Rep. Sam Liccardo (D-CA) & Rep. Mike Flood (R-NE)

0:00MUSIC Welcome to Cease Fire, where we look to bridge the divide in American politics. I'm Greta Bronner, in Ferdasha Burns. Joining me now from either side of the aisle, two guests who have agreed to keep the conversation civil, even when they disagree. California Democratic Congressman Sam Locarto, and Nebraska Republican Congressman Mike Flood. Thank you both for joining the program. Appreciate it. Good to be with you, Graham. Let's start with housing. The two of you worked on housing legislation that has been passed, components of it. Congressman Locarto, tell us first, what are the components that the two of you worked on? Well, thank you. I really should give a lot of credit here to Mike. He was an IS the chair of the subcommittee that's relevant for housing and insurance on the finance services committee.

1:06That's where the bill started. And really in the first couple of days of my career in Congress, he reached out to Democrats with manual cleaver who is our ranking member on that subcommittee. He said, hey, let's hear all the Democratic ideas because we're going to put it back together when we want to hear all the ideas. And frankly, that's not something that's done very often in Washington today. And I was grateful for the opportunity. So I showed up as a first term member of the minority party, which usually means nobody's interested in my ideas. And I had several. And Mike and I were able to work on a couple of bills that focused on expanding supply. That's an area where I think Democrats and Republicans can agree. We certainly have housing crisis. There's a lot of different solutions. But getting barriers out of the way so that we can enable more supply, specifically, one bill relating to federal funding for affordable housing, some of the procedural barriers there that were preventing a lot of communities from being able to move forward with affordable housing projects.

2:09So the whole act that passed ultimately included, I think, a little bit more than 50 different provisions, different bills all consolidated together. But I appreciate, you know, we had four bills that were bipartisan. That was a part of and Mike had many, many more obviously leading to charge. And Congressman Flood, were you interested in this first term lawmakers ideas? Let alone a Democrat? Well, of course, you know, I came from a unit camera where we had it was officially nonpartisan and I was the speaker there in Nebraska. But let me tell you this about Sam, like former mayors have a really good grasp on all of the different federal programs. And when a man, you a cleaver and I got together, I said, let's do this together. I said, why don't I come visit with your members and had been visiting with the Republican side. And if I'm correct, and Sam might want to correct me, he's actually not officially a member of the housing committee, but he's so passionate about it. He didn't miss one meeting. He waved on to every subcommittee hearing that we had. And that's how passionate he is about housing. And when he and I started talking, you know, he understood the home partnership program.

3:16He understood the community development block grant program. He knew what cities could get done. And I'm really pleased that in this bill that is now law, cities can now use their CDBG entitlement funding for home building, which is a huge win for municipalities. Because at the end of the day, it's the city council and the mayor that get blamed if there's not enough housing. And Sam here clearly understood all the programs and he started the ground running and it's been great to work with him. Congressman flood, then when will Americans do you think start feeling the impact of this legislation? Well, let's just talk about a couple of the things that I think are going to really excite people in housing, especially just the idea that we eliminated the need for a chassis or the requirement for a chassis in a mobile home. You know, last week on the mall, all those manufactured houses were there. And you'll notice something different this year. They now can build a second story. You know, in 1905, you could order a two story house out of the Sears catalog. Many of those homes are still standing in American cities today.

4:21Including the government got involved along the way. And now we have a situation where you can build two stories and at a cheaper cost without the chassis requirement. That has already adduced the manufacturing housing industry. They're adding jobs, they're building more, they're planning to sell more. And the other thing that I really get excited about is we walked away from some of the burdensome environmental reviews that have kind of stalled progress for a lot of developers and a lot of folks that use this federal funding. Some of the regulations we drew back, I think will really jumpstart housing in America, increase supply and hopefully lower costs. Let's talk about the politics of housing right now. Here is Politico's reporting. Rising mortgages are muddling the GOP's housing message. GOP lawmakers went to great lengths this summer to draw bipartisan support for sweeping legislation to make housing more affordable, passing the 21st century road to housing act. But Trump's war against Iran has sent energy prices soaring, pushing up inflation that increases the price of home loans.

5:26Congressman Flood are Americans seeing, feeling the impact of Congress's work. Well, I think it's going to take a little while for us to get the rules written through the Department of Housing and Urban Development. I listen, prices are too high. I've said that all along. We also have an existential threat in Iran having a nuclear bomb. I wanted ended as soon as anybody, but I don't want to cut and run like we did in Afghanistan. I want to make sure that those 18 service members that gave their life so that we could live free of an Iran with a nuclear bomb. And their lives are honored as well. To your point though, about mortgage rates. Yeah, 7% is what I'm hearing this morning. It's been as low as, you know, the low sixes. There are a lot of programs out there that we have talked about that can help first time home buyers get into these homes. And when we increase supply, lower the costs, you know, right now a home that was built for $275,000 in Columbus, Nebraska. And today, stick built is $415,000. With some of the changes we made, we can bring that down and make it more affordable.

6:30And, you know, as we all know, interest rates change and what goes up will come down. We hope it comes down way sooner than anybody else. I think, you know, dad, what Mike said, the nature of any policy of folks is on housing supplies. It's going to take time. It's not going to be felt right away. We know that the impact of supply on price is something that could take years ultimately. And so, you know, we recognize these were necessary steps, but they're going to be more that are going to be needed really to address the affordability crisis. And certainly the war is added to cost. I would also say, I think that, you know, the budget bill that passed last year, which added, like it's about 400 billion a year, to our deficits, it is also putting a huge strain on lending, which is also driving up interest rates. If we don't get our arms around this deficit and this debt, we're going to continue to drive up interest rates for a lot of folks who are looking for the first home. And it is part of this campaign cycle, along with gas prices.

