of family and speak of an almost traditional approach to values, to masculinity, to fatherhood, to parenthood, to fidelity in a way that is novel, in a way that imbues it with a kind of wonder and almost holiness.

He is much better at talking about family than virtually any other politician on the field right now. So I think when you say something like, is X and Y group ready for a Z president? Well, what are the stereotypes of Z for them? What have they been taught to fear? And that’s the set of questions that that person is going to have to overcome.

There’s always been something about this question of family and traditionalism and are we breaking something? I mean, this was always a fight about gay marriage for years and years and years before it became the law of the land. And Buttigieg is somebody who, I think, because of how ferocious his commitment to the life he has built a little bit beyond his own expectations is, he is very skilled at talking about that in a way that is fairly beautiful and affecting.

So I don’t know if America’s ready for a gay president. Is it ready for Pete Buttigieg? I think that’s going to be a different question.

The Fracturing of American Jewish Consensus

SCOTT GALLOWAY: So you recently wrote a piece in the New York Times titled “Why American Jews No Longer Understand One Another.” In it, and I thought, by the way, it really resonated with me, in it, you write that the consensus held was that American, or the consensus that held American Jews together for generations has cracked, and that “what is good for Israel is good for the Jews” no longer holds. What do you think ultimately broke that consensus?

EZRA KLEIN: So the piece for me was motivated in this moment by seeing the fights in so many films I knew about, where you would have young Jews in New York who were voting for him, who really liked him, older Jews. And I’m stereotyping a little bit, but this is mostly what I saw. Horrified, who were horrified, who saw him as anti-Semitic.

I’ve been, as I’ve been covering Israel and Gaza and also the politics of it here for a couple years now, feeling this fissure widening and there’s a lot of dimensions to it. The thing I say in that piece is that the consensus that held American Jewry together for a very long time was fundamentally about Zionism. It was that Israel’s good for the Jews and we need to be even in America committed to it. That opposition to Israel, particularly opposition to Israel as a Jewish state, is anti-Semitic. That Israel is seeking a two-state solution and will probably either find one soon or if it doesn’t, it is not their fault.

And as that consensus is broken down for a lot of reasons, but in this moment, because a two-state solution is nothing that Israel wants. And Israel is now, it seems, inflicting a mass starvation event on Gaza, which is broken through to the media and to people. This question of what does it mean to, what is the relationship American Jews should have with Israel and through that with each other has really polarized.

So you’ve had a fair amount of the community polarize around Israel. “We need to defend Israel. They’re living in a neighborhood where everybody wants to kill them. And Hamas could release the hostages if Hamas wanted to. So anything that happens on this is on their shoulders.”

And then another set that is moving away from it, that wants no part of what this is, not just no part of this war, but no part of government after government that is incredibly right wing, that is building settlements in the West Bank at an expanding pace.

And as a two-state solution has functionally dissolved as a live political project, it no longer exists as a kind of parking lot that can reconcile the liberalism of American Jews and their commitment to Israel. If Israel simply intends to rule over 7 million Palestinians, who will not have rights, Palestinian Israelis or Arab Israelis have some rights, but it’s not like what Jewish Israelis have. And then in West Bank and Gaza it’s a horror show.

There is not the capacity anymore to sort of explain that away. And so then what do you do? Do you believe in equality everywhere but in the place meant to be your spiritual home? Do you support what has become of the structure of apartheid? People don’t love the word, but we don’t have that many for it. Where do you end up?

And there’s not an answer right now. There isn’t a solution, a policy move or anything that can sort of reunite these two questions. And Israel itself, its politics have changed dramatically and it is seeking alliance with other right-wing ethnonationalist governments in the way that’s really changing the meaning of Israel on the world stage. So it’s a very tricky and very heartbreaking moment.

Israel’s Evolving Brand and Global Perception

SCOTT GALLOWAY: Yeah, it’s. I would love to hear more about how you personally feel as someone who is an atheist and never felt much connection with Judaism. Mother’s Jewish, I consider myself Jewish, but never really connected with Israel or Judaism. And then October 8th, I decided I was a full blown Zionist. And since then it’s become increasingly hard.

It’s just, the Diaspora, I think, is really conflicted. And when I think about brand Israel, the strongest component of brand Israel, I think used to be that they were seen as the good guys and the David to the Goliath, if you will. And I think that’s no longer the case.

At the same time, I’m curious to get your take here. I think the rest of the world and a certain element of America is really drawn to the strength and victory of Israel. I mean, if you take a look at the Houthis, if you look at Hezbollah, obviously Hamas, I mean, Israel’s taken out Iran effectively or at least now rules the skies over Iran. And I think strength is a fantastic brand association. So the brand is shifting, but there are some, I would argue, elements of the brand that are very aspirational and getting a lot of recognition from around the world. Your thoughts?

The Challenge of Israel’s Global Reputation

EZRA KLEIN: I think if you look on the right, Zionism has come to mean this actually goes, I think, back to our conversation about masculinity at the beginning. Zionism has come to be a symbol of a certain belief in strength. Israel is Sparta, or the closest thing like this world still has in a way to a Sparta.

