Speaker 1: Welcome back to a Numbers game with Ryan Groski. Thank
Speaker 1: you all for being here. I want to say Happy
Speaker 1: Saint Patrick's Day and recording this the day before, so
Speaker 1: it is Saint Patrick's Day as the recording of this,
Speaker 1: and I want to wish everyone who is of Irish
Speaker 1: ancestry or who has Irish ancestry. I meant to say,
Speaker 1: who has Irish ancestry like myself, a very happy Saint
Speaker 1: Patrick Day. I hope you all celebrate being Irish, really
Speaker 1: being Irish, which apparently the President of Ireland and the
Speaker 1: Prime Minister of Ireland do not share my joy of
Speaker 1: the history of the Celtic people. I don't know if
Speaker 1: if anyone saw it, but Michael Martin, the Prime Minister
Speaker 1: of Ireland, was in Washington on Saint Patrick's Day. I
Speaker 1: attended an event in the morning with Vice President of Advance.
Speaker 1: There was a prayer. President Advance blessed himself. Michael Martin
Speaker 1: didn't because the Irish politicians are allergic to being Catholic
Speaker 1: or having Catholic ancestry and lineage to them. Then sat
Speaker 1: with President Trump and nod how Ireland has just been
Speaker 1: thriving because of mass immigration. One in four people living
Speaker 1: in Ireland now is an immigrant. They've opened the floodgates
Speaker 1: across the country to Ireland and to the Middle East,
Speaker 1: and it's doing wonders for petty theft and for housing prices.
Speaker 1: And you know there's Irish citizens rogue, Irish citizens burning
Speaker 1: down asylum hotels. He mentions none of that. He says
Speaker 1: it's right with the economy is thriving. And Trump, to
Speaker 1: his credit, actually did push back and said a lot
Speaker 1: of problems are coming with it. And then over in
Speaker 1: Ireland you had the new Irish president, Catherine Connolly, who
Speaker 1: wore black, refused to call Saint Patrick Saint Patrick. She's
Speaker 1: called him Patrick as if she was his drinking buddy,
Speaker 1: and then talked about how it's really a day about migration.
Speaker 1: For those who don't know the history of Saint Patrick.
Speaker 1: He was a slave. He wasn't a migrant. It is
Speaker 1: an insult to call a he was a slave. I mean,
Speaker 1: it was no migration, there was no passport. He went there.
Speaker 1: He was forcibly brought to Ireland, but did great things
Speaker 1: with his time there. And it's absolutely in furi The
Speaker 1: Irish politicians who govern that country are embarrassments. I know,
Speaker 1: I have a few Irish listeners. I have relatives who
Speaker 1: live in County Cork, I have relatives who live in Belfast.
Speaker 1: It's an embarrassment. It's the most embarrassing politicians of any
Speaker 1: country in Europe. And England has Cure Starmer. That just
Speaker 1: goes to show how badly Ireland has fallen on its times.
Speaker 1: And Ireland is the last country in all of Europe,
Speaker 1: to Western Europe especially not to have an effective populist
Speaker 1: party pushing back in immigration. I know there's the Independence
Speaker 1: Ireland Party, but they're very small, they're very minor. They're
Speaker 1: trying to get it together. They only have I think
Speaker 1: three seats in their parliament, not enough to have any
Speaker 1: kind of effective governing. And the three major parties all
Speaker 1: believe in the same thing, which is the erasure of
Speaker 1: Irish history, of Irish people in Irish culture. Absolutely horror,
Speaker 1: especially on a day to celebrate the resilience of the
Speaker 1: Irish people and all that Ireland gave the world. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's absolutely astonishing. And you know, it's so funny. There
Speaker 1: was an app on I see the ads on Instagram
Speaker 1: all the time. It's a history app. I don't know
Speaker 1: the name of it, but they one day talked about
Speaker 1: the two hundred thousand Irish orphans that were shipped to
Speaker 1: America and used basically as slave labor, and Irish slavery,
Speaker 1: which has never talked about in his own country. And
Speaker 1: the endurance of the Irish people to survive is by
Speaker 1: famine and really horrific treatment, and now their politicians are
Speaker 1: willing to wipe that all away in the name of diversity.
Speaker 1: They have traded hatred for the English for hatred for themselves.
Speaker 1: And to quote a short lived poem by Patrick Pierce,
Speaker 1: I am come of the seed of the people, the
Speaker 1: people of that sorrow, that have no treasure, but hope,
Speaker 1: no riches, laid a memory of an ancient glory. My
Speaker 1: mother bore me into bondage, and as my mother was born,
Speaker 1: I come of the seat of the people, the people
Speaker 1: that sorrow. There's no reason Irish people to have any
Speaker 1: sense of guilt whatsoever, or to destroy their heritage and
Speaker 1: their country by flooding it with migrants from across the world.
Speaker 1: Ireland needs, you know, a place for the Irish. It
Speaker 1: is what it is anyway. I'm not an Irish citizen.
