August 29, 2024 • 25 mins
Dr. Jonathan Metzl joins Danielle for a contentious conversation about Democrats' gun control policies and the media cycle around Kamala Harris's joy-based campaign.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:11):
Good morning, peeps, and welcome to ookf Daily with Meet
Your Girl. Daniel Moody recording from the Home Bunker. Folks,
Oh my god, why can't JD. Vance just go away?
Every time there is leaked audio of this man, we
just learn what a fucking weirdo he is. And now
(00:33):
he has turned his attention to childless women who happen
to be teachers. He hates them just like he does
all childless women, but has a particular disdain. It's wild.
It's wild, and Donald Trump goes on doctor Phil and says, well,
you only need to vote this once and then you
never have to worry about voting again, continuing with his
(00:56):
line around being a dictator. On day one, we know
what the stakes are, we know what the narrative is
that this party is offering. And I just pray each
and every day that the excitement that we are seeing
is going to translate into the votes that are needed
in order to get Harris and Walls over the finish line.
(01:20):
And I mean in an effing landslide, not just by
the skin of our teeth. This needs to be a
decisive victory, one that will be written in the history books,
because I want like you all to be done with
Donald Trump for once and for fucking all. Coming up
today my conversation with our friend, our in house doctor,
(01:42):
doctor Jonathan Metzil. You'll be surprised by this conversation today
because Jonathan and I don't see eye to eye on
our thoughts around how the Harris Walls team is expanding
the Big Democratic tent. Jonathan offers some points as to
think said he thinks could be done better, and we
(02:02):
challenge each other on seeing the other side. So that
conversation is coming up next. Folks. You know that whenever
we have the opportunity to speak with our in house doctor,
doctor Jonathan Metzil, we are always always pleased and happy.
And Jonathan, oh, we even't spoken in over a week
(02:24):
because I was at the DNC.
Speaker 2 (02:26):
We did your snazzy podcast last week.
Speaker 1 (02:28):
Oh we did. Yeah, we did the other one. We
did the other one, the New Abnormal. So Jonathan, I
want to get your thoughts even though we are now
days removed from the DNC, But I thought about you
while I was there because of the presentation around victims
of gun violence that brought me to tears and a
(02:50):
lot of people around me in the United Center to tears,
and I just wanted to get your thoughts overall on
how again we talked about this, how this campaign is
dealing with the gun issue, how you thought that it
was handled during convention and by the time that folks
listen to this, we will be at less than seventy
days until the election, which is just extraordinary, And how
(03:14):
you're feeling.
Speaker 2 (03:16):
First, let me just say that I'm so honored to
be speaking with you here today because you're a star
of stage. On screen, You've been stripping it, spilling it
across every outlet, Like every outlet, I'm like, oh, there's
Danielle on TV is spreading the love on everything. So first,
awesome job, and I will follow you anywhere whatever you
(03:37):
tell me to do. I am sucking.
Speaker 1 (03:39):
I appreciate that.
Speaker 2 (03:40):
Now. I have to say, on one hand, of course,
that moment with the guns was incredibly powerful and well
it could have been totally cheesy, actually, but it wasn't.
It felt very very powerful and very urgent, and so
I thought it was handled very well at the convention,
and I think that the message at that moment was
(04:01):
spot on. But I think that there's two sides to
this coin and I'm really struggling with this, which is
that on one hand, I mean, I understand we're seventy
days out and that's huge. Is the issue to rally
our base? If the issue is to rally our base,
then framing guns in that way is important with the
(04:22):
historical caveat that I write about in my book, which
is that Democrats will answer polls saying that they support
gun safety laws, but they don't vote based on them.
And so if they think that there's a new entree
into getting people to vote, to mobilize our people to
vote based on background checks and red flag laws, it
(04:42):
would just be honestly, for a presidential election, like people
vote on a bunch of issues, but it's really Republicans
that vote out of the fear that Democrats are going
to have the government take away their guns. That will
mobilize Republicans. And so it's a strategy. But my concern
always is that we're using a very saturated playbook that
(05:03):
in a way, if we're saying all these horrible things happened,
which they did, just searing life changing, life ending, But
if the only conversation we're having about guns is to
talk about guns in relation to regulation, which is really
where that conversation ends, or to highlight people I call converts,
(05:26):
people who are like Tim Walls and other people like, Oh,
I'm a gun owner, but I don't believe in the NRA.
It's just that that's a very small sample of a
much bigger fraction, which is all gun owners. And so
the question is are the bigger group of gun owners
going to be moved by this? And so again it's
just a calculated decision that I, honestly, as I've said
(05:49):
azillion times, have a tremendous amount of concern about because
just from my research and everybody else has other thoughts,
people who are going to vote based on guns are
already voting for Democrats. It's not like you're going to
bring new gun owners into the fold, because I mean,
it was great in my book. I interviewed a guy
and he said, people think, if you just say it differently,
(06:11):
or message differently to me, or say it louder, I'm
going to change my mind. But actually I know what
the goddamn issue is, and I don't want government regulation
of my guns. He's actually somebody who said I probably
would vote for Democrats, but I don't want government regulating
my guns, and so just saying we respect gun owners
the converts are not representing those people, and so I
(06:35):
don't know. I feel like i'm I know who's advising
Harris on this issue. I know that they have a
very particular agenda which is not mine. I hope they're right.
