Speaker 1: Native lamb Pod is the production of iHeartRadio in partnership
Speaker 1: with Reason Choice Media.
Speaker 2: Well come, well come, well come, well come, well come, welcome.
Speaker 3: Okay, welcome home everybody.
Speaker 4: This is a Native Lamppod Mini pod and Today. Because
Speaker 4: sometimes we tend to be in gloom and doom, We're
Speaker 4: just gonna stay in the doom, So we at the
Speaker 4: end of most shows tell you how many days are
Speaker 4: left to the midterms. Now, Andrew might be feeling like,
Speaker 4: woo hoo midterms. I think me and Tiff really might
Speaker 4: feel a way about telling y'all how many days are
Speaker 4: left to the midterms, because I don't really know these
Speaker 4: things gonna damn happen, So tif, I think that might be.
Speaker 3: Where you're resting.
Speaker 4: Even if they are gonna happen, are they gonna cheat
Speaker 4: like they did? I still feel like they did in
Speaker 4: the twenty twenty four election. I don't have dad. I
Speaker 4: got a gut feeling. I'm telling about the black women
Speaker 4: in the Holy Goes We'll be spot on. So I'm
Speaker 4: curious to know if you guys think we should still
Speaker 4: be telling people how many days are left.
Speaker 1: I say that I think it's pointless. I get so
Speaker 1: frustrated when people say, Andrew already disagree with me. But
Speaker 1: I'm just gonna tell you, Andrew, I think it is
Speaker 1: pointless when people start talking to me like we just
Speaker 1: gotta hold on for one more year then the midterms.
Speaker 1: I'm hold on to what? What do we think the
Speaker 1: midterms are going to change? And after going out and
Speaker 1: telling everybody gotta vote, gotta votetta vote, gotta vote, and
Speaker 1: the country I know Angela believes the election is stolen.
Speaker 1: I can only go on what is before us, and
Speaker 1: that is that millions of people cast ballots for this.
Speaker 1: But I will say, Angela, the Latasha has been the
Speaker 1: most compelling to me in giving me actual facts that
Speaker 1: suggest the election is stolen. And I've really I'm hesitant
Speaker 1: to share what she said. So y'all give me a
Speaker 1: little bit of grace because I could be saying it
Speaker 1: incorrectly because I don't know the exact jurisdictions. But she
Speaker 1: was saying there were places where people would vote down
Speaker 1: ballot completely Democrat and not the top Republican and it
Speaker 1: happened overwhelmingly, and we should have her come on so
Speaker 1: she can say it directly. But when she said that,
Speaker 1: I'm like now, that is information to me, that is
Speaker 1: that's factual, it's logical, and it gives you a head
Speaker 1: scratch where yes, that does require, you know, some investigation.
Speaker 1: But even if they did, okay, it is here now,
Speaker 1: like what they're not gonna say, okay, takes these back seats.
Speaker 1: We stole it, like they have already instituted this authoritarian regime.
Speaker 1: And I don't know any post industrialized country that has
Speaker 1: come this far into authoritarianism and turned around. So why
Speaker 1: we think all of a sudden we're gonna have free
Speaker 1: and fair elections in this country for midterms, which we've
Speaker 1: never really had, as black folks know all too well,
Speaker 1: and as women know all too well, we've never really
Speaker 1: had that. But we think somehow in four hundred and
Speaker 1: eighty days that we're going to have a better chance
Speaker 1: at democracy. I just don't think so. But find Andrew,
Speaker 1: you've been shaking your head, So go ahead and tell
Speaker 1: me how I'm wrong.
Speaker 2: I think, so long as elections are still determining who
Speaker 2: is going to be running the country, serving as your mayor,
Speaker 2: on your school board, and your members of Congress, you
Speaker 2: need to participate. We need to show up, and we
Speaker 2: have to participate in the process that exists that allows
Speaker 2: for people to do exactly what they're doing right now
Speaker 2: to us, against us, and some would even say against
Speaker 2: our will. It certainly was against mine. My will when
Speaker 2: I voted, was for a different outcome, and it was
Speaker 2: to preserve democracy. But the other choice was also pretty
Speaker 2: clear to me, which was the opposite of holding democracy,
Speaker 2: but quite frankly flipping closer to autocracy. I do think that.
