Speaker 1: From the Skyinging Center. This is Paul Murray Live, Oho, Mate,
Speaker 1: What a lot of show we've got for you tonight,
Speaker 1: no knucking around. Had a fun day watching the debate
Speaker 1: with grita panicky highlights are up all nowtsky news dot
Speaker 1: com dot are you tonight on the show. Lots to
Speaker 1: get to, including a change of the way things are
Speaker 1: playing out in the Senate. This is going to become
Speaker 1: a big story as we get closer to an election.
Speaker 1: There is method to my madness. I'll explained it all
Speaker 1: in a moment or two time. We've got an insight
Speaker 1: today about just how hard it is to find a
Speaker 1: rental property some parts of Australia is well, frankly virtually
Speaker 1: statistically impossible. And about that debate analyst Nielsen life in
Speaker 1: the United States. As the spin continues and the reaction
Speaker 1: still comes in. Now, in a moment, I will go
Speaker 1: into the deep dive that you come to expect from
Speaker 1: me about all things to do with American politics on
Speaker 1: particularly significant days, but off the top, about this debate.
Speaker 1: Ignore anyone who tells you Kamala Harris is completely killed
Speaker 1: off Donald Trump, and ignore anyone who says Trump had
Speaker 1: the greatest day of his life. Now, for obvious reasons,
Speaker 1: people all go back into the corners Team red, team blue,
Speaker 1: in many ways male female. But remember the main point
Speaker 1: of this debate was that Kamala Harris at some point
Speaker 1: had to say what she was going to do with
Speaker 1: four years should she become the president. She ignored some
Speaker 1: fundamental questions. The fact checking, of course, was ridiculous. I
Speaker 1: think the side eye wasn't that fantastic. And the cutaway
Speaker 1: shots of course of Donald Trump at times looking a
Speaker 1: bit to cranky, tired, peed off, whatever, all of those things,
Speaker 1: while they all play into the amateur psychologist in all
Speaker 1: of us. But I can't get past the people who
Speaker 1: were running the debate. Now, I told you last night
Speaker 1: that an analysis of their version of the six PM News,
Speaker 1: which that guy on the left is the presenter for
Speaker 1: David Muir is his name or Democrat Dave as my
Speaker 1: dear friend was saying today. Well, they had the opportunity
Speaker 1: to decide where this debate went. Now again, if you're
Speaker 1: arguing about the referees rather than talking about the game,
Speaker 1: you can say that you're trying to change the subject.
Speaker 1: But the point is that this was as anti Trump
Speaker 1: a scenario for him to be in and rather than
Speaker 1: me explain my rage, our dear friend Meghan Kelly, this
Speaker 1: was her immediate take. This is why I love this
Speaker 1: lady and I'm so honored to have her honor show
Speaker 1: each and every week when she is here. Because this
Speaker 1: was her instant analysis. She didn't have to wait five hours,
Speaker 1: six hours the next day to come up with it.
Speaker 1: She nailed one of the fundamental problems with what we
Speaker 1: all watched in the middle of the day today.
Speaker 2: I'm disgusted. I'm disgusted. I'm ashamed of those moderators at
Speaker 2: ABC News. They did exactly what their bosses wanted them
Speaker 2: to do. The person who runs ABC News is a
Speaker 2: close personal friend of Kamala Harris. Is response for Kamala
Speaker 2: Harris and her husband meeting, and they did Dana Walden's
Speaker 2: bidding tonight. It's very easy to look like you know
Speaker 2: what you're doing when both moderators are entirely on your side.
Speaker 2: Trump did the best he could under the circumstances, but
Speaker 2: it really was like three fighters in the ring pummeling
Speaker 2: one opponent, and Trump tried to take them all on.
Speaker 2: He did fine, He did as best as he could
Speaker 2: he was thrown a few times to the point where
Speaker 2: he was unnecessarily defensive and he was getting angry, and
Speaker 2: so was I.
Speaker 1: Megan was absolutely spectacular in real time. I love her intellect,
Speaker 1: I love her passion in a presentation style. I think
Speaker 1: he's based of anyone in front of a camera anywhere,
Speaker 1: bay it on television, online, or anywhere else. She is phenomenal.
Speaker 1: I love having her on the show. As for Donald Trump, well,
Speaker 1: he has responded this morning on Fox News.
Speaker 3: It was three to one. It was a rigged deal,
Speaker 3: as I assumed it would be, because when you looked
Speaker 3: at the fact that they were correcting everything and not
Speaker 3: correcting with her, and we knew it when it was
Speaker 3: one hundred percent good coverage for her over the last
Speaker 3: month or last year. I looked at it and only
Speaker 3: bad coverage of me. No matter what. The press is
Speaker 3: so dishonest in this country. It's amazing.
Speaker 1: We'll talk about it with our guests, We'll talk about
Speaker 1: it with analysts from the United States. As the news
Speaker 1: moves on from what happened last night, it's nine to
Speaker 1: eleven over there, so it'll be a different type of
Speaker 1: news day. But I'll have plenty more in a couple
Speaker 1: of moments, the deep dive that I promise you have
Speaker 1: not seen anywhere else. So you may have heard lots
Speaker 1: of other people's takes, this is the one that I
Speaker 1: hope that you sit with us, because there's plenty more
Speaker 1: in the show tonight. But let's talk about our own
Speaker 1: country first and foremost. The disgrace that was the protests
Speaker 1: in Melbourne today. The behavior of those people is absolutely disgusting. Now,
Speaker 1: you can have your views about war, you have your
Speaker 1: views about specific wars, but when you intentionally turn up
Speaker 1: wanting to punch on and hurl everything from excrement to
Speaker 1: acid at the police, you lose the average Australian. You
Speaker 1: would hope that you even lose the center left Australians
Speaker 1: who often give this nonsense cover. Today they turned on
Speaker 1: any and anyone they could. They laid into journalists, they
Speaker 1: laid into the people holding the cameras, and of course
Speaker 1: they confronted the police only to create mayhem.
Speaker 4: Is done that calling for an antise military weapons, that's
Speaker 4: where that is happening today for just being yeah, and
Speaker 4: we might just they're moving and police are obviously trying
Speaker 4: to keep ahead of them, ahead of ahead of their
Speaker 4: next move.
Speaker 5: You can see it here you go.
Speaker 6: They're quite literally throwing things at the police as they're
Speaker 6: trying to do their job.
Speaker 1: Honestly, Now, as always, police have to be incredibly patient
Speaker 1: when people are screaming in their face. Now, this is
Speaker 1: not about free speech and your right to protest. You
Speaker 1: have the right to protest, to protest passionately, but as
Speaker 1: soon as it starts to become an active clash, then
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, all bets are off. But we know there's
Speaker 1: a limit to how police can respond. But I just
Speaker 1: wanted to show you again some of how the police worked.
