Transcript:
Daniella Gibbs Léger: Hey everyone, welcome back to “The Tent,” your place for politics, policy, and progress. I’m Daniella Gibbs Léger.
Colin Seeberger: And I’m Colin Seeberger. Daniella, can you believe that this is our last episode of the year 2024?
Gibbs Léger: No, I cannot.
Seeberger: Come and gone.
Gibbs Léger: Come and gone, and honestly, good.
Seeberger: Good riddance, 2024!
Gibbs Léger: Exactly.
Seeberger: You know, I will say, it’s been a heck of a year. I did make some predictions on “The Tent” as we wrapped up 2023, and my 2024 predictions did not quite pan out.
Gibbs Léger: I won’t ask you what they were, but I can only imagine.
Seeberger: Well, we aren’t going to be releasing episodes for the next two weeks as we celebrate the holidays and the upcoming new year. We’ll be back on January 9. So, I hope everyone is going to be taking a well-deserved little break to collect themselves from the chaos of current events and spend time with their loved ones.
But this week we also have a really awesome interview that you conducted with a good friend of ours.
Gibbs Léger: That’s right. I spoke with Tony Carrk, who is executive director of Accountable.US and a former CAP Action alum. We talked about some likely ways that [President-elect Donald] Trump will try to undermine laws and government processes next year, and how his administration plans to prioritize special interests over the American people, and where it may be most effective for progressive activists to push back.
Seeberger: Sounds like a super practical conversation to bring us into the new year. But first, we’ve got to look back at some of our favorite moments from this year. And like I said, it was a crazy hectic year. A pretty unprecedented wild one, but here at “The Tent” it was super busy.
We launched our YouTube channel and video episodes, as well as new accounts on Instagram, Threads, and Bluesky, so you can keep up with us wherever you engage in social media. We expanded our “Tent” community and brought in lots of new listeners. Shout out to all of you who joined us this year. And we also won a gold Davey award for government and political podcasts from the Academy of Interactive and Visual Arts.
But most importantly, we brought you some really important, insightful conversations with thought leaders and politicians, many of which really remain relevant as we embark on this next chapter in American politics.
In September, for example, Texas state Rep. James Talarico (D) gave us an important warning about the dangers of MAGA extremism—one that is really pertinent as we prepare to push back on extremist policies from the incoming Trump administration next year. Let’s take a listen to what he had to say.
[Audio clip begins]
James Talarico: And there’s always a temptation to trade away some of our constitutional rights in exchange for some kind of security. And back then, it was kind of national security. Now, I think it’s a form of cultural security for folks who feel like the country is changing too fast demographically. And I, as a lover of our Constitution, refuse to trade away those foundational freedoms for a false sense of security peddled by politicians and demagogues.
[Audio clip ends]
Gibbs Léger: Yeah, we’ve got to be aware in 2025 that Trump will try to chip away at our democratic systems and our rights and our freedoms. We’re going to have to speak up when those policies get put forward.
We also talked to Amanda Becker from The 19th about this in September. She shared some lessons on democracy with us that she learned while writing her book You Must Stand Up, which covers the fight for reproductive rights post Dobbs. And here she is talking about that.
[Audio clip begins]
Amanda Becker: I think it’s very important when you live in a democracy to realize that you have to tend to your democracy, and you have to participate in it to a greater degree than just showing up to vote, if you’re able, in order for it to be healthy and thrive.
Our government systems were set up in a way that I think the Founding Fathers who set them up expected a populace that was going to be very engaged. And so they put into place all of these things to be a check on the people. But now, we’re in a point where one of the reasons we have a bunch of laws right now that don’t reflect the will of the people is because people aren’t always participating.
[Audio clip ends]
Seeberger: Yeah, Amanda’s absolutely right. I think it was easy for folks to get excited this year during a big presidential election. But really now more than ever, it’s important that people don’t check out. We need all hands on deck to chart a better course for the future of our country and fight back against harmful policies that are putting people’s lives in danger.