Speaker 2: So one thing on the evidence around the down ballot
Speaker 2: versus up ballot. That's a trend that's happened in Florida
Speaker 2: for decades. It's only recently shifted where people elected local
Speaker 2: Democrats to school board, their mayors, their council in the
Speaker 2: western part of Lord of the panhandular region. But Democratic
Speaker 2: registration was really the majority registration across the Panhandle for
Speaker 2: frankly all of our existence up to Governor Jeb Bush
Speaker 2: being elected. But their national voting habits were always more conservative,
Speaker 2: so they would vote for Republican presidents, Republican US senators,
Speaker 2: and Democrats all the way down. The rest of the battle.
Speaker 2: We described those folks as Dixiecrats, and Dixiecrats don't just
Speaker 2: live in the panhandular region of Florida. Every part of
Speaker 2: the country has those folks who registered Democrats. They are
Speaker 2: not leaving their party registration, but their voting habits have shifted.
Speaker 2: And then Donald Trump came along and created a permission
Speaker 2: structure for those individuals to go from being registered ds
Speaker 2: to now fully flown, grown, registered Ours, and then their
Speaker 2: voting has now become consistent. They vote are at the
Speaker 2: lower end and they vote are at the top end.
Speaker 2: And I would imagine that that's a trend that exists
Speaker 2: all over the country. But Latasha's point, if we're going
Speaker 2: to find irregularities in the election system, it is going
Speaker 2: to happen at a precinct by precinct level in each
Speaker 2: county and every you know, and all over the country,
Speaker 2: but both very specifically in states that are considered basically
Speaker 2: beil weather states or states that could flip either Republican
Speaker 2: or Democrat from cycle to cycle. But the ability for
Speaker 2: someone to hold sales steal an election by flipping a switch,
Speaker 2: and if impacted the entire country, it is less likely
Speaker 2: given the decentralized nature of our election system, which is
Speaker 2: run county to county to county, and I mean not
Speaker 2: in but just make this final point, which is simply say,
Speaker 2: I think we have to be really careful and responsible
Speaker 2: with how we talk about our elections systems, because it's
Speaker 2: the only thing that people can have faith in if
Speaker 2: they're exercizing the process of going out of their house
Speaker 2: down to a precinct or in their house in filling
Speaker 2: out an absentee ballot and letting their voices be heard.
Speaker 2: Because I don't know too many people who willingly participate
Speaker 2: in what they find to be a futile experience. Most people,
Speaker 2: if I'm going to take my time, energy effort, in
Speaker 2: some cases money to fuel a gas tank or otherwise,
Speaker 2: it better have an outcome on the other end of it,
Speaker 2: hopefully in the direction that I would like it to go,
Speaker 2: but an outcome nonetheless that can be trusted. And if
Speaker 2: we erode that process, we think we have problems now
Speaker 2: with the couch winning quote unquote, we're really going to
Speaker 2: exacerbate a problem of people deciding to just check completely
Speaker 2: a wholesale out of elections because they don't believe that
Speaker 2: they're legal, that they're fair, or that it will count.
Speaker 2: Let alone the debate around whether it matters because of
Speaker 2: what happens once people get elected, but whether it will count.
Speaker 2: And I think that create that that crisis of confidence
Speaker 2: and a system opens up a whole new barrel for
Speaker 2: us to have to fight.
