Politics Politics Politics

Justin Robert Young
  • 4.6 (878)
  • News
  • Updated Semiweekly

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

  1. 1d ago

    Is Platner Done? All the Antics of Canadian Parliament (with Evan Scrimshaw and Charlie Feldman)

    The Trump administration is backing away from a planned $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund after a revolt from Republicans on Capitol Hill. The fund, tied to a settlement and intended to be administered by the Justice Department, had drawn criticism as a potential slush fund that could benefit Trump allies prosecuted under the Biden administration. White House officials told GOP leaders they were retreating from the proposal, at least for now. What stands out to me is that this was never something Trump could simply do by executive order. It would have had to move through Congress, and right now he is running short on political leverage. Collins, Murkowski, and McConnell have already shown they’re willing to break with the administration. Add in senators like Tom Tillis, John Cornyn, and Bill Cassidy, who have their own political considerations, and suddenly there are a lot of Republican votes that need convincing. If every other priority is tied to this fund, it becomes a problem. The White House has signaled retreat…. for now. Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Meanwhile, Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier has sued OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, alleging that ChatGPT is an unsafe product, particularly for children, and that the company misled the public about its risks. The lawsuit argues that AI contributes to harms including addiction, suicide, and even mass shootings. What makes this interesting is that there are no clean ideological fault lines on AI. In Florida, AI is increasingly being treated as just another version of Big Tech, grouped together with the companies conservatives believe have censored or de-platformed them. Simultaneously, politicians in states like Michigan are celebrating AI investments, data centers, and the jobs that come with them, even as it might leave Gretchen Whitmer on the outside looking in for 2028. As AI becomes a larger part of the economy, states are going to play a much bigger role in determining how it develops. But our biggest story remains Iran. Over the last few days, a targeted IRGC commander killing, an attack on a U.S. airbase in Kuwait, and reports that Iran is ending ceasefire talks have all pushed events away from diplomacy and toward escalation. Iran is threatening to fully shut down the Strait of Hormuz and other export routes. The president of Iran has reportedly tendered his resignation, while the IRGC appears to be tightening its grip on power. At the same time, Hezbollah has reportedly signaled a willingness to accept a ceasefire with Israel, though neither American nor Israeli officials seem convinced it would hold. Everything now revolves around leverage. The Strait of Hormuz is Iran’s last major bargaining chip. If it reopens without major concessions, Tehran loses a significant source of pressure. If Iran gives up its nuclear ambitions or loses the ability to project power through regional proxies, the regime risks undermining the very justification it has used for decades. Meanwhile, global oil markets are hanging on every development. Hopes of a diplomatic breakthrough have helped keep prices contained, but each new escalation raises the possibility that the conflict widens and energy markets absorb the shock. One small but important development is that internet access appears to be returning inside Iran after months of restrictions. That means more information is beginning to flow out of the country at a moment when the political situation appears increasingly unstable. Whether this ends in negotiations, further military action, or a deeper internal power struggle unfortunately remains wrapped in the fog of war. Chapters 00:00:00 - Intro 00:03:07 - Interview with Evan Scrimshaw 00:39:19 - Trump Slush Fund 00:42:13 - AI Lawsuit 00:46:34 - Iran 00:50:10 - Interview with Charlie Feldman 01:30:42 - 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

    1h 35m

  2. 6d ago

    Iran Proposal BREAKDOWN. Have We Reached the End of All Podcasts? (with Michael Tracey)