I hope they're right and I'm wrong. I would welcome that,
But I also think that there's another way to message, which,
as we talked about last week, has to do with
crime and the responsibilities of gun ownership and what it
(06:56):
means to own a gun and the right to own
a gun. That doesn't really change our platform at all,
but it does speak to those crossover people. And I
worry that if we're just doing every time for gun
safety and background checks, we're not speaking to those people.
And so the question is, will white voters who are
swing state voters, like, is that an important enough demographic
(07:18):
to speak to their concerns, because we're not doing it
right now.
Speaker 1 (07:21):
I wondered too, about how you felt about the law
enforcement officer who walked out on stage, gone on his
hip in full uniform at convention and what you thought
that kind of image was trying to convey as well.
Was that them which was my assumption trying to take
(07:43):
ownership of the law and order narrative as well.
Speaker 2 (07:47):
I mean, it's all about like permission structures. I mean,
the question is what does that person represent, right, does
that person represent the one cop who's willing to come
to our side, the one cop who's ex sceptible to
our side, or is it a sign of a bigger trend. Again,
that's why I worry about, Like, I know, it's a
big deal to have Republicans speak at the DNC. I
(08:09):
get that, But you know, the question is just what
bigger group do they represent? Is that a statistically significant
representation of a bigger group of Trump supporters? And I
just haven't quite seen that. And again, maybe that's not important.
So maybe it's important for us to think that this
is important. But I mean, the Liz Chaneys of the world,
they're not seen as I mean, I just remember the
(08:32):
last time Trump was up for election, number like two
hundred foreign policy experts wrote this guy's a danger to
national security and everybody said, look, these people are, you know,
coming over to our side. Again, I think if we
mobilize our base and broaden our base. To me, that's
a viable goal, and so I support that, But I
(08:52):
guess the question is does that represent a bigger cross
section of law enforcement or Republicans or gun owners. And
I just think we have to be realistic, Like the
polls are very very tight right now, and so I
advocate for reaching out to people on the other side,
but maybe mobilizing our base is a better strategy.
Speaker 1 (09:13):
I feel like there was a both and that was happening,
and I think that there is a both and that
is happening with regard to you know, you have two
hundred sam odd Republicans that have come out in a
letter former Romney, McCain and Bush staff that are saying
that they are voting for Kamala Harris, and they did
so in an open letter in the New York Times.
(09:34):
The New York Times will get to in a moment,
because I have my issues with them, But you know,
you have credible Republicans. And I use the word credible
because I'm just that's the synonym for not crazy. Who
were on stage at the DNC talking about their Republicanism,
like they didn't switch parties, right, but they recognize that
they want to put country over party and so like
(09:57):
to me, I agree you to an extent with the
strategy that you offer in your book what We've Become,
And I agree with the fact that the old tactics
are useful to a point, right, But I think that
they are doing outreach in a different way. Maybe not
on this issue in particular, but I do feel like
(10:17):
they're doing Republican outreach and independent outreach that shows how
big this tent is. And so the point of contention
may be guns, but they are reaching out to Republicans
on their belief in democracy, right, So like, how do
you see that action, which is something that they've been
(10:39):
doing since the beginning, since a month into the Harris
Wall's campaign. Versus on this specific issue of.
Speaker 2 (10:45):
Guns, it's actually a symptom of a similar kind of issue,
which is I hope we have the biggest geniuses in
the world. I hope there is a strategy. I trust
that there is a great strategy based on this. But
I tell you the times that I get nervous, it's
just we're too concrete and literal at times. And I mean,
we like we maybe, but for example, I feel like
(11:10):
the RFK going over to Trump is a really big
deal a much bigger deal than people have talked about,
not because of the actual people who were going to
vote for RFK, but because RFK gives a permission structure
for people who are very wary of the government, government intervention,
government intrusion to vote for Trump even if they don't
(11:32):
like Trump. And so for me, it's actually the downstream
effects of RFK among people who are skeptical or wary
of government because of COVID or because of guns or
things like that. And so I just know from my
own research that messaging about democracy saving democracy, if you're
in that camp of people, you actually don't hear, oh
(11:53):
my god, I'm going to save democracy. You hear these
fuckers are going to come and make more big government
and regulate my life. And so again the question, this
is the new statistical question, is how important are those
voters or can we overcome those voters. But I will
say that I just feel like I see a lot
of people underestimating the rfkju and your impact, in my opinion,
(12:14):
because there are a lot of people who have become
like deeply skeptical or deeply libertarian or deeply wary, and
what they hear I think and I'm not trying to
speak for anybody. I'm just going off of my interviews.
But what they hear is Harris, everything she's doing me
suggests building more government, more government for healthcare, more government
(12:36):
for gun regulation, more government for everything else. And if
you're in the camp of people who think that's a
really good thing because we should be sharing our resources
and supporting safety nets and you know, moral imperative in
future of the country, that's amazing. And so I'm only
speaking for the people that I research, and I will
say that for the people I research, they don't think
(12:58):
that more government is the answer to a lot of things.