Some of those are certainly going to include attacks on diversity, equity, and inclusion, and in particular marginalized groups, like the transgender community. We talked about what those attacks could look like and why they were occurring back in June with Raquel Willis, and here’s what she had to say.
[Audio clip begins]
Raquel Willis: But it’s not really just about Trump, right? I think, again, this kind of mindset of scarcity, that folks on the margins are coming after you—and coming after what you want in life—it’s at the heart of this. And we have folks with power who are exploiting that continuously.
What we also can’t ignore is that more and more folks of color, more and more women, more and more LGBTQ+ folks, and on and on, have a voice now. And I just wish that we had more of an open dialogue about what people are actually afraid of, and what the source of that fear is, right?
The fear isn’t actually that Black and brown folks or queer and trans folks are taking your place. The fear is that you will have less access to pursue the life that you feel like you deserve.
[Audio clip ends]
Gibbs Léger: You know, Colin, it can be really scary to take on dangerous things like right-wing extremism, transphobia, racism, and the other forces we see from the MAGA movement. I think an interview that really helped me this year was your conversation with Simon Rosenberg just before the election.
While we weren’t sure yet what the results would be, Simon’s insights on combating the MAGA movement with an affirmative, progressive vision still holds true. We need to give people hope and something to fight for as we enter the next administration. Here’s Simon on that.
[Audio clip begins]
Simon Rosenberg: MAGA’s job every day is they’re a negative sentiment machine. They want us to feel bad about everything. Everything has failed. He says this all the time, right? Everything has failed. And I think that part of the strategy we need to defeat MAGA is that we need to be positive sentiment machines.
[Audio clip ends]
Seeberger: You and Simon are spot on, Daniella. It’s been a roller coaster year, but every week, these conversations remind me of the strength of our progressive movement and the opportunities we now have to regroup, learn from one another, and bring more people under “The Tent” with us. It’s not going to be easy, but we promise to keep bringing you critical insights into how we go about it.
Gibbs Léger: And even when things are bleak, we promise to always make space for hope and optimism. So, here’s to a year of fighting the good fight and more to come in 2025.
Seeberger: Hear, hear, Daniella. Well, that’s all the time we have for this year.
If there’s anything else you’d like us to cover on the pod, hit us up on Twitter, Bluesky, Instagram, and Threads @TheTentPod. That’s @TheTentPod.
Gibbs Léger: And stick around for my interview with Tony Carrk in just a beat.
[Musical transition]
Gibbs Léger: Tony Carrk is the executive director of Accountable.US. He previously served as the deputy campaign director for Protect Our Care and research director for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. Before that, he held multiple roles here at the Center for American Progress Action Fund, as well as research and policy roles for Friends of Terry McAuliffe and the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee.
Tony, thank you so much for joining us on “The Tent.”
Tony Carrk: It’s so great to see you, Daniella.
Gibbs Léger: Hello. All right. Let’s jump into it. As we head into 2025, the Trump administration is going to start taking a lot of drastic action very quickly on many different fronts. The approach last go-round of elevating every issue and controversy did not work.
So, how should folks think about picking their battles? What should they prioritize in order to stay focused on where they can make the most impact?
Carrk: I think we need to be clear about what we’re trying to get out of these fights. I think, obviously, there’s going to be a lot of bad that’s coming out of the Trump administration that we want to defeat. But the numbers are what the numbers are, and we’re not going to necessarily be able to defeat every single measure. Because some of this, President Trump can just do with a stroke of a pen.
I think we need to be clear about what opportunities we have with these fights and the agenda that they’re pursuing. And for us at Accountable, what we’re trying to do right from the start with nominations is about showing whose side are they on, using these policy enactments, using these personnel decisions to paint a picture about who the Trump administration is actually fighting for.
And what we’re seeing so far, particularly with who the president-elect is nominating to key Cabinet posts, is that it’s billionaires, people well-connected, people that have ties to big corporations and are part of the same old typical Washington swamp that he said that he was going to drain. That seems to be what the second Trump administration is going to be.
But we need to engage in those fights. This isn’t going to happen just by hoping that it does. We need to engage and show people, raise awareness, arm people with the facts about people’s previous positions, people’s connections, to make sure that they have a good understanding about whose side are they on.
