Politix

Chuck Schumer and Senate Democrats continue to catch hell from their own voters for caving in the government shutdown fight. But in the coming days, perhaps sooner than most people are expecting, Congress will have to increase the debt limit. And once again, Democrats will have to decide whether and how to use their votes to rein in an out-of-control GOP.

After some quick observations about the Trump administration’s snowballing Signal Scandal, Matt and Brian discuss and explain:

* What happens, as far as we know, if the U.S. government runs out of borrowing authority;

* Whether DOGE has made a default crisis more imminent by crippling the IRS (and, thus, revenue collection);

* How Democratic leaders should seize control of this story now, and make their demands clear, before the deadline is at hand and Republicans beat them to the punch;

* Why articulating their demands up front might help them avoid the trap of caving to Republican pressure.

Then, behind the paywall, what should those demands be? It isn’t certain that Republicans will need Democratic votes to increase the debt limit. But if they do, should Democrats use their leverage to stave off the Republican threat to Medicaid? Or would they better off focusing on the issues like DOGE and Trump administration lawbreaking that were at issue in the aborted shutdown fight?

All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed.

Further reading:

* How the Trump administration texted Jeffrey Goldberg its war plans.

* Brian’s 19 thoughts on the Signal scandal.

* Donate to Susan Crawford.

* Join the Tesla Takedown movement.

* Elon Musk and the payment system.

Donald Trump is becoming unpopular, but Democrats are more unpopular than they’ve ever been, reflecting not just Republican voter partisanship, but the fact that tens of millions of Democratic voters are fed up with their party’s conduct in the aftermath of the election. With partisan anger boiling over, calls for Chuck Schumer to resign from leadership, and constitutional crises on our doorstep, Matt and Brian discuss:

* How did Democrats in Congress bungle the politics of funding the government so badly?

* Will they have another bite at the apple when it’s time to raise the debt limit, or has the ship full of apples sailed?

* Given mediocre Democratic congressional performance in 2024, and little prospect of winning the Senate in 2026 (absent a generational Trump-induced crisis) what’s the argument for Schumer to keep his job?

Then, behind the paywall, a lot of yelling. Are Democrats playing too much protect-defense under dire circumstances? Should leaders like Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries be focused entirely on 2026 election politics, or are the moral stakes of Donald Trump’s authoritarian takeover threat severe enough to adopt a less cautious, feistier, more procedurally aggressive posture? Is the Politix synthesis of Yglesias-style policy moderation and Beutler-style procedural hardball the sweet spot for the party in the Trump era?

All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed.

Further reading:

* Matt’s sigh of relief that Schumer prevented the shutdown.

* Brian argues that if Democrats aren’t going to pick big fights that might move public opinion, and leave everything to the courts, they should probably lay some political groundwork for whenever Trump decides he can ignore court rulings.

* Donate to Susan Crawford.

* Join the Tesla Takedown movement.

* Proposition: “We're gonna get a lot of primary challengers with the issue positions of 2013 Barack Obama and a burning, unhinged desire to put Republicans in jail.” Would this be good or bad, and would it win or lose?

By the time this episode runs, we’ll be two days from the deadline to fund the government. And if Republicans get there act together juuuust a bit, Democrats will have to decide if and how to wield their leverage to the end of forcing the Trump administration back into compliance with the rule of law.

In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss:

* Can Democrats hold out indefinitely, if Donald Trump refuses to faithfully execute the law, and win the politics of a government shutdown with the voting public?

* Can they wield the filibuster power to at least strip the funding bill of special goodies House Republicans added to unify their members?

* What would represent Democrats standing firm, and what would could as a betrayal of their constituents?

Then, behind the paywall, does the rapidly deteriorating economy change the equation at all? Does it give Democrats leverage to align against a clean funding bill, given that Trump has only been able to damage the economy so badly because he’s abused his economic powers? And what can Democrats at the state level do, short of encouraging Tesla vandalism, to make Trump and Musk feel pain for their dereliction of duty?

All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed.

Further reading:

* Brian argues that Democrats need to be prepared not just to blame Trump for economic turbulence, but to prebut all the lies he’ll tell about it.

* Matt says Democrats should learn from Trump’s economic failures, and re-embrace conventional economics.

* “Tesla faces vandalism and protests amid backlash” 🎻.

