Politics Politics Politics Podcast By Justin Robert Young cover art

Politics Politics Politics

Politics Politics Politics

By: Justin Robert Young
Listen for free

Unbiased political analysis the way you wish still existed. Justin Robert Young isn't here to tell you what to think, he's here to tell you who is going to win and why.

www.politicspoliticspolitics.comJustin Robert Young
Politics & Government World
Episodes
  • The 2026 Senate Draft! (with Evan Scrimshaw and Ryan Jakubowski)
    Mar 20 2026

    The Iran war is entering a more dangerous phase, not because of troop movements, but because energy infrastructure is now a target and the price tag is starting to match the escalation. At the same time, artificial intelligence is emerging as the next political battlefield, shaping both policy debates and the broader information environment.

    What stood out to me immediately is how the war is evolving. We are no longer just talking about missile launches and leadership strikes. Energy infrastructure has become fair game. Iran hitting a liquefied natural gas facility in Qatar, after Israel struck Iranian gas fields, is a complete and total shift in what counts as a legitimate target.

    Once you start targeting gas fields and LNG infrastructure, you are no longer just fighting a regional war. You are influencing global markets, allies, and supply chains all at once. Energy itself is global. That is usually the phase where conflicts either spiral or move toward negotiation.

    Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

    My instinct is that this is the point where talks at least become more likely. Not guaranteed, but more likely. Because once energy becomes the battlefield, the costs stop being theoretical.

    Then you get to the update, and this is where things get real. The Trump administration is reportedly preparing a $200 billion supplemental request for the Pentagon.

    That number doesn’t match the messaging. You don’t ask for $200 billion if this is a clean, four-to-six week operation. That’s a number that suggests duration just as much as it suggests uncertainty. It suggests that, whatever the original plan was, the current expectation is something longer and more complicated.

    And politically, that is where the ground starts to shift. Democrats are obviously not going to support that. But more importantly, there are plenty of Republicans who will not put their names behind this action either — epecially the faction that already believes this war risks turning into another Iraq-style commitment.

    So now the question is not just “are we winning?” It is “how long are we staying?” And those are very different political questions.

    Militarily, the signals are still positive for the United States and Israel. There have been clear tactical wins. Iran has taken significant damage. There are even hints of internal instability within the regime. But strategically, it’s still murky.

    We do not know how close the regime is to collapsing. We do not know whether continued strikes accelerate that collapse or entrench resistance. And we do not know whether the administration actually wants regime change or just behavioral change.

    That gap between battlefield success and strategic clarity is where wars tend to get complicated. And when you pair that with a nine-figure funding request, that’s how skepticism starts to grow — and fast.

