0:00

welcome to another episode of Inside Golden State Politics. I'm Bill Bosky, former city editor and columnist for the Los Angeles Times, and with me is our executive producer director, Nancy Bosky and Sherry Political Analyst and self. Coming to you from a state of total burnout. I've never really suffered a migraine headache before, but the last couple of days and the nonstop Trumpian insensitive and rambling rhetoric have given me a doozy, and I don't expect Trump and his acolytes to cool it anytime soon or maybe ever. Sherry among his, um, among his speeches was one that really. They were very long speeches and so it's hard to pick out any single point. They were long speeches and they tended to ramble, and if I may assume, the role of a drama critic has varied from strong to weak. I'd say from week to weaker, but go ahead. But among all this, he said something that was really important and really scary. It was in his. Speech to the top commanders of our armed forces who were brought or who voluntarily went to Quantico Marine Base to hear him and our secretary, voluntarily war Pete speak, and in his speech, which lasted, oh, somewhere over an hour, and the president talked about training. Our armed forces and using our American cities, I assume he means democratic cities as training grounds, and he went on without really explaining what he meant by this. And so we were all wondering what is. What did he mean? Does he mean training, like war on the cities, like house to house combat? Are, are the troops gonna walk down our streets and bang in the doors and come in and examine all of us who are in the houses and ask us to hold our hands up? I mean, how do you train troops in a city? Also, isn't that a little, you know, old fashioned, I mean, in wars now being fought by drones and high tech. What are we talking about? Well, first of all, I mean talking heads, I think it was on A-M-S-N-B-C, the point that. Trump was really doing in bringing the troops into, as he did name Democratic cities. He wanted his own quote, pocket police end quote, people that he could order about and do his bidding. And the argument is that that's part of Trump's desire to build his very own deep state. So that every branch of government kind of benza knee or is pressured to benza, knee of knee to the president. I don't know what he means by using the democratic cities for, for training grounds. I think you were right, assuming it wasn't. To put together an Olympic boxing team or anything, but we, we don't know and he's not telling us. Now back to your second point, which I think is a very good one, he Trump and Hedgehog, since I can't pronounce his name, his Secretary of defense, our intent on building a military. Basically for optics. Okay? They're gonna look like these, he mainly men, they're gonna, you know, be spiffy. They're gonna be fighting machines. Well, you're right, we, we don't do as much with human fighting machines as we did. Right now, and I think what is going on in Gaza and what is going on in Ukraine gave us a very big hint. We're doing it with the types of wet weapons like drones. I mean, soldiers, yes, are fighting soldiers, yes, are getting killed, but the main weapons of war aren't battleships. They aren't even jet planes. They're basically the new technology, drones and the like. And none of that was addressed by either the Secretary of Defense or the President of the United States. I mean, it's not so much that we need men, we need smart men and women who can develop and use. The new, shall we say, guns of war. And I, I get the impression that neither'em really knew what the hell they were addressing, quite frankly, except their own political agendas. This was a highly partisan speech, and it should not have been, and I must tell you. When I listened to both his UN speech Trump's UN speech and Trump's and hedgehog speeches to the military, I was embarrassed not only for me but for the country. This is not. What a president does. This is not what a ca a cabinet member should be doing. I am re, I mean, we are getting clue after clue after clue, I think as to what Trump really means when he says he's in charge and it ain't democratic in the end. He also said, hinting that, that this training is going to be directed against demonstrators who are exercising their First Amendment rights. He said in a phrase that will go down in American history, they spit. Gimme that will go down with give me liberty or give me debt. Yes. Yeah. So that's not what your country can do for you ask what you can do for your country and if it spits, you'll it. I, I, I don't, quite frankly, I don't know where we go from here. It just continues to get worse and worse, and it continues to get more open, more real. Um, very early on I know that there was a lot of giggling at some what people thought were misnomers, some. Silly observations. No, this is serious stuff. This is serious, serious stuff. He tried to make it unserious with that vulgar racist AI clip on showing the Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries with a sombrero in a mustache, and Schumer a little foolish himself, and that was a joke our vice president said. Sure. And I've got a bridge, I wanna sell'em, right? Yes. Right. I, I don't, I mean, don't forget the JD Vance was the politician who called Donald J. Trump sometime ago, not that long ago. America's Hitler. I mean, I can never forget that. And Vance is Trump's major. Well, he's a Trump whisperer. Of course. He's waiting for Trump to not