Gibbs Léger: So let’s talk about nominations, because he has announced a slew of very extreme people, from Pete Hegseth to Tulsi Gabbard. So how should Senate Democrats be thinking about these appointments and the confirmation process? What sort of questions should they be asking?
Carrk: Well, I think that the confirmation process is really important.
As you saw right after the election, I think, President Trump was like, “Republicans should just go into recess and install all my nominees, and nobody ask any questions, and let’s just get going.” We think the nomination process and the confirmation process in particular is important to let people know who is going to be making these decisions over our lives.
What are they going to be doing? Where have they been? What have they said? For example, the nominee for the IRS commissioner is someone that wanted to get rid of the IRS and wanted to get rid of the income tax and have basically a national sales tax that would raise prices for middle-class families.
I think that is the type of information that we want people to be informed and armed with the facts about whose side the Trump administration and the people that he’s putting in place are fighting for.
Gibbs Léger: So, let’s talk about that a little bit more. Donald Trump campaigned on the slogan of “America First,” but like we said, he’s been appointing and nominating billionaires, lobbyists, and elites to serve in his administration. What are these personnel choices revealing about his real intentions? And can you talk about the conflicts of interest that might lead to bias if some of these folks are confirmed for their respective roles?
Carrk: Sure. I’ll give a couple examples, but I think writ large, what we’re seeing is a group of people that aren’t looking out for everyday people but looking out for their own special interests or possibly looking out for their own special interests for their friends.
So, for example, if you have someone that’s overseeing Medicare and Medicaid, like Dr. Oz, who has investments in health insurance companies, I think that raises questions of does that create a conflict? Are you going to be making decisions based on your own portfolio, or decisions—you’re going to be overseeing Medicare Advantage. That’s something that millions of seniors are relying on for Medicare coverage, Medicare in general. Or are you going to be making decisions that’s best for people on Medicare or Medicaid?
For example, the nominee that’s going to be heading the Department of [the] Interior is an oil and gas billionaire that has vested interest in public land, exploring public lands. So again, it’s like, what is driving decision-making here? Is it that there’s self-enrichment, or is it for the well-being of the American people?
You had mentioned lobbyists. There are many, many, many lobbyists. So, for this outsider government that’s coming in, there’s a lot of insidery that’s happening where you’re bringing in lobbyists that have lobbied for big corporations. And so the question is when they’re confronted with an issue that might affect clients that they represented, who are they going to be looking out for? What kind of rules are they putting in place? Are they putting in any rules?
Typically, there are ethics pledges, like forms of recusal. There’s this outside government force that seems to be happening right now—you know, DOGE, the Department of Government Efficiency—that’s making all these decisions. We don’t really know who these people are and what their background is. I think transparency and just being open to the public is an important part of public service.
Gibbs Léger: Are you trying to tell me that the swamp is not going to be drained?
Carrk: I think it’s going to be a specific swamp. I think that whole notion of draining the swamp under the first Trump administration was dispelled quite clearly, and there doesn’t seem to be any difference now.
Gibbs Léger: No, it’s extra swampy. While Trump tried to distance himself from Project 2025 on the campaign trail, his team has now admitted that it, quote, unquote, “is the agenda,” surprising none of us.
But it’s also one that the American people largely don’t support. So what can we expect to see enacted from it as Trump takes office? And does knowing what’s in this blueprint give those looking to oppose these policies an opportunity to prepare defenses?
Carrk: I think so. I think the Project 2025 agenda is deeply unpopular. And obviously this was work that we did with the Center for American Progress over the course of 2024, just raising the alarm about what this project would do. And let’s just remember what it’s trying to do is trying to gut checks and balances. It’s trying to consolidate power into the presidency so that the executive branch and particularly the president has more control over our lives. And it’s also trying to impose an agenda that has no public support.
The thing about Project 2025 is a lot of what was laid out in it are steps that can be taken by executive action, so that they don’t even need Congress. And the whole notion of gutting checks and balances—I think one of the things we found throughout 2024, there was a believability gap about, well, they won’t actually try to do this or the courts will stop them or Congress won’t go along.
