Tina Brown On Trump Panic, Media, Autism

The inimitable Tina Brown revived Tatler, Vanity Fair and The New Yorker, before turning to the web and The Daily Beast (where I worked for her). She’s written three books, the latest of which we covered on the Dishcast a few years ago, The Palace Papers. This week she launched a substack, Fresh Hell: Tina Brown’s Diaries — “observations, rants, news obsessions, and human exchanges.” And yes, this chat really is unplugged. We had a lot of fun.

You can listen to the episode in the audio player above (or on the right side of the player, click “Listen On” to add the Dishcast feed to your favorite podcast app). For two clips of our convo — on the personal cruelty of Donald Trump, and why politicians in the UK are tougher than American ones — head to our YouTube page.

Other topics: Tina sitting behind Trump during Obama’s WHCD; the impact another Trump term will have on our sanity; the sad decline of Tucker Carlson; Jon Stewart on Crossfire; Vance and resentment over liberal condescension; being a right-of-center person in academia and the MSM; my defenestration at New York Mag; Alexandra Pelosi’s The Insurrectionist Next Door; Obama telling black men how to vote; the most multi-racial GOP coalition since Nixon; Trump’s tariffs and inflation; his interview with Micklethwait; candidates moving to podcasts; Biden’s decline; his failure to tackle immigration; the lack of an open primary; Bill Clinton on a killer migrant; Springfield; Alvin Bragg; the passion of the Trump cult; the new film The Apprentice; Roy Cohn’s crush on Trump; the stark racism of Fred Trump; Musk at the Butler rally; the exhilaration of fascism; lying as a form of obedience; PM’s Question Time; Corbyn getting mocked in Parliament; Brexit; Boris and Partygate; Keir’s early floundering as PM; Ukraine; Applebaum’s new book; the new Woodward book; Tina’s late husband Harry Evans and their storied marriage; their son Georgie and the difficulty of dating on the spectrum; Walz’s son; Tim Shriver “the only Kennedy worth anything”; the challenges of being a working mother; the importance of living near grandparents; and the intimacy of blogging and Substack.

Browse the Dishcast archive for an episode you might enjoy (the first 102 are free in their entirety — subscribe to get everything else). Coming up: Sam Harris for our quadrennial chat before Election Day, the return of the great John Gray, Damon Linker on the election results, Anderson Cooper on grief, Christine Rosen on humanness in a digital world, and Mary Matalin on anything but politics. Please send any guest recs, dissents, and other comments to dish@andrewsullivan.com.

On last week’s episode with Walter Kirn, a listener writes, “Very interesting interview — it actually altered my perspective on American culture.” Another fan:

You and Walter Kirn deserve some kind of special journalism prize for both independently recognizing the reality of Flyover America — despite your fine educations and your formative years working with the snootiest muckety-mucks of the elite print media on the East Coast. Kirn had the advantage of being raised in the Midwest, so he knew in his gut and heart that the New Yorker stereotype about his good and sensible “people” was unfair BS. He also realized that half of what the national news media have reported about Flyover America for decades was wrong, exaggerated, or demeaning.

As a Pittsburgh native and well-traveled, libertarian, ex-newspaper journalist (who interviewed you briefly in the 1990s), I already knew the truth about Flyover People in 2010 when I carefully retraced John Steinbeck’s 1960 Travels With Charley roadtrip. I enjoyed blasting the liberal East Coast media for their cruel political and cultural biases in my 2013 book Dogging Steinbeck. After listening to Kirn, I’m seriously thinking about driving 1,900 miles west to Livingston, Montana on Election Day night to have a beer with him at the Murray Hotel.

The one place where I personally witnessed real bigotry was Manhattan. Bigoted against anyone in the middle of America. This next listener is not so happy:

I just have to call some BS on Walter Kirn. I was born and raised in Montana and have lived here most of my life, in various locales. When I was younger, I resented the stereotypes of my home and the people I loved, so in that respect, I understand what Kirn is saying. But to argue that he isn’t privy to the ins and outs of the Trump campaign because he lives in Montana is bullshit. He’s basically then just confirming those stereotypes that he purports to have such a hard time with. I read The Atlantic, as does my sister who lives here, and we listen to your podcast. I mean, for god sake, we have access to everything everyone else does. I’m sorry, but for anyone who is a thinking person, Trump is unacceptable. Period.