Speaker 1: I think that's all completely fair. I just want to
Speaker 1: punctuate the point that you made around being careful how
Speaker 1: we talk about it. Something that you said that is
Speaker 1: in real time made me reconsider about midterms is when
Speaker 1: we talk about those down ballot races, when in your
Speaker 1: explanation of Dixiecrats, yes, those down ballot races may not
Speaker 1: be impacted by impropriety. You know, this is like school
Speaker 1: board elections, city council members. So at no point am
Speaker 1: I ever discouraging people from participating in the process. I'm
Speaker 1: really speaking more from a federal perspective. I don't know
Speaker 1: what midterm elections might change. Even should Democrats take seize
Speaker 1: power of the House and or the Senate. I'd be
Speaker 1: curious about what things that have happened that that could
Speaker 1: actually stop. I think there's a big tent in the party.
Speaker 1: There are conservative Democrats. So that's really my perspect in
Speaker 1: terms of your explanation on malfeasance in the past election,
Speaker 1: I just want to be clear there too, I am
Speaker 1: not saying the election was stolen. I'm not saying it wasn't.
Speaker 1: My only thing is before the responsibility for me personally,
Speaker 1: the responsibility I have before an audience. I would not
Speaker 1: say the election is stolen if I have not well
Speaker 1: researched it and said, here is the data chain that
Speaker 1: leads me to that. So I'm simply sharing what Latasha
Speaker 1: said to me, which is why, Yeah, I know, I
Speaker 1: just want to be clear for the audience, because I
Speaker 1: you know, I want them to understand this is what
Speaker 1: I'm told. I have not personally gone down that rabbit
Speaker 1: hole to say, oh, yeah, I see how this can happen.
Speaker 1: I'm curious when you say stuff like county by county,
Speaker 1: because you're not the only person to say that. I
Speaker 1: think Roland Martin did a segment on his shows that
Speaker 1: I haven't watched that I should, and Roland Martin is
Speaker 1: in a stude journalist, so I don't know what he did.
Speaker 1: But a lot of people were saying, oh, Roland Martin
Speaker 1: explored a report by somebody that gave them pause on
Speaker 1: the election. Those are the things that will entice me
Speaker 1: to say, okay, well, let me look at the information.
Speaker 1: I don't know if the election was stolen. I just
Speaker 1: think that some of us, maybe not you, Angela, but
Speaker 1: there are some people out there who are so traumatized
Speaker 1: at the pronouncement of white supremacy in this country that
Speaker 1: we can't even fathom it. That were like, there is
Speaker 1: no way y'all went out and put this half witted
Speaker 1: political idiot back in office after he said every racist,
Speaker 1: awful thing. There is no chance that you all could
Speaker 1: have done that, And that is where I'm torn. I'd
Speaker 1: rather the election be stolen than to know that the
Speaker 1: majority of people in this country right felt this way.
Speaker 1: So I don't know, And I want.
Speaker 4: To back into this a little bit because I had
Speaker 4: to think about, like I know that I did some
Speaker 4: research on the other side of the election, and there
Speaker 4: were definitely reports that were coming out from election experts
Speaker 4: on why this is a very likely phenomenon. So I
Speaker 4: went back and looked. There was a lot of discussion
Speaker 4: around county level manipulations. When we talk about mid term elections,
Speaker 4: we're talking about local state elections, and then of course
Speaker 4: our members of Congress that are elected in those off
Speaker 4: year elections, as well as House of Representatives and senators
Speaker 4: in some instances, I think it's a third normally that
Speaker 4: are up for election. There were five states that one
Speaker 4: entity said needed investigation into whether or not there was
Speaker 4: any count county level manipulation. Please look these up so
Speaker 4: that you're not just going off my smart elections one
Speaker 4: I'm about to I'm about to smart elections is one.
Speaker 4: Election Truth Alliance looked at Clark County, Nevada. The drawing
Speaker 4: off rate in Clark County, Nevada was astonishing to them.
Speaker 4: The way that they would have they flipped from the
Speaker 4: presidential nominee, the two presidential candidates to who they voted
Speaker 4: for in the Senate was astonishing to Election Truth Alliance.