run for a third term. Yeah, one way or another. I think you're right. I don't know that ax thematically, uh, he will be the heir to the throne, if you will. It's happened before the vice president hasn't made it. But I think, uh, in essence, you're right and I have noticed quite frankly that right now, I guess the two young starlets in. The Trump administration who are getting most of the spotlight are hedgehog, and that's interesting. Maybe that's gonna be the part of the Republican primary in 2028. Well, I don't know about that. You know, there is a log dealing with the sending of, uh, troops into cities, into civilian places of troops. Federal, federal, federal troops. It's between 78 posse com act. That do that forbid some. Well, yeah. A federal, it bans the, the federal military from getting involved basically with local law enforcement without. You know, bars them from participating in something that is of local or state concern in terms of law enforcement. However, the National Guard doesn't fall under the Posse Citis act unless they are federalized. As they were in Los Angeles over the objections of course, of the states and local leaders and different situation completely. But no, it's, it's a federal law and it deals with federal military. A different but similar vein while the discussions over the government shutdown were going on, the politics of it were quite interesting, and I'm wondering whether it's gonna hurt the Democrats or not. If the Democrats were holding out. For no cuts in the Affordable Care Act. Mm-hmm. The Republicans wanted to reduce the Affordable Care Act. Some people say the Democrats willing to fight and they've been criticized for not fighting, but the Democrats by their base, willing to fight egged on by their very liberal base. Are really walking into a trap and you know, in the end the Republicans will have caught'em. I don't know. This is a little con concluded. Well, yeah, we don't know, but I, the latest polling indicates that perceive at this point in time, the Republicans to be more responsible for the, of the closing of the government, but not by a whole lot, mind you, but that more voters, at least. Yeah, via the polling seemed to indicate that it's the Republican's fault. But I'll tell you, I've been watching the, the blame blitz, as I call it, back and forth for. Pretty, pretty closely for a while now, and I think that the Republicans have have got the edge because their message, and they've been better at messaging for a long time now. Their message is a simple one, one that voters can understand and it is, it is basically this. All we're saying is let's pass a continuing resolutions and then we'll be happy to negotiate. Healthcare. Therefore, they're betting that voters and probably a large part of the media, perceive that as a block. By the Democrats to settling the crisis, the Democrats, yet they're now beginning to focus on what's going to happen to healthcare. It's not happening yet. I guess it begins pretty shortly when the horrifically high premiums for a CA are announced. But it's, it's a, it's a far more complex. Explanation for what they're doing than the Republican's. Simplistic analysis. What's the problem with the Democrats? Why can't they get what sounds to be a very simple message across? I mean, the message is they wanna cut your healthcare. Don't let them. They're trying to get that across. Don't let them take it away. Well. Why can't you? We don't know what's gonna happen yet. I mean, clearly if all of these so-called reforms occur before, there's, before, well before there's a kick in of all of these slices and increases in premiums, it might change. But you know, it, it depends. If voters don't feel the hurt, they're not gonna react to it. That's, that's what's so sad, and who knows what's gonna happen, quite frankly, between now and 2026. But right now, I don't think the Democrats, I mean, are that far ahead in convincing voters that they are not. The problem with regard to the shutdown, it's Trump. Trump and his accolades. Who are responsible for it. If you don't see it, if you don't feel it personally, you tend not to agree with that analysis. Time will come however. And I think there will be some hurt involved and it can certainly, if that happens, it can certainly influence the midterm elections. How much, I dunno if people's health insurance go up, cost a lot more. You're saying at that time, the electorate will start feeling it and will start acne. Yeah, but right now, right now, nobody's being hurt. And we're, we're talking theory. It's coming soon. It's coming soon. The increase in and premiums is coming soon. But I, I keep thinking this bill, they're talking Medicaid. They're talking Medicare. Yes, but you're talking. Significantly about Democratic constituencies. Think about it. And if they don't vote Democrats, they don't, I don't know. They don't vote. They don't come out. I don't know. I mean, I just don't think anything is set in concrete that has anything to do with politics or policy in this country. I mean, we are polarized and it's our feet. Both sides that are in concrete. Um, I'm wondering if the Republicans are onto something about that. They don't care. Hurt you, don't vote for us anyway. Now think about it. No, that's definitely been their approach to, to the whole thing during the whole year. As you know, as the year passes, they've got their voters locked in. They're not gonna change. Don't worry about him. I mean, yeah, I, I just think that that's, at