The issue for that, I mean, I can’t say I really think about too much in terms of brands, but the issue with that is one, it is losing vast amounts of other kinds of support. I mean, France Command said it was going to recognize the Palestinian state. That has not happened before. When you say what Israel means around the world, Israel’s reputation around the world. You look at how Israel is seen around the world and it is terrible, right? I mean, whatever debates we’re having in America, that is not the dominant debate in the rest of the world. The rest of the world is moving very, very, very far away from Israel for the most part. If you go look at, say global polling on Israel.

But you know, back sort of to how I think about it here. One, American Jews overwhelmingly are liberal. They believe in human rights, they believe in multi ethnic democracy. And that’s not accidental. That is the set of ideas and ideals on which American Jews to some degree now European Jews, on which like the safety of the Diaspora is built, right? If the view is you can just dominate your ethnic minorities, then the Jews of the Diaspora are fucked, right? Because we are an ethnic minority wherever we are.

And so it is not accidental that this deep commitment to liberalism as a mode of politics, right, not talking here about like the American left, but the broader thing we mean when we say liberalism runs very deep in American Jewry. And so yes, Israel is moving to where its allies are, people like Donald Trump, right. J.D. Vance, Viktor Orban, sort of right wing, ethno nationalist strongmen.

What does that mean for Israel? Next time Democrats are in power and the democrat who is in power is not 80 some years old and remembers Israel at its founding. What does that mean for Israel in 10 years if it is just accepted that it’s an apartheid state when there’s no more excuses left to be made? So in terms of the long term, I don’t think that’s a very safe place to be.

What is strength going to get you? I mean the ability to execute military operations. But Israel’s not using its strength wisely or judiciously. This morning I woke up and an Israeli commentator I know, I don’t know if it’s published yet, so I don’t want to say who it is, but sent me a piece that he’s been writing and he’s not a person like on the far left just saying if we don’t do something, Sinwar will have won from beyond the grave. Because the way the world is looking at us is Hamas’s ultimate dream that they wanted. Hamas wanted the world to see us as butchers. They wanted to see us as having no respect for Palestine life and to be invested in only domination. And now that is beginning to be what they’re seeing.

And so it’s like in any war, right? The bombings are the easy part. If you have the firepower. It’s always been easier to take out. I mean, Israel has done amazing military operations function for its entire history. Right. It’s knocked out nuclear reactors before, although it needed us in this case to help with that. And we don’t really know how much was done. Like for all we know, in a year Iran is going to pop up with a nuclear weapon. Right. They’re just going to do a sprint in the background. So I don’t know that we know how these stories have ended.

But as with Iraq, as with Afghanistan, as with so many of these, the invasion, the bombing, the shock and awe, if you have the military technology is often the easy part. It’s what do you do when you’re ruling over those ruins. And it is very telling that almost two years now after October 7, Israel still has never put forward a day after planning Gaza. Right. It doesn’t have a vision of how it should be governed because it doesn’t.

SCOTT GALLOWAY: Could a lot of these problems with the brand perception or the perception, the erosion in the sentiment or goodwill towards Israel around the world, which I agree with. Do you think a lot of that could be repaired, quite frankly, if Netanyahu leaves the stage and Israel does a hard pivot away from these policies that one that might, you know, that might go a long way to repairing their reputation and also at the end of the day, isn’t it, I mean, what the world thinks of them is very important, but what the kingdom thinks of them and their neighbors believing that they have kind of exhausted their ability to invade or eliminate Israel, that obviously hasn’t worked. I mean, at the end of the day, could Israel argue this has been worth it?

Beyond Brand Problems: A Reality Crisis

EZRA KLEIN: I don’t know. I mean, you’d have to ask Israel if they think it’s been worth it. And I think obviously, at least its government currently does not obviously worth the deaths of October 7, but. But the cost of their military operations, I guess maybe the place I probably part. I don’t think what Israel has is a brand problem. I think what they have is a reality problem.

I mean, they are currently committing war crimes. There is just no other way to describe. They have choked off food to Palestinians in Gaza, a people under occupation from them. No matter what the insurgent or terrorist group that you’re dealing with wants or doesn’t want or will agree to or will not agree to under the rules of war, you cannot do that. You cannot hold the entire civilian population responsible. The idea that Hamas was stealing the aid has now been looked into and has proven false at any systemic level. And in the west bank they’re building settlements at a torrid rate. There’s a lot more violence against West Bank Palestinians from the treetop or the hilltop youth.

So, yes, I mean, it is the case that Israel could emerge as a kind of brutal ethnostate. I mean, or maybe is a brutal ethnostate that just rules over this and nobody can really do anything about it in the long run. I don’t think that’s stable in the world we live in. But I’m not going to. I don’t want to tell you that, you know, you cannot have brutal states in modernity. You certainly can. I just think that’s a bad thing. I think that it’s going to be a bad thing for Jews worldwide. I think it’s going to be a bad thing for what it means to be Jewish. I think it’s obviously going to be horror for the Palestinians.

I mean, my problem with this is not really so much Israel’s brand. I think we often filter a lot of American conversations when we’re among people who are sort of like committed to the long term health of Israel and the Jews through the question of is it good for Israel and the Jews. But even some world where you can say for Israel’s interests as a state, ongoing domination in an apartheid like structure is good for the way they have defined their interests. I still think it’s bad. Right. That violates my values as a human being and as a political thinker. And so in the long run, it will lose support for that. But I’m not, you know, you could certainly make an argument that it’ll find other. It’ll pick up other support. Maybe it’ll become very close with Russia. Right. You know, there’s always ways to sort of rejigger your alliances alongside your values. But, you know, it comes with a kind of deep cost as well.