Speaker 1: Additionally, for this as a quock question, when you say
Speaker 1: the drop off, you're saying that people are voting basically
Speaker 1: what Latasha was saying, that at the top they're voting
Speaker 1: Republican and down ballot.
Speaker 4: Ballant as Democrats. Yes, no, yes, even between the fads
Speaker 4: even yes, yes, exactly. And then the other thing is,
Speaker 4: and I forgot about this comment, but Donald Trump said
Speaker 4: right after inauguration that Elon Musk understood the Pennsylvania voting
Speaker 4: machines on a local level better than anyone and they
Speaker 4: ended up winning by a landslide, which caused a lot
Speaker 4: of alarm as well. So if you have someone saying
Speaker 4: that there are five states or an entity that studies
Speaker 4: this five states from an election integrity standpoint that need
Speaker 4: to be looked into because it looks like there could
Speaker 4: be some county by county manipulation. You have the President
Speaker 4: making this pronouncement about Pennsylvania voting machines and Elon Musk,
Speaker 4: and you have this Clark County analysis. And I remember
Speaker 4: going back and looking at what the Attorney General put
Speaker 4: out as well, Stephen horse Ford, to be fair, because
Speaker 4: when I raised was Stephen Horsford, he was like, well.
Speaker 1: The representative of Clark County, uh huh, Las Vegas.
Speaker 4: And he said, well, they've been looking into this for
Speaker 4: some time. It wasn't about this election, but it was
Speaker 4: about this election.
Speaker 3: So I'm not.
Speaker 4: Sure what the dis like, what the issue was, And
Speaker 4: I can't remember when how he responded to my response. Know,
Speaker 4: they are talking about the twenty four election, not twenty two,
Speaker 4: not twenty It was this year. But they did make
Speaker 4: an analysis and have data from the year prior or,
Speaker 4: the presidential prior and the one before that. And they
Speaker 4: show how there was a more significant drop off like
Speaker 4: ten percent from Harris to Jackie Rosen.
Speaker 3: Two women.
Speaker 4: So you also can't say, well, it was a woman thing.
Speaker 1: Two women on the.
Speaker 4: Versus YEP, versus what it was in twenty twenty versus
Speaker 4: twenty sixteen.
Speaker 1: Pennsylvania.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I need to go back, and Nevada was one.
Speaker 3: Pennsylvania was one.
Speaker 1: The interesting thing about those there are two swing states.
Speaker 2: They were a Democrat, I would imagine then Michigan.
Speaker 3: I don't want to even imagine you go back and
Speaker 3: pull on.
Speaker 2: But while you're looking that up, Ange, I'll just say
Speaker 2: in Florida and my race for governor, we had the
Speaker 2: US Senate race at the same time, which of course
Speaker 2: had a white male nominee Democrat on my side, and
Speaker 2: then my race obviously black male Democrat, and there was
Speaker 2: about a point difference. And when I say a point,
Speaker 2: I'm talking about like seventy thousand votes. Who were people
Speaker 2: who were comfortable voting for a Democrat for the US Senate,
Speaker 2: a white male Democrat for the US Senate, and who
Speaker 2: then and the race for governor appeared to have switched
Speaker 2: from their Democratic ballot to choose the Republican nominee. What
Speaker 2: makes it alarming for outside groups who are looking at
Speaker 2: these elections is if you see, usually these habits of
Speaker 2: flipping or going back and forth between D and R
Speaker 2: are sort of well laced. There's a history of it.
Speaker 2: There's a way in which you can go back and
Speaker 2: explain this to be a voting pattern of a particular area,
Speaker 2: be it a whole state or congressional districts, so on
Speaker 2: and so forth. What is anomalous is if there is
Speaker 2: no history, yet you find a significant difference, especially at
Speaker 2: same levels. Right, so you're talking about a statewide race.
Speaker 2: A Senate is a statewide race. A governor is a
Speaker 2: state wide race. So you're looking at two comparable races.
