Politics Politics Politics

Justin Robert Young
  • 4.6 (877)
  • 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. 2D AGO

    Why the Talking Filibuster Revival is DOA. The Epstein Files are Tearing the UK Apart (with Stella Tsantekidou)

    Over the past couple of weeks, Senate Republicans have come up with this plan to bring back the talking filibuster, all in an effort to pass the SAVE America Act. On paper, it is clever. Force Democrats to physically hold the floor to block voter ID legislation that polls as an 80-20 issue. Make them read the phone book. Make them look unserious. Put Jon Ossoff and other swing-state Democrats on the record defending a position that is wildly unpopular nationally. I actually think it would be smart politics. It’s also never going to happen. The reason is simple: Senate institutionalists. John Thune does not want to be the Republican leader who weakened the filibuster, even in a limited way. The Senate sees itself as the “august deliberative body,” not the truck stop chaos of the House. No one wants on their résumé that they chipped away at the 60-vote threshold. The irony is that nothing in the rules prevents a talking filibuster. It simply fell out of use. But reviving it would still be seen as escalation. Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. And escalation is not what senators do to each other lightly. They are there for six years. They share committee rooms and green rooms. They nurse grudges quietly. They do not enjoy public humiliation. So while conservatives may draw up elaborate procedural roadmaps, this one caps out at tradition. And tradition, in the Senate, wins more often than base energy. The Shutdown Nobody Wins Meanwhile, we are entering an actual shutdown this weekend because Senate Democrats blocked a Department of Homeland Security funding bill after the House had already left town. Democrats escalated their demands from a handful of changes to what is effectively a multi-point overhaul. The problem is not moral clarity. The problem is math. When you shut down the government, history suggests you rarely get what you want. Often, you get nothing. The Trump White House already has a blueprint from the last shutdown: keep the pain manageable, move money around where possible, and wait for pressure to build. If that pressure intensifies, especially around TSA delays, FEMA responses, or spring break travel, Democrats will face the same brutal reality every minority party faces during a shutdown. Just like in the fall, they will have to cut a deal. And when they do, their base will not celebrate incremental concessions. They will accuse leadership of caving. The drawdown of ICE activity in Minneapolis, which could have been framed as a win condition, has already been overtaken by new demands. That is the trap. You negotiate past your leverage point because your base expects maximalism. Then you are left explaining why the maximalist outcome was never achievable in the first place. A State of the Union Circus All of this sets up a February 24th State of the Union that looks increasingly like a circus. Some House Democrats are openly discussing protests, despite Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries urging restraint. We have seen these moves before. Last year’s disruptions did not damage Trump. If anything, they made him look calmer by comparison. When the visuals are heckling and signage next to moments crafted for television, the protest becomes the spectacle, not the message. The deeper issue is control. Neither Mike Johnson nor Hakeem Jeffries appears to have ironclad command over their conferences. The margins are thin. The base pressure is intense. And Trump remains such a polarizing figure that restraint feels like betrayal to some members. So expect noise. Expect moments engineered for viral clips. And expect very little institutional discipline. Chapters 00:00:00 - Intro 00:04:03 - Talking Filibuster DOA 00:18:06 - Update 00:18:33 - Shutdown 00:22:36 - ICE in Minnesota 00:25:50 - Democrats SOTU Plans 00:28:55 - Interview with Stella Tsantekidou on UK Politics and Epstein 01:13:06 - 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 20m

  2. 4D AGO

    Texas Senate Primary Gets SPICY. How Will AI Define the Midterms and Beyond? (with Tom Merritt)