And so even the issue of democracy, when they hear democracy,
they hear more government programs, more of my money going
to people that I don't think are deserving, etc. Et cetera.
And I just really trust in the smart people who
are running that campaign to think we have a strategy
(13:18):
for that, and hopefully we do.
Speaker 1 (13:20):
I think that, you know, Jonathan, what I will say
here is that, like, there are people that are just
not going to come over. Yeah, So I don't necessarily
like I think that your gun strategy point makes sense
in terms of people believe in regulation, but they also
understand that crime is an issue, and so we want
to be in a place where we can both. I mean,
(13:43):
I don't personally and everybody knows that I don't want
guns in this country at all, So I'm not interested.
I personally am not. But if we are never going
to overcome that place, then like I want us to
live in a society where hunters in gun enthusiasts like
understand their responsibility to protect those around them, and so
(14:04):
believe in regulation and believe in the understanding that like
their ability to do what it is that they love
should not put communities at risk. That's my hope and feeling. However,
these libertarians who like, in my opinion, if you were
going to vote for RFK Junior, you're a nutjob. The
man is anti vax he is anti education, he is
(14:26):
like anti thought, and so I'm not interested in a
Harris Walls campaign that is trying to get the RFK
Junior people over to their side.
Speaker 2 (14:37):
Right. But let me say, I'm not actually talking about
the RFK Junior people, because I think there aren't a
huge number of them. I'm talking about potentially undecided voters
in swing states, which is not RFK junior supporters. It's
guys in rural Pennsylvania and their families, and guys in
Georgia and their families, and so it's really and again
(15:00):
I'm not saying we should shift our messaging, but I
don't think what I'm suggesting is a huge shift. Like
last week we talked about how I think we should
talk about crime because red flag laws and background checks
don't really dent crime. But if you talked about geop
policies that are raising crime and were anti crime, that's
a different way to talk about the same thing with
(15:21):
the same thing. A lot of the economic stuff, I
don't think it kills us to also talk about the
importance of entrepreneurialism and capitalism in a way that says
this is America, and we want people to be rich,
and we want to help you, support you, all these
kind of things like something like that. Because Trump is
saying the government's I'm not going to take your money.
And if your answer is only people with more than
(15:43):
four hundred thousand dollars are going to blah blah blah,
people just hear that as like, man, that's a negative
incentive for me to get rich. And so Trump is
kind of speaking to a thing. And so I'm just
saying and again, I research like the very very very
far right people don't talk to me, but the kind
of like not crazy about one issue or something like that,
(16:03):
who might come to our side. So that again and again,
I hope I'm wrong and I'm just like wasting airtime
right now. But if you're not going to speak to
those people, which again is not a change in strategy,
it's a change in frame, then you better make sure
that like everybody in Michigan votes for Harris and everybody
in everywhere else votes for Harris, because you're making a
particular trade off. So do I sound crazy right now?
(16:26):
I'm just right there.
Speaker 1 (16:27):
I don't think that you sound crazy. I think that
you're basically saying that like not to leave anything on
the field, and like, if there are people to convince,
then think about the ways in which you can convince
those people that Trump is not for them. I'm just
not certain of the level of contortionism that this campaign
(16:47):
has to do to convince people that haven't voted Democrat
in the last fifty years, and I don't think that
they're ever going to vote Democrat. So I would rather
not waste energy on the white, rural male vote that
statistically has not voted for a Democrat since like the
nineteen fifties. And then instead of trying to get those
(17:09):
who are aligned with Democratic values, making sure that you're
getting out the vote and inspiring those people to the polls,
that to me is an absolutely different strategy.
Speaker 2 (17:20):
And again, I hope you're right now wrong, It's just
like I look at the polls, even after all the enthusiasm,
all the momentum the convention, North Carolina, toss up, Michigan,
very very close, Georgia.
Speaker 1 (17:32):
But we're never going to see Jonathan. We're never going
to see blowout polls Like that's just not the world
that we live in. Like she's never going there's not
going to be a Democrat that is going to be
up like ten percentage point five percentage points. That's not
the world that we live in. But the fact that
those places that are notably read are now toss ups
(17:54):
shows us that momentum is in fact building because in
twenty sixteen, those places or blood red right. And so
the fact is is that Biden turned some of those
places purple by a little bit of a margin because
of COVID and so many people dying. But the fact
that Harris, four weeks into this campaign, with seventy days
(18:18):
to go, that those red places are toss ups is
a win for Democrats. And you know me, I don't
love Poles. With a couple of minutes that we have left,
I do want to switch gears and put on your
psychiatrist's hat, because I want to talk about the joy
effect and what it is that people who call themselves
(18:41):
opinion writers in the New York Times are doing this
week and what mainstream corporate media has been doing for
the last several weeks, which is saying things to the
effect of joy is not a strategy. Donald Trump can
still win on character and attacking the joy angle, as
if joy alone is not what the American people need
(19:03):
according to Lindsay Graham, and Americans are not joyful according
to Lindsay Graham, What do you make of the psychological
impact of joy versus fear and how people have been
reacting over the last month versus over the last eight
years of trump Ism.
