Speaker 1: Hey, guys, ready or not, twenty twenty four is here,
Speaker 1: and we here at breaking points, are already thinking of
Speaker 1: ways we can up our game for this critical election.
Speaker 2: We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade
Speaker 2: the studio ad staff give you, guys, the best independent.
Speaker 3: Coverage that is possible.
Speaker 2: If you like what we're all about, it just means
Speaker 2: the absolute world to have your support. But enough with that,
Speaker 2: let's get to the show. Good morning, everybody, Happy Monday.
Speaker 2: We have an amazing show for everybody today. What do
Speaker 2: we have, Krystal.
Speaker 1: Indeed, we do a lot of interesting stories to talk
Speaker 1: about this morning, So a lot of notable old man
Speaker 1: moments from Joe Biden at the G seven.
Speaker 4: And various other places.
Speaker 1: Maybe even more remarkable than that is the MSNBC Cope
Speaker 1: and spin, so we will show you all of that.
Speaker 1: We also have some really fascinating new polls about how
Speaker 1: the coalitions are shifting between Trump and Biden. So older voters,
Speaker 1: for the first time in modern history, may actually vote
Speaker 1: for the Democratic candidate Joe Biden. Meanwhile, Trump is cleaning
Speaker 1: up up among infrequent voters. That is also a huge
Speaker 1: historical shift. So a lot that's really fascinating to dig
Speaker 1: into there. In terms of those numbers, we also host
Speaker 1: some new interesting numbers out of France. So you'll recall
Speaker 1: the sort of centrist leader of France, Emmanuel Macron, called
Speaker 1: for snap elections.
Speaker 4: He appears to.
Speaker 1: Have sealed his political doom by making that decision, So
Speaker 1: we'll break down those numbers for you what it could
Speaker 1: mean in the context of US politics as well. Israel
Speaker 1: is threatening a huge escalation in their war against Lebanon
Speaker 1: and Hesblos, specifically a US not doing a lot to
Speaker 1: forestall that possibility, so very dire consequences potentially there. We
Speaker 1: also have the US military kind of freaking out about
Speaker 1: how significant the Houthy threat has been, and we're going
Speaker 1: to take a look at what we know about how
Speaker 1: much it has cost us to effectively go to war
Speaker 1: with the Houthy's. We also are excited to be joined
Speaker 1: by Brianna Joy Gray. As you guys know, she was
Speaker 1: recently fired from the Hill for her commentary viz. Of
Speaker 1: the Israel and Palestine, so we want to hear directly
Speaker 1: from her about that and about censorship in general.
Speaker 4: So a lotto gives you today.
Speaker 3: Yes, we're excited for that.
Speaker 2: Before we get to that, don't forget we've got our
Speaker 2: premium subscription. You can go ahead and sign up at
Speaker 2: breakingpoints dot com. There's some awesome interviews, exclusive content, etc.
Speaker 2: That people get early access to, specifically from Counterpoints. So
Speaker 2: it's a great guess that is coming later. So you're
Speaker 2: going to want to go ahead and sign up Breakingpoints
Speaker 2: dot Com to become a premium subscriber. So, as Crystal
Speaker 2: alluded to, there's been some crazy Biden old man moments.
Speaker 2: You may have seen them, but we probably didn't see
Speaker 2: some of the most insane cope that we have gotten yet,
Speaker 2: both from MSNBC's Joe Scarborough and others on the network.
Speaker 2: Let's first start off with Biden at the G seven,
Speaker 2: where historic gathering of some of the most unpopular leaders
Speaker 2: in the entire world coming together. There's certainly something to
Speaker 2: be said about that, which we'll get to in a
Speaker 2: little bit. Where Biden, certainly a guest, made some headlines
Speaker 2: with some of his behavior.
Speaker 3: Let's go ahead and just take a look at this.
Speaker 2: So this is the most famous moment at the G
Speaker 2: seven for some reason, and they decided that people should
Speaker 2: parachute in for no good reason in front of all
Speaker 2: the G seven leaders, and they're all nodding and clapping approvingly. Well,
Speaker 2: what everyone's focusing on here is this very strange Biden
Speaker 2: wandering off moment where you could see him just basically
Speaker 2: walking away from all the other leaders. He goes and
Speaker 2: tries to engage with people who are jumping on the
Speaker 2: other side, and then has to be called back there
Speaker 2: by Maloney from Italy. Of course, he has to be
Speaker 2: the only person to cover up his face with the
Speaker 2: aviators to avoid the old man squint, and a lot
Speaker 2: of people focusing in on this just because it is
Speaker 2: the most classic hallmark of like old man kind of lost,
Speaker 2: seemingly listless. Now, Crystal the White House is accusing everyone
Speaker 2: who is showing this video of selectively not telling the
Speaker 2: whole story. And the whole story, according to them, is
Speaker 2: that he was simply just wandering off in order to
Speaker 2: give a thumbs up there to the other parachutists. But
Speaker 2: they can't erase the weird optics of the situations of
Speaker 2: anything you want to say before we get to some
Speaker 2: of the other ones.
Speaker 1: Well, I'll just say, as a prelude to the other
Speaker 1: ones that perhaps if this was an isolated incident. Yes,
Speaker 1: he may be more inclined to buy their spin Like, Okay,
Speaker 1: anybody who's on camera a lot, you might have a
Speaker 1: few weird awkward moments, because all human beings at some
Speaker 1: level are fundamentally awkward. But given the track record here,
Speaker 1: I think the initial impression of yet another wandering old
Speaker 1: man moment is probably the accurate one.
Speaker 3: That's right.
Speaker 2: So then, in the span of seventy two hours, Biden
Speaker 2: also finds himself in Los Angeles, right at a fundraiser
Speaker 2: with George Clooney and Julia Roberts and Barack Obama. Well,
Speaker 2: let's go ahead and play some of this first. Here
Speaker 2: at a fundraiser in Los Angeles, there's a ritzy gathering,
Speaker 2: George Clooney, Julia Roberts, Biden basically being led away from
Speaker 2: the stage by Obama.
Speaker 3: Now you can say again whatever you want, it's there.
Speaker 3: Not good. Here, very odd meeting with the Pope, Biden.
Speaker 2: Himself Catholic, basically touching heads with the Pope.
Speaker 3: And then here let's take a listen to him with
Speaker 3: a TikTok.
Speaker 5: Guy, and I know you're a typical pressure guy. You're
Speaker 5: grabbing me in front of this all and said, oh, man,
Speaker 5: I trust you. As far as I throw your phone,
Speaker 5: I can add a good arm. Man, I can throw
Speaker 5: a long way. But my point is this, I've made
Speaker 5: very clear to the Israelis, but they have to do
Speaker 5: in the near term. If they don't, that's gonna So.
Speaker 6: What's gonna help.
Speaker 3: See, guy's gonna cut off fronds.
Speaker 5: Because usually need to tell me I have a nice suit,
Speaker 5: and you did today, so.
Speaker 3: Please thank you.
Speaker 2: So being led away by Obama, I mean, the optics
Speaker 2: on that are just horrible because it's already the former president,
Speaker 2: the most popular Democrat in the entire.
Speaker 3: Country, leading away the aging president.
Speaker 2: Weird interaction with the pope that one you know that
Speaker 2: might not even be aged. That's just vintage Biden. Then
Speaker 2: you've got him having an old man moment with this
Speaker 2: TikToker where the backstory is that this guy was invited
Speaker 2: to a VIP reception of the White House. And then
Speaker 2: look how angry Biden gets at him threatening to throw
Speaker 2: his phone when he just asked a question about Gaza.