7:31The Wall Street Journal writes, vulnerable GOP candidates call for diesel export ban. Republican candidates in tight contests are running out of time to swage voters, angry about soaring fuel costs, setting off a last minute scramble on an issue many see as the GOP's political liability in the midterm elections. President Trump and the Treasury Secretary Scott Besant discussed where the administration stands on possibly banning diesel exports. Take a listen. Well, I call for that too. I've said that to the diesel. We make a lot of diesel. I could have a little bit of an effect on regular automobile gasoline because when you do that, you know, it's sort of a flow, it's a balance. But no, I've called for it. I've called for it within my people. I've been talking about it. Scott, you were talking about that person. We're examining that whether it's feasible in terms of the overall refining capacity and whether a full or partial ban would work.

8:34Is there a timeline for a decision on that? Yes, what do you do? Congressman Flood, back to you. Do you support banning diesel exports? Well, I think at this point, everything has to be on the table. We have to look at every available option and understand the ramifications, the long-term outcomes and the short-term relief that can be offered by any solution. I know that Ashley Henson, recently in Iowa, made a plea that we do this. I have my staff look into it. I think anything that we can do to lessen the burden on Americans, a lot of our farmers are starting to head into harvest and they run those combines that rely on diesel. The problem is you can have a gas tax holiday, but most people in America, most farmers don't pay tax on their diesel when it's for off-road use like in a field. So that doesn't really move the ball for farmers, but I think everything needs to be on the table. Congressman Locarto, do you think Democrats could get on board? I'm skeptical. I think, look, we have a global market here, artificially attempting to interfere with trade. That's not going to alter the incentive of oil companies to jack up the price to whatever the world will bear.

9:43And I think we're going to continue to suffer under high diesel prices and high oil costs and gas prices, as long as we have a warning on and we have the current policies at the administration. So Congressman Flood, then, are you worried about the impact of these high prices on the midterms? I worry about the impact of high prices on Nebraska and Americans. We collectively have been fighting inflation since Joe Biden took office. It has been brutal over the years. That's why we see the extreme increase in home prices. We also live in a dangerous world where a country like Iran, if they got their hand on a nuclear bomb or a chemical bomb or a dirty bomb, I have no doubt they'd use it. Keeping the homeland safe is a priority. Keeping the homeland affordable is a priority. These should not be competing, hopefully, but they currently are, and we have to find a way through it. I do not want to cut and run, but I do want to see us address affordability in every fathomable way possible, while also making sure that the long term outcome is that Iran doesn't get his hands on a bomb because they'd use it.

10:52They would definitely use it, and that is an outcome we is unacceptable. Well, Congressman Flood, take a look at this graphic from Fox News. It found the Democratic lead on the generic ballot has risen as gas prices have also risen 50% since the start of the Iran war. So should your Republican colleagues in tight races be worried? Well, listen, every midterm where the Republican party is in power, and we have a Republican president has historically been, there's been a lot of headwinds, and so none of this is surprising. Ultimately, it's incumbent upon members of Congress to sell what we've been able to achieve to the American people and to our districts. And quite frankly, we have a story to tell. We passed the largest tax cut in American history, no taxes on tips, no taxes on overtime. We eliminated taxes on social security for most Americans, housing legislation, child tax credit went to $2,200. We have delivered for the American people on top of working with the Democrats to pass the first really full budget since 2017.

12:00Think about that achievement. Everything except ice and border patrol were funded in a bipartisan manner in this divisive environment. And I think Congress should get credit for that. We took care of the needs of the American people and we did it on a bipartisan basis. Congressman Ricardo, then what is the Democrats message to the American people about if you give us control of the House and the Senate? This is what we will do to bring down prices. Yeah, the cost of living has been a crisis for American families. We haven't seen any significant action from this administration or this Congress to address that core concern. I appreciate very much the housing package. I think it's going to take a long time to work through the market. What I think the Democrats can lead with coming out of the gate in January would be some very basic provisions. Let's get rid of some of these tariffs that are causing so much pain for so many consumers and have us in trade wars with allies like Canada. Let's extend the ACA tax credits that helped 23 million Americans pay for their health insurance.

13:03I was just hearing from a hospital executive today about the fact that there are seeing emergency rooms throughout the country increase the number of uninsured folks coming in by 20, 30, 40 percent as a result of what's happened to the ACA. We haven't even seen the impacts to Medicaid yet. What we could do, for example, just lifting the minimum wage would do an enormous amount to help many families be able to pay their bills. There's a lot we can do and we will do if Democrats in charge. Congressman Flutty, if Democrats are in charge and they try to stop or end these tariff policies from the White House, do you think you and other Republicans would be on board? Well, I think that will have that conversation. I think at that point they would be working to overcome a veto so that obviously changes the math equation. Here's the challenge I think for the Democrats and I think Sam did a good job of articulating where he sees his party going. Most Democrats don't have a plan. Most Democrats focus mostly on their disdain for Donald Trump and don't ever get out of that box.