    We currently have a reported 60-day framework on the table between the United States and Iran that would temporarily extend the current ceasefire dynamics and create space for renewed nuclear negotiations. To be clear, it’s not a breakthrough deal. This feels like a pressure valve built to prevent escalation from snapping back while both sides decide whether they can actually land something bigger. The center of gravity here is the Strait of Hormuz. That is where the entire arrangement becomes real or falls apart. The reported structure prioritizes restoring and guaranteeing commercial shipping through the strait, easing maritime restrictions, and reducing the risk of renewed disruption in one of the most important energy chokepoints on the planet. In exchange, Iran would gain movement on sanctions relief and potentially access to frozen funds, while the United States would push for verifiable constraints on uranium enrichment and clearer handling of existing stockpiles. Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Nobody is pretending this is a final settlement. It reads more like a staged de-escalation plan: stabilize shipping first, then attempt to negotiate the more politically radioactive issues like enrichment levels, inspection access, and long-term nuclear limits. The idea is to reduce immediate risk before trying to solve the underlying conflict. That underlying conflict is the same one that has defined U.S.–Iran relations for decades. Economic relief in exchange for nuclear restraint. The structure is familiar, even if the packaging is not. Anyone watching this unfold will recognize echoes of past negotiations, especially the JCPOA framework, where the core trade was access to global markets in return for limits on Iran’s nuclear program. The political debate around that model has never really gone away, and it is very much present again here. The fragility of the situation is obvious in the way it is being described. Working-level agreement is one thing. Leadership approval is another. That gap is where deals like this tend to stall, shift, or collapse entirely. Even small changes in political appetite can rewire the entire structure. Still, this feels like the first tangible step towards restoring reliable, uninterrupted shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. If that actually does happen, everything else becomes more plausible. If it does not, the rest of the framework is just another document waiting for even events to overtake it. God knows we’ve seen enough of those. Chapters 00:00:00 - Intro 00:03:07 - Iran Deal? 00:10:49 - Interview with Michael Tracey 00:36:18 - Update/LA Mayor Polling 00:39:46 - Trump’s AI Deal 00:43:43 - 2028 Dem Frontrunners 00:46:09 - Interview with Michael Tracey, con’t 01:25:16 - 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

    1h 29m

  3. May 26

    FINAL Texas Predictions! Exploring the Uncanny Valley of AI Ads (with Brian Brushwood)

    Texas Republicans are about to answer a question that has been hanging over the party since 2024: is partial loyalty to Trump enough anymore, or do you either become fully absorbed into MAGA or get pushed out entirely? Because both John Cornyn and Chip Roy represent different versions of Republicanism that tried, in different ways, to coexist with Trump without completely surrendering to him. And right now it looks like both experiments are failing. Chip Roy backed Ron DeSantis and spent years cultivating the image of an ideological purist who would occasionally buck leadership. Cornyn, meanwhile, did the exact opposite. He spent the last few years trying to carefully stay inside Trump’s orbit, hiring Trumpworld operatives and constantly reminding voters how aligned he was with the president. One strategy was confrontation, the other was accommodation, and both may end in political extinction. Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. The Roy situation honestly feels more straightforward. MAGA voters have absurdly long memories when it comes to perceived disloyalty during the DeSantis challenge. Roy spent the last year trying to re-enter the fold by being more cooperative, less antagonistic, more visibly aligned with the movement, but the suspicion never really disappeared. In a normal political environment, Roy’s résumé would make him a strong favorite for statewide office in Texas. Instead, he now looks like somebody who made one unforgivable career calculation at exactly the wrong moment. If the polling is right and Mays Middleton wins comfortably, then the lesson Republican politicians will take from this is brutal: you do not get credit for eventually coming home after backing an alternative to Trump. The scarlet letter sticks. Cornyn’s downfall is more interesting because he actually played the game correctly, at least according to the old rules. He built institutional support. He raised enormous amounts of money. He aligned himself with Trump operationally. For a while it even looked like it might work. He outperformed expectations in the initial round of voting and there were persistent rumors that Trumpworld had seriously considered endorsing him. But the problem with trying to survive inside Trump politics is that eventually survival itself becomes weakness. Ken Paxton understood this instinctively. He didn’t need to prove he was more effective than Cornyn. He just needed to remain more emotionally connected to the base long enough for Trump to make a final decision. Once the endorsement landed, the race effectively stopped being about qualifications and became a referendum on who belonged more naturally inside the MAGA coalition. What’s fascinating is that this same dynamic is now showing signs of strain elsewhere. South Carolina Republicans refusing to immediately fall in line on redistricting suggests at least some elected Republicans are beginning to quietly calculate for a post-Trump future. Not necessarily because Trump lacks influence — he very clearly still has it — but because the timing starts to matter. If Trump cannot personally destroy you until after the next election cycle, then maybe you can survive long enough for his attention to move elsewhere. That’s the first real symptom of lame-duck politics: not open rebellion, but selective hesitation. Politicians start making small bets that enforcement may become inconsistent. And that’s probably the deeper story underneath all of this. Trump still absolutely has the power to end Republican careers. Thomas Massie just learned that. Cornyn is probably about to learn it. Roy may learn it too. But the coalition is also beginning to subtly adapt around the reality that Trump’s political clock is finite. The question is whether Republicans are entering a transition period where fear of Trump remains dominant but no longer universally paralyzing. Because once politicians begin believing there are scenarios where they can survive crossing him, even temporarily, then the entire incentive structure inside the party starts to change. Chapters 00:00:00 - Intro 00:02:51 - Final Texas Prediction 00:09:05 - AI Ads with Brian Brushwood 00:30:23 - South Carolina 00:33:54 - Iran 00:37:46 - Trump’s Physical 00:40:47 - AI Ads with Brian Brushwood, con’t 01:18:25 - 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