    Jasmine Crockett has a new ad, and it’s everything you’d expect out of 2026 so far. It’s a TV ad utilizing an anime style — and potentially some AI. It is inventive, loud, and undeniably designed to cut through clutter. In a vacuum, it might even be smart. Anime specifically has real cultural traction, especially with younger and Black voters, and the ad signals energy in a race where attention is scarce. The problem is context. Crockett is getting creative on television very late in the game, after being outspent roughly 19 to 1, and amid reporting that suggests her campaign lacks clear leadership and strategic direction. The theory of the campaign seems to be that message intensity can compensate for organizational weakness. That is a risky bet. Strong words without disciplined execution rarely scale, especially statewide. Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. What turned this race from messy to combustible was Colin Allred’s response to an influencer claim that James Talarico privately referred to him as a “mediocre Black man.” Allred did not hedge. He endorsed Crockett, appeared with her, and went on television saying Talarico refused to apologize. That escalated the race instantly. At this point, Crockett’s campaign is no longer merely contrasting policy or style. It is prosecuting a character case aimed directly at Black voters. If there were any functional party leadership involved, they would be trying to de-escalate this immediately. Burning Talarico to the ground may help Crockett in the primary, but it risks destroying a Democrat many believed could be viable in future statewide races. Instead, the attacks have intensified, and Talarico’s response has been uneven at best. His ads have not helped. They feel staged, overly cinematic, and oddly reverential, as if he is preaching rather than connecting. Authenticity is supposed to be his calling card, yet his campaign keeps placing a layer of polish between him and voters. That disconnect is now showing up in the data. A University of Houston poll taken in late January shows Crockett up nine points on Talarico, despite her spending disadvantage. That is a flashing warning sign. It suggests Talarico is not breaking through, and that Democratic primary voters are responding more to confrontation than caution. On the Republican side, the implications are enormous. If Crockett emerges as the nominee, the GOP path depends heavily on who survives its own primary. John Cornyn remains the establishment preference, backed by Trump’s former campaign leadership, but recent polling shows Ken Paxton leading. If Paxton is the nominee, Republicans will have to spend aggressively in a race they would normally ignore. If Cornyn is the nominee, the race likely snaps back to lean Republican. That is why this primary matters beyond Texas Democrats. A Crockett win followed by a Paxton nomination would force Republicans to defend ground they assumed was safe. If Texas flips, even into wave watch territory, it will not be because demographics finally arrived. It will be because campaigns failed, misjudged, or overreached at exactly the wrong moment. Chapters 00:00:00 - Intro 00:03:09 - Texas Dem Senate Primary 00:17:26 - Update 00:17:47 - DHS Funding 00:20:27 - Epstein 00:25:44 - Susan Collins 00:26:41 - Tom Merritt on AI’s Impact on the Midterms 01:07:49 - Wrap-up This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe

    1h 13m

  3. FEB 6

    The Clintons Strike Back! Is This a Vibes Bankruptcy for DC? (with Kirk Bado)

    The renewed focus on Jeffrey Epstein has pulled Bill and Hillary Clinton back into a political posture they know better than almost anyone. Hillary Clinton’s decision to publicly challenge House Oversight Chair James Comer and call for a live, televised hearing was not defensive or impulsive. It was classic Clinton strategy. When scrutiny becomes unavoidable, they prefer exposure on their own terms rather than silence that allows suspicion to metastasize. This approach is rooted in decades of experience. From Arkansas through the White House years and into the post-presidency era, the Clintons have learned that retreat signals weakness. Engagement, even aggressive engagement, creates opportunities to reframe. By demanding a public forum, Hillary Clinton is betting that structure, preparation, and confidence outweigh the risk of unpredictable questioning. It is a wager based on a long track record. Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. There is a widespread assumption that a public deposition would inevitably turn into a referendum on Donald Trump or spiral into uncontrollable chaos. I do not buy that. For such a moment to damage the Clintons meaningfully, Bill Clinton would have to concede proximity to wrongdoing he has denied for years. That would contradict every instinct the Clinton political machine has ever displayed. Instead, the more likely outcome is disciplined deflection. Epstein becomes a cautionary tale about elite misconduct broadly defined. Republicans become opportunists exploiting tragedy. Trump becomes the moral counterexample. This is not improvisation. It is choreography. The Clintons are exceptionally skilled at narrowing the scope of inquiry while expanding the scope of blame. What we are watching is not a reinvention, but a revival. The logic of the “vast right wing conspiracy” never disappeared. It simply went dormant. In moments like this, it reemerges because it still works with Democratic audiences inclined to see investigations as partisan weapons rather than truth-seeking exercises. That does not mean the Epstein issue goes away. It means it gets absorbed into a familiar frame where accountability is abstract and suspicion is redistributed. For Democrats privately uneasy about defending Bill Clinton, this strategy offers an escape hatch. For Republicans hoping for a decisive reckoning, it is a reminder of how resilient the Clintons remain under pressure. Chapters 00:00:00 - Intro 00:05:45 - Clintons 00:24:37 - Update 00:24:53 - Jobs 00:28:15 - Maine Polls 00:29:50 - Texas 00:32:19 - Kirk Bado on the State of DC 01:03:29 - Wrap-up (and Bonus Crazy Political Ad) 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 9m