Speaker 1: I don't know why I care so much. I think
Speaker 1: it's because the Irish heritage, and I have relatives named Seamus,
Speaker 1: so I mean, you get about Irish as it gets,
Speaker 1: and just to see that just our collective ancestry being
Speaker 1: washed away. Okay, enough about Ireland, let's talk about America.
Speaker 1: I am. I know what you're all thinking right now.
Speaker 1: You're all thinking, Ryan, you were right again? How did
Speaker 1: you know? How'd you do it? And you're probably all saying,
Speaker 1: what are you talking about? So I set a month
Speaker 1: ago on this podcast that Hakem Jeffrey is going to
Speaker 1: quickly wake up and realize that if he has a
Speaker 1: House majority in January, it will be the house that
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders built. Bernie Sanders and progressive activists who love
Speaker 1: Bernie have been winning primaries across the country. They are
Speaker 1: changing the face of the Democratic Party, and a lot
Speaker 1: of them not big fans of Hakeem Jeffries, and they're
Speaker 1: increasingly saying they're unsure if they're going to support him
Speaker 1: for House Speaker. Axios. That's what I said a month ago.
Speaker 1: Now Axis is out with a new report that had
Speaker 1: a number of Democratic candidates coming forward and saying they
Speaker 1: are unsure who the next Speaker will be that they're
Speaker 1: not gung ho for Hakim. This is the quint of
Speaker 1: axious Why it matters. It is a stark reversal from Jefferies'
Speaker 1: virtual untouchable standing in the Democratic Party just a few
Speaker 1: years ago, and a sign that has passed the speaker
Speaker 1: may be rockier then previously thought. Jeffries and his allies
Speaker 1: maintained there's not a remotely worried about a massed affection,
Speaker 1: pointing out that even the minority, he has endured twenty
Speaker 1: speaker ballots and hasn't lost a Democratic vote. But this
Speaker 1: crop of freshmen may provide the first chink in here
Speaker 1: two four impenetrable armor, with a block of genuinely viable
Speaker 1: candidates making clear that voting for Jeffries as Speaker is
Speaker 1: not a given if the Democrats take the House. As
Speaker 1: of now, there are eighty candidates running for a Congress
Speaker 1: this year who say they are not committed to backing Jeffries.
Speaker 1: That is not a small number. Especially Democrats find themselves
Speaker 1: in the same place that Kevin McCarthy did a couple
Speaker 1: of years ago. You have a majority, it's not a
Speaker 1: huge majority. What do you do A couple of defections
Speaker 1: means you have to concede a lot of things to them.
Speaker 1: It means you're not guaranteed to get the speakership. And
Speaker 1: in the era of Trump two point zero term two
Speaker 1: point zero, there is a lot of belief among rank
Speaker 1: and not rank Bible but activist Democrats the Democratic Party
Speaker 1: is not doing enough to fight the Orange Man right
Speaker 1: that the Democrats have gone along with funding the government
Speaker 1: that they've gone along with other things that they should
Speaker 1: have been doing more whatever it is more, I don't know.
Speaker 1: I think some Democrat activists would have wanted the Democrats
Speaker 1: to shut down the government of day one. They possibly
Speaker 1: could have and kept the government shut down all four years.
Speaker 1: And Jeffries hasn't gone along with that because being leader
Speaker 1: means you have to govern responsibly, So no surprise that
Speaker 1: he didn't do that. What Jeffries has going for him
Speaker 1: is the same thing that McCarthy had going for me
Speaker 1: is that there's no central opposition. Pelosi faced opposition a
Speaker 1: few times while she was Speaker, but there was a
Speaker 1: person running against her. There was a guy who running
Speaker 1: against her and saying I'm going to be the opposition.
Speaker 1: They always lost, but there was someone to rally troops
Speaker 1: against Pelosi. There is no one rallying troops against Jeffrey's
Speaker 1: like there's no one reallyships against McCarthy. They may be
Speaker 1: someone saying I don't want him to be in power,
Speaker 1: but there's no no one's saying vote for me instead,
Speaker 1: which is important. Matt Gateston on McCarthy. But they didn't
Speaker 1: find a consensus candidate. Wasn't like Gates himself was being
Speaker 1: presented as a choice for speaker. There was nobody. It
Speaker 1: was either McCarthy or nobody. And they're kind of having
Speaker 1: the same situation with the Democratic Party right now. They
Speaker 1: don't have a singular person offering a progressive vision who
Speaker 1: could raise money, because that's a big part of the
Speaker 1: job is who can raise money. And the truth is
Speaker 1: you can't beat somebody with nobody, unless AOC or someone
Speaker 1: like that who has the belief, the support, the troops,
Speaker 1: the money, and I can't with this money is very
Speaker 1: important for the speaker. You're not going to find somebody
Speaker 1: kind of break Hakeem Jefferies' lock on the Democratic Party.
