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 coverage.
Speaker 3: 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.
Speaker 3: But enough with that, let's get to the show. Good morning, everybody,
Speaker 3: Happy Monday. We have an amazing show for everybody today.
Speaker 3: What do we have, Crystal, indeed we do.
Speaker 4: How many days are we till day?
Speaker 3: Fifteen days?
Speaker 4: Oh my god, super close.
Speaker 1: We've got new early voting data out of Nevada that
Speaker 1: is quite interesting to dig into with our friend Logan,
Speaker 1: so we will do that. We also have some new
Speaker 1: numbers about how both campaigns are making their closing pitch.
Speaker 1: They clearly both have very different analyzes of how to
Speaker 1: move voters here in the final days that we'll dig
Speaker 1: into that as well. We also have a lot of
Speaker 1: activity on the campaign trail, Donald Trump working at McDonald's.
Speaker 4: We'll show you that.
Speaker 1: He also was talking about Arnold Palmer Stick for some reason,
Speaker 1: we'll show you that as well, for whatever that's worth.
Speaker 1: Elon is out potentially breaking election law. Will break that
Speaker 1: down for you. Kamala was on a SEBC with Reverend
Speaker 1: Al Sharpton, clearly trying to make a pitch to black
Speaker 1: men in particular.
Speaker 4: Some interesting moments there.
Speaker 1: She continues to struggle with Arab American voters and gave
Speaker 1: a just in my opinion, horrendous answer about whether she
Speaker 1: could lose the election over October seventh and her signing
Speaker 1: with Joe Biden and not breaking with him whatsoever. We
Speaker 1: also have some updates for you out of the Middle East.
Speaker 1: Israel Know assassinated successfully, Yeah yah Sinoir. They released the
Speaker 1: video of you know as a drone video of the
Speaker 1: moments leading up to his death and really in certain
Speaker 1: ways provided a propaganda final propaganda win for him, even
Speaker 1: outlets like Wall Street Journal writing it up as such.
Speaker 1: So we'll break those details down for you. And Ken
Speaker 1: Clippenstein is going to join us. He just posted some
Speaker 1: documents that were leaked to a telegram channel that was
Speaker 1: the you who us is assessment of how Israel may
Speaker 1: retaliate against Iran. A lot that's interesting there. Both the
Speaker 1: substance of the documents, also details about, you know, our
Speaker 1: relationship with Israel and the media's relationship to reporting on
Speaker 1: these type of leak documents. So Ken will join us
Speaker 1: to break all of that down.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's going to be a great show today. Make
Speaker 2: sure you go ahead and subscribe Breakingpoints dot Com. You're
Speaker 2: going to get access to part of our conversation with Logan.
Speaker 2: That's what you guys get, as well as the show
Speaker 2: Early Ama, etc. I think we're going to be doing
Speaker 2: that tomorrow, So go ahead and subscribe Breakingpoints dot Com.
Speaker 2: Become a premiumbscriber. But let's get to Logan joining us
Speaker 2: now is Logan Phillips. Great to see you, sir, our
Speaker 2: exclusive partner here at Breakingpoints. Always glad to have you.
Speaker 5: He always great to be on.
Speaker 3: Awesome.
Speaker 2: All right, let's talk a little bit about the early vote.
Speaker 2: So some interesting analysis that we flagged on ABC News
Speaker 2: want to get your reaction to.
Speaker 3: Let's go ahead and take a listen.
Speaker 6: Based on the likely partisanship of the voters that we've
Speaker 6: seen so far, we're seeing more Republicans as a share
Speaker 6: of the electorate than Democrats. Take a look at that
Speaker 6: four years ago than the third, only thirty two percent
Speaker 6: of people that had voted so far were Republicans. That's
Speaker 6: up six points so far this cycle. Now that could
Speaker 6: be a sign of enthusiasm among Republicans. That could because
Speaker 6: Donald Trump is sometimes at least supporting early voting, and
Speaker 6: it may be that these are voters they're going to
Speaker 6: vote anyway on election day. But the bottom line is
Speaker 6: that people are voting and they're enthusiastic about this race.