this point in time I'm also, I'm out also wondering why and how Trump. Still has a fairly strong grasp on the Republican party and the Republican party in government. I mean, you know, the buzz is that, and it is true that his approval ratings are sinking and sinking by and large, but I don't know, I mean. Why is nobody on the Republican side saying this is lunatic. What he's doing in many ways is illegal. Certainly many ways unethical. Let's get the Epstein viles out. What is going on? What does that mean in terms of the, of American politics and governance? And the only answer I can come up up with is it really means that we will continue the road toward authoritarianism. The Republicans have the majorities in both houses. Very slim. Very slim. But they have'em. And that, that gives them a lot of power. I mean, yeah, but see, I guess what I'm saying is, and particularly when it pertains to the House of Representatives, these guys represent districts, right? Right. Are those districts so safe? Or I guess maybe now they may be even safer with the redistricting war, but safe enough that they can flaunt everything and go along with this guy and not worry about reelected election. I don't know. I do know they worry about the primary, and I'm sure Donald Trump has sent the message to them, try it and I will primary you, but my God, what does that say about the people that we elect? They're not thinking about their constituents. They're not thinking about this country. They're thinking about their own reelection, their own hide. The Democrats so far have not been able to mount a campaign against that or come up with a couple of glorious leaders who can lead the party to come from behind victory? Not yet. Not at all. You know, this brings up a real case study for the Democratic Party, and that's the. Race for governor of California, the covered one. There's so many candidates. 16 now. There's so many candidates that it's really quite confusing and you know, you think of the Republicans who won in the last few decades. They stood out from the beginning and they had a simple message. And we have here, God knows how many Democrats with no message, but eight Democrats, seven Republicans, one Libertarian so far, and don't forget it, it's the Democrats who keep losing candidates, which is not bad news for the remaining democratic candidates, particularly I think Katie Porter. They're, you know, two strong women have opted out of the race. After opting in, and of course Kamala Harris decided not to even try. That's right. It's either Kamala Harris was either sick of the game and didn't wanna play anymore, or she felt she couldn't play this particular game and wait for something better to come along, whatever. But she went out and not with a shout either. She went out with the. With a book, sort of a whimper, but her book tour, as we were talking about last week, she got a bad break with that. Assassination of Charlie Kirk, the Charlie Kirk assassination, which closed her out of the normal publicity that she would have. But in that period when she was on her book tour, and this was pointed out by a story in the Los Angeles Times by Sima, that she didn't come right out and. Talk about what was the issue, you know, what should the Democrats do to get ahead and all of that. That's exactly right. And she didn't have any kind of a plan. It was sort of, it wasn't me people who ruined it, it was everybody else and Right. That's not, you know, that Hillary Clinton did something similar after she lost the pre. Presidency. Um, it was her analysis of why she lost. I, you know, she had, I would say a couple of new cycles, uh, of criticism, if you will. There was never a real thought that she would come back and run again, I think, and that makes a difference. You can't alienate people who you will need. If you're going again, and she was not nice to a whole lot of Democrats, Kamala. Yes, thank you Will, we'll get that pronunciation. It's there. I'm telling you, you know why I, I call her Kamala because a member of her staff told me way a long time ago that that was how she pronounced it. And that's the way I've pronounced it ever since. Now, if she wants to, she can get a restraining order, I suppose. But until then, to me she's Kamala. Wouldn't you like to hear what she has to say about healthcare? Sure would. But wait, yeah. If I were faced with the question, do I wanna vote for her either for president or. No longer but for governor. Yeah, but she's not running for anything theoretically, at least right now. But she the choice that she made to do the book that she did. Yeah. But I know smart people are already writing her political obituary because of it. But you know, she had no reason, unless she was running and was certain that she was running and wanted to lay out her agenda. She had no reason to go so deeply into questions of policy at this point. I see the healthcare issue now. The reason I brought it up, talking about Kamala Harris, I've always thought that healthcare is one of these issues that's, uh, an election changing, huge issue. Now, if the economy's doing, I may be wrong, you know, maybe people don't care about it. No, they care about it, but they also care about other things. And you know, we don't know how the. The polling on issues is gonna line up right before the election at least, but they care about other things also, and they make their decisions on that basis. If the, if, if the economy is in terrible shape, if inflation is above the ceiling, um, if