Speaker 1: So Haqem is safe right now, but things are dicey
Speaker 1: and if they don't get their way or they kept blank,
Speaker 1: or they cave one or two times, and they have
Speaker 1: a small majority, it's going to be very very dicey
Speaker 1: for Jeffries going anyway. That's my little nod to my
Speaker 1: audience telling I told you guys, I was ahead of
Speaker 1: the curb. I knew what was happening, and I think
Speaker 1: this is going to be a long term issue for
Speaker 1: Hikim Jeffreys and whoever governs the Democrats in the House.
Speaker 1: The Democrats are going to act a lot more like
Speaker 1: the Republicans in the House when it comes to being
Speaker 1: less orderly. Now, I want to talk about something else
Speaker 1: that people think is very far into the future, but
Speaker 1: it's actually only a few months away, and that is
Speaker 1: the twenty twenty eight presidential election. I know some of
Speaker 1: you are like Ryan, that's four years away. No, it's not.
Speaker 1: The first candidates who will announce their run for the
Speaker 1: White House will happen within the next nine months. Basically,
Speaker 1: you will have you could have a baby if you
Speaker 1: get pregnant today, and you will have a Democrat running
Speaker 1: for president or a Republican running for president by the
Speaker 1: time that baby is born. It's not a long time
Speaker 1: left before we're entering into the twenty twenty eight presidential cycle,
Speaker 1: and there's two things. There's two essential questions, which is
Speaker 1: one is JD Evans inevitable on the Republican side and
Speaker 1: who is the most likely candidate on the Democratic side.
Speaker 1: Let's go into the Republican side first. I get messages
Speaker 1: about JD literally every single week from somebody saying, you know,
Speaker 1: is the nomination process really over? What has he done
Speaker 1: to deserve the nomination? Is he ready to be president?
Speaker 1: Can we nominate someone else? Or is somebody else going
Speaker 1: to run? Let me answer the last question first, Is
Speaker 1: someone else going to run? Yes, other people are going
Speaker 1: to run. Ted Cruz is almost definitely running for president.
Speaker 1: You know, he believes that he's got some kind of
Speaker 1: compact with God where he ends up being president one day.
Speaker 1: He's almost destined. He's got this, you know, destined from
Speaker 1: from Christ himself to be president United States side. Note,
Speaker 1: you guys remember when he picked Carly Fiorini as his
Speaker 1: vice presidential candidate and they kind of grass hands and
Speaker 1: missed each other's hands at the rally. I don't know
Speaker 1: why that kind of flashed in my memory as I
Speaker 1: was recalling Ted Cruz running for president, but it did.
Speaker 1: I've also heard rumors that Brian Kemp, Governor Georgia, is
Speaker 1: strongly considering a run. Ron to Santa's governor Florida is
Speaker 1: considering a run. I've heard Josh Holly, the Senator from Missouri,
Speaker 1: is asking questions. Ram Paul says that he's exploring his options.
Speaker 1: He's the senator from Kentucky. Steve Bannon, I've heard for
Speaker 1: a while wanted to run. But the Epstein stuff, the
Speaker 1: idea that he made this video tape with Epstein, not
Speaker 1: not those kinds of tapes, but a different kind of
Speaker 1: tape with Epstein and was interviewing him and never released
Speaker 1: the footage and could have been very complimentary for Epstein,
Speaker 1: possibly in the footage. Whatever the case may be, I heard,
Speaker 1: it's really hurt his potential of running. There's other people
Speaker 1: who want to run but don't really have a lane.
Speaker 1: Telsea Gabbard I heard, is interested but doesn't know if
Speaker 1: she has got a lane. R Okay Junior very much
Speaker 1: wants to make a run for something and doesn't know
Speaker 1: if he has a lane. And then there's the nine
Speaker 1: hundred pounds elephant in the room, which is Mark or Rubio.
Speaker 1: Now Rubio has been doing optionally good job as Secretary
Speaker 1: of State, and everyone has taken notice, including the president,
Speaker 1: and it's clear that Rubio is having an effect on
Speaker 1: the President's thinking when it comes to foreign policy. According
Speaker 1: to several reports, President Trump has asked multile people if
Speaker 1: he should endure Vance or Rubia for president, and at
Speaker 1: least one report said that a lot of donors really
Speaker 1: do love Rubio. They love Rubia Moore. Also, I want
Speaker 1: to point out that Susie is very close to Rubio
Speaker 1: as well. Susie the chiefest staff. Now. Polling on the
Speaker 1: twenty twenty eight presidential race is very, very difficult because
Speaker 1: there are multiple names that are being floated in these
Speaker 1: polls who are not running, like Donald Trump Junior is
Speaker 1: not running for president. There is no reason why a
Speaker 1: pollster is throwing his name on a poll because it
Speaker 1: changes the poll's outcome. Because the polls very very high.
Speaker 1: Is the president's son, and it absolutely affects the way
Speaker 1: that these polls are coming out in the certainty of
Speaker 1: these polls, so other poles that just have the most
Speaker 1: likely contenders. Vans has a formidable twenty two thirty point
Speaker 1: lead against Rubio, who's a distance second, and then Dessanta's
Speaker 1: is in third, and he's just in the high single
Speaker 1: digits in early swing states and polls like in New Hampshire,
Speaker 1: Advance is more than fifty percent. Even Rubio is not
Speaker 1: even in double digits. Now. Obviously, if Trump were to
Speaker 1: endorse Rubeo over Vans, that would change things considerably. But
Speaker 1: I have a hard time seeing that happen. And here's
Speaker 1: the reason Vans is doing fundraising for the twenty twenty
Speaker 1: six midterms. Vance is creating these independent relationships with donors.
