MALE_1: [MUSIC] Welcome to Dialogue Across Difference. An event series hosted by the Center for the Study of politics and governance at the University of Minnesota's Humphrey School of Public Affairs. Join us as center director, Larry Jacobs and guests engage in conversations across the political and policy spectrum on issues of the day. Larry Jacobs: I'm Larry Jacobs. I'm the director for the Center for the Study of Politics and governance at the University of Minnesota's Humphrey School of Public Affairs. Today's event is the first of our new look and the name a new name for our public events series. Since April 2020, more than 100,000 people have tuned in or watched the YouTube or followed our podcast. It's a lot of folks. We're taking the opportunity to come up with this new name, Dialogue Across Difference, which captures our mission. Our mission is to bring multiple perspectives on the key issues of the day and to create an opportunity to have a conversation, to learn, and listen across our differences. That's what we're all about, and I'm really excited for today's conversation because it fits perfectly. Welcome, and thank you for joining today's program. Are you ready for the 2022 elections? Our guest today, Rebecca Pearcey, who is vice president at the political consulting firm Bryson and Gillette. Miss Pearcey is involved in 29 Senate House and gubernatorial elections on the upcoming election season. She has steered hundreds of campaigns and was the political director and senior advisor for Senator Elizabeth Warren's presidential campaign. We're also joined by Kirsten Kukowski, who's president of K2 and Company. This is 100% owned business by women that's operated in the Twin Cities. Previously, Miss Kukowski spent five years the National Press Secretary for the Republican National Committee. She was communications director for Governor Scott Walker's presidential campaign and was the communications director for the 2016 Republican National Convention in Cleveland. Thanks to both of you for joining us. Let's just start off because there may be some people wondering, really, 2022, aren't we just seven or eight months after the really raucous the 20 election back in November? Why does the strategy and thinking about the 2022 election matter now? Miss Kukowski, do you want to start us off? Kirsten Kukowski: Sure. I know it sounds silly to be talking about politics, and I know that when the promotion for this event started to come out, I was asked the same question. The reality is, I know that some of us live and breathe politics all day long, 24/7, 365. But the reality is, right now, it's very important in terms of how people in Washington and frankly, people in St. Paul are thinking about getting things done, whether in a bipartisan fashion or not, because it all relates to the midterm elections next year. Things like the infrastructure bill in Washington DC, very important calculus happening right now with Mitch McConnell coming out in support for the infrastructure bill while many people in his caucus not wanting to give President Biden a win. I look at those very key things and just how people are calculating their moves even today as it pertains to next November. Larry Jacobs: Miss Pearcey, can you give us some specific examples of how Democrats and Congress are factoring in 2022, as they're plotting and voting in Washington now? Rebecca Pearcey: Sure, well, I first want to echo Kiers, and it's only 464 days until election day 2022. With early votes starting earlier and earlier in lots of these states, I do think it's time for us in August of 2021 to start thinking about what will happen in 2022. For Democrats, it's incredibly important for us to put forth an agenda that our incumbents can vote on and take back to their districts. They're talking a lot about, like Kirsten said, the infrastructure package. They're talking a lot about the $300 child tax credit that is going to parents at a certain income level, and working closely with the Biden administration to make sure that folks know that this Democratic trifecta in Washington is delivering for American families up and down. It's everywhere. It's not just in blue states or red states, but it's happening all across the country. Larry Jacobs: When we read and see progressives really pushing the case for even more, and you hear even Democrats saying, Whoa, this is you're going too far. Is that partly because the progressives are thinking, it's now or maybe not for years. We've got to get this program in because the likelihood of our power weakening after 2022 is quite significant. Rebecca Pearcey: I don't know if I would say that the power of the party would be weakening, but I think we all know that the realities of a Democratic or Republican trifecta here in Washington is really unlikely. I think it's important for Democrats as a whole, to recognize this opportunity to deliver for our constituents on an agenda that we all can agree on. Larry Jacobs: There's also been pressure, even quite open public pressure on Supreme Court Justice Breyer to step down, retire. It's partly this, well, trifecta, but in this case, the president and the Senate being controlled by Democrats. Is that another reflection of this anticipation of what might happen in the fall of 2022? Rebecca Pearcey: I think, look, Democrats are scarred from the Trump administration's unwillingness to seat a ninth Supreme Court justice in the case of Merrick Garland and then pushing through Kavanaugh and Any Coty Barrett. I think that it's well founded fear, I guess you could call it, but it's also, I think, more progressive and less pragmatic Democrats that are calling for this push for Breyer to step down at this point. Larry Jacobs: But they are anticipating that come November 2022, they may not have the power they have now. Rebecca Pearcey: Sure, there's always a chance. Larry Jacobs: Miss Kukowski, I'm curious if you see Democrats because of this anticipation of the fall of 2022 elections, maybe not going well for them and the odds of that setting themselves up for a trap, whereas they need to get as much as they can now. But as they do that, does that create an opportunity for Republicans who are going to portray Democrats as socialist or overreaching? Kirsten Kukowski: I think that's always a risk, frankly, on either side of the aisle, and I think that Nancy Pelosi is very good at managing that, and she has a very tough job on her hands between now and the next midterms, because I think you see I think there was a tweet from AOC the other day directly at Senator Cinema about just getting the infrastructure bill done and some other progressive things. I think that that tug is very real, and it's something that