  4. FEB 3

    Clintons Will Testify in DC as DRAMA Hits the Texas Primaries (with Michael Cohen)

    Texas has found itself in the spotlight over the past few days, and for pretty interesting reasons at that. First, we saw a Texas special election that flipped a deeply Republican district at the state level. In a seat Donald Trump carried by roughly 17 points, Democrats managed to pull off a low-turnout win. This was not a wave election, and pretending otherwise does not help anyone. Special elections are weird, electorates are tiny, and turnout models collapse. But the direction still matters. However, Republicans continue to rely on a coalition that is extremely Trump-centric. When he is not on the ballot, participation drops, especially among lower-propensity voters. Democrats, by contrast, have been showing up consistently in off-cycle contests. While that does not guarantee success in a general election year, it is enough to justify early anxiety. If Republicans cannot reliably mobilize their voters without Trump himself, Texas becomes less static than it has been for decades. Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. That volatility should be a gift to Democrats. Instead, the Texas Democratic Senate primary is rapidly becoming a cautionary tale. Senator John Cornyn’s seat is up, Ken Paxton is leading on the Republican side, and Democrats should be salivating. Paxton is polarizing, ethically radioactive, and deeply divisive. In theory, this is the opening Democrats have been waiting for. In practice, the primary is turning ugly. James Talarico, a rising star with genuine crossover appeal, now finds himself in a five-alarm crisis after a viral allegation that he described Colin Allred as a “mediocre Black man” while expecting to face him in the race. The context, the intent, and the precise wording are now almost secondary. What matters is that the damage landed squarely where a Texas Democrat cannot afford it: trust with Black voters. Colin Allred’s response was not subtle. He went directly at Talarico, endorsed Jasmine Crockett, and framed the controversy as a racial and moral failing, not a messaging mistake. Talarico’s apology attempted to split the difference, acknowledging poor phrasing without directly calling the accuser a liar. That move may have been legally cautious, but politically it validated the outrage. With the primary weeks away and a runoff likely, Democrats are now locked into a prolonged intraparty fight that makes the eventual nominee weaker, not stronger. Zooming out, this is why Texas continues to torment Democrats. Structural conditions occasionally line up. Republican candidates overreach. Demographic change inches forward. But the moment opportunity appears, the coalition turns inward. Instead of clearing the field and running a disciplined campaign against Ken Paxton, Democrats are now litigating identity, intent, and trust in public. The tragedy here is not ideological. It is tactical. Texas Democrats do not need a perfect candidate. They need a boring one who does not give voters a reason to hesitate. Every additional week spent tearing down a potential nominee is a week Paxton gets for free. If Democrats manage to lose this race, it will not be because Texas is unwinnable. It will be because they couldn’t get out of their own way. Chapters 00:00:00 - Intro 00:02:37 - Drama in Texas 00:18:02 - Michael Cohen on Texas, Midterms, and More 00:38:36 - Update 00:38:52 - Clintons 00:41:00 - Shutdown 00:43:15 - Republicans’ House Margin 00:44:22 - Michael Cohen on Texas, Midterms, and More, con’t 01:19:52 - 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 24m

  5. JAN 29

    What Do Dems Want After Minneapolis? A Deep Dive into CBS and Modern Media (with Bill Scher and Chris Cillizza)