Speaker 2: He immediately calls him some typical prescott. I could throw
Speaker 2: your phone as far as I can. So you've got
Speaker 2: the ornerinist. You've got the wandering away, You've got all
Speaker 2: of this literally happening in the span of like seventy
Speaker 2: two to ninety six hours.
Speaker 3: There's no spinning this away. It is what it is.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And with the TikTok guy, I mean, there's a
Speaker 1: lot to say about that one, because first you have
Speaker 1: these are TikTok influencers you invited to the White House
Speaker 1: because there's an assumption that they're like, you know, going
Speaker 1: to be on your side, et cetera. You're antagonizing them.
Speaker 1: You don't seem to really understand who they are or
Speaker 1: why they're there.
Speaker 4: They're not some typical press guy.
Speaker 1: And then when he's asked a question about Israel, are
Speaker 1: you going to keep funding Israel? I mean, there's there's
Speaker 1: such a long pause too before he can marshal any
Speaker 1: sort of a response. Then ultimately AIDS have to swoop
Speaker 1: in and rescue him. I mean, this is just on
Speaker 1: like the simplest, possible and most obvious question from this
Speaker 1: influencer who obviously is there because they think he's more
Speaker 1: or less friendly a friendly so underscores the issues that
Speaker 1: Biden obviously has with young people over the gods of war.
Speaker 4: We're going to show some numbers too.
Speaker 1: I mean, is this a significant issue for his African
Speaker 1: American base as well?
Speaker 4: So just listen.
Speaker 1: I mean you have to be insane, delusional, a liar, etc.
Speaker 1: To deny the reality in front of our face at
Speaker 1: this point, which is Joe Biden may well very well
Speaker 1: survive another four years, but on some key levels, he's
Speaker 1: already gone.
Speaker 4: I mean, even from when he.
Speaker 1: Was elected just a few years ago, the decline is notable.
Speaker 1: And we know that not just because of the little
Speaker 1: clips that happened to sneak out, but because they refused
Speaker 1: to allow him to even do you know, the limited
Speaker 1: interviews he was doing before. So I maintained that you know,
Speaker 1: a few years, whether he loses now or he you know,
Speaker 1: gets gains reelection, And we're talking a number of years
Speaker 1: down the road. Once he's out of office, maybe two
Speaker 1: years later, there's going to be some White House insider
Speaker 1: writes a tell all about the decline, about the things
Speaker 1: they witnessed, about the moments where he couldn't marshal the words,
Speaker 1: where he didn't know what people were talking about, where
Speaker 1: he was confused. It's you know, it's getting to I
Speaker 1: don't think we're quite too, but getting towards Diane Feinstein
Speaker 1: type of levels Wherewin's just pretending who's around him that no, no,
Speaker 1: he's vigorous and you don't see him, you know, off camera,
Speaker 1: et cetera.
Speaker 4: Like we're not stupid, we are not stupid.
Speaker 2: Well, you said you'd have to be a liar or
Speaker 2: propagandist to deny this, and we found our fair share
Speaker 2: over at MSNBC. Let's take listen to how they're spinning it.
Speaker 3: It needs to be sad.
Speaker 7: I mean you you you have jump Bien here with it.
Speaker 3: Schedule would be brutal for anybody.
Speaker 7: Oh my god, I'm president any a going to Europe,
Speaker 7: you know, Dons on d Day and spending five days
Speaker 7: in France, going over to the G seven.
Speaker 4: In the middle of the personal struggles.
Speaker 7: In the middle of the personal struggles, the Hunter trial,
Speaker 7: and and yesterday I even even critics were saying that
Speaker 7: that he did a strong job, very good job representing
Speaker 7: the United States, even though again we have some some
Speaker 7: cheap fakes that the RNC once again uh spreading vicious
Speaker 7: lies about Joe Biden. But that's just that's that's who
Speaker 7: they are, that's who they've become We will point out
Speaker 7: a second, but Jonathan merr I was struck by that,
Speaker 7: struck by the strong, strong message as well that Joe
Speaker 7: Biden delivered yesterday.
Speaker 6: I mean, the United States and our great allies in
Speaker 6: Europe have really stood shoulder to shoulder here other than
Speaker 6: Mike Johnson and Donald Trump holding up badly needed UH
Speaker 6: security aid the Ukraine.
Speaker 8: Now that that roadblock has gotten pasted, and people who
Speaker 8: actually love freedom and love democracy and hate authoritarians who
Speaker 8: invade other countries, it seems to me we have them
Speaker 8: out numbered.
Speaker 2: Got them out numbered. Yeah, certainly with the most unpopular people.
Speaker 3: In all of Europe.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we'll get to that, and our little France segment
Speaker 2: about how the Ukraine situation is basically collapsing the entire center, right,
Speaker 2: you know, the entire center. I coalition in France, one
Speaker 2: of the great powers on the continent.
Speaker 3: Put the policy aside.
Speaker 2: He's like, look at the strong, vigorous job, and what
Speaker 2: a tough schedule. It's like, that is the most basic
Speaker 2: schedule for a president. Yes, we expect it's a tough schedule.
Speaker 2: It's opposed to be the toughest job in the world.
Speaker 2: That's why ostensibly, you want somebody who is strong in
Speaker 2: that job that can cope with it. We don't give
Speaker 2: them points for doing the most basics of traveling from
Speaker 2: Europe to Los Angeles for a fundraiser. It's also not
Speaker 2: like easy into doing anything anything special. Oh he went
Speaker 2: and saw and attended to review on D Day. Yeah,
Speaker 2: so is every single president who has ever held the office.
Speaker 2: That's literally part of the job description. So there's so
Speaker 2: much going on there. But yeah, maybe it pales in
Speaker 2: comparison to our next clip before. If you want to
Speaker 2: say anything.
Speaker 1: Before, yeah, let me. I just want to comment on
Speaker 1: the policy. I mean this line about the you know, oh,
Speaker 1: if you believe in freedom and democracy, Like are you
Speaker 1: kidding me? How can you even mouth those words now
Speaker 1: given the support for Israel committing a genocide in Gaga, Like,
Speaker 1: how can you pretend that human rights and freedom and
Speaker 1: democracy has anything to do with this foreign policy? How
Speaker 1: can you even pretend at this point with regard to
Speaker 1: Ukraine that the policy has been anything other than abject
Speaker 1: and complete disaster with monstrous results first and foremost for
Speaker 1: Ukrainian men in Ukrainian society. Like that's the part that
Speaker 1: gets me is It'd be one thing if you could
Speaker 1: point at the policy and be like, well, he's really
Speaker 1: freaking old, and I'm not sure if he's going to
Speaker 1: make it another but at least things are going good,
Speaker 1: but they're not, especially on foreign affairs. To try to
Speaker 1: make that argument that he's been a strong, effective leader
Speaker 1: is just complete and utter lies, propaganda and insanity that
Speaker 1: I can't even believe that Joe Scarborough believes. I mean,
Speaker 1: this person is not an idiot. He's not an idiot,
Speaker 1: he's not naive. He was in Washington, he knows the
Speaker 1: real reasons that these people actually make the decisions that
Speaker 1: they do, and it has nothing to do with, you know,
Speaker 1: defending democracy or human rights.
Speaker 4: Et cetera.
Speaker 1: But he also, Joe Scarborough has a track record of
Speaker 1: being wrong and basically every major foreign policy of an
Speaker 1: issue of our time.
Speaker 4: So I guess it's par for the course.
Speaker 2: Even more MSNBC slavish North Korean propaganda, let's take a lesson.