Speaker 2 (19:22):
Well, I'm all for joy, you know, bring on the joy.
And I'm actually right now I don't want to see
any media outlets close right now, because we need everybody
on board to get the word out. I will say
that what I think about is, on one hand, there
is something very positive about feeling like you're on the
winning team. You know, we see this in sports. People
(19:44):
have fewer heart attacks after their teams win and stuff
like that. And so, you know, we saw the Obama
effect of the message of hope as a mobilizing strategy.
The caveat, I'm like mister Caveat today anays is that
we used to have this saying in psychiatry the negative
affect gets the energy. And it's basically, if you have
(20:05):
twenty happy people in a room and one discontent person
in a room, and I know because I have dated
these people, I just have a very powerful, painful breakup
with somebody like this. But it's like if somebody's unhappy,
it's our brain that works toward, oh, can we make
that person happy. So if there's twenty people in a
(20:27):
room at a party and one person comes in and
is miserable, that person gets the attention. You never remember
the twenty happy people in the room. And so there
is something very powerful about constant grievance, which, as we
know from Trump, it just mobilizes people to, as I've shown,
act against their own self interests, et cetera, et cetera.
(20:47):
And so I hope that joy can carry the day.
But I think the point that some people are making,
which is joy as a general strategy is important, but
it's probably going to be important to tie it to
some very material gains for people or material realities. I think.
I think the concern people have is, you joy is
(21:08):
not sustainable in and of itself, but you know, you
never know. I mean Obama showed differently, So I'm TBD
on this. I will just say that when you start
telling people they're being ripped off or taken advantage of,
and you're there champion that, and you're creating the conditions
of austerity where they actually feel they're being ripped off
(21:28):
even though they're being ripped off by you. That's been
Trump's game, and the question is can we overcome it?
And I'm curious to see how that plays out.
Speaker 1 (21:36):
Yeah, I'm on the different side of the fence as
somebody who has been living in existing in a place
of darkness for a very long time and recognize that
fear mongering, even if it is about let's say lifting
up the horrors of Project twenty twenty five is not
as palpable to people as them feeling possible about their lives. Yeah,
(21:59):
And what I think is happening is that one, I
think mainstream corporate media does not want people to be
joyful because that does not drive clicks for them. And
so I think that there is a coordinated strategy that
is happening as a way to make it seem as
if this campaign is somehow vapid in comparison to I
don't know what the fuck Donald Trump is offering, and
(22:20):
they don't know because they don't ever ask him any
goddamn questions. But I also think that America has become
quite numb to the grievance politics. And by numb, I
mean like they're over it. It's been perpetuated over and
over and over again. It's the same bullshit, and I
feel like now the American people have got reached a
place of exhaustion.
Speaker 2 (22:41):
Well, there two less things. I mean one about the media.
Like for me, my critique of the media is a
little different. I watch MSNBC all the time, and I
don't get a picture of why non crazy Trump supporters
support Trump. I would love to hear more from the
other side in ways that it's not trying to talk
anybody out of it or trying to talk to anybody
on our But I found myself like watching Fox News
(23:03):
every now and again just to see what the script
other people are getting is, because I do think that
there's a level of like stereotyping the other side, and
so for me, the media quote unquote, it's falling into
like simplistic positions on both sides. I would just love
to understand, like why do you support Trump? And not
in a way that I'm trying to talk you out
(23:24):
of it, but just so I can understand what drives
you in a way. And I don't feel like we're
getting that story. It's kind of like, oh my god,
you must be insane to vote for the other side.
And so I think that for me is part of it.
And I do think the point about joy is just that,
I mean, we know what Trump's going to do. He's
going to start hammering Harris about foreign policy Israel and Afghanistan,
(23:45):
I think is going to be huge issue and put
her on the defensive, and so I just think that
you know, how we respond to that. I think the
issue is Trump set the Afghanistan policy. He basically signed
the country over to the Taliban.
Speaker 1 (24:00):
Correct, So I'm like, I'm confused about why she can
be put on the defensive about the fact that he
had five thousand Taliban members released that took the country back.
Speaker 2 (24:08):
I'm not telling you what I believe. I'm telling you
what I think his strategy is going to be. Let's
talk in a week and see if I'm right, But
I think he's going to start hammering stuff like that.
And so the question is how are you going to
respond to that? And I just think that the retort
for what's coming from Trump is either to get dragged
down in the ditches or to take the high road.
And I'm not sure which one is better. Obviously, I
(24:29):
just said I think Trump created a nightmare in Afghanistan
that we walked into. But that's different from how he's
going to use it. And the question is how do
you do you have to go down and have a
street fight with him or do you want to stay
at a higher level. And I don't know the answer.
Speaker 1 (24:45):
Well right now, he's too busy talking about how good
looking he is on the campaign trail, So I don't
think that he's going to get around to policy anytime soon.
As always, my friend, doctor Jonathan Metzel, thank you so
much for making the time for wokf We always appreciate
your insight. That is it for me today. Dear friends
(25:07):
on wok af as always power to the people and
to all the people. Power, get woke and stay woke
as fuck.