Speaker 2: But then there is a difference between whether folks so
Speaker 2: for a Democrat or a Republican in those seats and
Speaker 2: most states, you can vote an entire Democratic line or
Speaker 2: you can vote an entire Republican line, which means anyone
Speaker 2: who is running for partisan office and they are a Republican,
Speaker 2: your ballot will choose them, and the same for Democrat exactly.
Speaker 2: And then there is there are the people who go
Speaker 2: back and forth. Even when you have to make individual
Speaker 2: selections back and forth. Overwhelmingly, people vote party line ballots.
Speaker 2: That's where anomalies come from when folks don't do that.
Speaker 2: And you see a difference between a statewide race where democrats,
Speaker 2: the Democrat got four million votes and the Republican got
Speaker 2: four point one million votes. But it then switches to
Speaker 2: a governor's race and the Democrat gets three point nine
Speaker 2: million and the Republican got four point two million. That
Speaker 2: is a pretty significant difference without a trait. We have
Speaker 2: to identify what the trait was that made the difference possible.
Speaker 2: In twenty sixteen, this confounded a lot of us because
Speaker 2: we had not seen the kind of drop off that
Speaker 2: we'd seen before between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump and
Speaker 2: the races that came below them, with folks choosing between
Speaker 2: Democrat Republican. And what we found in later research is
Speaker 2: that Trump was able to hyper activate the white vote turnout,
Speaker 2: and he did the same in this last election.
Speaker 1: In this last election, that is the thing.
Speaker 2: Turnout of white voters about turn out totally skewed. It
Speaker 2: threw all the polling off, of course, but it also
Speaker 2: throws out a lot of these what do you call
Speaker 2: those closing numbers at the end of the day they
Speaker 2: say exit poled numbers and that kind of thing, which
Speaker 2: because these people a lot of practice around exit polling,
Speaker 2: and if they were, they're still not giving an honest answer,
Speaker 2: and so it confounded a lot of us.
Speaker 3: Okay, so just really quick.
Speaker 4: So now I went to the Smart Elections thing and
Speaker 4: they have a chart. I'm just going to send you
Speaker 4: all the link. And they examined seventeen states, and the
Speaker 4: swing states had the most significant drop off versus the
Speaker 4: non swing states for reasons.
Speaker 3: We understand there are swing states for a reason.
Speaker 4: But the swing states were Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania,
Speaker 4: and Wisconsin. And then there are non swing states where
Speaker 4: there was also drop off, but it was no where
Speaker 4: near I mean it is. It is astonishing. So I'm
Speaker 4: gonna send you guys to craft.
Speaker 1: Send it to me. I remained unconvinced to be honest.
Speaker 1: I mean, I and my challenge is when I'm citing
Speaker 1: someone else's research, I want to know, like, how you
Speaker 1: got this research. And then I got to talk to
Speaker 1: five other people explain to me because this is what
Speaker 1: they said they got how they got the research. Andrew,
Speaker 1: you'd be one of those people like I don't read
Speaker 1: cross tabs and feel all that stuff, Like I don't
Speaker 1: know what I can look at the numbers, and I
Speaker 1: remember I was at Michael Harriet's house when the new
Speaker 1: Pew data drops and I was asking him to explain
Speaker 1: it to me, and we talked about it in our chat.
Speaker 1: Because even the idea, I know we disagree here, Angela,
Speaker 1: but even the idea that the couch won, I don't
Speaker 1: know that that's true, Like the data just does not
Speaker 1: support it, but it's always my So then the couch
Speaker 1: wins every year like that. When you said that that's
Speaker 1: not that craasy number, that's the part that I actually,
Speaker 1: I think it would be nice for us as a
Speaker 1: country to get to a place where democracy was winning
Speaker 1: enough that one candidate at least superseded that ninety million number. Yeah,
Speaker 1: to me, that's that's I think, And specifically about this
Speaker 1: idea that in this election it was so crazy because
Speaker 1: ninety million people stayed home, and when you look at
Speaker 1: over all the cycles, that is pretty consistent with how
Speaker 1: many people stayed home. And then when you dig deeper
Speaker 1: and you disaggregate this data, you go down each rabbit
Speaker 1: hole individually, and that requires a collection of research, and
Speaker 1: it's boring, right, It's like boring to sit there and
Speaker 1: it takes hours and days to get to ask people.