Speaker 1: And they did it from very early in the morning
Speaker 1: till after lunchtime. I thought they were very good. Now,
Speaker 1: at times, Victoria police can go too far. We all
Speaker 1: saw that during COVID. There is no way they went
Speaker 1: too far today. But of course the protest is to
Speaker 1: make sure this goes on and on and on claim
Speaker 1: they were the victims despite the fact I repeat, they
Speaker 1: threw everything from horsepoo to acid at police.
Speaker 4: Today, police under anti terrorism laws have had increased powers,
Speaker 4: which means they are using robber bullets, they're using Stunn grenades.
Speaker 4: We are seeing the use of excessive force and weapons
Speaker 4: to control crowds, which have been very clear from the beginning.
Speaker 5: That we are peaceful.
Speaker 1: You're not. You're not. You See what I never understand
Speaker 1: about these people is that if the cause is so important,
Speaker 1: then you would want to police your own crowd as
Speaker 1: soon as something starts to get out of control, and
Speaker 1: you'd tell those people to bugger off because they are
Speaker 1: not helping your cause. But instead they try to play
Speaker 1: that lefty mind trick. This is a peaceful protest. It's
Speaker 1: not peaceful when you're hurling stones at cops. It's not
Speaker 1: peaceful when you're hurling acid at police officers. For his part,
Speaker 1: the Chief Commissioner responded today about the allegations that they
Speaker 1: went too far, which of course were nonsense. He praised
Speaker 1: his own officers right down to every man, woman and horse.
Speaker 1: That's rubbish.
Speaker 7: We have conducted ourselves appropriately. We have conducted ourselves properly.
Speaker 7: I couldn't be prouder of the officers down there, and
Speaker 7: to see the way they used restraint when confronted by
Speaker 7: people intent on provoking violence and using violence.
Speaker 1: Now, let's talk about how we got here and why
Speaker 1: this protest took place. Today, there was a weapons conference
Speaker 1: which was at the Convention Center in Melbourne, that is
Speaker 1: in the heart of Melbourne. That makes it a pretty
Speaker 1: difficult area to turn around and police. Now, I understand
Speaker 1: the importance of the industry. I understand the size of
Speaker 1: the industry, and I understand Australia's role in the defense
Speaker 1: material industry. But why was this held in the middle
Speaker 1: of the city. Why wasn't this held either on the
Speaker 1: side of an airfield or the side of some sort
Speaker 1: of a base somewhere. We'll talk about that with our
Speaker 1: panel in a couple of minutes time, about whether where
Speaker 1: this was the right thing, not because they don't have
Speaker 1: a right to see the best parts of a fantastic
Speaker 1: city like Melbourne, but because it would make it harder
Speaker 1: for this bunch of looms to carry out and do
Speaker 1: what they did. But let's also roll back and look
Speaker 1: at some of the people who you assume these people
Speaker 1: actually vote for. Because the only significant political party in
Speaker 1: Australia that was calling out this defense exhibition is something
Speaker 1: that shouldn't be happening. Well, unsurprisingly it was the Greens.
Speaker 1: The Greens must go last if it means that the
Speaker 1: Liberal Party gets Labor MPs elected or it means that
Speaker 1: the Labor Party gets Liberals elected. Yes, that's what should happen.
Speaker 1: But these people should be wiped from the political map
Speaker 1: because they give cover and legitimacy to the nonsense that
Speaker 1: we saw today in Melbourne.
Speaker 8: Imagine making a profit every time something you'll company builds
Speaker 8: below as a human being into pieces. This is the
Speaker 8: horror of the global arms industry, and that industry is
Speaker 8: holding a gathering next week here in Australia and people
Speaker 8: are coming together in response. People are gathering for demonstrations
Speaker 8: and actions to call out this horrific industry and to
Speaker 8: condemn our government.
Speaker 1: Now let's see what happens tomorrow. You can still be
Speaker 1: absolutely passionate about what is happening on the other side
Speaker 1: of the world. But will any of these people turn
Speaker 1: around and say they went too far? No, it'll be
Speaker 1: the police went too far. When you and I both
Speaker 1: know the police don't start this stuff. Sadly they end
Speaker 1: up having to end it because of the way these
Speaker 1: people start this stuff. Unbelievable. Now let's talk again. While
Speaker 1: people were distracted by the news that was either happening
Speaker 1: on the streets of Melbourne today or happening over in
Speaker 1: the United States. There was a lot of other news
Speaker 1: around today and I want to get to some of
Speaker 1: it before I start again talking about that in later
Speaker 1: debate and discussion. And it becomes yet another example of
Speaker 1: what we have always known that when you import too
Speaker 1: many people to the country in order to fill in
Speaker 1: the Ponzi scheme the population creates for the federal government,
Speaker 1: you cause trouble in almost every suburb and certainly every
Speaker 1: city in the country. What am I talking about, No,
Speaker 1: not people who look different, sound different, or come from
Speaker 1: somewhere else. Literally, there are not enough homes in Australia
Speaker 1: for the people who are currently in Australia. We all
Speaker 1: know that for people who want to buy a house,
Speaker 1: and you definitely know it if you're renting one right now.
Speaker 1: In fact, we got this data today and world under
Speaker 1: real estate dot Com. That are you for pointing it
Speaker 1: out about real estate vacancies? Now, this is frightening about
Speaker 1: how few places there are available for rent in all
Speaker 1: of the country. The nation's rental vacancy rate was one
Speaker 1: point three nine percent, So of all of the housing stock,
Speaker 1: what was available for rent one point three nine percent.
Speaker 1: That's across the whole country. The whole joint conditions a
Speaker 1: remaining extremely challenging for renters. Let me show you what
Speaker 1: this is like. Maybe in your city or part of
Speaker 1: the country. Just one point six percent of all potentially
Speaker 1: available properties are available for rent right now in Sydney,
Speaker 1: basically the same in Melbourne, fewer in Brisbane and less
Speaker 1: than one percent right now in Hobart and Darwin. These
Speaker 1: are huge once you start to look at the regional numbers.
Speaker 1: There are fewer houses available for rent in Regional New
Speaker 1: South Wales than there are in Sydney Regional Victoria, than
Speaker 1: there are in Melbourne Regional Queensland than there are in Brisbane.