    1h 21m

  4. May 22

    The DNC Autopsy RISES! How Political Outsiders are Dominating the Midterms (with Chris Cillizza)

    The Democratic Party finally released its 2024 autopsy and somehow managed to make the whole situation look even worse. Not because the conclusions were devastating. Honestly, the conclusions barely mattered. The thing itself apparently reads like garbage. Wrong facts, shallow sourcing, no real accountability structure, no serious attempt to interrogate the deeper failures of the campaign. Ken Martin’s explanation for why he sat on it for months was basically: “I thought it sucked.” Which immediately raises the obvious follow-up question: then why are you releasing it now instead of fixing it? That’s the part that really sticks with me. A bad first draft is not some unforgivable sin. Every organization produces bad drafts. The problem is what happened next. Instead of commissioning a better version, expanding the scope, interviewing more people, and turning it into something useful, the DNC chair basically admitted he got scared. Scared of upsetting Biden loyalists. Scared of upsetting Kamala people. Scared of turning the 2028 primary into a blame war. Scared of stakeholders. Scared of his own shadow. And if your political party just suffered a massive defeat and is going through a structural identity crisis, “risk-averse hall monitor” is probably the worst possible archetype you can install at the top. Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Because the Democratic Party’s problems are not cosmetic — they are systemic. The issue is not whether they were two clicks too progressive or three clicks too centrist on Gaza or Liz Cheney or whatever argument people want to relitigate forever. You can build winning coalitions with different ideological mixes. What you cannot survive is an outdated operating system. The Democrats still communicate like it’s 2012. They still protect candidates through message discipline instead of exposure. They still behave like traditional media gatekeeping works. They still think carefully managed campaigns can survive in a hyper-networked political culture where voters expect constant access and authenticity, or at least the performance of authenticity. That’s why I keep coming back to the feeling I had during the 2024 Democratic convention. Everybody was celebrating. Everybody was dancing. Everybody was acting like the vibes alone had solved the party’s problems. And the whole thing felt to me like a deeply dysfunctional family that had temporarily won the lottery. For one week everybody’s hugging each other, buying champagne, pretending the underlying rot disappeared. But the money doesn’t fix the alcoholism. It doesn’t fix the debt. It doesn’t fix the resentment. Eventually the sugar high wears off and you’re left with exactly the same structural problems you had before, except now everybody’s angrier because the miracle cure didn’t work. Republicans, for all their chaos, at least went through this process earlier. Trump bulldozed the old Republican establishment starting in 2016, and whether you think that was good or bad, it forced the party to evolve operationally. They adapted to social media faster. They understood small-dollar online fundraising faster. They cultivated emerging political communities like crypto and AI faster. The Democrats still feel institutionally run by either the same people from the Obama era or the protégés of those people. Even when personnel changes, the culture often doesn’t. And culture matters more than almost anything in politics because culture determines how fast you can adapt when the ground shifts underneath you. Which is why the current Democratic polling advantage feels fragile to me. Democrats are benefiting because Donald Trump is politically damaging himself on Iran, Epstein, and governance. They are functioning as a check on Trump. That is different from voters enthusiastically buying into a coherent Democratic agenda. Even now, when Democrats talk about affordability, it often sounds abstract and bureaucratic instead of tangible. Huge spending programs, diffuse benefits, complicated delivery systems — the exact kind of stuff voters chronically struggle to emotionally connect with. So if the party leadership can’t even produce a competent internal autopsy after one of the most consequential losses in modern politics, it’s hard to argue they are materially closer to fixing the deeper problems underneath all of this. Chapters 00:00:00 - Intro 00:03:00 - DNC 2024 Autopsy 00:15:24 - Interview with Chris Cillizza 00:40:19 - Trump’s AI Deal Postponed 00:46:11 - Senate Republicans vs. Trump’s Slush Fund 00:50:38 - Raúl Castro 00:57:25 - Interview with Chris Cillizza, con’t 01:19:44 - 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