Speaker 6: In Pennsylvania, we've seen Republicans so far ahead of the
Speaker 6: twenty twenty pace. Again, Democrats are still a larger share
Speaker 6: of early voters, but there are more Republicans in just
Speaker 6: about all of the states.
Speaker 3: We've seen significant votes so far.
Speaker 2: So that is aggregated data. We also have this we
Speaker 2: can put up there on the screen. L two is
Speaker 2: doing a job. They're aggregating all of this early ballots
Speaker 2: that are actually been returned. So logan, what can we
Speaker 2: glean from this? I know it's a little bit like alchemy,
Speaker 2: you're not supposed to dig too much, but this is
Speaker 2: all we got. These are actual voters that we've got
Speaker 2: votes like the in the bank. So what do you
Speaker 2: see so far? That's different and perhaps interesting to you, I.
Speaker 5: See, the biggest thing is that the American elector is engaged.
Speaker 5: Twenty twenty saw the biggest turnout in American history. In
Speaker 5: twenty twenty four, I don't think we're going to reach
Speaker 5: those levels. Is going to be a lot higher. It
Speaker 5: makes sense when someone votes once, they're a lot more
Speaker 5: likely to vote a second time.
Speaker 3: Right, good point.
Speaker 1: So you don't think it will reach twenty twenty four levels,
Speaker 1: but it will be I mean twenty twenty levels, but
Speaker 1: it will be higher than say, twenty sixteen in previous elections.
Speaker 5: That's what I think. I can't say it should be
Speaker 5: number two, but I think it's going to be high
Speaker 5: up there.
Speaker 1: So I heard someone making the case for actually digging
Speaker 1: into the early voting data, because I know traditionally averyone says, listen,
Speaker 1: you can't really read too much into this. On the
Speaker 1: other hand, post COVID, you do have such a large
Speaker 1: share of the electorate that are actually voting, and given
Speaker 1: the fact that you've had polling misses in a variety
Speaker 1: of different directions, isn't there actually a case for taking
Speaker 1: seriously you know who is actually turning out and trying
Speaker 1: to glean from that. Okay, we know the Democratic strategies
Speaker 1: really to excite young women. We know the Republican strategies
Speaker 1: try to turn out some of these infrequent voters, especially
Speaker 1: among young men. Can't we glean from this whether they're
Speaker 1: being successful in some of those strategies or not.
Speaker 5: Yeh, as long as you do fair amount of caution,
Speaker 5: because you know normally the stuff I use. For example,
Speaker 5: I can go back to the nineteen sixties and say, hey,
Speaker 5: this is how accurate it is. Right, you were kind
Speaker 5: of flying by the seat of our pants and everyone.
Speaker 5: If you come in with any sort of bias, you're
Speaker 5: going to be looking for the things that support your side,
Speaker 5: or if you're cynical, the things that go against your side, right,
Speaker 5: and they're going to stand out to you. Yeah, So
Speaker 5: to find like a fair balanced account, like you have
Speaker 5: to have an absolute mastery level knowledge of a county
Speaker 5: by county, precinct by precinct what's going on, Like this
Speaker 5: guy John Ralston, reporter Nevada has right. Most people don't
Speaker 5: have that, and so you got to be really careful
Speaker 5: who you listen to here. Well, it's largely yeah, go ahead.
Speaker 2: No, I was going to say, that's a good segue
Speaker 2: we actually have Ralston's piece about early voting. Let's go
Speaker 2: and put that up there please on the screen. So
Speaker 2: what really he flagged logan was just the major difference
Speaker 2: in turnout amongst Republicans. Some of the data is quite
Speaker 2: Striking't believe chrystals you have in front of that.
Speaker 7: I have it.
Speaker 1: So Dev's won the mail in ballot in Clark County
Speaker 1: as they're expected to buy two to one about thirty
Speaker 1: th eighteen thousand, but they only now have at an
Speaker 1: eighteen hundred vote lead over the Republicans. Last time they
Speaker 1: led at the same point we're talking about after one day.