SCOTT GALLOWAY: And the term war crimes obviously is a serious term. Do you think America’s guilty of similar war crimes across almost every war it’s engaged in?

EZRA KLEIN: Since World War II, America has been guilty of some war crimes. Mass starvation of civilian populations is usually not one of them. There’s a grid. I don’t know if you’ve read the New York magazine cover story on this. It’d be worth having her on. This has been the people I know who do this work. They think this has moved out of just normal war.

SCOTT GALLOWAY: We’re going to need a bigger boat. So we’re going to. We’re going to move on to local New York politics. Mom. Donnie, your turn.

Mamdani’s Campaign and Governing Challenges

EZRA KLEIN: You know, we’ll see. Right? The guy ran an amazing campaign.

SCOTT GALLOWAY: Yeah, agreed.

EZRA KLEIN: He has often say that there are two kinds of politicians. The kind that communicate about policy and the kind that communicate through policy. And Mamdani is the kind that communicates through policy. Right. Every one of his policies frees the rent, free buses, free daycare, government owned grocery stores. They say something about him, they’re about his values, about how he views society. They’re memetic. The question is, if he wins, and I think you got to see him as a favorite at this point, can he govern effectively?

So a bunch of those policies need a bunch of money. He does not have any control over taxes. He would have to go to Albany and Governor Kathy Hochul, who has said she will not raise taxes. So he, under virtually any scenario we can see, is not going to have the money to do the things he wants to do. Some of them, free buses actually would not be that expensive. You could probably get that from somewhere else in the New York City budget. But in terms of big things, it’s very unlikely he’ll be able to pull together the money for that.

I also think that if he wins, Donald Trump is going to see him as a kind of soft target and go to war with Mamdani. And that will include taking a lot of money or trying to take a lot of money. The federal government flows from the federal government into New York City, away from it. So that could be a sort of crisis, that there’s real questions about how he’ll be able to respond to it.

Then there’s the freeze of the rent dynamic, which for a year or two, and I get why that policy is popular. If you’re living in rent controlled or stabilized housing, or housing that is meant to be affordable and the rent is going up by 10 or 12%, that’s terrible for you. If you do an extended rent freeze, you’re going to reduce the incentive by a lot to repair those buildings and to build new ones. Right. There’s no way of getting around that. So you need to be really opening the floodgates some other way on construction.

And when I look at Mamdani’s proposals, when I’ve talked to him and heard him talk about this, I think a lot of his head is in the right place. I’m not sure he’s willing to disappoint the people he would need to disappoint or wield enough power to really unleash a building boom at an affordable cost for him, really. Most of his plans have focused on publicly public housing, which is great, but new York City has not built public housing at that level in a very, very long time. And whether or not it still can is a little bit unknown. And whether it can, under the kind of laws that it currently has and regulations and deals it has made, it probably can’t if you don’t change those. Will Mamdani be willing to disappoint his friends and pick the fights to change? I don’t know.

So he’s somebody who has an incredible amount of talent. I think it’ll matter a lot who we see him surrounding himself with. Who does he listen to? Who would his police chief be? What would his relationship with the police be like? Who will be helping him run all of this? Right. Will Brad Lander be his first deputy mayor? That would be, I think, one world, and I think that would be an encouraging sign. But I think there is still a lot that is unknown.

The, the transition from being a movement leader, which is what Mamdani is in a campaign context, to being an executive is a very big transition, as you know, as you know better than me. And the question of can he sort of wield executive power and, you know, tack when policies aren’t working out or come up with alternatives when he doesn’t have the money, you know, or kind of browbeat people or make allies you wouldn’t expect him to make and listen to people you wouldn’t expect them to listen to, you know, all that remains to be seen.

Lessons for Democratic Campaigns

SCOTT GALLOWAY: Strikes me that it’s a no brainer if he just has lunch very publicly with Michael Bloomberg once a week up until the election, that if he just pivots to sort of the old guard or softens his image a little bit, kind of rough sands out the rough edges, that he’s a lock, I would think, and I think a lot of people feel a little bit conflicted that say, okay, I don’t love his policies. Some of the things he said in the past are somewhat troubling, but at the same time, I think it’s difficult not to be inspired. Right.

My understanding is 4,000 young Democrats or people under the age of 40 filled out paperwork to run for office after he won, which is a good thing. And what also struck me, and I’m curious to get your thoughts, was how similar it was to the Trump campaign. A focus on affordability and weaponizing these new mediums isn’t. Regardless of what you think of his politics, doesn’t it potentially Mamdani’s victory potentially sort of illuminate a path for Democrats moving forward in terms of how they should be acquitting themselves or prosecuting a campaign.

The Lessons from Mamdani’s Victory

EZRA KLEIN: I’m not sure. There are a lot of lessons from Mamdani, obviously, but I think one of it is find incredible political talents that are well matched to the places they’re running. So look, I mean, the guy wins by, I forget the exact margin in the primary now, but you’re talking about a win I think was in the a little bit over 10 points range in a New York City primary.

SCOTT GALLOWAY: Around 10% of the total vote voted for him, Is that what you’re saying?

