Geoff Garin on Truth in Polling and Jim Tankersley on the Slow Demise of America's Middle Class

The specter of 2016 still looms in the minds of Democrats everywhere, creating no small amount of fear and uncertainty about what might happen come November. But while caution may prove prudent, there is no denying that there are stark differences between four years ago and today. Hart Research Associates president Geoff Garin outlines key polling numbers explaining a likely turn away from Trump in the coming months. And nowhere is that resentment towards the current status quo felt more than among America's beaten and broken middle class, whom New York Times economics reporter Jim Tankersley explores the plight of in his new book "The Riches of the Land."

Show Notes:

00:00 – Intro
01:30 – 2016 vs.Today
09:00 – COVID's effect on Trump
18:45 – A consistent appeal
24:30 – This cycle's sleeper hits
27:45 – Strategy matters little at this point
35:45 – Conning the middle class
40:15 – Skipping ahead to solutions
47:00 – The story of Ed Green
52:30 – Community college investment
54:30 - What We're Reading

Transcript:

Al Hunt: [00:00:00] Hello, and welcome to 2020 politics war room with James Carville. Who's out in the Shenandoah and I'm Al hunt here in Washington. We are proud partners with the sine Institute at American university in Washington. And someday we hope to get back to that studio. We have a couple of great guests this week, but I want to first thank you all who have been writing your opinions and questions.

An email. I hope we get to answer most of them. We love that. You're interacting with us. Remember to tell your friends about the show and please subscribe great and review politics, war room on Apple podcast now to our guests. Yes, Garren. There's this small group of American pollsters that are reliably accurate and always honest, a number were trained by Peter Hart and Selzer Fred yang and our guest today.

Jeff Garren, the president of heart research. Pollster for two of the most important democratic support groups, priorities USA, and the Senate majority pack as well as most every prominent democratic top office holder. Jeff first, thank you for being with us. I know you're stuck up in Martha's vineyard, but I hope you're getting a good sense of the pulse of the people hold up there.

Geoff Garin: [00:01:14] Uh, well we're no, what. What if the Martha vineyard or is think,

Al Hunt: [00:01:20] uh, you know, every time that you talked to to most Democrats these days and you, anyone exudes confidence about this November, uh, they will say, Ooh, and they'll harken back to 2016. Lest I forget what happened back then. What are the differences and any similarities between Joe Biden's standing today, as opposed to Hillary Clinton on August six, 2016.

Geoff Garin: [00:01:45] Well, you know, for, I think inaccurately, but you know, four years ago at this point, Hillary Clinton's, uh, was not a trusted figure at all. Among Americans people focused back then on the fact that, uh, close to 60% of voters thought that. Uh, that Donald Trump didn't have the temperament to be president, but it really didn't pay very much attention to the reality that that nearly as many people thought that Hillary Clinton didn't have the honesty and integrity to be precedent.

Uh, again, I think it's a, definitely a miss, uh, uh, perception of her, but, um, but, uh, the, the level of antagonism to Hillary Clinton. Four years ago does not compare at all to voter's attitudes, um, to, uh, Joe Biden today. So that that's a, um, that's a really big difference. And it, you know, this is not, we're not talking about small numbers, we're talking about large numbers in this regard.

Uh, and, um, you know, there are that some polls show that, uh, and his personal favor abilities Biden is slightly. Below water. Um, but not, um, uh, by polls show that, but certainly not by the margin that secretary Clinton was. And more importantly, not with the intensity. That people felt about Hillary.

Al Hunt: [00:03:24] So his standing today is, is considerably stronger, you would say than hers four years ago.

Geoff Garin: [00:03:30] Yes. Well, I think there's, uh, that, that, uh, just in terms of kind of the, how they view the two of them. Um, but I think Donald Trump is a different person, um, today in the voters minds than he was. Um, four years ago that four years ago at this point, Trump had high negatives as he does now. Uh, people didn't like the way he comported itself and his demeanor and things of that sort.

But you know, if you want it to be for Hillary, for Donald Trump back then you could say to yourself, you know, this is an act. That, uh, you know, the office makes the man, if Donald Trump gets elected president, put the stick aside and start to act himself back in a kind of a presidential way. Um, and you know, now, especially in the wake of the COVID crisis, they is under the illusion anymore that, um, that, you know, this is not the real Donald Trump people know who he is, who he is.

And we'll never be anything, uh, different. So, um, you know, there's no, you can't resolve your dissonance by saying, Oh, well, you know, when he gets into office, he's going to change. People know that this guy doesn't change that. Um, but that he, you know, he has zero learning curve and, uh, so that you know, that, uh, people really are reckoning with the reality of.

Of a Donald Trump in a way that they weren't four years ago.

Al Hunt: [00:05:05] Let me pick up on a variation that I try to absorb every fall is that they're particularly if it has Jeff Garen or heart, uh, attached to it. But I also look at a couple of the things that I think in some ways, these are as telling four years ago, I think this picks up on your point.

There were one in seven voters. They didn't like Trump or Oakland. And according to Gallup on election day 69 31, they went for Trump. Now, if you think about it, that's logical, you know, they're both bombs, but why not go for the new one? There's similar surveys today that show there's a, a number of voters that don't like either one of these candidates, but they, by an overwhelming majority prefer Biden again, logical.

I can't take four more years of this guy. And I guess the second thing that strikes me is that I can't find just in phone calls. You don't go out and now anyone who lasts time voted for Hillary, who this time say they're going to vote. For Trump and she did win the popular vote. Last time. I I'm just struck by both of those.

Is that too micro?