Speaker 1: So keep in mind this is after one day. But
Speaker 1: last time after one day they had a forty.
Speaker 4: Thousand vote lead, and this time they have an.
Speaker 1: Eighteen hundred vote lead. So he's flagging that as potentially
Speaker 1: very significant and goes on to say, if, as expected,
Speaker 1: there's a five point or so Republican turnout edge after
Speaker 1: election day, that means Democrats will have to win Independence
Speaker 1: by somewhere around five points to win the state, which
Speaker 1: is roughly what Biden won independence by. He won Independence
Speaker 1: by six points in twenty twenty, but that was twenty twenty.
Speaker 4: That was Joe Biden.
Speaker 1: This is Kamala Harris, your response to mister Ralston, who
Speaker 1: everybody does feel like has earned his credibility in the
Speaker 1: early vote analysis arena.
Speaker 5: He's like the only guy trusting this stuff. I would
Speaker 5: say it is a mildly good sign for Republicans. He's
Speaker 5: very hard for us to know what's going to happen
Speaker 5: on election day. It's also expected, I don't mean specifically
Speaker 5: in the dividen numbers, but absolutely expected Republicans to vote
Speaker 5: a higher share because one Donald Trump was warning everyone
Speaker 5: out to do it, Democrats were encouraging everyone to do it,
Speaker 5: and Democrats disproportionately care were viewed COVID as a bigger threat,
Speaker 5: and therefore we're using vote by mail and voting at
Speaker 5: much higher rates than Republicans. So it was never going
Speaker 5: to be repeated to the same degree. Twenty twenty is
Speaker 5: going to be the biggest key you will probably ever have.
Speaker 1: Yeah, the biggest distance between the two parties in terms
Speaker 1: of the modes of voting exactly. So to go back
Speaker 1: to that first SoundBite that we played with what was
Speaker 1: at ABC talking about how there's maybe a ten point
Speaker 1: margin that Republicans have closed the gap between Democrats. That
Speaker 1: doesn't strike you as particularly significant given that twenty twenty
Speaker 1: was such an anomalous year with COVID.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I would say it' slightly get used Republicans, but
Speaker 5: how much it's hard to say. I mean, if you
Speaker 5: think about it like this, right, if you're looking at
Speaker 5: the twenty twenty vote, we would think Democrats were heading
Speaker 5: towards a massive landside, which is what the poll suggested too,
Speaker 5: because they were had so many votes early. But then
Speaker 5: Trump arguably had to even better turnout on election day
Speaker 5: than Dems did. Democrats just won the swing voters and
Speaker 5: that's why they won the election.
Speaker 4: Yeah, very narrowly.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, if we look a little bit at
Speaker 2: the highly engaged populace, can we put what is it
Speaker 2: a two please up on the screen? Because I was
Speaker 2: looking at that Crystal and I really struck out to
Speaker 2: us that if you look at that sixty five plus
Speaker 2: number of old people like to vote early, they certainly do.
Speaker 2: You got a lot of ballots that have been returned.
Speaker 2: It's also pretty white. You got sixty seven percent there
Speaker 2: people who are white. If you look at the gender
Speaker 2: gap though, and that was I was like, maybe it
Speaker 2: could be a good sign for Democrats. You've got what
Speaker 2: is it, fifty four percent of early voters who are women,
Speaker 2: So that could certainly be good considering this is going
Speaker 2: to be one of the larger gender gap elections, or
Speaker 2: at least that's what it's currently projected. So can you
Speaker 2: give us the bull and the bar case for both
Speaker 2: parties within this at least?
Speaker 3: Yeah?
Speaker 5: I think both caase Republicans is they're turning us some
Speaker 5: of their votes early. That means they could focus on
Speaker 5: the other voters swing selection day, right. Bothcase for Dems
Speaker 5: is that they're doing a great job of turning out
Speaker 5: black voters in major cities. Atlanta Democrats have been very
Speaker 5: happy about what they've seen with really you know, I've
Speaker 5: heard good things from my friends. Yeah who the Democratic
Speaker 5: side of Milwaukee.