Speaker 5: It's amazing because you think about the fact that the
Speaker 5: president is playing chess and the former president at best
Speaker 5: is playing like hungary, hungry hippo.
Speaker 9: Yeah, well, if that maybe una, I'm gonna give he's
Speaker 9: playing O O now and somebody keeps telling him draw four.
Speaker 9: I just you know, it's the split screen this week,
Speaker 9: much like this split screen last week. We keep talking
Speaker 9: about the split screens that have happened, and again much
Speaker 9: for everyone to say. And you know, oh, Joe Biden
Speaker 9: seems a little too old. I don't know about you,
Speaker 9: but from France doing all these things, coming back to America,
Speaker 9: going back out to the G seven in Italy.
Speaker 3: Now he's on.
Speaker 9: His way to la right now as we speak, to
Speaker 9: do another event. This is and I don't know where
Speaker 9: Donald Trump has been. Oh oh yes, I didn't know
Speaker 9: where he's been railing. Really, I'll get the machine on
Speaker 9: a stage.
Speaker 10: It's a little bit marginal, but I think it shows
Speaker 10: that the one thing we've known about Joe Biden since
Speaker 10: he took office is this is a man who meets
Speaker 10: his moments. He met his moment at the beginning, he
Speaker 10: met his moment with the economic crisis in the wake
Speaker 10: of COVID, he met his moment with Ukraine. He has
Speaker 10: met his moment over and over and over again. And
Speaker 10: I think, now, look, we're just a few days away
Speaker 10: now from that first debate, and so what the split
Speaker 10: screen is going to look like is exactly what we're
Speaker 10: going to see in Atlanta not too long from now,
Speaker 10: which is someone railing against the ghosts.
Speaker 3: Who else is in the room with you?
Speaker 10: Donald? Do you see the people there with someone who's
Speaker 10: going to be like you really went four more years
Speaker 10: of this?
Speaker 3: Like, I don't know what's what's screen?
Speaker 2: Middle look at because the only one I'm seeing here
Speaker 2: is Biden. Now, look Trump, He certainly says some off
Speaker 2: the wall stuff and he goes on his meandering rabbit
Speaker 2: holes that said, I covered him for many many years.
Speaker 2: That has been par for the course now for a
Speaker 2: long time, long before even this race. It's not all
Speaker 2: that noticeable, honestly in terms of the difference in his performance,
Speaker 2: whereas with Biden, I mean, I don't know how again
Speaker 2: you can deny reality. We also have this we can
Speaker 2: put up there on the screen. This is from the
Speaker 2: New York Post. They report that Biden's condition quote shocks
Speaker 2: allies at the G seven summit, with one saying that
Speaker 2: it is worst he has ever been.
Speaker 3: This was during discussions at the G seven.
Speaker 2: Diplomatic insider telling British press quote that Biden had been
Speaker 2: losing focus, and that is the worst that he has
Speaker 2: ever been. In several separate instances, he had awkward, you know,
Speaker 2: exchanges with Meloney from Italy. Quote apparently got on the
Speaker 2: wrong foot with her, keeping her waiting for over twenty
Speaker 2: minutes before arriving for an unknown reason. Then in the
Speaker 2: meeting itself, like things kind of went off the rails.
Speaker 2: At the same time, he had all these meetings with
Speaker 2: other leaders, many of them allegedly or at least their
Speaker 2: aides telling all of their local media they're shocked at
Speaker 2: his condition. This is just more and more that adds
Speaker 2: to what we already see on the camera. And yet
Speaker 2: for them, it's like they are literally living in a
Speaker 2: different reality.
Speaker 1: I mean, I wonder with the MSNBC crew, like, does
Speaker 1: their own audience even believe this and buy us at this.
Speaker 4: Point, I don't actually think.
Speaker 3: I don't know, I.
Speaker 1: Don't actually think so, maybe because their audience is so small.
Speaker 1: But when you look at the word clouds that we
Speaker 1: had from jail Partners last week, every demographic, every partisan group, Democrats, Republicans,
Speaker 1: and certainly independence. Most of all, independence the number one
Speaker 1: word they associated with Joe Biden as old. So I
Speaker 1: don't even know, if the MSNBC crowd is buying that
Speaker 1: he's playing nine dychs while TRUP is playing Hungry Hungry. Ifoh,
Speaker 1: I mean this kind of amusing turn of phrase, I
Speaker 1: wish it actually applied. You know, if I didn't think
Speaker 1: Joe Biden was a monster at this point, I might
Speaker 1: find the whole situation somewhat tragic, because here's a man
Speaker 1: who chased the White House his entire adult life. Finally
Speaker 1: he's able to grab the brass ring, and it comes
Speaker 1: at a time when he's basically too old to do
Speaker 1: the job. And I think, I don't know if it
Speaker 1: was just manipulation, public manipulation, or if he really considered
Speaker 1: if he had more self awareness at the time when
Speaker 1: he was running back in twenty twenty and he was
Speaker 1: suggesting to the public that he would step down, that
Speaker 1: he would serve only one term, and now that he's
Speaker 1: in the job, there's both just the you know, the
Speaker 1: allure of the power and not wanting to give that up.
Speaker 1: But also I think as he has gotten to a
Speaker 1: point of age and decline, he doesn't have enough self
Speaker 1: awareness to realize how much he's lost at this point.
Speaker 1: So in any case, whether it was just a sheer
Speaker 1: lie for public manipulation, or whether he really had some
Speaker 1: thoughts of moving aside. You know, if you actually believe
Speaker 1: the things that Democrats claim to believe about the existential
Speaker 1: threats facing the country is this is you know what
Speaker 1: Jane Yuger says, and I think he's one hundred percent correct.
Speaker 1: This is one of the most selfish, narcissistic moves that
Speaker 1: you could possibly make. It really is a betrayal of
Speaker 1: his own voters and the reasons that they put him
Speaker 1: in place to begin with. And it has set up
Speaker 1: Democrats for potentially a stunning loss against another incredibly weak
Speaker 1: candidate who would be easily defeated by virtually any other
Speaker 1: just like normal basically coherent democrat.
Speaker 2: We have a lot of polling actually to show some
Speaker 2: of the dichotomies that we have in the race. Let's
Speaker 2: go to the next block here, please, and let's start
Speaker 2: with the first element, the quote dread election. Let's go
Speaker 2: and put it up there on the screen. The share
Speaker 2: of quote double haters has hit historic highs. Now, what
Speaker 2: you can see in front of you is that the
Speaker 2: share of Americans who have unfavorable views of both major
Speaker 2: party candidates is at an all time high, nearly as
Speaker 2: high as twenty sixteen when Hillary Clinton was on the ballot.