And what we’re seeing right now is that is not happening. We’re seeing Senate Republicans in particular fall into line. We have a court that’s captured by big interests and big corporations that have been ruling for big corporations for a while now. So, there really isn’t any guardrail to the extent that there was in the first Trump administration.
Now, what does that mean about the agenda that’s going to happen? There’s a lot of things that, in terms of rulemaking and other regulations, that the administration can do without congressional approval. I think the most important thing that we have is the public’s on our side and just raising awareness and raising the facts about what is happening, who’s going to be impacted, and what that will mean.
There are some things that they’re going to try to do, like I think eliminating the Department of Education or getting rid of overtime rules. There’s going to be a process that I think, as people that are looking out for working class Americans, we can use the process to raise awareness and to show that this is not what we want.
Gibbs Léger: So, as someone who’s done this work for a while, I’m wondering if you can offer some hope and optimism for our listeners who may be wondering how are we going to get through the next four years? What are some unlikely wins for accountability that you’ve seen in the past, and do they give you hope that effective organizing could at least help mitigate some of the harmful policies and abuses from the next administration?
Carrk: I think the short answer is yes. And I’ll give a few examples. One, I remember where we were, where Democrats were, right after the 2004 presidential election. I remember being on conference calls that talked about how the Republican Party basically wiped out Democrats countywide across the nation. It was at the lowest point for Democratic politics.
Within two years, the Democrats had taken back the House and the Senate. And then obviously the 2008 presidential election, it was a complete role reversal. So, what I take from that is nothing is static; it’s moving. Where we are right now isn’t where we’re going to be in two years or in a year. There’s hope that things can change, particularly if we engage in the fight and we show who we’re fighting for.
The second one is a little more granular. I remember right after the 2016 election, particularly health care groups, I did a lot of work at Center for American Progress on health care reform, obviously Protect Our Care. And the conventional thinking in November of 2016 was Obamacare was going to be repealed by February.
And we were able to organize. We were able to raise the stakes. And we were able to get people on record. February became March became April became the summer, and people were letting their voices be heard. And then obviously in July, the Senate rejected the repeal effort. And that was not done by accident. It wasn’t necessarily going to happen but for people coming together and raising their voices.
Now, what we did was give that space for that to happen. So, there’s analyses that I’m seeing about what happened in the 2024 election and what to glean from it or not. I do think we have a Republican majority that has no interest in governing or doesn’t want to govern or know how to govern. I think there’s going to be a misinterpretation of what voters wanted. I think they’re very upset about high prices, and they were angry about that. And if they’re going to be pursuing an agenda that’s going to be exacerbating their costs or not even paying attention to that, I think they’re going to be in for a rude awakening.
So, I don’t think things are as dire as they seem. Although, trust me, I’m fully aware of where things are. But I see the opportunity for us to be able to move forward and get some wins, but to also get back into the fight and show who we’re fighting for and who they’re fighting for.
Gibbs Léger: I think that’s a really great way to end our interview, reminding people that when it comes to policy, the American people support our policies as progressives, and keep that in mind as we see what actually comes out of the Trump administration and who they’re fighting for and who they’re working for.
Tony, I want to thank you so much for joining me on “The Tent.”
Carrk: Well, I’ve been waiting. This has been great. Thank you.
[Musical transition]
Gibbs Léger: Well, that’s going to do it for us today. Be sure and go back and listen to previous episodes of the podcast.
Before we go for the year, I want to talk about holiday traditions. Colin, I am very excited, although it’s like really warm today in Washington D.C., but it is going to be Christmas and it will be chillier. And I am excited to have some hot cocoa and listen to some great Christmas music and have my child rip through his presents, hardly waiting after opening up one before he opens up the next, and just the joy that will bring him.
What about you?
Seeberger: Very much looking forward to the same. However, I am used to having a warmer-than-Washington Christmas. I grew up in Texas, as many of you guys know. And—
Gibbs Léger: We know, Colin. We know.
