Center for American Progress Action

State Rep. James Talarico on Project 2025 and Christian Nationalism
Podcast
Part of a Series

Texas state Rep. James Talarico (D) joins the show to talk about Christian nationalism, the impact Project 2025 would have on democracy, and why he thinks Texas is a purple state. Daniella and Colin also discuss the conflict in Gaza and how Project 2025 would increase the threat of nuclear war.

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, it is September, and I am just living for this cooler weather.

Gibbs Léger: It is so incredibly nice right now.

Seeberger: It really, really is. On a more serious note, though, I heard that you had a great interview this week.

Gibbs Léger: I really did. I spoke with Texas state Rep. James Talarico (D)—and yes, Colin, if you have a TikTok, you’ve definitely seen him there.

Seeberger: Oh, that I have.

Gibbs Léger: We talked about Project 2025 and the threat of Christian nationalism, and how to reach religious voters, and why he thinks Texas could be a purple state.

Seeberger: That is music to my Texas ears, Daniella. I am super stoked to listen to it. But first, we have to get to some news. And since it’s September, that means students are back in school. And unfortunately in America, that means that too many students are at risk of going to school and not coming home at the end of the day.

At the time of this recording, we actually are marking the 218th school shooting this year—a school outside of Athens, Georgia. And it’s just a sad reminder of the fact that in the United States, too many states are loosening gun laws at the same time that we know that commonsense gun safety measures can save lives. It’s just infuriating. And it’s a sad, sad day for too many parents.

And I’m so tired of being told by our politicians that they’re extending their thoughts and prayers but don’t want to do anything to step up to the plate and actually protect our kids. It’s despicable, and I hope a reminder that we need to be vigilant and we need to take action to rein in this problem that no other country in the developed world seems to suffer from, but it’s one that we have resigned ourselves to.

And from everybody at the Center for American Progress Action Fund, just want to share our condolences with all of those families who are suffering this terrible tragedy and affirm that we are recommitting ourselves to taking action to end the scourge of gun violence in this country.

You can go check out the gun violence prevention work by our partners at the Center for American Progress on our website, americanprogress.org, and search “GVP.”

Gibbs Léger: Yeah, folks, make sure you take care of yourselves today. It’s a really heavy day. And unfortunately, I’m going to turn to some news that is also rather heavy, and that’s the recent developments in the conflict in Gaza.

I’m sure you were just as horrified as I was, Colin, when I heard over the weekend that six hostages that were held by Hamas had been killed by their captors just as Israeli troops were closing in on their location. One of them was Hersh Goldberg-Polin, a 23-year-old Israeli American. And if his name sounds familiar, it’s probably because you have seen his parents on TV or speaking recently at the Democratic National Convention.

Seeberger: Yes, I did see them in Chicago.

Gibbs Léger: Yeah, and just so moving and so powerful. And they’ve been speaking out about their efforts to free Hersh and the other 100 or so hostages that are still in Hamas’ custody. This is devastating news for Hersh’s family and for all the families whose loved ones have been killed by Hamas.

As a mother, as a human being, there are no words to describe the anguish that I can only imagine that these families are feeling right now—on top of all the suffering they’ve experienced this past year, not knowing the condition of their relatives or their partners and their loved ones.

News about the deaths of these six hostages has sparked massive protests and labor strikes in Israel over the war and Prime Minister Netanyahu’s handling of it. And yet there’s been a lot of disinformation and garbage spewed by the far right about what’s happening in Gaza. So we’ve got to set the record straight on a couple of things here, Colin.

Seeberger: We sure do, Daniella. And first, I have to start off by saying that two things can be true at once. The events of October 7th were horrific. They should never have happened and can never happen again. And yet also, the mass bloodshed and starvation in Gaza is completely and utterly unacceptable. Full stop.

Gibbs Léger: Yep.

Seeberger: Back in May, roughly four months ago, the Biden administration said the Israeli military had degraded Hamas so much that the terrorist group is no longer capable of carrying out another October 7th-scale attack.