Speaker 1: This is a huge problem for our country. Now. The
Speaker 1: first and most important thing that you can do to
Speaker 1: make sure that those rental lines become shorter is to
Speaker 1: stop the number of people that are coming in. To
Speaker 1: certainly lower the number of people that are coming in,
Speaker 1: because we need to make sure that there are enough
Speaker 1: homes of all different shapes and sizes being built. But
Speaker 1: obviously that doesn't happen overnight. But what does happen overnight
Speaker 1: is that the four fifth of bugger all places that
Speaker 1: there are to rent. The line gets longer because each year,
Speaker 1: we bring in hundreds of thousands of extra people to
Speaker 1: the country. Now again they'll say you have to do
Speaker 1: it because of the skill shortage. Well, in part that's
Speaker 1: because generations of kids have been told you've got to
Speaker 1: go off to university get your BA rather than go
Speaker 1: to tafe and get a trade. And there's also scenarios
Speaker 1: here where you've got governments turning around and shutting down
Speaker 1: projects like the gold mine in Blaming in New South
Speaker 1: Wales that would create jobs, would create a reason for
Speaker 1: people to move away from the cities and create even
Speaker 1: more import for people to be building properties in those
Speaker 1: regional areas. This was huge news today and I get
Speaker 1: that the numbers sometimes can sort of fog over for us,
Speaker 1: but think about it. Every house, every unit, every townhouse,
Speaker 1: every studio, every granny flat in the country, what is
Speaker 1: available for rent right now one and a bit percent
Speaker 1: less than one percent in places like Hobart and Darwin. Now,
Speaker 1: also regarding the rental situation, the people who are in
Speaker 1: rental homes where we're finding a lot of people are
Speaker 1: being pushed out of them because of the interest rates
Speaker 1: that mean to pay off a home is now twelve
Speaker 1: times higher under this government than it was under the
Speaker 1: previous government. That's the number of interest rates under Albow
Speaker 1: and Charmers, and that of course means people are being
Speaker 1: booted out so they can push up the rent, meaning
Speaker 1: the people who are paying the rent are paying more
Speaker 1: than they can probably afford. So renters with un secured
Speaker 1: debt meaning they don't own anything. Okay, they might have
Speaker 1: things like credit cards or personal loans or hex's dead,
Speaker 1: but they don't, say, own a car that somebody can
Speaker 1: take off them. They definitely don't own a house or
Speaker 1: shares or something that a lending institution can take off them.
Speaker 1: Have been slogged with above inflation price hikes in the
Speaker 1: past few years amid the supply constraints and surging population. Again,
Speaker 1: this is another report on what we've been talking about
Speaker 1: week in, week out, month in, month out, because it matters,
Speaker 1: and they now make up nine in ten of personal
Speaker 1: insolvencies in Australia despite making up just twenty one percent
Speaker 1: of the population. So twenty one percent of the population
Speaker 1: are people who rent but don't own anything. Therefore they
Speaker 1: have unsecured debt because the debt becomes too much and
Speaker 1: they basically have to rule themselves bankrupt. Nine out of
Speaker 1: ten people who end up in that scenario are renters.
Speaker 1: The bloke who put the data together says that the
Speaker 1: government agency was bracing for fourteen eight hundred and fifty
Speaker 1: personal insolvencies, remember nine to ten of them being renters
Speaker 1: this year. That's up twenty five percent since last year.
Speaker 1: So these are the realities. These are the victims of
Speaker 1: the Albanezi and Charmers economy. These are also the people that, yes,
Speaker 1: are being affected by paying off a home being twelve
Speaker 1: times harder than it was under the previous government. Of
Speaker 1: course yes, that goes back through the RBA, but it
Speaker 1: all goes back to the government all the polls have
Speaker 1: told us, because it's true government responsibility in all of
Speaker 1: these areas. And those people that are lucky enough to
Speaker 1: have a job, regardless of whether they are paying off
Speaker 1: a house with it still living with mum and dad,
Speaker 1: living with mates, or in rental accommodation. Now, while there
Speaker 1: has not been a huge explosion in the number of
Speaker 1: people that have lost their jobs, there has been a
Speaker 1: very significant increase or should I say decree in the
Speaker 1: amount of hours that people are working. So remember, technically,
Speaker 1: to have a job in the country that we've got
Speaker 1: this nonsense where what one hour of work a week
Speaker 1: equals a job? Well, of course under employment that's the
Speaker 1: best part of what's six and a bit percent in
Speaker 1: the country, almost double the unemployment rate. Again the Reserve
Speaker 1: Bank with more data on that. We'll discuss that with
Speaker 1: Robin Bishop and Stephen Connery in a moment or two's time.
Speaker 1: And if you just want to double check how normal
Speaker 1: you are when it comes to the types of debts
Speaker 1: that you're trying to pay off now. Of course, remember
Speaker 1: we're going all the way from an eighteen year old
Speaker 1: either just out of school or starting off in UNI
Speaker 1: or tafe, all the way through to people of a
Speaker 1: certain age. So the averages are worth having a look at. Here.
Speaker 1: The reality for many people, certainly in that middle group
Speaker 1: of about let's say your late twenties to your late fifties,
Speaker 1: it's going to be higher than this. But have a
Speaker 1: look the average loans that we are trying to pay off.
Speaker 1: The average brand new home loan being written in Australia
Speaker 1: now is for six hundred and forty one thousand dollars.
Speaker 1: The average credit card debt that people have is about
Speaker 1: three thousand dollars. People taking out personal loans is twenty
Speaker 1: two and a half thousand dollars. Now, yes, you take
Speaker 1: them out for a whole collection of different reasons, but
Speaker 1: we know there are people that are taking out personal
Speaker 1: loans to, among other things, payoff debt like credit cards,
Speaker 1: or have enough money to be able to keep food
Speaker 1: on the table. The average hex debt is about twenty
Speaker 1: six thousand dollars and the people who do that buy now,
Speaker 1: pay later thing with massive interest rates. If you miss
Speaker 1: the payments, it's about nine hundred bucks. So yet another
Speaker 1: devastating insight into the reality of the economy under this government.
Speaker 1: Make no mistake, it is their responsibility. It is their fault.
Speaker 1: Thank you to a lot of people who reacted to
Speaker 1: what I showed you last night, which was why I
Speaker 1: have my views that social media for teenagers and definitely
Speaker 1: young people is as dangerous as drugs or smoking or
Speaker 1: drinking adults. You make whatever choices you want with it,
Speaker 1: but kids should be nowhere near this stuff. There has
Speaker 1: been an exponential rise in mental health issue since the
Speaker 1: introduction of the smartphone, and coupled with that the explosion
Speaker 1: of social media, the dependence on it in many ways,
Speaker 1: it works like a casino about dopamine. And again, if
Speaker 1: you'd like to see a great documentary about all of this,
Speaker 1: go on to Netflix and to be able to go
Speaker 1: and have a look at what's called the social dilemma.