14:09But I think it's interesting and this is not my counterpart that's on the show with us tonight. This is the socialists that have invaded his party. And if in fact we end up in the minority, it will be a narrow majority and it will be drawn to the left by folks that want to hijack the Democratic Party. I have a lot of great friends and Democrats there, nowhere near what we're seeing coming out of the Senate candidate in Michigan or the folks in New York that want government to run grocery stores and defund the police and all of that business. So that will be a struggle I think regardless of who's in the majority. His party is getting hijacked essentially and there are really good folks in the Democratic Party that we've been able to work with very successfully, especially on financial services. I think the financial services committee is should be held up on a hill. These are all adults that want to get things done and they're there for the right reasons and that speaks to our success this Congress, the clarity act, the genius act, the housing bill, the efforts on TRIA.

15:20Like we have made a lot of progress on that committee and I think it's the way Congress should run. Want to give you a chance to respond, Congressman Locardo, as your party been hijacked? Well, first I agree with Mike Sanemite that the committee is a much more collaborative committee than we see just about anywhere else in this Congress. But no, I don't think we've been hijacked. The largest caucus in Congress ideologically is called the New Democrat Coalition. That's the group of moderates. That has grown. And the Obama days, there may be 50 or 60 of us, there's 115 now. There'll be 130 probably by November. This is the largest caucus. This is the caucus that's driving policy making in the Democratic Party. Yes, there'll be some folks we know. There'll be on the extremes of both parties. I think both parties have problems with folks on the extremes. I'm confident leadership is going to understand we need to get things done in a concrete way for millions of families who can't pay bills. That's what we'll be focused. Another issue dominating the election cycle is the Iran War. President Trump addressed the conflict during his address at the United Nations General Assembly. Take a listen.

16:24But I have a big decision to make. Will the deal be made with Iran that lets them rebuild and create a far greater country than it ever was before? Maybe one of the greatest in the Middle East or even the world? Or do I annihilate the Islamic Republic and do it quickly, never giving them a chance to kill and destroy people and countries again? Do I drive them into hell with no chance of survival and no hope of future greatness or generations? But I believe we'll make a deal right after the election because it doesn't make sense for them not to. They're waiting to see how I do in the midterm election. Congressman Flynn, what did you make of the president saying this will be over after the election? He's in the best position to answer that question as the president of the United States with a constant briefs he gets from both the State Department and the Department of War.

17:31I've said for a long time internally the Iranians don't want to do anything before the election and I think that is what it is. They understand our system of government. I wish it was tomorrow. I wish it was next week and I wish it was on our terms. But I can wish it. It doesn't mean it's going to happen. Ultimately we have to make sure that Iran does not live long into the future chanting death to America with a plan to use a chemical weapon on one of our stadiums. And we have to be honest about what the threat is here. This isn't a country that's been a pain in our side. This is a country that has funded terrorism throughout the world. They armed Hamas, Hamas went in and did unspeakable things to the Israelis. They've armed Hezbollah, they've armed the Houthis, they are funding terrorism throughout the world. And ultimately at the end of the day we have to deal with the issue. It's not going to go away if we decide we want to stop today. They're going to rebuild. They're going to be back and they're going to be a threat to our future and a threat to our homeland.

18:31And I think we have to deal with it unfortunately. Congressman Lakarta is Congressman Flood correct in his assessment. Well I agree with Mike that certainly Iran has been a major sponsor of terror throughout the Middle East. And we should do nothing to help them in any way spread that terror. The question of whether or not we declare war should really be answered with some clear, articulable and achievable objectives, which this president has never offered prior to actually entering this war. That is you have to define what you're going to accomplish with the use of military force. He hasn't been able to do that. I think every expert who's ever spent any time on this would tell you, hey if we're going to go get those nuclear weapons you better have a ground invasion. I don't think the American public is willing to accept a ground invasion. We had an approach to address the nuclear threat of Iran. It was called having inspectors in the country who would be accountable, who would make sure that the thousands of pounds of uranium would be accounted for and obviously not enriched beyond a certain threshold.

19:39That was working. It wasn't perfect but it was working. And this president completely threw that out the window in 2017. We now have what we have. I think the bottom line is, look, Trump has articulated many times. I can't count how many times he's declared a ceasefire. I think we're somewhere north of 30 or 40. He's convinced that he's going to talk his way out of this war. It's not going to happen that way. We have to have a very clear strategy about how we get the straight of Hormuz open again and then we get out of this war. And he has not articulated clear strategy for doing that. And frankly this department defense has not implemented it very well. Our fighting women and men have done an extraordinary job but the leadership has been awful. Sticking with foreign policy, the president and the Chinese leaders, Xi Jinping taking part in a three-day summit this week in Washington, D.C. Congressman Flood, you've been critical of China in the past. I want to show a campaign ad you put out in 2024 following the Chinese balloon controversy.

20:42China is our enemy, plane and simple. The Chinese Communist Party hacks our computers, buys up land near military bases and spies on our armed forces even here in Nebraska. That's why I'm fighting to keep Chinese technology off of our cell towers. Stop China from buying Nebraska farmland and protect Americans from Chinese spine and cyber attacks. I'm Mike Flood and I approve this message because I'll always defend Nebraska. Whatever it takes. Congressman Flood wasn't an effective ad and do you think it was given your criticism? A good idea that the president was hosting the Chinese leader this week. Well first and foremost nothing gets better unless you talk. Nothing gets better unless you understand where you're coming from. Today I do think China poses an existential threat to our status as a world superpower. They want to be the world's sole superpower. They want their building AI infrastructure to try and get past us. One thing I do happen, I do hope happens with the Chinese leaders arrival in Washington, is that he makes good on his promise to buy soybeans.

