Six Months Later

In this podcast, our hosts indulge in a wide-ranging airing of grievances, starting with a ...

By
69

In this podcast, our hosts indulge in a wide-ranging airing of grievances, starting with a reflection on the political salience of the January 6 Capitol insurrection, six months after the fact. The gang then discusses whether Republicans have lost the right to be called the party of ideas and what might be behind the GOP’s current allergy to nuance. Sarah also explores the tension between Ron DeSantis and Donald Trump that cropped up over Trump’s recent Florida rally. Looking ahead to the 2024 elections, Chris argues that most pundits are missing who will be the biggest player, by far, in the contest: President Joe Biden. Lastly, Chris asks whether the abysmal state of election administration in some cases—as revealed by the recent New York City mayoral race—is proof that Democrats’ are not taking threats to the American democracy seriously, and whether the failure to do so will make it easier for bad actors to steal elections.

Show Notes:

–New York Times:  Inside the Capitol Riot: An Exclusive Video Investigation

–Straw poll showing Ron DeSantis edging out Donald Trump in 2024

You're out of free articles
Create an account to unlock 1 more articles
By signing up with your email, you agree to The Dispatch’s privacy policy and terms and conditions
Already have an account? Sign In
By
Comments (69)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Ben Connelly

    Sarah, you might be right about some segments of Americans not caring about 1/6, but actually most of the moderates/middle of the political aisle/normal people, whatever you want to call them (not far left or far right), are the most horrified by the events of 1/6. They were the most surprised and the most turned off by it. The people I know who are progressive either 1. Already assume Republicans are like that or 2. Trumpet that it proves them right about Trump and authoritarianism. On the Right, people I know either dismiss it or are just less concerned. I guess my point is that the people in the middle were the most shocked and surprised and because of that they were more affected by it.

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Angie

    I enjoyed this pod. I wish more dem politicians listened to it...lol..the sane ones anyway

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Steve Gordon

    This pod was incredibly sparky and derisive. Count the number of times one of them accuse people of being stupid, unhinged, idiotic, etc. I'm not saying there aren't PLENTY of those people. I'm just not sure how instructive or interesting it is for a whole discussion about how dumb everyone else is.

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    AndreaLeane75

    I would love to think that people in general don't want the stupid, as you worded it. But I'm cynical enough to think many are lying to themselves. I work at a community newspaper in NE Texas. People call and complain about various things. They want "their" stupid, not the other side's stupid when it comes to politics. They also complain about too much crime in the paper. But what are the most popular stories on our site? The crime stories. If people didn't want stupid, the Kardashians wouldn't be popular. I'm just saying. I know you were talking about a different kind of stupid, but I've learned to never underestimate many people's capacity to lean into stuff like that.

    Collapse
  5. David B.

    When Sarah started searching for the 70's court "gotcha" show, in my head I said "Perry Mason" right there. Great minds... Lol.

    Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    DCS_3

    Aaaagh!!! Stop denying it! Trump is running in 2024! He is not bright. He is surrounded by people who are less bright. The base of the GOP, running GOP at the local level, are missing chromosomes. In 2023, no matter what is going on, no matter who is leading in the (as we all now know, total bulls*^t) polls, he will be told by the knuckle draggers around him in their best Adrian voice "you can win!" and he will believe it. Why? Because he is a narcissistic moron! Zoolander looks at him and says, "jeeze, get a clue bro." I love you all but you are in your cups if you think anything else is going to happen, provided he is around. Yes he is old, but other than that, nothing will stop him. And what's worse is that when he loses again we are really in for a shit show. Remember: Beer Hall Putsch was 1923. Chancellorship was 1934.

    Can I please be on your show? My topic will be "Is America that stupid?" ps: yes

    Collapse
  7. Jason Runyan

    So, after watching a lot of Fox today, I noticed Trump's cult members / mouthpieces, you know, the ones that changed their long held beliefs to be consistent with their new master, they were quite the cheering section for Biden's withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan.Molly Hemmingway (who has long been an isolationist), Jesse Waters and Greg Gutfeld, who have changed, and others. My question is, are they calling THEMSELVES "Vichy Republicans"? Are the same people attacking David attacking them? I suspect not. Really could have used Steve or Jonah on the panel tonight. Although Bill McGurn did okay.

    Collapse
  8. Anonymous

    Collapse
    1. Maddmac

      James, thank you. I feel like David and Chris were sort of saying this. Sarah sounds like she is digging her heels in that none of this will matter in two years. The "suburban wine mom" contingent and others are not going to vote for a party who are in anyway affiliated with QAnon, MTG, Rudy G, etc. I mean seriously here is what will happen as they fill out their ballot, "Hmm, do I really give a fig about CRT or whatever it is, or what is with these people who believe in Pizzagate?

      Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    karmol

    I'm curious how the panel feels about non-partisan redistricting?

    I am far more concerned about partisan gerrymandering than i am with election security at this point. The NYC election board is a disaster, but there are so many safeguards in place that i'm not worried about them getting the correct count (...eventually). this is also a primary, and not the general. In NYC, it's basically the same thing - but it's not like we're running up against any deadlines for a candidate taking office. My life will in no way be impacted by the Dem Mayoral candidate of NYC not being decided even up until the day of the general (extreme example, but as a brooklyn dweller i don't see anyone up in arms about this).

    But gerrymandering is a whole 'nother can of worms that concerns me a lot more in terms of the long term health of the Republic - large swaths of this country are effectively disenfranchised.

    Collapse
    1. jmk789

      There's a bunch of additional cans of worms that the current SCOTUS seems to be happy to open. Are districts really required to be geographically contiguous? Why not redistrict after every election? The previous 5-4 SCOTUS decision on the Arizona citizens' redistricting commission might be in danger, which would lead to even fewer options to oppose blatant gerrymandering (and which would be highly ironic considering that in Shelby the majority opinion in that decision pointed to the AZ decision as proof that people can overcome gerrymandering!). Even Baker v. Carr (one person, one vote) has come in for criticism from people on the legal right who claim that it's a violation of state legislatures' sovereignty over state elections. Also, with these somewhat extra-textual readings of the VRA suddenly finding favor at SCOTUS, it seems likely that some state legs will only be too happy to keep pushing the boundaries of what's acceptable in the future.

      Collapse
  10. Avatar photo
    ed74siasl

    I feel like an important topic was missed: kicking Trump off Twitter.
    Has any other single act ever done more to save the U.S.from herself?

    Collapse
Load More