The race is on between Donald Trump, who’s desperately trying to put down the raging scandal surrounding his Jeffrey Epstein lies (whatever they happen to be) and Democrats who are finally engaged, and trying to pry the truth loose. Who’s gonna win?

In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss:

* How has the Epstein scandal developed over the past week?

* Why have Democrats been uninterested in all matters Epstein, both recently and over many years of right-wing conspiracy theories?

* What’s the likeliest explanation of why Trump is behaving so desperately now?

Then, behind the paywall, we tackle a bunch of pressing questions: what have Democrats done thus far to move the story forward? What more could they do? Will the files be released, or will the story fizzle? Could “the Epstein files” be the thing that finally creates real, lasting political problems for Trump? And what would it say about America if this—rather than matters of major civic significance, like COVID failures and the insurrection—becomes the thing that finally brings Trump low?

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 wrote, “I’m not deeply invested in any theory about Epstein, but I always thought Democrats blew it by not pushing for some oversight here,” way back in 2021.

* Brian on how the Epstein saga illustrates the need for Democrats to get outside their comfort zones, and how they might use this opportunity to wage war on the entire right-wing bad-faith media complex.

* The 2002 Epstein profile that started it all: “‘I’ve known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy,’ Trump booms from a speakerphone. ‘He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it — Jeffrey enjoys his social life.’”

* Julie Brown, the reporter who broke the real Epstein trafficking scandal, weighs in with The Bulwark.

The Trump administration suddenly wants you to stop asking questions about Jeffrey Epstein. Case closed. Nothing to see here. That client list we promised to release? It doesn’t exist.

In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss:

* What is the Jeffrey Epstein conspiracy theory, and why has it persisted so long?

* Why are Epstein’s old, wide-ranging associations distinct from all the other rich guys who hobnob with politicians and powerbrokers?

* How should Democrats react to Trump administration efforts to sweep this under the rug, after dangling it so conspicuously.

Then, behind the paywall, Zohran Mamdani and the shortcomings of institutional diversity efforts: the perspective of two white, Jewish, latinos who’ve grappled with a few box-checking exercises themselves. What’s wrong with the assumption that Mamdani must have been trying to game the affirmative-action system? Zooming out, are institutions that request demographic data (universities, employers) doing so for the right reasons? Is there a better way to recruit, or to take account of applicants who’ve had a rough go in a country with plenty of racial discrimination, than asking them to approximate their ethnic identities?

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:

* From Brian’s archives: Call MAGA’s Jeffrey Epstein bluff.

* Matt: Yes DOGE failed, and it matters.

* Nothing fishy about this!

Minutes after recording this episode, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) provided the decisive vote for GOP legislation to kick 15-20 million people off their health insurance and give rich people a trillion dollar tax cut, along with many other horrors.

Now it’s back to the House, where hope, which springs eternal, goes to die!

In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss:

* What more could have been done to stop this?

* By whom?

* Given GOP margins and Donald Trump’s warlord-like control over the GOP, would it have made any difference?

Then, behind the paywall, could Zorhan Mamdani kill this bill … by endorsing it?

And, more seriously, what does his victory in the New York mayoral primary mean for Democrats post-2024? Is there anything Democrats in more conservative places can learn from a primary in a very blue city? Can the Democratic Party be a genuinely big tent, where centrists abide progressives (even self-avowed socialists) and progressives give red-state Democrats room to run on cultural issues?

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 sewer socialists Mamdani can (and hopefully will?) learn from.

* Brian on whether Republicans’ continued obsession with “starving the beast” will return us to the era of New Deal politics.

* Matt, again, on the moderate-left synthesis: The view that an obsessive focus on cost-of-living issues is a winning move across factions.

* Brian, again, on the hard truths progressive and moderate leaders should tell their fellow travelers, for the sake of unifying against right-wing extremism.

Welcome to hell, because we’ve reached the hot war phase of the second Trump presidency. Or have we?

In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss:

* What has actually happened, both since 2018, and just in the past couple weeks, and why it’s so unlikely to have left the U.S. and the world better off.

* Is there any upside to Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu using and playing each other in a way that undermines both of their political goals?

* What’s the least worst and worst worst possible near-medium term outlook?

Then, behind the paywall, how opponents of Trump and his war can balance political and substantive objections? Is it possible to oppose/criticize/mock Trump for his spastic, failed policy without driving him toward further hostilities? Is that even a consideration Democrats should heed? What about the fact that Trump and his administration lied to justify the attacks? That the strikes were illegal? That they may lead to American civilian deaths?

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 how Trump’s evolution from shitty president who posts a lot to shitty president who wields dictatorial power should bring an end to the Democratic tick of brushing off all of his outrages as “distractions.”

* Matt’s 21 thoughts on Trump’s Iran war.

* Chris Murphy: 8 Things You Should Know About Trump's Strikes on Iran.

