Friday mailbag!
It's book week.
My book — “Power Players: Sports, Politics and the American Presidency” — came out this week!
It’s been a CRAZY few days — between doing radio and TV hits to promote it and relentlessly checking to see where the book ranks on Amazon.1 We got up to #271 on Thursday!
Which is amazing! Did I mention you can buy the book right here? It’s a great gift for the political or sports junkie in your life!
I am still doing a bunch of publicity today and over the new few days so I will be writing slightly less in this space.
But if it’s Friday, that means it’s time for a mailbag post — where I answer your questions. And I never miss a mailbag day!
Let’s get to it!
Q: The media and “civilians” are trying to make sense of the Fox/Dominion deal.
I was not surprised at all, having worked in institutional investment field. The fact that Dominion is dominated by a hedge fund company made it apparent to me that there was always going to be a deal before the trial went too far into witness phase.
That said, Chris, do you think there will be any far reaching changes in the media landscape and the attitudes of the deeply divided country as a result of this legal agreement?
A: Hmmm. I wish I could say “yes” but I am skeptical. While the $787 million settlement is a massive chunk of money, it’s less than half of what Dominion was asking for. And Fox can pay it without worrying about going bankrupt; the company made $1.5 billion in 2022 alone.
Is it possible that the Dominion suit — and settlement — keeps Fox from pushing some of its most extreme personalities like Maria Bartiromo and Lou Dobbs. Or more closely monitors what they say to avoid future lawsuit like this one?
Sure — on both fronts. but, Fox isn’t going to change its stripes because of the lawsuit. The business model just works too well for them to do that.
Q: Two questions (feel free to answer either!):
1) To me, and after seeing Fox News’ statement, it almost feels like Fox still won, even though it’s paying almost $790 million. Do you get that sense as well?
2) Who do you like in the Stanley Cup playoffs?
A: Look, I think the financial penalty Fox paid is real and significant. But, Fox is also a ratings and money making machine so they will make that money — and then some — in the coming years.
I think what FNC really wanted to avoid was Tucker Carlson or Sean Hannity reading a public apology admitting that their coverage of the 2020 election and its aftermath was fundamentally dishonest.
And they avoided that. So, yeah, I think that is a win for them.
As for the NHL playoffs, I’ll pick the same team I pick every year: The Hartford Whalers
Q: Regarding GOP's electoral dangers regarding its support for abortion rights. The percentages of support for gun control are far larger than the support for abortion rights. The GOP continues to go against the considerable grain on gun control and rarely pays the price for it at the polls. With more mass shootings than days in the year, how is it the GOP isn't losing elections for its blind support for guns? Why should supporting an unpopular position on abortion change their strategy? Are Republican playing the long game here?
A: It’s a really good question.
There are elements within both party bases for who guns — and gun control — is the central issue. That’s long been the case for Republicans who have always had hardcore 2nd Amendment defenders in their ranks. The rise in mass shootings — especially at schools — have now created a pocket within the Democratic base for whom guns is the sole issue on which they vote.
BUT, for the independent and swing voters, guns are not a top of mind issue when they head into the ballot box. That’s not to say people don;’t CARE about guns — or, as you. note, there aren’t strong majorities that support some gun control measures. There are! But, the political reality is that for the persuadable voter, guns isn’t an issue that moves the needle. They’d rather there be more strict gun laws but they aren’t going to punish politicians who disagree with them.
Q: With George Santos’ announcement of his re-election campaign, I thought I’d pose this question to you:
In your opinion, which of the following is most likely to occur?
1) George Santos wins the GOP nomination in 2024 AND wins re-election to his seat for 2024
2) The Washington Nationals OR Oakland A’s win the 2023 World Series
3) Trump suddenly sees the error of his ways and runs a “Mr. Nice Guy” 2024 campaign
4) Fox News decides they’ve been remarkably unfair to President Biden and switch to glowingly positive coverage of him moving forward
A: In order of likelihood — from most to least:
1, 4, 2, 3
HA!