21:55This is a promise made in March of this year. I know that two weeks ago they bought 1 million cubic tons of soybeans. He's got a ways to go. That would go a long way with American agriculture and Nebraska soybean farmers. Right now prices are inching up, which is awesome, but China needs to make good on their pledge to buy our soybeans. And Congressman Locarto, this visit by the Chinese leader is wrapped up in the AI headlines that we have seen of late. You introduced a bill calling for the coordination between the United States and China on AI safety. We heard from the leader on Thursday at the White House saying he thinks that the US and China should work together. Is that promising? It is promising, but we have a lot of work to do. And the technical work that has to proceed any kind of agreement on safety hasn't been done. Those technical experts are overwhelmingly outside the government. And so what the bipartisan bill would do that I've introduced with Kevin Kylie is focus on getting those technical experts at the think tanks, the universities, the AI companies themselves.

23:07I'd be able to have a very narrow pathway to actually communicate with their Chinese counterparts so that we can actually get some common understanding around what are the standards and protocols we use for testing, for evaluation, and most importantly for verification. Because obviously we can't trust Beijing. We need to have strong verification measures. All that needs to be worked out by the experts before you can even get to the negotiating table. And unfortunately I don't think this administration has understood that well enough. So we're going to have to do it for him. This week's Senate Democrats talked about protecting US chips, computer chips. Here's a minority leader Chuck Schumer with this warning. President Trump must draw a hard line. Do not weaken America's export controls. Do not give China greater access to the advanced chips and chip making equipment. It needs to close the gap with the United States. Congressman Flatt, I'll go to you first. Do you agree with the Democratic leader?

24:11Well, I don't trust China. I haven't trusted China and I think we need to treat this the same as we do with our nuclear triad. We need to have strategic deterrence. We need to know exactly, and get as much intel as to what they're doing, and we need to make sure that they know we have as much capability so that there's a deterrent effect. Here's the thing that I think we're missing here. We need to educate the American people on what the real risks are. Two weekends ago, tech CEOs came out on a weekend and dropped all of this information. Very little specifics. Just words like world destruction and completely changed the narrative about AI in the course of two weeks. What I'd like to see happen is they need to sit in front of Congress and they need to answer our questions. You can't say things like world destruction without building a foundation upon which Americans can truly appreciate the threat, the opportunity, the mission.

25:14I think this isn't just a Congress thing. This is an American thing. And we're only going to get through this when Americans are bought into what the real risks and the real rewards are. And that's what Congress can do. We can convene. We can ask questions. We can get answers, put people under oath, and find out what's going on. I'm sure some of it's classified, but the American people need to be read into what's going on here before we run off and start talking about passing laws and making changes because this is a very complicated issue. And I think there needs to be more transparency in our final minutes here. I want to turn to a big story over this past week. President Trump's decision to ban three media outlets from the White House MSNOW, CNN and Politico. We saw major TV networks suspend their pool coverage in response to the controversy. The three outlets that were banned took this fight to the courts. Congressman Flood, you have a media background, TV background. Did you agree with the White House's decision?

26:17No. Absolutely not. That is the people's house. And those outlets are legitimate outlets. Those outlets are credentialed. They have viewers. They have consumers. They have readers. They have listeners. And at the end of the day, the president of the United States has to have a press pool that represents the media landscape that we have. I think the media were right to do what they did and it sounds like things will have been resolved here shortly. But I think we're on the right track and this is, should set a precedent that you can't do that. Agreed. It's unfortunate that we had to have a federal court tell the president that there is a first amendment and he actually has to abide by it. This is the reality we are dealing with today. Congressman Flood, the White House said it was because of national security. What would you say to them if you were in the room, maybe in the oval, with the president in advising him on this?

27:19Well, I don't have any knowledge of any national security issues and I would imagine if there are national security issues, those could be dealt with at the highest levels of those media outlets without interrupting the coverage of the president of the United States. That said, I don't know what those concerns are. I do know this. Our democracy, our country, our states functioned better with an open government that has pressed that push back and ask questions. That tension is natural. It's needed. It's necessary and it's purely American. And there's no part of my being that would like to see outlets be dismissed from the White House. That's not to say that an individual reporter or a personality may conflict with the White House, but those outlets should have access to that information and that video. All right. That's all the time we have California Democratic Congressman Sam Lakarto and Nebraska Republican Congressman Mike Flood. Thank you both for joining me.

28:23Thanks, Greta. Good to be with you. Thanks for having me. All right. As we mentioned, President Trump addressed the United Nations this week, outlining his approach to the war with Iran, including his longstanding position that Iran must not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon. The Iranian delegation was in the room as Trump made his case. The Islamic Republic of Iran. For 51 years, the fanatical Iranian regime has ruled by bloodshed and mass murder, spreading death and carnage and chaos across the entire Middle East and beyond. They were the bully of the Middle East, but they are the bully no more. From the first day I entered the political arena, I have been unwavering. I will never allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon. Upon taking office last year, I immediately opened negotiations with Iran and offered them full economic cooperation in exchange for ending their nuclear program and support for terror, but they refused.

29:29They absolutely refused. That was a big mistake. That setting echoes you in address from 2002, which brings us to this week's C-SPAN flashback. President George W. Bush used his UN speech to outline what he described as the threat posed by Iraq's weapons program, including its nuclear ambitions. Today, Iraq continues to withhold important information about its nuclear program, weapons design, procurement logs, experiment data, and accounting of nuclear materials and documentation of foreign assistance. Iraq employs capable nuclear scientists and technicians. It retains physical infrastructure to build a nuclear weapon. Iraq has made several attempts to buy high-strength aluminum tubes used to enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon.