you're going to see discussed very often. You obviously also have the reality that a Supreme Court fight or nomination is a very good thing for both partisan bases. If you're Democrats looking toward the midterm elections in 2022, and there's a chance that you could have a nominee, that's a very interesting base motivation issue for them. Republicans right now, and you do see this historically, the party that loses the White House two years later, generally, the motivation is on their side. Republicans, I'd say, you know, for a lot of different reasons, the makeup of the house and where the seats are that they currently have. But also just that motivation piece, I think, right now, if the election were today, I think most people predict that you would go towards the Republicans. Anyway, back to your question, yes, I think that there is risk of overreach, and I think that is something that you're going to see Nancy Pelosi really monitor very closely. Larry Jacobs: She's going to be monitoring that because, of course, her majority rests on a relatively small number of seats that are not bright blue. These are hard fought seats and areas where swing voters are really going to matter and possibly an election that doesn't really favor Democrats. Is that what you mean? Kirsten Kukowski: I think there's probably seven or so Trump congressional districts where former President Trump won those districts even last election, and there's Democrats sitting in those seats. One of them is just across the river in Wisconsin. Ron Kind has been in Congress for decades and is one of the top targets, and he has a rematch again this time around. I think when you're Nancy Pelosi and you see that map, I think that that's where you have a little bit of heartburn when you have your progressive side of the party pulling one direction, and you have Ron Kind sitting in a seat that is very likely to go Republican this time around. Larry Jacobs: Miss Pearcey, do you see the Democrats as split between these two factions, progressives, AOC sitting in an ultra safe district in the heart of New York City versus the Democrats like Ron Kind who are really going to be vulnerable, they're going to be targeted, and they could well lose in 2022. Is that define the split in the Democratic Party? Rebecca Pearcey: I think it's less of a split and more of a difference, and here's why. I think that Democrats get to rally around the Biden agenda, no matter if you're a socialist Democrat or if you're a very more conservative Democrat or a blue dog Democrat, as we like to call them, like a Ron Kind, or somebody that's in a probably more, let's say, bluer, purple, reddish kind of a district, like a Wisconsin seat like his. I think that the difference between Republicans and Democrats on those splits are pretty significant in that there are still Trump-ish Republicans who are not jumping on board with any of the programs that are being given out as economic recovery programs due to COVID. Then there are Republicans that are embracing them. In my mind, there's more of a split between the Republican Party and the wings there than there is in the Democratic Party. Only in that we are all aligned message wise on what's happening and what we're able to bring back to our constituents. Larry Jacobs: Miss Kukowski, it's true that the Democrats are talked about in terms of the splits and the tensions and AOC is a very popular source of CNN coverage and Fox, too, because she tends to be a flashpoint. But do you see these tensions within the Republican Party as you look at it between those who are just reading some focus groups with Trump supporters who are now benefiting from Obama Care. They say things like, Well, I'm really sorry, but I had cancer, and I really needed the Affordable Care Act to help pay the bills, versus those who are ready to jump on a bonfire for Donald Trump and follow his work. Is that a real tension? Kirsten Kukowski: Yeah, I think it's definitely a real tension in the party. I think you still have the dynamic where you have the tried-and-true Trump Republicans. Then I think you have some Republicans who were the never Trumpers, but I think you also have a subset of people who they maybe held their nose last time around, but I think after January 6, I think that changed some things, and I think that they're looking for something different from the party. I do think that that is something that we're going to go through, probably less so in the midterms. I think that's probably more of a 2024 conversation, and you're already seeing that play out in Iowa. We're going to have a very large cast of candidates who are going to be running against Biden in 2024. I think that's probably when that's going to play out more than it is going to be in the midterms. I think you're going to see more of the Trump influence of the party play out in a stronger way in the midterms, just because of what I was talking about earlier with the dynamics in the House. But that said, when you look at the US Senate and what the path is for the Republicans to maybe take back the Senate, then maybe that calculus is a little different. Larry Jacobs: I'm going to ask you, Miss Kukowski about Donald Trump and his influence as we move towards 2022. There's a sense that Donald Trump is this political Goliath. Certainly, in terms of fundraising, he seems to be literally a golden ticket. I noticed that a lot of the RNC committees love to do Trump-themed fundraisers. Mr. Trump himself has done quite well, perhaps 100 million in his war chest. But do you feel there's a bit of the tides are shifting on Donald Trump that there are limits to what he can do and that people in Washington are beginning to assess where he is influential and pick and choose their spots? What do you think? Kirsten Kukowski: Yeah. I mean, for sure. And I think you're seeing this play out in a lot of his endorsements that he's making in House and Senate races for the midterms across the country. Last week, he had what was seen as a loss in that he endorsed a candidate who did not win. But then last night in Ohio, he had what some people are saying was a win. I think it's going to come down to where if you're working on a political campaign, I think the calculus is a lot geographic and a lot of it is just are you working in a seat that was a Trump seat in 2020? Then you're going to probably have a different calculus than if you're going to be in a little bit more of a toss up area. I think it's too early to know for sure, but I think that there are definite questions which signals that maybe, you know, some of his influence is waning. Fundraising, though, I will say, the committees are going to keep working through the fundraising because