Speaker 1: But when you go across that and look at all
Speaker 1: of it, and it'saggregated by race, this dude, the same
Speaker 1: way that Obama brought out the highest number of black
Speaker 1: voters and the lowest number of white voters, Donald Trump
Speaker 1: ignited a movement among white people. And that is my challenge. Yes,
Speaker 1: that is my challenge here because if that's what it
Speaker 1: took for you all to participate in this here democracy,
Speaker 1: and you were motivated. They were united in our destruction,
Speaker 1: they are united in our failures in this country. They're
Speaker 1: united and making sure that we never even get what
Speaker 1: they have or come close. And they are so motivated
Speaker 1: by that that they put this man back in office.
Speaker 1: That is the part I have challenged, and I understand
Speaker 1: why people are like, no, this can't be right, Like
Speaker 1: this can't be true. I just have not seen all
Speaker 1: the depth the New York Times analysis, Pew, all the
Speaker 1: data I've looked at, nothing has supported a that the
Speaker 1: couch has won, b that the election was stolen, even
Speaker 1: in these swing states, that you're talking about. I remain open.
Speaker 1: You know, I'm not saying this with certainty, but I
Speaker 1: just feel some level of disgust that these people have
Speaker 1: that they were motivated by him to come out. I
Speaker 1: would love to hear that the election is stolen, because
Speaker 1: I'm like, oh, these people, we have to cohabitate with
Speaker 1: our fellow countrymen. They're actually not pieces of shit, and
Speaker 1: they're actually not so bad. There's only a small number.
Speaker 2: No.
Speaker 1: What this election showed me is, yeah, ancient chains, they
Speaker 1: are still awful people who voted for this man because
Speaker 1: they don't like you and they don't like brown people.
Speaker 1: That's I'm experiencing it.
Speaker 2: I think we can if we talked about narcissism, it
Speaker 2: would be a narcissist thing to say if we believe
Speaker 2: that folks were motivated exclusively by why, Because I think
Speaker 2: it's probably more complicated than simple. I think it can
Speaker 2: be racist. Oh no, no, I'm not giving racist. I
Speaker 2: think you can be racist, have racist belief in tendencies
Speaker 2: ninety nine percent of your day in time or one
Speaker 2: hundred percent of your day in time, and still have
Speaker 2: other motivations for doing a thing beyond just being racist.
Speaker 2: Is what I'm saying it doesn't make them better people.
Speaker 2: It just means that they had motivations forgetting out and voting.
Speaker 2: And by the way, a motivation had to be first
Speaker 2: of all, when Barack Obama ran, these same white folks
Speaker 2: could have been motivated equally like that Ma's Gillham that
Speaker 2: that movie where at the end in California, like the
Speaker 2: polls will be closing and whatever you know, Chris Rock
Speaker 2: I think is the main character of that movie, and
Speaker 2: they everybody's pulled out their driveway and rush into the
Speaker 2: polls to go and vote to make sure the black
Speaker 2: man didn't win. But just as they were motivated to
Speaker 2: see Donald Trump, when they could have equally been motivated
Speaker 2: to prevent a black man from winning the presidency. I mean,
Speaker 2: in real time, they could have showed up in unprecedented
Speaker 2: numbers to stop that from happening, and couldn't do it
Speaker 2: every time, quite frankly up to now and probably beyond
Speaker 2: for several election cycles, because that's just where the numbers
Speaker 2: are when it comes to electoral performance. That if white
Speaker 2: folks wanted to vote and vote the way they vote
Speaker 2: right now, which is white men overwhelmingly Republican and white
Speaker 2: women consistently over a majority Republican So if they could
Speaker 2: have done that, then if this was only going to
Speaker 2: be about race, but they didn't. But they didn't do that,
Speaker 2: then they did not prevent that from happening. And they
Speaker 2: could have, and they could have done it even with
Speaker 2: fewer of them showing up than showed up to support Trump,
Speaker 2: and in this case, they wanted Trump. And I will
Speaker 2: just I'm layering on this that in addition to not
Speaker 2: wanting a black woman there, it can also be that
Speaker 2: there's some other things that were being communicated in that.