Speaker 2: There has really been no parallel for those two elections
Speaker 2: twenty sixteen and twenty twenty four. Even only just thirteen
Speaker 2: percent back in twenty twenty said that they had an
Speaker 2: unfavorable an unfavorable view of both of the major party candidates. Now,
Speaker 2: this actually could be a decent thing for Trump. We'll
Speaker 2: get to that. We have to parse some of the
Speaker 2: nuances here. But last time around, the unfavorable views of
Speaker 2: hate both parties broke hard for Trump because people had
Speaker 2: a very negative view of Hillary Clinton. There is some
Speaker 2: evidence to say that some of that unfavorability could be
Speaker 2: transferring over to Joe Biden. But what this has also
Speaker 2: done is it has really forced a choice amongst key
Speaker 2: parts of coalition voters. Let's put this up there. As
Speaker 2: you alluded to, Joe Biden somehow has gained significantly amongst
Speaker 2: older voters. Now, traditionally older voters are more conservative, and
Speaker 2: the thesis was that yes, Democrats were going to lose
Speaker 2: older voters, but keep the margin relatively small and will
Speaker 2: blow it out amongst Black, Hispanic and younger voters. Well,
Speaker 2: what you can see actually in front of you is
Speaker 2: that a lot of the data that has been collected
Speaker 2: recently shows that there has been a big flip, mostly
Speaker 2: in the last couple of years, where some fifty one
Speaker 2: percent now of people who are over the age of
Speaker 2: sixty five support Biden, and as significantly drop for Trump
Speaker 2: in his support, which was well above fifty percent in
Speaker 2: twenty twenty, down to just forty two. And I think
Speaker 2: a lot of the data that we've talked about here
Speaker 2: on this show can give us some inklings as to why.
Speaker 2: First and foremost is that the number one reason that
Speaker 2: younger voters, Hispanic voters, and others people were supporting Trump
Speaker 2: is they want change, even though they don't even like Trump,
Speaker 2: they just want a major change, a shock to the system.
Speaker 2: Inflation is killing them. They're having problems with housing in general.
Speaker 2: They see like a real shakiness uncertainty in terms of
Speaker 2: America's foreign policy abroad. If you're old, I mean, this
Speaker 2: has been the greatest term you know, in modern history. Right,
Speaker 2: You've seen significant increase in your housing prices. You in
Speaker 2: general have a good steak in the system. You have
Speaker 2: enough of a cushion in order to be able to
Speaker 2: eat inflation. A lot of these boomer voters, I mean,
Speaker 2: they have very different views on Israel on Ukraine.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 2: These are people who view Russia literally remember the Cold
Speaker 2: War and in some cases haven't really forgotten it. So
Speaker 2: for them, they've gotten a lot of what they want.
Speaker 2: In fact, they probably hold against Biden that he withdrew
Speaker 2: from Afghanistan. These are the coalition of voters that delivered
Speaker 2: Georgia w push the same White House they remember nine
Speaker 2: to eleven. They're probably still steeped in a lot of
Speaker 2: that propaganda. They watch a lot of cable news, and
Speaker 2: that's why I said many of them may believe the propaganda.
Speaker 2: These are the key demos that keep all three of
Speaker 2: the cable news networks going. So for them, you could
Speaker 2: see that their stake in the system is actually doing
Speaker 2: well well. A stake for everybody else is not doing well.
Speaker 2: And that's what explains that overall drop. And when Trump
Speaker 2: runs against the system, he in in a way is
Speaker 2: running against the consensus for a lot of the people
Speaker 2: who are older.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and just to underscore the fact that I mean,
Speaker 1: in modern history, this would be unprecedented for Republicans to
Speaker 1: lose older voters, and it has been a huge benefit
Speaker 1: to them electorally that older voters have been so strongly
Speaker 1: in their camp. Why because they vote. We're going to
Speaker 1: get to this in a minute. The way that this
Speaker 1: is contributing to a huge shift in you know who
Speaker 1: in frequent voters favor. But just to pause on the
Speaker 1: older demographic shifting to Biden, it really is remarkable. It's
Speaker 1: interesting because, for one thing, I think Joe Biden is
Speaker 1: a product of his generation. What he has his finger
Speaker 1: on the pulse of is how your average eighty year
Speaker 1: old fields about these conflicts and about the country and
Speaker 1: about the economy, et cetera. And in fact, when you
Speaker 1: look at the issues that Democrats are prioritizing, you know
Speaker 1: the fact that they lead with preserving democracy, well, it's
Speaker 1: older voters who say that that is a top priority.
Speaker 1: And so not only do you have the bifurcated economy
Speaker 1: that you're talking about, soccer where if you are an
Speaker 1: asset owner, which you know that very much skews along
Speaker 1: age demographic lines. So if you are an older voter,
Speaker 1: you're much more likely to be a homeowner, You're much
Speaker 1: more likely to have you know, some investments in the
Speaker 1: stock market or four oh one K retirement account. You're
Speaker 1: much more likely to own assets. And those are the
Speaker 1: people who have benefited overwhelmingly from our economic system under
Speaker 1: Joe Biden, but honestly for the last like, you know,
Speaker 1: several decades, that's the way our economy has been set up.
Speaker 1: It's just particularly notable, and that divide is growing and growing.
Speaker 1: So for you, yeah, things seem really good economically. Well,
Speaker 1: that allows you to prioritize some of these more sort
Speaker 1: of high minded theoretical issues like quote unquote preserving democracy.
Speaker 4: You also have a group of voters and older voters.
Speaker 1: Who remember a time when there was a lot more
Speaker 1: reference and trust in American institutions. You know, if you're
Speaker 1: a young voter and your a whole life has been
Speaker 1: formed in the you know, post Iraq War, post financial crisis,
Speaker 1: Donald Trump era, your whole like, oh, the institutions, the norms,
Speaker 1: the guardrails, like, you just don't have that in you.
Speaker 1: Whereas for older voters, there's still this instinct that Joe
Speaker 1: Biden really reflects of these institutions really matter and we
Speaker 1: really have to preserve them, and that's top priority. Also,
Speaker 1: as I said, if you're doing economically better, you can
Speaker 1: sort of afford to have those types of concerns. So
Speaker 1: I think the democratic message in a lot of ways
Speaker 1: is perfectly pitched and tuned to this older demographic. And
Speaker 1: you are already mentioned as well on foid affairs. This
Speaker 1: is the group that's the most pro Ukraine. This is
Speaker 1: the group that shares the views of Joe Biden, Viza
Speaker 1: the Israel and has you know, in their mind this
Speaker 1: is our ally and you know, against the Soviet Union
Speaker 1: in the Cold War, and we just stand by Israel.
Speaker 1: That's what we do, period, end of story. And also
Speaker 1: have an understanding of Israel. It's very different from what
Speaker 1: is actually going on in modern Israel today. So you know,
Speaker 1: when you think about all those pieces, it makes a
Speaker 1: hell of a lot of sense. And it also reminds
Speaker 1: us that voters are not stupid or irrational. You for
Speaker 1: older voters who've benefited from this system, I guess this
Speaker 1: is a rational place to be.
Speaker 2: Yeah, people vote their interests mostly, and actually, as you
Speaker 2: just said, when they fulfilled the majority of their interests,
Speaker 2: then they can worry about high minded ideals. Well, and
Speaker 2: let's be very very clear, he could win because of this,
Speaker 2: and that is the craziest part.
Speaker 3: Let's put this off on the screen.
Speaker 2: Fantastic right up here from the New York Times really
Speaker 2: confirms a lot of what we've talked about here, where
Speaker 2: the headline is if everyone voted, would Biden benefit not
Speaker 2: anymore so. If you voted in the twenty twenty two
Speaker 2: primary election, it was a Biden plus five overall in
Speaker 2: the sample. But if you voted in the twenty twenty
Speaker 2: two midterms but not the primaries, it was just Biden
Speaker 2: plus one. In other words, people who are very invested
Speaker 2: primary voters, people who come out when others don't, Those
Speaker 2: people are skewing much more heavily Biden. Let's go in
Speaker 2: head to the next one, because this confirms even more.