Speaker 1: Yeah, similar in Michigan. I think Detroit has had one
Speaker 1: of the highest turnout rates, if not the highest turnout
Speaker 1: rate in the state of Michigan. So yeah, like you said,
Speaker 1: there's kind of something for everybody to take a look
Speaker 1: at and be like, Yay, we're doing our thing right exactly.
Speaker 1: All right, let's go and put a four up on
Speaker 1: the screen. You mentioned that the one thing we can
Speaker 1: clearly say is that voters are quite engaged and turnout
Speaker 1: will be relatively high. In North Carolina, Day one early
Speaker 1: voting set another record, narrowly beating out I think the
Speaker 1: twenty twenty was the previous record.
Speaker 4: They say there was no clear partisan edge.
Speaker 1: This is also obviously really significant because North Carolina, Western
Speaker 1: North Carolina was just walloped by Hurricane Helene. People still
Speaker 1: digging out, still recovering. So it's good to see so
Speaker 1: many folks being able to turn out to the polls here.
Speaker 1: But one of the things I wanted to ask you about,
Speaker 1: Logan is one of the theories is that Republicans are relying
Speaker 1: on these less frequent voters to turn out, and so
Speaker 1: in prior election cycles you might have said, Okay, high
Speaker 1: turnout probably means that's good for Democrats. We can't necessarily
Speaker 1: say that anymore. In fact, it could very well be
Speaker 1: the reverse.
Speaker 5: It could very well be the reverse. I think that's
Speaker 5: the thing about these elections. We have this crystal clear
Speaker 5: image of what the election is supposed to be, and
Speaker 5: then the election actually happens and there's going to be
Speaker 5: some real differences. We have those narratives that go on
Speaker 5: for months and so it kind of makes us view
Speaker 5: it through a prism. In twenty sixteen, Boy, did people
Speaker 5: under count the voters who supported Trump, who were white
Speaker 5: and didn't have a college education, blue collar who turned
Speaker 5: on in big numbers. And you know, for Democrats, President
Speaker 5: Obama was incredibly successful getting none why voters and young
Speaker 5: voters out who didn't historically vote before. So we didn't
Speaker 5: necessarily know what it's going to be right there. It
Speaker 5: really depends on who those people are right that end
Speaker 5: up turning out. And I haven't seen enough analysis on this,
Speaker 5: but I'm also curious with the early vote, how many
Speaker 5: of these are people that haven't voted before?
Speaker 3: Yes, such a key point.
Speaker 2: Well, this is part of the problem with early voter
Speaker 2: and even state by state is they don't necessarily break
Speaker 2: it down all the time. You know, we're lucky when
Speaker 2: we even get partisan identification. So some of them is
Speaker 2: just demographic or sometimes early ballots requested versus return. So
Speaker 2: in the swing states? Do we have early voting now
Speaker 2: in all of the swing states that is opened? So
Speaker 2: will we get more data in this week? How should
Speaker 2: we look for the week going forward?
Speaker 5: I believe so ye, one hundred percent. Soon I know,
Speaker 5: we definitely haven't started in Georgia. Yeah, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan.
Speaker 5: So yeah, I guess they just don't know about Arizona, if.
Speaker 3: The gos right. Pretty interesting, interesting.
Speaker 1: Certainly absolutely all right, let's turn to how the parties
Speaker 1: are making their closing pitch. Premium subscribers. That's going to
Speaker 1: be posted for you guys exclusively now. Everybody else will
Speaker 1: get it for free later in the week, but definitely
Speaker 1: subscribe if you want to hear what Logan has to
Speaker 1: say about the closing pitch that both of the parties
Speaker 1: are making. So we found this really fascinating. Put this
Speaker 1: up on the screen.
Speaker 2: Donald Trump took to the campaign trail yesterday. He started
Speaker 2: to work at McDonald's. Quite a few meme tastic moments
Speaker 2: that came out of it. Let's take a listen.