I don’t think any of these things will happen — including Santos returning to Congress in 2025. But, given what’s happened in the last 8 years in politics — and by that I mean the election of Trump and his likely renomination in 2024 — I simply can’t rule out the possibility that Santos wins again. I’d give it a 5% chance but that’s still a chance.
Q: Can you talk about the writing process- the book was announced in summer 2020, you mentioned you finished writing it in fall 2022 and it's just coming out- as someone who often writes multiple columns a day, was it frustrating having to adjust to the snail's pace of a book?
A: YES!
So, we initially announced the book in August 2020. I began doing the research and reporting for it in the 2nd half of 2021 and the writing in January 2022.
My editor gave me a really good piece of advice when faced with the decidedly-daunting task of writing between 60,000-80-,000 words — write a little bit every day.
So, I wrote 500 words every single day — no matter what. I would write snippets of various presidents and chapters, not worrying too much about how it cohered.
Then in the summer of 2022, I really dialed in and spent 6-8 hours a day writing and linking all the smaller segments I had previously done together. It actually wasn’t bad!
As for the pace, yeah, it was sloooow. But, I have to admit it is really cool to have a physical copy of the book now. It feels like a major accomplishment. I am really proud!
Q: Which sports connection and President that you write about, (something about you having a new book out?) surprised you the most?
A: I think the one that both surprised me the most and was the most illuminating about who a president was and how he governed was Richard Nixon and his fascination with bowling.
Nixon had lanes installed in the White House. At around 10 pm many nights, he would head over to the lanes and bowl — by his own admission — between 7 and 12 games. By himself! (Nixon got to be a pretty good bowlers by the time he was done; he once rolled a game in the 230s.)
That image of Nixon literally bowling alone says so much to me about him as president — isolated, socially awkward and preferring his own company to anyone else’s.
Q: Who is advising Dianne Feinstein? I don't understand why replacing her is so difficult, even temporarily. She is hurting the party right? Although all of this discussion is making me want an age limit to serve in Congress. I know THAT will never happen.
A: I think Dianne Feinstein is basically advising herself at this point. I think her absence — she hasn’t been in Washington in more than 2 months — is making it harder for Democrats to do what they want to do in DC, especially on judges.
The Senate Judiciary Committee, without Feinstein there to vote, is split 10-10 along partisan lines. So when the committee holds votes on judges, the split is always 10-10 — which means, in a committee setting, that the vote fails.
Replacing her temporarily on the Judiciary Committee is harder than you might think. To add a senator to a committee requires 60 votes on the Senate floor — meaning that Republicans would have to go along with it. And they have shown ZERO interest in helping Democrats push through their preferred liberal judges.
As for an age limit, I agree with you — not happening.
Q: Do you think the US will really default on its debt? Or is it all just a strategy and there's no way McCarthy will actually allow that to happen given the consequences?
A: See above. I just don’t rule ANYTHING out — especially when it comes to what the modern GOP will or won’t do.
At the moment, we are at a standoff. Joe Biden says he won’t even consider anything other than a clean debt ceiling increase with no other strings attached. McCarthy just unveiled a series of cuts that he says will be necessary to get Republicans to vote for the debt ceiling increase.
Who blinks first? I genuinely don’t know. Both sides are pretty dug in. And that suggest a default is at least a possibility.
Q: How do you see Disney vs. DeSantis playing out? Any predictions?
A: I think DeSantis had a bad week in the Disney fight. (As I wrote, he had a bad week overall too.)
His threats to open a rival amusement park funded by the state or to put a prison next to Disney World — as ways to punish Disney — felt petty and deeply personal.
I thought DeSantis was on solid ground — for his political prospects — when he made the Disney fight about “woke” companies and the penalties they would pay for their views in Florida.
But, of late, it just feels like he is looking for ways to get Disney because they dare to challenge him, which is a much less effective look for the governor.
I honestly don’t know where this all ends up. But I do know that Disney brings massive amounts of money into the Florida economy — and picking an extended fight with them might not be in the interest of Floridians, even if it is in Desantis’ political interests.
Relentlessly. The struggle is real.
Love the Whalers pick
Credit where it's due - nice meme and Dumb and Dumber reference!