that is definitely his biggest strength. Larry Jacobs: Miss Pearcey, I'm noticing that the Democrats appear to still be running against Donald Trump. I hear his name being mentioned by all the Democrats. Joe Biden was in Virginia, which, of course, has a very important gubernatorial race coming in November, and Joe Biden couldn't stop himself constantly comparing Republican opponent who defeated the Trumpers to win the Republican nomination and comparing this Republican nominee to Donald Trump, I'm just waiting for the ads which the Trump face and the Republican candidate face. Is that the Republican strategy? I mean, Miss Kukowski is saying Republicans would love to pick and choose where Donald Trump is a factor, but maybe Democrats would just love to just do a redo of 2020. Rebecca Pearcey: Yeah, I think that's right. And I also want to echo something that Kirsten said. The national committees will continue using Donald Trump as a fundraising tactic until we stop raising money because of it. It is a rallying cry for Democrats, and it is not incumbent on Democrats to pick and choose where Donald Trump was popular or what candidates supported him. I think that what you saw in Virginia with President Biden there with Terry McAuliffe is probably it's an omen for what you will likely see, particularly in these 2021 races where we've got legislative races and gubernatorials in Virginia and New Jersey, but also some of these races as we get lines, and they are in a little bit more of a swingy area, I think that we will start to dig in and figure out where actually, maybe it is that we talk about where Trump is effective and where he's not. Because once we get new lines, I think that whole dynamic could change. But at this point, if it's a state wide and especially in a place like Virginia, it's really easy to tie Glen Youngkin to Trump because he doesn't say, I wasn't for Trump. Larry Jacobs: We're going to come back to this, excuse me, in a moment. But when Miss Pearcey is referring to lines, she's referring to the redrawing or redistricting of legislative seats. We'll get to that a little bit later. But the main thing I want to just draw out is you can see this nuanced difference between Republicans who like to localize races, control where Donald Trump is coming in and can be most helpful and the Democrats who would just like to redo 2020, at least at this point and nationalize the race as a referendum on Donald Trump and by the way, Donald Trump is not in office, in case you've forgotten that. This is a really, it's going to be an interesting project. I want to ask about where we are and kind of our expectations about the midterm elections. The general story about midterm elections is it's bad for the in party, meaning the party that controls the White House, in this case would be the Democrats. Historically, going back to 1946, the average loss in the House is 26 seats. That varies a little bit about the popularity of the president, but you can hear already in this conversation this presumption that November 22 is going to probably be pretty tough for Democrats and will create real opportunities for Republicans. Miss Pearcey, is that the way you see the midterm elections that you guys are kind of behind the eight ball? Rebecca Pearcey: On the defence? Yeah, absolutely. It's it will be a challenge to hold everything. I think it's going to be a challenging Senate situation. And then once we figure out what these lines look like for the congressional map, I think it gets even more challenging as our incumbents are figuring out new districts as we're going through recruitment with candidates in districts, and we don't actually know how they will perform in a midterm election or any election for that matter. But I do think that it can't be as bad as 2010. Like, hopefully, that's that's where my head is. It can't be as bad as 2010 when Democrats lost 63 or 64 seats in the House. I do think that, these cycles, even the 10-year cycle has its own cycle, and it is very indicative of what will happen. I think a lot of Democrats are anticipating that this is what we will lose seats in both the House and the Senate, and then this is the push to get everything done. But there's also the upside of this, which is we have everything. We know what this part of the cycle looks like. We should really get our stuff together and figure out how to start messaging now so that we're not behind the eight ball when the new lines do come out. In some states, it will be as soon as August 16. In other states, we won't have actual lines drawn until mid March when elections are right up upon us. I think it's incumbent on us to, like, continue this push to talk through the Biden agenda and how Democrats are delivering for Americans and to stay very disciplined in that messaging throughout the redistricting process. Larry Jacobs: Folks, if you're following this and you started off wondering, you're really talking about 2022, you can see, as you pull back the curtains that there's a lot of work, a lot of thinking, and, frankly, a lot of money being spent to plan for it. Miss Kukowski, are Republicans particularly optimistic about the midterm elections because of their control over the line drawing or redistricting in so many parts of the country? Kirsten Kukowski: I would say, yes, I think we are. Sorry, I'm trying to get rid of something on my screen. Sorry about that. Distracting. Particularly optimistic, I think that the Republican Party in general does better in midterm elections. That's not 100%, but I think in general, I think that there was I think the Republican Party made some inroads in the House last cycle that were unexpected. And I think if you continue to follow on those coat tails, I think, especially with all the dynamics, with the Biden White House and the party in power, generally, losing seats in the midterm. I think that there's room for the Republican Party to be optimist. I will say, though, I think COVID is a big unknown. We don't know exactly how that's going to play into everything. I think redistricting is a huge unknown. We don't know how that's going to play into everything. Then I would say, too, I feel like a lot of the conversation has probably been more focused on the house because I think that is a little bit more clear right now than the Senate. I look at the US Senate race right across the river in Wisconsin, and I think that has been moved to a toss up seat, and I think that those dynamics, I think we're going to be seeing more and more as we get closer. I don't know. I mean, I feel like there's optimism, especially in the House. I think there's just some unknowns this far out that we don't really know exactly what this is going to