30:29Should Iraq acquire fissile material, it would be able to build a nuclear weapon within a year. And Iraq State Control Media has reported numerous meetings between Saddam Hussein and his nuclear scientists, leaving little doubt about his continued appetite for these weapons. More than two decades apart, both presidents used the UN meeting to make the case that a Middle Eastern adversary posed a serious security threat. A message delivered directly to an international audience with the country at the center of the speech represented in the room. To discuss President Trump's speech this week and other top political stories, we are joined now by two pros from both sides of the aisle. The Democratic strategist, John McCarthy, former senior adviser for political engagement for President Biden, he was also deputy national political director for the Biden 2020 campaign.

31:33And Republican strategist T.W. Ariggy, former national press secretary for the National Republican Sen. Committee. Let me begin with the President's remarks at the UN, T.W. And the President indicates that a deal could come after the midterms. Are the voters buying that? I think the voters would like a deal to happen now, or at least a pause or an end to the hostilities. Look, I don't think anything the President said there was inaccurate. Iran was building nuclear weapons. Unlike the George W. Bush clip that you put, Iraq was not as far along in the processes Iran was. We know they have nuclear facilities. They don't make any bones about it. A lot of these rogue regimes look to nuclear weapons as a security blanket. And in those days, in 2002, as you played that clip, the UN, many people in the administration knew he was hiding the truth about a weapons program because he wanted the world to think he had them.

32:34He did not. Today, we know that Iran is actively working on building a weapon or was until midnight hammer. The administration went to the negotiating table and said this cannot continue any further. They offered them abilities to have nuclear energy from the United States. They chose not to go that way because the weapon was their ultimate goal. Their ultimate goal of having a weapon using it against Israel or at least threatened to use it as an Israel in our allies in the region. That was unacceptable. Donald Trump took action. I think there's a lot of debate that can be had and valid debate about what happened after that, the planning that went into that and the strategy moving forward. But I think at least what he said there about going to the table in good faith and then having to act on it is accurate. John, can Democrats tie the two together? I mean, I don't think that Democrats have to be the one to do that. I think it's pretty clear in voters minds. Since the beginning of this conflict, Donald Trump has been unable to really define what the objective is, what the off-ramp is.

33:34And I think that the lack of support for this conflict and the president's plummeting approval rating is indicative of where voters actually are on this. To me, one of the things that I think is interesting is the president had an opportunity with this speech to do something that only presidents get to do. You have this iconic backdrop, you have the world's attention. Under normal circumstances, you'd have all of the media sitting and covering it. And for Nefarious tends to be a place where the presidency has somewhat unchecked powers. The president gets to show strength, he gets to have these kind of iconic symbols in and around him. And he did not do that in this speech. In this speech, instead, he talked about ending all of these wars that he, in fact, did not end. He went off talking about the unnecessary guardrails around AI. He talked about climate changes, a hoax. There were all these other kind of delusional parameters inside of this speech that, you know, I think was just a swandered opportunity for him. And I think that how's the Republicans are probably thinking the same thing? T.W., are you concerned about the impact of this war on the midterm elections? Absolutely, as at least as it pertains to gas prices and diesel prices, which have been a hot topic all this week.

34:38I think everyone agrees on principle, but I ran not having a nuclear weapon. I think a lot of Republicans would tout some of Donald Trump's successes, both in the previous term with the elimination of ISIS, the Abraham Accords, our close partnership with the Gulf States. And some of the accomplishments today, what we've achieved in Venezuela, what we're going to achieve in Cuba, what the deal that we've reached about Greenland. There's a lot that we could tout, but we are still stuck in the conflict that we have in Iran. Definitely not as kinetic as it was in Iraq. Thank God. However, we still have issues with the straight-of-war moves. Gas prices continue to go up, and that is not something we want to be dealing with on November. The President also used his address to the United Nations to talk about another issue, dominating headlines, artificial intelligence. The United States also totally rejects any attempt to construct a global scheme to control for the artificial intelligence being spoken of so much now, here and after officially called Super Intelligence, changing the name, in that the use of the word artificial makes intelligence fake.

35:47It makes it sound fake, and it is not fake. It's actually amazing, but we have to be careful. In fact, it is exactly the opposite of what it purports. From this point forward, all of the United States documents, and hopefully the world will be changed to use the much more accurate term, Super, as opposed to artificial. So it's Super Intelligence. In other words, welcome to the New World of Super Intelligence, Dash SI. Let's see if that goes. It sounds much better. It is much better, and it's much more accurate. All right, T.W. Beyond the rebranding, Americans are fearful of artificial intelligence. A new CNN poll out Thursday showed that. Is the President doing enough to address the concerns? So I think there's a few different avenues in which to look at that. Americans have rights to feel, to be fearful, especially in light of the New York Times reporting last week,

36:50and so many other reports of agents breaking out of the sandbox, et cetera, et cetera, what that does the jobs, and so forth. However, there's a few different ways to look at that. The regulatory capture could be one end of it that regulations will help make, and throw up air, open AI, and other companies protect them from competition. President doesn't seem to eager to do regulations, though. Well, so here's this thing. It's President Xi this week acknowledged while he was in Washington that there needs to be humans at the wheel. Donald Trump did not echo that. So I think there's growing consensus in both the Democratic and Republican Party that the need to be some guardwails while also realizing we cannot lose the race to China. Okay, so China we understand will not use this technology as responsibly as Americans, or at least we hope, but having those guardwails, having humans at the control will prevent things like them getting access to controlling our nuclear or biological weapons, them having dealing with our electrical grid and so forth.