Good morning, peeps, and welcome to ookf Daily with Meet
Your Girl. Daniel Moody recording from the Home Bunker. Folks,
Oh my god, why can't JD. Vance just go away?
Every time there is leaked audio of this man, we
just learn what a fucking weirdo he is. And now
(00:33):
he has turned his attention to childless women who happen
to be teachers. He hates them just like he does
all childless women, but has a particular disdain. It's wild.
It's wild, and Donald Trump goes on doctor Phil and says, well,
you only need to vote this once and then you
never have to worry about voting again, continuing with his
(00:56):
line around being a dictator. On day one, we know
what the stakes are, we know what the narrative is
that this party is offering. And I just pray each
and every day that the excitement that we are seeing
is going to translate into the votes that are needed
in order to get Harris and Walls over the finish line.
(01:20):
And I mean in an effing landslide, not just by
the skin of our teeth. This needs to be a
decisive victory, one that will be written in the history books,
because I want like you all to be done with
Donald Trump for once and for fucking all. Coming up
today my conversation with our friend, our in house doctor,
(01:42):
doctor Jonathan Metzil. You'll be surprised by this conversation today
because Jonathan and I don't see eye to eye on
our thoughts around how the Harris Walls team is expanding
the Big Democratic tent. Jonathan offers some points as to
think said he thinks could be done better, and we
(02:02):
challenge each other on seeing the other side. So that
conversation is coming up next. Folks. You know that whenever
we have the opportunity to speak with our in house doctor,
doctor Jonathan Metzil, we are always always pleased and happy.
And Jonathan, oh, we even't spoken in over a week
(02:24):
because I was at the DNC.
Speaker 2 (02:26):
We did your snazzy podcast last week.
Speaker 1 (02:28):
Oh we did. Yeah, we did the other one. We
did the other one, the New Abnormal. So Jonathan, I
want to get your thoughts even though we are now
days removed from the DNC, But I thought about you
while I was there because of the presentation around victims
of gun violence that brought me to tears and a
(02:50):
lot of people around me in the United Center to tears,
and I just wanted to get your thoughts overall on
how again we talked about this, how this campaign is
dealing with the gun issue, how you thought that it
was handled during convention and by the time that folks
listen to this, we will be at less than seventy
days until the election, which is just extraordinary, And how
(03:14):
you're feeling.
Speaker 2 (03:16):
First, let me just say that I'm so honored to
be speaking with you here today because you're a star
of stage. On screen, You've been stripping it, spilling it
across every outlet, Like every outlet, I'm like, oh, there's
Danielle on TV is spreading the love on everything. So first,
awesome job, and I will follow you anywhere whatever you
(03:37):
tell me to do. I am sucking.
Speaker 1 (03:39):
I appreciate that.
Speaker 2 (03:40):
Now. I have to say, on one hand, of course,
that moment with the guns was incredibly powerful and well
it could have been totally cheesy, actually, but it wasn't.
It felt very very powerful and very urgent, and so
I thought it was handled very well at the convention,
and I think that the message at that moment was
(04:01):
spot on. But I think that there's two sides to
this coin and I'm really struggling with this, which is
that on one hand, I mean, I understand we're seventy
days out and that's huge. Is the issue to rally
our base? If the issue is to rally our base,
then framing guns in that way is important with the
(04:22):
historical caveat that I write about in my book, which
is that Democrats will answer polls saying that they support
gun safety laws, but they don't vote based on them.
And so if they think that there's a new entree
into getting people to vote, to mobilize our people to
vote based on background checks and red flag laws, it
(04:42):
would just be honestly, for a presidential election, like people
vote on a bunch of issues, but it's really Republicans
that vote out of the fear that Democrats are going
to have the government take away their guns. That will
mobilize Republicans. And so it's a strategy. But my concern
always is that we're using a very saturated playbook that
(05:03):
in a way, if we're saying all these horrible things happened,
which they did, just searing life changing, life ending, But
if the only conversation we're having about guns is to
talk about guns in relation to regulation, which is really
where that conversation ends, or to highlight people I call converts,
(05:26):
people who are like Tim Walls and other people like, Oh,
I'm a gun owner, but I don't believe in the NRA.
It's just that that's a very small sample of a
much bigger fraction, which is all gun owners. And so
the question is are the bigger group of gun owners
going to be moved by this? And so again it's
just a calculated decision that I, honestly, as I've said
(05:49):
azillion times, have a tremendous amount of concern about because
just from my research and everybody else has other thoughts,
people who are going to vote based on guns are
already voting for Democrats. It's not like you're going to
bring new gun owners into the fold, because I mean,
it was great in my book. I interviewed a guy
and he said, people think, if you just say it differently,
(06:11):
or message differently to me, or say it louder, I'm
going to change my mind. But actually I know what
the goddamn issue is, and I don't want government regulation
of my guns. He's actually somebody who said I probably
would vote for Democrats, but I don't want government regulating
my guns, and so just saying we respect gun owners
the converts are not representing those people, and so I
(06:35):
don't know. I feel like i'm I know who's advising
Harris on this issue. I know that they have a
very particular agenda which is not mine. I hope they're right.