Speaker 1: It talks a lot about how big tech companies work
Speaker 1: when it comes to our data. Where remember, if anything's
Speaker 1: free on the Internet, you I are the product, as
Speaker 1: well as a great insight into those dangers of social media.
Speaker 1: But again back to that idea, if it's free on
Speaker 1: the Internet, you and I are the product. Facebook Australians
Speaker 1: have been on this thing for well fifteen years at
Speaker 1: this point in time. Now certainly we're there with a
Speaker 1: Facebook page. It's a great way of getting information out
Speaker 1: to people. But be ful about what you have posted
Speaker 1: or have left posted on your Facebook page, because we
Speaker 1: learn today that the parent company of Facebook, Meta, which
Speaker 1: is now putting together its own AI system. That's that
Speaker 1: little circle that rolls around inside say your WhatsApp or
Speaker 1: your Instagram or your Facebook where you're able to with
Speaker 1: your mates asker to draw funny pictures, which is most
Speaker 1: people's use for it at the moment. Well, guess how
Speaker 1: the pictures that come back, are trained. They are trained
Speaker 1: to look like real things, because every single image you
Speaker 1: have ever posted to Facebook since it's started is being
Speaker 1: what's called scraped, otherwise known as used by Facebook to
Speaker 1: build this system. So while you think that it's an
Speaker 1: electronic notice board or bulletin board or a message between
Speaker 1: you and your family, yes that's true. But the reason
Speaker 1: it's free is because every photo that you post, they
Speaker 1: are able to collect worldwide, and they are able to
Speaker 1: use that to feed into this new artificial intelligence. It's
Speaker 1: not a conspiracy theory. It's not me making it up.
Speaker 1: It's their own admission. Today, when the Senate was pushing
Speaker 1: on this very issue, you will first see a Greens
Speaker 1: senator who is right on this issue nothing else but
Speaker 1: on this issue, is good and a representative of Facebook.
Speaker 9: The truth of the matter is that unless you consciously
Speaker 9: had set those posts to private since two thousand and seven,
Speaker 9: Meta has just decided you will scrape all of the
Speaker 9: photos and all of the text from every public post
Speaker 9: on Instagram or Facebook that Australians have sheared since two
Speaker 9: thousand and seven, unless there was a conscious decision to
Speaker 9: set them on private. That that's actually the reality isn't
Speaker 9: it correct?
Speaker 10: Thanks for the answer to that that is correct, and
Speaker 10: center shoe Bridge is rightly raise that point.
Speaker 1: Now you may have always had this feeling, Now it
Speaker 1: is confirmed. So what can you do if you've already
Speaker 1: posted things in the past. It is the world of
Speaker 1: too late. But what you can do is get a
Speaker 1: tech savvy friend to come around and work out how
Speaker 1: you can actually, with a couple of clicks, save every
Speaker 1: photo that you've ever posted on Facebook, and then you
Speaker 1: can slowly delete all of the photos from ten fifteen
Speaker 1: years ago if you'd like to get them offline. Also,
Speaker 1: you can set things to private. Always go through every
Speaker 1: couple of months. Have a look at those privacy settings
Speaker 1: because they magically change them, and they send you one
Speaker 1: of those fourteen thousand word things that we all just
Speaker 1: flick through and press okay. Because the flick through and
Speaker 1: okay means your photos are their photos, okay. And if
Speaker 1: you don't want them to be their photos, don't post them.
Speaker 1: But if you do, do it on private all right.
Speaker 1: Make sure that we're I get a text expert on
Speaker 1: in the next couple of days to walk you through
Speaker 1: that process to save your images and then take them away.
Speaker 1: From Zuckerberg in the rest of them's hands. All right,
Speaker 1: let's go the deep dive now about Harris and Trump
Speaker 1: and the debate today. Now, for what it's worth, my
Speaker 1: take is that what was needed out of this debate
Speaker 1: because the polls told us that about thirty percent of
Speaker 1: voters said they needed to learn more about Kamala Harris. Now,
Speaker 1: did she absolutely take on Donald Trump and make the
Speaker 1: case against Donald Trump? Yeah, of course. All right, that's
Speaker 1: why all the lefties love it and say she won,
Speaker 1: she won, she won, because they want this to be
Speaker 1: not a referendum on the past four years, where she
Speaker 1: was the cope islot of the plane that's been flying
Speaker 1: too close to the mountain, if not crashing into it.
Speaker 1: So that's why they're saying she won. She won, But
Speaker 1: she was pretty bad on being able to say what
Speaker 1: her four years would look like. She tried to make
Speaker 1: it look like Donald Trump was still the president and
Speaker 1: she was the challenger to the sitting president when he,
Speaker 1: of course, is the challenger to the sitting vice president,
Speaker 1: the vice president, who, by the way, on her own
Speaker 1: campaign side, has basically literally clicked and dragged a lot
Speaker 1: of the Joe Biden policies and claims that she is
Speaker 1: not walking away from most of the Joe Biden policies.
Speaker 1: So if you like what Joe Biden did, she's the
Speaker 1: choice if you want to change it, because you know
Speaker 1: it's the wrong way the country's gone. Well, you know
Speaker 1: what happens in a couple of months, and Trump's the
Speaker 1: only way to make that change. But let's have a
Speaker 1: look at the reaction. First, lefties with glee about what
Speaker 1: they thought was an incredible performance of Queen Kamala, where
Speaker 1: she wasn't just the empty pants ait anymore, she was
Speaker 1: the second Obama. She spanked that ass.
Speaker 2: Most importantly, he looked pissed, and there's nothing worse.
Speaker 10: Than a piste bigot on the stage.
Speaker 1: With a woman he can't control.
Speaker 2: Donald Trump got destroyed in this debate because.
Speaker 5: He can't control his mind.
Speaker 1: They very well be the best televised debate performance ever.
Speaker 11: Didn't think I was ever going to witness a debate
Speaker 11: as devastating as the one that you and Dana moderated
Speaker 11: back in June, where Joe Biden basically tanked his reelection campaign.
Speaker 11: I think tonight was just as devastating.
Speaker 1: Place settled in Chris, I now you're going for the
Speaker 1: hot tight that everyone around the world says, and we're
Speaker 1: applying into that bit place. If anyone thinks that this
Speaker 1: was as bad for Trump as it was for Boden,
Speaker 1: handing you gun in your bed, you don't know what
Speaker 1: you're talking about. As for the rot this was their response.
Speaker 12: Is nothing fundamentally changed here.
Speaker 3: The people of America still don't know Kamala Harris.
Speaker 11: Donald Trump has not done his job in making sure
Speaker 11: that the people of America actually know anything about her positions.