Speaker 1: Vance is also whilst campaign isn't up and running yet,
Speaker 1: it will escalate quickly after the midterms, and it will
Speaker 1: have a lot of the infrastructure from the Trump twenty
Speaker 1: twenty four campaign on his side and Rubio. That's I
Speaker 1: think that's why Rubio has firmly said I'm not running.
Speaker 1: Advance is running now. If there's going to be some
Speaker 1: kind of upset where Rubio is shocks everybody and announces,
Speaker 1: it has to be in the next six months, because
Speaker 1: it's got to be. You have to get the jump
Speaker 1: start to create a parallel organization and kind of take
Speaker 1: over part of the Trump organization that I don't think
Speaker 1: that Advance would just give up on his own. So no,
Speaker 1: I don't think that vance is inevitable. But if you
Speaker 1: were a betting man and you're placing your house on
Speaker 1: the betting markets, you should bet on vance. That's what
Speaker 1: my opinion. Now on the Democratic side, there's so many
Speaker 1: people running it is becoming a clown car. You have
Speaker 1: Kentucky Governor Andy Basheer, Senator of from New Jersey, Corey Booker.
Speaker 1: You have Pete Buddhagjeeds. You have Rammanuel, former White House
Speaker 1: Sheep of Staff or President Obama and mayor of Chicago.
Speaker 1: You have Josh Green, the governor of Hawaii. I had
Speaker 1: to look him up to I don't know who Josh
Speaker 1: Green was when I first read that he was considering running.
Speaker 1: Kamala Harris, the former Democratic nominee from twenty twenty four.
Speaker 1: Senator Mark Kelly from Arizona, Senator Ruben Gego from Arizona,
Speaker 1: Congressman Roe Connor from California, Governor Gavin Newsom from California,
Speaker 1: Congress from Alexander Cortest from New York, Centator John Auso
Speaker 1: from Georgia, Governor J. P. Pritzker from Illinois, and Governor
Speaker 1: Joshapiro from Pennsylvania. Okay, that is the people who are
Speaker 1: running on the Democratic side so far, those of the
Speaker 1: names being floated so far. Early polls at this part
Speaker 1: far out without someone sitting in office, really is about
Speaker 1: name ID and obviously Kamala Harrison Gavin Newsom have the
Speaker 1: highest name I D they have the upper hand in
Speaker 1: these polls. But what is more important than the name
Speaker 1: recognition for the Democratic nomination is the calendar. No one
Speaker 1: is talking about this. See, the Democratic primaries has changed
Speaker 1: significantly where states like Iowa and New Hampshire, which used
Speaker 1: to go first, have been pushed aside from South Carolina.
Speaker 1: The Democratic Party says they're too white, and you know,
Speaker 1: white people, if they get a voice in the Democratic Party,
Speaker 1: it's you know, that's bad news. Can't can't let a
Speaker 1: white man from the Midwest have a voice in the
Speaker 1: Democratic Party. Absolutely not allowed. So they've moved to South Carolina,
Speaker 1: which is a majority black voting population with the Democratic primary.
Speaker 1: And that is the way that most of the Deep
Speaker 1: South still is. There's something like Florida. I don't think
Speaker 1: that it's like that anymore. Texas is not like that anymore.
Speaker 1: But most of the states in the South are still
Speaker 1: black majority Democratic voting bates, and they favor candidates who
Speaker 1: are more establishment, who are more centrists, and they give
Speaker 1: the Democratic nomination. It is almost virtually impossible to win
Speaker 1: the Democratic nomination without the support of older black women
Speaker 1: in the Deep South. They nominated Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton,
Speaker 1: Barack Obama, Bill Clinton. I mean only I think John Kerry,
Speaker 1: and only because John Kerry won all the states before
Speaker 1: the South, and so by that point it was just
Speaker 1: kind of cleaning up. I think he lost, you know,
Speaker 1: I think he lost North and South Carolina, but he
Speaker 1: was the only one and he was able to speak
Speaker 1: basically everywhere else. He might have lost one other state
Speaker 1: to I think maybe lost Oklahoma as well, but he
Speaker 1: basically swept the entire race very very quickly. But he
Speaker 1: was once again the only one. So you need the
Speaker 1: Deep South. You need old ladies, the black old ladies
Speaker 1: Deep South. And who they support is who the likely
Speaker 1: Democratic nominee eventually will be. They're not going to support
Speaker 1: a people to judge. They're not going to vote for
Speaker 1: a gay candidate. They're not going to support a radical
Speaker 1: left winger. They're not going to support a Bernie Sanders.