Geoff Garin: [00:06:06] No, not well, uh, you know, arithmetic matters, uh, on the first point you're you're exactly right. Um, about just this statistical reality of people who don't like either candidate this time, um, it's the devil. They know who they worry, uh, much more about and people think, you know, we're, we're at a, at a high point now, now we've been working together for, for years and decades.

So you know what the right track wrong track numbers have been over time. We're at a high point now where people saying the country is going in the wrong direction. So there's this impetus for change, uh, for one thing. But, um, you know, just in terms of the basic arithmetic of the election, here's, uh, here's, the deal is show Biden wins, sorry.

Um, that, um, you are right. That there are very few people who voted for Hillary Clinton. Who have somehow said all, I made a mistake and now I want to be for Donald Trump. The numbers are negligible in the, in the kind of, you know, very low single digits. There are, um, uh, you know, it's not most people who voted for Donald Trump, a large majority of people who voted for Donald Trump in 2016 will vote for him again in 2020.

But, um, the fraction who will not. Is larger than the, than the, than the people who will defect, uh, the Clinton voters who will affect to Trump the other way. Um, then you've got, um, kind of, uh, the third party voters from 2016. Uh, and they are now much more inclined to, to choose between the two party candidates and they are overwhelmingly inclined toward bias.

Um, and then the biggest piece of the puzzle, uh, and, and the most important segment of voters by my lights are the people who did not vote in 2016 at all. Um, either because they were too young or because they chose not to vote, I would guess that, you know, we're looking at somewhere between, you know, around 15% of the 20, 20 electorate will be people who, um, didn't vote in 2016 and in every poll that we've done, that group of voters is now splitting very.

Uh, decisively for Joe Biden, uh, led by young voters, uh, splitting, uh, in an overwhelmingly, a large degree for, for, for vice president Biden.

Al Hunt: [00:08:34] Well, let's turn to James carbo, but I do want to point out cause you noted it. That for 16 years, uh, when I was at the wall street journal, I directed a poll with, with Jeff Garen and Peter Hart and the late great Bob Bob Teeter.

It's one of the reasons I have such enormous respect for

Geoff Garin: [00:08:50] Jeff Garren,

Al Hunt: [00:08:51] James takeover.

James Carville: [00:08:53] So Jeff is that count. We've been knowing each other for 40 years, which translates into 10 presidential cycles. You're probably seeing more polls than anybody in this business. What. Three or four things stand out about August of six presidential year.

This year, that is unique. Among presidential elections that you have seen?

Geoff Garin: [00:09:19] Yes. Yes. Yes. It's a good question. Cause, um, you know, there are, there are, you know, part of the reason why after 40 years, more than 40 years, I still wake up every day, really excited to go to work and really interested in what I'm doing is kind of finished change a lot.

And so there's a lot about, um, this election and the way it's conducted. That, um, that's unique. I'm not sure it kind of that's w relates to a particular number in a poll. But, uh, before I talk about, uh, uh, about that, people keep on hearkening back to the 2016 election and Democrats, um, you know, still are, um, you know, that, that, you know, have PTSD about.

Um, about that election, but I, you know, to me, I think that we're kind of more analogous to the 2008 election. Not because people are excited about Biden in the same way they were about, um, um, uh, Obama, but because, you know, in the, in the wake of that financial crisis, people really kind of made a decision that we needed to make a change in the country.

And, um, you know, the, where we are now with the coronavirus crisis is, um, is very much like a, where people were. Uh, I'm on the financial crisis. In fact, I would say that, that, uh, the situation today with the coronavirus crisis is worse for president Trump and the Republicans. Then the financial crisis was for president Bush, Senator McCain, and the Republicans back then.

Uh, because they see, uh, Trump as being so negligent and responsible for all how bad this has become, uh, for the country. Um, so that, you know, that's the other kind of, you know, very big difference from 2016 is that, um, the election was not being. Uh, conducted against the backdrop of this re you know, w this profound crisis that most Americans really think of as a profound crisis.

Uh, and most Americans say the worst of the crisis is still a head of us, not, uh, not behind us, uh, because of Trump's failure to deal appropriately and, and, um, aggressively, uh, with it. Um, and so, uh, you know, as we talk about. You know, looking at elections over time, over that 40 year period, this is kind of a lot more like Jimmy Carter and the hostage crisis in, um, in 1980 or, or the Republican party and the financial crisis in 2008 than it is, um, in any which way paired to two, uh, 20, uh, uh, 2016, you know, I think James, in terms of your other question about, um, about, uh, you know, what's unique about this election is, uh, and, uh, and the data is, you know, how, you know, it's, uh, it's really the continuation of a trend.

It's just how siloed people are in terms of. You know what information they're getting and who they're getting it from. Uh, and you know, when you and I started there as a kind of a real, such thing as a national debate that Americans were exposed to, and, you know, we're not seeing that very much at all.

Um, this is kind of, uh, people are, are kind of hearing about the election and hearing about the candidates based on their, uh, kind of what compartment they're in. So

James Carville: [00:13:13] one of the numbers I always do for in a polar that self identified ID. And since Trump has been elected, it strikes me too, you know, 2018 was a Republican disaster of Epic proportions, both in terms of turnout popular vote.

That was disappointing in Florida and Ohio, but there's literally 90%. Of the off year elections Democrats have performed way above expected performance. Have you seen a decline in Republican identifiers during the

Geoff Garin: [00:13:49] Trump years? Well, we've seen that on steroids in the last six weeks. Where, um, you know, one not to get too nerdy on you here, but one of the things

Al Hunt: [00:14:04] we love nerds.