Speaker 1: Was Donald Trump perfect?
Speaker 7: No?
Speaker 1: Was Kamala Harris phony? Yes? Did this debate change anything?
Speaker 1: I don't know.
Speaker 13: President Trump really brought voice to the American people who
Speaker 13: are concerned about crime on their streets, who are concerned
Speaker 13: about illegal and millions ofvily oliverents a crossing the border.
Speaker 14: The avid and buyers are the moderators who are fact
Speaker 14: checking constantly. Kind of triviality as way President A. Trump,
Speaker 14: but didn't as far as eyes in fact check face
Speaker 14: President Harris single timing.
Speaker 1: Yeah, little side note, free advice to Trump world. The
Speaker 1: only people who should be speaking publicly on your behalf
Speaker 1: is Toulci Gabbard because she hits Harris Hard is RFK
Speaker 1: because you need all of his voters. And is Tom
Speaker 1: Cotton because every time that senator turns up on a
Speaker 1: Sunday show, the reporter is left in a puddle. Regardless
Speaker 1: of what questions they asked, he wax and he whacks
Speaker 1: back very cleverly, smartly and with that lovely Southern drill.
Speaker 1: As for the fun that I had today, I had
Speaker 1: fun because I got to hang out with my mate.
Speaker 1: I love reader. You know how much I love the
Speaker 1: Persian Princess. We'll read a Panahy and I get together
Speaker 1: whenever there's big news events and we sit down and
Speaker 1: we watch them together. We try to have a bit
Speaker 1: of fun along the way. And here's part of the
Speaker 1: fun we had along the way.
Speaker 15: Thank you President. She exclamation point when we know that
Speaker 15: she was responsible for lacking and not giving us transparency
Speaker 15: about the origins of COVID.
Speaker 1: So she's going to like China for COVID.
Speaker 6: When Trump is doing that, they called him racist that campaign.
Speaker 1: Stop Asian hat. Look at this now we wear a
Speaker 1: Maga hat.
Speaker 4: Next.
Speaker 1: This is not good. This is she's been over advised
Speaker 1: years ago, and four years ago is out the window.
Speaker 1: She's going to my philosophy.
Speaker 3: Now, in fact, I was going to send her a
Speaker 3: mega hat.
Speaker 1: She's going to my philosophy. So what about that? From her,
Speaker 1: from her lips to the Donald's ears that fast. That
Speaker 1: is the special connection that she has. Of course, you
Speaker 1: can watch You're Reaching every night eleven o'clock here on
Speaker 1: Sky News. You can see all of her highlights on air,
Speaker 1: and our conversation having fun about the debate is up
Speaker 1: at Sky newt Com dot Au or on our YouTube channel.
Speaker 1: But I got to show you just one more bit
Speaker 1: of fun.
Speaker 15: Couples who pray and and and dream of having a
Speaker 15: family are being denied IVF treatment.
Speaker 12: This is another lie.
Speaker 1: This is another lie. Free he wants.
Speaker 16: More IVF because he wants more babies.
Speaker 3: I have been a leader on fertilization, IVF and the
Speaker 3: other thing that's going.
Speaker 5: To become a line.
Speaker 2: I've been a leader in fertilization.
Speaker 1: Many women, many women. I've been the best.
Speaker 12: That's quite a good line for a sort of a
Speaker 12: Tinder profile leader.
Speaker 1: I'm a leader in fertilization.
Speaker 10: Just ask me.
Speaker 1: She's the best every time. I love hanging out with
Speaker 1: her in the real world and on camera as well.
Speaker 1: She's just the best. I love reader very much. It's
Speaker 1: all up at sky Newes dot com. Do I you
Speaker 1: or it's on our YouTube channel right now. Please don't
Speaker 1: just watch it, like it, share it, push it out
Speaker 1: as far as you can amongst all of your friends.
Speaker 1: That will fun to say. But finally, the one group
Speaker 1: of people you probably haven't heard of all night or
Speaker 1: any indication of where they are, the actual voters. There
Speaker 1: were some voters in Pennsylvania, voters in Arizona, boat Swing states. Yes,
Speaker 1: a very random selection, but here's their reactions to what
Speaker 1: they saw.
Speaker 2: Trump lostin Harris opened the door, and I would like
Speaker 2: to see more. I think a lot of people would
Speaker 2: like to see more.
Speaker 3: Well.
Speaker 5: I felt like they were parents trying to control little
Speaker 5: kids fighting.
Speaker 2: Because at some point in debate, both of the competitors
Speaker 2: kept going trying to top off each other.
Speaker 5: What was to the point that the motors had to
Speaker 5: cut that down?
Speaker 1: But they couldn't.
Speaker 12: And I think Trump's demeanor was fairly good, fairly good
Speaker 12: for this format and for how he might go off
Speaker 12: the handle. I think he held it together and even
Speaker 12: with his facials.
Speaker 9: She really deflected on immigration and didn't take responsibility or
Speaker 9: Bin's responsibility for letting people in.
Speaker 1: Illegally sensational stuff. A lot of content we had to
Speaker 1: wade through today, a lot of fun we had today.
Speaker 1: A massive thanks to my team who worked even harder
Speaker 1: than they normally do to get their head and hands
Speaker 1: around it. And I really appreciate it because I'm telling you,
Speaker 1: this is the show that doesn't just follow the data
Speaker 1: but shows you all the clips. That's hard to do,
Speaker 1: but we love doing it for you each and every night.
Speaker 1: So thanks for watching debate Stephen Conroy, Bromwin, Bishop and
Speaker 1: then analyse Nielsen in the United States. Lots of stuff
Speaker 1: about Australia first and then back to the States. All right,
Speaker 1: you've had a lot from me. Let's get into these two.
Speaker 1: None of them the wonderful bromber Bish carry out a
Speaker 1: chap on Wednesday night, and he's here, just here to
Speaker 1: help former Labor Minister, football fan Pious Tragic and our
Speaker 1: dear friend none other than Steven Conroy. All right, let's
Speaker 1: do it quickly before we get too distracted. Bromwin, your
Speaker 1: thoughts on today and what people saw or didn't see
Speaker 1: in that debate today?
Speaker 17: Well A, the expectations were very low, so she really
Speaker 17: only had to stand there and not cackle and look,
Speaker 17: where's me competent and she'd be right now. Last night
Speaker 17: I said the stories were already written that she was
Speaker 17: going to win today. But she did present herself in
Speaker 17: a cogent sort of way. He would have satisfied his
Speaker 17: own base and her base would have been delighted. Does
Speaker 17: it move the needle? Don't know.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I don't think so, because I mean, firstly, we
Speaker 1: literally saw somebody fall out of the race after the
Speaker 1: last one and again left his love it because of
Speaker 1: all of the January sixthness and all the rest of it. Look,
Speaker 1: did she do well? Absolutely, absolutely all right, But don't
Speaker 1: expect sort of five point bounce in the next week
Speaker 1: or so.