I was raised a Republican and am now an Independent, so I’m not saying this as a partisan Democrat. And, frankly, many of the Trump voters in Montana are newcomers who have moved in the last few years and are fans of the TV show Yellowstone, who are looking for “freedom” and some kind of fantasy vision of the West. They have transformed the state. We used to elect Dems of a certain type, like Tester and Bullock, to national office. They were of the state, knew its issues, knew the people. That is no more.

What was unfathomable ten years ago — that rich out-of-staters would be elected to national office — is now our reality because of these newcomers coming in. Any thinking Montanan with a brain should know that Trump is unfit for office and is a delusional narcissist.

Walter should stop playing the rube who is our voice. Give me a break. My brother is a Trumper, as are many of the ranchers I grew up with. It’s about cultural resentment, masculinity, feeling important. That’s the appeal. And I have no sympathy with that, regardless of their circumstances. My cousin, who is an anesthesiologist and a graduate of the Air Force Academy, is also a Trumper, and he’s hardly one of the forgotten downtrodden.

A small-town Midwesterner writes:

I relished your conversation with Walter Kirn, partly because I come from a remarkably similar background. Yet I feel he may be partly guilty of the minstrelsy he accuses Walz of — or, at least, the caricature of interpreting the salt-of-the-earth folk to the coastal elites.

It sticks in my craw for the Princeton/Oxford/Hollywood alum to accuse the Chadron State College/Mankato social studies teacher of inauthenticity. Whatever Walz’s flaws, I think he was the real deal until pretty recently, going back to the tradition of Kirn’s childhood librarian and the progressive Midwestern Christians he cites.

Still, I think Kirn is onto something in sensing a possible realignment of the political landscape. One line has stuck with me from the NYT article about JD Vance’s lost friendship with his nonbinary lefty Yale classmate Sofia Nelson. From a message Vance sent to Nelson:

“My zany prediction: in 20 years H.R.C. and Paul Ryan will be part of the same party,” he continued, using an abbreviation for Mrs. Clinton. “And you and I will be on the other side.”

That’s a real possibility, and I would join them. But it’s still undetermined which party will be theirs. Will it be the Sherrod Brown version of the Democratic Party, or the Vance version of the GOP? While Trump offers recognition to the “folk” and a poke in the eye to the elites, Biden kicked off some remarkable infrastructure spending, for example, for a system that has been neglected for decades by both parties. When I was back in my deep-red home state recently, I saw important road work being done — not by immigrants, likely by Trump supporters. Those good jobs and that enduring infrastructure were funded with zero GOP votes in either the House or Senate, with Harris as tiebreaker. 

It’s going to be a steep uphill to bring Maytag plants back to Iowa. We should try, but the history is far more complex than the stroke of the NAFTA pen that Kirn evokes. In the meantime, the crumbling roads and schools and homes offer ample opportunities for good blue-collar jobs. Both Bernie and Trump cracked the consensus in 2016, and for that I’m partly grateful. This year, I am fine to vote for Harris, figuring we’re far more likely to get a child tax credit and continued baseline infrastructure support under her administration than Trump’s — not to mention I just want to be rid of him.

Another listener:

I was puzzled by Kirn’s obvious loathing of Tim Walz, but I’m not from the region, so I’ll accept that he picks up signals I don’t. But the part I couldn’t stomach was his certainty (and yours, kind of) that Trump would not succeed in being a dictator just because he didn’t last time. Everything is different this time: he’s scared of prison; he knows he can motivate crowds to violence; and he has extremists all around him. Last time he hired “normies” who largely kept him in check. All of them are telling us to fear him and that he is unfit for office (Kelly, Milley, Bolton, etc.)