Geoff Garin: [00:14:05] So one of the things that you know, changed is that. Over the, the way we do polling, um, over time is that we now, uh, work exclusively from voter files, where there are kind of, um, model scores that predict whether somebody's a Democrat or Republican. And so that, um, when we do a survey, we make sure kind of in a very rigid way that our sample of completed interviews is reflective of the distribution of those predictions.

It doesn't mean the predictions are right, but it means our sample is consistent with, um, what, what we would expect based on the voter file. So even, you know, with that control for predicted party, We're seeing kind of a very substantial decline and people identifying, um, with the Republican party and, um, uh, and, and it makes perfect sense.

I mean, if you just think of what's going on today, um, you know, right now where we have, uh, in the middle of this crisis, Uh, Congress, uh, has to determine what kind of measure to pass in the next, uh, COVID bill, the Republicans and the Senator. Now wholly irrelevant to that, to this process. Um, you know, because there are 14 to 20 Republican senators who would never vote for anything McConnell has no.

And the party and the Republican party is so divided. McConnell really has there's no, you know, there's no, there, there any longer, uh, for the Republican party. So this is entirely a speaker Pelosi leader Schumer with, um, uh, with the white house. And, and, you know, the Republican party, I think has really not just lost its way, but lost its meaning.

Um, for, for voters, you know, it's become kind of a, you know, this kind of native, well, it's become the party of Trump more than anything else. And the fact that it's the party of Trump as a, as a, you know, support for him, decline support for the Republican party, declines with it. Right.

James Carville: [00:16:19] The people say, Oh James, 90% of the Republicans backed Trump.

And I said, look, if 90% of 41 is a hell of a lot different than 90% of 35,

Al Hunt: [00:16:35] I mean

James Carville: [00:16:35] you can't. So what happens is as a lose, as people go from being weak, Republican, independent, or independent to weak Democrat, the face electric changes. And it's less in, of course the smaller your, your self ID number is the more your base or the more hardcore people on the left.

And this is not an evenly divided country at all. They'll just more people that don't like Republicans than do like Republicans. And it's not very close. And that's just one of the things that drives me crazy when people just say, well, we're evenly divided as a country.

Geoff Garin: [00:17:15] We're not w we definitely are not.

Um, and, uh, you know, and it's not just a, you know, party identification. Um, one question that we asked with Al, uh, way back when, but, uh, at NBC a wall street journal poll, and continue to ask is, do you want government to be doing more or less? And, uh, the Republicans have always been the party of less leaving things, more things up to businesses and individuals.

Uh, and we are now very decidedly in a country of, of wanting government to do more, to be more active in solving problems. Uh, facing the country today. So it's not just the kind of the party identification, but it's also what, what the, what the party represents. And James says, in terms of, you know, thinking about the arithmetic of what you were saying, you could think of, well, you know, what's happened is you had somebody who identified as a kind of Republican the year ago.

Who now when you ask them, say I'm an independent. But you, you might think that, you know, because that's a former Republican, um, they're still conservative and still more inclined to vote for democratic candidates. Even though we have kind of a different composition of the independent vote than we had previously, the independent vote right now is still far more, uh, pro Biden, um, than, uh, than it was pro Clinton in 2016.

Al Hunt: [00:18:42] Jeffrey, let me, when you talk about those democratic. I think false as you have pointed out nightmares about the 2016 analogy, um, uh, secretary Clinton of course won the popular vote. So it's the electoral college that throws people in some kind of a tizzy. I think, first of all, I think that was an aberration last time.

Some of it, some of it, frankly, due to the Clinton campaigns and miscalculations, but let's just go through a couple of the important subsets and see how they stand today. First of all, there's the blue wall. Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, that cracked four years ago and cost the Democrats, the election.

How do those States look today?

Geoff Garin: [00:19:22] Uh, Trump is substantially behind and all of them. And in the, you know, there's some variation in the, um, some of the public polls that are summer and. That has to do with the polls themselves as opposed to the reality on the ground. But, um, you know, uh, you know, in terms of the work that we're doing, uh, in our, um, internal, private polling and what, what you see in the public polls, um, uh, Biden has had a solid stable lead in all three States.

Um, you know, Michigan and Pennsylvania are, I think, um, are, you know, becoming more solidly for Biden, Wisconsin, which is you would have thought would have been the kind of, most tenuous of the three also has been, you know, knocked by kind of huge numbers, but consistently, uh, advantage to Biden. Uh, so kind of on, on those three States, which president Trump.

One by collective 77,000 votes. Um, in 2016, it's hard to see, um, you know, that, uh, 77,000 votes, uh, you know, carrying them through, uh, to victory across those three States. This time it'd be game

Al Hunt: [00:20:42] set match. Let me, let me, let me turn to the changing South, uh, Sunbelt, North Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Arizona.

Geoff Garin: [00:20:50] Well, um, I don't think they're all in the same category. Uh, but the fact that, uh, I think our Arizona is, um, a little bit better than the others in terms of, um, the. Possibility or probability of pied and carrying them. Uh, I Biden as a head in North Carolina, but North Carolina will be competitive. And you know, the fact that we're talking about Georgia and Texas as competitive States just speaks volumes and, um, uh, and you know, those are, you know, very.

Close races. You know, I think campaigns or, you know, vice president Biden is a, his campaigns decided to invest in, in those States. I think there's good reason to think that they're winnable, but there they are. You know, the, the, you know, uh, the fact that they're even competitive now, I think is kind of reflective of what terrible shape.

The Republican party is in. And, uh, but also the changing nature of the electorate, uh, in, uh, in those States, you know, uh, Texas is, uh, you know, a place where the weakness of Republicans is among suburban voters. Uh, is really coming to haunt them now. And, uh, and remember, uh, you know, the other big thing about Texas is how hard it's been hit by the coronavirus crisis.