I hope they're right and I'm wrong. I would welcome that,
But I also think that there's another way to message, which,
as we talked about last week, has to do with
crime and the responsibilities of gun ownership and what it
(06:56):
means to own a gun and the right to own
a gun. That doesn't really change our platform at all,
but it does speak to those crossover people. And I
worry that if we're just doing every time for gun
safety and background checks, we're not speaking to those people.
And so the question is, will white voters who are
swing state voters, like, is that an important enough demographic
(07:18):
to speak to their concerns, because we're not doing it
right now.
Speaker 1 (07:21):
I wondered too, about how you felt about the law
enforcement officer who walked out on stage, gone on his
hip in full uniform at convention and what you thought
that kind of image was trying to convey as well.
Was that them which was my assumption trying to take
(07:43):
ownership of the law and order narrative as well.
Speaker 2 (07:47):
I mean, it's all about like permission structures. I mean,
the question is what does that person represent, right, does
that person represent the one cop who's willing to come
to our side, the one cop who's ex sceptible to
our side, or is it a sign of a bigger trend. Again,
that's why I worry about, Like, I know, it's a
big deal to have Republicans speak at the DNC. I
(08:09):
get that, But you know, the question is just what
bigger group do they represent? Is that a statistically significant
representation of a bigger group of Trump supporters? And I
just haven't quite seen that. And again, maybe that's not important.
So maybe it's important for us to think that this
is important. But I mean, the Liz Chaneys of the world,
they're not seen as I mean, I just remember the
(08:32):
last time Trump was up for election, number like two
hundred foreign policy experts wrote this guy's a danger to
national security and everybody said, look, these people are, you know,
coming over to our side. Again, I think if we
mobilize our base and broaden our base. To me, that's
a viable goal, and so I support that, But I
(08:52):
guess the question is does that represent a bigger cross
section of law enforcement or Republicans or gun owners. And
I just think we have to be realistic, Like the
polls are very very tight right now, and so I
advocate for reaching out to people on the other side,
but maybe mobilizing our base is a better strategy.
Speaker 1 (09:13):
I feel like there was a both and that was happening,
and I think that there is a both and that
is happening with regard to you know, you have two
hundred sam odd Republicans that have come out in a
letter former Romney, McCain and Bush staff that are saying
that they are voting for Kamala Harris, and they did
so in an open letter in the New York Times.
(09:34):
The New York Times will get to in a moment,
because I have my issues with them, But you know,
you have credible Republicans. And I use the word credible
because I'm just that's the synonym for not crazy. Who
were on stage at the DNC talking about their Republicanism,
like they didn't switch parties, right, but they recognize that
they want to put country over party and so like
(09:57):
to me, I agree you to an extent with the
strategy that you offer in your book what We've Become,
And I agree with the fact that the old tactics
are useful to a point, right, But I think that
they are doing outreach in a different way. Maybe not
on this issue in particular, but I do feel like
(10:17):
they're doing Republican outreach and independent outreach that shows how
big this tent is. And so the point of contention
may be guns, but they are reaching out to Republicans
on their belief in democracy, right, So like, how do
you see that action, which is something that they've been
(10:39):
doing since the beginning, since a month into the Harris
Wall's campaign. Versus on this specific issue of.
Speaker 2 (10:45):
Guns, it's actually a symptom of a similar kind of issue,
which is I hope we have the biggest geniuses in
the world. I hope there is a strategy. I trust
that there is a great strategy based on this. But
I tell you the times that I get nervous, it's
just we're too concrete and literal at times. And I mean,
we like we maybe, but for example, I feel like
(11:10):
the RFK going over to Trump is a really big
deal a much bigger deal than people have talked about,
not because of the actual people who were going to
vote for RFK, but because RFK gives a permission structure
for people who are very wary of the government, government intervention,
government intrusion to vote for Trump even if they don't
(11:32):
like Trump. And so for me, it's actually the downstream
effects of RFK among people who are skeptical or wary
of government because of COVID or because of guns or
things like that. And so I just know from my
own research that messaging about democracy saving democracy, if you're
in that camp of people, you actually don't hear, oh
(11:53):
my god, I'm going to save democracy. You hear these
fuckers are going to come and make more big government
and regulate my life. And so again the question, this
is the new statistical question, is how important are those
voters or can we overcome those voters. But I will
say that I just feel like I see a lot
of people underestimating the rfkju and your impact, in my opinion,
(12:14):
because there are a lot of people who have become
like deeply skeptical or deeply libertarian or deeply wary, and
what they hear I think and I'm not trying to
speak for anybody. I'm just going off of my interviews.
But what they hear is Harris, everything she's doing me
suggests building more government, more government for healthcare, more government
(12:36):
for gun regulation, more government for everything else. And if
you're in the camp of people who think that's a
really good thing because we should be sharing our resources
and supporting safety nets and you know, moral imperative in
future of the country, that's amazing. And so I'm only
speaking for the people that I research, and I will
say that for the people I research, they don't think
(12:58):
that more government is the answer to a lot of things.