    In the immediate aftermath of the fatal ICE shooting in Minneapolis, Senate Democrats are attempting to translate outrage into leverage. After a closed-door caucus, they emerged unified around a set of concrete demands tied to Homeland Security funding: tighter warrant requirements, bans on agents wearing masks, mandatory body cameras, visible identification, and a uniform code of conduct with independent investigations. These are not abstract reforms. They are specific guardrails aimed at slowing enforcement down and restoring a baseline of accountability. The politics here are brutal. Republicans are warning that reopening the funding package would stall it in the House, and they may be right. Any deal that ultimately passes will require Donald Trump’s explicit blessing, otherwise it dies before it clears the lower chamber. At this point, a partial government shutdown looks likely no matter what. The real strategic question for Democrats is prioritization. If they are forced to choose, which reform matters most. Masks. Warrants. Body cameras. They can’t win them all, and it’s up to them to determine which one is worth a shutdown fight. Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Georgia, the 2020 Election, and Reopening Old Scars As if immigration were not volatile enough, the FBI executed a court-authorized search warrant at election offices in Fulton County, Georgia, seeking records related to the 2020 presidential election. The bureau confirmed the investigation is ongoing but offered no details. County officials acknowledged the focus on 2020 materials and declined further comment. Anything touching the 2020 election is radioactive. Anything touching Georgia is worse. This reopens the deepest fault line inside the state Republican Party, the one that pits Donald Trump against Governor Brian Kemp and Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger. Trump tried and failed to destroy both men politically, and they emerged stronger for it. Whenever 2020 resurfaces, that fragile détente collapses. Even without knowing where this investigation leads, the act of reopening the file guarantees renewed tension inside Georgia politics and fresh oxygen for conspiracy narratives. The Fed Holds Steady Under Growing Pressure The Federal Reserve held interest rates steady at 3.5 to 3.75 percent, signaling confidence in economic growth and a stabilizing labor market after three rate cuts late last year. The language shift mattered. The Fed removed references to rising employment risks and emphasized that rates are now near neutral. Chair Jerome Powell stressed that future decisions will be data-driven, not political. That reassurance comes amid extraordinary pressure. The Justice Department is investigating matters related to the Fed, the Supreme Court is weighing a case on presidential authority over the institution, and Donald Trump is nearing a decision on who he will nominate to succeed Powell. Two Trump-appointed governors dissented, favoring a quarter-point cut. Through it all, Powell insisted the Fed’s independence remains intact. Whether markets believe that as the political scrutiny intensifies is the question that now hangs over monetary policy. Chapters 00:00:00 - Intro 00:01:58 - Bill Scher on a Potential Gov Shutdown and Dem Primaries 00:43:47 - Update 00:44:18 - Democrat Demands for DHS 00:46:17 - Fulton County FBI Investigation 00:47:51 - Fed Rate Holds 00:49:13 - Chris Cillizza on CBS News, Washington Post, and Modern Media 01:41:01 - 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 45m

  6. JAN 28

    What We Know About the Minneapolis Fallout. Talking Canada, Carney, and Midterms (with Evan Scrimshaw)

    The killing of Alex Pretti is different from the earlier death of Renee Good in ways that matter politically and institutionally. The video is clearer, the optics are harsher, and the official response has been far less defensible. In this case, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem immediately claimed Pretti brandished a weapon and intended to inflict maximum harm on officers. There is no evidence to support that claim, and there likely never will be. What should have been a period of restraint and investigation instead became a rush to narrative control. That choice carries consequences. Law enforcement credibility depends on patience and precision, not speed. When leadership declares conclusions before facts are established, it erodes trust not just among critics, but among potential allies. The Minneapolis footage has already become iconography, a moment that redefines how many Americans understand immigration enforcement. This will not fade quickly, and it will not be compartmentalized to one incident. Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. The DHS Civil War Comes Into the Open What made this whole scene unavoidable is that it landed directly on top of an internal power struggle that has been building for months inside the Department of Homeland Security. On one side are Stephen Miller, Corey Lewandowski, and Kristi Noem, who favor aggressive, street level enforcement driven by visible numbers. On the other is Tom Homan, a hardliner himself, but one who believes deportations at scale require discipline, prioritization, and some measure of public legitimacy. The Minneapolis shooting detonated that fault line. Noem’s public statements effectively forced the White House to intervene. Donald Trump responded by dispatching Homan to Minneapolis and opening direct communication with Governor Tim Walz and Mayor Jacob Frey. That is not a coincidence. It is a signal that the White House understands the damage being done and is trying to reassert control through a figure it trusts to stabilize the situation. Whether that effort succeeds depends on whether optics or operations ultimately win inside DHS. Organized Resistance and Local Political Reality Another element that cannot be ignored is the sophistication of the protests themselves. Groups like ICE Watch were not reacting spontaneously. They were coordinating through encrypted messaging, dividing the city by districts, assigning roles, and establishing rules of engagement. That level of organization changes the risk environment for officers and protesters alike. Obstructing federal officers is a felony, regardless of intent, and these encounters were always going to escalate under those conditions. At the same time, Walz and Frey face their own political bind. Cooperating too closely with federal authorities risks backlash from highly motivated activist groups that have demonstrated an ability to mobilize quickly and aggressively. That tension leaves local leaders squeezed between federal pressure and domestic unrest, a dynamic that makes clean resolutions unlikely. Congress, ICE Funding, and the Shutdown Clock The legislative consequences are now unavoidable. Senate Democrats are openly stating they cannot support funding bills that continue to finance ICE in its current form. House Republicans moved spending bills forward before the storm, but Senate leadership did not act in time. As of now, a government shutdown by the end of the week looks more likely than not. What makes this moment especially dangerous is that it did not need to escalate this far. With slower messaging, tighter discipline, and less performative leadership, DHS could have contained the damage. Instead, a tragic death has become a defining symbol, one that will stick to this administration through the midterms and beyond. This is the kind of image that reshapes political reality, not for a cycle, but for a generation. Chapters 00:00:00 - Intro 00:01:40 - Minneapolis 00:23:23 - Update 00:24:15 - Trump’s Visit to Iowa 00:26:08 - UK Conservatives 00:27:24 - Vindman Runs for Senate 00:31:41 - Evan Scrimshaw on Canada, Carney, and the Midterms 01:04:40 - Steelers Talk 01:21:46 - 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 25m