Speaker 10: Steven thoughts, Look, I'm about to shock your all of
Speaker 10: your viewers by saying I agree largely with Bromin's analysis.
Speaker 1: Shut down, We're done, shut it, were finished breaking news.
Speaker 1: But Conroy Bishop Unity tickets correct.
Speaker 10: So but I think but I think Bromin was fundamentally correct.
Speaker 10: I think you would score it that she probably narrowly won.
Speaker 10: But to anybody who thinks that there was a knockout blow,
Speaker 10: let me explain to what a knockout blow looks like
Speaker 10: Joe Biden at the last debate. That's the definition of
Speaker 10: a knockout blow. Donald Trump is still in the race,
Speaker 10: in case anyone's wondering, and he's very, very competitive in
Speaker 10: this race. I think the buy the Harris camp will
Speaker 10: be pleased. I think it give them confidence that they
Speaker 10: can keep their momentum going. I think the concern over
Speaker 10: the last week or so is the mentum was just
Speaker 10: petering out. I think there was enough in this debate
Speaker 10: for the Harris camp to go, right, We're through this.
Speaker 1: Let's let's keep.
Speaker 10: Powering on with confidence. But let's also not forget that
Speaker 10: Hillary Clinton clearly won three debates against Donald Trump in
Speaker 10: twenty sixteen and.
Speaker 1: Lost the election.
Speaker 13: Ye.
Speaker 10: Correct, So to the Harris camp, it was it was
Speaker 10: a good step, but it was in no way a
Speaker 10: defining moment of this campaign.
Speaker 1: Correct. He's been now in seven presidential debates, he's won one,
Speaker 1: and that of course was the Biden one. All right,
Speaker 1: let's talk here about the disgrace that was playing out
Speaker 1: on the streets today. Brom, How do we, for one
Speaker 1: of a bitter term, put the source back in the
Speaker 1: bottle here? Because there are these people amongst us who
Speaker 1: you know, you can protest all you want. Free speech
Speaker 1: means you can say whatever you want. But when you
Speaker 1: start hurling acid and you know, horse droppings at the cops,
Speaker 1: and the cops are the ones who have to hold back,
Speaker 1: We're in a weird spot.
Speaker 17: Until such time as the Albanese government says that this
Speaker 17: support for Hamas and the Palestinian movement, which are won
Speaker 17: on the same thing, is not to be tolerated in
Speaker 17: this country, it will continue. The pattern was started when
Speaker 17: there was no action taken at the Sydney Opera House,
Speaker 17: when that most disgraceful right occurred before Israel had done anything. Yes,
Speaker 17: so it was all pre planned and this is a
Speaker 17: net result. It's like it's almost like the equivalent of
Speaker 17: the riots that occurred in the United States. It just
Speaker 17: got worse and worse because there was no clamp down.
Speaker 1: Yeah, the BLM, which is worse, worse and worse, and
Speaker 1: of course Harris was trying to bail people out of jail.
Speaker 1: Stephen again, Melbourne, You've had plenty of protests, but when
Speaker 1: they get wild again, I don't envy the police, but
Speaker 1: how do we pull this back a little here? Because
Speaker 1: we know what they want, which is confrontation and cameras
Speaker 1: to turn up, including you know, I noticed some bloke
Speaker 1: was wearing a QR code right to get the message
Speaker 1: out today. Cameras should have been turned away from that
Speaker 1: bloke as opposed to giving him the platform. But your thoughts.
Speaker 10: Look, first, you know, just a week or two ago
Speaker 10: we had a fifteen thousand strong rally in support of
Speaker 10: the CFMEU. There was no violence, yep, okay, So it
Speaker 10: is possible to hold rallies about issues that people are
Speaker 10: passionate without resorting to the sort of disgraceful, disgusting violent
Speaker 10: behavior and the abuse you know, physically and in every
Speaker 10: other sense, and you've described it of the police. It's
Speaker 10: just not acceptable. But the only good news I took
Speaker 10: out of today was people were predicting twenty thousand and
Speaker 10: twenty five thousand turn up, So best case, I think
Speaker 10: they're about twenty thousand short of the twenty five I think,
Speaker 10: so I think the focus the focus, Yeah, it's Look,
Speaker 10: it is hard to say this to the media because
Speaker 10: they want to cover this and show this, but this
Speaker 10: has been blown out of serious proportion. We've got a
Speaker 10: lot of very ugly scenes shown on camera, and the
Speaker 10: media should cover those, but they should also point out
Speaker 10: what a disappointing turn up it was given the forecasts
Speaker 10: of the claims of the number of people that were
Speaker 10: going to turn up. So I think keeping that in proportion,
Speaker 10: what got out of proportion was the violence, the ugly
Speaker 10: attacks on the place. Melbourne has many, many peaceful demonstrations
Speaker 10: on passionate issues. Yeah, this is not acceptable. It's disgraceful
Speaker 10: and I hope the police are able to identify some
Speaker 10: of the worst culprits and put them in jail.
Speaker 1: All right, enough of this agreeing. Let's get into a
Speaker 1: slight disagreement here, and it is what's playing out in
Speaker 1: the Senate right now, which is because the government can't
Speaker 1: get a deal with the opposition, they are now of
Speaker 1: course turning to the Greens and then it'll be Poke
Speaker 1: I go and Lamb and Thorpe and all the rest
Speaker 1: of it. On two pretty big things, right, one which
Speaker 1: is this fiddle around of the Reserve Bank and then
Speaker 1: secondly the establishment of a branding Environmental Protection Agency. Let's
Speaker 1: deal with the questions in and around the RBA. First,
Speaker 1: the Greens leader.
Speaker 16: Have the power and it's therefore a reason. It's there
Speaker 16: because in emergencies and in crises, and we're saying that
Speaker 16: people are at breaking point and are in a crisis now,
Speaker 16: in the middle of a cost of living, an inequality crisis.
Speaker 16: Labors saying they want to take their hands off the
Speaker 16: steering wheel even more, and we're saying, no, that's not
Speaker 16: the answer.
Speaker 1: And Daniel Pliber sick about the negotiations with the Greens
Speaker 1: around the EPA and a climate switch that would be
Speaker 1: built into things.
Speaker 6: I've got to be clear, we are in intense negotiations
Speaker 6: right across the Parliament. I'm not going to pretend to
Speaker 6: you that there's you know, there's no discussion of climate
Speaker 6: considerations as part of this negotiation. I can't can't pretend that.