And so even the issue of democracy, when they hear democracy,
they hear more government programs, more of my money going
to people that I don't think are deserving, etc. Et cetera.
And I just really trust in the smart people who
are running that campaign to think we have a strategy
(13:18):
for that, and hopefully we do.
Speaker 1 (13:20):
I think that, you know, Jonathan, what I will say
here is that, like, there are people that are just
not going to come over. Yeah, So I don't necessarily
like I think that your gun strategy point makes sense
in terms of people believe in regulation, but they also
understand that crime is an issue, and so we want
to be in a place where we can both. I mean,
(13:43):
I don't personally and everybody knows that I don't want
guns in this country at all, So I'm not interested.
I personally am not. But if we are never going
to overcome that place, then like I want us to
live in a society where hunters in gun enthusiasts like
understand their responsibility to protect those around them, and so
(14:04):
believe in regulation and believe in the understanding that like
their ability to do what it is that they love
should not put communities at risk. That's my hope and feeling. However,
these libertarians who like, in my opinion, if you were
going to vote for RFK Junior, you're a nutjob. The
man is anti vax he is anti education, he is
(14:26):
like anti thought, and so I'm not interested in a
Harris Walls campaign that is trying to get the RFK
Junior people over to their side.
Speaker 2 (14:37):
Right. But let me say, I'm not actually talking about
the RFK Junior people, because I think there aren't a
huge number of them. I'm talking about potentially undecided voters
in swing states, which is not RFK junior supporters. It's
guys in rural Pennsylvania and their families, and guys in
Georgia and their families, and so it's really and again
(15:00):
I'm not saying we should shift our messaging, but I
don't think what I'm suggesting is a huge shift. Like
last week we talked about how I think we should
talk about crime because red flag laws and background checks
don't really dent crime. But if you talked about geop
policies that are raising crime and were anti crime, that's
a different way to talk about the same thing with
(15:21):
the same thing. A lot of the economic stuff, I
don't think it kills us to also talk about the
importance of entrepreneurialism and capitalism in a way that says
this is America, and we want people to be rich,
and we want to help you, support you, all these
kind of things like something like that. Because Trump is
saying the government's I'm not going to take your money.
And if your answer is only people with more than
(15:43):
four hundred thousand dollars are going to blah blah blah,
people just hear that as like, man, that's a negative
incentive for me to get rich. And so Trump is
kind of speaking to a thing. And so I'm just
saying and again, I research like the very very very
far right people don't talk to me, but the kind
of like not crazy about one issue or something like that,
(16:03):
who might come to our side. So that again and again,
I hope I'm wrong and I'm just like wasting airtime
right now. But if you're not going to speak to
those people, which again is not a change in strategy,
it's a change in frame, then you better make sure
that like everybody in Michigan votes for Harris and everybody
in everywhere else votes for Harris, because you're making a
particular trade off. So do I sound crazy right now?
(16:26):
I'm just right there.
Speaker 1 (16:27):
I don't think that you sound crazy. I think that
you're basically saying that like not to leave anything on
the field, and like, if there are people to convince,
then think about the ways in which you can convince
those people that Trump is not for them. I'm just
not certain of the level of contortionism that this campaign
(16:47):
has to do to convince people that haven't voted Democrat
in the last fifty years, and I don't think that
they're ever going to vote Democrat. So I would rather
not waste energy on the white, rural male vote that
statistically has not voted for a Democrat since like the
nineteen fifties. And then instead of trying to get those
(17:09):
who are aligned with Democratic values, making sure that you're
getting out the vote and inspiring those people to the polls,
that to me is an absolutely different strategy.
Speaker 2 (17:20):
And again, I hope you're right now wrong, It's just
like I look at the polls, even after all the enthusiasm,
all the momentum the convention, North Carolina, toss up, Michigan,
very very close, Georgia.
Speaker 1 (17:32):
But we're never going to see Jonathan. We're never going
to see blowout polls Like that's just not the world
that we live in. Like she's never going there's not
going to be a Democrat that is going to be
up like ten percentage point five percentage points. That's not
the world that we live in. But the fact that
those places that are notably read are now toss ups
(17:54):
shows us that momentum is in fact building because in
twenty sixteen, those places or blood red right. And so
the fact is is that Biden turned some of those
places purple by a little bit of a margin because
of COVID and so many people dying. But the fact
that Harris, four weeks into this campaign, with seventy days
(18:18):
to go, that those red places are toss ups is
a win for Democrats. And you know me, I don't
love Poles. With a couple of minutes that we have left,
I do want to switch gears and put on your
psychiatrist's hat, because I want to talk about the joy
effect and what it is that people who call themselves
(18:41):
opinion writers in the New York Times are doing this
week and what mainstream corporate media has been doing for
the last several weeks, which is saying things to the
effect of joy is not a strategy. Donald Trump can
still win on character and attacking the joy angle, as
if joy alone is not what the American people need
(19:03):
according to Lindsay Graham, and Americans are not joyful according
to Lindsay Graham, What do you make of the psychological
impact of joy versus fear and how people have been
reacting over the last month versus over the last eight
years of trump Ism.
Speaker 2 (19:22):
Well, I'm all for joy, you know, bring on the joy.