EZRA KLEIN: No, no, no. His margin over Cuomo was, I think around 10, 12, 14 points, something like that. That’s great, right? That’s a very impressive victory. Cuomo came in with a lot more money than he had first. He hasn’t won the general yet. I think he will. But let’s not totally get ahead of ourselves. And Cuomo is a very, very, very weak and obviously scandal ridden candidate who ran a terrible campaign.

So the question is, can you run like Mamdani trying to win a Senate seat in Kansas City or Wisconsin? Can you win the governorship in Wisconsin that way? Right. There are these elections that are going to have to be fit to the place where the person is running.

I think the thing you see in some of these figures who are overperforming Mamdani or in a very different way, Ruben Gallego in Arizona. I’ve been impressed with what I’m seeing from John Ossoff in this reelection campaign he’s running in Georgia is what you need is not like the one recipe. You need candidates who are compelling on their own. And one reason they are compelling on their own is that they know who they are and they’re willing to stand up for it.

And sometimes that is to the left of where, you know, much of the electorate is comfortable with them being. And sometimes it’s like a little bit to the right. But there is something about being willing to unleash the energy of some conflict around yourself. Right. Not being so careful and cautious and poll tested and mealy mouthed that everybody feels when they hear you talk. Like the first thing happening in your mind is a filter that is catching anything you might say that anyone might not like first.

People really sense when they’re not quite talking to you. And when you talk to Mamdani or you hear him talking, you’re talking to him. When you talk to Gallego or you hear him talking, you’re talking to him. Or that’s true for Angie Craig, right? That’s true for Elise Slotkin, there are a lot of really good candidates, but one thing that those candidates tend to have is an authenticity. And you watch him, you’re like, yeah, I would keep listening to this person.

One other thing I will just say about Mamdani that I’ve always found to be a big part of his appeal and what makes him a real political talent, is he feels very motivated by his sympathies and not his resentments. That’s not, in my view, how Donald Trump feels, but it’s also not how a lot of people on the left feel. Oftentimes, people in politics, they feel more motivated by who they hate than who they’re in this for.

And Mamdani, who took a lot of flack, right, you know, who got a lot of unfair attacks, nevertheless, there’s a fundamental friendliness to his campaign, a sense that even if you disagreed with him, he didn’t hate you. He wasn’t looking to push you out of his circle. He wanted you in there. He wanted you in that tent.

And that idea that there is a political value to what you might call, like a high political theory, level pluralism, and what you might call as a normal human being, like friendliness and openness to other people, I think that’s easy to underestimate. I think that a real failure of the left, and I don’t just mean like the democratic socialist left, I mean, like the broad left of the center, was developing a politics that seemed like it was more interested at times and a communication style and figuring out who wasn’t on our side and making that clear than inviting people, even people who didn’t agree with us in at least halfway.

And Mamdani, though he’s to a lot of people’s left, he doesn’t feel that way. He’s looking for where you agree with him, not where he can kick you out.

Trump and the Epstein Files

SCOTT GALLOWAY: You’ve likened Trump to a living Twitter algorithm, which I love, saying that his focus generally drifts from being from thing to thing, not because he’s trying to distract us, but because he himself is easily distractible. My sense is right now that may in fact not be true, that he’s. The majority of his focus right now is on weapons of mass distraction from Epstein. I’m curious what has surprised you about the most recent iteration of the Epstein scandal? And if you have any speculation around where it heads and what it means for both parties and Trump?

EZRA KLEIN: There are a level of obvious panic around it. I can’t tell you what’s at the center of that panic, but as you say, he has been quite consistent on his anger about this, his desire that these files now are not released, whatever he was saying. At another point, Mike Johnson recessing the House rather than allowing that vote.

SCOTT GALLOWAY: Yeah. Epstein is now closing. Epstein has closed the government.

EZRA KLEIN: I mean, yeah, it was a moment that I think, even if you’ve been a bit skeptical, that, you know, that beneath the smoke, this fire certainly made a lot of people look at it differently. Where it goes from here, I don’t know. It doesn’t feel to me like it’s going away.

SCOTT GALLOWAY: I feel. I’ve said on Pivot, the fix is in that all of a sudden they’ve decided they want to speak to Ghislaine Maxwell after she’s been there for several years, that it has been communicated to her that she will get a pardon if, in fact, her comments come across as exonerating the president. To me, this feels just plain as day. Your thoughts?

EZRA KLEIN: I think the fact that so many people believe that is going to make that move a little bit hard to run. Now, look, my view is not that Epstein is going to bring down Donald Trump, and the Wall Street Journal reports that he is somewhere in those files, maybe multiple times. You know where he is in them? I don’t know. It could just be notes of them being at parties together.

It’s one of these things that I wonder how much what’s in there would confirm what we know, which is that they were good friends and he knew about Epstein. Right. Trump is the first person, to my knowledge, on record in this New York Magazine story From, what was it, 06, saying publicly, “Jeffrey Epstein likes young women.” Right. He says a lot of people say Epstein likes beautiful women almost as much as I do, and he likes them young. Trump knew. Whatever else you want to say about it, Trump knew. So. And we know Trump knew.

But sometimes there’s something more sticky about finding it in the official files than, you know, reading into a quote from 20 years ago. So, yeah, maybe they try to trot out Ghislaine and maybe she does give testimony. It seems exonerating. And in a world where it seems like she got something for that or people suspect she did, I’m not sure how persuasive that will be.