  7. JAN 23

    Venezuela, Iran, and What Russia Wants Out of Ukraine (with Ryan McBeth)

    I went back and watched Donald Trump’s speech at Davos after the reaction to it spiraled into calls for the 25th Amendment. Having seen it in full, I have to say, that response struck me as pretty overstated. The speech was odd, repetitive, and occasionally sloppy, but it was also entirely familiar. Trump no longer has multiple registers. He speaks the same way at Davos that he does in Greensboro, North Carolina. Rally Trump is the only Trump left. Yes, he mixed up Greenland and Iceland, and that matters if you believe he is on the brink of ordering military action. But once the Greenland panic subsided and the White House quietly declared the issue settled, the speech reads less like evidence of incapacity and more like evidence of stagnation. Trump told the same tariff stories, did the same accents, and framed global politics through the same lens of personal deal making. That consistency may be unnerving, but it is not new. If anything, the Davos speech underscored how little adaptation Trump feels he needs to make, even on the world stage. Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. DHS Infighting and the Immigration Power Struggle The most revealing domestic story was the open tension inside the Department of Homeland Security. Reporting that Kristi Noem and Corey Lewandowski are trying to force out CBP Commissioner Rodney Scott is not just palace intrigue. It exposes a deeper divide between political operatives and career enforcement officials. On one side are Stephen Miller’s allies, filtering through Noem and Lewandowski, pushing for maximal optics and aggressive deportation numbers. On the other are figures like Tom Homan and Rodney Scott, who argue that certain tactics erode public trust and make enforcement harder, not easier. Homan’s recent media blitz reflects that anxiety. He keeps stressing that deportations are happening, that priorities exist, and that blue state resistance is the real bottleneck. When enforcement professionals feel compelled to publicly justify their competence, it usually means politics has begun to overwhelm operations. Congress Moves, Barely, and Voters Notice On Capitol Hill, the House narrowly passed funding for the Department of Homeland Security, overcoming Democratic opposition tied to immigration enforcement concerns. It was not a clean win. Only seven Democrats supported the bill, and the compromises focused on oversight rather than substantive limits on ICE. Still, the broader takeaway is that Congress is moving more bills than expected for late January, even as shutdown deadlines loom. At the same time, new polling suggests Democrats are regaining momentum. An Emerson College survey shows Democrats leading Republicans by six points on the generic congressional ballot, alongside Trump’s approval sitting well underwater. Six points is not a wave by itself, but it is the range where wave watching becomes justified. Voters are signaling frustration on affordability and foreign policy, and that dissatisfaction is beginning to register in the numbers. If that margin holds or grows, Republicans will not be able to dismiss it as noise. Chapters 00:00:00 - Intro 00:03:23 - Davos 00:16:05 - Ryan McBeth on Venezuela 00:43:29 - Update 00:43:58 - DHS Infighting 00:47:18 - DHS Funding 00:48:28 - Midterms Polling 00:50:13 - Ryan McBeth on Iran 01:06:19 - Ryan McBeth on Russia-Ukraine 01:14:44 - 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 19m

