Speaker 1: Today, we're going to be speaking with former Republican congressman from Illinois,
Joe Walsh, former presidential candidate, host of the new podcast White Flag with Joe
Walsh.
Really appreciate your time.
Speaker 4: Hey David, I've been a fan of yours.
It's good to be on with you, man.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
So OK.
I mean, so to start to give the audience some sense.
I mean, in the Tea Party era, you were not just a Republican.
You were sort of like a leading voice in the Tea Party movement, strong opponent of Barack
Obama.
And then at some point during the Trump era, things things started to change for you.
Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah.
That's a that's a gentle way of putting it, David.
You're right.
Look, I was a tea party guy, a big tea party leader.
You would have called me a crazy tea party back in the day.
Yes.
And you and I could have had some interesting debates and fights about the Tea Party.
But generally it was about issues.
And then Trump came along, and now the Republican Party, the party I belong to my whole life
is basically an anti-democratic cult.
And I didn't want to belong to a cult.
It doesn't matter where you stand on the issues.
It's always been the issues that drove me.
I don't recognize this party anymore.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
And what's interesting about that is when I chart the path to Donald Trump of the Republican
Party.
The Tea Party, in my mind, was a big piece of that.
In other words, you now say, Well, the Tea Party made sense to me, but Trump doesn't.
But if we go back to the civil rights era and then Reagan Gingrich in '94, but the way
I've seen it is, all of this has been a move by the Republican Party away from substance
and towards cultural issues and being anti-democratic.
And it's interesting that I mean, do you agree that the Tea Party in a way set the stage
for Trump?
Speaker 4: Absolutely.
Oh, you do.
Yeah.
No, you're spot on.
And in fact, I've publicly apologized for helping bring you and I and the whole country
Trump.
What I did helped bring Trump.
I look at it like this, David.
The the Republican Party base is mostly middle aged, older white people.
And for years and years, the party establishment ignored them and their concerns.
And then Tea Party people like me came along and inflamed them and riled them up.
And then by the time Trump came along in 16, they were primed baby to be captivated by
a cult show to be captivated by a demagog.
So I led to Trump.
I think the Republican Party establishment did as well.
Speaker 1: When did you?
OK, so when Trump started to run?
What was your initial thought and how did that evolve over time?
Speaker 4: David, I screwed up.
I didn't pay enough attention to him when Trump started running in 15 and 16.
I was on the radio, you know, right wing talk radio, two hundred stations around the country,
but I never paid enough attention to him.
I didn't take him seriously.
I voted for him in 16 because he wasn't Hillary.
I figured he's just a goof.
And maybe he'll play golf for four years and nothing will happen.
I thought, Excuse me, I messed up David.
I messed up.
Once he got elected, I started to pay attention to him and I realized every time he opened
his mouth, he told a lie.
I couldn't live with that.
And then I began to see and really see all the uglier things he did.
My final straw, David, was Helsinki in the summer of 2018, when he stood on that stage
and said, I'm with Putin and not the Americans.
That was the greatest act of disloyalty I've ever heard.
I went on the radio that night and said, I'm going to do everything I can to make sure
he's not reelected.
I began to lose, then my radio show and everything shortly thereafter.
Speaker 1: So here's one of the things I'm interested in because we earlier this week
we were reading about Republicans holding closed door meetings to try to figure out
how can we get Trump's grip on the party loosened and all of these things.
I've seen no evidence that those folks are actually against the authoritarianism of Trump,
it seems.
They just don't like Trump at the head, but that they're sort of OK with the authoritarianism
that has been ushered in by Trump.
Where are you on that issue?
Like, is the problem just Trump?
Or is it the Trump ism that I mean, like DeSantis to me, seems like it's the same sort of mold,
for example.
Speaker 4: David, you and I agree, man, I totally agree.
Look, it Trump has metastasized.
He unleashed it.
It is now Trumpism.
If Trump went away tomorrow, it'll be a dis Santas or somebody like that who will who.
It's a party now that has embraced authoritarianism, that is this Republican Party.
I don't want to be a part of that, so anybody who stands against that no longer has a place
in this party.
Speaker 1: So like when you I mean, in figuring out your politics now, when you look at Joe
Biden, for example, like just to pick taxes, I don't know to pick something right?
Joe Biden wants the top tax rate to go up a couple points.
And there are some on the right who want like a 25 percent top tax rate or whatever when
you see the Trump and Biden differences on taxes like on that policy issue.
Where would you like to see the top tax rate?
Speaker 4: Well, I probably don't support either one.
You know, Trump's tax reform piece of legislation that he passed right away, I thought, was
a lousy piece of legislation because it did lower taxes for wealthier Americans.
David, I generally support the notion of a flat tax.
You do simplifying the tax code?
Yes, simplifying the tax code so that wealthier Americans who got all the accountants and
the lawyers.
I think most studies I've read, if you simplify the code, wealthy people actually pay more.
I prefer a route like that that I don't think Biden or Trump support.
Speaker 1: Well, I think so.
OK?
If you figure out the effective tax that's being paid by the very rich and then you set
the flat tax above that and you say not only is this the flat tax, it's also the minimum
tax so that you can't loophole and deduct your way out of it.