I think there’s still going to be a lot of calls to release. Then at some point, Democrats, if they take the house in 2026 and then, you know, have it in 2027, I think you should expect that to be passing a bunch. And if Republicans have the Senate now, you have, like, the Senate and the House fighting over this legislation, maybe you have oversight committees that are subpoenaing people, again under a Democratic House to get information and to have testimony, and people are actually paying attention to that testimony.

It’s one of the first places where I think Democrats have seen real weakness with Trump. And so I don’t expect that it is simply going to dissolve, but nor do I think that one should expect that it’s going to become what liberals once hoped the Mueller report would become. And something will happen. And that’s the end of the Trump administration.

Democratic Strategy on Epstein

SCOTT GALLOWAY: If you were advising the Democratic Party on how to handle the whole Epstein scandal, what would your advice be?

EZRA KLEIN: If I were advising them? I mean, you keep up the pressure. Ro Khanna has been very sharp on this, and he’s been very smart on this. And you focus on issues that are going to crack the other side’s coalition, and you weave this into a larger argument about corruption. This is one of many examples that Donald Trump and the people around him are astonishingly corrupt. And Jon also has been doing this on the campaign trail in a way I think is effective.

But this is a place where these powerful people banded together to pull one over on you, whip you up about the Epstein followers. And as soon as they got what they wanted from you, which was your votes, your support, your faith, they turn around and spent it on tax cuts for themselves. And you don’t get the Epstein files, you get Medicaid cuts, you get food stamp cuts.

You know, meanwhile, Trump is taking Qatari jets, and he’s taking, you know, making billions of dollars on crypto meme coins. And he is over and over and over and over again screwing people over to line his own pocket and that of his friends. And this becomes, in a kind of an oversight structure, one of many things Democrats will be going after to build a case about what has always been, to me, the very soft underbelly of this administration, which is that they said they would come here and govern on your behalf, and they’re just making themselves rich and they’re screwing you over.

The Response to “Abundance”

SCOTT GALLOWAY: We’ll be right back after a quick break. You and Derek Thompson, who we’re big fans of, put out “Abundance” earlier this year. What surprised you most about the response to it? What issues do you think got more attention than you were expecting or less attention than you were expecting?

EZRA KLEIN: I mean, the level of response to it surprised me. You release a book that is about, in substantial portion how strong the state is in state capacity and zoning policy and housing and how hard it is to build transmission lines and issues in scientific institutions. You know, you could see a world for that book. Probably the modal world is some respectful reviews and then you kind of everybody moves on with their life.

So the fact that it became this huge discourse object that it’s at least as of last week, still on the bestseller list, whatever it is, 18 weeks later, that’s been amazing. I didn’t expect the backlash from the. I’d call it like the neo populist left that we got. We didn’t get a backlash from all parts of the left, but that wasn’t one I was expecting. Sort of Brandeisian people are very focused on corporate power because I didn’t see it coming, because I don’t see abundance as in conflict with that.

What I came to realize over time and over talking to them was that abundance’s sort of more underlying theory of politics, which I think is more liberal theory of politics, which is that power is ill used. In a lot of places, there’s no one kind of power that if you just broke it, you would get the society wanted right. For abundance, the kind of list of enemies is not just like corporations and rich people. Sometimes those are your problem and sometimes you have lots of other problems that those don’t fix.

So I think that became. It became, in my view, the fight over abundance became a version of a fight that is inside the Democratic Party between what we may call liberalism and populism, which are more structurally different ways of viewing politics. Of course those can be synthesized and I think skilled politicians will do that. But I do think it is a very real divide in people’s implicit way of thinking about what the problem is and how to solve it.

Housing Policy and Democratic Programs

SCOTT GALLOWAY: Yeah, the thing I was disappointed that Democrats. It seemed like an argument over the theories as opposed to trying to inspire a thoughtful conversation around specific programs. And the thing I took away from it and that you and Derek kind of inspired in my mind was. And one of my disappointments for the Democratic Party is they’re long on rhetorical flourish and short on actual programs and big bold ideas.

But the thing I took away from listening to your interviews and the book was 8 million houses in 10 years. Let’s build 8 million manufactured homes which cost 30 to 50% less than on site homes and create little cool communities for young people, which will create cool and basically just say to Americans, your kid’s going to be able to afford a house if they’re making a decent living, like right there, just one program, specific number, specific cost, let’s get on it and we got seems like diverted into this existential argument over what abundance means and the externalities of it.

So was your intent to foment a conversation around some sort of federally backed or tax credit, private sector unleash inspired housing program?

The Path to Abundance Politics

EZRA KLEIN: I mean, I think that’ll come as people are coming up with their 2028 plans and trying to think about how, you know, what abundance them and how they instantiate in policy. I think you’re going to see a lot of versions of that. I mean, hell, Zoram Hamdani was talking about abundance on the campaign trail.

The thing I think what you’re getting at, which I feel is true, but I may be more placid around, is the focus was really on the critique. And the critique unleashed a lot of energy because it unleashed a lot of conflict. We’re saying government has worked poorly. We have failed in a lot of the places where we, liberals, Democrats, people on the left have governed. We have not made life affordable for people. We have not delivered big mass infrastructure projects.

People have lost faith in the government for a lot of reasons, but this is one of them and they’re not wrong to do so. Right. If California comes back to you and says we’d like to try building high speed rail again, I think you should say, “Well, what did you learn? Because right now you’re failing.”