Just six weeks into his presidency, Donald Trump has dragged the country to the brink of recession. He’s become unpopular, lost the public’s trust to handle the economy, and hollowed out the government in risky ways. So in his first speech to Congress, Trump: blamed all of it on Joe Biden, subjected Democrats to a torrent of abuse, lied about Social Security (among many other things), and redoubled his commitment to tariffs, even if they cause “disturbance.”

In this free post-address episode, Matt and Brian discuss:

* Was this speech worse (that is, more dishonest, defamatory, etc.) than his first-term State of the Union addresses?

* Does his dishonest and degrading style simply make him less popular, or is there a method to it?

* What’s the endgame of seeding a bunch of lies about Social Security—a program he’s promised never to cut, and doesn’t have the votes to cut anyhow?

* Would Democrats have served themselves better by boycotting the speech or having another party-wide plan to convey their contempt for and total lack of confidence in Trump?

Plus: Elon Musk, Elissa Slotkin. William McKinley

To our free subscribers: Thanks for listening. We hope you’ll stick around, and consider upgrading to a paid subscription.

Even in the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, most Americans thought Donald Trump was a good steward of the economy. This misplaced faith has been key to his political durability. But after just one month of indiscriminately firing federal workers, illegally reneging on federal spending commitments, and making erratic threats to tariff the bejesus out of our trading partners, his economic approval has fallen under water. So what’s going on?

In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss:

* Are people really just annoyed that Trump has ignored the price of eggs and other staple goods?

* Is it that by mistreating people and crippling important services, he’s created an unflattering news environment that has soured people on him generally?

* Or might he have actually tipped the economy into recession at lightning speed?

Then, behind the paywall, why does the explanation matter? Did Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries happen to land on exactly the right strategy to oppose Trump in his second term? If people are actually mad about the cruelty and lawlessness, does it suggest Democrats should shift their focus from egg trolling to forcing Trump back into regular order?And to that end, are Democrats prepared to force a confrontation over the rule of law as the deadline to fund the government approaches?

All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed.

Further reading:

* Brian on why losing popularity so quickly puts a big dent in Trump’s plan to become an autocrat.

* Matt on how foreign leaders on the receiving end of Trump’s tariff’s threats can exploit this weakness by calling his bluff.

* The perils of the Trump-GOP plan to cut Medicaid.

Explaining the GOP’s rapid slide into authoritarianism is complicated, but you can’t tell the story if you don’t understand that Republicans have been unwilling to abandon huge, unpopular tax cuts for the rich as an organizing principle. In their view of things, if popular majorities don’t support regressive tax cuts, then democracy has to go. So it’s no surprise that last week House Republicans published its blueprint for special legislation that would cut taxes by many trillions of dollars, and partially make up the cost through enormous cuts to Medicaid.

In this episode, Matt and Brian (who used the wrong mic like an asshole) discuss:

* Why Democrats are so eager for Republicans to shift emphasis from attacking the civil service and the rule of law to advancing huge tax cuts for the rich.

* Can Republicans, with their small Senate majority and tiny House majority, actually pass anything significant

* Have they convinced themselves that there’s never a big political downside to cutting rich people’s taxes?

Then, behind the paywall, why that assumption is more likely than usual to blow up in their face. How many people would lose their health insurance if Republicans cut $2 trillion from Medicaid? How dramatically would trillions of dollars in (mostly deficit-financed tax cuts increase inflation? If Republicans have doomed themselves no matter what (either they cause economic harm, or they abandon their legislative agenda), why don’t Democrats train more of their focus on the unfolding constitutional crisis, before Republicans succeed at wiping out constitutional government.

All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed.

Further reading:

* Matt on the disconnect between Donald Trump’s aggressive power-grabbing and his party’s legislative incompetence.

* Real-world consequences of the Trump-Musk assault on the work force are really bad.

* The famous George H.W. Bush-Bill Clinton exchange on the real world impact of federal debt.

* We’re rationing eggs now.

Donald Trump and Elon Musk are now on the receiving end of multiple court orders requiring them to rein in their constitutional crime spree: resume impounded payments, destroy improperly downloaded government data, restore regular government communications. Their response, as of this recording, has been to see how contemptuous they can be of the orders, and musing openly about outright defiance.

In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss:

* What, specifically, precipitated this legitimation crisis?

* If the Trump administration’s announces it will disregard district court orders, is it time to take to the streets?

* Is Kendrick Lamar likelier to shatter the MAGA coalition than professional Democrats?

Then, behind the paywall, how well, if at all, are Democrats responding to the prospect of a completely lawless presidency? Should they be more plainspoken about how they will use their power to restore the rule of law? If Trump will ignore district court orders enjoining his efforts to impound money, will he also ignore them if he tries to spend money absent a congressional appropriation?