look. Larry Jacobs: I want to get into some of those individual races, particularly in the Senate, but before we do, Miss Pearcey I hear so many Democrats, you know, when I'm out giving a talk, they'll say, wait, we have all these great things we've done, and they'll talk about the coronavirus package. They'll talk about the administration's response to getting the shots in the arms with regards to COVID. They're looking at Republican governors, in some cases, putting up roadblocks as we have this latest surge with the Delta variant. Can Democrats win with that kind of positive, good news message or is the environment that we're talking about just, you know, puts Democrats at a disadvantage? If so, what is it about that environment in particular that makes you nervous about November? Rebecca Pearcey: I think we all need a little good news, and so I will give it to Democrats and let them have it that they get to go out and message on all of the good things that the Biden administration and our Congress is putting forth. Look, I think there's going to be bad news. There always is bad news and I don't think it will be something that is caused by the administration. It will be something that is a function of just life, whether that's the Delta variant, picking up steam or whatever the next variant is picking up steam. I think Kirsten's right that redistricting puts another wrinkle in how we calibrate our messaging and when we sort of recalibrate what the next phase of this messaging trajectory is, I think that should make everybody nervous. Both parties should be nervous about not knowing when to shift or how to shift or what to shift to because there are so many unknowns so it's pandemic life. It is the redistricting piece of this and it's also I think part of this is who's going to run? That goes for the Senate races, the House races, as the presidential primary starts heating up even earlier than ever before on the Republican side. I think all of those sets of dynamics go into making everybody a little bit queasy about what November 2022 looks like. Larry Jacobs: Let me just dig in a little bit on this environment that leads you to say, expect bad news, which is sobering. Rebecca Pearcey: You don't know anything. I don't know, but, like it can't all be good news. Murphy's law, Professor. It's Murphy's law. That's all. Larry Jacobs: But let's dig in a little bit on this and Miss Kukowski referred to this turnout among Democratic voters midterm elections dips. It dips more than among Republicans. Why does that happen? Rebecca Pearcey: I don't think we know the answer, but I know that we are doing a better job as Democrats and with the party committees digging into who voted in our last midterm in 2018 and then also in 2020. We're figuring out data points for who are these people and what motivates them and as we are figuring these things out, we're also figuring out that we need to do a better job communicating our persuasion messages before shifting them to a mobilization message. Talking to them about what we're doing and then transitioning them from, well, we're talking about what we're going to do. Like, now, can we count on your support? Will you turn out for XYZ Democratic candidates? I think that there's been a lot of research and a lot of thoughtful research done on the Democratic side to figure out the psyche behind midterm voters and how do we unlock that. Because we recognize that Republicans have consistently done better in these midterms. Larry Jacobs: Let me just ask you one other question, which is about the kind of overall environment. There are about 60% of Americans who still say the country's off on the wrong track rather than heading in the right direction. That is just hostile to incumbents, right? Rebecca Pearcey: Yeah, it is. It is, it's hostile to incumbents, but it's also hostile to people in office. If you're a county commissioner and you think you're going to run for Congress, it's just as tough as if you're the guy in Congress, and so it is sort of an outsider's game at this point in some of these races where you've got a person who's a community activist who can say, I can deliver. I'm not part of the problem in Washington or Little Rock or wherever else there might be the seat of power. Larry Jacobs: Miss Kukowski, did you want to add anything to this conversation about the environment? Kirsten Kukowski: Yeah, I would just say one thing I was thinking and I meant to say your last question, and I think it applies here too. I think one thing that a lot of people have been kind of looking at in terms of the environment and just whether or not the Democrat Party can tell the story that they want to tell is that President Biden's approval ratings. Right track wrong track has been moving a little bit more than his approval ratings and his approval ratings are hovering right around 50%, and they're not moving very much and on one hand, that is positive. He's seen as a very stable president, which is very different than the last four years in terms of approval ratings. But on the other hand, does he have that thing that he needs to be able to sell the country on what he's doing? Right now, I think that's a big question because a lot of these house races are going to be directly tied to his approval rating and whether or not he can talk about what he's doing on COVID and on infrastructure if that gets done. I think that is just one thing that, you know, they still have time. The White House still has time. But back to the why are we talking about this in August of 2021, it takes a ton of time to move a messaging ship in the right direction and sustain it for all the Americans to actually absorb and they're going to need every minute and every second that they can get to do it. Larry Jacobs: I'm glad you raised that because I found it curious where the Democrats can't talk more enough about Donald Trump when they're out on the campaign trail. You don't hear a whole lot of conversation among Republicans about Joe Biden. I hear a whole lot about socialism, overreach, crime, inflation, I mean, all those kind of issues. But when it comes to Joe Biden, he doesn't seem to be a top target among Republicans. Is that accurate? Kirsten Kukowski: >> There aren't that many negatives. You have to focus on the big spending, you have to focus on socialism, you have to focus on the lack of freedom around COVID regulations. Those are all the things, but you're right. That isn't necessarily President Biden, and it's because he is pretty stable, all things considered, and so you have to latch on to other negatives that are happening as a result of his policies. Larry Jacobs: >> I'll be just curious how that plays out because usually, the talk