I do think that there could be and hopefully will be more conversation about what does abundance actually look like. As you were saying, maybe it’s 8 million homes in 10 years. I think we could do a lot more on defining and really pushing for clean energy abundance. Right. Having a lot more energy, having energy that is on the path to truly being too cheap to meter, that would be an incredible genuine step forward in human wealth.

There’s so much around innovation and healthcare and healthcare supply and what people have access to, like for an extended period of time. The question of GLP1s is going to become a very, very, very important political question because right now Medicaid and Medicare do not cover them as anti obesity drugs. If they did at current prices, it would probably bankrupt the system. So this question of how do you create abundance of new technologies and new medications and there is a lot of there.

So there is a critique of how government works and in some ways of how the sort of Democratic Party has governed, which has been the focus because people are fighting over that. I do think being a party that can offer people a vision that they can actually feel of what a more abundant America would look like, what it would look like if not just you, but your children could afford a home in the place they actually wanted to live. What it would look like if we really were world leaders in next generation energy. What it would look like if we really did have a lot more great public infrastructure and then proved ourselves, you know, ruthless enough to change government, to slaughter our own sacred cows to get there. I think that’s very compelling.

But yes, that part, that kind of visioning I think has been, even though we start the book with it, has been less a part of the conversation than I would like to see.

Lightning Round: Policy Ideas

SCOTT GALLOWAY: I just want to do. I’d love to do a lightning round around to specific policy ideas and just get your quick response to it. Lower Medicaid eligibility by two years. Every year for 10 years brings it down to 40 or 45, which effectively is socialized medicine because I think 70 to 90% of all healthcare costs are people over the age of 40. But basically a slow but steady march towards socialized medicine.

EZRA KLEIN: I’ve always been pro lowering the Medicare age by a lot and also doing something like Medicare for kids.

SCOTT GALLOWAY: So there’s been a theory for a.

EZRA KLEIN: Long time that you can basically do a Medicare like program for kids who are pretty cheap in general, call it up to 18 and bring Medicare eligibility down to 45. Now it’s worth saying that eligibility is different. You have to decide are you going to subsidize them at the same rate you subsidize people over 65. Right. There’s all kinds of questions in probably nobody gives a shit about this anymore.

In the Affordable Care act there was almost when the public options getting killed, a compromise to do Medicare eligibility at 55. And Joe Lieberman personally killed it, which I’ve never forgiven him for the late Joe Lieberman. But I have always been a big fan of increasing the age ranges that Medicare can cover and building a very clear healthcare system for kids built on public insurance.

SCOTT GALLOWAY: Alternative minimum tax of 50% for anyone making over say $3 million. Elimination of the exemption for estate tax.

EZRA KLEIN: One of my views about 2028 is that the tax code is now too broken and Democrats should figure out. Smart Democrats will figure out an actual simple tax reform that you got to throw out the code and start over.

SCOTT GALLOWAY: Agreed.

EZRA KLEIN: And doing something much flatter but highly progressive. Right. And much simpler. That has much simpler rules and not a billion different carve outs. And all of the lobbyists poked holes that we have here. So something very heavily built around a value added tax I think would make sense. You can do progressive consumption taxes. Right? There’s a lot of ways to do it. Your version is another one of that. Sort of more oriented towards richer people. But I think a flat, but highly progressive. And flat, I should say broad but highly progressive tax code is the way to go.

Media Strategy and Platform Building

SCOTT GALLOWAY: So just as we wrap up here, and we do appreciate how generous you’ve been with your time, I’m just curious with the kind of. I remember Thomas Friedman at Davos 25 years ago talking about the emergence of this supranational, the basically nation states as individuals. And I thought that was actually quite, if you look back, quite prescient.

But I also think the same thing has happened. There’s a certain number of people in media who have developed whose work is so outstanding and that it breaks through. But in addition, they’re able to sort of weaponize different mediums and kind of become bigger than the platform itself. And I think you’re one of those people.

I’m curious what your strategy is. And please don’t tell me you don’t have a strategy. You just want to do great work. Well, you can say it, but I won’t believe you. But what is your strategy around these different mediums? Where are you allocating more of your precious human capital around different technologies, different platforms? And where are you spending less time when you think about yourself as a content producer? And a lot of it is the medium is the message. Which mediums are you over and underinvesting in?

EZRA KLEIN: Well, one thing that I think is a little different about how I approach this than other people is that I tend to be fairly all or nothing. So I want to have an absolutely amazing podcast. Right. I want my show to be amazing and I put a lot of time into that. Right. I want to be a really good columnist. I put a lot of work into those two things.

SCOTT GALLOWAY: Yeah, you do the work and then.

EZRA KLEIN: I don’t do social media. So I’m not really on Instagram. I’m not on X. I’m not on Bluesky. The podcast is on YouTube, which I think is important. But I think of that as one project. I’m not myself on TikTok. We put my stuff on TikTok and actually does really well there. But that’s part of the kind of podcast in my view.

I just, you know, and I wrote a book, but I don’t write tons of books. Right. It’s my second book and my. I’m, you know, I’ve been doing this for more than 20 years. It’s my second book. I try to really, really, really fully put my energy into creating a fairly discreet number of, you know, journalistic products that are really good and that lead. They create conversations.