Speaker 1: So let's step back a little bit. Let's take the
Speaker 1: thirty thousand foot view of this. Bromman. The Liberal Party
Speaker 1: obviously thinks we're not going to help you stuff things up,
Speaker 1: so you have to stuff them up with the Greens,
Speaker 1: the Teals and others, because then we can go to
Speaker 1: an election and say vote for us, and all of
Speaker 1: this goes away. But of course, potential changes of the Senate,
Speaker 1: let alone, the fold over of half Senate means the
Speaker 1: chance of there being a center right majority after the
Speaker 1: next election in the Senate probably unlikely, meaning you'd be
Speaker 1: stuck with this stuff and you'd have to say, well, look,
Speaker 1: we tried to change it, but we can't. So what
Speaker 1: do you think the strategy is here and do you
Speaker 1: have to negotiate in order to make it better for
Speaker 1: when you eventually take over or you're just trying to
Speaker 1: throw as many bricks in the backpack of the government.
Speaker 17: Look, you've got to understand what's really going on here.
Speaker 17: Albernizey's leadership is toast. He is so bad that you've
Speaker 17: got people counting numbers now. Charmers and Burke been out
Speaker 17: there putting their case forward for a long long time.
Speaker 17: Plibosek thinks she's in the mix. Now, if you're going
Speaker 17: to be in the mix, what do you do. You've
Speaker 17: got to be hard and strong, you've got to be different.
Speaker 17: So stop the mind say we're going to put it
Speaker 17: in the climate trigger if you don't give.
Speaker 10: It to us.
Speaker 17: This is all about positioning. So that's the Labor Party position.
Speaker 17: From the Liberal Party's point of view, they've got legitimate
Speaker 17: reasons to say no to what's being proposed. I'll say now,
Speaker 17: I do believe that Dutton has got the ability to
Speaker 17: form a government, and I do think that Victoria down
Speaker 17: your part of the well Stephen, is going to be
Speaker 17: very bad for the Labor Party really, and the anger
Speaker 17: against the Labor Party down there is so great that
Speaker 17: the Liberal Party that the federal election is going to
Speaker 17: become before the state election. And I think a couple
Speaker 17: of others have pointed out that the last time this
Speaker 17: sort of happened was when Andrew Peacock won nine seats
Speaker 17: in the nineteen ninety election, which occurred before Jeffrey Kennett. Now,
Speaker 17: the reason I remember that so well is I was
Speaker 17: very much in that election with Andrew Peacock and New
Speaker 17: Southwelles fail to win a seat, and that was for
Speaker 17: all sorts of other reasons which I won't go into tonight.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but what's fascinating about what you're saying there is
Speaker 1: there's some polling out today that yet again shows the
Speaker 1: Allen gouvernment going backwards and with a massive number of undecideds.
Speaker 1: But potentially what that Presuido bloke may will end up
Speaker 1: being the preferred premier, which.
Speaker 17: Is, oh, you've got John kerna Mark two.
Speaker 1: Well correct, all right, Steven lots there. But to the
Speaker 1: tactics around all of this, right, you obviously want to
Speaker 1: get an achievement through. You have to find the numbers
Speaker 1: to get it through. But don't the Greens make everything
Speaker 1: worse when you're going into a tight election, let alone
Speaker 1: what happens in three years from now.
Speaker 10: Look, I mean there's absolutely a clear and present danger
Speaker 10: to Labor if they were to form any sort of
Speaker 10: ongoing relationship with the Greens. And I know Bromwin will
Speaker 10: start interjecting any second, but if we could just put
Speaker 10: that aside. So the sort of mistake that we made
Speaker 10: in twenty ten was to sign a formal document with
Speaker 10: Bob Brown. That was a mistake and we paid a
Speaker 10: heavy price for that. So I don't think there's any
Speaker 10: danger that Labor would form any so sort of overarching
Speaker 10: relationship the Senate. No party has. I think Howard had
Speaker 10: it for a few years, phrase at it for a
Speaker 10: few years. But apart from that, it's always a negotiation
Speaker 10: to try and get legislation passed, and sometimes you have
Speaker 10: to accept amendments you might agree with. Now, I don't
Speaker 10: agree with the Greens on much as both of you
Speaker 10: would understand. On the Reserve Bank Board issue, I could
Speaker 10: live comfortably with keeping that reserve power. I don't think
Speaker 10: it's been exercised. I don't think it means anything in substance.
Speaker 10: I think that's why Jim Chalmers said, look, it doesn't
Speaker 10: really matter. But if we were to say no, let's
Speaker 10: keep it. It's been there under both labor and liberal
Speaker 10: governments before. So if that was the cost to fix
Speaker 10: the Reserve Bank Board's stupidity, then then well.
Speaker 1: One that was on and.
Speaker 17: Not not leaving the current people who are setting the interest.
Speaker 10: When the board has been the board has been stacked
Speaker 10: by the Liberal Party for ten years. A bunch of
Speaker 10: Liberal Party flunkies are there. So please don't go, oh
Speaker 10: my god.
Speaker 1: You're attack on the results.
Speaker 17: I think you do it every night.
Speaker 10: So I'm happy to do it again. I've got a
Speaker 10: whole list of things there.
Speaker 1: That I want to sign. One you got thirty seconds.
Speaker 10: On the Reserve Bank. That on the Reserve Bank Board,
Speaker 10: that is that is actually out come I think is reasonable.
Speaker 10: So I don't think the Green's position is outrageous on
Speaker 10: that one. On the climate trigger, well, I think there's
Speaker 10: a lot of dangers change the party would the Party
Speaker 10: would would struggle, and the Liberals if they were to
Speaker 10: allow this to be the price, the Liberals would pay
Speaker 10: the price for this down the track as well. So
Speaker 10: they've got to make a tough choice whether they want
Speaker 10: to live with something that is bad for the country
Speaker 10: in the future or the prepared to negotiate.
Speaker 1: Yeah, don't give Well, that's the thing you got to
Speaker 1: view it about that teal section of things, let alone
Speaker 1: obviously the National Party. We're sadly at a time. I
Speaker 1: know you're ready to go. You've got plenty more of
Speaker 1: I've got analyst standing by in DC.
Speaker 10: I've got a list here, I've got a whole list.
Speaker 1: I have no doubt. All Right, thank you guys, love
Speaker 1: you both. We'll see you again next.
Speaker 17: I was just going to tell you they can move
Speaker 17: another disallowance motion against the mine.