    1h 23m

  5. May 18

    Kentucky's Crazy Republican Primary Ads! Is Iran Settling in for the Long Haul? (with Ryan McBeth)

    Kentucky’s Republican primary out of its 4th District has turned into the most expensive House primary in American history, and it doesn’t take a detective to tell where the money went. No, not into field operations. Not into policy. Not even into persuasion. It went into some of the most deranged political advertisements I have ever seen. Thirty-two million dollars dumped into a district where basically all the ad spending is concentrated around Cincinnati media buys, and the result is a nonstop fever dream where every commercial break feels like somebody slipped hallucinogens into the broadcast feed. At the center of all this is Thomas Massie, who has spent years building a reputation as the libertarian conscience of the Republican Party. He’s the guy who votes no on spending bills, needles leadership, pushes Epstein file transparency, and generally treats party discipline like a disease. Normally that kind of anti-establishment energy would mesh perfectly with Trumpism. Instead, Trump absolutely hates him. Massie crossed him too many times, and now removing him from Congress has become a personal project for the president. Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. The actual challenger, Ed Gallrein, barely matters as a political figure in his own race. His campaign’s main qualification is basically “Donald Trump likes me more than the other guy.” That’s enough. The first ads are almost normal by comparison. One of them goes after Massie for abandoning his old support for term limits. Another features Massie literally walking alongside a CGI elephant wearing a MAGA hat and Trump hair while talking about how he and Trump are aligned after all. It’s less “principled constitutional conservative” and more “please stop yelling at me, sir.” Then the campaign fully leaves Earth’s atmosphere. One anti-Gallrein ad argues that the real force behind the race is some kind of shadowy gay liberal conspiracy, complete with rainbow lighting effects and a parade of terrifyingly unflattering images of trans women like the editor accidentally imported a folder labeled “Fox News Facebook comments.” In other words, on’t be fooled by Trump endorsing Gallrein — the real people backing him are THE GAYS. It feels less like a campaign commercial and more like a local-access panic attack. And then came the AI ad. One PAC generated fake footage of Thomas Massie romantically wandering around Washington with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar. Hand-holding. Walking together. Getting into cars. Ending at a hotel room with a “Do Not Disturb” sign hanging on the door. The implication is obviously that Massie is not merely politically disloyal, but sexually and emotionally aligned with the Democratic left in some kind of forbidden MSNBC throuple. This is the sort of nonsense that 32 million dollars will buy you in 2026. The craziest part is that this stuff probably works. Maybe not the specifics, but the overall environment absolutely does. If you live in Kentucky right now, these ads are your atmosphere. You cannot escape them. Basketball game? Ads. Baseball? Ads. YouTube? Ads. Streaming? Ads. Every available surface is screaming about Thomas Massie, Donald Trump, transgender conspiracies, and AI-generated hotel hookups. National media tends to treat Massie like an interesting ideological dissenter, but Republican primaries are not decided by cable-news admiration. They’re decided by highly motivated Republican voters who really, really care whether Donald Trump wants somebody gone. Chapters 00:00:00 - Intro 00:03:33 - Kentucky Primary Ads 00:13:51 - Interview with Ryan McBeth 00:42:30 - $1 Billion Ballroom 00:45:58 - IRS Lawsuit 00:49:49 - Trump’s Bad Polls 00:54:08 - Interview with Ryan McBeth, con’t 01:32:40 - 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

    1h 36m

  6. May 14

    Why Vance vs. Rubio 2028 Isn't Real! How AI Will Impact Midterms and Beyond (with Katie Harbath)