Speaker 2: If you voted in the twenty twenty presidential election but
Speaker 2: you didn't vote in a primary or in a midterm,
Speaker 2: Trump is actually winning that group by plus one. So
Speaker 2: what do we know about presidential elections? Huge portions of
Speaker 2: the public only come out to vote in presidentials. If
Speaker 2: they come out to vote at all, mostly infrequent, they
Speaker 2: might like Trump. They hadn't voted since nineteen eighty four
Speaker 2: or whatever. They're like, Oh, I like what this guy
Speaker 2: has to say, or I really hate Trump. Okay, I'm
Speaker 2: going to come out and vote. But they don't frequently vote.
Speaker 2: They don't you know, they don't register for campaigns, or
Speaker 2: they don't sign petitions, they're not going to city council meetings,
Speaker 2: et cetera. Those people are the people that Trump is winning.
Speaker 2: Right now, let's go to the next one too as well.
Speaker 2: No voting history. This is the crazy part, and this
Speaker 2: is what Biden people should really be afraid of. It's
Speaker 2: Trump plus fourteen people who have never voted before. Now again,
Speaker 2: that could be a good thing if they do come
Speaker 2: out to vote.
Speaker 3: It's also you know.
Speaker 2: The past is usually predictive of future behavior, as in,
Speaker 2: if you've never voted before, why should we have any
Speaker 2: confidence that you're actually going to go and vote on
Speaker 2: election day or get a mail in ballot and send
Speaker 2: it in. Takes a little bit of effort, effort that
Speaker 2: you've never mustered previously. If we'll go to the next
Speaker 2: part as well, you can continue to see if everyone
Speaker 2: voted again, it is not it is not Biden who
Speaker 2: would benefit. And the reason why this is such a
Speaker 2: big flip is just because in all of the past Previously,
Speaker 2: it was a Democratic talking point that if we just
Speaker 2: got these hundred million people who had never voted before,
Speaker 2: if they actually came out to vote, Democrats would win
Speaker 2: every single election. But Trump has completely realigned that where
Speaker 2: these frequent voters, suburban women and older voters who are
Speaker 2: voting on either abortion and or preserving democracy, they are
Speaker 2: crawling over broken glass to participate. And it used to
Speaker 2: be that many of those people were Republicans, but a
Speaker 2: lot of them are very rich, and a lot of
Speaker 2: them are very old, and on aggregate, those are the
Speaker 2: people that you would always want to be coming out
Speaker 2: for you, because that's how you prevail at the local
Speaker 2: and the state and the federal election. So Obama was
Speaker 2: kind of the inverse of this. He was the king
Speaker 2: of winning the infrequent voter, which is why he would win. Meanwhile,
Speaker 2: you know, a thousand state house seats, both chambers of
Speaker 2: Congress midterm elections, he would always suffer. Now it seems
Speaker 2: that Biden is actually flipping that around. Then, you know,
Speaker 2: we come down to this trite you know observation, quote
Speaker 2: unquote it comes down to turnout. But unironically it really
Speaker 2: does here Crystal, because this time, if it's a high
Speaker 2: turnout election like in twenty twenty, I think Trump is
Speaker 2: going to win. If it's a low turnout election, then
Speaker 2: I think Biden is going to win because he's got
Speaker 2: more actual frequent voters who are coming out. And on balance,
Speaker 2: those are the people in general who you want to
Speaker 2: bet on. You never know what if it rains on
Speaker 2: election day, what if this happens, What if that happens.
Speaker 2: Like the people who you want who are always voting that,
Speaker 2: those are the people who you want with you on
Speaker 2: election day.
Speaker 1: And the funny thing is even the two parties don't
Speaker 1: seem to have realized the way this has flipped because
Speaker 1: so much of modern political history. I mean, think of
Speaker 1: all the battles that have been fought over like voter
Speaker 1: id and it's always Democrats on the side of let's
Speaker 1: do mail in voting. Let's have a longer early voting period,
Speaker 1: Let's extend the hours, Let's make it easier to vote.
Speaker 1: Let's make it so you don't have to have a
Speaker 1: driver's license in order to vote, so we can get
Speaker 1: as many people as possible to the polls. And the
Speaker 1: Republicans have are always and continue by the way, to
Speaker 1: be on the other side of that of let's restrict
Speaker 1: the hours, let's make it harder to vote, let's require
Speaker 1: various forms of IDA in order to vote.
Speaker 4: That just political logic.
Speaker 1: You know, there's a morality question around that too, but
Speaker 1: just in terms of the naked political calculus, it should
Speaker 1: now be Democrats who were like, let's make it hard,
Speaker 1: let's make it show that it's only during working hours,
Speaker 1: and so only old retirees can easily go and cast
Speaker 1: their ballots. So I think even the parties haven't recognized
Speaker 1: the way the shift has occurred. It's hard for me
Speaker 1: to wrap my head around because this is so baked
Speaker 1: in to the Obama era like conception of politics that
Speaker 1: the infrequent voters, that this new rising young coalition is
Speaker 1: the core of the Democratic Party, and the Republicans have
Speaker 1: the older voters who are always reliable, that's why they
Speaker 1: always crush the Democrats. And special election and midterms, we
Speaker 1: have seen the way that's flipped. And so you know,
Speaker 1: as we've been covering the the special elections and in particular,
Speaker 1: like we just covered the one in Ohio six where
Speaker 1: Democrats outperformed by twenty points in a very red district
Speaker 1: that Trump won by twenty nine points. That is a
Speaker 1: story of who turned out. I believe we were looking
Speaker 1: at some of the numbers in one of the key
Speaker 1: counties there the Republican candidate who did prevail, but it
Speaker 1: was much more narrow than it should have been. He
Speaker 1: was only able to draw up twelve percent of Trump's
Speaker 1: twenty twenty totals there, Whereas the Democratic candidate who spent
Speaker 1: no money by the way, and was like basically no
Speaker 1: one had ever heard of this person, he was able
Speaker 1: to obtain about twenty two percent of Joe Biden's vote total.
Speaker 1: So it's just purely a matter of turnout. So who's
Speaker 1: going to show up on election day? I mean, it
Speaker 1: really is very interest. It's hard for me to imagine
Speaker 1: that people have never voted in presidential election before are
Speaker 1: going to find this particular election so like exciting and
Speaker 1: compelling that they're going to show up. But even when
Speaker 1: you're just looking at the universe of people who voted
Speaker 1: last presidential election, Okay, well that seems more plausible that
Speaker 1: those people show back up again in another presidential election.
Speaker 4: And guess what among those people? Trump does have the edge.
Speaker 2: Yeah, bingo, And let's put this up there the traditional
Speaker 2: voter demographic that that Biden voters and the Democratic Party
Speaker 2: could always rely on black votvoters. Well, here you see
Speaker 2: an oversample by USA today. Black voters are not thrilled
Speaker 2: with Biden, but they dislike Trump more. If you dig
Speaker 2: though into a little bit, they show quote how Biden
Speaker 2: has lost ground not necessarily to Trump, but either to
Speaker 2: non voting or to third party candidates, and quote in
Speaker 2: states like Michigan and Pennsylvania where the race could be
Speaker 2: decided by the slimmest of margin, the president can hardly
Speaker 2: afford to lose any support from his most reliable base
Speaker 2: as he faces a rematch with Trump, and the support
Speaker 2: is not really as big as he previously thought.
Speaker 3: It's actually in Pennsylvania, he's getting.
Speaker 2: Some fifty six percent of the vote, but RFK Junior
Speaker 2: and Cornell West are racking up almost fifteen percent combined,
Speaker 2: and you've still got fourteen percent who are undecided. In Michigan,
Speaker 2: for what I have in front of me, very similar numbers,
Speaker 2: Joe Biden fifty four percent, Trump's got fifteen. But again
Speaker 2: RFK Junior and Cornell West are combined percentage rough for
Speaker 2: around fourteen points. And then undecided at fourteen as well.