I think you’re doing the right thing voting for Harris, even if you’re not thrilled with her (I don’t think you give her enough credit, but that's a different conversation.) I think Kirn is playing a dangerous game. Where I am solidly with Kirn is on the snobbery of elites, and I absolutely agree that Dems long ignored Americans hurt by NAFTA. I also think there is a fringe left that is wildly out of sync with most Dems. But remember that Biden (not an extremist) won last time, even though it was 2020 when the most radical leftists had some traction. 

A defense of the Dem running mate:

This guy doesn’t know Tim Walz. Walz has political courage — he voted for the ACA from an incredibly unsafe district, in large part because he listens to the stories of constituents. He does not “hate the people he is among.” As a member of Congress, he visited my dad’s high-school classroom to teach the kids about Washington. After the ACA passed — again, with Walz’s help — he sent a note to my dad, not a wealthy donor, to celebrate the success of expanding health coverage. These are a few of many personal anecdotes speaking to a humble advocate for the people — a side of Walz that Kirn clearly doesn’t know or care to explore.

Thanks for this perspective. A dissent directed at me:

I found myself disappointed that so many of Kirn’s absurdities went unchallenged by you. His charge that Kamala Harris lacks substance seems undercut by his own hot takes. It’s hard to claim that Harris lacks policy specifics and then that those non-existent policies will explode the deficit. Has he seen the deficit projections under Trump?

Regarding Kirn’s claim that the sad people wandering Montana byways have been displaced by immigrants, it’s possible that they are unhoused by rising costs due to costal elites like Kirn moving in. Why was Kirn unchallenged on his take on Walz? According to this Princeton and Oxford-educated Vanity Fair journalist, Walz — a former high school teacher and football coach, a lifelong Midwesterner — is inauthentically Midwestern. Vibes all the way down. At least I know that the next four years with President Trump will be better if I drop acid.

I have listened to recent interviews where you — bordering on rudeness — continue to challenge guests into sharper conversation (your episodes with Anne Applebaum and Michelle Goldberg come to mind). I would have hoped you could do the same for Kirn. Despite your own concerns about Harris’s lack of policy, her platform does exist.

The choice, as it has always been, is between a functioning political party and a death cult of personality. Anything else is sanewashing, false equivalence, or just plain dishonest. It’s like one restaurant overcooks their steak, the other puts ground glass in their mashed potatoes. The choice is not an agonizing one.

I hear you. Here’s another dissent along those lines:

When Kirn expressed suspicion that “elites” detested Vance, you never brought up all the despicable things Vance has said about childless persons — and women in particular. Or his extreme position on abortion that he is suddenly trying to hide.  Or the fact that he privately despised Trump (“American Hitler”) until he realized he had to embrace DJT to get elected. From American Hitler to American Savior is not just a change in a policy position; it’s cynicism of the lowest order — comparable to Tucker Carlson.

Likewise, when Kirn mocked the very idea of Trump having totalitarian tendencies, you failed to mention the hundreds of times Trump has promised to weaponize the Justice Department against political foes, journalists, even anyone who has testified against him. You also failed to point out that there will be no guardrails in a second Trump term because this time he will only be appointing loyalists rather than persons with expertise. He intends to gut civil service and all agencies showing independent judgment through expertise.

You had a mountain of evidence to challenge Kirn and you said almost nothing of the sort. He was allowed to toss out unsupported assertions that in Montana the number of homeless has gone up by multiples during the Biden administration. His proof is that he had witnessed “strange people” walking down the road. You would not have allowed Michelle Goldberg get away with such a statement. You were MIA last week.

Well, Walter is a charmer. But thanks for the critique. One more on the pod:

By no stretch of the imagination would I have thought Gene McCarthy would be considered a left-wing radical, but Walter Kirn made me realize imaginations are far more pliable than I realized. McCarthy was against American involvement in the Vietnam war, as were many other Senators at the time. McCarthy took it a step further by running against Lyndon Johnson for the nomination, but that didn’t make him a left-winger. His positions on the issues were eclectic, including positions that were liberal, libertarian, progressive, and conservative. Among other things, he endorsed Reagan against Carter in 1980 — not something a left-winger would do.

