Search for a command to run...

Timestamps are as accurate as they can be but may be slightly off. We encourage you to listen to the full context.
In this revealing episode of Raging Moderates, Scott Galloway and Jessica Tarlov dissect a particularly chaotic day in MAGA world and explore the broader implications for American politics. (04:06) The hosts begin by analyzing the strange events that unfolded when Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene abruptly resigned after Trump branded her a "traitor," while simultaneously Trump was praising New York City mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani - whom he had previously called a "communist lunatic." (05:26) This paradox, combined with a federal judge throwing out indictments against James Comey due to prosecutorial incompetence, reveals the deeper tensions within Trump's movement and the broader American political landscape.
Scott Galloway is a bestselling author, entrepreneur, and clinical professor of marketing at NYU Stern School of Business. He's the founder of multiple companies including Red Envelope and L2, and is known for his sharp economic analysis and predictions about technology and business trends.
Jessica Tarlov is a political strategist and co-host of Fox News' "The Five." She holds a PhD in Political Science from the London School of Economics and regularly provides Democratic perspectives on major news networks, known for her data-driven political analysis.
The episode reveals how economic frustration is creating unexpected political alliances, as demonstrated by Trump's meeting with democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani. (05:35) Both politicians bonded over affordability concerns and positioning themselves as political outsiders working for regular Americans rather than the establishment. This suggests that traditional ideological boundaries are weakening when faced with voters' immediate economic concerns. As Galloway notes, the stark wealth inequality in America - where elite private schools spend $75,000 per student compared to $15,000 in average public schools - creates conditions where economic messaging resonates more than partisan talking points.
Galloway argues that Democrats make a critical error by promising direct cash payments rather than addressing structural economic problems. (10:22) He advocates for breaking up monopolistic companies, eliminating tariffs, and creating genuine market competition to naturally drive down prices. Using the example that 88% of Christmas toys come from China, he suggests removing tariffs would immediately reduce costs for families. The key insight is that voters don't want handouts - they want fair opportunities to succeed through their own efforts in a competitive marketplace.
The dismissal of cases against James Comey due to prosecutorial incompetence illustrates how administrative failures undermine political objectives. (34:54) Galloway emphasizes that America's global reputation depends on being seen as competent and ethical, not just powerful. When basic legal procedures fail - like ensuring prosecutors have valid appointments - it signals broader institutional weakness that affects everything from foreign policy to domestic confidence. This incompetence becomes particularly dangerous when dealing with complex international negotiations or economic policy.
The discussion of airline civility campaigns highlights how inadequate infrastructure creates social friction. (53:00) Rather than asking passengers to be more polite, Galloway suggests that investing in high-speed rail and improving transportation infrastructure would naturally reduce stress and conflict. He points to European train systems as examples of how comfortable, efficient transportation reduces cortisol levels and social tension. The underlying principle is that when basic systems work well, people behave better - addressing root causes rather than symptoms.
Tarlov discusses the emergence of a "Fight Club" group among Democratic senators who are pushing back against establishment approaches. (13:24) This group, including Chris Van Hollen, Chris Murphy, and others, advocates for candidates willing to challenge corporate interests directly. The key insight is that voters respond to politicians who seem genuinely willing to fight for them against powerful interests, rather than those who appear to be defending the status quo or making incremental changes.