Speaker 2: So this is where the third party phenomenon could really
Speaker 2: come back to Biden, because you cannot afford to lose
Speaker 2: those votes in the slimmest of margins, especially in the
Speaker 2: cities places like Detroit and Pennsylvania where really those cities,
Speaker 2: those margins are. Their lack of performance in twenty sixteen,
Speaker 2: that's what cost Hillary the election, both in Pennsylvania and
Speaker 2: in Michigan and Wisconsin too. Actually, Milwaukee and many of
Speaker 2: the urban core in Wisconsin, a lot of those voters
Speaker 2: they just didn't come out to vote when they previously
Speaker 2: had voted for Obama and boom, Trump wins the election.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and this was the demographic too where we saw
Speaker 1: weakness for Democrats in the midterms. It was kind of
Speaker 1: covered up by the fact that they had out performance
Speaker 1: in other areas and so we're able to, you know,
Speaker 1: do much better then people thought they were going to do,
Speaker 1: much better than historically the party in power does during midterms.
Speaker 1: But this was a notable place of weakness. And if
Speaker 1: you dig into the numbers of Okay, black voters who
Speaker 1: backed Joe Biden last time, but they're not saying they're
Speaker 1: going to back in this time, what are there are reasons?
Speaker 1: And what they say is that more than a third
Speaker 1: say they just haven't been impressed with his performance in office. Okay,
Speaker 1: fair enough, so just sort of general like, I don't
Speaker 1: feel like this is going all about well. Fourteen percent
Speaker 1: said he's too old for the job. Thirteen percent said
Speaker 1: that they are concerned about a support for Israel during
Speaker 1: the war in Gaza. That was interesting to me that
Speaker 1: that number was as high as the he's too old number,
Speaker 1: And another eleven percent said that Biden hasn't kept his promises. So,
Speaker 1: you know, in a lot of sense, you know, Charlemagne
Speaker 1: is obviously you know, he's an entertainer and a prominent figure.
Speaker 1: But I do feel like he's been representing a lot
Speaker 1: of these feelings in the way that he's discussed the
Speaker 1: Biden presidency and his unwillingness to come out and actively
Speaker 1: endorse him this time around. Now he's indicated all but
Speaker 1: come out and said, okay, he's going to vote for
Speaker 1: Joe Biden again. But he feels that promises have been broken.
Speaker 1: He feels that he was sort of you know, led
Speaker 1: down the garden path last time around and can't put
Speaker 1: himself out in the same way. And so you know,
Speaker 1: the question for Democrats is number one, is RFK Junior
Speaker 1: or Cornell West? Are they going to actually be on
Speaker 1: the ballot? That's question number one and number two when
Speaker 1: you come down to it and people realize, like, okay,
Speaker 1: but at the end of the day, it's going to
Speaker 1: be Biden or Trump. Does that bring people back around?
Speaker 1: And there's a good chance that it will, we should say,
Speaker 1: because that's typically what happens frequently with third party candidates
Speaker 1: is when things get real and you know, people are
Speaker 1: really focused in on this come September October, there is
Speaker 1: a kind of you know, realization that there are only
Speaker 1: really two viable choices, and support for third party candidates
Speaker 1: falls off. That's historically what's happened, is that what happens
Speaker 1: this time around?
Speaker 2: Big question mark Yeah, will we will see, as they say,
Speaker 2: but overall interesting signs and just more so about one
Speaker 2: of the great lessons that we can all take away
Speaker 2: from this is that politics is a living thing. It
Speaker 2: doesn't just stay static. Things have changed dramatically in four years.
Speaker 2: They have become unrecognizable in sixt years, and all those
Speaker 2: people who wrote books about the laws of politics James
Speaker 2: Carville forty more years, et cetera didn't work out. And
Speaker 2: I think that's a great thing because it shows that
Speaker 2: people are not static, that they do pay attention. They
Speaker 2: change their mind and just because what they change their
Speaker 2: main mind on may not be with a pundit class
Speaker 2: wants them to, they certainly do pay attention in their
Speaker 2: own way. So I have more faith actually in the
Speaker 2: American people because they're always actually changing their mind and
Speaker 2: looking at things and deciding things on the fly.
Speaker 3: And I think that's good.
Speaker 2: Let's move to France, where again people are certainly changing
Speaker 2: their minds. There is a fantastic thread here. I want
Speaker 2: to make sure I say this gentleman's name correctly. I
Speaker 2: think it's Arnault bertrand should we go with that. He
Speaker 2: has had some fantastic insights into French politics that we
Speaker 2: wanted to put here on the show just because it
Speaker 2: is possibly a harbinger of some major change that's happening
Speaker 2: here in the US. But probably most importantly, it's just
Speaker 2: that the European like neoliberal consensus, as we previously talked
Speaker 2: about at the G seven, has never been more unpopular
Speaker 2: actually with European voters.
Speaker 3: So let's go ahead and put this up there on
Speaker 3: the screen.
Speaker 2: This is some analysis basically about the French election that
Speaker 2: is upcoming, which was called by Emmanuel Macrone after the
Speaker 2: shock win of Marine Le Penn's party in the European
Speaker 2: parliamentary elections.
Speaker 3: What Arnold Batrand says.
Speaker 2: Here is that the left quote got their shit together
Speaker 2: quote very fairly fast, almost immediately, announcing the creation of
Speaker 2: a popular front that gathers all of the left wing parties.
Speaker 2: Let's go to the next part, he says. It's on
Speaker 2: the right that things have really started to go wild.
Speaker 2: After the president of one of the major center right parties,
Speaker 2: the Party of Jacques Chirac and of Nicholas Sarkozi, announced
Speaker 2: that he would then do an alliance with Marine la
Speaker 2: Penn's party.
Speaker 3: Let's go to the next one, he says.
Speaker 2: Almost immediately though, top officials in that party started saying
Speaker 2: that person was speaking in their name only and he
Speaker 2: needed to resign from the party's presidency. And now there
Speaker 2: is some major infighting as to who who is managing
Speaker 2: this party. Are they going to ally with Leapenn or not.
Speaker 2: Let's go continue, he says. Meanwhile, Macrone is quote shooting
Speaker 2: at this newly formed Popular Front, saying that those who
Speaker 2: are joining it are quote anti Semites, so we're bringing
Speaker 2: some of the Israel stuff into this. And because the
Speaker 2: left wing party coalition quote campaigned for a lot of Palestinians,
Speaker 2: so obviously that makes them and everyone with them anti Semitic.
Speaker 2: So continue if we want here in some of this analysis,
Speaker 2: if we look at the actual projections, it looks like
Speaker 2: right now, and this is from the Financial Times, that
Speaker 2: the far right block his words of Marine Lapen and
Speaker 2: some of the leftovers of the right wing are in
Speaker 2: the lead for three hundred and sixty two seats. The
Speaker 2: left wing block, the so called Popular Front, is in
Speaker 2: the lead with two hundred and eleven seats. Meanwhile Macrone's
Speaker 2: party is in the lead in just three seats, and
Speaker 2: none of these three seats are even in France, all
Speaker 2: of them are seats for French people. And then that
Speaker 2: old center right party is in the lead for just one.
Speaker 2: So remember, as he said, the election is two rounds.
Speaker 2: The projections for the second round or the left and
Speaker 2: the far right would battle it out for the five
Speaker 2: hundred and thirty six seeds, but that the Macron alliance
Speaker 2: would only make the runoff in some forty one seats.
