Politics Politics Politics

De: Justin Robert Young
Escúchala gratis

  • Resumen

  • Unbiased political analysis the way you wish still existed. Justin Robert Young isn't here to tell you what to think, he's here to tell you who is going to win and why.

    www.politicspoliticspolitics.com
    Justin Robert Young
    Más Menos
Mundial Política y Gobierno
Más Menos
Episodios
  • Schumer Blinks! Ranking Winning Presidential Campaigns (with Ettingermentum)

    Schumer Blinks! Ranking Winning Presidential Campaigns (with Ettingermentum)
    Mar 14 2025

    Schumer blinked. House Democrats are furious. But there will be more on that tomorrow.

    While the dust settles, I’m joined by returning guest ettingermentum to dive deep into the best and worst winning presidential campaigns. We rank every campaign from 1964 to 2024: Who ran the best campaigns, who completely fumbled, and which elections had the biggest long-term impact. Ettingermentum previously put together a two-part series ranking these campaigns, and I, naturally, had to make his own. So, we go back and forth, comparing notes, debating rankings, and making the case for why certain campaigns deserve more credit (or less).

    Justin’s Rankings

    S-Tier:

    * 2008 (Obama)

    * 1984 (Reagan)

    A-Tier:

    * 1992 (Clinton)

    * 2024 (Trump)

    B-Tier:

    * 1972 (Nixon)

    * 1996 (Clinton)

    C-Tier:

    * 1968 (Nixon)

    * 1980 (Reagan)

    * 1976 (Carter)

    * 2000 (Bush)

    D-Tier:

    * 1964 (Johnson)

    * 1988 (Bush)

    * 2004 (Bush)

    * 2012 (Obama)

    F-Tier:

    * 2016 (Trump)

    * 2020 (Biden)

    Chapters

    00:00:00 - Intro

    00:01:04 - Schumer Won’t Block Spending Bill

    00:03:43 - Ranking Winning Political Campaigns, Part 1

    00:48:26 - Update

    00:49:21 - Mayor Pete Not Running For Senate

    00:52:45 - Probationary Federal Employees Rehired, Judge Says

    00:54:56 - Birthright Citizenship Battle

    00:59:00 - Ranking Winning Political Campaigns, Part 2

    01:36:49 - Wrap-up



    This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe
    Más Menos
    1 h y 43 m
  • The Unraveling Of ActBlue. House Republicans Avoid A Shutdown (with Matt Laslo and Jen Briney)