about midterm elections and the general election, it's a referendum on the incumbent, and in this election, it's like a referendum on the incumbent party, not Joe Biden, who's the face that I think more Americans know about. It's a curiosity. Miss Pearcey, have you noticed this, too or am I just alone in this observation? Rebecca Pearcey: >> I'm glad you said it, and I'm glad that Kirsten agrees that he's not the lightning rod that President Trump was. The thing that I am seeing across a lot of the races that I'm working on, whether or not my candidates lean a lot more progressive or a little bit more progressive is Republicans are going to call them socialists, no matter what. Even if they are a pro-life, pro-gun, rural, wherever Democrat, our Republican opponents are still labeling them as Nancy Pelosi socialists. If that is the message piece, and it doesn't involve Joe Biden or the good things that are happening here in DC, I think that that is probably an easier stereotype to break down individually in each race with each candidate based on their records. Larry Jacobs: >> I'm going to ask you about some of the questions that are coming up. One theme is, we haven't talked about January 6th. Isn't that going to have a big impact on the midterm elections? Miss Pearcey, do you think January 6th and the Democratic commission that Nancy Pelosi has put together, including, I thought, quite riveting first public hearings with the Capitol police, is that going to be a big factor in a year and a half from now? Rebecca Pearcey: >> Look, I'll say this and I will say that I live about nine blocks from the US Capitol so this really is one that hits home, and I'm glad to see that the Commission did have the hearings last week and that they were so publicly televised that people are asking about them and still remember them even a week later. I think it's tough to break through on a 24-hour news cycle, and it's even tougher for that to carry through for another 15 months. I do think that there will be some particular districts where it may be an issue just based on an incumbent Republican and their posture towards the insurrection and their comments in the aftermath of it even all the way up to last week but I don't think it's going to be a top issue for an ordinary voter who just wants to know how they're going to pay for health care and college for their kids and how are they going to get the COVID shots for their other kids. I hate saying that. To me, I would run on this all day long, but I just don't think it's realistic. Larry Jacobs: >> Miss Kukowski, are you worried about the January 6th hearings? Do you see them as a threat to Republicans in November of '22? Kirsten Kukowski: >> I really don't. I mentioned earlier just that January 6th and what's happened in the aftermath and what the party breakdown and the path forward I think that we're internally going to have some conversations about that but at the end of the day, the base, which is by the largest sector of the Republican Party right now, I don't believe that's going to be an issue. I do agree with Rebecca and I know I keep bringing up Wisconsin. I've just spent so much time there politically that it's intriguing to me. One exception that I think I agree with Rebecca on is they're going to play that January 6th messaging out against Ron Johnson if he decides to run again. But that's more because of his comments and his continual just bringing it up and not letting it go. He's embraced it as his issue. That's more of the dynamic there. But I agree that there are going to be some seats that this is going to be a thing, but really large, no, I don't believe it will be. Larry Jacobs: >> Miss Pearcey, question from one of our friends who are watching us. 21 progressive Democrats ran in house seats in 2020. They all lost. Is this a warning for Democrats and who is being brought forth as a candidate? Rebecca Pearcey: >> No. Look, I think whoever wants to run should get to run. I think whoever runs the best campaign should be the winner. I don't necessarily know if those progressives were running in very progressive seats, and that's why they didn't win. If you're a progressive running in an Ohio one and it's the Cincinnati suburbs, good luck. It's just not the right demographic for a progressive Democrat as the lines are drawn currently. It doesn't mean it can't happen. I just think it means we need to allow candidates the opportunity to run their races as a party and as the committees. But I don't actually find that that surprising. I do think that the Democratic Party is not all a bunch of socialist liberals that are ready to put all of our money in one pot and redistribute it to everybody else in America. That's where I think we get this bad connotation around socialist. Larry Jacobs: >> I didn't read that question to be on that theme as much as could Democrats do better if they nominated candidates who better fit a district? Like, for instance, yesterday, we saw a progressive defeated in one of the primary battles in Ohio. Is that a sign of the party being more pragmatic, looking for candidates who fit districts? Rebecca Pearcey: >> I think that's right. I think you phrased it the right way. Yes, it's about finding candidates that fit the districts, and I think that has been the aim of the DC since I worked there in the 2013 and 2014 cycle. There are certainly going to be outliers. You're people that are going to challenge incumbents and win like an AOC against Joe Crowley back in 2018. Certainly those pop outs will happen. But by and large, I do think it's finding pragmatic Democrats where it makes sense and finding progressive ones where that makes sense, also. Larry Jacobs: >> Miss Kukowski, I'm sure you've feasted on the data that Donald Trump actually increased his share of Latino voters as did Republicans in Florida and Texas in particular, African-Americans, particularly African-American men also seem to tilt a bit more towards Republicans. Do you read something more broadly into that, or is that just the 2020 election, the way it played out? Kirsten Kukowski: >> I don't think we know yet, which is a cop out, but not really. I think the party invested a lot of time and money and effort into particularly the Latino vote. I know the RNC they really had a lot of infrastructure over the last four years of the Trump administration. That could be part of it. I think that 2020 and just, I think, COVID and regulations and just how they saw government in their lives impacted some of that. I don't know if that's going to continue. TBD on that. I think one race that I was diving in on this subject is I think Marco Rubio's re-elect in Florida will tell us a little bit more about this. I think