37:51So there are pathways forward. I think when Congress gets back in session, and there's a new Congress in session, there will be a new wave of support for something to be done. And what that Congress looks like, we will have to wait and see because we won't see Congress, or at least the House until after the election. John McCarthy, do you think Democrats can come together with Republicans on this? I mean, I think that both sides of the aisle know that AI is something that's going to dominate this election cycle. I don't know that rebranding it is going to solve any of those political issues, so you can call it superintelligence. It didn't sound super coherent in the way that the President presented it, because I think that he has not, again, defined what the actual issue is in the minds of voters. And he had, again, another opportunity to do so here. Voters are concerned about it in a number of different ways. They're concerned about workforce replacement. They're concerned about data centers that are popping up in their communities. It's something that we're seeing in a lot of exit polls in some of these closest races. The President should, of course, take the stance that America needs to stay at the forefront of this innovation, that America should lead on it, that our energy concerns are real, but, you know, have national security implications.

38:53Voters are with you on that. But until you can help define where you want to solve these other issues, sitting and saying that there should be no guardrails on this is a political loser. The best thing that Democrats can do at this point is sit back and let the President keep doing this, because time after time after time keeps going against where voters actually are. AI has wrapped up this week as well with the President of the China visiting the United States. And that upset one GLP Senator on Capitol Hill, Roger Wicker, the Chair of the Armed Services Committee had this to say. Had the White House asked me for advice, I would have suggested the President not invite Xi Jinping to Washington for such a lavish welcome here in the United States of America, based on all of the troubling issues we have with President Xi and the Chinese Communist Party. Our Commander-in-Chief should keep in mind that his guest is a brutal, unelected, and oppressive dictator who seeks to dominate his neighbors and whose massive military arsenal is aimed directly at the United States of America.

40:06The relationship between the United States and China will define the 21st century, what happens in that relationship. The idea that we would not interact with them at the highest levels is irresponsible. It's outrageous. We have to. That doesn't mean we don't have strong disagreements. Of course we do. T.W. at the end of that, we saw Marguerubia, the Secretary of State, questioned about Roger Wicker's floor speech. What did you make? I mean, our Republicans divided about how to deal with China. In a weird way, I think both of them are right. Xi Jinping is a brutal dictator. Xi Jinping does not have the United States best interest at heart. Xi Jinping wants a Chinese future. But at the same time, we live in the reality. We live in today. It will define the 21st century, whether we go to war or we have peace. Where does AI go from here and what impact does it have on humanity? If we do not have any sort of dialogue with our greatest adversary in the world, we don't talk violence happens that has proven itself throughout history.

41:08How do Americans make sense of that and a lavish dinner for the Chinese president? Well, I think again, it goes to keeping your friends close and your adversaries closer. They are glad that Donald Trump has at least opened the door to having a warmer relationship with China to hopefully get to a better place. But that last point is what remains to be seen. If nothing comes of it, they're not going to be so thrilled and give them the benefit of the doubt. But until then, I'm waiting in anticipation. I think you can keep your adversaries close without having them over for dinner. I mean, we have to look at Donald Trump's history since he came down that golden escalator. I mean, he has had an odd affinity for strong men dictators. Like that is just something that is core to who he is politically. I think he thinks that maybe by associating in some way with them, it makes him look stronger. But I do think that something that voters do find ultimately uncomfortable. To me, the interesting split screen out of this was actually Secretary Rubio as a Democrat who's obviously thinking ahead about 2028. I think that Secretary Rubio did a good job right there of actually trying to do both things at once.

42:11He sat and said that, of course, this relationship is going to define the future, but also pointing out the difficult contrasts and substance policy that we have to have. The Secretary got some points for me on that one. I think that that was a compelling picture for what the future could look like for the Republican Party. All right. Well, before we get to 2028, we have to deal with 2026. Let's talk about the midterms and money. Here is CNN's report. Democrats privately sounding alarm on GOP spending ahead of the midterms. Top Democrats across the country are privately warning that they do not have enough cash in the November midterms to capitalize on what could be their party's best political environment in over a decade. It's a serious risk of leaving winnable seats on the table. John, how big of a deal is this for Democrats? I talk to a lot of campaigns and I talk to a lot of donors and I do think that this environment does feel different. Part of it is because the Trump administration has weaponized various parts of the government and put it with the intention of putting a chilling effect on the center left, left ecosystem.

43:15I think that that is very real. But I would also say that if you look back to the start of his administration until now, you have seen massive Democratic overperformance. Right now, Democrats are sitting at about 8.4, 8.5 on the generic ballot. That's about where we were at the same time back in 2018, where we netted 40 seats. So would of course I love to have more money in the coffers for Democrats? Yes. But the important thing is that I think voters understand our message and they understand our contrast. We have been laser focused on economic messaging, something we're not always great at staying disciplined on, but we've done it. We have a new generation of candidates who are leading the party. Anything voters are going to reward us in November. All right, T.W. There's some interesting reporting on Republicans as well and spending. Here's from Semaphore, Senate Republicans way whether to keep investing in North Carolina and Georgia races. As President Donald Trump's low approval ratings hamper the party's candidates nationwide and widen the battleground map, some of the GOP, one of adjust tactics and consider moving money away from races where its candidates are struggling to gain traction.