So after all we’ve seen transpire since May, and given the events over this weekend, we know Netanyahu’s approach to this war and his commitment to a so-called, quote-unquote, “total victory” against Hamas really is just unworkable and comes at a really reprehensible cost to innocent people. Even Netanyahu’s own defense minister has questioned this strategy time and time again, calling it gibberish. And as more events are happening day by day, it’s clear he’s—increasingly clear he’s right.

Gibbs Léger: Yep.

Seeberger: It’s clear that the time to end this war, negotiate a ceasefire, and return all the hostages being held by Hamas was yesterday. We all remember what happened in Iraq after America’s failed intervention there. ISIS rose from the ashes just a few years later, and now the writing is on the wall in Gaza. U.S. intelligence assessments showed that this war in the Middle East has created a recruiting boon for terrorist organizations that pose a direct threat to the security of all people in the region. I mean, whether it’s Hezbollah or Iran, literally every few days see other organizations or states trying to foment a broader regional conflict.

So to those right-wing extremists with the audacity to suggest a ceasefire deal and return of hostages sends the wrong message to Hamas: Are you paying attention?

Gibbs Léger: No.

Seeberger: Each and every day that Prime Minister Netanyahu muddies or obstructs a ceasefire deal is another day where the lives of hostages and countless innocent Palestinians—not to mention the security of Israeli citizens—is put at risk.

Gibbs Léger: Exactly. And let’s not forget that Prime Minister Netanyahu faces an ongoing trial over corruption charges.

Seeberger: Sure does.

Gibbs Léger: If he loses power, he won’t be able to move ahead with his plans to alter the legal system in Israel—plans some have said could help him avoid a conviction. So right now, in order to stay in power, Netanyahu is politically reliant on Israel’s far-right nationalist parties.

And these extremist groups, they want to keep fighting in Gaza. So, shocker, how has the prime minister responded? He’s chosen to wage a war on behalf of these far-right groups, putting his own political interests ahead of the lives of all the innocent Israeli and Palestinian people desperately pleading for this war to end. Sounds a little bit familiar, Colin.

Seeberger: Mm-hmm.

Gibbs Léger: This week, President Biden rightfully said that Netanyahu wasn’t doing enough to negotiate a deal that would finally end this conflict. It is damn well time that Netanyahu change his course. Otherwise, I genuinely wonder: How many more innocent civilians will he allow to die on his watch?

Seeberger: It’s truly awful, and I wish that I had something a little bit better for us to turn to. But unfortunately, we’ve got to talk about another man who’s drunk on his own power and willing to do just about anything to hold on to it. This time, I am of course talking about Vladimir Putin.

In case you missed it, Russia recently announced that it’s changing its policy regarding how and when it uses nuclear weapons in its arsenal. These changes will make it easier for Putin to launch nuclear weapons in his war of aggression against Ukraine or against its adversaries like the United States. At this point, Russia’s conflict with Ukraine has been dragging on for years, and this unnerving announcement for the Kremlin on the heels of a surprisingly successful counteroffensive launched by the Ukrainians into parts of Russia earlier this summer really drives home how much Vladimir Putin is really grasping at straws here, right?

Gibbs Léger: Mm-hmm.

Seeberger: Moscow is now accusing Ukraine and the West of somehow engineering a proxy war to destroy Russia. It’s really bonkers stuff. I mean, it’s not like the United States and Ukraine were the ones who invaded Russia.

Gibbs Léger: Right.

Seeberger: But these are the types of threats we should expect to hear from weak leaders like Vladimir Putin. That said, we got to take them seriously, and here’s why. You’ve heard us talk about Project 2025 on this podcast, right? But one of the policies in this 920-page policy document that we haven’t talked about yet is the impact this far-right agenda would have on the threat of nuclear war.

Gibbs Léger: Oh my goodness. Colin, it feels really surreal to say this, but sadly, we’re already much closer to the brink of a nuclear war than most of us would like to think about. Events like the war in Ukraine, the Trump administration pulling out of the Iran nuclear deal, and the development of nuclear weapons in countries like North Korea have all escalated the risk of a possible nuclear conflict.

But—surprise, surprise—Project 2025’s solution would actually make that risk even worse. G7 leaders like the United States committed to nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation at a convening in Japan last year. These are the steps that we should take if we want to tamp down tensions. But the far right wants to walk away from our commitments to our allies and instead ramp up our nuclear stockpile. That approach would not only increase the likelihood of nuclear conflict, but it would put us at odds with our allies, who might then be hesitant to support us if something were to happen. That all sounds pretty scary, yes?