Speaker 1: Oh yes, of course they should do it. Do it
Speaker 1: as soon as you're possible. Thank you. See some free
Speaker 1: advice appreciated. Analysee Nielson live from the United States the
Speaker 1: morning after the big debate. Do you know how hard
Speaker 1: it's been for me not to call Analyse Nielsen for
Speaker 1: the past twelve hours or so, because I wanted to
Speaker 1: talk to her about the debate. We texted a little bit,
Speaker 1: but I thought, no, let's have the conversation on the TV.
Speaker 1: She is, of course in the United States right now
Speaker 1: where the sun is coming up. Analyse over to you.
Speaker 1: I think that the biggest challenge that she had was
Speaker 1: to reach out to people and look presidential. I don't
Speaker 1: know that she did that. I think she certainly whacked
Speaker 1: Trump enough. So if you're a Trump hater, it was
Speaker 1: the greatest night of all time. But guess what, She's
Speaker 1: already got those people your thoughts.
Speaker 13: Absolutely, And look, we were at a very Democrat heavy
Speaker 13: event and so for those voters, they were excited to
Speaker 13: see Carmla's performance. But I don't think it's necessarily moved
Speaker 13: the dial. What it's done is given her enough ammunition
Speaker 13: to fight the next two months. And it's not a
Speaker 13: gift to say that this is a very unprecedented election,
Speaker 13: the fact she just took over the ticket.
Speaker 5: But there were a lot of issues.
Speaker 13: With how the debate was run, and I think that's
Speaker 13: another thing that we need to take into consideration with this.
Speaker 13: I think that the Trump supporters are going to be
Speaker 13: extremely angry.
Speaker 5: We're going to try and get out and talk to
Speaker 5: some of them today.
Speaker 13: But the fact that the moderators were waiting in to
Speaker 13: the discussion was very different to how CNN ran it,
Speaker 13: and I think that did change it. And the other
Speaker 13: thing I can tell your view is we get access
Speaker 13: to the White House pool reports, and they did allow
Speaker 13: White House Press pool reporters in the room.
Speaker 5: This time.
Speaker 13: There was back and forth between the two candidates off mike,
Speaker 13: and I think musing the mic gave viewers at home
Speaker 13: a completely different perspective to what was happening on stage,
Speaker 13: and not necessarily for the better.
Speaker 1: Okay, so could you give me an idea there about
Speaker 1: what are we hearing. Are we hearing that she got
Speaker 1: a couple of jabs in that we didn't see, or
Speaker 1: that he pushed back. What's the general tone, because again
Speaker 1: we sort of we obviously didn't see who was winning those,
Speaker 1: But give us an idea. That's fascinating.
Speaker 13: Well, look, it sounded like she I'm sorry that the
Speaker 13: car exaust coming over the screen.
Speaker 5: If you're wondering what that smoke is, that's all right.
Speaker 5: What we saw was her getting.
Speaker 13: Some jabs in promise something, not smoking you. What we
Speaker 13: saw we saw her getting jabs in and Donald Trump
Speaker 13: was really defensive, and I think that's where he seemed
Speaker 13: to fall down in this.
Speaker 5: He let her get under.
Speaker 13: His skin, and he was on the defense for so
Speaker 13: much of the debate, and so he got that pushback,
Speaker 13: that one moment where he said, I'm speaking HARKing back
Speaker 13: to her debate against Mike Pence in twenty twenty. That
Speaker 13: was kind of her iconic line that her supporters loved.
Speaker 13: But I think that's going to be the thing that
Speaker 13: really defined how this debate ran. I don't think anyone's
Speaker 13: minds would have been changed.
Speaker 5: By last night.
Speaker 13: There was no fatal blow they both got in their
Speaker 13: talking points. I mean the fact that she was asked
Speaker 13: to rule out abortions at six seven, eight months and
Speaker 13: couldn't say that. When she was asked about has the
Speaker 13: economy been better in these four years than it was
Speaker 13: four years ago, and she couldn't answer that either. This
Speaker 13: is why there isn't anything in this that was a
Speaker 13: death blow. But it certainly gave her the opportunity to
Speaker 13: fight another few months.
Speaker 1: Now, you know, you to swap just for a week.
Speaker 1: You're in of course Pennsylvania. She's there in the heart
Speaker 1: of Philly. That's the super blue bit. But as you say,
Speaker 1: you're going to hop in the car check out lots
Speaker 1: of different places. I know you've been to Erie Pennsylvania.
Speaker 1: Like if I could sit and plunk a show anywhere
Speaker 1: for a month and it'd be Eerie Pennsylvania, because that
Speaker 1: is the swingy bit of the swingy state. Right. So yeah, again,
Speaker 1: the perceptions of the debate will be fascinating to see
Speaker 1: in the next little while. Every pole says that it's
Speaker 1: absolutely line ball all the rest of it. Even the
Speaker 1: insiders have no idea what's going to happen in that
Speaker 1: state and who wins there, wins.
Speaker 13: Everywhere absolutely, And look, we came here after they announced
Speaker 13: the campaign for Karmala Harris and Tim Wallas is a
Speaker 13: joint ticket, and there was huge enthusiasm for Kamala Harris.
Speaker 13: People felt relieved that Joe Biden had dropped out. They
Speaker 13: felt like they had been given a second chance this
Speaker 13: time around. We're not seeing that across the board. It
Speaker 13: does seem like the dust has settled on that the
Speaker 13: enthusiasms waned, and people are staring down this election really
Speaker 13: wondering how how it's going to go there's not a
Speaker 13: huge sense that there's leaning either way.
Speaker 5: And this is one of the things why we.
Speaker 13: Come out and talk to voters, because the polls aren't
Speaker 13: always right, but you can get a great sense on
Speaker 13: the ground. The sense we're getting is this is still
Speaker 13: extremely tight and all that polling is coming in well
Speaker 13: within the margin of era. There's no way that this
Speaker 13: is not a race that Donald Trump can win.
Speaker 5: Right now.
Speaker 13: He's absolutely still fighting chance. And I think there could
Speaker 13: be another debate now after how last night went, especially
Speaker 13: now that Fox News has reached out.
Speaker 5: That would be a real test for.
Speaker 13: Kamala Harris if she could survive in that kind of
Speaker 13: environment where the moderators aren't facilitating with that kind of
Speaker 13: the pushback really went Donald Trump's way.
Speaker 5: Good stuff, moerators.
Speaker 1: And alas morning, noon night. Thank you no matter where
Speaker 1: you are, you're always so avitable to everyone here. You're
Speaker 1: the best. We love you, Dunalan and we'll see this
Speaker 1: very soon. There she is in Philadelphia in Pennsylvania. Oh,
Speaker 1: she's got a great gig and she does an amazing
Speaker 1: job at it. That's our show to night, said tomorrow.
Speaker 1: Megan Kelly's on the sho shot