Speaker 2: So basically it quote looks like they will essentially destroy
Speaker 2: Macronism as a political force in France. Either that is
Speaker 2: somehow ninety chess that no one understands, or his dissolution
Speaker 2: of the French Parliament is one of the stupidest moves
Speaker 2: ever by a French president.
Speaker 4: Is it ninety chess or is it hungry hungry hippos.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm thinking hungry hungry hipo probably dumber than hungry
Speaker 2: hungry ht BO. I mean, look, I mean, I think
Speaker 2: it's fascinating because I don't again, I don't really know
Speaker 2: why he's doing this at all. What we do know
Speaker 2: here is that the Neo Lib consensus in France, which
Speaker 2: leading indicator I would say for the rest of the continent,
Speaker 2: it's dead. It's either left or right, and actually like
Speaker 2: left or right in terms of who is going to
Speaker 2: win here and La Penn and her party, it's looking
Speaker 2: like a historic for them d act's release genuinely take power,
Speaker 2: and this is ahead of the twenty twenty seven election,
Speaker 2: where if they do so, I mean, this destroys Emmanuel
Speaker 2: Macron his entire legacy as the president of France, and
Speaker 2: his real legacy would almost be like Obama ushering in
Speaker 2: this new era as opposed to actually doing anything himself.
Speaker 1: It is remarkable. I think he was betting on, which
Speaker 1: is usually a safe bet, left wing dysfunction. Yes, he
Speaker 1: was thinking that the lefties wouldn't be able to get
Speaker 1: their shit together, wouldn't form this popular front, which they
Speaker 1: did very quickly and were able to, you know, announce
Speaker 1: cannons in all of these seats, an incredible feat of
Speaker 1: organizational muscle from you know, a group of individuals who
Speaker 1: are not really known for such and so he thought
Speaker 1: they would remain splintered and then he would be able
Speaker 1: to bet on you know what is he hopes still
Speaker 1: a majority revulsion towards the far right in La Penn
Speaker 1: and be able to convince peeople like the lesser of
Speaker 1: two Evils kind of a vote once again and be able.
Speaker 4: To potentially pick up seats.
Speaker 1: Instead, they did get their act together, and so as
Speaker 1: you were laying out, you know what will happen is
Speaker 1: you'll have an initial vote in all of these districts
Speaker 1: and then the top two vote getting parties then built
Speaker 1: head to the runoff. So if you're not in the
Speaker 1: top two, that's it.
Speaker 4: Game over. They're leading in three seats.
Speaker 1: Their only potentially making it's the runoff in right now
Speaker 1: projected some forty seats.
Speaker 4: So you're done.
Speaker 1: Now you have the left and the right battling it
Speaker 1: out for the future. And listen, I don't want to
Speaker 1: read too much into it, but I think when you
Speaker 1: look here and you look at the negative approval ratings
Speaker 1: for you know, G seven leaders, When you look at
Speaker 1: Joe Biden and you know the disgust for him and
Speaker 1: his the sense that the economy is going backwards and
Speaker 1: the country's on the wrong track, which has really been
Speaker 1: a sentiment that's been picking up and picking up over
Speaker 1: the years. It's just pretty clear that for most people
Speaker 1: in these countries they feel, not that they would articulate
Speaker 1: it this way, but they feel that the neoliberal consensus
Speaker 1: that has reigned for you know, forty plus years, really
Speaker 1: started under Jimmy Carter and then sort of solidified under
Speaker 1: Ronald Reagan and then Bill Clinton, it has failed them.
Speaker 1: It has failed to deliver secure economic security for them.
Speaker 1: It has failed to deliver higher wages. It is increasingly
Speaker 1: funneled more and more and more wealth to the very
Speaker 1: top it has not had any significant answers for you know,
Speaker 1: various societal issues, and so they're they're done with it.
Speaker 1: I also think it's really interesting in the context of
Speaker 1: macrona I brought this up before, but again has some
Speaker 1: you know, potential implications for Joe Biden. Although you don't
Speaker 1: want to read too much into these things because they
Speaker 1: have such a different political system than we do. But
Speaker 1: Macron did try to He realized immigration was a big
Speaker 1: problem for him. He tried to do more hardline things.
Speaker 1: They were so significant that you know, Lapen was saying, hey,
Speaker 1: this is an ideological win for me. Macron's own party
Speaker 1: was rejecting it and wouldn't vote for it, et cetera.
Speaker 1: And surprise, surprise, Like if you're an immigration hardliner, that
Speaker 1: wasn't going to enoy, Like that wasn't going to make
Speaker 1: you fall in love with Emmanuel Macron. And same in
Speaker 1: the US as Biden tries to signal this, you know,
Speaker 1: let me be more hardline on immigration shift, you're not
Speaker 1: gonna win over Trump supporters, Like if your immigration is
Speaker 1: your top issue, you're still not voting for Joe Biden.
Speaker 1: So that ploy really hasn't worked for mcron. It hasn't
Speaker 1: worked for any of the European leaders, and I don't
Speaker 1: think it's going to work for Joe Biden either.
Speaker 3: It's complicated. I agree.
Speaker 2: In terms of the politics there also, I would say
Speaker 2: the polling here is so radically shifting. We should cover
Speaker 2: this tomorrow. I've been sending some stuff. I'll save some
Speaker 2: of my comments on that. Let's put this up there
Speaker 2: on the screen because this highlights exactly what you're talking about.
Speaker 2: Look here at the approval ratings for the G seven leaders.
Speaker 2: So you've got olof Schaltz minus fifty one in Germany,
Speaker 2: Trudeau minus thirty eight in Canada, minus thirty one for
Speaker 2: Macron in France, minus ten for Maloney in Italy. She
Speaker 2: somehow is the most popular lady on the entire stage.
Speaker 2: Bidenus eight eighteen point five for his approval rating. Kashida
Speaker 2: in Japan is at minus forty.
Speaker 3: I don't know what's going on in Japan. I need
Speaker 3: to look into that more.
Speaker 2: And then Rischie Sunak takes the cake minus fifty four. So,
Speaker 2: like you said, each of these are individual leaders. Each
Speaker 2: of these have individual circumstances, but we are more connected
Speaker 2: than at any time before. And you know, one of the
Speaker 2: things about globalization is that all of our economies look
Speaker 2: more similar today than they ever did in the past.
Speaker 2: So what we can generally surmise across all of these
Speaker 2: is that you have a deceleration of wealth, you know,
Speaker 2: for the bottom tranch, or really the bottom half of
Speaker 2: a lot of these societies, safety sets, safety social nets
Speaker 2: or not. In general, economic opportunity is being divided. You
Speaker 2: see higher inflation against all all of these economies, and
Speaker 2: in each one there is a asking of the new generation,
Speaker 2: which is flirting with left and right politics which have
Speaker 2: not been seen in any of these countries in decades.
Speaker 2: You see this with the rise of a major right
Speaker 2: wing coalition in Japan. You see the AfD doing incredibly
Speaker 2: well in Germany, I believe, in Canada and in France
Speaker 2: you're seeing some similar dynamics.
Speaker 3: And then Italy.
Speaker 2: Of course, Maloney herself was heralded allegedly as some like
Speaker 2: right wing personnel, though she's governed very differently while she's
Speaker 2: in office, but at the very least in every instance,
Speaker 2: you know, if we're seeing a flirting with different types
Speaker 2: of politics, which we're unheard of really in the last
Speaker 2: forty five years or so, which means some sort of
Speaker 2: new quote unquote world order. No conspiracy is likely inevitable
Speaker 2: if we are to hue two democracy. I mean, let's
Speaker 2: be said, honest, though we could go in the other direction.