[Musical transition]

Seeberger: It sure does, Daniella. And it’s all the more reason why we don’t need Putin apologists in power in this country.

Gibbs Léger: Correct.

Seeberger: Well, that’s all the time we have for today. If there’s anything else you’d like us to cover on the pod, hit us up on Twitter, Instagram, or Threads @TheTentPod. That’s @TheTentPod.

Gibbs Léger: And stick around for my interview with Rep. James Talarico in just a beat.

Gibbs Léger: James Talarico is a representative in the Texas state House. Before being elected in 2018, he served as a public school teacher and is currently pursuing a master’s of divinity at Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary. Rep. Talarico, thank you so much for joining us on “The Tent.”

Rep. James Talarico: Thank you for having me.

Gibbs Léger: So let’s start by talking about religion. You are deeply religious and, as I mentioned, are currently enrolled in seminary, so it’s clear that your Christian faith drives a lot of what you do. I want to ask you why the MAGA movement appeals to so many conservatives—who also call themselves Christians—despite the fact that Donald Trump and his MAGA policies are antithetical to the values many Christians hold dear.

So could you talk a little bit about that inconsistency and how to counter this false MAGA narrative?

Talarico: Yeah, great question. So my granddad was a Baptist preacher in South Texas, and I’ve been going to the same church since I was 2 years old. And as you mentioned, I’m now a student at seminary studying to become a minister myself. So my faith is everything to me and motivates all the work that I do here at the Texas Capitol.

And what scripture tells us when we’re having a conflict with someone else is to look inward at maybe the ways in which we have failed in this relationship. And so I would actually encourage us, when we’re asking why Christian nationalism appeals to so many Americans, to look in the mirror and ask why we as progressives or people who love democracy haven’t put forward an alternative vision of religion or theology.

And that’s really what’s occurred in this country over the last 50 years in particular. The pro-democracy forces in this country have not put forward an alternative theological framework to understand how Christian teachings actually lead us toward democracy, not away from it, and how it encourages us to love all of our neighbors—particularly our neighbors who are different from us racially, economically, culturally, religiously. And I think once we do that, once we put forward that defense of Christianity, you’ll see more Americans leave Christian nationalism, leave megachurches, and start to return to the roots of our faith tradition and return to the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Gibbs Léger: So you have a very large social media following, and you’ve definitely blown up on TikTok a few times. Can you talk about the role that you see social media playing in reaching religious communities, especially younger religious folks? And why do you think that your message resonates with so many young people?

Talarico: Yeah. I joined TikTok at the end of last year. I’m an elderly Millennial, so I felt a little bit out of my depth on that website. But my Gen Z friends welcomed me with open arms when I joined the platform. And honestly, I’ve been able to reach so many more people on TikTok than I’ve been able to reach with traditional media or even with platforms like Twitter, which tend to attract people who are already interested in politics.

TikTok, in my experience, allows you to reach folks who are not obsessed with electoral politics, and those are the exact people that we need to speak to if we’re going to build a pro-democracy majority in this country.

And so I’ve gotten so many DMs, so many messages on TikTok from people all over Texas, all over the country, who tell me that they have been yearning for someone to speak about faith in this way. Many of the folks who have sent me messages on TikTok have been hurt by organized religion—in particular the American Christian church. I’m talking about women, I’m talking about LGBTQ people, I’m talking about people of color who have really been targeted by Christian nationalists and those who are perverting the gospel to consolidate their own social and economic and political power.

And so I oftentimes get messages from young people, from Gen Zers, who say that “If I had heard this message, I’d probably still be going to church today.” I don’t think Christians realize how this MAGA Christianity has really repelled young people away from the church. And if we’re going to save our faith tradition and save our church for generations to come, we have got to get back in touch with the roots of our religion—which is love, peace, and justice. And those are the things the world needs now more than ever.

Gibbs Léger: You’re an elder Millennial. I am a Gen Xer.

Talarico: OK.