44:17Is that the right tactic when you look at Georgia and North Carolina? Well, I'm not so sure actually this week I just spoke to it to Michael Watley about this race. In his internal polling and many of the polls, so he's just about where Ted Bud was at this time when he won and just about where Tom Tillis was when he won. There's a lot to play out between now and election day. And yes, we do have a great cash advantage. But I would push back a little bit on what John is saying. The Democratic Party is historically unpopular about there of a 20 point gulf in popularity right now. And it's fine to be opposed to Donald Trump. But the substance isn't there and the candidates that are leading the charge for Democrats are ones that are pushing the party further left. You just heard Mitch Landry this week say that the Democratic Socialists need to find a new party. You've heard a number of other Democratic members of Congress say to get lost that they are the scum of the left. That's fascinating because the people who are driving energy in the Democratic Party right now are the fringes of the party. It's what the Republican Party went through in 2010 and we left a lot on the table.

45:25So these races that are popping up in competitive now like New Hampshire, Michigan, those are going to be important. All right. Are you feeling good about North Carolina and Georgia? Of course. Because you know, people are wanting to sit and say that the energy of the party is on this kind of like further left a DSA thing. And people who say that are of course Republicans and it's because they don't actually have a message in themselves to run on. So their whole goal is trying to define the Democratic Party as too far left. I will say you drew the comparison to the Tea Party when the Tea Party first emerged. They endorsed over 100 candidates, sent about 40-50 of them to the Congress, you know, over the course of two cycles. Right now if every Democratic Socialist on the tickets, you know, kind of wins, we're looking at maybe again of, you know, eight members out of 435. They're just realistically is no comparison numerically between the amount of DSA candidates and the members of the Tea Party. So it's not a fair comparison. The other thing I would sit and say is like good luck trying to paint Roy Cooper as a Socialist. So you can sit and say all these things about Democratic, you know, unpopularity nationally. And I am a centrist Democrat. I have real concerns about this. But the candidates we have locally are outperforming and they're going to be hard to paint with that brush.

46:31And the president is the leader of the party and his ratings not great. Fox News poll. Take a look at this poll from Fox News. It found 25% of voters were more likely to vote for a Trump pick, but it found 51% of voters were less likely to vote for the Trump endorsed candidate. Yes, though that the president's approval numbers are without a question of a drag on the party. I would quarrel with that the Democrats have a message that is residency and their messages that they're not Donald Trump and that the prices will come down magically. Although they don't support they want the largest tax cut in the United States history by undoing the big beautiful bill. They want to reenact the taxes on tips, Social Security over time. They've shut down our refineries that we could use right now with Venezuela and crude coming in and the great expansion of the United States energy. We have a plan to finish. And the president is without question to drag. But again, do not mistake Trump's unpopularity for Democratic popularity. There's a recent Johnson new new is competitive in New Hampshire and it's not because of Donald Trump. There's a reason why there's a that the NRC is very bullish on on this midterm.

47:39And it's not because of Donald Trump is because the candidates they're running and the far left message that the Democrats are going to have to grapple with socialism, a lot of trans issues that are popping up around the country. Those are tough to answer about what their vision is and why they aren't going to be the radical left. Democratic are you concerned about states like New Hampshire where it could be a Republican pickup Michigan as well? Yeah, I'm concerned about all of these races. I mean, but the fact that we're even talking about a potential Democratic control of the Senate is a huge shift from where we were just a few months ago. The fact that we are even competitive in these places is a testament to the type of candidates who are running. I would say I mean, T.W. You did a good job of defining kind of like how Republicans should run against Democrats. It was a smart framing. The problem is that the president who has the biggest pulpit in the country is talking about ballrooms and arches and all these fringe things that actually says I care more about myself than I care about you the voter. And I think that that's the perception problem that Republicans are actually up against this November. Speaking of surprising competitive races from Blaze media by Steve Dase, Iowa is flashing a giant red warning light for November.

48:47The warning as it was relayed to me was stark. This is from Steve Dase. If you represent a district Trump carried by 15 points, you may still be within the margin of error. If you represent a Trump 10 plus district, you may be already under water. Well, I'm working on races in districts just like that. And I'm not seeing that verbatim in the polling I'm seeing internally and from other campaigns. Make no mistake about it. This is a very tough cycle for Republicans. There's no sugar coating it. But again, I think the Republicans have a message and your points well taken about the president. I do wish he would do more and stick to the issues and talk about what the path that lies ahead. That is what we're about Trump. Right. Perhaps. But the point is is we have candidates who are doing it. And I'm seeing it play out in real time. There is a reaction to it. But again, there's macro issues that are always going to rule the day economically. Gas prices happen to be the top of that list, diesel prices.

49:47And a lot of that is outside of the control of what can happen immediately. Well, let's stick with that and talk about the Michigan Senate race because Republican Mike Rogers released a new ad calling for an end to the Iran war due to its impact on Americans. Michigan families are struggling with the price of everyday life. Rosaries cost too much. You have to bring prices down. The war with Iran needs to end and then quickly when it does energy costs will plummet. But Michigan families can't afford to wait for that to happen. We need to do something now. I previously called for the suspension of the state and federal gas tax. 70 cents a gallon. And another place we can start diesel diesel fuels the trucks that bring groceries to the store. If you have the tractors that grow our food and when diesel costs more, it costs more to grow it, ship it, stock it and ultimately buy it. So until this war is over, I'm calling for a temporary embargo on American diesel export because lowering the cost of moving and producing our food can help bring down the everyday costs family see right here at the grocery store.