    Chapters

    00:00:00 - Intro

    00:02:09 - Senate Draft Begins

    00:04:13 - 2026 Senate Draft Round One

    00:28:39 - Iranian Negotiations

    00:30:50 - White House AI Framework

    00:32:35 - 2026 Senate Draft Round Two

    00:49:34 - 2026 Senate Draft Round Three

    01:04:19 - Wrap-up



    This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe
    Show more Show less
    1 hr and 7 mins
  • The Modern Rebirth of Yellow Journalism. Talking Paxton, Cornyn, and Oklahoma (with Reese Gorman)
    Mar 18 2026
    One of the most striking developments during the Iran war has been the reappearance of something that used to define American media a century ago: yellow journalism. Historically, the term referred to sensationalized reporting that prioritized outrage and emotion over accuracy, often using thin sourcing and dramatic narratives to mobilize public opinion. The Spanish–American War, famously fueled by headlines like “Remember the Maine,” is the classic example.Today the structure is different, but the incentives are remarkably similar. Instead of a handful of powerful newspaper publishers driving the narrative, the modern system is decentralized. Social media users, influencers, and coordinated networks can amplify stories through algorithms until traditional outlets feel compelled to cover them simply because they are trending.All of this results in feedback loop. A rumor or distorted piece of information circulates online, gets boosted within a particular political community, and eventually becomes a topic of mainstream reporting. At that point the original claim, even if false, has successfully entered the public conversation.Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.The Five Tribes of the Iran WarThis dynamic is especially powerful because the online political ecosystem is already divided into ideological “tribes” that interpret events through their own narratives.On the left, there is what might be called the new resistance, Democrats who see every development in the war primarily through the lens of whether it helps or hurts Donald Trump politically. Alongside them sits the progressive anti-war faction, deeply skeptical of Israel and convinced the conflict validates their warnings about American interventionism.On the right, the divide is just as sharp. One faction could be described as the Gnostic MAGA movement, a group of populist conservatives who believe Trump has betrayed the movement’s core promises by engaging in foreign conflict. In contrast, another faction believes Trump is right about everything, arguing that the war’s early results show his strategy is working and that critics are panicking too early.Then there is a final group: the “maybe this time Trump” neoconservatives, longtime critics of the former president who nevertheless support aggressive action against Iran and therefore find themselves, temporarily, aligned with his policy.These communities overlap in complicated ways, but each one is primed to amplify certain narratives that confirm its worldview.How a Rumor Becomes “News”The mechanics of modern yellow journalism often begin with a small piece of truth that can be exaggerated or distorted. Once it is framed in a way that triggers emotional reactions inside one or more of these ideological tribes, the story spreads rapidly through reposts, commentary, and algorithmic amplification.Eventually, the rumor becomes so widely discussed that major media outlets cover it, sometimes simply to debunk it. But by that point the narrative has already achieved its goal: it has entered mainstream awareness and eroded trust in competing sources of information.In wartime, this dynamic becomes even more powerful. Governments themselves may benefit from confusion, exaggeration, or competing narratives. The battlefield isn’t just physical territory, but also public perception.The deeper challenge is that the modern information ecosystem has no central referee. In the past, editors at major newspapers could decide what was credible enough to print. Today, social media algorithms and online communities perform that role collectively, often rewarding the most emotionally compelling stories rather than the most accurate ones.That means the burden increasingly falls on individuals to filter information themselves. If a story makes people furious or ecstatic instantly, that reaction is often a sign to pause before sharing it.A New Information EraThe Iran war may eventually be remembered not only for its military consequences but also for what it revealed about the way modern media operates. The sensationalism that once drove early twentieth-century newspaper empires has reappeared in a decentralized, digital form.Yellow journalism never disappeared — it’s just changed and evolved to keep up with modern times. And in the middle of a war, its power to shape public perception may be greater than ever.Chapters00:00:00 - Intro00:02:14 - Susie Wiles00:03:38 - DHS Shutdown00:04:33 - Yellow Journalism in the Iran War Era00:29:10 - Iranian Security Chief Killed00:33:15 - Joe Kent00:39:29 - Texas AI Ad00:41:32 - Reese Gorman on Texas and Oklahoma01:12:27 - Wrap-up This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe
    Show more Show less
    1 hr and 16 mins
  • A Deep Dive Into All Things Iran War. Plus, Oscar Nominee Picks (with Ryan McBeth and Jada Yuan)
    Mar 12 2026

    Washington state Democrats have passed a new 9.9 percent income tax on millionaires, the first income tax in the state’s history. The measure now heads to the governor’s desk and represents a major shift in a state long known for its lack of personal income taxes.

    But the policy debate is already colliding with economic reality. Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz has announced he is relocating to Florida, a state with no income tax. That move underscores a longstanding pattern in American economics: high earners often respond to aggressive tax policies by moving to lower-tax jurisdictions. If more states pursue similar policies, the migration of wealthy taxpayers to places like Florida, Texas, and Tennessee could accelerate.

    The broader question is what happens if that migration significantly shrinks the tax base in high-spending states. European countries experimented with wealth taxes for years before many rolled them back after wealthy residents simply moved elsewhere. Washington may now be testing whether the same dynamic will play out inside the United States.

    Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

    The Filibuster Fight and the SAVE Act

    Meanwhile, a new institutional battle is brewing in the Senate. Senator Ron Johnson is pushing for a vote to begin debate on ending the legislative filibuster, at least in its current form. The immediate catalyst is the House-passed SAVE America Act, which focuses on citizenship-based voter registration and voting ID requirements.

    Republicans do not currently have the 60 votes needed to pass the legislation under existing Senate rules. That reality has revived calls to weaken the filibuster by shifting to a “talking filibuster,” forcing senators who want to block legislation to continuously hold the floor rather than simply signaling opposition.

    Institutionalists in both parties warn that such a move could be the beginning of the end for the Senate’s 60-vote threshold entirely. Supporters argue the change is inevitable anyway and that the current rules simply prevent major legislation from passing. Either way, the vote could force senators to go on record about how much they value the chamber’s traditional rules.

    Jim Clyburn and the Persistence of Incumbency

    Finally, South Carolina Congressman Jim Clyburn has announced that he plans to seek reelection at age 85. First elected in 1992, Clyburn remains one of the most influential figures in Democratic politics and a central leader within the Congressional Black Caucus.

    His decision highlights the enduring power of incumbency in American politics. While voters and activists often debate generational change, long-serving lawmakers frequently retain strong political machines and local loyalty that discourage serious primary challenges. For now, there is little sign that anyone in Clyburn’s district is preparing to challenge him.

    Taken together, these developments offer a snapshot of the current political landscape: states experimenting with new tax policies, the Senate wrestling with its own rules of power, and long-time incumbents continuing to dominate the institutions they helped shape.

    Chapters

    00:00:00 - Intro on Iran and Elections

    00:08:47 - Iran Breakdown with Ryan McBeth

    01:07:54 - Update

    01:08:14 - Washington State Tax

    01:09:53 - Filibuster

    01:13:30 - Jim Clyburn

    01:14:37 - Oscar-Nominated Movie Talk with Jada Yuan

    02:38:28 - Wrap-up



    This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe
    Show more Show less
    2 hrs and 44 mins
All stars
Most relevant
Big fan of your show for a while and i hope youre brand of analysis and interviews finds a home here.

Welcome to Audible

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.