    The obsession with a hypothetical JD Vance versus Marco Rubio showdown for 2028 says a lot more about the Republican fascination with palace intrigue than it does about actual political reality. Trump himself clearly enjoys stirring the pot, whether he’s privately asking allies which one they prefer or turning a public event into a literal applause contest. To be fair, both men have handled the awkwardness well. Vance joked that it’d be very unlike Donald Trump to hold a televised competition to decide his successor, while Rubio has mostly brushed the drama off. But the deeper point is that this chatter only really matters if Trump’s presidency ends in a very specific way — something it’s looking increasingly unlikely to do. If Trump rebounds politically and leaves office on a high note with Republicans, the conversation is basically over before it starts. JD Vance is the vice president, he’s fully aligned with the administration, and there’s no obvious reason he’d lose his grip on the base. Republican politics has become so intensely loyalty-driven that there are very few examples of major figures breaking away successfully. In that world, Vance is simply the heir apparent because continuity becomes the safest and easiest path for the party. Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. The only scenario where Rubio really becomes a viable alternative is if the administration collapses politically by the end of the term. But that creates a massive “Catch-22,” because if things go south, Rubio is one of the people most likely to absorb the damage. Iran is the perfect example. Trump may ultimately get blamed for rising gas prices and economic frustration, but Rubio, as Secretary of State, would almost certainly carry the bag for the foreign policy side of the equation. If the administration’s biggest weakness becomes a war that spirals, Rubio is standing much closer to the blast radius than Vance is. That’s what makes the whole “Vance vs. Rubio” framing feel pretty silly right now: the conditions that would make Rubio a serious alternative are probably the exact same conditions that would weaken him the most. Still, the fact that people are even entertaining the idea says something important about Rubio himself. Back in 2016, he often looked overwhelmed trying to compete with Trump’s brand of politics. Now, he comes across as far sharper, calmer, and more comfortable in his own skin. Years in the Senate clearly helped, but so did surviving the wreckage of his first presidential campaign. The version of Rubio inside this administration is a much more polished figure than the one Republicans watched a decade ago. He’s become more confident in interviews, more effective in hearings, and more naturally presidential in public settings. Just look at a recent exchange in the White House press briefing room, where Rubio gave a thoughtful answer about what it means to be an American. It’s exactly the kind of moment that reminds people why he was once viewed as the party’s “golden boy” in the first place. He feels less like a nervous young senator trying to prove himself and more like someone who finally understands how the levers of power actually work. But there’s still a ceiling on how independent anyone in Trump’s orbit can really become. Rubio may be more charismatic and politically mature than he was before, but Republican politics still revolves around Trump’s approval in a way that can change in a heartbeat. One bad Truth Social post can instantly transform an ally into a target. Rubio already learned the hard way that MAGA voters were skeptical of him, especially given his reputation as a more traditional hawk. That skepticism hasn’t fully evaporated. So while he’s certainly more compelling today than he was in 2016, there’s a real chance this is the most comfortable position he’ll ever occupy: close enough to the sun to feel the warmth, but still not quite part of the inner circle. And that path doesn’t put you in the Oval Office, friends. Chapters 00:00:00 - Intro 00:03:37 - Why Vance vs. Rubio Doesn’t Matter 00:15:21 - Trump’s Trip to China 00:20:52 - Democrats Get Aggressive 00:23:53 - Fireworks!!! 00:26:46 - Interview with Katie Harbath 01:02:16 - Wrap-up and Odyssey Controversy Thoughts 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

    1h 12m

  7. May 12

    Iran War Brings BIG Inflation. Is the UK Already in Need of Another PM? (with Stella Tsantekidou)

    Trump’s trip to China is happening at the exact moment his most persistent political vulnerability is becoming impossible to ignore: the economy. Inflation has ticked up to 3.8% year over year, gas prices are rising again, and the White House is leaning on a familiar argument — to the Biden administration, at least — that the pressure is temporary. At the same time, instability in the Strait of Hormuz keeps energy markets on edge, with the potential for sudden price shocks baked into the background. The administration’s framing is that this is the cost of a broader strategic shift: a tougher posture toward Iran and a reordering of global trade in America’s favor. The issue is that voters don’t experience macro strategy as macro strategy. They experience it as prices at the pump, at the grocery store, and in monthly bills. Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. That gap is widening in housing. The spring buying season, usually a reliable indicator of economic momentum, is unusually subdued. Mortgage rates and uncertainty are keeping buyers out of the market, reinforcing a sense that affordability is slipping out of reach even when headline indicators are mixed. This is where the politics get sticky. Economic perception tends to lock in emotionally before it ever becomes analytical. Once recurring costs start to feel consistently painful, the economy stops being a set of statistics and becomes a daily irritant. At that point, presidential approval on the economy becomes hard to unwind, even if conditions later improve. Against that backdrop, the China trip is unusually high stakes. The administration is trying to sell it as a potential economic pivot point, with talk of Chinese investment in U.S. manufacturing and a broader reset in relations. But the negotiating environment is constrained by simultaneous pressures: Middle East volatility, energy market sensitivity, and domestic inflation concerns. China is not approaching that dynamic passively. The more pressure Iran-related instability puts on oil markets, the more leverage Beijing has in shaping the terms of any broader economic or geopolitical understanding. Stability itself becomes a bargaining chip. And then, of course, behind all of this is the Taiwan question, which remains structurally unresolved regardless of public messaging. Any movement toward cooperation on Iran or energy stability would likely be accompanied by implicit tradeoffs elsewhere in the system. The concern in Washington is not an explicit Taiwan deal, but incremental shifts in positioning that accumulate over time. Given Taiwan’s central role in global semiconductor supply chains, even marginal changes in its status would ripple quickly through the technology and manufacturing sectors. Chapters 00:00:00 - Intro 00:05:47 - Inflation 00:20:30 - Virginia 00:26:22 - Cuba 00:29:42 - Iran 00:40:15 - Interview with Stella Tsantekidou 01:12:23 - 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