Speaker 1: Missing voted against her or they voted for him either
Speaker 1: and both make them racist.
Speaker 2: Series it's a difference without distinction. Completely agree. All I'm
Speaker 2: saying is is that if that were the only motivator
Speaker 2: by itself, then why didn't that motivator also keep Barack
Speaker 2: Obama from office?
Speaker 1: They weren't engaged then, And.
Speaker 4: Since that's not true, some of them, some of them
Speaker 4: were voted, were voting to demonstrate they weren't racist. I'm looking,
Speaker 4: I'm trying to see where I'm missing this too, but
Speaker 4: is then looked up In twenty four ninety million people
Speaker 4: didn't vote in twenty eighty million people didn't vote, and
Speaker 4: so it was the highest turnout and voter participation since
Speaker 4: nineteen o eight, and twenty four was the second highest
Speaker 4: since nineteen sixty. In twenty sixteen, one hundred million people
Speaker 4: didn't vote, and I'm trying to figure out what the
Speaker 4: twenty twelve and two thousand and eight numbers are tour,
Speaker 4: which is fine, but I don't remember it and sometimes
Speaker 4: might not remember it either.
Speaker 1: I'm not saying that, I'm just saying I don't just
Speaker 1: so people know I'm not googling something during the show,
Speaker 1: because sometimes numbers are.
Speaker 4: I am googling it during the show because I'm trying
Speaker 4: to figure out where the breakdown is. I think what
Speaker 4: I was trying to get to is at the end
Speaker 4: of the day, what we know is voter participation is
Speaker 4: not where it should be in this country, and as
Speaker 4: a result, that means that democracy has consistently been failing
Speaker 4: people because it doesn't feel like people power. So people
Speaker 4: are not going to lean into a system where they
Speaker 4: do not feel represented, which brings us full circle to
Speaker 4: the point of this show. Because I know we are
Speaker 4: supposed to be leaving like really soon and closing out
Speaker 4: it really soon.
Speaker 3: What we are struggling with.
Speaker 4: I think all in all is telling people counting down
Speaker 4: to the days where their circumstances are going to dramatically change,
Speaker 4: counting down to the days where a midterm election means
Speaker 4: that all of sudden, now things are going to be
Speaker 4: sky as blue, things are great. That is not how
Speaker 4: it's feeling, because even while we had a reprieve from
Speaker 4: twenty sixteen to twenty twenty, things still haven't drastically changed
Speaker 4: for a number of people in our communities. And so
Speaker 4: while we count down, let us also be intentional about
Speaker 4: the work that needs to shift that is in our
Speaker 4: power to do, and be recruiting people that can dramatically
Speaker 4: change circumstances because they are showing real courage. Whether it's
Speaker 4: one hundred million or eighty million or ninety million, tip,
Speaker 4: it is too many people who are sitting out of
Speaker 4: participating in this democracy, and that means that the democracy
Speaker 4: has to change. I think at the verities we can
Speaker 4: all agree on that point.
Speaker 1: I can definitely agree. Yeah, none of us ever disagree.
Speaker 1: My only point was to present it like ninety million
Speaker 1: people didn't vote this time, as though that was some
Speaker 1: sort of anomalycessys crisis that's when I say crisis that
Speaker 1: has happened over a lot of election cycles unfortunately in
Speaker 1: the country.
Speaker 2: And my question is with you to.