Gibbs Léger: So, I mostly just lurk on TikTok—

Talarico: Fair.

Gibbs Léger: —so I can stay up with the lingo.

Talarico: That’s a very Gen X thing to do.

Gibbs Léger: Yes it is. Don’t mess with us, we won’t mess with you.

Talarico: That’s right, that’s right.

Gibbs Léger: We talk about Christian nationalism, and I want to get into that a little bit. What makes Christian nationalism so dangerous? And how are movements like Project 2025 threatening to impose it on Americans?

Talarico: Yeah, it’s a great question. So I define Christian nationalism as the worship of power—social power, economic power, political power—in the name of Christ. And in my reading of the gospel, Christian nationalism is antithetical to the teachings of Jesus. It’s a betrayal of Jesus. And in religious terms, it is idolatrous, which I know is a strange word for some people. But an idol, in our scriptures, is just something that human beings worship instead of worshiping God, or instead of worshiping love, which—the Bible tells us that God is love.

So if you put your faith in anything besides love, that is idolatry. And we do that all the time. I do that all the time, unfortunately, putting my faith in political power or in money or in status. Those are the things that a lot of us here in the United States put our trust in. We may say that we trust Jesus or that we trust the power of love, but if you look at what we do on a day-to-day basis, we trust money. We trust power. We trust status.

These are the things that too many in our culture, including myself, have put our trust into. And so kind of the radical message of not just Christianity, but actually all of the world’s great faith traditions—they’re trying to help us let go of these earthly things and put our faith in love, in each other, and in creation.

So Christian nationalism, at its core, is idol worship. It is worshiping power and control over anything else. And you see that here in states like Texas, where Christian nationalists are trying to control what we read, who we love, who we marry, when we have children, what we do with our own bodies, where we travel.

This disturbing desire to control other people is rooted in fear, and it actually shows that there’s a lack of faith. Because the opposite of faith is not doubt. Doubt is a healthy part of any faith. The opposite of faith is control, and that’s at the heart of this Christian nationalist movement.

Gibbs Léger: So let’s talk about what’s happening in Texas and Project 2025 in particular. I feel like your state and maybe Florida and some others are the little learning labs—

Talarico: That’s right.

Gibbs Léger: —where they could see how these policies took place.

So could you tell our listeners: What are some of the extreme policies that you’ve already been seeing in Texas, and how did Texas lawmakers get them done? And do you see an agenda like this actually possibly happening at the national level?

Talarico: I do. I talked to my friends in other states, in blue states or on the coasts, and Project 2025 is a theoretical fear for them, right? It’s something that could happen in the future. But for those of us in red states like Texas, it is not theoretical. It is happening to our constituents, to our neighbors as we speak: the most extreme abortion ban in the country; no exceptions for rape, or incest, or threats to the mother’s health; 26,000 Texas women, since that Trump abortion ban went into place in our state, have been forced to give birth to their rapist’s baby; infant and maternal mortality have spiked; pregnant women with life-threatening complications are being told to wait in emergency room parking lots until they go into sepsis.

So this has never been about life; this has always been about controlling women. In some Texas counties, Republican politicians are banning women from using public highways to travel out of state to get an abortion. Trump is saying that he’s going to let red states monitor women’s pregnancies. And if you look at the latest platform of the Texas GOP, it calls for the death penalty for women who get abortion care.

So this is not theoretical. This is happening on the ground in my state and in red states across the country. And so I hope I can be a canary in the coal mine for the rest of the country and urge my fellow Texans and my fellow Americans to avoid this path, because it only leads to death and despair.

And it is not just abortion, obviously. Book bans; forcing public school teachers to display the Ten Commandments; replacing school counselors with untrained, unsupervised religious chaplains; teaching Bible stories to elementary school students in public schools as historical fact—these are all the things that are going on in Texas, and the forces behind these dangerous policies are now promising to take them nationwide. They’re testing these ideas here in Texas before they take them across the country.

And so take it from a Texan that we have to do everything in our power to stop Project 2025 and the policies that will hurt Americans across our country if they’re implemented.

Gibbs Léger: So let’s talk a little more about schools. You’re a former teacher, and you’ve been very outspoken about the need to protect our schools from MAGA and Christian nationalist overreach. And you talked about schools being forced to display the Ten Commandments or teach Bible studies.