Speaker 1: They probably will not support an AOC. So that's who
Speaker 1: you have to keep an eye out for. If you're
Speaker 1: going to stare at cross poles, at crosstabs and polls,
Speaker 1: that's who you want to look at. How are black
Speaker 1: voters in the South considering who are they voting for
Speaker 1: right now? They really do like Kamala Harris still because
Speaker 1: she was the nominee, she's a black woman. We'll see
Speaker 1: if they find favor or of love with anybody else,
Speaker 1: but right now, according to the most recent pole, there's
Speaker 1: been no polls in South Carolina, but according to the
Speaker 1: most recent nationwide poles, thirty six percent of black voters
Speaker 1: say Kamala Harris and if she holds true that she
Speaker 1: could absolutely be the nominee. Again with me to discuss
Speaker 1: all things twenty twenty eight is the great journal us
Speaker 1: Mark Apprin that's coming up with me to discuss the
Speaker 1: twenty twenty eight election is legendary journalist Mark Appron of
Speaker 1: Next up with Mark Auburn and Chwo Way Fame. Thank
Speaker 1: you so much for coming on.
Speaker 2: Mark, honor to be here, sir, Thank you for inkluing
Speaker 2: so Mark.
Speaker 1: The question I get all the time, and I had
Speaker 1: asked literally once a week is is JD. Vance inevitable?
Speaker 1: What is your opinion on that?
Speaker 2: I thought he was, and now I don't. I think
Speaker 2: the three things have happened and make him short of inevitable.
Speaker 2: He's still the base case, I think. Still the most
Speaker 2: likely outcome, probably still by far, is that he decides
Speaker 2: to run, the President endorses him, and he's the nominee
Speaker 2: by consensus and probably runs with Marco Rubio. But three
Speaker 2: things have happened. First of all, the rise of Rubio,
Speaker 2: just the groundswell of interest in in and support of him,
Speaker 2: and the belief amongst many stakeholders that Rubio would be
Speaker 2: a better nominee is pretty big. So that's number one.
Speaker 2: Number two, Vance has rubbed some people the wrong way,
Speaker 2: and his public appearances and his private meetings with donors.
Speaker 2: He's just went from a run of nine months or
Speaker 2: so of extreme popularity and being extremely well received, and
Speaker 2: now some people having questions about his personality and about
Speaker 2: his failure to repudiate people like Tucker Carlson, so some
Speaker 2: doubts about him. And then, lastly, as it's become a
Speaker 2: kind of a possibility that it won't be Vance, whether
Speaker 2: Ted Cruz runs or other people run, just a sentiment
Speaker 2: of he needs to earn this, that it wouldn't be
Speaker 2: in the party's interest, and it wouldn't be right to
Speaker 2: simply hand him the nomination, and that there should be
Speaker 2: whatever needs to happen to make it a competitive process
Speaker 2: needs to happen. So those three things have combined to
Speaker 2: make me pull back from my view that it was
Speaker 2: a mortal locke for Vance.
Speaker 1: Well, I mean, Ted Cruz is going to run no
Speaker 1: matter what. Ted Cruz thinks that he's got a contract
Speaker 1: with Jesus Christ to be president one day. That is,
Speaker 1: you know this vision from above. I don't care who's
Speaker 1: running with Siza, and there's other people who want to run.
Speaker 1: I know Ron de Santas has made phone calls. I
Speaker 1: know that Brian Camp has made phone calls. There are
Speaker 1: people who have that dream of the presidency hasn't loss
Speaker 1: upon him. But there is a belief among people in
Speaker 1: Vance camp that there shouldn't that the vice president shouldn't
Speaker 1: even be on a debate stage with anybody else, that
Speaker 1: he should be running by himself. Is that you think
Speaker 1: the wrong opinion to make among Republican voters.
Speaker 2: Well, it's a long time before voters have a say
Speaker 2: in this, and I think I still think that there's
Speaker 2: a chance to Mansel decide with his young children not
Speaker 2: to run. I just wouldn't rule that out. But if
Speaker 2: he decides to run, I find it hard to believe
Speaker 2: that he wouldn't get the president's endorsement. And then the
Speaker 2: question is, is the RNC finance share, which is a
Speaker 2: unique slot, would be given to an incumbent vice president
Speaker 2: with presidential ambitions as someone who still retains an extraordinary
Speaker 2: amount of goodwill within the party is the front runner
Speaker 2: in the polls. I think he'd win every element of
Speaker 2: the invisible primary well before any votes were cast, So
Speaker 2: that's what would lead him to get Trump's endorsement. And
Speaker 2: I think to largely clear the field again, well before
Speaker 2: anybody voter to voters, to voters eventually, if he refused
Speaker 2: to debate, if he didn't clear the field, would they care? Maybe?
Speaker 2: But I think the question will largely be answered before
Speaker 2: voters cast.
Speaker 1: Why is van Why is Trump asking about Rubio all
Speaker 1: of a sudden? Does does Trump all of a sudden
Speaker 1: have a feeling like he's not as strong or that
Speaker 1: Rubio is so great?