  8. JAN 20

    What the Hell is Happening with Greenland? A Pre-Midterms Congressional Vibe Check (with Kirk Bado and Juliegrace Brufke)

    The Greenland situation continues to look more theatrical than existential. To me, leaked private messages from Emmanuel Macron, public frustration from Donald Trump, and hurried diplomatic calls ahead of Davos all point to the same conclusion: this is pressure politics playing out in real time. Trump’s irritation appears rooted less in Greenland itself and more in confusion over European military commitments and mixed signals from allies. That kind of misunderstanding is combustible, but it is also solvable, especially when everyone involved is about to be in the same conference rooms in Switzerland. Europe’s response, though, has been pretty revealing. Ursula von der Leyen’s declaration that the “old order is dead” was less a threat than a signal of insecurity. Europe wants leverage, and hinting at closer ties with China is one way to gesture at it. My priors remain that this all de-escalates quietly. The United States and Europe trade too much, rely on each other too deeply, and share too many strategic interests for this to spiral beyond bruised egos and tough talk. The laws of economics tend to win these fights. Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Immigration Enforcement and the Internal Split Back at home, the most interesting fight is not between parties, but within the Trump administration itself. Tom Homan publicly arguing for better messaging around ICE operations is a tell. He understands that enforcement without a moral argument collapses under public scrutiny. His claim that roughly 70 percent of those arrested are criminals is clearly meant to counter the perception that ICE is acting indiscriminately, especially after the fatal shooting of Renee Good in Minneapolis. What stands out is who is not making that case. Kristi Noem, who has leaned heavily into the aesthetics of enforcement, has ceded the substance to Homan, and that imbalance matters. When enforcement becomes spectacle, it invites backlash. When it is framed as governance, it can sustain itself politically. The friction between Homan and Noem is, to me, the most important palace intrigue to watch in Trump’s second term. Britain, Chagos, and Playing to the Future Speaking of our relationship with Europe, Trump’s sharp criticism of the United Kingdom over the Chagos Islands is best understood through a political lens, not a strategic one. The deal to transfer sovereignty to Mauritius while leasing Diego Garcia back for 99 years is not new, nor was it opposed by Washington initially. Trump’s reversal feels less about the base itself and more about aligning with figures like Nigel Farage, who benefit from confrontation with current European leadership. This is Trump playing a long game with the people he thinks will be in power next, not the ones currently holding office. Whether that gamble pays off is unclear, but it explains why a relatively obscure British territorial issue suddenly became Truth Social fodder. It is coalition maintenance, not military planning. Netflix, Warner Bros., and the End of Cable Gravity Finally, Netflix’s revised all-cash bid for Warner Bros. Discovery does a great job highlighting just how badly legacy media wants scale — and how selectively Netflix wants assets. Netflix does not care about cable networks. It wants intellectual property: Batman, Harry Potter, Game of Thrones. Paramount, by contrast, wants the whole thing in order to fight back against Netflix, and is willing to fight in court to get it. Hovering over all of this is CNN, which Netflix has no interest in owning and Paramount views as distressed but strategically important. Trump’s recent reposts criticizing Netflix’s cultural dominance suggest he may no longer stay neutral, which adds another unpredictable variable. This fight is not just about entertainment. It is about who controls narrative power in a post-cable world. Chapters 00:00:00 - Intro 00:05:47 - Justin and Kirk Bado on Republicans, Greenland, and Trump 00:32:59 - Justin and Kirk Bado on Democratic Midterm Primaries 00:49:20 - Justin and Kirk Bado on Josh Shapiro and 2028 00:59:51 - Steelers Talk 01:13:25 - Update 01:13:48 - Immigration 01:16:30 - Chagos Islands 01:21:16 - Netflix, Paramount, and Warner Bros. 01:25:06 - Interview with Juliegrace Brufke on Congressional Vibes 01:58:28 - 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

    2h 2m
See All (388)

4.6
out of 5
877 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
    388
  • Rating
    Explicit
  • Copyright
    © Justin Robert Young
  • Show Website
    Politics Politics Politics

You Might Also Like