Affordability Rules the Midterms — Trump Calls It 'Made Up'
Most voters this November say they care about one thing – fixing America’s affordability crisis. Which party has the most convincing pitch and will get your vote?
What does “affordability” mean, and who should we trust to deliver it? Democrats are pounding the affordability message hard, saying President Trump began a global tariff war and a war in Iran that have both pushed prices up for Americans.
But one side of the party is doing it better than the other.
“The Democratic establishment has sort of abdicated the big ideas lane to the progressive wing,” said Mo Elleithee on the left, “and that’s why the progressive wing is getting some traction because they sound like they are coming up with bold ideas. Whereas the establishment seems to be afraid of bold ideas.”
Sarah Isgur on the right had a problem with how to pay for those big ideas.
“Where’s the money coming from?” she said. “If we actually had a balanced budget law that required Congress to point to how they’re paying for things, I might be much more comfortable with these sort of wealth transfer programs.”
Republicans like President Trump are on the defense. He recently said affordability is a term made up by Democrats, and it’s something he’s already fixed.
“Donald Trump could not sound more like Joe Biden in talking about this issue if he tried,” said Mo. “He ran entirely on the notion that Joe Biden was out of touch on the cost of living for people. And he now could not sound more like him.”
But Sarah said there’s some weight to Trump’s argument that he inherited a mess from Biden 18 months ago.
“He can absolutely try to explain what he inherited from Biden and why that takes longer to fix than he initially said it would,” she said, “and they should take into account the things that he’s done, which economists said on the front end would cause higher prices, like tariffs and like starting a war with Iran. Both can be true at the same time.”
Mo and Sarah also build their own platforms on how to bring prices down, from free school lunch programs to drilling for more oil.
Sen. Rand Paul Puts Dr. Anthony Fauci In The Hot Seat
There was a tense standoff on Capitol Hill this week when Republican Senator Rand Paul held a committee hearing focused on the COVID pandemic. His main target was the face of the government’s COVID response, Dr. Anthony Fauci, who refused to answer any questions.
Dr. Fauci believed that the hearing was a “gotcha” moment by Paul to find a reason to prosecute him, so he pleaded his Fifth Amendment rights over 100 times.
“There were mistakes that were made during that era. I don’t think anybody can say that there weren’t,” said Mo. “When the chair of the committee has been saying for months – years – that Dr. Fauci belongs in prison, that there is no way that he is going to have the good faith conversation.”
Sarah agrees that the government should be investigating how the COVID response could’ve been handled better, but Rand Paul should’ve given Dr. Fauci an incentive to talk truthfully.
“If you actually want to know the answer, you gotta give the person immunity. The second they say ‘I invoke the Fifth Amendment,’ you say, ‘Great, then we’re giving you immunity.’”
Producer: Leo Duran
Host: David Greene
Guests:
Mo Elleithee, executive director at Georgetown University's Institute of Politics and Public Service - @MoElleithee
Sarah Isgur, senior editor at The Dispatch - @whignewtons
Community Guidelines
As a reminder, this space is for thoughtful, good-faith conversation. Disagree passionately, but stay respectful. No violent or dehumanizing language is tolerated. We reserve the right to remove comments that break these rules in order to keep the discussion safe and welcoming.
Sarah Isgar is opposed to subsidies for alternative energy. Is she also opposed to the billiions in subsidies that oil companies receive?
Wow Mo, total miss on the energy conversation, you gave that one to Sarah… I made an account just because of this 😆
She focused on supply, your counter should have been to lower demand! We have millions of EVs on the road everyday now, cheaper electricity and access to charging would result in less gas powered cars. Reduced demand, greater supply, lower costs. Imagine the gas crisis right now had all those vehicles still been non-ev?! Globally it would be massive. And I'm just focusing on EVs here, public transport and the rest would obviously reduce consumption even further.