Donald Trump may not always chicken out, but his on again/off again, advance-retreat dance does seem to insulate him from lasting blowback. It seems the only way to drag Trump’s popularity down low enough to really hem him in is for his supporters to find out the hard way.

In this episode, Matt and Brian tackle the questions:

* Does the hyperbolic claim that “Trump Always Chickens Out” serve to insulate him from public backlash, while also perversely encouraging him to prove his haters wrong?

* Would we be better off if he stopped chickening out?

* Does defeating Trump (in Congress, the courts, etc.) weaken him, or does it protect him from his own unsustainable policies?

* If we’re all accelerationists now, where would failure (or catastrophic success) undermine Trump most? Economic mismanagement? Medicaid cuts? Mass deportation? War?

Then, behind the paywall, some considered thoughts on how the Trump opposition would respond if Trump didn’t chicken out. What can Democrats as a whole learn from the handful of leaders (most recently Alex Padilla and Tina Smith) who’ve drawn attention to their causes in productive ways? Are Democratic political fortunes best served if Trump’s Medicaid cuts fail, or if they succeed? And how, in this hothouse environment, can progressives and moderates align to help Democrats recruit viable Senate candidate in red states?

Further reading:

* Matt argues you’re not really alarmed about the slide into autocracy if you aren’t willing to make ideological sacrifices to help Democrats win the Senate.

* Brian’s schema for when to try to stop Trump, and when to let him step in it.

* Noah Wyle helps get the word out about looming Medicaid cuts. (Paging George Clooney, Jimmy Kimmel…)

Since last week’s episode, Donald Trump and Elon Musk had a bitter falling out, Republicans encountered new obstacles to enacting their top priorities (cutting rich people’s taxes and poor people’s Medicaid) and Trump ordered a federal siege of Los Angeles.

Also, Brian got his first taste of sweet, sweet European health care.

What do these things have to do with one another? Arguably not much, arguably quite a lot. If safety nets weren’t valuable and important, Republicans wouldn’t be lying about the contents of their budget reconciliation bill. And if their reconciliation bill was wise, popular, and on the glide path to passage, Trump (really, Stephen Miller) wouldn’t be trying to whip up a violent pretext to squeeze Republicans on Capitol Hill into voting for a reckless, terrible bill.

But siccing federal troops on American citizens is a big deal, whether it’s intended as a diversion or an inducement or not. Should Democratic leaders have seen it coming? Should they have been more prepared? Are there ways for them to increase public awareness of the looming decimation of Medicaid without falling back on the trope that everything else is a “distraction?”

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 Democrats overweighted the importance of “issue salience” and it left them unprepared to wage unavoidable political battles with Trump.

* Matt argues that if progressives understood FDR’s legacy more accurately, they would be more tolerant of Democratic efforts to widen the party’s appeal.

* No Kings protests across the country on Saturday.

Brian’s European Vacation continues as Matt is joined by special guest Jane Flegal of the Blue Horizon Foundation to break down the energy provisions of Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill.

The energy cuts have attracted less attention than the health care provisions in part because they were made much more severe at the last minute. Jane breaks down how the Inflation Reduction Act changed America’s approach to clean energy subsidies — making them more durable, more flexible, and more inclusive of the full range of technologies including nuclear, geothermal, and carbon capture — and how it connects to larger industrial policy questions related to supply chains and battery production. Repealing these measures will leave America worse off than it was pre-Biden in terms of clean energy production, which is going to lead to higher levels of air pollution and higher energy bills as Americans face a generational increase in electricity demand from AI and data centers.

After the break, Matt and Jane analyze the broader philosophy of investment-led climate policy — what’s the right lesson to learn from the failure of Obama-era carbon pricing and what can we do about the flood of extremely dirty Chinese steel on world markets?

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 Republicans turned against energy programs in their Big Beautiful Bill.

* The impact of repealing energy credits on electricity prices.

* Dylan Matthews on the geopolitics and environmental economics of steel.

Brian is on vacation, so special guest McKenzie Wilson joins Matt to talk about Blue Rose Research’s retrospective on the 2024 election and their work on message-testing. McKenzie came to Blue Rose after working in the private sector, working for Jamal Bowman, and working in the Biden administration’s Department of Health and Human Services — she believes in progressive values and she wants to win elections.

In this episode, Matt and McKenzie discuss:

* The central role of the cost of living in the 2024 election.

* The importance of partisan realignment based around engagement with news and politics.

* The deep unpopularity of Joe Biden and the need for Democrats to internalize that as they move forward.

Then, behind the paywall, what are the Trump administration’s biggest points of vulnerability? What are Democrats getting right and wrong about highlighting those issues? Most of all, McKenzie makes the case for a disciplined approach that ties everything back to core values that motivate progressives and also resonate with swing voters.

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:

* The full Blue Rose slide deck.

* Matt’s article on Republicans’ Medicaid cuts.

* A corporate marketing guru’s appreciation and praise of Bernie Sanders’ message discipline.