Speaker 4: So, yeah, let's let's get let's fix that.
Speaker 2: Find the idea of the couch one. It's good on
Speaker 2: a shirt, but it doesn't have effectual impact in the
Speaker 2: sense that when the couch wins, then the couch gets
Speaker 2: to decide what happens. And in our democracy, the one
Speaker 2: who actually wins gets to decide the policy. And so
Speaker 2: when the couch starts laying people off and federal agencies
Speaker 2: all throughout the land, then they won. But so long
Speaker 2: as they're there. The in the sense that more people
Speaker 2: sat the couch than got out and voted for any
Speaker 2: one particular candidate, it is. It is a cool observation. However,
Speaker 2: the effect of winning to me is you governed. Winning
Speaker 2: means you're in charge. Winning means you get to do
Speaker 2: the thing that you're inclined to do. And unfortunately the
Speaker 2: couch didn't win because I don't think the couch would
Speaker 2: have done what Donald Trump has been doing.
Speaker 3: I think.
Speaker 2: I think it should absorb as much time as we've
Speaker 2: given the couches one, because it is semantical, and it
Speaker 2: has created a debate that I think again ends up
Speaker 2: talking about numbers rather than what is I think a greater, bigger, larger,
Speaker 2: comprehensive point, and that is around a democracy and a
Speaker 2: system of representative democracy that has failed so miserably that
Speaker 2: the majority of people are choosing I will stay out
Speaker 2: rather than have an impact on which one of these
Speaker 2: fools end up serving.
Speaker 1: This is a conversation. No, that's fine. This is a
Speaker 1: conversation that I think will be ongoing because I don't
Speaker 1: think we've resolved. Do we need to start telling people?
Speaker 1: Do we need to continue to tell people how many
Speaker 1: days until midterms? So I guess for now we'll keep
Speaker 1: doing it. But what I love about this conversation I
Speaker 1: have to be honest, all three of us feel very differently,
Speaker 1: and I surmised that among our audience that there are
Speaker 1: groups of each like. We each have followers who are like, yes,
Speaker 1: what Angela is saying, Angela's right? Yes, what Ti He's saying? Yes,
Speaker 1: what Andrew was saying?
Speaker 2: Occasionally a good point, yes, even in your whole.
Speaker 1: Like narcissism shade that you threw to me. I actually
Speaker 1: take that point and think about it. I think about it.
Speaker 2: I said it's narcissistic. Believe that.
Speaker 1: I think that's agree.
Speaker 2: All the.
Speaker 4: Narcissists was thrown around a lot in the show before
Speaker 4: in this show, and I.
Speaker 2: Just want to because you got called it for yourself
Speaker 2: asking about tips too.
Speaker 4: I'm just saying, we like that should be the default,
Speaker 4: Like y'all need to stop watching the social media videos,
Speaker 4: like let me tell you how to find a narcissist,
Speaker 4: like everything is it the way.
Speaker 3: You're not actually believe it's actually.
Speaker 1: But let us know it's it's over killed.
Speaker 4: And I do think that we have to do the
Speaker 4: hard work of unpacking again. We might have some flat side, Yeah,
Speaker 4: trying to We're just trying to solve. Friends, We're just
Speaker 4: trying to solve.
Speaker 2: Don't take up space with me either.
Speaker 1: We must hold space.
Speaker 3: Have a boundary. You have a boundary.
Speaker 1: We have the boundaries, all the therapy words. Okay with that,
Speaker 1: I'm running. Y'all can keep going, but I'm kind I'm out.
Speaker 1: Thank y'all for listening. There are we'll know how many
Speaker 1: days the midterm alexis because we don't never don't have
Speaker 1: to anyway. We will see y'all next time. Welcome home, y'all.
Speaker 4: Native Lampard is a production of iHeart Radio and partnership
Speaker 4: with Reason Choice Media.
Speaker 3: For more podcas we ask for iHeartRadio visits, iHeartRadio app,
Speaker 3: Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.