Seeberger: Yes, I know. Hey, at least you get to watch the Dallas Cowboys for the course of your holiday break, Daniella!
Gibbs Léger: No, thank you.
Seeberger: So I’m used to having a warmer-than-usual Christmas, but I love the festive season. I love gifting to others. Also, last week my daughter had a holiday show. Her school always puts one on. And it was just so cool and exciting to see her in her little tree costume, and watch her development year to year, how much she’s grown and blossomed. So, that’s been real fun.
In terms of food, my dad has a tradition of always making surf and turf—
Gibbs Léger: Oh, nice.
Seeberger: —on Christmas evening, which is great. I’m not much for turkey, so a little steak, a little lobster, let’s go. All about it.
Gibbs Léger: So, I’m cooking Christmas dinner for my family and my brother’s family for the first time in eight years. And there was a part of me, right, that’s like, do I even remember how to cook a turkey and how long? I mean, that’s what Google is for, so I’ll be OK. But I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t a little nervous about making sure that my turkey is perfectly cooked and moist and tender. Because nobody wants dried-out turkey.
I do want to talk about holiday movies for a second, because I need to express my love for the movie that is “The Holiday.” And this movie, when it first came out, it underperformed. People were like, oh, it’s not successful. And I don’t know what happened that made it the movie that a bunch of us have to watch every Christmas, but let me tell you, Jude Law in glasses, crying, being a dad—I mean, it’s, it’s just a perfect holiday movie.
Seeberger: So I like it just fine.
Gibbs Léger: Just fine!
Seeberger: Yeah, it’s fine. It’s fine. I mean, it’s no “Love Actually.” I know, how cliche, but I love “Love Actually.” I also have this weird thing where, if a movie has a scene that takes place over Christmas, I consider it a Christmas movie. So whether it’s “Die Hard”—
Gibbs Léger: No, “Die Hard” is not a Christmas movie.
Seeberger: Yes, it is, Daniella. So also is—
Gibbs Léger: No, it’s not.
Seeberger: I’m not sure if you’ve ever seen “Love, Simon”—
Gibbs Léger: I haven’t.
Seeberger: —but I also consider it a Christmas movie. Yeah, it’s weird, I know, but—
Gibbs Léger: It’s not weird. There are people in this world who believe to their core that “Die Hard” is a Christmas movie. And I’m like, no, it is a movie that takes place over Christmas. It has nothing to do with the holiday itself. I’ll write a novel about why “Die Hard” is not a Christmas movie.
Seeberger: Well, I feel like we may need to have a whole podcast episode on that, because it’s absolutely a Christmas movie.
Gibbs Léger: OK, we may not. All right, we have to end on something that we agree on.
Seeberger: Mariah Carey? Hold on, we’ve got to talk music.
Gibbs Léger: OK, yeah, there we go.
Seeberger: Mariah Carey?
Gibbs Léger: Yes.
Seeberger: She slaps. She can do no wrong.
Gibbs Léger: No wrong at all.
Seeberger: All I want for Christmas is to listen to Mariah Carey 5,000 times between now and December 25.
Gibbs Léger: OK. On that, I agree. And I think that is a perfect note to end this year’s podcast on. It’s been great hosting this with you, Colin, and I look forward to getting through 2025 with you.
Seeberger: Likewise. And I’m wishing you, your family, and all our listeners a very happy, healthy, and safe holiday.
Gibbs Léger: Same. Everybody take care of yourselves, and we will talk to you next year.
[Musical transition]
Gibbs Léger: “The Tent” is a podcast from the Center for American Progress Action Fund. It’s hosted by me, Daniella Gibbs Léger, and co-hosted by Colin Seeberger. Erin Phillips is our lead producer, Kelly McCoy is our supervising producer, Mishka Espey is our booking producer, and Muggs Leone is our digital producer. Hai Phan, Matthew Gossage, Olivia Mowry, and Toni Pandolfo are our video team.
Views expressed by guests of “The Tent” are their own, and interviews are not endorsements of a guest’s perspectives. You can find us on YouTube, Apple, Spotify, Google Play, or wherever you get your podcasts.