that what's happening in Cuba and just some dynamics with Cubans will also impact this discussion, the border. I think that's why you're seeing some of this in Texas, and I think that's going to continue to be a midterm election issue is the border, and that's where I think the White House has to be very careful in terms of the electorate and increasing Latino boat. There's just a lot at play right now, but I don't know that I'm ready to say yes, the Republican Party has made significant inroads in these communities quite yet. Larry Jacobs: >> Miss Pearcey, I've heard so many different conversations among Democrats, particularly those who are researching 20. There are a lot of explanations, and honestly, it sounds more like, well, excuses. We didn't get out on the doorsteps. We didn't put enough money in the right places. We didn't have the right messaging. But I'm curious, do you think liberals have been overly optimistic about the changing identity of America as the country has become more diverse? Rebecca Pearcey: >> Well, I think part of it goes back to what I was saying before about messaging to voters before beginning to turn them out. Communicating with communities of color earlier is something that we are working on and are constantly working on, particularly in a midterm where we know our turnout is probably going to be decreased in a way that is impactful on some of these races. But I do want to go back to 2020, and I think that while our expectations may not have been met, I think we still increase turnout in races like in the Senate race in Arizona, in the Senate race in Nevada, places like Wisconsin with significant African-American and Hispanic populations, even Pennsylvania. Those are places where we've made inroads and have been successful in turning out a majority of our voters in these communities of color, but it certainly doesn't mean that we should stop now. We should continue the conversation that we dropped in 2020 and start to re-educate people about, okay, now that Donald Trump is out of office, here's what's happening. Here's what's happening in your legislature. Here's who's running for Congress. Here's who's running for Senate and governor. Here's what the Biden agenda is doing for you. Here's all the programs. Let's continue this conversation before we start knocking on your door again in September of 2022 to say, okay, now it's time to start thinking about your plan to vote and how are you going to get there, and are you going to vote all the way down the ticket. Larry Jacobs: >> My colleagues who study Latino voting, they're like, constant refrain is that Democrats treat Hispanics, Latinx as a monolith. This is foolish, and that is the opening for then a 40-minute presentation about all the differences. Do you think Democrats do make that mistake? Just to take the example Miss Kukowski mentioned about Florida, you've got the Cuban community, and you've got other Latinos who are very sensitive to what's going on in Cuba, who are very worried about socialism, government overreach. Do you think that's a mistake that Democrats make the overgeneralizing? Rebecca Pearcey: >> I do. I think Latinos are different in Arizona and Texas and Florida. If we've got one Latino project that's telling us X versus a very siloed off approach at different ethnicities within the Latino community. That is probably a much better approach that we need to start to engage in immediately. The other piece of it, I will say, particularly in Florida, I think that there is a generational divide that we need to take into account as well. That is Cuban born Americans versus Cuban people that are now in America. It's your mom who's in her 60s, who was born in Cuba and came here and had you, and now you're a 30-year-old adult. I think that those generational divides also need to be examined and we need to figure out how we communicate with each of those sets of the population as well. Larry Jacobs: >> Miss Kukowski, we've been talking about November 2022, but of course, there are a couple big elections coming up in November 2021, and early voting will be starting. I'm curious, do you think of the Virginia gubernatorial race as a bellwether for what might be happening in the midterm elections, or is that overplayed? Kirsten Kukowski: >> I think it's probably overplayed. I think it's one of the only shows in town, and I think post Trump presidency, it really is the only show in town. I think it's probably overplayed a little bit. I think dynamics, after January 6th and post Trump, I don't know that the DC suburbs are going to be a good battleground like they have in the past when we've been talking about off year Virginia races. I look at that and I think we're going to need a little bit more time between the Trump presidency and Republicans taking back Northern Virginia. I'm a little bit more pessimistic on Virginia just for those reasons. Larry Jacobs: >> Miss Pearcey, I assume you agree. Rebecca Pearcey: >> I hope it's a bellwether. [LAUGHTER] No one controlling the house. [LAUGHTER] We have the governor's race. I think Kirsten's right, though. It is always the only show in town, and so it gets in my mind, some undue attention from people like us who are looking at this 24/7 as opposed to voters who turn in during the last three months before an election. Kirsten's also right that the DC suburbs are not ready for a major switch here quite yet. Larry Jacobs: >> Let's talk about some of the Senate races. Of course, the Senate right now is split 50/50, so any net change in the Republican direction would give them control of the chamber. Miss Kukowski, how confident are you that Republicans are going to take the Senate? What races do you see as really the strongest path towards that? Kirsten Kukowski: >> Strongest path. I look at our races that I think are more open, which is Pennsylvania, North Carolina. I think Arizona will be interesting. I think that what's happening with the border within the Biden administration could really impact Arizona. >> I think if Ron Johnson runs again versus if he doesn't, and the timeline of that, is very interesting. The Democrats have a huge field in Wisconsin right now, and though they're trying to clear it a little bit to improve their chances. So I guess this is just a long way of saying each race is going to have very interesting dynamics, and I think it's a little too early right now to say, I'm on the fence on the Senate. And that's why I've made comments about how I feel much better about the House, and I think a lot of people feel much better about the House in terms of Republicans taking a bash. I think the Senate's 50-50. Larry Jacobs: >> Do you feel like Ron Johnson would hurt the Republican chances