Speaker 2: Just because they're unpopular doesn't mean that they couldn't become
Speaker 2: a more dictatorial and controlling and censorship ridden to try
Speaker 2: and control the current world order that we are in.
Speaker 2: I think that's the more likely path because all of
Speaker 2: them have such a religious devotion, for example, to Ukraine.
Speaker 2: I mean, this entire some is basically just being a
Speaker 2: slave to Ukraine and being like, oh, here's fifty billion
Speaker 2: more dollars and we're with you until the very end,
Speaker 2: and let's endorse your BS peace conference and all of
Speaker 2: this other stuff. But again, they're doing so in a
Speaker 2: very unpopular manner if you look at the feedback from
Speaker 2: all of the actual democracies for what's happening. So that's
Speaker 2: really I think the only way that we can connect,
Speaker 2: and why I think the France example is so important
Speaker 2: is because it really is part of a global phenomenon
Speaker 2: just previously, like we saw with Brexit last time in
Speaker 2: twenty fifteen.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and I think it's important to say too, because
Speaker 1: you could look at those numbers and go, oh, well,
Speaker 1: I mean, first of all, Joe Biden's doven better than
Speaker 1: a lot of these people. Second of all, you can say, oh, well,
Speaker 1: they're just like a victim of circumstance because they had
Speaker 1: COVID and now you've got inflation as a result of COVID,
Speaker 1: and so people are very upset about that, and they're
Speaker 1: blaming their leaders, even though you know, there's a consistent
Speaker 1: theme across the countries. So it's not all the leader's fault.
Speaker 1: But if we look then at the numbers for AMLO
Speaker 1: in Mexico, where they also struggled with, you know, inflation
Speaker 1: and GDP growth isn't astronomical though there is a lot
Speaker 1: of you know, there's increasing as there's been more moved
Speaker 1: towards near shoring and away from China. There is a
Speaker 1: lot of economic possibility for Mexico right now that I
Speaker 1: think people are there are very excited about. But you
Speaker 1: had a different economic program that actually delivered wage increases,
Speaker 1: significant wage increases beyond notably beyond inflation for average Mexican workers.
Speaker 1: And so because of that, in spite of the difficult
Speaker 1: global circumstances. You know, Amlo one of the most popular
Speaker 1: leaders in the entire world. So it's not that, you know,
Speaker 1: they're just a victim of fate and circumstance and there
Speaker 1: was absolutely nothing that they can do. People have rightly
Speaker 1: judged that there were other pathways open to them and
Speaker 1: they didn't take it, and that they aren't focused on
Speaker 1: delivering for their lives. Instead, they're focused on, you know,
Speaker 1: backing Israel and they're endless assault against Gaza and backing
Speaker 1: Ukraine in what has become, you know, a hopeless situation,
Speaker 1: rather than improving the lives of their own tax paying citizens. So,
Speaker 1: you know, I think some of those themes are probably
Speaker 1: very consistent across those countries.
Speaker 3: Well, there's a couple lessons.
Speaker 2: So, like I just said, I have the most popular
Speaker 2: leaders in front of me. Some of the one of
Speaker 2: these surveys is actually after the Indian election, even though
Speaker 2: India Mody suffered a setback, he and Amlo are the
Speaker 2: two most popular leaders in the world.
Speaker 3: What can you at least say about those two leaders.
Speaker 2: Neither would ever be accused of being quote unquote neoliberal,
Speaker 2: and in fact have explicitly rejected over the implicit neoliberal consensus.
Speaker 2: So in India's case, you have the Congress Party, this
Speaker 2: was the neoliberal party being powerful decades, very similar actually
Speaker 2: to Mexico, and they're part of ruling coalition.
Speaker 3: Mody comes in and basically sweeps it.
Speaker 2: Off the table, turns it almost into an irrelevant political
Speaker 2: force whose only victory is winning a few more seats
Speaker 2: but still not being in power. Amlo very similar basically
Speaker 2: just delivered this huge mandate for his party in Mexico
Speaker 2: despite I mean a lot of troubling coalition, troubling problems,
Speaker 2: but at the very least in Mexico, the ruling previously
Speaker 2: ruling center right party, they're not in the discussion as
Speaker 2: part of the actual solution. The voters don't even count
Speaker 2: them in their minds. So I think in both of
Speaker 2: those cases we could see that if you are willing
Speaker 2: to move in that direction, you can reape massive political
Speaker 2: rewards in either of those However, you know, the g
Speaker 2: seven these economies, like I said, these are the most
Speaker 2: highly developed economies in the world in a certain sense,
Speaker 2: like the elites of all of those countries do control
Speaker 2: things at a much higher level, whereas in a developing nation,
Speaker 2: I think, for some reason.
Speaker 3: You know, you.
Speaker 2: Can both have like lots of oligarchy, but you can
Speaker 2: have some sort of democratic revolt, and institutions are not
Speaker 2: nearly as entrench and are probably easier to take on
Speaker 2: in that certain scenario. So, I mean, it's a fascinating
Speaker 2: discussion honestly, Like we said about the whole new world
Speaker 2: order and what that may look like as opposed to
Speaker 2: we really have two options like going down the path
Speaker 2: of democracy or more control, more censorship.
Speaker 3: They'll probably try for the former. The only question is
Speaker 3: actually going to work.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and of course to bring it back to the US,
Speaker 1: even as we have a number of third party candidates
Speaker 1: on the ballot, because of the nature of our system,
Speaker 1: we don't really have a non neoliberal option. We have
Speaker 1: Joe Biden and Donald Trump. Donald Trump, Matt Stiller did
Speaker 1: a phenomenal piece. We're actually going to try to have
Speaker 1: him on the show to talk about it. About the
Speaker 1: way Trump doesn't even talk about going after business anymore.
Speaker 4: It doesn't even pretend.
Speaker 1: Instead he's in these fundraising rooms promising them everything that
Speaker 1: they could possibly want. And we know, of course when
Speaker 1: he was in office, well he did do some things,
Speaker 1: especially vias of v China, Visa ve renegotiating NAFTA that
Speaker 1: were different in a genuine break from the past neoliberal consensus.
Speaker 1: The primary accomplishment was the Tax Cut Jobs Act, which
Speaker 1: was sitting on the shelf from the neoliberal Reaganite type
Speaker 1: of system. That's one of his primary promises moving forward
Speaker 1: is We're going to make sure we continue those tax cuts,
Speaker 1: so you really.
Speaker 4: Don't have another option.
Speaker 1: Although stylistically Trump gives the vibes of being a real
Speaker 1: threat to the system even as he's promising them like no, no, no,
Speaker 1: I'm going to do what you want, and billionaires are
Speaker 1: responding to that. I mean, this is another way going
Speaker 1: back to how the coalitions are shifting. You know, under
Speaker 1: Obama and Hillary and Biden. Last time around, Wall Street
Speaker 1: really started going for Democrats. They're going back to Republicans.
Speaker 1: Now they're going back to backing Trump. They feel very
Speaker 1: comfortable with him because they don't like under Biden the
Speaker 1: antitrust move and the more pro labor postures. So in
Speaker 1: any case, that's part of what makes our system unique
Speaker 1: and in my opinion, uniquely bad, is that we don't
Speaker 1: really have any options beyond the status quo.
Speaker 2: Yeah, certainly, especially in the modern era didn't always used
Speaker 2: to be like this, though, at least back in eighteen
Speaker 2: hundreds and early ninety hundreds,