Why are extremists specifically targeting schools? And what are some lessons that you have learned from their efforts in Texas that can be extrapolated nationwide? Because I think sometimes people hear, “They want to display the Ten Commandments on school property—well what’s the problem with that? It’s just a display, what’s the big deal?” So I’d really love it if you could unpack that for our listeners.

Talarico: Yeah, and you said Bible studies earlier—that would be one thing. There are ways to teach the Bible in an academic context, in a public school setting, as long as you approach it from a scholarly academic perspective, and as long as you are allowing students to study the holy texts of other religious traditions, right?

I believe that public school students should learn about the great faith traditions of the world. It’s a critical part of engaging with other cultures, with entering into a global economy and being able to participate in a diverse democracy like we have here in Texas.

My problem is when you slip from teaching to preaching. And again, I know the difference because I am both a former public school teacher, and I’m also a current seminary student learning to become a minister. So I know that there is a difference between teaching and preaching. And [Gov.] Greg Abbott (R) and other Republicans here in Texas are fond of saying that schools are for education, not indoctrination. And I completely agree.

And my concern is that the way these Bible stories are being taught to very young students as historical fact—that becomes indoctrination. That no longer is education. And so we’ve got to be very mindful about how some of these policies chip away at our Constitution—particularly our First Amendment, which establishes a separation between church and state—and starts to chip away at the very foundations of our multicultural, multiracial democracy.

And I kind of—we were talking about being an elderly Millennial—I kind of came of age politically in the Bush years. And I remember after 9/11—9/11 happened when I was 12 years old, and it was a searing experience for me, as it was for so many young people during that time—and I remember in the wake of that tragedy the Bush administration starting to chip away at people’s right to privacy through things like the Patriot Act. Because folks were scared and wanted security.

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 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.

Gibbs Léger: “Cultural security”—I really love that expression. I think that sums it up very nicely about what they’re trying to do. So for my last question, I want to turn a little bit to politics. It’s been a lot of chatter over the years about Texas becoming possibly a purple state. And you’ve been deeply involved in driving democratic momentum there.

So with your unique perspective, how do you think folks are feeling right now? Is this a burst of enthusiasm and energy that we’re seeing in other parts of the country? Is that a reality on the ground in Texas? And what do you think all of this could mean for Texas’ political landscape in the future?

Talarico: Well I just said how important it is for us to follow the Constitution and follow our laws. And I am sitting having this conversation in my office in the state Capitol, and so I can’t advocate for any particular candidate. Happy to do that outside this building. But I will say—

Gibbs Léger: That’s OK, we don’t either.

Talarico: But I will say that as an elected official, I think the best color for our state is purple. And I actually think that’s the best color for any state, because when you have one-party rule—whether it’s the Republican Party, like we have here in Texas, or the Democratic Party, which you see in states like California—that tends to lead to extremism. It tends to lead to corruption and a lack of accountability.

I think our democracy functions best when politicians like me are forced to compete for everyone’s vote—when you’ve got to go out and earn it and appeal to people outside of your base, and when you feel the heat of the competition on the back of your neck. Every politician should be running scared all the time. If there are comfortable politicians in our country, then our democracy is not working as intended.

And so I am optimistic that we are seeing more competitive elections in Texas, which is a good thing for all of us—for Republicans, for independents, and for Democrats—because it leads to better government. And that should be our goal, right? No one should be just rooting for the red team or the blue team. Our goal should be better government and better policies for the people. And I think, in my six years of doing this now since I first ran, the best way to do that is to have competitive elections that fire people up and that keep citizens engaged in the process.

What I’ve seen is, if you have one-party rule, you tend to see participation decline because people don’t feel like there’s a need to go out and vote because their vote’s not going to matter. But when you have a hotly contested state like Georgia or Arizona, suddenly you see turnout at record numbers. And that’s a good thing for all of us who love this American democracy.

Gibbs Léger: Well I think that is a good note to end this interview on: that we want people to be engaged and to be paying attention to what their local elected officials are doing and get out there and vote. Rep. Talarico, thank you so much for joining us on “The Tent.”

Talarico: Thank you for having me.

[Musical transition]

Gibbs Léger: Well, that’s going to do it for us. Please go back and check out previous episodes. But before we go, boy, Colin, do we have to talk about “The Bachelorette.”

Seeberger: Daniella, we may need a whole special second episode this week because we have so much to discuss.

Gibbs Léger: So much! I mean, Jesse [Palmer] always says this is going to be the most dramatic “Bachelor” or “Bachelorette” finale ever. He wasn’t lying this time.

Seeberger: He sure wasn’t.

Gibbs Léger: I don’t even know where to begin.

Seeberger: Yeah, I mean, it wasn’t even—it’s funny because we’ve never seen a bachelorette propose to the person that she picks at the end here.

Gibbs Léger: Right.

Seeberger: That happened on this week’s episode, the finale. However, that is not even the meat of what we got to discuss here.

Gibbs Léger: Not at all. I mean, first of all—Jenn, if you’re listening, Jenn, I love you, and I’m so sorry. She came out looking amazing, by the way.

Seeberger: Yeah, she did.

Gibbs Léger: And we got to talk about Marcus for a quick second. I loved Marcus, but he’s just not emotionally ready to do this, and it was clear.

Seeberger: He’s not.

Gibbs Léger: He wanted to be there, but he couldn’t get there. She saw it. She sent him home, which I thought was the right thing to do—even though, to me, it seemed like she really liked him. Fine. She chose herself, right? Which is the right thing to do.

And so then she comes out, Marcus comes out, they have a conversation. It was all very fine and good, and then she stays. And then when Jesse set up the whole “she’s going to talk about what happened,” I leapt up in my seat. I was like, what’s happening?

Seeberger: What do you mean, what happened?

Gibbs Léger: Oh my goodness. She could barely make it out through explaining that Devin dumped her two months after they got engaged.

Seeberger: It was—

Gibbs Léger: Over the phone, Colin!

Seeberger: —heartbreaking, Daniella. I couldn’t believe it. And then Devin comes out, right? And he’s got no answers.

Gibbs Léger: None.

Seeberger: She’s like, “What do you mean you just stopped talking to me? What do you mean you just stopped returning my calls or my texts? You dumped me via a 15-minute phone call offering no reasons why things are quote-unquote ‘different’ after filming wrapped.” And yet then is off partying in New York City with Jeremy.

Gibbs Léger: With Jeremy. Jeremy’s like, “Why am I in it?”

Seeberger: I know, I know. Jeremy, we’re going to see you on “Paradise”—

Gibbs Léger: Yes, we are.

Seeberger: —I have a feeling. But the thing that just ticked me off more than anything was when they didn’t originally air the proposal before they had the conversation with Jenn and Devin. Sorry I had to do that: Devin.

Gibbs Léger: Devin.

Seeberger: But Jesse, after they had this really tense conversation where there clearly still are a lot of feels that are very raw, and Jenn could barely make it through—it’s so, so sad to watch—he’s then like, “How about we watch that proposal?”

Gibbs Léger: I was like, “What are you doing?”

Seeberger: How cruel.

Gibbs Léger: So cruel.

Seeberger: While she’s sitting there next to Devin.

Gibbs Léger: And they put a camera on her face and then showed her sobbing hysterically as they’re playing this back. Jail for all of them—the producers, for Jesse. How dare they do that to her?

Seeberger: Every last one of them.

Gibbs Léger: Oh, I was so mad. And—at least get Devin off the couch.

Seeberger: Right?

Gibbs Léger: I was so mad and so aggravated. I was literally the Tyra .gif of “we were all rooting for you.” Because I didn’t like Devin at first, and then he won me over.

Seeberger: Yeah.

Gibbs Léger: He’s such a liar—

Seeberger: He is.

Gibbs Léger: —and then he did that. I was like, oh my goodness. I can’t. Yeah.

Seeberger: Yeah.

Gibbs Léger: And then the fact he turned and immediately started following Maria on Instagram.

Seeberger: I could not when she said that.

Gibbs Léger: The audience couldn’t either.

Seeberger: No, they gasped, and then it was like dead silent.

Gibbs Léger: Yeah. I just—I feel like they did her dirty kind of this entire season. One, I thought the guys just weren’t up to par.

Seeberger: Not just that, but they also didn’t really seem in it.

Gibbs Léger: No. It was almost like everyone was expecting it to be Maria, and then it wasn’t.

Seeberger: Yeah. Like, they wanted somebody else, which is—

Gibbs Léger: It’s so unfair to her.

Seeberger: It’s awful.

Gibbs Léger: Yes. So like, don’t start casting until you land whoever the bachelor or bachelorette is, so that way you know that these people are there for the right reasons.

Seeberger: Yep.

Gibbs Léger: Right?

Seeberger: Go off, Daniella.

Gibbs Léger: Listen, I hate the fact that Sam “they’ll keep the main thing, the main thing” was right about Devin.

Seeberger: I mean, it pains me to say—

Gibbs Léger: He saw it.

Seeberger: —but as you tweeted during the finale, a broken clock is right twice a day.

Gibbs Léger: 100 percent. And that broken clock …

Seeberger: Woo!

Gibbs Léger: Piece of work. In maybe happier “Bachelorette” news, “The Golden Bachelorette” does start in two weeks.

Seeberger: I’m very excited. I am a Maryland resident now,

Gibbs Léger: Oh, yes.

Seeberger: —so we’ve got local Rockville native.

Gibbs Léger: Oh, she’s from Rockville?

Seeberger: Yeah.

Gibbs Léger: Oh, OK.

Seeberger: Yeah.

Gibbs Léger: Oh, wow. Let me go see some sightings. Did you think it was interesting that Kelsey’s dad was like sitting kind of right in front of her in the audience?

Seeberger: I did. And also, I’m not going to lie, I think Kelsey’s dad is so cute and charming, seems fun, good energy. And also she is, too. So like, I’m not surprised. So I feel like he’s maybe going to do OK.

Gibbs Léger: I think so. I’m definitely team Kelsey’s dad. But I have to say: now, Joan’s men? I was like, “all right, now this is a good group of men right here.”

Seeberger: Yeah, they seem solid and good-looking guys that have hobbies and things they actually may want to talk about—

Gibbs Léger: Exactly.

Seeberger: —and their own stories. That’s what I love about the goldens, right?

Gibbs Léger: Exactly, they’ve lived life.

Seeberger: They actually have some experience. Yeah, exactly.

Gibbs Léger: Not like these people who are like, “I’m 23, and I’ve never been in love.” It’s like, OK. Anyway. All right.

Seeberger: OK.

Gibbs Léger: We’re going to end on that positive note of looking forward to “The Golden Bachelorette.”

Seeberger: Yes.

Gibbs Léger: And we’ll be back next week talking about football.

Seeberger: That we will.

Gibbs Léger: We most certainly will, Colin.

Seeberger: Ready for the Cowboys.

Gibbs Léger: No, we’re not.

Seeberger: Yes, we are.

Gibbs Léger: No, we aren’t. Anyway, that’s it for us. Y’all take care of yourselves, and we’ll talk to you next week.

“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. You can find us on YouTube, Apple, Spotify, Google Play, or wherever you get your podcasts.

The positions of American Progress, and our policy experts, are independent, and the findings and conclusions presented are those of American Progress alone. A full list of supporters is available here. American Progress would like to acknowledge the many generous supporters who make our work possible.

Producers

Daniella Gibbs Léger

Executive Vice President, Communications and Strategy

@dgibber123

Colin Seeberger

Senior Adviser, Communications

Kelly McCoy

Senior Director of Broadcast Communications

Erin Phillips

Broadcast Media Manager

Mishka Espey

Senior Manager, Media Relations

Muggs Leone

Executive Assistant

Video producers

Hai-Lam Phan

Senior Director, Creative

Matthew Gossage

Events Video Producer

Olivia Mowry

Video Producer

Toni Pandolfo

Video Producer, Production

Department

Communications

Explore The Series

Politics. Policy. Progress. All under one big tent. Produced by CAP Action, “The Tent” is a news and politics podcast hosted by Daniella Gibbs Léger and co-hosted by Colin Seeberger. Listen each Thursday for episodes exploring topics that progressives are focused on.

Previous
Next

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.