of holding the Senate? Kirsten Kukowski: >> I love Senator Johnson, but I feel like he's overplaying his hand on January 6th right now. And I think Wisconsin is different than when he ran in the past, and I think that 2020 showed us that. So I think he needs to be very careful. But I think there's some really good prospects if he does not run, including a friend of mine. At this point, I think that he's becoming quickly more of a liability, unfortunately. Larry Jacobs: >> Thank you for that candor. That was really great. Question about Georgia. Of course, there was a special election in '20. Now the normal six-year term election will be coming up. Donald Trump seems very eager to get involved in that race, the governor's race, and possibly the Senate race. Is he a plus in Georgia? Do you think if he gets really engaged and becomes the face of the election for Republicans? Kirsten Kukowski: >> I don't actually know how to answer that question. I don't know. I think it's TBB. I feel like Rebecca has an answer. She smart. Rebecca Pearcey: >> I was laughing about Ron Johnson if he's going to run. I'm like, Ron Johnson is part of our path to Victory. Ron Johnson running for US Senate in Wisconsin certainly makes Wisconsin easier. I'm sorry, I didn't answer your question about Georgia, but I just thought it was worth saying. Larry Jacobs: >> Well, now you get your chance on Georgia. Rebecca Pearcey: >> The Trump meddling here, I think, actually helps Democrats because there are so many Republican critics of his interactions in the race both prior to the election and then in the aftermath of the election. Larry Jacobs: >> And what do you make of the Arizona race? Democrats have been increasingly optimistic about Arizona, but the border is certainly a big issue, and there are other issues in the state. Do you feel pretty confident about Democrats holding the Kelly seat in Arizona? Rebecca Pearcey: >> I do. I think Senator Kelly does a great job of delivering for his constituents and not being this DC liberal senator that says one thing in Arizona and then says another thing here in DC. So I think that he'll be able to walk the line here and really produce a good agenda that Arizonans can relate to. I think on the other side of that, that Republican field I think it's messier. It's not a Wisconsin Democrats, but it's a little bit more challenging, and I think that they've also got time to consolidate and get their message stuff together between now and the election. Larry Jacobs: >> Miss Pearcey, I want to ask you about one of the Senate race I find perplexing. I hear so many Democrats are optimistic about taking the Pennsylvania Senate race. This is a state that Joe Biden won by around 1%. Do you think the optimism is a little too much? It looks to me like it's going to be a fight, and a tough fight depending on who the Republicans put up, but there's some pretty good names on the Republican side that are being mentioned. Do you think the Democrats are being a little overconfident? Rebecca Pearcey: >> Yes, probably a little overconfident, but it doesn't mean it won't be a battleground. I think it's a massive state with a lot of different pockets of communities, and it will require disciplined message in each part of the state and each part of these communities. It's also expensive, and I think that means that both sides are going to have to get some real firepower candidates in there who can raise the millions of dollars that are needed to start communicating with voters through a probably very rigorous primary, which is pretty late. I think it's April and then all the way through to a general election. Too optimistic, probably, but we should be optimistic. It's an open seat, and those don't come up often, particularly in a state where the margins were so slim in 2020. Larry Jacobs: >> Miss Kukowski, we've got a question here. With all the extreme weather lately all around the country, West Coast, East Coast, Midwest, do you think climate is going to be more of an issue in 2022 than we've seen in the past? Kirsten Kukowski: >> Real quick before I answer that, I would just say on Pennsylvania, I'm glad it's a midterm. I think our prospects in Pennsylvania in a midterm for a statewide are a heck of a lot better, especially after you look at the margins from last year, or last cycle. That was just one thought there on climate. It's a really good question, and I would say, if we weren't dealing with the pandemic, possibly, but I think that the pandemic, which is showing no signs of truly going away, as we all maybe thought a few months ago, I don't see anything really overtaking that because I think then the Number 2 issue would be the economic issues that are associated with COVID, inflation, etc. And so I don't, it's possible, but I think there's just too many other things that are going to take precedence. Larry Jacobs: >> Miss Pearcey, do you agree with that? Rebecca Pearcey: >> By and large, I do. I think that it will become an issue in California races in particular because of the wildfires there and their impact on the ability for farmers to go to work for people to function normally. I remember last summer when the fires were raging everybody in our LA offices had to get air filters for their homes. Just knowing that there's a person on the ballot who will think about that, has changed the way a lot of people on the West Coast think, even in places like Oregon and Washington, where it's not necessarily the fires, but it's really hot, and we need to know what the plan is. What's the plan? What is the immediate plan? If you're running for mayor, are you opening cooling centers? How are we going to function without somebody in office who can address some of these concerns? Larry Jacobs: >> I'm curious how you both think about COVID heading into the midterm elections. On the one hand, we've got millions of Americans now have shots in their arms. It's about 50% of the country with at least one shot, 18 and over. On the other hand, we've got now the ratcheting up of mandates and we've got some real serious debates about what's going on with the virus itself. Miss Kukowski, do you see COVID playing in as an advantage to Republicans or maybe not an issue at all, or one you can neutralize and fight on other issues? Kirsten Kukowski: >> Right now, it feels like it is possibly an advantage only because I feel like it plays into the motivated electorate comment that I made earlier. I think we were always going to be more motivated. I think that the people who really feel very strongly against COVID related mandates and what's happening around COVID feel very strongly. You see this in school board fights with masks and education and just the grassroots