    1h 16m

  8. May 8

    The Best (and Worst) Bets on Midterm Races (with Evan Scrimshaw)

    The Trump administration is looking for a new ICE director, which at this point might qualify as one of the least appealing jobs in American politics. Todd Lyons is heading for the private sector at the end of the month, and whoever replaces him is walking straight into a political minefield. ICE is under pressure from every direction at once, criticism over aggressive raids, backlash tied to the Minnesota shootings, scrutiny around deaths in custody, and a White House that still wants to project toughness on immigration without constantly relitigating the most politically toxic parts of enforcement. What’s interesting is that the administration does not seem eager to escalate things even further. The expectation appears to be more continuity than confrontation, likely with a heavier focus on cases involving gangs, fraud, and violent offenders rather than the kind of broad raids that dominate cable news. But that still leaves the core problem unresolved. The administration wants someone who can satisfy the base without constantly creating politically damaging optics, and there are not many people eager to occupy that awkward middle ground. Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Susan Collins Tries to Get Ahead of the Age Question Susan Collins is trying to get in front of a political problem before it grows into something larger. After online attention focused on the visible shaking in her campaign announcement video, Collins revealed that she has a benign essential tremor that she’s managed throughout her Senate career with medication. Doctors say the condition is not tied to cognitive decline, but politically, the challenge is making sure voters hear that explanation before opponents define the issue for her. That matters because Graham Plattner’s core argument is built around generational contrast. He wants the race to be about old versus new, establishment versus change. Collins, meanwhile, would much rather make the election about experience and steadiness, especially if the alternative is a candidate dealing with his own controversies over judgment and seriousness. By addressing the tremor directly now, she’s trying to keep the focus from drifting entirely onto age and energy, which is exactly where Plattner wants it. The Epstein Story Refuses to Disappear A federal judge unsealing a purported Jeffrey Epstein suicide note is the latest reminder that this story never really leaves the public imagination, even when there’s very little genuinely new information involved. The note is undated, partially illegible, and unverified, but none of that stops it from immediately generating another wave of speculation. At this point, almost any document tied to Epstein automatically becomes a cultural event online, regardless of whether it actually changes the known facts. Part of the reason is the source itself. The note came through Epstein’s former cellmate Nicholas Tartaglione, a convicted murderer who has become a recurring figure in the broader Epstein mythology. That combination of sensational claims, unreliable narrators, and public distrust keeps the story alive indefinitely. Even when official investigations conclude one thing, there remains a huge appetite for alternative explanations, hidden details, and unresolved questions, which is why the Epstein saga never really seems to end. Chapters 00:00:00 - Intro 00:02:19 - Gasoline 00:07:00 - Political Betting Odds with Evan Scrimshaw 00:32:38 - ICE Director 00:34:36 - Susan Collins 00:37:03 - Epstein 00:39:08 - Political Betting Odds with Evan Scrimshaw, con’t 01:10:46 - Wrap-up and Ted Turner Thoughts 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

    1h 17m
See All (400)

4.6
out of 5
878 Ratings

About

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

Information

  • Creator
    Justin Robert Young
  • Years Active
    2015 - 2026
  • Episodes
    400
  • Rating
    Explicit
  • Copyright
    © Justin Robert Young
  • Show Website
    Politics Politics Politics

You Might Also Like