Speaker 2: I'm an expert in politics and campaigns and government, not
Speaker 2: in psychology, but I'll do my best. I think he
Speaker 2: you know, he loves central casting, you know the concept
Speaker 2: of central casting. He loves people who do well on TV,
Speaker 2: and he's fascinated by kind of an anthropology. Right, So
Speaker 2: I think he thinks it's interesting how often he hears
Speaker 2: from people at mar A Lago and members of Congress
Speaker 2: and people reporters who he talks to. I have Rubio
Speaker 2: is kind of awesome? Is in Rubyo asome? He thinks, well,
Speaker 2: that's interesting. Why are people talking so much about how
Speaker 2: awesome Rubio is? Then I think, you know, as much
Speaker 2: as he may want to anoint Vance, eventually, you know,
Speaker 2: he likes competition. He likes to put scorpions in a
Speaker 2: bottle and or you know, go to the Bronx to
Speaker 2: a cock fight and see people hammer each other, and
Speaker 2: then you know, again he's a pretty sophisticated TV producer.
Speaker 2: He sees what I see, which is Vance has had
Speaker 2: some less than surefooted moments in public and Rubio has
Speaker 2: not of late. So probably all those things just make
Speaker 2: him want to make mischief. And he knows that even
Speaker 2: if he's his thought is you know, if I'm right
Speaker 2: then eventually he's going to endorse Vance. There's no cost
Speaker 2: to doing this now, and probably he sees an upside
Speaker 2: that Advance should have some competition, because if he endorsed
Speaker 2: Vance right away, or if he only said nice things
Speaker 2: about Advance, I think he probably believes Vance would get
Speaker 2: to the general election without any sort of test. And
Speaker 2: as you know, often candidates who have rough nomination fights
Speaker 2: go into the general election a lot more battle tested
Speaker 2: and ready for the fight. Then if they if they
Speaker 2: cruise the nomination.
Speaker 1: Also, he does create the situation where he really is
Speaker 1: a lame duck once there's a nominator follow It is
Speaker 1: a certain sight. You know. Steve Bannon once said if
Speaker 1: Trump would be the last president ever, that would be
Speaker 1: his dream like because he really would never want that
Speaker 1: to happen. And then and last part of this before
Speaker 1: we go on is, you know, the Tucker Carlson correlation
Speaker 1: with Vance is what I hear about so often, particularly
Speaker 1: from Jewish friends of mine, Jewish political activist, Jewish donors.
Speaker 1: I think it is really actually haunting him with a
Speaker 1: certain segment of the population that can't be understated. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's it's real, like, it's not fake. Anymore. I believe
Speaker 1: things are fake until I've heard it a million times.
Speaker 1: I'm like, Okay, maybe it's real, but I do believe
Speaker 1: it's real.
Speaker 2: Yeah, no way, it's for them, it's a question of
Speaker 2: character and values, and I think for some of them
Speaker 2: it's a question of competence. They just they think it's
Speaker 2: a no brainer to distance from Tucker. And and it's
Speaker 2: not just Tucker. You know, those those college Republicans who
Speaker 2: had the text chain where they you know, made jokes
Speaker 2: about Hitler some other people in MAGA, like the Vice
Speaker 2: president's attitude is seems to be in kind of a
Speaker 2: I would say, almost childish way, is to be like, ah,
Speaker 2: I'm not going to repudiate people just because people tell
Speaker 2: me to repudiate people without regard to well, like would
Speaker 2: you repudiate you know, Osama bid Laden, right, so so
Speaker 2: so I totally agree with you that I hear it
Speaker 2: all the time. And like I said, it's not just
Speaker 2: that it kind of rubs them the wrong way from
Speaker 2: a from a you know, like a political point of view.
Speaker 2: Really they think it speaks to his values, and of
Speaker 2: course it plays into the doubts that a lot of
Speaker 2: people have had about him. Over the course of his
Speaker 2: time in public life that he went from saying Trump
Speaker 2: was the Republican Parties Hitler to saying Trump was the
Speaker 2: greatest president of all time. And they just some people
Speaker 2: seeing him a phony and a person and without values
Speaker 2: and without a north Star. And the Tucker stuff plays
Speaker 2: into that for a lot of people, not just Jews,
Speaker 2: but a lot of Jews.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it is a lot of yeah. Okay. So on
Speaker 1: the Democratic side, Mark has this great ranking. I watch
Speaker 1: it every time you post a new one on the
Speaker 1: Democratic primary. Who is the most likely to get it?
Speaker 1: Who's not his the least likely to get it. You
Speaker 1: have been famously bearish on Gavin Newsom for a very
Speaker 1: long time until recently. You are extremely bullish though on
Speaker 1: Rama Manual, in my opinion, much more so than I
Speaker 1: would I really you speak very favorably about his possibility
Speaker 1: of him being nominated.
Speaker 2: Truly, my sources do, and I report what they say.
Speaker 2: I think there's a very small chance of his being
Speaker 2: the nomination, probably none except if except if lots of
Speaker 2: people don't run and the establishment just gathers random think that.