organizing on the right. On this is, I think, going to be a major factor in the midterm. Larry Jacobs: Miss Pearcey, do you agree with that? That sounds like a fairly nuanced response that COVID is going to be helpful motivating the Republican base or part of the base. Do you see it differently? Is it helpful to Democrats in some way and how so? Rebecca Pearcey: >> I think it's the other side of that coin, whereas Kirsten talked about the policies that are being implemented that Republicans don't like as a motivator. I think that for Democrats, it's the policies that have come out of COVID relief packages, shots in arms that are motivating to Democrats and Democratic base. So it's just a different tact at the motivation behind any COVID related messaging. But also, here's the reality. I don't think this is news, but it's still scary. COVID is still scary and people are still freaked out, and there's still a lot of people who don't have enough facts to make decisions on politics, let alone whether or not they're going to wear a mask or get a shot or any of these other things. And so I think that there is a broader sect of the population that this is an unknown, whereas there are the very anti-mask, anti-mandate people that are very motivated, Republican voters probably anyways, and the very motivated liberal progressive people who are fine with all of the mandates, fine with all the shots, fine with all the other stuff. Kirsten Kukowski: >> I would just add real quick, Larry, I think you're right, Rebecca, and I think that's why I was trying to be a little bit more nuanced in the motivation piece of it. I think we also are going to find I'm seeing this already in some of my races Republicans having a divide on this. Even in Arkansas right now, there is a Republican governor who is in a little bit of a war with his Republican legislature on legislation that is basically saying no mandates related to COVID. I think you are going to have people especially where there's Republican governors who they're in a different position. I think you're going to have Republicans who are on that far right, no mandate line. They're going to be pushing for that, and there is going to be a little bit of a divide. Larry Jacobs: >> There are 435 elections that are going to be held in November '22 for the US House of Representatives. Of course, plus 95% of them are safe, and neither party is really going to put much resources into it. We're looking at the number tends to be a little larger this far out, but 2, 3, 4 dozen races that are on the radar, and they'll get narrowed. Miss Pearcey, could you give us a sense of how many races you think will be competitive come 2022, and which ones, a handful or so, that you think could really be the tip that puts Nancy Pelosi back in as speaker or Mr. McCarthy? Rebecca Pearcey: >> Sure. I do think that the size of the battlefield definitely matters when you're allocating resources from the committee standpoint here in DC, but also when you're talking to national donors or people that want to give their $5 to a race that matters if they're in a very safe seat or very safe Democrat or Republican seat. I would put the number somewhere in between 45 and 50 at this point. I think that's probably large, but I do think that I would caveat that and say, without knowing how these districts perform within new lines, it's going to be really hard to narrow things down even further than that. I think that a lot of these California races, as they get redistricted and communities are moved from one district to another, that is a place where I think Democrats will have an opportunity to pick up some seats. I think that there are probably a set of the Florida Orlando races where there are three districts swirling around, and we're sure there will be Democratic gain there, but what does that look like and how easy will it be and how much will we have to invest? Actually, there's going to be a new Oregon seat, which I think will be a good thing for Democrats the way that map will likely shake out. Then I think you've got some races that will maybe surprise you. That could be some upstate New York, that could be some Western New York, that could be a Colorado, something that just didn't quite pop for us in 2020, and we needed a population shift more than we needed a different message or a different candidate. We can do a redo of 2020 with a different set of voters and see how that goes. Larry Jacobs: >> Great. Thank you. That's great. Miss Kukowski 45-50 competitive races at this point. What do you think? Kirsten Kukowski: >> It seems a little high for me. But I also think that my take is that the Congressional Committee and the Republican side is very focused on the crossover districts where they still see Democrats in Republican territory, and a lot of them are in the Midwest, and I think that they're focused a lot on that right now this far out because of the questions that Rebecca's outlining. In terms of redistricting. I think right now, the NRCC is probably playing with a little bit smaller map, but I think that'll increase because I think conserving dollars is very important. I'd be interested, Rebecca, you brought up upstate New York. I wonder how the Democrats are looking at Elise Stefanik with everything that's been happening over the last couple of years. Rebecca Pearcey: >> There's going to be a primary on the Democratic side, but I feel particularly bullish about it, and it's actually a race I'm working on, but maybe that's why. But it's a district that I worked in 2014 and know what that North country district looks and feels like. I think it's hard to take on the number three on either side of House leadership, but I do think it's something that Democrats would be foolish not to go after just based on the district dynamics alone and then Representative Stefanik's tack to the right on everything since her election in 2014 and how her career trajectory has led her. But I think it's interesting. I also think some of those Western New York seats they're bound to get better for Democrats just because they're going to lose a seat and they've got to go somewhere. Larry Jacobs: >> We're going to pick this up the next time you two join us, which I hope won't be too far off. This has been a great conversation. Thank you very much Kirsten Kukowski, Rebecca Pearcey. Folks, the curtains just been pulled back. We've just walked into the Central Committee of the Republican Democratic Party, and this has been very helpful. So thanks to both of you, and please do join us again. This is wonderful, and we appreciate it. To all of you, have a great day and thanks for joining us. Bye. Kirsten Kukowski: >> Thank you. Rebecca Pearcey: >> Thank you.