So, I mean, that piece you mentioned on “American Jews Don’t Understand Each Other Any Longer.” That piece took me time. There are, you know, I think six interviews in that piece, not even made it into it, but behind it, at the very least. It took me weeks to do. I held it beyond when it was supposed to initially run. We then did a version in audio where we actually wove more of the interviews into it. I wanted that to be something that would create conversation, and it really has.

And so I think one of my. And this might also be, you know, I have advantages and a big platform, so I have the privilege of being able to do this. But I try to be more engaged in the role of starting conversations than kind of jumping into them. And that’s because I find that if I’m jumping into a lot of conversations, I find it very, very distracting.

The other thing, that is not a medium that I participate in, the way I participate in podcasting, but I just spend a lot of time reading things on paper, and I think it’s a huge advantage. I think it makes me smarter, lets me see things that other people aren’t seeing. I just, I think compared to a lot of people, a lot more of information diet is books and printouts, and a lot less is scrolling. And that keeps my work a little bit more different.

Advice for Young People

SCOTT GALLOWAY: And just in terms of. We have a lot of young people listening to podcasts. A lot of young men, actually, I think we’re 70 or 80% young men. People are going to look at you and think, “Wow, 41. I want to be Ezra Klein,” right? You have my senses. I know you. I don’t know you, but I sort of know you. And my sense is you’re doing something. You have a lot of influence. You seem to like what you do. You’re making an exceptional living irrelevant.

And a lot of people probably look at, you know what? I’d like to be in those shoes. I’d like to be in that seat. Can you talk about the one or two biggest influences and what young people can take away in terms of getting you to where you are now?

EZRA KLEIN: I came up through blogging, which was a very different way to come up at a time when that was a very open space, which it isn’t now. And so I started a blog when I was a freshman at UC Santa Cruz and University of California.

SCOTT GALLOWAY: I didn’t know that. I didn’t know I could like you more Ezra. Well done. UCLA and Berkeley. Greatest, greatest gift from government.

On Building a Career Through Blogging and Reporting

EZRA KLEIN: I got rejected from Berkeley repeatedly. I got rejected from Berkeley when I applied first and then when I tried to transfer there. But then I went to UCLA a bit too, for a year. But I think of myself primarily as a banana slug. So that, I think, allowed me to go through a backdoor when I started blogging.

Nobody thought of that as a career, nor did I. You know, it sounded like something that would grow on your foot. And there was one, an amazing community around that of like, really, really excellent people who are still like amazing figures today. Right? You know, Matt Yglesias was an early inspiration for me as a blogger because he was another college kid. You know, Andrew Sullivan was like one of the big bloggers of that era. Unfortunately, Kevin Drum passed away. I think it was austere now, but he was a real figure in that.

And so I think I was able to build my own sense of how to do my work and then got brought in repeatedly to institutions in this kind of protected space where I was doing something they wanted, right? Blogging in different formats and later podcasting. And so they come in and they sort of like, almost like aqua hire me to do this thing they didn’t really know how to do yet. And that gave me a lot of freedom that not everybody else had. So Tyler Cowen, early blogger and a big influence on me. So one, I think the blogosphere, I still in some ways think a lot of who I am is formed by that.

And then, you know, the other thing that I think has always been very important in my own work is that I’m actually a reporter. I’m not just. I don’t think of myself primarily as a takes writer. And I think something that keeps my work pretty fresh is that it’s not just my voice over and over and over again. And for that, I give credit to a bunch of my early editors. You know, Mike Tomasky, who I remember at the American Prospect, I came and brought him one of my early features and he looked at me and he said, “This isn’t even a piece of journalism.” I was like, “What do you mean?” That was such a mean thing to say to me. He’s like, “There’s no other voices in it. It’s just you.” And that made a big impression on me.

And so my podcast is primarily interviews with other people. My columns, they’re not literally all interview based, but they are heavily. If you look at Abundance, the book, it’s a lot of reporting, much of it on the ground in different places. I think it is people think so much about what they’re telling other people and whether other people are listening and are they like, you know, how do they get in the algorithm? I think the first question is how to actually be interesting, have something that is worth saying. What kind of work are you doing that you’re bringing to the audience? Why? What service are they hiring you to do?

Because nowadays there’s so much political opinion out there, so much writing, so many voices. You really got to be able to offer something that other people aren’t offering. And for me, a lot of the time that comes from other people. Right. It comes from being able to kind of, you know, interview and show them at their best. But yeah, that sort of mixture of blogging is a kind of constantly iterative learning in public, you know, opinionated and then merged with like a real commitment to reporting, which I think I still have.

On Parenting and Self-Care

SCOTT GALLOWAY: You have two kids. Any thoughts or learnings or advice to young dads on how to be a good father or your learnings as a father and trying to be a good partner?

EZRA KLEIN: This will sound not cliche, but like a little, I think something. But parenting yourself is hard. It’s harder than parenting your kid. And what I mean by that is that. But it’s really important, first and foremost, how you show up for your kid, how good of a parent you are going to be is going to have a lot to do with, are you sleeping? And if you’re not sleeping, are you taking care of yourself in other ways? Are you feeling good in your marriage with your partner? If you are married, are you feeling good at your work? Are you working out at all?