    The Unraveling Of ActBlue. House Republicans Avoid A Shutdown (with Matt Laslo and Jen Briney)
    Mar 12 2025
    In the intersection of politics and technology, few innovations have had as significant an impact as online donation platforms. ActBlue, the Democratic Party's premiere fundraising tool, has revolutionized small-dollar contributions since its inception in 2004. However, recent internal turmoil at the organization is raising serious questions about both its future and about the broader landscape of political donations.A Game-Changer for DemocratsActBlue was an early pioneer in digital fundraising, allowing Democratic candidates and progressive causes to tap into small-dollar donors efficiently. Through gamification and mobile accessibility, the platform made it easy for supporters to donate with just a few clicks, contributing billions of dollars to campaigns over the years.By 2024, ActBlue played a crucial role in helping President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris amass over $1.5 billion in campaign funds, outpacing the Republican counterpart, WinRed, which raised $900 million for Donald Trump. The platform also helped Democrats dominate small-dollar fundraising in Senate races, with candidates like Sherrod Brown (Ohio) and John Tester (Montana) outraising their Republican opponents, despite ultimately losing their races.A Leadership Exodus and Rising ConcernsDespite its success, ActBlue is now facing a crisis. In February 2025, seven senior staff members resigned suddenly, including the organization’s chief legal officer, vice president for customer service, and a technical expert with 14 years of experience. This mass departure was alarming enough that two employee unions publicly voiced concerns, warning that confidence in the organization’s stability was eroding.This followed a December 2024 letter from over 140 political stakeholders — consultants, campaign staff, donors, and academics — urging ActBlue to implement stronger safeguards to prevent donor exploitation.One particularly cryptic development came when a newly appointed technical leader at ActBlue reminded employees of whistleblower protections, a warning that suggests internal concerns about potential misconduct.Allegations of Financial MisconductWhile ActBlue’s success has been attributed to its superior technology and network effect, some critics argue that there may be fraudulent activity behind its fundraising dominance.A GOP strategist, Mark Block, filed a racketeering lawsuit against ActBlue, alleging that his identity was stolen to make 385 fraudulent donations totaling $884. He claims that these small donations — each under $200 — were used to exploit a loophole in Federal Election Commission (FEC) reporting requirements.This practice, known as “smurfing,” is a form of money laundering that involves breaking large donations into smaller, untraceable amounts to avoid detection. Block’s lawsuit cites donation receipts from an old campaign email account, showing repeated micro-donations averaging just $3.24 each, many of which he did not authorize.Additionally, there have been reports of:* Elderly individuals discovering numerous small donations in their names without their knowledge.* Foreign nationals using surrogates to funnel money into U.S. elections, a violation of campaign finance laws.These allegations, combined with the sudden staff exodus, suggest that ActBlue could be facing a major financial scandal.The Potential FalloutIf these accusations are substantiated, the implications for ActBlue — and Democratic fundraising — could be severe:* Small donors may hesitate to contribute if concerns about fraud persist, resulting in a loss of trust in one or both parties.* The FEC or other watchdogs may launch formal investigations, leading to stricter oversight.* With ActBlue in turmoil, Democrats may struggle to replicate their past fundraising successes in upcoming elections.There is also speculation that WinRed, the Republican alternative, could face similar scrutiny. If both major fundraising platforms are found to have engaged in unethical practices, the entire online political donation system could be upended.Looking Ahead to 2028ActBlue’s situation is still unfolding, but one thing is clear: The Democratic Party’s dominant fundraising machine is in serious jeopardy. If ActBlue collapses or loses credibility, Democrats will need to quickly find an alternative — something that won’t be easy given the platform’s deep integration with campaign operations.With the 2026 midterms and the 2028 presidential race on the horizon, the future of small-dollar political fundraising is more uncertain than ever.Chapters00:00:00 - Intro00:01:05 - Interview with Matt Laslo00:21:00 - ActBlue Chaos00:32:22 - Update00:33:46 - US/Canadian Tariffs00:35:29 - Ukraine Ceasefire00:37:35 - Mahmoud Khalil’s Arrest00:40:17 - Interview with Jen Briney01:15:08 - Wrap-up This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com...
    Más Menos
    1 h y 19 m
  • Has DOGE Been Leashed? How the Stock Market is Reacting to Trump's Tariffs (with J.D. Durkin)