You could have a situation where the very rich do pay more.
I think the problem people would have then is somebody making $40000 a year is paying
the same rate.
Would you to dig a little deeper on this?
Have some threshold below which you pay no federal tax?
Or how do you deal with the regressive nature of it?
Speaker 4: I think there's always going to be some threshold where people at a certain
level don't pay taxes.
I do believe, but I do believe generally David and you and I might disagree on this.
The notion of progressivity in a tax rate.
I generally oppose really.
I generally, yeah, I generally believe just a flat rate.
And and the more money you make, you're going to pay more because you're making more money.
But I don't believe you should have a higher rate.
But David, what's fascinating to me is.
I can't remember having this discussion in the last five years.
All right.
Like, like actually talking about a substantive policy issue, the Republican Party doesn't
talk about stuff like this anymore.
Speaker 1: So to that end, why would they start going back to issues if it's not clear
they need to to win races right?
And you know, you look at like the Glenn Youngkin victory in Virginia.
The only thing approximating policy was that he would stop the teaching of critical race
theory, which was not being taught.
So if they can win on that stuff, what's the incentive to get back to policy?
Speaker 4: They have none, right, David, which is why I believe and I get into this debate
with some of my fellow former Republicans who think this party can be saved.
I don't think it can.
But I also believe, David, that I do believe the Republican Party is a dying national party,
which might sound oxymoronic right now because they'll probably take back the house next
year.
Yeah, but it's becoming a strong rural regional party.
I think it stays as a national party are dying.
Speaker 1: Is there a national Republican right now that you say that this is someone
kind of like in my, this is someone who thinks sort of like me, like maybe Mitt Romney?
Or is there anybody right now that you see and you say, that's who I would like to see
the future of the party be?
Speaker 4: Well, you know, it's odd, David.
I'm not.
I'm not a moderate and no one would ever call me a moderate.
But generally the only national non Trump Republicans are moderates like a Romney.
Mm hmm.
But there's no way on God's green earth Mitt Romney or anybody like that could get a nomination
in this in this party.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
So I guess then the question becomes what happens in in 2024?
And I think there's two questions if the question is who has the best shot of winning?
I don't think it's anybody you would actually like to see representing the party.
If the question is what's what would be best for the party and the country?
I think you're right.
There doesn't really seem to be an interest in that type of Republican right now among
the Republican voters.
Speaker 4: Look, David, never Trump to me, and I'm a never Trumper, never Trump to me
means never him and never anybody, any Republican who supported him after four years of his
presidency.
So I can never support any Republican who voted for Trump in twenty four.
That's DeSantis.
That's Pence.
That's Cruz, any of them.
Now, not every Never Trumper is where I am, but generally, look, David, I think if Trump
runs in twenty four, the nomination is his nobody challenges it.
Now, if he doesn't run, you've got to be the most Trump person you can be to win that nomination
Speaker 1: at this point.
On social issues for a for a while, the Republic, the most conservative elements of the Republican
Party, including the Tea Party, made a big deal out of We're against gay marriage, for
example.
Abortion played a big role.
You know, a lot of these kind of social issues.
To some degree, some of these issues are settled.
Gay marriage, for example, is settled and you just don't hear much more about it from
from Republicans.
There's renewed interest on abortion now because of what's going on for for the Supreme Court.
Where are you on those social issues and do you think it's to the advantage of Republicans
to run on them?
Or it's better to not even talk about those issues?
Speaker 4: Yeah, it's probably an advantage because that's where their base is.
I'd quibble with you on one thing, David.
When it comes to the Tea Party and the base of the Republican Party, I've always thought
there were two strands to the Tea Party.
One was the anti debt anti, you know, fiscal keep your fiscal house in order at Strand,
but there was an uglier social issue.
Nationalist populists, bigoted strand as well.
And the Republicans, when it comes to issues right now, that's the only game they play
is this culture war stuff, and that's all they're going to talk about and run on.
I over the years, if I've evolved or changed at all, David, I've probably become more proudly
woke.
I'm generally more libertarian in my leanings.
I always have been more live and let live, but that's not where the Republican base is.
They're socially very conservative.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
And along those lines, what is your assessment of the so you've got the voters who when they're
surveyed Republican voters around 55 percent right now want Trump to run again, which is
still more than half, but it's lower than it was a year ago.
Some similar number believes that Trump was actually the winner in November of 2020, and
one of the things we've talked about is like, Do they really believe this stuff or do they
see it as what you have to say to be part of the club on the elected officials, like
the senators and the members of the House?
Do you think they believe the Big Lie stuff or that they similarly realized they have
to say it to stay on Trump's team?
Speaker 4: A David, I talked to hundreds, sometimes thousands of Republican voters every
day.
The vast majority of them believe this stuff OK.
When it comes to my former colleagues in Congress, most don't.
Oh, interesting.
You've got a small group of the crazies.
Jim Jordan, Marjorie Taylor Greene and Paul Gosar.
They believe this stuff.
But the biggest, most dangerous piece of the Republican Party elected official base is
all of those my former colleagues who know it's all B.S., but they keep their mouths
shut.