the market is wobbling healthcare. Gonna help the Republicans at all, and the Democrats should know by then to focus on the economy. It's the economy stupid. If it's good, it's a whole different dynamic. I think that Harris, if, if she still interested in a national political career, and she may not be, you know, this. That's right. We dunno. That was great. I haven't talked to her lately, bill. That was quite an experience that she went through, but she, she has an obligation, she has an opportunity, I would say to, to be. The voice of the Democratic party. I mean, she could be out there not on getting on deep, you know, getting deep into the weeds on all these issues, but she could be the voice of the Democratic party on certain things that have a, a resonance healthcare, for example, or Trump using the, the armed forces, his personal army. Those are things we've been talking about. They're not complicated things, but they're things. There are voices, women who have served in the armed forces who are speaking out like that. The question I have for you is, you know, will people even care about what she says at this point in time? Is she perceived by the progressive wing of the party, for example, as a member of the establishment? Um, you know, not the voice of the Democratic Party. I don't see that there is one voice or can be at this point in time, one voice for the Democratic Party, and she's been there. I don't think the, the, I think, I don't think the progressives yet are going to line up solidly behind her if and when she would be the nominee and. Whoever the Republican nominee is. I think by and large, the Democratic electorate will think very hard about what might happen if they don't vote Democrat if they don't come out to vote. But I don't think anybody in the Democratic Party is willing at this point in time to crown. Head, the leader of the Democratic Party. There many other people looking in the mirror and seeing the next president of the United States. Right. I think they're rather not ready to crown her for anything. Crown her in the archaic sense of the term for what she said in her book. She's managed to antagonize the party I, I think, but. Another thing that's happening that affects her and, and the other Democrats in this state, but also nationally to some extent, would be the rise of Governor Newsom. He seems to be getting a lot of attention. Sure. And moved into a strong anti-Trump, the voice of anti-Trump, and he's doing it along with Pit Illinois. In fact, I've seen him probably as much as Newsom on television recently. I think he's moving along. Yeah. That's right. He was last week. He was, they're using up a lot of the oxygen right now. They sure are. And there isn't room for anybody else. And so the other candidates are, other potential candidates are really being overwhelmed and outplayed by, by Newsom and Pritzker and any of the senators who are thinking about it, uh, have something else on their agenda that they can't turn their back on. IE. Budget negotiations and the government shut down. Government seem to be able now more to commandeer the media and the discussion than senators are. I mean, because I think partially because the democratic senators are largely shut out from government. I mean, it's just shut out from governing and the governors on the other hand have the time and freedom. Go out and campaign and just speak. Well, it, it's not only that they have more control over policy and discussion than the minorities in the house and the Senate. They're in charge. They're the executive. They're to some extent the anti-Trump army. They can have their own ideas and their constituency at this point isn't quite as large. You remember a while back when people were saying the governorship of a state is a dead end, only senators can run for president. Well, well, and remember that there have been senators IEP Wilson who left the Senate. Run for governor, it's done. And that reminds me a new name who has not announced but is thinking about the possibility of running for California Governor is Senator Alex Padilla. That's right. When, when the Republican Party came to Pete Wilson, who was then a senator in 1990, they said, oh, please run. We're coming up for reapportionment. We've gotta have a voice in this. Please run. And he did. For governor, but you know, the question now is, I think if nobody's pushing you and I'm, do you wanna give up a Senate position to run in the, in an open primary for governor of the state of California or not? I mean, I don't know. You go theoretically from being 1%. Of the US Senate, one out of a hundred to being. The CEO of the fourth largest economy in the world, California having far more power, you're immediately, well a figure, although Padilla is now because of his getting batted about by Christine. Nos thugs, difficult decision, don't you think? Yeah, that's a tough one. Uh, it really depends on his ambition. He's a, he's a very ambitious person. He's extremely smart, he's really articulate. You're gonna get a lot of, as, as these democratic candidates sort of. Flail around a bit. There's gonna be more pressure on him as there was on Pete Wilson, to, we need you here, you've gotta run. We really need you. And, and he'll have to respond to that. Well, Sherry, this has been a round, many things. Yeah. I don't know. Maybe a little bit of a a, a bolt of light. It wasn't all gloo and doom. It was quite a bit of gloo doom, but so is the world, right. We'll see you next week, byebye.