All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed.

Further reading:

* Matt on why there are many, many better forms of resistance than doomscrolling.

* Brian argues a crisis like this is the right time for Democrats to sideline over-cautious, elections-oriented consultants, and listen to people who know how to put down coup attempts.

* Cass Sunstein on the high price of ignoring the social cost of carbon. (Trust us, it’s relevant.)

Prior to the election, Elon Musk warned non-billionaire Americans to brace for “temporary hardship” (approving) in the event of a second Donald Trump presidency. Over the weekend, after insisting he’d impose 25 percent tariffs on all Canadian and Mexican imports, Trump also acknowledged (perhaps for the first time) that his economic policies will cause “pain.” By Monday, he’d backed down from the tariffs, but Musk is still on a rampage through the federal bureaucracy and Trump continues his efforts to purge the Justice Department and remake the government dictatorially.

In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss:

* Why did Trump (again) chicken out of his tariff threats?

* Does it tell us anything meaningful about his real views, his political calculations, or what he may do in the future?

* Why didn’t Trump exempt China, and what does that mean for the U.S. economy (and for Musk, who conducts tons of business in China)?

Then, behind the paywall, a through line connecting Trump’s economic policy bluster with his very real effort to mount an authoritarian takeover. What are Trump, Musk, and his technogoons doing behind the scenes at the Treasury Department? Why are they also fixated on USAID? And how should Democrats, including nervous moderates, be prepared to respond?

All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed.

Further reading:

* Brian’s 18 thoughts on the omnicrisis, what Trump thinks he’s doing, and how to sort his volleys and outrages to focus on what matters most.

* Matt makes the case that beleaguered civil servants shouldn’t quit their jobs.

* What Musk’s techdork mafia appears to be doing at the Treasury Department.

* Did Russians sneak a bug into the Oval Office during Trump’s first presidency?

In just the past week, Donald Trump has illegally fired over a dozen federal anti-corruption watchdogs, installed Fox News weekend host Pete Hegseth as secretary of defense, and then claimed the power to arbitrarily withhold congressional appropriation—an unconstitutional maneuver called “impoundment.”

In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss:

* What are inspectors general, and why does Trump want to fire them?

* How does his desire to avoid waste, fraud, and abuse oversight interact with his attempt to impound federal grant, loan, and aid spending?

* What Democrats can do to try to force Trump and the GOP back into compliance with the law before it’s too late.

Then, behind the paywall, are these just indiscriminate power grabs, or is there a method here? Why did Elon Musk, the country’s biggest defense contractor and political donor, take a special interest in getting a lightweight like Pete Hegseth confirmed as defense secretary, at a department that suddenly has no watchdog? Did the fact that Trump had limited success abusing and corrupting the civil service in his first term trick people into letting their guard down?

All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed.

Further reading:

* Matt on congressional Republicans’ war against the poor.

* Brian on how Democrats can use their leverage to insist on compliance with the law and constitution.

* Days after saluting just exactly like a Nazi would, Elon Musk tells German neo-Nazi party that Germans should get over their holocaust guilt.

It’s the first Politix podcast of Donald Trump’s second presidency, and it began more or less how we expected: with a lot of bluster and bullshit, but also real demonstrations of lawlessness. Thanks John Roberts?

In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss:

* Trump’s immigration executive orders, with a special focus on his effort to unilaterally suspend the Constitution’s birthright citizenship guarantee;

* Will Trump follow the law if and when this and other orders are enjoined by federal judges?

* Why does birthright citizenship make the United States a better country?

Then, behind the paywall, where does Trump’s appetite for lawlessness leave things going forward? Will there be any consequence for his day-one decision to pardon over 1,500 January 6 insurrectionists, even exceptionally violent ones? Will Democrats come to the defense of any affected immigrants, or will they remain divided (as they were through the GOP push to pass the Laken Riley Act)? And why did Biden fritter away the lame duck period instead of doing more to protect the country?

All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed.

Further reading:

* Brian argues House Democrats should move to impeach Donald Trump over the January 6 pardons, even knowing Republicans will rally to protect him.

* Matt on the basic fact that because Trump is so self-serving and dishonest, nobody actually knows what he’s going to do. thinks Democrats can just follow Joe Manchin’s lead.

* Greg Sargent on Trump’s executive order to declare illegal crossings an “invasion” and thus justify the deployment of troops to the southwestern border.