And I'm actually right now I don't want to see
any media outlets close right now, because we need everybody
on board to get the word out. I will say
that what I think about is, on one hand, there
is something very positive about feeling like you're on the
winning team. You know, we see this in sports. People
(19:44):
have fewer heart attacks after their teams win and stuff
like that. And so, you know, we saw the Obama
effect of the message of hope as a mobilizing strategy.
The caveat, I'm like mister Caveat today anays is that
we used to have this saying in psychiatry the negative
affect gets the energy. And it's basically, if you have
(20:05):
twenty happy people in a room and one discontent person
in a room, and I know because I have dated
these people, I just have a very powerful, painful breakup
with somebody like this. But it's like if somebody's unhappy,
it's our brain that works toward, oh, can we make
that person happy. So if there's twenty people in a
(20:27):
room at a party and one person comes in and
is miserable, that person gets the attention. You never remember
the twenty happy people in the room. And so there
is something very powerful about constant grievance, which, as we
know from Trump, it just mobilizes people to, as I've shown,
act against their own self interests, et cetera, et cetera.
(20:47):
And so I hope that joy can carry the day.
But I think the point that some people are making,
which is joy as a general strategy is important, but
it's probably going to be important to tie it to
some very material gains for people or material realities. I think.
I think the concern people have is, you joy is
(21:08):
not sustainable in and of itself, but you know, you
never know. I mean Obama showed differently, So I'm TBD
on this. I will just say that when you start
telling people they're being ripped off or taken advantage of,
and you're there champion that, and you're creating the conditions
of austerity where they actually feel they're being ripped off
(21:28):
even though they're being ripped off by you. That's been
Trump's game, and the question is can we overcome it?
And I'm curious to see how that plays out.
Speaker 1 (21:36):
Yeah, I'm on the different side of the fence as
somebody who has been living in existing in a place
of darkness for a very long time and recognize that
fear mongering, even if it is about let's say lifting
up the horrors of Project twenty twenty five is not
as palpable to people as them feeling possible about their lives. Yeah,
(21:59):
And what I think is happening is that one, I
think mainstream corporate media does not want people to be
joyful because that does not drive clicks for them. And
so I think that there is a coordinated strategy that
is happening as a way to make it seem as
if this campaign is somehow vapid in comparison to I
don't know what the fuck Donald Trump is offering, and
(22:20):
they don't know because they don't ever ask him any
goddamn questions. But I also think that America has become
quite numb to the grievance politics. And by numb, I
mean like they're over it. It's been perpetuated over and
over and over again. It's the same bullshit, and I
feel like now the American people have got reached a
place of exhaustion.
Speaker 2 (22:41):
Well, there two less things. I mean one about the media.
Like for me, my critique of the media is a
little different. I watch MSNBC all the time, and I
don't get a picture of why non crazy Trump supporters
support Trump. I would love to hear more from the
other side in ways that it's not trying to talk
anybody out of it or trying to talk to anybody
on our But I found myself like watching Fox News
(23:03):
every now and again just to see what the script
other people are getting is, because I do think that
there's a level of like stereotyping the other side, and
so for me, the media quote unquote, it's falling into
like simplistic positions on both sides. I would just love
to understand, like why do you support Trump? And not
in a way that I'm trying to talk you out
(23:24):
of it, but just so I can understand what drives
you in a way. And I don't feel like we're
getting that story. It's kind of like, oh my god,
you must be insane to vote for the other side.
And so I think that for me is part of it.
And I do think the point about joy is just that,
I mean, we know what Trump's going to do. He's
going to start hammering Harris about foreign policy Israel and Afghanistan,
(23:45):
I think is going to be huge issue and put
her on the defensive, and so I just think that
you know, how we respond to that. I think the
issue is Trump set the Afghanistan policy. He basically signed
the country over to the Taliban.
Speaker 1 (24:00):
Correct, So I'm like, I'm confused about why she can
be put on the defensive about the fact that he
had five thousand Taliban members released that took the country back.
Speaker 2 (24:08):
I'm not telling you what I believe. I'm telling you
what I think his strategy is going to be. Let's
talk in a week and see if I'm right, But
I think he's going to start hammering stuff like that.
And so the question is how are you going to
respond to that? And I just think that the retort
for what's coming from Trump is either to get dragged
down in the ditches or to take the high road.
And I'm not sure which one is better. Obviously, I
(24:29):
just said I think Trump created a nightmare in Afghanistan
that we walked into. But that's different from how he's
going to use it. And the question is how do
you do you have to go down and have a
street fight with him or do you want to stay
at a higher level. And I don't know the answer.
Speaker 1 (24:45):
Well right now, he's too busy talking about how good
looking he is on the campaign trail, So I don't
think that he's going to get around to policy anytime soon.
As always, my friend, doctor Jonathan Metzel, thank you so
much for making the time for wokf We always appreciate
your insight. That is it for me today. Dear friends
(25:07):
on wok af as always power to the people and
to all the people. Power, get woke and stay woke
as fuck.
Host
Danielle Moodie
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Bobby Bones Show
Listen to 'The Bobby Bones Show' by downloading the daily full replay.