50:53American energy should provide relief to American families first and how fight to make life more affordable Michigan. Let's get to work. John smart move. Yeah, I mean, that's a good campaign ad. The thing that I think that candidates like him are really trying to figure out is like, what does the voter who might otherwise stay home think? And we saw some really interesting polling come out this past week on it where they said that amongst swing voters in these states about 55% of them are looking for the idea of wanting a flip of control of the Senate. They want Democrats to be in control as a check on the president. The interesting thing is I don't know that in some of these states, and we feel to the most competitive typical candidate for a general election, traditionally find the most pragmatic boring person and try and run them and think it'll persuade enough people to come over to your side. You know, that's not what we did this cycle. So I think that candidates like Al-Sahead and Troy Jackson are not the traditional mole that you would put up in these types of seats. But simultaneously voters are holding the second thing in tension. Voters are also sitting and saying, I am so fed up with the system.

51:55And we've seen really interesting polling from Harris actually with these voters sitting and saying that I want bold change over incremental change. That is very different voting behavior than we typically see from candidates in a midterm election. So I think that candidates are going to be doing strange things to try and appeal to this very small sliver of people. Well, it's all the iron of the president and add like that. No. I actually could tell you with some certainty that there's a lot more latitude being given to candidates across the country. What do you mean with the politics? Through the conversations I have, through the clients I have, this is becoming the norm. Is it a message from the White House? That I can't say. But what I can say is this. Across this country have to rectify what the concerns of the people are in reality. So if the president, if we have a difference of opinion with the president, you need to say it out loud. We are past primary season. We had some late ones like New Hampshire, Massachusetts, other places. They were late in August.

52:56We are now just now with all the money you were talking about actually putting out contrast ads with the Democratic opponents. I'll say it has a lot to answer for. Obviously we know about his associate with the son Piker and all the horrific things he said about deserving 9-11, how much he hates America, etc. And that might seem really small. But to a lot of Americans that is emblematic of a bigger shift. People want large bold change, but they wanted to help their pocketbooks. They don't want to change the culture of this country. When the wars end, energy prices will go down. If Democrats get elected, they will not come down quicker because we need more refining capacity and Democrats are hell bent on a war on oil and gas. I also just think the interesting variable though is that the president is also a lame duck this go around. So of course you're going to see more candidates step out against him or create more space. Because for some people who are running, this is the only time they will ever be on a ballot with him. So it's not like he's going to have to be someone that they answer to politically anymore. In Michigan this week, Abdul El-Sahed meeting with Vice President, former Vice President Kamala Harris, as he seeks to unify Democratic voters.

54:00I think her presence here speaking to communities that were really empowered by her voice throughout her political career. I think will help us to continue to bring our coalition together and build a broadest possible coalition to defeat microaggers in November. I'm here to support Dr. El-Sahed. His will be a voice, Abdul Elms, that is a voice representing the people of this state and it will be a national voice. John McCarthy, an interesting person to bring Tim Michigan ahead of the midterms after how voters felt about her in the 2024 presidential cycle in Michigan. Michigan voters. I mean, based Democratic voters still really like the Vice President. It's something that we see especially with black women, young people. I mean, these are key turnout populations that he's going to have to drive up support from in order to close some gaps. But I mean, the whole story of his campaign at this point is bringing in everyone into the fold. Haley Stevens, who I think is kind of the picture perfect example of how to, you know, lose an election.

55:03She jumped right in and said that she was going to do everything she can to make sure the Democrats win that seat. I think that people understand the stakes. So I think you'll be seeing more of the Democratic Party apparatus coming out to be helpful here. What did you make? I understand exactly what he's doing trying to show that the party is coalescing around him. The problem is that there is great uncertainty among the middle of the road Americans about El Sayed, his past comments and where he has stood on the issues compared to where he is now. We are noticing in states all across this country, whether it be South Carolina, whether it be Michigan, whether it be literally any almost every state in the union where the Democratic candidates are walking back, or previous comments that they have made that put them far to the left of where the middle of the road Americans will decide his election are. And that's what he's trying to fix. That's all the time we have. Republican strategist T.W. Arigee and Democratic strategist John McCarthy, thank you both for lending your expertise. And let's close this week's program with our ceasefire moment of the week, highlighting what's possible when politicians come together as Americans, not just partisans.

56:10The bipartisan team of Congresswomen faced off with members of the DC press corps in the 18th annual Congressional Women's softball game. It was held at Audi Field in Washington, DC. The event raises money for young women battling breast cancer. Lawmakers spoke about why they take part. In this incredible time of anger, infrustration, and politics, all of us need to dive into doing things that we love to do. It started out fun. It's just continued to be fun, but now we're really making meaningful difference raising money for a really great cause. The camaraderie is really exceptional. And in this time where there's so much partisanship, like getting out and playing softball, the women can put all that other stuff aside and actually just have a little bit of fun. Some people move on, some people become governors and other office holders, so it really forms great relationships. And it's nice to meet other women leaders. It's really important even in these really divided times that we make an effort to do things together.

57:12The press corps team, which calls themselves the bad news babes, beat Congress 22 to 16. That's all the time we have for this episode. Ceasefire is also available as a podcast. Find us in all of the usual places. I'm Greta Bronner, and remember, whether or not you agree, keep talking, and keep listening. Thank you.