Speaker 2: I think his record with one of your favorite groups
Speaker 2: of teachers unions in Chicago. I think is his lack
Speaker 2: of bedside manner. I think is being Jewish, being short,
Speaker 2: I think being I think, he said opposition researchers dream. No,
Speaker 2: I'm sorry, I gave you the wrong impression. He's on
Speaker 2: my list of eight because of such a weak field
Speaker 2: and because he does have so much support for the establishment,
Speaker 2: and under certain circumstances, I believe he could be endorsed
Speaker 2: by both Barack Obama and Bill Clinton, which for a
Speaker 2: lot of voters could make a difference. Endorsements really do.
Speaker 2: But I think those might, So I'm not bullish on
Speaker 2: him at all. I'm aware though that a lot of
Speaker 2: my sources are what in your.
Speaker 1: Opinion, because I said, this is my monologue. The calendar
Speaker 1: is very important. If South Carolina goes first, black women
Speaker 1: in the South play an extraordinarily. You know, their vote really, really,
Speaker 1: really matters, and they are the vote that say Bill Clinton,
Speaker 1: Barack Obama and Joe Biden. Who is playing to the
Speaker 1: progressive base, who lives in New Hampshire and Vermont, and
Speaker 1: who is playing to black women in the Deep South
Speaker 1: and playing them strong because it's a complete at least
Speaker 1: out of different values.
Speaker 2: Well, yes and no, I mean in this field, in
Speaker 2: this Republican in this Democratic Party. I don't know that
Speaker 2: that's some sort of like existential choice between the two.
Speaker 2: I think right now at this phase, at least, what voters,
Speaker 2: whether they're Bernie Sanders, you know, living on the New
Speaker 2: Hampshire border Vermont border in New Hampshire, or whether they're
Speaker 2: you know, seventy year old black women who vote regularly
Speaker 2: in South Carolina. They want someone who'll stand up to Trump.
Speaker 2: They want someone who's got energy, they want someone who
Speaker 2: seems to be able to bridge the divides within the
Speaker 2: party and within the country. So I think I unlike
Speaker 2: some past cycles, and again partly it's because the calendar
Speaker 2: is unsettled, and partly because of the fields so weak.
Speaker 2: I don't see lots of specialization in terms of either
Speaker 2: demographics or giagrit geography. At this point, I think everybody
Speaker 2: is trying to play everywhere and because no one is
Speaker 2: particularly strong you can beat Pete bootagege historically, you know,
Speaker 2: comically with black voters and say I'm going to make
Speaker 2: a play for that, because with the exception of Kamala
Speaker 2: harris'sually no one in the in the potential field who
Speaker 2: has some sort of historic or deep hold on black
Speaker 2: women voters.
Speaker 1: I have told polsters to put a poll in South
Speaker 1: Carolina or in Alabama or wherever where you put Pete
Speaker 1: foota judge up against a fictional Democrat and see who
Speaker 1: polls higher with black voters. I would actually like to
Speaker 1: see if, as I bet, it's not Pete Pooter judge.
Speaker 1: But I think that there is. I think there's a
Speaker 1: cautionary tale with Kamala Harris in twenty twenty four where
Speaker 1: she famously said that she would give transgender illegal alliens
Speaker 1: free medical care and it really did actually hurt her
Speaker 1: base with progress with with regular voters and for the
Speaker 1: you know, love of progressives that she did'ed up getting. Anyway,
Speaker 1: is there caution exists today at all? Like, hey, we
Speaker 1: can't go too far to the left. I know Andy
Speaker 1: Basher does it, but does anybody else.
Speaker 2: Well, your favorite candidate Ramamanuel does, Gavin Newsom does it.
Speaker 2: Gavin Newsom does it. Episodically, I think there's part of
Speaker 2: why this is so unsettled, besides again the weakness of
Speaker 2: the field and the lack of DNC sanctioned nominating calendar,
Speaker 2: is there's two variables that if you look at the
Speaker 2: elections of twenty sixteen and twenty twenty, you would say
Speaker 2: would be a super source of strength for the Democratic nominee,
Speaker 2: because I believe Sanders, Senator Sanders would have been the
Speaker 2: nominee in sixteen and in twenty if the DNC hadn't
Speaker 2: agreed the rules to keep him from winning. One is
Speaker 2: super progressive, and with the exception of AOC and Rocanna,
Speaker 2: there's no one else in my top lists that are
Speaker 2: super progressive, like single payer, green, new deal, you know
Speaker 2: all that. So that's one, and then the other is
Speaker 2: is sort of a populist outsider that no member of
Speaker 2: Congress except AOC need apply. Even governors might not be
Speaker 2: outsider enough.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 2: So it's hard to know because four is not part
Speaker 2: of the sample space because we had an incumbent president
Speaker 2: and then he ended it off to an incumbent vice president.
Speaker 2: But most of the of the fingertip feel my sources
Speaker 2: have and I have for the Democratic Party says a populist,
Speaker 2: super left wing outsider is a good lane. It may
Speaker 2: not win, but it's a good lane. And again I
Speaker 2: don't think AOC will run in the end, and so
Speaker 2: someone has to fill that lane, and I don't see
Speaker 2: it right now. I don't see who that person is.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's funny. Also, thing I'm hearing from Democratic consultants
Speaker 1: and activists is no women. I've heard from multiple Democratics thing,
Speaker 1: we are not voting for a woman this time, right.
Speaker 2: So like, you hear no women, you hear no jew,
Speaker 2: you hear no gay, you hear no non white. So
Speaker 2: that doesn't leave a lot of people. That leaves Gavity, Newsom,
Speaker 2: and Andy to be sheer.
Speaker 1: For the most part, I do not believe that that
Speaker 1: Joshapiro conversation happened where they accused him of being an
Speaker 1: age or asked me he was an agent for Israel.
Speaker 1: I don't believe that happened whatsoever.
Speaker 2: I mean, I don't know. I'm agnostic on that, but
Speaker 2: I just don't think that that that that specific or
Speaker 2: the general question of whether he makes stuff up or
Speaker 2: very big problems compared to most of the other candidates.
Speaker 1: Well, yeah, that's true. Okay, So if you had your ranking, now,
Speaker 1: who is the top person who is leading the field?
Speaker 1: The weak field, that, mind you, but the leading field.
Speaker 2: I think Newsome and Shapiro are head and shoulders above
Speaker 2: everyone else. But I don't think Newsom's going to make
Speaker 2: it to the starting line in the end, and I
Speaker 2: think Shapiro has massive flaws. But I also don't believe
Speaker 2: in this white Night theory that somebody's surprising is going
Speaker 2: to come through. So my current, my current bet is
Speaker 2: is it's going to be bootages, as implausible as that is,
Speaker 2: but until until they proved either they're not running or
Speaker 2: they're weak, I think it'd be their Newsom or Shapiro.
Speaker 1: I literally guessed that is that is that is a
Speaker 1: hot take. If you could compare this field, as a
Speaker 1: student of history, compare this field to any other previous
Speaker 1: primary which one would it be? Is this like two
Speaker 1: thousand and four, two thousand and I don't even know.
Speaker 2: Nineteen two two thousand and four was a pretty weak field,
Speaker 2: but I think this is currently the weakest field.
Speaker 1: Well, Mark Halpern, thank you so much. Where they'll go
Speaker 1: to read all your stuff, listening to you. Your shows
Speaker 1: are always must watching my household.
Speaker 2: I appreciate that. Next up on YouTube or two way
Speaker 2: dot tv, you can find some of my content there.
Speaker 2: That's plenty.
Speaker 1: Yeah, thank you so much.
Speaker 2: Okay, thank you, great to see you.
Speaker 1: Now it's time for the Ask Me Anything segment. If
Speaker 1: you want to be part of the Ask Me Anything segment,
Speaker 1: ent me Ryan at Numbers gamepodcast dot com. That's Ryan
Speaker 1: at numbers Ploural Numbers gamepodcast dot com. This question comes
Speaker 1: from my buddy Peter Fomo. He says, if the sayback passes,
Speaker 1: what is your opinion on whether or not it will
Speaker 1: help Republicans. I assume it will help, but my concerns
Speaker 1: are Republican the lower pencity voters may not get the
Speaker 1: effort to register. Maybe I mean it affects new registrations
Speaker 1: on existing ones. I think it will have a minimal effect.
Speaker 1: Where I think it could have a large effect. The
Speaker 1: place is going to have the biggest effect is in
Speaker 1: states with automatic voter registration, so among Spring State's places
Speaker 1: like Pennsylvania, Nevada, and Georgia. In Georgia, I think you
Speaker 1: will actually help Republicans a lot a lot of lober pencany,
Speaker 1: mostly black voters who do turn out for Joe Biden,
Speaker 1: who turn out for Stacy Abrams, who turn out for
Speaker 1: any Democrat. They will likely not be able to automatically
Speaker 1: get voter registration, which means they have to do the
Speaker 1: work and not just show up on election day, which
Speaker 1: would probably decrease voter turnout among that population. But it's
Speaker 1: going to be very small, my bet, and I don't
Speaker 1: think it's going to necessarily change the economy too much.
Speaker 1: I would guess if I had to put up money
Speaker 1: a where it helps Republicans, it will affect automatic voter registration,
Speaker 1: and that will impede probably automatic registration in states that
Speaker 1: in states with large populations of lower pensity Democratic voters
Speaker 1: like Nevada and Georgia. That's my guess. We'll see, we'll
Speaker 1: see if it even passes. I mean, they're coming up
Speaker 1: to a problem and I will leave some Rokowski not
Speaker 1: supporting it, so who knows. I mean, it's gonna be
Speaker 1: by the skin of their teeth that they get this
Speaker 1: thing through. We'll have to wait to see. Anyway. That's
Speaker 1: this episode. If you like this podcast, please like and
Speaker 1: subscribe on the iHeartRadio app, Apple podcast where to get
Speaker 1: your podcast, and I will talk to you guys on Friday. Bye.