Speaker 8: I'm going for a job right now at McDonald's.
Speaker 3: I've had I really.
Speaker 9: Wanted to do this all my Life's.
Speaker 10: A wealthy guy. He owns a lot of McDonald's.
Speaker 9: That's great, thank you. I like every ounce and everything.
Speaker 4: But I do like the French rise.
Speaker 3: Who I'll be working?
Speaker 10: I listened to Kamale.
Speaker 6: She said it was so hot.
Speaker 9: It was so hot. It was such a tough job.
Speaker 8: But till you have a man that's been doing it
Speaker 8: for many years of the French.
Speaker 9: French by a human head, nice and clean.
Speaker 3: My hands are nice and king.
Speaker 9: This guy's a good instructor.
Speaker 1: I appreciate it.
Speaker 9: I'm going to give a really big one. So that
Speaker 9: was pouring out of the good looking family. How did
Speaker 9: you produce those good looking kids? Oh, they look like
Speaker 9: the they look like them. How are you nice to
Speaker 9: see you? That's way? Thank you, I mean appreciate, thank you,
Speaker 9: thank you. It's an amazing business, it's an amazing gun change,
Speaker 9: and it's gonna make American greater than ever.
Speaker 3: I mean, you know, what do you even say about that?
Speaker 3: It's pretty extraordinary. Yeah.
Speaker 2: So what I saw Crystal was that in the back
Speaker 2: of his head for years, he's wondered, do they get
Speaker 2: their grubby hands on my fries? And so he finally
Speaker 2: found it was like a moment of clarity for him
Speaker 2: to see that nobody touched him.
Speaker 3: But I mean, look, meme wise, come on that it's everywhere.
Speaker 2: It's it's one of the biggest campaign photos, I would say,
Speaker 2: outside of the assassination photo.
Speaker 3: I've seen that one spread like wildfire. Yeah, you know,
Speaker 3: literally everywhere. Look there you go.
Speaker 4: I might hate the man. This is a brilliant bit
Speaker 4: of political theater.
Speaker 3: It is.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, we'll get to the substance the
Speaker 1: fact that I won't brace them, that I'm wage that
Speaker 1: during his administration he undercut the ability of workers like
Speaker 1: these ones to be able to organize. But just on
Speaker 1: the level of like pure political theater. Yeah, he positions
Speaker 1: himself as like the working class fans billionaire. There he
Speaker 1: is working at McDonald's. It's also like a nice stop
Speaker 1: to the base. He didn't talk too much about this,
Speaker 1: but he got this in somewhat. He doesn't believe that
Speaker 1: Kamala ever actually worked at McDonald's, so it's like throwing
Speaker 1: some red meat to the base as well. I mean,
Speaker 1: what can you say? The man has an authentic love
Speaker 1: for McDonald's food. Do you definitely know that much?
Speaker 3: It's true.
Speaker 2: Let me allow me to read Andy Warhol quote apparently
Speaker 2: from the nineteen sixties, says, I always thought the president
Speaker 2: would do so much to help change images. If president
Speaker 2: would go to a public bathroom in the Capitol and
Speaker 2: have TV cameras film him cleaning the toilets and saying,
Speaker 2: why not, somebody's got to do it. It would do
Speaker 2: so much for the morale of the people who would
Speaker 2: do wonderful job of keeping the toilets clean.
Speaker 3: It's a wonderful thing that they're doing.
Speaker 2: So people were like, oh, this is the Trump's apotheosis
Speaker 2: of Andy Warhol political theory that was going around. I
Speaker 2: don't think it's that deep. It's like you said, I mean,
Speaker 2: really what it is? And I saw a friend of mine,
Speaker 2: Reuben on Twitter, made an interesting point, I'm curious what
Speaker 2: you think is that Trump's camp actively helps to dispense
Speaker 2: a lot of the negative imagery of him by Democrats,
Speaker 2: as in, it's very hard to imagine like a Trump
Speaker 2: dictator when he's also like McDonald's just serving fries.