That's the biggest part of the elected officials.
Speaker 1: Do you think that if it looks like Trump's gone in twenty four, they immediately
abandoned even the premise that they might believe this stuff?
Is it just for self-preservation or are they going to keep going?
Speaker 4: No, because it's always been about the base.
These guys, privately, David, have never been afraid of Trump.
Right when I primaried Trump, they would call me privately and say, I love what you're saying
about him there.
They knew that Trump.
They know that Trump has a lot.
I can the base.
So they've always been afraid of the voters.
They don't want to lose those voters.
So again, if Trump's gone tomorrow, DeSantis or somebody is going to get them and these
Republicans are generally cowards.
They sold their soul and it will stay that way beyond Trump.
Speaker 1: There's this phenomena we've been seeing along these lines of saying one thing
and believing another where in the last, I'd say, a year and a half or, you know, we could
even say, like when Trump was banned from Twitter, it became visible.
There's the stated principle from some of these folks like, for example, businesses
basically should be as unregulated as possible.
Let them do what they want as long as it's not illegal.
And once the real world becomes inconvenient to the principle, they say, Oh, we've got
to regulate Twitter all of it.
We need government to tell Twitter exactly who they have.
We need to force Twitter to allow these views, etc..
How concerned are you about the ease with which the principles are abandoned when the
outcome is inconvenient?
Speaker 4: David Extremely.
And it's it's it's been the most disappointing aspect of the this Republican Party, not just
the abandonment of principles, but the embrace of authoritarianism of fascism to actually
use the power of government to shut down voices that you don't agree with.
Look at that crap that DeSantis is doing down in Florida.
Yeah.
Get rid of anything taught about race in schools that makes people uncomfortable having the
government do that.
And we're seeing some of the same Republicans in other states who want to shut down speech
about LGBTQ issues that make them uncomfortable.
This this embrace of I want a dictator to shut up people who I disagree with.
That's this party now.
I find it frightening.
Speaker 1: If you ran again, would you run independent?
I mean, it seems like there's basically no home in the Republican Party.
It doesn't sound like you really have an interest in being a Democrat.
Speaker 4: David, here's the truth.
I realize two or three years ago, I have no home in this party.
Adam Kinzinger and I are really good friends.
Adam Kinzinger knows privately he has no home in this party.
What do I do?
I could become a Democrat, but between you and I. I don't know that the Democrats would
want to sack me.
I don't know that I would fit there.
I think what's going to happen is temporarily, people like me are going to be political independents.
I do believe, David, that within eight years there's going to be a new major political
party occupying the middle.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, because when you look at some of your positions and if these
are out of date, then you know, we can correct them.
But a lot of these things, you're against the death penalty.
As far as I know, yes, you're for the legalization of marijuana.
You've come around on the science, on climate change.
Yes, on on immigration, I guess.
Where are you on immigration at this point?
Speaker 4: I've always been supportive of the party and opposed in that.
I'm a huge hawk when it comes to illegal immigration, but I'm a huge embracer of expanding legal
immigrants coming in.
I don't know where that puts me.
Speaker 1: What an Undark are the people that were brought here as minors.
Speaker 4: We got to find a permanent solution.
Speaker 1: Right?
Yeah.
I mean, it's like it seems my audience might go crazy.
But in talking to you, it sort of sounds like there's not that much difference between you
and a moderate centrist Democrat at this point.
Speaker 4: Well, that's interesting, David in today's Republican Party is very anti-illegal
immigration as well.
Yeah.
So I don't fit there.
I'm very pro-gun.
I am pro-life, right?
I'm very I can fiscally.
I'm very conservative and almost libertarian on
Speaker 1: social safety net.
I mean, I know in the past you, you were very you.
At one point, I think you said, there's no there's no nothing in the Constitution that
points to having any kind of social safety net.
Have you moderated at all on that?
Speaker 4: Well, I agree.
Yeah, no, that's still true.
But I still acknowledge that government needs to play a role to help those who can't help
themselves.
And I would argue over the years, we've expanded that social safety net to the point where
we're not helping the people who really need help.
Speaker 1: So you're not against having it, but you want it to function, meet its goals
in a better way, I guess.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I want it to be more limited to like like free college for everybody.
No free college for people who absolutely can't afford it.
Sure.
Every every government program I want very targeted.
We tend to expand these programs to include everybody.
Speaker 1: Got it.
Got it.
Well, listen, it's going to be very interesting in nine months to see whether your version
of Republicanism is at all welcomed by voters.
And of course, what candidates there are to choose from will be a big part of that.
But I'm as interested as you are in seeing what happens.
Speaker 4: I think.
No, I agree, David.
I don't think there's room in the Republican Party for people like me anymore.
I think the Democrats have a great opportunity and there's a political realignment going
on.
The party can grow if they take people from the center, right, all the way to progressives
because the Republican Party is shrinking.
Speaker 1: Right, right.
A former Republican congressman, Joe Walsh, thank you so much for your time.
I really appreciate it.
Speaker 4: Hey, David, it's been an honor.
Thank you, sir.