    Has DOGE Been Leashed? How the Stock Market is Reacting to Trump's Tariffs (with J.D. Durkin)
    Mar 7 2025
    In a Truth Social post on Thursday, President Donald Trump declared that "the golden age of America has just begun." He touted his administration’s early successes and emphasized that his newly assembled cabinet is focused on cost-cutting measures and staffing decisions, with the Department of Government Efficiency — colloquially known as "DOGE" — playing a central role.According to Trump, his administration will take a "scalpel rather than the hatchet" approach to reducing government waste. He praised Elon Musk and DOGE for their efforts in streamlining operations, stating that his team would be conducting biweekly meetings to assess and refine their approach.However, the speed and aggressiveness of the administration’s restructuring efforts have not gone unnoticed. Over the past 48 hours, there has been a discernible shift — a brake pumping, if you will — on the administration’s initial velocity. Reports suggest that Attorney General Pam Bondi recently presented Trump with binders labeled Epstein files, only for him to realize that most of the information was already publicly available. The implication? There may be an effort to control the chaotic rollout of these reforms.Behind the scenes, Chief of Staff Suzy Wiles appears to be taking on a stabilizing role. She remains largely unquoted in the press, but her influence is evident. While no one can dictate Trump’s decisions, if there is anyone capable of channeling his impulses into a more structured path, it is likely Wiles.The Challenge of Government ReformPolling data presents mixed signals for the administration’s strategy. While government reform remains broadly popular, Elon Musk himself does not poll particularly well. Moreover, while fiscal responsibility is a winning message, mass firings are unpopular, especially when they disrupt essential services.Some of the layoffs initiated by DOGE have drawn minimal public sympathy, such as the widely ridiculed case of a Yosemite employee responsible for bathroom keys. But other cuts have raised alarm, like the reported downsizing at the National Weather Service. This agency is crucial not only for routine weather forecasts but also for emergency alerts, particularly with tornado and hurricane seasons approaching in the coming months.If the administration is now signaling a more measured approach, it may be an acknowledgment that they have tested the limits of public tolerance for aggressive government downsizing. Silicon Valley's ethos values rapid iteration, but that approach does not always translate well to governance. In the tech world, listing a feature that doesn't yet exist isn’t necessarily misleading if it eventually becomes reality. However, in government, making sweeping announcements without a clear plan can create the perception of recklessness rather than innovation.This shift in tone suggests that the administration is attempting to move away from the narrative that it is slashing government with reckless abandon. Instead, the messaging now emphasizes precision: cutting waste while retaining key personnel and essential services. Whether this recalibration is enough to change the public perception is a question for another day.One clear indication of this shift is a new push in Congress. Senate Republicans are urging legislative action to codify DOGE’s spending cuts, following a court ruling that limits the department’s unilateral authority. While some lawmakers have praised Musk’s efforts, others, including Senator Rand Paul, have cautioned that major spending cuts should be handled through Congress rather than executive fiat. Senator Lindsey Graham, a supporter of DOGE, has acknowledged its flaws and has encouraged a more structured approach through legislative rescission.The Coming Battle Over RescissionOne term that is about to become more prominent in political discourse is rescission. While it may sound similar to reconciliation, the two are entirely different budgetary mechanisms. Rescission allows the president to formally request that Congress cancel previously approved federal spending.Here’s how the process works:* The president submits a rescission proposal to Congress, specifying funds to be cut.* Congress has 45 days of continuous session to approve the request. Importantly, approval only requires a simple majority in both chambers, meaning it bypasses the 60-vote Senate filibuster.* If Congress approves, the specified funds are canceled, preventing the executive branch from spending them. If Congress rejects or ignores the proposal, the funds remain intact.The significance of this approach is that it moves beyond the constitutional gray area of unilateral executive spending cuts. Instead of DOGE simply slashing budgets at the departmental level, rescission would put the matter before Congress, potentially giving the cuts more permanence.According to reports, Musk was convinced to support this approach after Lindsey Graham pointed out that any ...
    Más Menos
    1 h y 2 m

Lo que los oyentes dicen sobre Politics Politics Politics

Calificaciones medias de los clientes
Total
  • 5 out of 5 stars
  • 5 estrellas
    1
  • 4 estrellas
    0
  • 3 estrellas
    0
  • 2 estrellas
    0
  • 1 estrella
    0
Ejecución
  • 5 out of 5 stars
  • 5 estrellas
    1
  • 4 estrellas
    0
  • 3 estrellas
    0
  • 2 estrellas
    0
  • 1 estrella
    0
Historia
  • 5 out of 5 stars
  • 5 estrellas
    1
  • 4 estrellas
    0
  • 3 estrellas
    0
  • 2 estrellas
    0
  • 1 estrella
    0

Reseñas - Selecciona las pestañas a continuación para cambiar el origen de las reseñas.

Reseñas de Audible.com

Opiniones de Amazon
Ordenar por:
Filtrar por:
  • Total
    5 out of 5 stars
  • Ejecución
    5 out of 5 stars
  • Historia
    5 out of 5 stars
Imagen de perfil para John Miller

Welcome to Audible

Big fan of your show for a while and i hope youre brand of analysis and interviews finds a home here.

Denunciar

Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña