top of page
Search

‘Explain yourself’: A Trump voter and Trump critic let you in

  • 7 days ago
  • 63 min read



Moni is liberal. Travis Tripodi is conservative libertarian. Much of what he supports terrifies her… and vice versa. But when Trump returned in 2025, they knew they had to talk. In a new A Braver Way experiment, the two friends let you in on what’s become a critical exercise: bringing each other the headlines that bother them most, saying what they really believe, and having it out.


This isn’t a tidy debate or performance of “civility”. In good faith clashes over everything from socialism to political retaliation, Moni and Travis push, challenge, and try to listen even when they hate what they hear. Then, the debrief: Did Moni get too mad — or not mad enough? Did Travis listen, or just assume he did? And in all that heat, did they find any light? Note: This conversation was recorded on July 30.



Credits


  • Host & Executive Producer: Mónica Guzmán

  • Senior Producer: Tracy Egbas

  • Producer: Jessica Jones

  • Associate Producer & Graphic Designer: Fredo Viola

  • Contributors: April Lawson & Travis Tripodi

  • Artist in Residence: Gangstagrass

  • A production of Reclaim Curiosity  

  • Distribution Partners: KUOW, Braver Angels, and Deseret News

  • Financial Supporter: M.J. Murdock Charitable Trust




Links & References



Call to Action


  • Submit a question: If you've been impacted or taken action because of the podcast, let us know. Or if you found yourself mulling over something, turn it into a question and share it with us. You can send us a quick email at abraverway@reclaimcuriosity.com

  • Subscribe: If you like what you've heard, hit subscribe, and leave us a 5-star review!

  • Share this episode: reclaimcuriosity.com/post/a-braver-way-episode-25

  • Follow us: @abraverway on Instagram and YouTube and @moniguzman on Instagram

  • Join our text line: Text "brave" to 206-926-9955 to join.


Moni: Thank you for your brutal honesty on that.

Travis: I think that might've been our biggest fight, Monica. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. Yeah.

Moni: I kind of loved it. But I'm also like, I'm so mad right now. 

Hello everyone, and welcome to A Braver Way. I'm Monica Guzman, your guide across the divide, and this is a really special episode. I'm here with my very good friend, Travis Tripodi, for a conversation that's gonna be pretty different from what you've been hearing on the podcast so far.

We will probably do that thing that we talk a lot about, uh, here, which is d- disagree. Hi, Travis. Hello.

Travis: Hey, Monica. How's it going? Good to see you again

Moni: Good to see you too. Uh, so to our listeners, a fun fact about Travis right now is he just became a dad. Oh my gosh, so exciting. Uh-

Travis: It’s very exciting. So if I'm a little bit, uh, a little bit distracted or tired, I apologize.

Moni: Tired especially. My friends told me after maybe my son was two years old, they, they, they admitted that they thought that in the first year I was a zombie. And I was like, "What? Was it that bad?" Apparently it was that bad. Do you feel zombie-ish yet, or no? You're good.

Travis: I do, but my wife is giving me a hard time 'cause I read four books already. It's only been a month and, um, she thinks that that's too many books to read with an infant. So,

Moni: Whoa. W- books about infants or just books that you love?

Travis: like on philosophy and stuff like that. It's not a...

Moni: That is very impressive.

Travis: it, it's been, uh... I've, I've managed to maintain some of my brain, I guess.

Moni: That's great. Well, we need your brain here, so I'm very glad you have some of your brain. I, y- it's funny, you reminded me, it's... What I would say to your wife about that is that, I don't know, like, having a baby, in a weird way, makes you look for more activities that you can do while staying still. So while I was nursing my son at night, I blew through Breaking Bad, the whole show.

So I was watching this violent drug,

Travis: That’s so funny.

Moni: drug-addled show.

Travis: We were watching it right before she gave birth. Uh, we were re-watching "Breaking Bad," and we, she, we decided to stop. We were like, "We can't have, we can't subject him to this."

Moni: Yeah, it's so much.

Travis: We're, we're re-watching "Game of Thrones" instead, and it's not better.

Moni: no.

Travis: It's not better.

Moni: I did have headphones on, so baby did not hear all of that, but maybe he saw my heartbeat go like, "Oh my God," when Walter White was in real trouble. Anyway, um, yay for continuing to intellectually grow and expand while you, uh, while your heart grows to fit a new family member. But yeah, super excited for you, Travis. 

So, okay, before we jump in, note to our listeners, a little more about what we're doing here. So Travis and I, we've known each other for years, and we see things really differently politically. Like, really differently. And we're here to talk as honestly as we possibly can about what's going on out there right now. So the current events, the headlines, the things that, you know, you and I, Travis, just look at and have feelings and thoughts about, we're gonna bring them to each other. Uh, and, and we're specifically gonna talk about things that bother us, like, that are bothering us that we ascribe to some piece of the other side.

So we each picked a couple of topics to, to come with today. We're gonna let loose with them because we trust each other to, to do that. Um, so Travis and I started chatting in earnest about politics right after this administration kicked off, right? Travis, I, I remember calling you and being like, "Help.

What, what, what is all this?" Uh, what do you remember about that very, very beginning?

Travis: Tell me everything's gonna be okay. And something like that, uh,  but

Moni: Well, I don't know about that, yeah. Not quite. I was like, "Explain yourself!" But what, what do you remember? Like, what, interested you about talking to me in the, in the beginning there?

Travis: Oh, yeah. I mean, I just, I find, um... Well, primarily, you're just a very curious person, so it's always engaging to chat with you 'cause you, you know, people who come from my perspective often don't get listened to.

Moni: Mm-hmm.

Travis: So you know, it's sometimes a little bit unorthodox or maybe a little bit outside of the Overton window, and, and so that's difficult for people to engage with.

So, um, you've, you've always been very curious and given me space to, to share my thoughts and, and show how, you know, it's not like my... You know, if I say something crazy or something you maybe never have heard before, it's not like I'm a bad person, you know? And so, um, that's, uh,

Moni: You'll hear me go, "What?" You've heard shock, uh, yeah, but usually not condemnation, I suppose. Sometimes, but

Travis: Yeah no, and so, and so that's been, that's been really good. Um, it's fun. I think we have fun chatting and learning different perspectives, and I always, I always learn, um, learn a, like I guess a, a new way of looking at, um, some of the topics that I, I see in the news that I, I might, I might view with some skepticism, at first, so

Moni: Yeah. No, right back at you on all of that. I learn a ton from you, and I really appreciate how measured and kind of robust, uh, a lot of what you bring to me is, 'cause it's often just things I don't see, angles that I haven't really considered, uh, or angles that I had dismissed without hearing from somebody who, you know, takes them seriously and, and thinks that that's the right angle.

And it's been huge for me, which is why we've-- we kept doing it and doing it and doing it and finally said, "You know what? There might be something to letting others witness this." So that's the other thing for our listeners. We're, we're trying really hard not to perform for you all, to be honest. We're, we're trying really hard to have the conversations we have with each other and just let you in.

And the reason is because, as Travis was saying, like a lot of folks just don't talk across the divide, and when they do, and the, the conversations we see are like on 24-hour cable news or on social media, and they can be pretty ridiculously awful and not really constructive at all. And yet, like Travis, you know, you and I feel like ours are.

So let's try to put out in the world more of these kinds of conversations, right? So to be clear, like I'm not here to try to convince listeners about my point of view. That's not why I'm here. There will be moments where I really wish Travis agreed with me, and I might really try to push him to do that.

But that's in the context of the conversation between him and me. Do you know what I mean? Would, would you say that that's the same kind of parallel?

Travis: Yeah, no, well, I was gonna say you might not be here to do that, but I am. 

Moni: Well, there you go.

Travis: No, I'm just kidding. No, I, I do think that there's, you know, obviously everybody wants the people that they're talking to or are being heard to agree with them. Um, but you know, from my perspective, it's just like it's on, on me to do-- make the best case possible and, it's, it's not like trying to do it at the point of a gun here.

It's, you know, trying to do it by persuasion. And so, part of that is just, you know, speaking, what's the, the phrase you use? Fully, freely, and without

Moni: Fully, freely, without fear, and that's from Braver Angels, and I love it. Who doesn't love good alliteration, right? Fully, freely, and without fear. I mean, that just rolls off the tongue. And it, yeah, it just so happens to be a goal of mine personally, is I want to be somebody who can speak more bravely, whatever my opinion is, and not be afraid of being judged by others, et cetera.

So that, I'm trying to bring that into here, even though, you know, a lot of my career when I've been interviewing people and things like this, like my opinion is, is taking a backseat to something else. Um, in this case, we're, we're-- I guess I'm letting myself show my opinion, but for a purpose. Um, so yeah.

Okay, and let me make sure that I didn't miss anything else. Okay. Yeah, so the other point is that we are not here to represent anyone other than ourselves. I think this is really, really important. Um, I will say, listeners, I mean, when I hear political podcasts and I hear someone who I relate to and I think shares my views, and then they say something in a way that I don't think was the best way to say it, then I'll be mad at them, you know?

You're welcome to be mad at me, but I'm not going to try to represent views that are not mine or angles that are not mine. I'm here just as myself, for what that's worth, right? So just keep that in mind if something kind of bugs you about something I say. Um, all right, and the other thing is that we're not trying to be pundits or experts, 'cause we're not. We're not. We didn't prepare for this by being like, I don't know, super, you know, memorize a bunch of facts and things like that. Uh, we have a couple notes in front of us, but not a whole lot. I think the less, the better.

Travis: Just to keep us centered.

Moni: Yeah, and to make this more like it's an organic conversation. Again, we're trying not to perform anything.

So okay, one last note. We might get things wrong in the moment because again, natural conversation, people get things wrong all the time. You know, for the sake of keeping the conversation going, we don't like stop and check notes all the time. But if something big comes up, and one of us is like, "Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, what?" Then, uh, we, we might just kind of stop and go look something up together, right? And that means negotiating sources and things like this. Um, anything to add on that, Travis? Does that sound right? 

Travis: Well, I mean, we, like, we're trying to demonstrate a normal conversation, and sometimes that's more difficult than other times. And with the chatbots and AI and stuff, it's become a little bit easier to do some quick, quick research. But, that might be the one piece that's like a little bit... Like, we get to do that. In a normal conversation you probably won't be able to do that. Uh, but, um, I think that there's... When you can, it's, it's a good idea, so.

Moni: Yeah. Yeah. Learning together across difference I found is amazing. It's pretty, really fun. 

Um, okay. So, uh, yeah. Also feedback, our email is abraverway@reclaimcuriosity.com. So email us your reflections, anything on this. We'll be doing this pretty regularly we hope. So yeah, let us know what you think about it.

And now I'm gonna take off my host hat and join Travis for a conversation on what's been bothering us, uh, to start about what's been going on there. So Travis, wanna kick us off with the first topic of something that's bothered you?

Travis: Oh, OK. Uh, I thought you were gonna start. Um,

Moni: Oh, no, no, no. I've got, I've got on my script... Oh, shite. You're right. It says ‘Moni topic one.’ Hang on. But up here it says, ‘Turn to Travis because I'm ready to hear our first topic.’ I'm gonna go with I think that you should start. I do think that you should start. So I'm just gonna make that executive decision. 

Travis: right. Sounds good

Moni: So, go!

Travis: Sounds good. Well, uh, the first thing that I wanted to chat with you about, because we've, we've kind of talked about it a little bit in the past, is this idea or this kind of like trend that's happening where socialism is kind of having its day in the sun in New York City, um, with the administration of Mayor Mamdami.

Um, there's two things that I, I saw in the past couple weeks that kind of stuck out to me as, like, concerning or what I would say objectively socialism. You know, like, not like, oh, uh, you know, using socialism as a bad word to say like, ‘That's a thing I don't like.’ But actually socialism, and that would be the grocery store concept that he released, I think, a couple days- it was earlier this week, and just to give some context on that, he was saying there was gonna be a city-run grocery store opened in each of the five boroughs that was going to be,  operated by a third party, but owned and, uh, I guess, you know, have the rules set for it by the city.

Primarily, the thing that's the most concerning-- That's concerning on its own, but like, the most concerning to me is the idea that a certain basket of goods, um, which I think, I don't know if this is accurate, but like fresh produce, meat, seafoods, milk, bread, cheese, things like standard foods, uh, whole foods, would be set at 30% below typical retail levels.

Um, so that's one as- what's one thing, and l- we can dig into why I think that's, that's a problem. Um, but that's one aspect.

Moni: I wanna hear like, yeah, the part that really bugs you about it

Travis: A- and the second piece is this tax that the, new tax that they released on second homes. Um, I won't try to say the French word that people say to, when they're trying to pretend they know more

Moni: I studied French and I think it's pied a- pied a terre. 

Travis: Okay. Yeah, that sounds, that sounds familiar. But essentially it's a tax on, um, high-value residential properties that nobody's using as their primary residence.

There's a lot of minutiae on the specifics of, like, how much tax, which ones it applies to, et cetera, but the reality is that it's a, a little bit of like a wealth tax, um, you know, and a, and a regular tax on, on, people that have assets that are worth over a certain amount, and pretty much only because of how wealthy they are, um, in a, as an attempt to raise, more revenues for the city.

And so those are the two areas that, like, uh, to me, those are just straight up, that's socialism, and, you might not have a problem with socialism. Um, I, I think it, I think it is an issue, and I can, you know, I'm happy to, you know, dig into a little more

Moni: Yeah. Well, can you say... Yeah, exactly. Like, if you, in, in the strongest, honest terms, like argh, like what really wrinkles you about this?

Travis: Well, that it's not gonna work.

Moni: Umm, mm-hmm.

Travis: That’s my objection to socialism generally, is that it's economically unsound. Um, it's policies that are developed that I believe are contrary to human nature. They don't... It fails across the world, and it has failed, like, for, because it doesn't work with who we are, like how we operate

Moni: Contrary to human nature is a line that's really sticking with me. How-- Yeah, like what led you to like a conviction that this is just ineffective because it is not who we are?

Travis: Well, the- Well, I mean, a lot, a lot of things, are evident, like, just how socialism has been implemented across the world. So historically, that's one thing. But the, everybody can always point to, you know, there's that line or whatever. It's like, ‘Oh, it's not like real communism’ or whatever. ‘It's not real capitalism.’ Everybody wants to say it's, like, not really what they claim is their ideal version of the ideology that they're, you know, pushing forward. But, and so, but I would say that, like, what you see is all that we're capable of implementing. So what we've seen historically about, you know, regarding socialist policies is, like, the best it's gonna get, you know? So there's no, you know, there's always this idea that it could be, there's a utopia right around the corner. And, and I really think that it's the best that it's gonna get. 

So anyways, like, specifically, like, with regards to the grocery stores and setting, and price fixing 30% below retail values, I mean, that, the real impact that that's going to have from, from my perspective, you know, again, I think this is evidenced by just, like, general economics, is that it's going to push - it's going to create increased demand for those goods at those price levels, which is going to create shortages, um, which maybe they'll be able to account for by taking up, by buying more of the products, like, to sell and out-competing their, their neighbors, so other private grocery stores in the area.

Those grocery stores in the area, probably convenience stores also, like, a lot of the, the smaller, um, you know, the way that lower and middle class people, like, support their families, they're going to be destroyed. Um, and then at the end of the day, like, Mamdani's gonna go away and, like, somebody's gonna come in and clean up his mess, but only after, like, tens of thousands of people, maybe hundreds of thousands of people have had their lives completely disrupted. And ultimately, like, it will have done no good. And so,

Moni: It will have been a waste of time that hurts people.

Travis: Yeah. Yeah. And, and, you know, I, I understand \that, like, the desire to do that is, like, maybe, maybe it's from a good place, maybe. 

Moni: Maybe!? 

Travis: But I'm not, I'm not necessarily willing to grant that because of all the historical evidence we have. It's like, well, what is the ultimate goal here? And maybe the ultimate goal is what you achieve. Um, and so it does feel a little nihilistic and, you know, we-- it's just, there's lots of... Yeah. So anyways, that's-- I'll stop there. That's my... I'll get off my soapbox and give you a chance to respond.

Moni: Oh man, no, there, there's so, there's so much. Uh, I found myself reacting to, when you said ‘maybe it comes from a good place’, because that's what I see... That's probably the strongest thing I like about this, because I agree with your criticisms on a lot of fronts about all this. But the strongest, the thing that I like is I do think it comes from a good place in that, you know, there's statistics that have been put out. But for example, the first borough, the Bronx, that they're planning to open one of these stores in, I believe it's something like 70, 77% of people struggle to afford food.That's a lot of people. 

Uh, so for me, like one of the only justifiable reasons for me, because I don't consider myself a socialist, for wanting to try something like this is to help people, because something about that seems wrong. There was a statement Mamdani put out that said something like, you know, ‘The richest city in the richest country, we just shouldn't have people struggling like this.’ And, and in principle I agree. We shouldn't. And so for me, trying this, I, I am not where you are, where I'm so sure that there's nothing to learn. But I do think that it won't work because how will you not compete with grocery stores? Of course you'll compete with grocery stores, and it will be unfair, and it's not what the market sets out to do and, and the rules of the market are really strong and really cool.

So I do consider myself a capitalist more than a socialist, but I don't know. But the part... Let me see if I can try to identify this. Like, I'm sympathetic to trying to help people who are struggling. I'm sympathetic to that. To the extent that I think that this might work, I don't know. Maybe the best I can say is that we might have something to learn because somebody in a big enough city is just willing to try under all the pressure and all the economic good sense that says, ‘Wow, you better show results for what you wanna change or we're gonna condemn you for trying something that on paper looks so awful.’

So part of me's like, well, I don't know. Maybe. Maybe they'll end up innovating some things that surprise us in the end. Um, yeah, but I don't know. But if people can eat when they couldn't eat, uh, seem like a good idea? You know what I mean? Like,

Travis: So I am incredibly sympathetic, and you know, we've, we've talked about this before, but I'm, I'm incredibly sympathetic to this idea that like grocery price, it's affordability issues that we're having in this country. Um, it's not just groceries, it's living, it's all these things, you know, like all the, the core things that we require, um, to get by. And, you know, one of the primary reasons for that, from my perspective, is that those are the things with the lowest margins for error. So you, like, those are the things that go up and are impacted by inflation first. Um, so, but like, I mean, like a, a grocery store profit margin is like 1% or 2%, you know, like a standard grocery store.

So it's not, it's not like these... Like the reason food is getting more expensive is because we're at war right now. You know, like the, there is, uh, there's an impact on the global economy that’s..

Moni: we will be talking about that later on, I think

Travis: Yeah. No, I mean, and, and, and that goes into some of  my opinions on, you know, what we'll be talking about there.

But like there are real reasons for like... That's one reason for inflation. But like the other reason for inflation is that like our country just can't stop printing money. And it, it really, you know, it disrupts the global economy and it like, well, you know, you could argue that that's how the global economy is run.

But, but you know, it creates these economic distortions make, which make food and, um, housing values and things like that go up.

Moni: Yeah, and we've talked about this before, and I, I understand that you, you have more, mm, reliance and confidence in an economic system that stays really true to concrete goods and concrete trade, you know, and doesn't, like, create all these products that start to get speculative and things like this in the finance industry.

Travis: Yeah, I mean, I definitely, I would say like I'm... Well, I believe in like, like a hard money standard and, and like a real, you know, like the, where the value is created for humanity is in the real economy, not in all these like financial abstractions. Um, and, and like... So anyways, I mean, that's probably too much and, and a different conversation. 

Moni: Yeah. Yeah. We don't have to get in the weeds, but this is a, in a way, another kind of financial abstraction that's trying to...

Travis: That's my point though, is like that's the problem. It's not because grocery stores are profit gouging in New York City. If like, if food's expensive in New York City, there are reasons for it, and we should target the reasons for them. And, and what Mondami and his administration is doing is targeting like the effect.

And so I mean, economics is like part human nature, part math. Like the math part isn't going to work. It just, it, it just won't work because they'll, they will undercut all of their competition and they will destroy it, and then New York City food supply or food distribution will be completely destabilized for the next decade.

Like that, now, that is if he actually accomplishes what he wants to do 

Moni: Well, and on that note, I-- just as I was looking around at this stuff, I saw a note that last year Mamdani said, "If this doesn't work, then we'll drop it." He said, he would s- he said, "C'est la vie, then the idea was wrong." That gave me a little confidence that at least there's some sense of like, we're gonna try this, and if it's really failing.

But what I, what I wanna see is metrics for what failure would look like. What would be the signals where the administration would pull this back? Because without hearing that, then it's more kind of what you're saying, is like, a lot of good sense says this won't work. Why are we doing it? Um, but I wanna make one more point, which is what you were saying about human nature.

You know, with things like this, I try to ask myself like, why are we doing something that so many people have such an opposition to? Why?  Like, like you said, socialism is having its day in the sun with Mamdani. Why? And it seems to me, like, I agree with you that there are root causes for prices going up at the grocery store.

Clearly, we haven't addressed them adequately enough, because if we had, we probably wouldn't be doing this, right? We wouldn't be trying something. So, so there's another thing about human nature that's desperate times call for desperate measures kinda thing. And the kinds of-- the ideas that a lot of people think won't work start to look attractive when nothing else is being done or people start to feel like this is so unacceptable, it's been going on too long.

And I wonder if you, I wonder if you have any sympathy for that, because you and I have talked about an economic inequality across the country and what a drastic impact it's had, and it has led to more reactionary politics, I think on the left and the right. So is this not kind of part of that? Um, and can there not be some trust in the fact that people are tired and so therefore wanna try something else?

Travis: Uh, well, I'm sympathetic to, like, the feeling behind it. It just... I mean, the, I'm sorry if I can't, like, give you more.. I just, it's not going to work. Like, that's...

Moni: You’re so sure! But like what, I don't know. What if?

Travis: So again, I think the consequence, and why I say maybe, by the way, uh, you know, like maybe it's motivated by goodwill, is that I…

Moni: Or not motivated by goodwill

Travis: I think people with an economics background know this is not going to work. And if anybody is advising him that it will, like, 'cause you'll... Look, you know, like I was Googling, you know, using AI to summarize this concept, whatever, and it was like, uh, ‘New York City says that it will, you know, save everybody $1,000,’ or whatever. You can find economists to make up numbers for you, like, any day of the week.

And my point is that, like, the consequence of this is going to be, like, a consolidation of power at the top for Mamdani. Like, everything, every time you vote to have the government do more, they, corruption increases and things get worse. And, and I think that there's this idea in socialism that, like, well, if we only just pick the right people to give the power to, then, like, we can fix this problem.

And, and honestly, like, that's the logic behind, like, why Trump's populist campaign worked. You know, a lot of people thought, like, ‘Well, you know, he's the guy,’ you know? Like, we'll just...

Moni: He's, he's the good guy for me. Yeah.

Travis: Yeah. And, and so it's the same, it's the same logic, and I just don't think it's, um... It really makes me angry because this in particular with regards to food, with regard… in New York, in the greatest country, certainly in America, but possibly in the world, like, I don't know, like, just over 50% of the people who voted, so, like, 10% of New York City decided to put this person in charge who's now, from my perspective, going to have, like, a multi-decade long impact on, on the, like, prosperity of that city.

And, and, and it's going to have a real impact of hurting the most disadvantaged and, and the poorest individuals, who are going to be, like, your immigrants, your..

Moni: Yeah,

Travis: whatever. All the people that liberals or progressives claim to care about the most. And I say that, like, a little bit glibly, but you know, it's like, uh, maybe, maybe do care about the most, maybe not just claim. And it's gonna have the worst impact on those people, and I'm...

Moni: Well, what makes me wanna push back on that though is that if the confidence of that, we know that a lot of folks in those groups are the people who voted Mamdani, are the people who wanna see these different things because they do believe it could work. So I don't know. There's a part of me that wants to not sit up here in my more privileged place and say, ‘That will never work,’ you know?

But I'm not in that situation, and I am very sympathetic to people in that situation. Uh, and I, I want to trust something of that instinct, I guess.

Travis: Yeah, am, can I just say one last thing and maybe we can move on to the next topic?

Moni: Yeah.

Travis: We didn't talk about the taxes, but I, I will say that what's, from a moral perspective, what concerns me about that is.. Fair enough if localities would like to vote in leaders to help them improve their lives. They are perfectly able to do that, and I think, like, the fact that we have a relatively decentralized system with, you know, you can have a city experiment with things, you can have a state experiment with things. That's a good thing.

Moni: That is a good thing

Travis: But what we're really talking about here is these people voting to take other people's money to achieve their own goals.

Moni: I never thought of that…

Travis: We're, we're not talking about them voting to try to solve the problem by removing barriers or by, like, upholding the law or, you know doing whatever. They're actively voting to redistribute wealth in their favor, and that's, I find that to be immoral, and I think that that's just generally what taxation is, you know, but more so when the government does more.

Moni: That's fascinating. And another time I hope we can dig more into that because I disagree with so many of the premises and it'd be so fun to just understand that. But it also makes a lot of sense to me what you're saying, and this is, ugh. I have a feeling you're right, like socialism, Democratic socialism is rising. We're gonna see more of these kinds of experiments, and yeah, it's gonna, it's probably gonna get rougher. 

Um, okay. Well, let's move on to the next one. So this is something that's bugged me, and bugged me a lot. I saw this headline and flipped. I, oh, okay, so hold on. I'm looking at my wrong notes. Right. So this is Uh, there was some amazing reporting that showed that the Trump administration admitted in court documents that it canceled over $7 billion of contracts across the country based solely on the political identity of the grant recipient's state.

So 16 states that voted for Kamala Harris saw over 300 funding awards across 200 projects terminated, uh, because they voted for Kamala Harris and/or because they had two Democratic senators. That's it. The administration said, ‘Solely.’ Like, that word makes me so mad. And, um, more than 300 projects that were in red states allowed to go on.

So there was no merit to this cancellation whatsoever. Hmm. I mean, I don't know. This one kind of, to me speaks for itself. The idea of the federal government choosing to use its institutional, you know, job and authority of giving grants for certain things that are supposed to be based on, like, how good is your project.

Like, okay, this is an energy project. Sure, let's work on it. Let's work on this one. Let's cancel that one. That should be merit-based, and for it to come as a punishment, I guess, or some kind of tribal identity-based thing where you're allowed to continue your project, but you're not because I don't like you, that, that is, that is a surefire way to get to a corrupt, awful government that I don't think we are, and we are so much better than that.

Um, and, um, before, you know, closing, because I could rant forever about this, I will say that this reminded me of the time a couple of years ago, maybe you remember this, where it came out that there was an employee down in Florida of FEMA who told... And FEMA is the, uh, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

There's an employee of FEMA in Florida who told their team, "Skip the houses that have Donald Trump signs on their lawn. We don't wanna help them." That employee, when that came out, that employee was fired, and an official from FEMA said on X, "This is a clear violation of FEMA's core values and principles to help people regardless of their political affiliation."

So that person was fired. We're done. In this case, I've seen no accountability. I've seen no apology. It's as if the Trump administration is saying, "It's absolutely our right to punish our political enemies. We've done it here, here, here, here, and now we'll do it here. See what, see what you, see what you wanna do about that."

Oh, I... Mm, mm-mm. Nope. No, Travis, this is wrong!

Travis: Well, let me, let me try and offer you an alternative perspective. I, and I won't, you know, I'm not... I'm gonna push back on one thing that you said. You said that this is not who we are. It is, I believe objectively, who we are. I don't think that this is a better, there's a better... Like, this is, this is what politics is. This is what centralizing all of the money and power into a singular institution that controls all of American life. This is what, this is what you get from it.

Moni: What!? No!

Travis: So let me, let me, let me kind of tell it, like explain like, like what is pork belly spending or what is, um, earmarking? Like what, other than this?

Moni: Remind me. Earmarking is people in Congress going, "Oh yeah, I'll vote for your bill, but, like, include this one thing for me." Is that what you’re?

Travis: Yep. And it's not for them, it's for their district or, or whatever. You know, sometimes for them, depends on the people. But like, um, it generally is for their district. Like, "Oh, you know, I'll vote for XYZ," you know, it's something completely unrelated. So say like the SAVE Act, right? Like, "I'll vote for, like, voter ID laws if you keep this military base open in Louisiana," right?

That... This is like the same thing. Like..

Moni: No it’s not! That's not the same thing. Travis, really? Okay, tell me why you think that’s the same thing.

Travis: To me, to me it's the same thing because you, you basically, like, um, you're picking and choosing not based off of merit, just based off of like either horse trading or just arbitrary power dynamics who is receiving the federal funding. And I don't think that federal funding is, like in the decisions on how to spend that, has ever been merit-based.

Moni: What!?

Travis: Um, there may be a layer of, of merit, uh, but I don't I think.. You could go back to the beginning of the country, it's always been about political power and will.

Moni: To this degree? 'Cause I don't remember ever seeing...

Travis: I mean, this is kind of like pulling the Band-Aid off in my mind. Like, this is like, it's a bit extreme. 

Moni: To you this is showing what's always been there except now we just get to see it, that's the only difference?

Travis: Yeah, a little bit. And I think that that's true for a lot of things that Trump does. It's like, well, you know, he's kind of like revealing the game to everybody. He's like, "I'm gonna do it in my Trumpish way," like big, bold. And it's like, 

Moni: Mean

Travis: And then everybody... And it, and it shows what's kind of always been happening. I, I'll say this, like, as somebody who voted for him, one of the things I wanted him to do was cut the spending, cut the distribution for pet projects to, to states. Now,

Moni: Yes, remember that

Travis: They didn't.. They did not do as good of a job as I wanted them to do.

I, you know, I think that there's still a lot of excessive spending, but the, the reality is that he is trying to do a lot of things, and in order to maintain the political, um, power to accomplish those things in the Senate and the House, he can't go around taking away funding from his allies. He simply can't do it.

They, they wouldn't, they wouldn't vote for him. They wouldn't vote for his initiatives if he went to the, you know, the swing vote in the Senate and said, "Hey, I'm, you know, I'm taking $20 million away from Louisiana. Now go back and, and, you know, campaign for me, uh, for my project or, or whatever." So it makes a lot of sense to me that he, he just, you know, he decided, all right well, the Democrats aren't gonna vote for anything I wanna do anyways, so, like, I'll, I'll take the funding from them.

Moni: So let me clarify something because I'm making an assumption based on what I'm hearing, and I just wanna make sure that I check it. I'm assuming that you think this is okay that this happened. Is that true?

Travis: Well, I don't- I'm not, like... I don't think about it very much. I'm, like, not too concerned about it at all because I think it falls into a category of thing that, like, I object to the whole system. I don't think that we should be sending all of our money to the federal government to then redistribute to the states.

I, I don't. I don't like any of that, and I think that what you get from that is corruption. This is, like, one instance. And, and then, like, just crossing your fingers and hoping for no corruption is, like, not a good system. It, like... So I…

Moni: Ok, well let me put it this way. Let's, let's imagine the tables were turned and it came out during the... Okay, that it, it came out that Obama canceled over $7 billion of contracts based like, solely because they were in red states, and that came out, and that was admitted. Um, so all those red state projects that the federal government had approved in a Republican administration, canceled by the Democrat administration for no reason other than that.

So people had been hired, you know, were gonna go work on this. Communities were like, "Yay, we're gonna get this thing," and then, " Oh, you voted for the wrong team. Sorry, you're out of jobs." Would you, would it really not bother you?

Travis: Um, if, a Democrat, Democratic president wanted to cut spending of any kind, I would be mind-blown. Um, and 

Moni: Ok, that’s not what I asked. Let's imagine it's on anything that you think is worth spending on, anything. Like, 'cause I guess another thing worth saying is that these are energy projects, right? I think both folks on the left and right wanna get our energy policy and infrastructure to a good place.

Um, maybe one could say, I suppose, that the left is so concerned about climate change that, you know, energy's really important. But again, like, the Trump administration allowed to continue 300 of these projects because they were in red states. So it's not, it's not...

Travis: Which, that does that make sense. What I was, like, was my characterization of it making sense to you? That, like they wanted to cut but they couldn't, they couldn't actually cut from the red states because they would lose, they would lose like support from the Senators?

Moni: No, I, I don't, I don't accept that at all. I think that's ridiculous. I think that federal-- the federal government should be making merit-based decisions that are not politically motivated, and

Travis: I’m not talking about should though

Moni: I, I disagree with you. You, you're saying that, "Oh, this is human nature. They make all their decisions politically motivated."

No, I don't think that's true at all. This is controversial because it is not the norm, and I do not believe that this has just always been happening and never come out. I, I just don't accept that. I don't see, I don't see evidence that that is true at all

Travis: I'm not saying, I'm not saying that I think that this particular thing is happening. I'm saying that in my brain, like how I analyze these things, things are happening that are similar enough to it that I just don't view it as that much of an abnormality. And it fits completely within the system that I, I object to like generally. So I just think it's like I... 

Moni: You're not surprised, in other words?

Travis: I'm not surprised at all. Like I, and, and like I don't even... I also in- So we talk about this a lot, Monica, which is the, um, reporting aspect of it, 'cause every story that you read is, there's like what happened and then there's how they presented the information.

I read exactly how, l what they said regarding it being solely for those reasons. That's not an exact characterization of what they were saying. They were asked an explicit question. They said, "Did you ever do it solely because of this?" And so they said, "Yes, occasionally we did it solely based off of these two reasons."

You know, they voted for Kamala Harris, and they voted... As a grand sweeping way of being like, let's not worry about the analysis, let's just cut. We, you know, say we're gonna cut 50%. Like, how do we do it? Well, start with these easy, easy factors.  I, I think generally like the, the, the number one thing though was like, we need to cut. That was number one. 

Then they started looking at the things that started to get recently funded from the Green New Deal, and a lot of those projects were funded in those areas. And I don't know if they were funded based off of merit in the first place, or maybe they were funded based off of the, like, Biden administration's preferences for blue states. I don't have that information and, and I'm not saying that it definitely is the case, but

Moni: But to me, what cuts though, is the fact that there are 300 projects in red states allowed to continue that are energy projects. It's not like these only exist in blue states.

Travis: I agree with you. This is not great.

Moni: And then Biden administration set up a lot of these in red states

Travis: I don’t love this.

Moni: Thank you for saying that's not great and I don't love this. I was waiting for that.

Travis: I know. I apologize if I didn't say it sooner, but I, I mean, 'cause I do think that like.. You know, I just, you know, I really don't, I don't care that much, you know? And I'm sorry, like, I, and it's just like I don't care that much about this.

It's very like, I think whether or not we've highlighted it, like, and I think if the Biden administration did this, I don't think the New York Times would report on it also. So I'm just highly skeptical 

Moni: Oh, Yes they would. Mm. Yes they would! Well, we, we can never know. Fair.

Travis: I don't know, and like I said, I think it's a really, it would be really interesting factor to understand, like, what the specifics are, were of the cutting, and if there was a finger on the scale with the granting of the monies in the first place. Because if the administration did an analysis, a broad sweeping analysis, and showed that blue states got excessively more funding, maybe they would have put in a rule like this, and maybe it would be completely reasonable, and, and it's something that I wouldn't object to. I, I don't know any of that information, and I'm, I'm...

We're gonna always come back to this

Moni: you're very suspicious of the reporting

Travis: I'm so suspicious of the reporting aspect of it. I just, I, my trust level, it's, you know, my trust level for government is very low, but for the media it's even lower.

Moni: Yeah but these are court documents, Travis. They're not making that up. That wasn't reporting. It's in the document. The administration admitted it, didn't apologize, said nothing about it's against the values of the federal government to pick and choose based on who won the fricking last election.

Travis: Well, but it's not framed that way. I don't, I don't think it's a

Moni: It’s not a reporting thing

Travis: I don't think that it's a fair-- Like, the way that the article presented the information, I, I don't think that the people who said that would agree with it.

Moni: Well, I could send you the AP article, right? I could send you the Reuters article. Like, is it a... I, I don't know. I, um, you can tell I'm, like, upset..

Travis: No, I know. 

Moni: ..that there's not a core thing we can agree- maybe there is, 'cause you did say this isn't great. So

Travis: I, I don't love-- I mean, I don't like that we should be picking and choosing. Like the Trump administration shouldn't be doing this. No administration should be doing this

Moni: No. No administration should be doing this. We're better than this

Travis: But primarily, we shouldn't be taxing people at the federal level, accumulating all of their funds, and then picking and choosing which projects we wanna support based off of anything.

Moni: Anything? So you don't think the government should be funding cool stuff?

Travis: Anything.

Moni: So you don't think the government should be funding cool stuff?

Travis: No, I don't

Moni: Okay. Well, yeah, that's a pretty big, that's a pretty big disagreement. So you're more like, "Oh, good. As long as, you know, whatever. They're all, it's all nonsense." I think I understand a little more. Like, 

Travis: And I do. My point, that's my opinion, but I also think that there are a lot of people in this administration that share that opinion, that were involved at this time with DOGE and whatever, that were exclusively just trying to cut across the board, period. And that's why I give them a little bit more leeway.

Moni: right, and your political strategy argument about the, you know, they're not gonna do it to allies, they're gonna do it to their opponents. I guess from that cold, hard place makes sense to me. But kinda what you were saying about Mamdani, you think it's gonna be a lot of damage down the road.

This is a lot of damage down the road. If this kind of bull***t becomes normalized. Good Lord, every administration comes in and goes, "Well, you know what? We just don't feel like supporting anything in the states that don't like us." Like, that to me is a pathway to gonna have a fricking national divorce. We can't go on like that. It's crazy

Travis: Well, I agree with your assessment that we can't go on with that, but I don't nec-

Moni: The Federal government should not behave that way. That's for campaigning, not for governing.

Travis: It doesn't need to end up in a national divorce necessarily, but what it should end up in is a recognition that this is a like, an unstable system that, that we cannot continue to centralize. That's from my perspective. So I'm, 


Moni: Ok, I get that.

Travis: I'm hopeful that it will, it, it will, uh, result in decentralization and a reduction of the role that the federal government has. So you can't just vote one person in and then take over the, like, the whole economy because

Moni: I guess, but look, like, if it, if there's a reduction in the role the federal government has because, because the federal government does more of these kinds of things that would make half the country straight up distrust it because it's all political favoritism, that's, I don't know, that's a, that's an awful reason to have less, less of stuff that can make stuff happen in this country.

Um, okay. Wow, that was fascinating. I have a lot to think on. Thank you for your brutal honesty on that.

Travis: I think that might've been our biggest fight, Monica. I'm not sure. Yeah.

Moni: I kind of loved it. But I'm also like, I'm so mad right now. 

Um, okay. Well, let's go, um, I think we said... Let me do my topic two first so that you close out with your topic two. 

Travis: Yeah, makes sense

Moni: So okay, now we're moving to topics where we are bugged by something that our side did, something we consider our side, or we're actually kind of surprised, delighted by something the other side did.

So that's these other topics. And for me, um, and I hope it's no surprise to people who are on my side politically, I was appalled at this thing that happened two years ago in New Jersey. The governor of New Jersey announced very recently that due to a ‘system error’, is how she put it, a software error, 6,600 people were improperly registered to vote. They were not US citizens, and they were registered to vote in the state of New Jersey. Whoa. Um, uh, an analysis according to the governor showed that 400 of them went on to vote, to cast ballots. And then here's the other thing. This happened two years ago under the administration of Governor Murphy in New Jersey.

Apparently, his administration fixed the bug or whatever, so they wouldn't keep registering non-citizens, but didn't say anything, didn't disclose it publicly, which I'm just, I'm just gonna be like,  No. What? That's horrific. So among my reactions, you know, there's some positive ones. I thought the statement by the New Jersey governor was pretty awesome.

Those are the kinds of values and principles I wanna stand on. She knew that Trump is on a tear about voter fraud and untrustworthy elections and all these things that are broken and people being improperly registered. She knew, and she released this as, when she found out, and she knew that Trump and the Republicans were gonna use this as a talking point, you know, to say that, "Look, see? It's all stinks." Um, which I have issues with, but I have to say, I get it. I get it. 

If there, if there are governments, municipal, state level, that discover errors like this, fix them and don't say anything, or don't fix them, oh my God. Like, that's actually terrifying to me. That's horrific. If it happened here, it probably happened elsewhere, and now I sound like a Republican.You know what I mean? 

Because this is exactly what a lot of conservatives are telling me is they're, they're not, a lot of them don't trust elections because they just, they're just, they're just so sure that there's something going on behind the scenes, and this kind of lack of transparency, it just makes me just seethe.

I'm, I'm not okay with this. So Travis, your thoughts.

Travis: Well, I agree. All right, next topic. No. Um, I mean, no, but I do. I mean, like, I will, I'll caution myself against, like, leaning too heavily into it because it's like a small example, and I don't think... Like, I do think that..

I think that we should have evidence to support these claims. I will say though, that there's..this is a really good example of when, like evidence is being withheld, you know? And maybe not, I don't know. This is related in my mind, but maybe it's not. I was watching Dr. Fauci's hearing yesterday, and it's like to me that's an example of like, you know, I spent years being told that nothing I claimed about COVID had any evidence supporting it. And the reality was that it was withheld, and so like a lot of the information was withheld. And so I think we have to be really careful when we're talking about the voter fraud issue, like there's a very big incentive. This is basically treason, right? Like, you know, like..

Moni: Very big incentive to what? Just to be clear.

Travis: to not be honest if, if it's happened, you know?

Or, you know, if, you know... For lots of reasons. One, because like, you know, the Republicans and Trump are a dog with a bone for sure,

Moni: Yeah!

Travis: And they will be. This is gonna be a huge campaign. I'm sure this will be prominent.

Moni: And, and can you, can you, can you acknowledge that Trump has pushed a lot of things without having evidence, just a gut feeling and that that's not great?

Travis: Well, I  try to approach that with a little bit of humility because I don't know, like, what kind of evidence they have that I don't have. And I don't-- I'm not saying that, like you know, I – don't put too much weight on that because I'm not, I'm not saying like, "Oh, like they must have something," like or whatever. I just don't..

Moni: If they did, they would've shown it, 'cause they show flimsy evidence that lost court cases. If they had evidence, they'd have shown it.

Travis: Yeah. I mean, I, I don't know. I think, you know, it was, I can't remember the exact story, but it, you know, right before she left, Tulsi Gabbard, um, the head of the Department of,

Moni: yeah DNI

Travis: uh,

Moni: National Intelligence, yeah

Travis: DNI, whatever. I'll use the acronym. DNI. Um, you know, she did release something on voter fraud in Arizona, I believe, um, with regards to the machines, and I don't remember the specifics of it.

But it's-- I'm, I think like I'm, I don't wanna use this and be, again, be a dog with a bone and say like, "Hey, see? Like, this is, if it's true here, it's true everywhere," because I, I recognize the limitations of that. But I think that it's more than the media's presenting and that we're able to develop a bipartisan consensus around it. I think it's more than that, and I think it's a really big problem.

Moni: Yeah, I agree. My, my hope is that, you know, more liberal Democratic folks like, like me, look at the story and recognize that it is possible that we've had blind spots to this, right? We should want this disclosed. We should put a lot of pressure on all officials up and down. Like, please don't politicize this.

You know, what you were saying about like, "Oh, grants will be politicized." Like, I don't think so, but okay, please, if there's a Democratic governor, right, who discovers something fraudish or whatever and says, "Oh, well, blah, blah, blah," like, "Our," you know, "we won." Like, no, we can't allow this. We can't. We have to be bigger people. We have to stand for something bigger. 

Um, so yeah, I don't know. I just hope people are really paying attention and that we're not, like you said. I hate to say it, but it's true. It's like you said, you can't be too arrogant in the conviction that nothing is wrong merely because no overwhelming evidence has appeared so far.

It, it's important to listen to the concerns out there because people are worried, and I, I just, I just wanna trust people's intuition. I don't wanna act too hard without evidence ever, you know? And you can swing too far the other way. But this, this was a big deal to me, you know?

Travis: I think, I think, um, a good, like a good system for identifying truth is like allowing competing guts to like battle it out, you know? 

Moni: Yes!

Travis: Um, because I think, you know, there are a lot of gut feelings that maybe yourself or like people on the, the left side of the political spectrum have right now that are really strong things we should be focusing on so we don't allow the Trump administration to be too, or, you know, just whatever, Congress or the Senate or whatever, any, any government institution to be too corrupt.

Um, and I think that we do ourselves a disservice by dismissing those things. Uh, but I think it's, you know, it's true on both sides, where over the past maybe 10 years or six years or whatever, it kinda like felt like it got worse during COVID. There have been a lot of gut feelings on the right that were dismissed because they couldn't present scientific fact, objective evidence, or whatever.

And I think as a society or as, as a community, we like really suffered from that,

Moni: Yeah. Yeah, I think that's right. And it, you know, like everything, everything is trade-offs. Everything is a really tenuous balance between, between two things, two poles, two places that we can go wrong. So, you know, it's too easy to say, like, "Only the facts and no gut feeling at all." It's also too easy to say, "Only the gut feeling and no facts at all," and I've seen a lot of that in our politics.

Neither is great. But both of them have value. So yeah, I don't know. It just comes down to me to, like, gotta be aware of our blind spots, got to be humble about what we don't know. Um, and if people are worried, let's try to get to the bottom of it and see what stone hasn't been turned. You know, and, and another thing, another takeaway from this is that it would've been really difficult for someone outside the government to have even known about this, right?

So we need officials who are bigger than their party because... You know what I mean? Like, we need officials who are bigger than their party, and I think the New Jersey governor showed serious integrity here. I am, uh, big points for her because now she has to clean up a mess that, that a prior administrator made.

She has to deal with the fact that the Democratic Party is like, "Darn it. Why'd you do that now?" Like, I, I hope nobody's really saying this. Like, they know this isn't good for our country. But some of them might be thinking like, "Did you have to say that now when Trump is, is on a tear about this fraud stuff ahead of the midterms? You know how poisonous that is to our democracy?" And I think it is. But that's integrity.

Travis: Yeah, no, I think, I, think, like, the system we have of voting in elected officials is, like, a really good system of accountability. It's broken in a lot of ways because we don't have good information and, and there's, you know, bad incentives and, and things like that. But it's overall, like, a really good system of accountability where you have people, like, you know, she has to probably feels like she needs to do the right thing because if it comes out, then she'll, like, never get elected ever again.Maybe sh- maybe she still would

Moni: that. But I, but I like to think that it's not all anticipating a bad thing. I think she also hopefully acted out of integrity

Travis: and no, and I think, yeah, I think that perhaps she's somebody that has a higher moral standard than your average politician. Um, but I guess, like, the concern, what I, the, the, just, like, the point that I was making with regard to accountability is that we have so many people that operate within our government that just don't have that system of accountability.

Um, and, um, I, I think that,

Moni: Unelected bureaucrats,

Travis: unelected bureaucrats, these career politicians, but career bureaucrats, people who go, like, I don't know. I'm probably gonna offend somebody, but for people who go to school for politics and then, like, do politics their entire life, it was like, that's not a productive, uh, like, career.

Like, that's, there's not, you're not creating anything.

Moni: yeah. I, I disagree with some of that, but I, but I get where you're coming from. Um, and clearly integrity and trust in our elected officials is really, really important. You know, independent researchers from the outside are only gonna find so much, right? We just need people to be like this.

Uh, and I would love to see more politicians be like this, and you know I have strong opinions about some really powerful folks on the right that have not shown me this side of themselves. Uh, and I would like to see that side more. 

Okay. Let's go to your, your topic, uh, that either, uh, bugged you about your own side or that you were delighted about for the other side.

Travis: Maybe it says something about the state of politics right now that you and I both are finding things that bug us about our own side rather than something that's nice about the

Moni: Yeah.

Travis: the other side.

Moni: Yeah.

Travis: it's easier to, to find that. But

Moni: Good point 

Travis: mine's... It's a pretty big one, um, but it's been on my mind a lot, and I've been really hoping to chat with you about it.

Um, regarding the war in Iran. And, um, you know, as somebody that voted for Trump, one of the reasons I did that was because he campaigned on no new wars, um, as the peacemaking president. He campaigned on somebody that... as somebody that was, um, aware of the dangers of adventurism in the Middle East, and he had a track record to prove that he was not going to do that.

And then fast-forward to the end of February, and, um, the US, on Israeli intelligence and, and depending on, you know, what you believe potentially based off of the Israeli government Um,

Moni: Improperly influencing kind of deal

Travis: improperly influencing the, yeah, the government or at least putting them in a, between a rock and a hard place by saying, you know, they're going to attack first.

They, they initiated Operation Epic Fury, which was supposed to be, you know... They executed the supreme leader of Iran and many senior officials, um, created... It was essentially a regime change. They did exactly what he said he wouldn't do. Um,and then, um, you know, went back and forth for five to six weeks creating tons of economic turmoil, but also losses of life, US soldiers dying, not to mention all of the non-US folks that are, um, dying or having their lives disrupted as well.

And, um, I think war is really, really bad, and I was looking forward... You know, I, was encouraged by an administration that felt the same and, um, was interested in, in pulling back and, uh... Yeah, very discouraged, um, by the state of things. Um, and I say that... Yeah, I'll call, I'll, I'll kinda get ahead of it.

Not that I think it's gonna come from you, but I'll, like... Like, my father, like, really think, you know, thinks I'm, like, being like a peacenik or whatever. Like, you know? Or like, really, like, too, like, um, a pacifist is what he called... He didn't call me a pacifist. He called Tucker Carlson a pacifist. But, but anyways.

So, uh, but my point is, like, I'm not, I'm not even, like... Like, I'm not advocating for, like, this, like, peace and tranquility and like, you know, like, like, whatever, zen. Like, you know, everybody should just love each other. That's not what I'm saying. I just think it's not... It's, it's really horrific, and we should do less of it.

And, um, I don't think that it was necessary. Um, and yeah, I'll leave it there and, and get your thoughts.

Moni: Yeah. So is it... There's-- It's a big one. Uh, is the big thing that it's, it's lasted too long, that it should've never happened at all? What's kind of-- Where do you land right now in July?

Travis: I try not to get too particular about if it's lasted too long because, like, what do I know about the specifics of waging a war? Um, I think it probably should have never happened in the first place, and, and I evidence that by saying that we have no interests outside of Israeli interests in that area. And I don't

Moni: Is that the thing that makes you... What, what makes you the most angry?

Travis: I don't think Americans really love war. Like, I don't think that Americans would vote for war on-- in general. I think it's against the American identity and American spirit. I really, I think that, that like every war we joined until like 1970 or whatever, we had to be pulled into it like by European forces, by

Moni: Yeah

Travis: propaganda and manipulation tactics and saying like, "Oh, if you don't help us, the whole Western world is gonna fall."

You know, like, like it was like,

Moni: But at least after 1970, weren't there a lot of wars that, like, we started because we want to reshape the world?

Travis: Yeah, no, I think something, I think something changed, but, you know, but I don't, I don't really point that to the American, the spirit of the American people. I think, I think of that more of like a, a high level, like there are certain like, uh, elites in the country that have maintained power and, and been able to, like, take actions with the full force of the federal government, and we haven't yet been able to ho-hold them accountable.

Um, I was optimistic that we were starting to move in the direction of holding the people that are going to war with the whole world, um, piece by piece, uh, accountable. And I'm, you know, without droning on here, my, my, um... It bothers me that, like, I don't think this would happen without Israeli influence.

I don't think we can have an honest conversation about that in this country. I think that if me saying this, I'm probably going to get, be told that I'm anti-Semitic. Um, and I'm, I'm not. Uh, you know, if anything, I'm pro-Semitic. You know, I've, uh... And, and, I... But I think that the country of Israel and the government of Israel has a different agenda than the, than the American people, and I think that they are stopping us from being able to finish the war and, and create peace and create harmony until their incentive- or their goals are met.

Um, and I, that bothers me 'cause I don't know why this administration doesn't do more to push back against that.

Moni: Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Well, you know, I noted your, your sense of this feels like you can't even have an honest conversation because it involves Israel and, you know, I think, I think clearly there's just a lot of strong feelings about what's tied to what, right? And what's the moral order of things, and where should people fall on that?

And, and I agree, I see some of those same dynamics where it's difficult to talk about this or the war in Gaza, and it's just real tough. Um, I-- Yeah, as an American citizen, I, I would want us to be making decisions about where to go to war based entirely on our interests. I do think that sometimes our interests align with other countries' interests.

Um, but I, I agree with you that I have also been kinda worried that it possibly, uh, you know, is a little, little too much another country's interest. But, like you, I have a lot of humility in the face of that. Like, I don't know. This is, this is international politics. I'm not sure. In the beginning, I think you and I talked about this, but in the beginning, um, like the day that we launched the attack, I would say I was actually for it. Um, so for me, the issue is I think this has gone on too long. I, I was, um, maybe too optimistic that, okay, you know, sometimes as much as Trump really bugs me on a million different levels, and bugs is a light term, um, I remember thinking, "Well, okay, maybe this is one situation where having an impulsive leader who just breaks rules and just kinda does the thing that, you know, might need doing is actually good."

I've talked to some folks who are in national security who've made... You know, who've just underlined things that I've learned about Iran and, and the situation, and it's, it'll be ugly and it could be really bad, but we need to do it, and I think I kinda nodded along to that. 

But as time has gone on, I've been like, "Mm-mm. Oh, no. Oh, no." Um, and I was, you know, conv- not convinced, but, but certainly compelled by some of the arguments from the right, from the non-interventionist right, right? That's been saying, "This was a bad idea from the start. We don't like, like this kind of stinks of undue foreign influence. I don't like it.

Like, it just doesn't seem like our thing." And, um, it's been weird to find myself, uh, drawn to some of those conversations, being like, oh, what? Okay. What are they talking about? Like, some of this also feels weird to me. So, there we are. Uh, it, it seems like the whole quagmire of the Middle East yet again, here we are, stuck.

Travis: Yeah. No, I, I, um, I don't know. Like I, like I said, I'm, I'm... I don't know what I don't know, but, and I try not to read in, like... I really, like it's a big, it's a balance of like, um, you're only as good as the information that you're able to consume, right? And, and so like wherever you're looking is, is going to like influence that.

But from my perspective, like a lot of the actions we've taken, you know, 'cause I know people say like, "Oh, we should've gone in, in, and, and like it would've been quick, and, you know, it should've..." Like whatever. It's, it's a, it was the right thing to do. It's, a lot of that is based off of ideas that like, oh, they were close to having a nuclear weapon or, you know, they're, you know, whatever.

Um, a lot of that information comes from Israeli intelligence, and I, and I am concerned that a lot of the information we get on the Middle East comes from Israeli intelligence. And I don't think that that's like, that just like makes sense that

Moni: Yeah,

Travis: they’re in the Middle East and they're a partner

Moni: yeah, Israeli intelligence and the Israeli military is, like, among the most incredible in the world. Like, in my read of, of Israeli history, like, good lord, you know? Like, they're very, very strong, very strategic. They have a lot to protect, and it is, it is all the way down in the bones, and I, I have a lot of respect for that. Um, and I, I like the idea of being friends with people who can pull those things off, and what they can learn and what they can do. Yes.

Travis: I think they can be a really strong partner as if we can maintain sovereignty over our decision making. And I think we- the, like, functional issue that I see right now is that we're relying too much on their intelligence, and their intelligence has an incentive to convince us to do things that are in their interest, not necessarily communicate objective truth

Moni: I think that's every country, right? When, when Zelensky from Ukraine visits with Trump, it's got the same thing. Like, everybody who visits with America wants something from America. We are the we're... Is this true? I think this is true. We're the most powerful country in the world.

I think

Travis: Yeah. And, and so I think that that's

Moni: I can't blame any country for wanting to influence us to, to do something that's in their interest and try to convince us that it's our in, in our interest, too.

Travis: Yeah. My, my blame, my, my problem is... So my problem is, like, not with the Israelis necessarily. Like, I think a lot of people will point fingers there, like, 'cause, you know, they, they're like, don't like what they're doing. But I think that they're acting in their interests. I think even... You know, I think maybe it's questionable if Netanyahu's acting in his interests or if he's acting in the Israeli people's interests.

I don't know. I don't, I don't

Moni: A lot of Israelis are not fans,

Travis: Yeah. And so it's, you know... But, but whatever. Like, anybody acting in their interest is, is like, that's what they should be doing. That's, like, uh, for sure. Um, I don't have an expectation that anybody does more than that. What, what's concerning to me is that our government doesn't seem… Either they're, they're okay with it, or they don't seem to understand the problem that overly relying on the Israeli intelligence to make decisions. You know, like, it was Israeli intelligence that gave us weapons of mass destruction, you know, that, that had us go into Iraq. Like, the-- This has been, it's been decades.

Moni: I don't know. I don't know that much about that, but I'll, but I'll, I'll see that that's how you see it.

Travis: Fact-check, we can, somebody, whoever, we can fact-check me. But like, the, I mean, my, for my, for the things that I consume that inform my opinion, we've been relying on Israeli intelligence for decades in that, in that region, and I don't... Like, it's not going well.

Moni: They are our biggest ally there, right? It's hard to get away from that. There's a reason why we would be relying on that intelligence. I mean, makes sense

Travis: But yeah, we're, but we're the like richest and most competent civilization that's ever existed. I think we could figure it out on our own, um, as well. And so anyways, I just... That's the, that's the concern for me. It really has drawn a line in my mind, like in who I'd be willing to support, you know, coming up in this, this next election. It's like, I

Moni: That’s a big deal.

Travis: There's a schism in the Republican Party, and I, you know, I'm, I'm gonna be going in the direction of, of people who are willing to remove us from the interventionalism across the world. I, I mean, I think 'cause like if

Moni: And it's so ironic because that's exactly what I heard Trump say he was gonna be radically able to do.

Travis: So like, whether or not the person you vote for is actually gonna do it is another question. Um, but I, I think like for me the-- not to go on, again, not to go on too long here on this topic, but like the alternative to the US government and US military acting in the interests of Israel is that they are acting in the interests of US companies nationally, and it, and it's more of like a mercantilist foreign policy than it, than it is like an actual like free market capitalist policy where like we're like waging war, whether it's about oil, you know, or about opening up free trade or whatever.

If it's not about the sovereignty and like existential crisis that Israel feels like it's facing, it's, it's about like it's the US government doing something I don't think it should be doing anyways. So yeah, you can come, you can come at it

Moni: So even those, yeah, those justifications you wouldn't, yeah, you wouldn't go to either.

Travis: Yeah, and so I, I'm concerned. I just, it's a huge, huge waste of money and, and we have so many problems in this country.

We have so many like the, the affordability crisis is causing real harm to people, my neighbors, my friends, my family, and continuing to print money to give it to defense contractors..

Moni: It is billions

Travis: …to bomb people in the Middle East is not a good way of solving that problem.

Moni: It is extraordinarily expensive. Like these numbers I've seen Hegseth, you know, tell Congress they need, like goodness. Uh, it's rough. Yeah. What would you-- I mean, one last question for you on this and then we'll probably move to close. What would you have Trump do if Trump lived up to your best expectations of him with this war?

Travis: Uh, I would hope... I'm not sure that it would look any different than what I'm seeing right now. Like, I, I think, like, they're trying-- It does seem like they're actively trying, trying to end this war. Like, I, I think, like, I would've hoped that he would've been more discerning in the beginning to, to not have, like, made this, this call.

I think he was listening to the wrong people and, and opened up a can of worms that's incredibly difficult to close. And I think I, I want them to, to solve the problem. Um, and I, and I think that that's going to look like making Israel, or at least Netanyahu, unhappy on a couple of different fronts.

Moni: So you wanna see him make some bold moves that, that Israel wouldn't like and that would give you some, some confidence that you're concerned that there's, there's sort of too much influence isn't

Travis: Yeah, no, and, and they are, like, they are doing some things that clearly Israel doesn't like. 

Moni: It seems that way.

Travis: But it always, from my perspective, like way out here, like in the, like just in the... nowhere close to the, like, decision-making at all, um, it seems like every time something like that happens, it reverses real real quick.

And, and it you know, so I, I'd like to see them be stronger. Um, and, you know, I don't, I don't know exactly what that looks like, but that's just from a, for, like, from like a principle perspective

Moni: I'll bet this will come up and up 'cause I don't see this actually ending anytime soon. Uh, we will see. 

Well, Travis, thank you so much, uh, for this. We are going to come back in a bit to have a debrief. Um, yeah, 'cause that's also part of, part of the structure of what we're doing. And, um, yeah. And then we'll do it all again with new things that, that, that tick us off. Fun, fun. So, thank you.

All right, so we are here to debrief on the conversation we had just yesterday on all those topics. So there's two questions we're gonna tackle. So let's just dig right into the first. What do you feel you understand better about the other person's perspective now? So why don't you kick us off?

Travis: Sure, yeah. Um, so I was thinking about this a lot last night, and I'd say, I mean, we've talked about a lot of these topics like offline before, so it was actually kind of hard for me to pull out something that I've, uh, I've really, um, learned new, um, from you from this particular conversation. But I'd... One thing stuck out for me, um, and that was just the difference in our perception of journalism.

Um, it's something that keep, you know, keeps coming up in our conversations, but this one, it, you know, uh, was clear to me that for you, and maybe you can correct me if I'm, if I'm wrong here, but my, uh, from what I was hearing is that you put a lot of trust in the journalistic process, that it's something that's pulling out truth, um, and revealing truth.

And, you know, so that's something I, I... It's really being solidified in, in like I think the difference in how we see things and, you know, just 'cause I really have a, a lot of skepticism over that as a truth-seeking process. And, um, I think that was going into our um, second conversation, um, about the, um, canceling of the grants, um, from blue states. I think that that underpinned a lot of the difference of how we were seeing that.

Moni: Yes, for sure. Does that, um, suspicion carry over to more conservative-leaning media or only to what's called, like, mainstream?

Travis: Oh, uh, everything. Um, I just, you know, I, I don't think-- I think on its best day, like, reporting or journalism is intended to be a truth seeking enterprise, and the processes that we have in place or that we've developed over years are, are, like, supposed to help that. But, like, social media or, like, the, like, how fast news breaks nowadays has almost, like, thrown air, all of that out of the water and, um, I just don't, I don't have a lot of trust. Like, I, I just read everything, like, what is this person's bias and what are they trying to convince me of?

And then, you know, what are they leaving out, uh, like, you know, specifically. Um, it kind of like, you know, I, I would say that's true for, like, a lot of truth seeking enterprises. Like, I have that same criticism of science, you know, or, like, how science is done in academia, um, and things like... I think, you know, just general, like, dissolving of institutions that um, I, I feel

Moni: Yeah. Well, that's connected to how I answered this. The thing that became more clear to me in trying to understand your perspective, which I think is something that will never end, there's no bottom to that as far as I'm concerned. Is the degree, the degree to which, uh, government is just inherently suspicious.

You know? Um, when we were talking about those grants that were canceled, it, it – I, I heard you, um, kind of pull in some of the themes I, I've heard from you before, where you're just not surprised that this happens, and you, you see these systems, I, I think as sort of, uh, you know, inherently there's, people are gonna misbehave. It's just, it's just a kind of... That's just the mess that's in there. So that, that does seem to be a contrast, and maybe it connects a little to what you said about journalism, 'cause I-- it's making me realize that I have, and I even wrote it, I wrote it down in these notes. Um, I at first I called it, you know, I'm more trusting, and then I said, "Well, what if I'm more naive?

What if I'm more Pollyannish," you know, about the government and, and how these systems are supposed to operate, and what if I believe the rhetoric and the virtues, you know, stated, um, a little too much? I don't know. But, but clearly your suspicion is, is really strong to, to the point where, you know, like you, you, you said, "Yeah, it's bad that they canceled those grants on political grounds, but, eh, it's all bad."

It's sort of what I heard from you. "But it's kinda all shady, so who cares?" And I was like, "Whoa," you know? Um, and that, that does seem to be a, a theme, a kind of this, this gap in trust and suspicion, trust and suspicion, and where we apply and where we don't.

Travis: Yeah, it's, it's interesting that you were asking yourself that question, um, of like, well, am I, am I more trusting or am I too naive? 'Cause I'm asking myself the same question on the other side, which is like, you know, am I too skeptical? Like, you know, this is a really good example where like he, like, uh, I can't remember the name of the guy who said it, but he did say that.

You know, like it's not, it, you know, the, it, he did say like, "We sole- we made this decision solely on removing from blue states." And, and, and so, you know, um Whatever. I do think that there's some context missing, but I, but I, you know, it's, it's sometimes I, I can be too skeptical and I, and I, I'm, I struggle with that on the other side for.

Like too cynical maybe even. Like skeptical is good, but like when it becomes cynicism, it's I think not as accurate and, you know, and not as useful.

Moni: Yeah, and, and for me, trusting is good, but when it comes Pollyannaish and naive, it's not good. So yeah, it's like we know that there are extremes to our tendencies,

Travis: Mm-hmm. Yeah,

Moni: that we don't wanna go to. So fascinating. And that to me feels like one of the great things about checking in with you is I get to, I get to talk to somebody who is just at the polar opposite of that trust suspicion line on a bunch of issues, and it just helps me ask myself these questions, right? Like, how am I seeing? Am I seeing clearly or do I just think I'm seeing clearly? 

So awesome. Second question, uh, and I've just lost it. Hang on. There it is. Second question is, are there new-- any new questions, insights, or concerns that surfaced after the conversation, whether with regard to the subject matter or to the way the conversation went?

And then we wrote, "Keep in mind we will not be continuing the debate." Uh, so yeah, you wanna take that one?

Travis: Sure. Yeah, sure. I, I had... 'Cause this is, this actually came up, like, while we were speaking and I, um, you were like, "Let's move on." And I was like, " Oh, okay, fine. Yeah, you're right. We should, we should move on." But, um, so it was when we were talking about the, um, socialism in New York, um, or when I characterized New York City voters as...

Well, you know, you, you would claim, you had said that, that we... You kind of wanna trust them, like this is what they want, they should be able to make this decision, you know, to do this. And I said, "Well, like yes and no," like 'cause, uh, like the voters are not voting to spend their money, they're voting to redistribute wealth from the, the wealthy to, to the, the poorest.

And, and, and you pushed back, you kind of like objected. But we didn't talk about it. And so I guess, uh, one question, like, came to mind, uh, with regards to that is, 'cause it's something I just keep, keep thinking about with our conversations, is like, do you believe that the majority rules is an acceptable or fair form of government?

And I know you didn't have any time to prepare for that question, so, but that is something that I think is, is tugging at me, like, because it's just like that's... But anyway, so I'll, yeah, that's the question I have for you.

Moni: That's a great question. Do I believe the majority rules is a fair form of government? No. Uh, and I have a bit of a recency bias that I just read Yuval Levin's "A Time to Build," which is his book about institutions, and I reread recently "American Covenant," which is his book about the Constitution, and I adore the checks and balances and the fact that we have to protect minorities, and I think our system of government does that really, really well.

So the flat answer is no. Um, but like leaning into the spirit of, of what you were saying, that the-- again, we're back at trust. I wanna trust the people. I guess, I guess I make a distinction between people who need help and people who maybe don't, and I guess a part of me wants to trust the people who need help.

And to the extent that they're the people who support some of these policies, that's where I kinda go, "Well, I'm not like them. They must-- They, they have to know something I don't," because I believe that our experiences shape us. So if I'm too certain that these policies are just like absolutely never gonna work, we shouldn't… Ah, forget it. Close the door. We're just gonna follow this.

But this keeps c- this, this system keeps pushing down the same kinds of people, then I should be suspicious. I, I should wonder what I'm missing. So it comes from that

Travis: Okay. Yeah, that's interesting. Yeah, and I, and I don't-- We don't-- I-- We might be bordering on having the conversation again,

Moni: Yeah, we might.

Travis: But I, I, I'll say that from, from my perspective, like, the Constitution is, and our, like, our system of government is intended to protect the natural rights of individuals so that no matter what the form of government is, they can't infringe on those natural rights.

So even if it's a democracy or, you know, whatever, if the majority rules, you-- there are certain things that they can't do still. So the government is not able to take people's property, um, for example. And I, I would just argue that, you know, in New York City, what we're seeing is, uh, consolidation of power, you know, and, and an infringement on those rights of, you know, spending,

Moni: So this is, yeah, and let's not get into the debate, but I, but I will highlight 'cause I see exactly the distinction you're seeing, that it seems like for you, what's going on amounts to the taking, the, the unlawful kind of taking of people's property when you redistribute wealth, to use your phrase, right?

I do see it differently. We're not gonna talk about it, but yeah, that is that

Travis: Some-something for the future.

Moni: Yeah. I'm sure this will come up again. Okay, and then my answer to this, are there any new questions, insights, or concerns that surfaced after the conversation, either about the subject matter or how the conversation went?

There was a point where you said, "I think that was our biggest fight, Monica," and it was when we talked about the topic I brought up around those canceled grants. I think I let myself get madder there, and I'm always wondering if I am letting, if I'm, if I'm getting too mad or not mad enough is what I was left with.

Did my-- Did I get worked up in a way that matched my level of, mm, the level of severity I give to the concerns behind that topic for me? So I, I don't know. I mean, on the one hand, I, I thought I really enjoyed that interaction, and I trust our interaction enough to not try to be so restrained that somebody can't hear how much this matters to me.

You know? I want you to hear how much this matters to me, and the way I express it is through emotion. I'm just a passionate expresser in all kinds of ways. And I, I like that I can do that and I can let loose. At the same time, sometimes I watch, you know, YouTube videos of some extraordinary leader, and they just have incredible restraint, and they talk about whatever in these really calm ways and, and I go, "Oh, should I, should I be more like that?"

Like, I don't know. Maybe, maybe I can translate all the passion into words and that's better. And so that's, that's one. Um, and connected to that was just am I choosing the right points to challenge you? Uh, I don't wanna interrupt. I don't wanna interrupt you to the point that I don't hear something super clarifying.

At the same time, sometimes something rises up in me so fast that I can't help it. Uh, but the truth is I can. I can help it. You know, should I try to help it more?

Travis: Yeah. So it's interesting because I, I feel, um, you need-- I think you need to interrupt me more sometimes. Um, you know, but that's, uh, 'cause I can just, you know, I can keep going, going on for forever with endless clarifications. You know, I always get a hard time... My, my wife, like, edits my writing, and she's like, "You just use too many commas."

And I'm like, "Well, you know, like..." 'Cause I just keep... She's like, "You wrote one run-on sentence. It's like, you know, four pages long." I'm like, "Okay, well." Um, and I speak like that too. Um, so I... Feel free to interrupt me, but I, I do think, um, you know, I, I had a to, to reflect on your reflection, I, I was thinking that I, um, could also do a better job at listening to the objections when, when you present them, um, because clearly they're… something's not hitting and, you know, like I should, I should probably, you know, I need to pull back and listen to, um, the, the specific objection rather than just assuming that I know what that, like, objection is and

Moni: I was gonna ask you what you mean by something's not hitting. You mean, you mean something's not hitting you about something I'm trying to say? Or, or something's not hitting me about something you've been saying? What, what do you mean?

Travis: Whatever I'm saying is not like resonating with you, or it's resonating in a way that's like making you object. And I take that objection, recognize it, and assume that I know what the objection is, and then try to like correct for it, rather than just like slowing down a little bit and asking you what you mean so I can address it more appropriately.

And so yeah, that's something I was, I was thinking about as well. 

Moni: Oh, that's cool. No, that's, and that's exactly what happens to me when I let myself... When I, when I kind of like do the, the pressure release valve and just let a little more steam out, the, every, every time I do that, I can fall more into those traps of assuming that I know what you mean without stopping and asking, and then it just becomes breathless.

Travis: Same. And I, I always regret, like there are a couple areas in the conversation where like I, listening back on it, I just go, "You know, I, that was really imprecise and I'm really unhappy with how I presented that." And it's exactly those times when I started to get a little bit more emotional, um, you know, or like, you know, speak really, you know, speak more quickly or be like, oh, you know, like hand wavy.

And, um, and so yeah, I really try, I try to my best to be reserved, although I, I recognize the charismatic utility of expressing emotion effectively. It's not, it's not as precise.

Moni: That’s a great way to put it. Charismatic utility, that's right. It's a tool. It's a tool. The-- Yesterday, my brother-in-law was showing us a YouTube video of Fred Armisen, the comedian on SNL. He did some sketch where he imitated some CEO, I don't know, but basically it was just a lot of saying nothing with a lot of charisma.

"You know, the thing is, in a perfect world, what you would wanna see is people are just different, you know?" And they would just go on and on and on like that with saying absolutely nothing.

Travis: Yeah

Moni: I was like, wow, we can do that, can't we? We can hack each other's brains. And so we don't wanna do that. We wanna have substance.

Travis: Yeah, no, that's-- I have nothing to add.

Moni: There you go. Uh, all right. Well, thanks Travis. This was awesome, and we get to do it again in a week. I'm excited.

Travis: I'm excited

Moni: All right. Talk to you later, friend

A Braver way is produced by reclaim curiosity and distributed in partnership with Braver Angels, KUOW, and Deseret News.

Our theme music is by the fantastic number one billboard, bluegrass charting, hip hop band, gangster grass. You can subscribe to a braver way on YouTube and follow us on your favorite podcast app.

Wanna chat, You can join our listener text line by texting the word Brave to 2 0 6 9 2 6 9 9 5 5, or email us anytime with anything at abraverway@reclaimcuriosity.com. I'm your host and guide across the divide, Monica Guzman, take heart, everyone. Till next time


 
 

CONTACT

Want to drop me a note?
Fill out this quick little form and I'll get back to you ASAP.

Interested in booking me for a speaking engagement?
Fill out this form instead.

WANT TO INTERVIEW ME for your podcast or media outlet? THERE'S A FORM FOR THAT, TOO!

  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Facebook

Thanks for submitting!

Website by jasmine barta

bottom of page