Uh, and, um, where are they now feel in a very personal way, um, that, uh, that you know, that their state has been a victim of the too little too late approach of president Trump, that kind of the, the urging people to. Uh, reopen the economy, even when it wasn't safe to do that. So, uh, uh, States experience with COVID is important.

A colleague of mine named Jesse Steinbrink, who's a really smart young, um, analyst kind of emailed me. Yeah. Yesterday about the correlation between a state's experience with COVID. And the strength or weakness of president Trump and there's more States are having more, um, serious COVID experiences. It's taking a toll on president Trump and other Republicans.

Al Hunt: [00:23:23] What'd you have, I mean, I think James, James has got a lot to pick up on this, but just finally, those States that were, we thought were irredeemably red, Ohio, Missouri is Biden the ideal candidate in those two places.

Geoff Garin: [00:23:34] I think he is. I mean, relative to, um, uh, to president Trump, I think the comparison, uh, is, uh, is good at that.

Uh, I think there's a comfort level with, um, with Biden among, uh, suburban voters who are, you know, Missouri yesterday passed in a expansion of, of, uh, of Medicaid. Um, driven by, uh, votes around the Kansas city metropolitan area and the st. Louis metropolitan area, uh, and then sort of some, you know, competitive results, um, in, uh, in other parts of the state.

And so I think Joe Biden is able to both kind of maximize, uh, support in those kind of Metro areas and, um, uh, you know, while still being a relatable to. Um, many old kind of working class voters, uh, too.

James Carville: [00:24:31] No, I was like asleep, you know, my sleep at a cycle actually got to Alaska Senate and Missouri governor, you know, races that just don't pop right into people's minds right away.

You got a couple of sleepers out there that might not be, you know, on the national headlines, but democratic candidates that you think. Do better than people anticipate?

Geoff Garin: [00:24:56] Well, I definitely, um, I think those two are really smart, um, uh, smart, uh, uh, choices, I think, uh, you know, uh, even if, um, Trump wins Georgia now, rarely, I think John Asaf is going to give David Purdue a hell of a good race in, um, in Georgia.

Um, you know, if there's a, if there's a real way of, I'm not predicting that there will be, but I certainly think that that is a possible ability. Uh, you know, we're, we're going to, um, I think we're going to see, uh, some upsets one, uh, this is not an individual race, but here's kind of a sleeper prediction.

Um, that, uh, that I think there's a decent chance that, um, that the Democrats will expand their majority in the house as opposed to have their majority be contracted, which is something that nobody thought possible at the beginning of this cycle. Um, I'm not certain that that's going to happen, but it's a lot more likely now that that could happen than it was six months ago.

Or, um, or a year ago and, um, you know, uh, uh, P you know, people were, I think some people were fretting up out, you know, and, uh, and the, uh, and the Republicans were threatening of, you know, about what the impact of, of impeachment would be on house Democrats. You know, the short answer to that is zero. Um, a zero negative impact.

I think some actually some positive impact, but, um, you know, and you know, you know, there are some, um, Republicans, Democrats running in and, and kind of Trump districts that will be hard pressed. Um, things that were narrowly Trump districts in 2016, I think Democrats are gonna do really well in those house races.

And even in the ones that were larger Trump's victories in 2016, where it's now represented by a Democrat. I think most of those Democrats will, will also win. So, um, and, uh, you know, and. And, you know, despite the imbalance in seats, the Republicans are having more retirements in the house. So, um, uh, so I think Democrats have a good chance of winning the Senate and they have a good chance of, of expanding their majority in the house, uh, which is, uh, I think kind of an extraordinary state of affairs.

Al Hunt: [00:27:47] Well, yeah, I was going to say, I just had gone over to the house races with some experts. Jeff, there are by, I dunno, maybe by a margin of a half dozen or more, more Republican held seats in play today than there are democratic seats in play. I mean, that really is kind of stunning. You don't expect that when a party has a majority, there are, I would guess, well, over a dozen Republican seats in play and there are, you know, maybe five or six Democrats  that's it?

Uh, yeah, places they thought

Geoff Garin: [00:28:20] they

Al Hunt: [00:28:20] were really in good, you know, they were going to come and they were going to win back. Mikey, Cheryl and. Uh, New Jersey and Jason Crow out in Colorado, uh, and, uh, uh, McGrath and Georgia where they're not even very competitive. It's just a stunning. Let me ask you this. Uh, this has been a very upbeat, uh, assessment of where Democrats, where Joe Biden stance, what keeps you awake at night?

What worries you put Biden people to say, okay. And these next. Whatever it is now 13 weeks. What do you think they're going to do? How they're going to come after us? Where might we be vulnerable? What should we be prepared for?

Geoff Garin: [00:28:57] Well, I mean, there are the things that we're looking at in our research. You know what, uh, you know, if, uh, we have, uh, some evidence of a substantial economic recovery between now and the election, we're trying to understand what the impact of that will be.

I don't think that that's going to happen at this stage. Um, and, um, what, one of the really interesting results and important results we've found in that regard is that, you know, we ask people to imagine a scenario where president Trump has been able to lower the unemployment rate in the United States from, you know, a high of 19.3% down to eight or 9% in October.

Um, so, you know, evidence of substantial progress there, but also imagine that the same time, the number of fatalities we asked this not so long ago when it was a federal 120,000 fatalities. Now we're already well above 150,000 fatalities, but at the same time that the unemployment rate is going down to eight or 9%, that the number of deaths is.

Increased to 200,000, uh, people and you know, how would they feel in that, in that circumstance? And by close to two to one people said, that's not, that's not a good bargain for America. I would think of that as a failure, rather than a success, if we get unemployment that low, but the fatalities are that high, but still we're trying to understand the impact of, of, um, of, um, of, you know, a recovering economy.

If that indeed occurs. We're trying to understand the impact of, you know, if president Trump is able to make some, um, Uh, uh, uh, dramatic announcement of kind of a, uh, a vaccine, um, you know, how will people react to that? Um, so, you know, I think this is, um, it's, you know, it, it's not structural questions that worry me so much.

It's not, you know, are, are, are, is the Trump campaign all of a sudden going to hit on a really smart strategy. Um, that doesn't worry me so much, although, um, you know, I think there, um, you know, I, I don't, you know, take, take, take that for granted, uh, that they won't, but, uh, the problem, the problem is I've got Trump, you know, it's, it's, it's really about events.

I think it, you know, that, uh, you know what, we'll take events for things too. Uh, to change the election. And, um, so as opposed to something about the structure and the race, or some tactical or strategic decision that one campaign or the other banks

James Carville: [00:31:59] to any of your clients is this it's time for a change, you know, 80% wrong track country change is the greatest word in the English language bar, an out party in a.

Three, two, one wrong track.

Geoff Garin: [00:32:15] Well, I think you're right. That's my view. I think you're right in. Um, you know, I also think that, uh, you know, the, the, the w we we've had changed, you know, it's people thought, yeah, 2016, it was a time for change. And part of the reason why Donald Trump got elected back then now they kind of feel, yeah.

Even more powerfully. So, so you're definitely right about that then for. Um, you know, Democrats obviously have to kind of represent the, you know, of that change. Um, but I think, you know, the extension of that James is not just that we need to change, but that in every way, imaginable president Trump and the Republicans are changing things for the worse, they're making things worse than they needed to be or had to be.

And it's not just uncovered, but, um, but on that for sure that, uh, that, that. That, um, that uncovered president Trump has made things is making things worse on the economic packs of, of the COVID crisis. He's making things worse in terms of people's access to affordable healthcare, um, that they can rely on.

He's making things worse, uh, on, even on the, in terms of the, you know, the, the, uh, the unity of the country and what's going on with protests. Well, he's, uh, he's making things worse. So it's not just that we need a change and the Democrats need to represent that 2020. There's a very specific case. Is that the things that are most important to America and Americans right now, Donald Trump and the Republican party are consistently making things worse.

And that we need to elect Democrats to turn that around and turn it and turn the country around.

Al Hunt: [00:34:05] The one thing we know is Jeff Garen is consistently good. Jeff, Peter Hart trained you. Well, we can't thank you enough for being with us. Please give our best to Debbie and stay safe up there. And the people's Republic of the Mark of Martha's

Geoff Garin: [00:34:18] vineyard.

I will do thank you for having me.

Al Hunt: [00:34:33] The riches of the land. Uh, Jim tankers, Lee's book with compelling personal stories and convincing data about how America built a robust middle class and the generation after world war two. With not just white workers, but, but also people of color. And then sadly, how it has eroded. Jim is the chief economics writer for the New York times.

And it's covered politics and economic policies for more than a decade and a half. Jim. Thanks for being with,

Jim Tankersley: [00:35:02] Oh, it's my pleasure. Thank you so much.

Geoff Garin: [00:35:04] You write

Al Hunt: [00:35:04] the politicians, but  Donald Trump have conned the middle class. Some planes are racial and cultural divisions. Well, workers are falling further and further behind, sometimes working two or three jobs, not just to get even further behind.

Jim Tankersley: [00:35:21] Yeah. It's, it's a, it's a tragedy. Do you mean the decline of the American middle class even before. Uh, this pandemic recession, which turns out to have been the second once in a lifetime, uh, recession of my lifetime, uh, thus far, um, even before then the middle class was stagnating. Uh, it was not enjoying anywhere close to the gains that it had made, uh, in the late 1990s or particular in, in the period after world war two.

And I think the con that popular the populist politicians have pulled on American workers is this idea that. Um, the only way to get back is by cracking down on immigrants, by cracking down on, uh, trade, um, the through sort of, of set of policies that are designed to in one way or the other restrict certain groups of people from contributing to the economy.

And my argument is the opposite. That history shows us the reason we had an, a vibrant, uh, middle-class boom after world war two was because. All workers really got ahead, not just white men, but in particular women and men of color had been shuttered out of the great opportunities of the U S economy for centuries.

And after world war II, they began to demand entry into much better jobs. And when they got those better jobs and contributed their talents to the economy, The entire economy boomed. And that was why we had such a great period for the middle class and really with the exception of the late nineties, why we haven't had one since.

And so, um, I think that the, the, the real recipe is to re-empower those, those workers, women, and men of color and immigrants, and then everyone will get ahead including white men. And, um, that's not the story you hear so often from populous politicians today.

Al Hunt: [00:37:04] Jim, let me ask you, because Donald Trump pre pandemic claim, no one has done as much for African Americans.

They were doing better economically. Uh, and wage wise in any time in history, what are the facts,

Jim Tankersley: [00:37:18] XR that, you know, Donald Trump inherited an economy that had been finally starting to work for everyone. And what we know out about. Uh, black workers in American history is they tend to be hurt first by recessions and recover last.

It's just the sad truth of discrimination in our economy. And, um, we had a long road to recovery from the great recession. We were finally getting to a place where, where it was really starting to deliver for black workers. And, um, you know, in the final years of Barack Obama's presidency, the black unemployment rate was falling faster than it actually did.

Under Trump, but you know, it's the old expression born on third base. Think he hit a triple Trump, comes into office with a 4.7% unemployment rate and, um, and a real, a couple of year set of momentum on an improvements for workers come with a tighter labor market toward the end of an economic cycle. And so he's claimed credit for.

The, you know, the levels basically that the economy reached when he came in. When, if you just look at rates of chains fast, the economy grew how fast incomes were going up for most people. Um, economy is basically indistinguishable from the second term of Obama or even the second term of George W. Bush.

So his great, um, uh, achievement economically has been selling Americans on the idea that what he did was special as opposed to the conditions he inherited were special.

Al Hunt: [00:38:46] How about, you know, let me, let me go again to this overarching point about the decline, how much of it, middle class guy, how much of it is attributable

Geoff Garin: [00:38:53] to the decline

Al Hunt: [00:38:54] of labor unions?

Labor unions back in the fifties were about 35% of the workforce. I think it's less than 15. Now, how much of it is due to the decline of labor unions?

Jim Tankersley: [00:39:04] Certainly a real part of the story. Um, I mean, labor unions of course have had a, an interesting. Um, role in American history. At times they have been exclusionary forces.

You know, they, they excluded certain workers and kept them from getting good jobs. But at other times they've been a major forces for inclusion and forces for bargaining power. And I think that is bargaining power is clearly something American workers have not had for very, very. Um, long supply for decades.

And again, only at the times of really low unemployment, when you have a low unionization rate, it's only when the labor market's really tight, um, that workers and demand raises to the degree that, you know, they had in the past. And so, um, You know, what we had in the late nineties was a scenario where the economy was growing really fast with really low unemployment, which I think is sort of the recipe for broadly shared prosperity.

And so it didn't matter as much, but then when you have higher unemployment or slower growth, um, workers who do not have bargaining power, definitely found that they were not able to get wage gains while corporate profits were rising.

James Carville: [00:40:13] So Jim, first of all, congratulations on the book and you're weaving these narratives are really interesting thing, but the first thing I want to see, one of these books I do is I go to the last chapter where you talk about solutions and you actually did a much better job than most.

I mean, you honestly called around you got it. What ideas that stick out in your mind or things that we could do. To help reverse this, which obviously happening to a vast number of Americans and have been happening to them for quite a while.

Jim Tankersley: [00:40:47] Well, so I think there's basically two buckets of things. One is sort of things policymakers can do right now.

It's just such a great question. Um, you know, I think women are such a key to our economy. They are, uh, they're statistically, our highest skilled, best educated workers right now in the country. And yet. They are still struggling to participate in the labor force, to the degree that they used to. So I think a big suite of policies to remove the impediments women have to working and getting ahead.

And that starts with childcare. There's just so. Much, uh, that, that this sort of our social norms hold women back because, and we see it in the pandemic right now. There are millions of women who are unable to work at all, or work as much as they want, because they are being forced to care for children at home, with, with school not being open.

Um, and we don't have a good public policy solution for that even in regular times, let alone in the pandemic. So I think it starts there. I think, you know, I would propose a few kind of radical things in there. I think our elite universities. Should have to admit far more students, um, Stanford's and Harvard's and Yale's of the world.

And they should be really focusing on low income, low, you know, students from low opportunity areas from disadvantaged backgrounds and, and so we can be just really churning out more. High quality graduates, but James, I think actually the other, the other thing, which is much harder that we need is almost like a national attitudinal shift.

We need to agree all of us that, um, we don't, we don't want workers fighting with each other anymore. And, and that, and that racism and sexism are aren't just bad for

Geoff Garin: [00:42:25] women

Jim Tankersley: [00:42:26] or for men of color, they're bad for everyone. And if we can get this sort of. National agreement that, Hey, we're really going to try to complete the work of civil rights, which was left unfinished.

I actually think that would be the greatest economic policy we could have. And that's, that's, that's something you can pass through a law. That's something we all kind of have to, um, decide on a community and individual level and we need real leadership for,

James Carville: [00:42:51] so I entered the workforce right. There was 29, 1973.

I described right in Moscow. There was one African American in my class and three women. I didn't know what a BMW or Sony TV was. Jeremy in Japan was still digging out. China was being led by madman, right? That's not the world that someone that's not the workforce to someone is entering a day. And I know I had a law degree, but just take it in general.

I mean, the world is just a much, much more competitive place. And I don't, you know, of course I'm from more unions. I think Warren's federal daycares, the single best proposal, maybe to come out of 2020 cycle. But there is a Buddhist don't live in the same world when we had these growing wages and we had, you know, six, 7% GDP growth.

And I don't think that's going to come

Geoff Garin: [00:43:48] back. So,

Jim Tankersley: [00:43:49] so, I mean, I agree it's a totally different world than I think part of what, what happened is that those changes have advantaged, you know, particular sets of workers who kind of control the institutions, the business world. I mean, CEOs remain predominantly white men and from elite universities, um, you know, the finance industry remains dominated by white men.

So, so the changes in the economy that have. Uh, helped corporate America and multinational companies and have helped wall street had disproportionately helped those workers. You know, I think about this a lot. I lay out of this book. I got interested in the middle class questions, you know, when I was a kid, well, long before I entered the workforce.

Because I grew up in a timber town and in Western Oregon, where the guys, I went to high school with so many of them, you know, their dads worked in or around the timber industry and those jobs when they cratered in the eighties and nineties just weren't going to be available to the guys I went to school with.

And I wanted to know, you know, when is this changing world going to start working for those guys? Of course, it's not just those guys. It's, it's um, black men and, and, you know, women from rural areas across the country and cities is and suburbs, but it, um, the idea, the question of when will this new economy create good paying jobs for those workers is sort of consumed me and my entire time as a, as an economics reporter.

And I've just really come to this conclusion, they're they really have the potential to contribute it. Isn't more. Competitive world. It is one that advantages people with higher education, but I truly believe there is potential in the American workforce that is untapped, that if we just get the right entrepreneurs, um, creating companies that use human labor in new and interesting ways that good jobs can reappear.

We just, we just haven't found those combinations

James Carville: [00:45:35] yet mentioned, and I'll just cry. So I want to point it out a third time that we did have. Across the board income growth in the late nineties, which is probably to the apex what's happened in this country since this early seventies. Am I correct?

Jim Tankersley: [00:45:54] Oh, absolutely.

James Carville: [00:45:56] And who was president in the late nineties?

Jim Tankersley: [00:45:58] That was the bill Clinton presidency. I think you may remember that

James Carville: [00:46:01] it is robotic to say anything good about the Clinton presidency. I would just want to point that out.

Jim Tankersley: [00:46:06] No, I think, you know, I have a stat in the book that, um, I added check like six times. Cause I, I barely believe that James, but if you, if we had continued, um, through this century, um, since 2000 with the income growth, uh, that we had in the second term of the Clinton presidency, The median American family, the American middle class today would be earning 50% more than it's earning.

Now it's just a dramatic drop off that we've had since the end of the Clinton presidency. Well, I, I think, you know, we also had a bursting tech bubble and then, and then, you know, the China shock really did, uh, that, that started, um, that, you know, to be fair was ushered in, in part by Clinton policies, uh, did take away a lot of good jobs in America.

James Carville: [00:46:53] Yeah, that's that's fair. And it came back. Obama had TPP and that would have helped a lot, but of course we didn't do that, but we were, we were in pretty good shape in 2000.

Jim Tankersley: [00:47:03] We were in Christian.

Al Hunt: [00:47:05] Yeah. And the other thing, I mean, your book is just fascinating in the way Chronicles this all, you know, everything it's happened.

Jim Ben also has some wonderful personal portraits. Tell us about

Jim Tankersley: [00:47:15] ed green. Oh man. Um, you know, I, uh, I feel, I feel like, uh, you know, you're  and my favorite stories are always the stories where I get to just get out of the world and talk to folks who are working in their jobs about how the economy affects them.

And I've met a lot of wonderful people in my career, but I've probably never met anyone as extraordinary as that. Um, he's a, he's a guy from Winston Salem, North Carolina. Um, and I met him in the fall of 2013 on the last day of the minor league baseball season and Winston Salem. And, uh, he came ambling down the Concourse.

Very tall black man, uh, shook my hand. Uh, he was basically like, I think the 12th or the 13th hour of his Workday, he got up every morning, laid tar on the highway for the state. And then he worked a second job every night, doing custodial service in, in the, in the summer for the baseball team and the winter for wake forest football and basketball.

And he was just a soft-spoken thoughtful. Very kind man who works his butt off every day still does. And, uh, and does it, because he wants to give his family the sort of middle class life that you used to be able to get with one job. And it has to do it with two, with two jobs, or now he's down to a job and a half he's he's, um, ramped down just a little pit, but,

Al Hunt: [00:48:42] um, and sometimes it's been three,

Jim Tankersley: [00:48:44] sometimes three.

And, uh, and so I've just, I wrote about him, um, that, uh, the following year. And then I've just stayed in touch with him. And I got to meet his family and tell their story. And I went back down last summer to talk to him and, and we talked about how hard it is to work in all those jobs and what it does to you.

And he never complains, you know, he got cancer and never missed a day of work even with treatment. Um, just an extraordinary example of the spirit of the American worker. And yet the economy is still not working for him. And he's worried that it's, it's not working for his kids, who, who he worked hard to send to college, and his kids are just wonderful, you know, adults now.

And, um, You know, I just feel really lucky to have had the chance to tell his story. And it's sort of the backbone of the book, his family, uh, his, his parents embody the great middle-class surge of, of the postwar era and then his own story embodies kind of the downfall of the middle class since then.

Well, there are

Al Hunt: [00:49:44] many reasons to read this book, but I want everyone who does to really, really look, I mean, read, read about ed green and he's a remarkable CA did he get his college degree while he was working these two and three jobs?

Jim Tankersley: [00:49:55] He is not yet. It's his goal for when he's, uh, for when he's done. He, he wants to go back and not just get a college degree, James.

He wants to get a lot of gray. Um, uh, when it's all over, uh, he wants to. Basically help wants to do sort of labor law and help, uh, workers like himself, uh, you know, navigate the, the, the difficulties of the workforce.

James Carville: [00:50:17] You know, the sad thing is, is a small degree of really expensive. Now my tuition, but $110 a semester, I used to work off shore like $5,000 in my pocket.

And I was on the GI bill. I got $300 a month. It was in the early seventies. I was so flush. It was unbelievable. But now these kids graduated from law school and they got. Worth of debt. It's really,

Geoff Garin: [00:50:43] it's really tough. No, we've made it really hard

Jim Tankersley: [00:50:45] for young people to get the education. They need to even just compete for the, for the, you know, medium paying jobs anymore.

I mean, that's, that's just a sad fact of our economy.

Al Hunt: [00:50:53] Well, I know, I know a little bit about a certain university in Winston Salem, and I'm going to strongly recommend that they

Geoff Garin: [00:50:59] contact, uh,

Al Hunt: [00:51:00] mr. Green. Cause he'd be a great asset, whatever he can do for them. But boy, it's a, it's an incredible story, Jim.

Jim Tankersley: [00:51:06] Well, thank you guys so much for letting me ramble on about it.

I, um, I feel very passionately about the people in the book and about the themes. And, um, and I think w you know, we're in a moment in America where we're rebuilding the economy again, and we do have some choices to make, and if we choose to invest in each other there in not just, uh, you know, snipe at each other, well, maybe we got a shot and we could do this.

Al Hunt: [00:51:30] Well, as James asked you, uh, you, you spell out some of the things we can do and taking advantage of, of that shot. And I would encourage all of our listeners to read the riches of the land by Jim Tankersley, who is as good an economics reporter as there is in Washington today. Uh, now that my buddy Dave has left, uh, Jim, I may even crown you as the best, but, um, it's just a it's, it's a terrific book.

And thank you for being with us.

Jim Tankersley: [00:51:58] Thank you so much for having me. I really appreciate it.

James Carville: [00:52:00] Good luck right afterwards. You should be very proud

Geoff Garin: [00:52:04] of it.

Jim Tankersley: [00:52:04] Thank you, James. Thank you so much.

Al Hunt: [00:52:20] Well, boy, that was, you know, that was a good show, James.

James Carville: [00:52:23] It really, what? You don't want to talk about something in gym. People at the desk about these massive endowments at these schools, Hale Harvard, Stanford, MIT, you pick it right. And one of the ideas is that they expand enrollment. Okay. So let's just say a thousand more coming up.

What I think they should do is get together and use endowment, you know, the expertise to make some of these community colleges better. I mean, you can, you can educate masses, right? People at Dade County, Northern Virginia community college, Kings community college in Seattle. And I think there's more bang for the buck improving that level of education and just.

Turning out more elite school graduates. I mean, there's more bang for the whole economy.

Al Hunt: [00:53:17] I I'm in, you know, I, Dave Wessel a minute ago, 20 years ago, he and Bob Davis wrote a book about community colleges as the engine of economic growth in America and the. Early part of the 21st century, it was right on.

And James, one of the tragedies, and this has been done largely at the state level, but the feds bear some responsibility, we have cut back on assistance to community colleges. And that, that is a terribly dumb, short term decision. They are great investments. Yeah. I like

James Carville: [00:53:47] these big endowment schools say, Hey, we're rolling.

And we're going to, you know, we're going to assign faculty, we're going to look at your programs, you know, as an electrician program at Dade County, or maybe an MIT. You know, electrical engineer can take a look at it and say, Hey, these are 10 things you can do. And without boom, boom, boom.

Al Hunt: [00:54:07] I mean the health care industry in America, which is so under resourced right now, basically depends on community colleges, uh, for their workforce.

You cannot be an auto mechanic today, unless you have at least a level 14 education, which is community college. So you, you, you you're right. That is a, I just,

Geoff Garin: [00:54:27] I just

James Carville: [00:54:28] to see, I'd pick a focus on that.

Al Hunt: [00:54:31] It was a great show before we go. Uh, our, our squad producer, Jeremiah said, just tell people, uh, just briefly at the end, what you're watching, what you're reading, uh, James, I'm watching baseball.

I'm watching the Washington nationals cause I've missed it. So much, uh, and when a game, it may not matter. They're only four and four. I don't know at all confident the season will continue, but when it comes on, I say, Hosanna, here it is. And I usually watch it until the end of the night that he last night it was the seventh cause of rain and reading.

I did a lot of work reading. I wanted to read Jim's book this week. I read your colleague, Paul, Begala his book. Cause I'm doing something with him. I read the Mary Trump book because someone's that you ought to read it. It was okay. And my favorite

Geoff Garin: [00:55:16] book of this week,

James Carville: [00:55:17] Is

Al Hunt: [00:55:17] Christopher Buckley's make Russia great.

Again, the novel about, about Donald Trump. I guarantee if anyone reads it, you will laugh for two solid hours. So tell us what you've been doing.

James Carville: [00:55:29] Well, I'm reading, burning the house down. I won't be discussing that about the gang of travel and it was crazy. And I remember. And for fiction, my friend Daniel Silva has, and I'm a big Daniel silver guy.

He has a new book called the honor, which is as much fun as I've had reading a piece of fiction in a long time. Put it that way. And it's, it's, uh, it's fiction, but it's, it's very educational and very thought provoking as everything that, that damn silver rights is now I'm a big fan of heroes. Really a big fan of his newest book.

Geoff Garin: [00:56:07] Oh, he's a really, really

Al Hunt: [00:56:08] counted writer. And, uh, you know, as his, as his Chris Buckley, he's got a carry he's got, he's got a character, the, uh, and you can guess who this is James. It's the senior Senator from South Carolina who once was a harsh. Trump critic who's turned into a sycophant and his name is squiggly Lee biscuit.

Now I don't know who that could be, but I'll tell ya. This really was. I, I love this show. I love those two guests. I learned a lot. That's what we're all about. Uh, and, uh, I just want to thank everybody out there for listening to 2020 politics war room. I hope you'll follow the show on Twitter at politics war room.

Uh, I hope James, his dog will follow the show. I hope you'll email us at politics. We're on the gmail.com as politics were rum@gmail.com. Thank you for subscribing. Please rate the show hopefully with a five star review. We'll be back next week. We've got another good guest right on the Eve of the democratic convention, such as it is.

So everybody be safe out there. James, you be safe out there.

James Carville: [00:57:14] I got a new slogan for the show. We got bark.

Al Hunt: [00:57:18] Well, all right. He's going to be our special guests most weeks. Okay. Alright. Alright. Thank you. And be safe.