I can understand Walter being unaware of McCarthy’s positions, since he was 8 years old when McCarthy left the Senate, but I wonder where and how he obtained his impression of McCarthy. You might wish we had more politicians like him today if you read McCarthy’s No-Fault Politics: Modern Presidents, the Press, and Reformers, or Parting Shots from My Brittle Bow: Reflections on American Politics and Life. I doubt McCarthy would have much patience for wokeness or present-day “progressives”, but given his thoughts on the presidency, I believe he would be appalled that the country could have elected Trump and might elect him again.

Here’s a guest rec:

I was touched by a listener’s remark:

During your episode with David Frum, I was very much taken aback by his assertion that the best years of his life are behind him, as if that is a truism for men his age. (Maybe he was speaking from a place of grief.) I’m a 58-year-old man and, while many of the joys of youth are gone and now memories, I feel quite often that experience and wisdom bring me a deeper and richer experience of life. I expect my life to get better and better. 

One person that interests me is Arthur Brooks, a happiness researcher. He says that one of the most solid and durable findings in his field, which holds true across cultures, is that people tend to be happier when they’re older. I find that boggling because I can’t logically discern a single upside to being older except for having a bit more money (I’m 54). But money doesn’t matter much to me! So, I’m confused. Granted, I miss things about being younger — such as being better looking, and healthier, and having more to look forward to, and having way more fun, and much more sex — but on balance I think I’m happier now. I can’t figure it out; the question fascinates me. 

Jon Rauch (a Dishcast alum) has a good book on that question: The Happiness Curve: Why Life Gets Better After 50. But Arthur is a great idea. I knew him years ago, and always liked him. A reader recommends a future column:

I have loved the Dish since I was in my 20s, so you’ve helped raise me intellectually. I’m hoping for a Dish (not necessarily a podcast, but a post) about Ta-Nehisi Coates and his newest book. Perhaps I’m wrong, but I don’t think he was always like this; I remember thinking he had great intellectual curiosity in his blogging days and a genuine desire to understand. The entrenchment of his ideology into something so rigid that it produces this farce is something to be traced, and who better than you? You’ve known him forever and had a front seat to his evolution.

Or perhaps he didn’t evolve and was always this way. I was a lot younger then (weren’t we all), so maybe there was something I missed. 

I’ve been reluctant to go there, because, out of the blue, his beef with me got personal, and I’m uninterested in feuds as I enter my dotage. But it is a matter of record that I was one of TNC’s earliest and strongest champions, introduced him to countless readers, supported him in the office, did many online chats with him, thought we were friends, and have always praised his writing style. He then went after me, after he got famous, by demonizing me personally in front of the entire Atlantic staff as someone beyond the pale of legitimate journalism. Jeffrey Goldberg, who I helped bring to The Atlantic, chimed in to call me an anti-Semite as well. An absolutely vile piece of witch-burning to appease the red guards in Gen Z. But without me, back in 2007 and after, The Atlantic website would have taken far, far longer to get off the ground, and its traffic much, much lower. I helped save the place. But hey, fuck that guy.

(One small irony given TNC’s new foray into Israel/Palestine. There was a staffer at The Atlantic who took on AIPAC and Israel’s treatment of Obama. It wasn’t TNC. And I had Goldberg occasionally screaming at me for it.)

From a “looong time reader of the Dish”:

Before I get to the point of my email, I want to thank you for something that happened long ago. I was in a hotel room during a business trip, finding what I could on TV. You were doing a book tour for Virtually Normal. After it was over, I said to myself, “I am all wrong about homosexuals.” You upended my long-standing assumptions in that half-hour. Thank you.

Now I am trying to change a few minds: three family members in Georgia who are inclined to vote for Trump. Below is what I wrote to them. I thought you might find it interesting, and it’s the best a politically homeless man of the center-left can do. You are welcome to publish it, even if only to tell where I’m wrong.