And a lot of the place where parenting gets really tough is when you have poorly parented yourself and now you are poorly parenting your child because you’re pissed off, because you’re a distraction from what you really want to be doing because you can’t give them your attention. And I don’t say this from the mountaintop or it never happens to me. I say this from the place where it happens to me all the time, where I’m like, “I’m just being a bad parent today.” Like, not terrible. I’m not beating my kids, but I’m, you know, mentally checked out and I’m tired and I’m not being, you know, being able to be there with them.

And I just often see parents not do a good job, not even sort of realize, like, they’re part of the equation too. And that, you know, in the same way that how their kid responds to their parenting is going to depend on. Has a kid eaten recently, have they slept? Like, what’s going on in their lives, how they parent is going to depend on how they’re eating, how they’re sleeping, whether they’re working out, whether they’re going out on a date with, you know, the person they love or finding a person they love or whatever it might be. Parenting yourself is hard. You got to pay attention to it. Your kids, first of all, need you to be present.

Balancing Career Success and Family Life

SCOTT GALLOWAY: Is it difficult? And I struggled with this my whole career, between being great at what you do and having your own relevance and your own economic security, which your family benefits from, and quite frankly, just being exhausted or just not having the time to be a very engaged partner or father. Is that something you struggle with?

EZRA KLEIN: Yeah, all the time. I mean, one of my worst feelings is feeling like the podcast often gets the best of me, and sometimes my family gets the worst. And they get me at the end of the day, when I’m tired, when I’m worn down, when the caffeine is worn off. I feel like I spend so much time running from my own exhaustion. The thing that I feel the most often that I fight the hardest is feeling tired. And it’s also just a part of my life. There’s not some way of doing what I’m doing or the number of things I’m doing and not having to wake up earlier than my body would like to, you know, there isn’t a way to do it all.

And so just accepting that you’re going to be in triage all the time, and, you know, sometimes you will flex too far in one direction and you’ll have to flex back for a while. I mean, the first six months of this year, with Abundance kind of blowing up and, you know, asking more of me than I had quite anticipated, that was stress on my home life, that was stress on my wife, that was stress on my kids.

And so at a certain point, some. What is it? It’s July now. So I think really right about the beginning of July, I just called a full four month stopped any work, travel. And like, for three or four months, I’m just a hard no. And I’m still working, right. I’m not disengaged, but I just find sometimes I have to do that. Like, I pushed really hard in that direction, but that could just attain its own momentum after that. And then you just are doing it and doing it and doing it, and everything you do spins off more options and panels and you should come here and can you come talk at the policy school?

And so I gave it everything I had for a while and then kind of full stop. And now I’m focusing back on, you know, my call on my podcast, my family life, my friendships, my partnership, my health. You got to kind of. There are seasons for things, but you got to know when one season’s ending and another is starting.

Advice to Your Younger Self

SCOTT GALLOWAY: Yeah. And we always end with the same question. You got a time machine. You go back, you’re plopped in front of you, your 25 year old self, and you have 15 seconds. What do you say to your 25 year old self?

EZRA KLEIN: My 25 year old self. So I’d be in DC. It’s really hard because I, like, I’m happy with how my life has turned out. There’s not a lot here that I want to change. There’s not a lot I think I could have told my 20. Because advice is so. Advice is bullshit. It’s all execution. Right. We all know to a large extent.

SCOTT GALLOWAY: What we should do. But isn’t that the answer? Wouldn’t your 25 year old say, I.

EZRA KLEIN: I mean, I would have invested in Tesla.

SCOTT GALLOWAY: Buy Tesla.

EZRA KLEIN: Buy bitcoin. Yeah, buy some bitcoin.

SCOTT GALLOWAY: That’s a thoughtful response.

EZRA KLEIN: Yeah, that’s my. I think that is. That would have changed. That would have changed a lot.

SCOTT GALLOWAY: You just would have said the word Bitcoin over 15 times. I love that.

EZRA KLEIN: All right, look, man, there’s a lot I could have told myself that I wouldn’t have been able to put into practice, but that I would have.

Closing Thoughts

SCOTT GALLOWAY: There you go. Ezra Klein is a New York Times columnist and the host of the Ezra Klein Show. Previously he was the founder, editor in chief and then editor at large of Vox. By the way, there’s a lesson in there. I find that the most relevant people doing the best work have the shortest bios. Ezra joins us from New York. Ezra, I’m a huge fan and I just. Let me. This will be the third time I reference it. When you read your stuff, when you’re listening to your pods, when you read your books, it’s just clear. And I think this is a really important lesson for young people.

EZRA KLEIN: You can tell you just work really.

SCOTT GALLOWAY: Hard, that you bring it, that you show up, you run through the tape. Success is in the last 10%. You just hear it and feel that you are laboring over sentences and words and fact checking and very much appreciate the role model you set for professionals. Just in terms of, you just. Quite frankly, my brother, you just bring it really appreciate you and your work.

EZRA KLEIN: Thanks, Scott. It’s incredibly kind of you to say.

Related Posts

• President Trump Remarks on US, Israel Attacking Iran (Transcript)
• President Trump on Economy, Energy in Corpus Christi, TX (Transcript) 
• Bulwark Podcast: w/ Susan Glasser on Trump’s State of the Union address (Transcript)
• Douglas Macgregor: US-Iran Diplomacy Fail (Transcript)
• The Truth About Trump’s State of the Union w/ Sen. Bernie Sanders (Transcript)