Speaker 3: And I thought that actually might be the most astute
Speaker 3: part of it.
Speaker 2: We're about to show the whole Arnold Palmer thing, but like,
Speaker 2: there's something hilarious about a guy talking about Arnold Palmer's
Speaker 2: penis and working at McDonald's, you know, and obviously having
Speaker 2: the time of his life that dispels this, like, oh,
Speaker 2: Trump was going to do all these X, Y and
Speaker 2: Z bad things and I was like, you know, that
Speaker 2: might be probably the best like analytical framework for why
Speaker 2: this stuff matters at all.
Speaker 3: I think that's true.
Speaker 1: I think that's correct because not only the McDonald's thing,
Speaker 1: but I mean that's the part of the podcast strategy,
Speaker 1: like the bro strategy is aimed at a specific voting
Speaker 1: demographic group, but part.
Speaker 4: Of it is also just to you.
Speaker 1: Know, humanize, humanize him and make him seem like he's
Speaker 1: one of the guys that can just hang out.
Speaker 4: And then it makes it.
Speaker 1: Hard for you to take seriously, even though you should
Speaker 1: take seriously. Sagur and I had a whole debate about this,
Speaker 1: but you know, his enemy within I want to call
Speaker 1: out the military against them comments it makes it easier
Speaker 1: for people to just kind of handwave that away. And
Speaker 1: I think between those efforts and the multiple assassination attempts,
Speaker 1: I do think that's part of why his favorability rating
Speaker 1: is so much higher now than it's really ever been
Speaker 1: before in politics. And you know, I think that's a
Speaker 1: very important part of why he has such a strong
Speaker 1: chance of ultimately winning the selection. You know, the other
Speaker 1: thing that I saw is, you know, it is worth
Speaker 1: pointing out if people didn't know that this obviously was
Speaker 1: like stage in the cars preselected and of course and
Speaker 1: all of that. But it's like, of course, like you
Speaker 1: think they're just going to let random people go through
Speaker 1: the drive through with Donald Trump there, I mean, so
Speaker 1: the security could of course, it was a stage campaign
Speaker 1: of waiting.
Speaker 2: People were like, wait, just so you know stage, Yes,
Speaker 2: the president can't go anywhere.
Speaker 1: I know, I know, but I mean, I mean, I
Speaker 1: do think there were people who thought these were like
Speaker 1: authentic exchanges that the drive through as well, but just
Speaker 1: for anyone out there who needed to know, yes, it
Speaker 1: was a stage campaign event, because of course it was
Speaker 1: a stage campaign event, like very obviously, do you think you.
Speaker 2: Can interact with the president or the forum president on
Speaker 2: the campaign trail after an assassination attempt and not be
Speaker 2: pre screened by secret service?
Speaker 3: How could?
Speaker 11: How?
Speaker 2: When what scenario would some random be able to roll
Speaker 2: up to McDonald's and get their order.
Speaker 3: From Donald Trump? What if they had a gun? That's nuts.
Speaker 1: Yeah, So anyway, it was not just like random voters
Speaker 1: who were there being like maga, we love you. These
Speaker 1: were pre screen people by the campaign, et cetera, et cetera.
Speaker 1: Just so everyone understands that's the reality of how campaigns work.
Speaker 4: There were a couple of questions that he was.
Speaker 1: Asked that ended up being relevant, especially I thought the
Speaker 1: best question was about, you know, would you raise them
Speaker 1: in the wage and he won't say yes.
Speaker 4: He also got asked a question.
Speaker 1: About you know, will you will you accept the results
Speaker 1: of the election, and he won't really commit to that either.
Speaker 1: So let's take a listen to those exchanges on wag
Speaker 1: should be raised.
Speaker 4: Well, I think this.
Speaker 9: I think these people work hard, they're great.
Speaker 4: And I just saw something you process. It's beautiful.
Speaker 9: It's a beautiful thing to see. These are great franchises
Speaker 9: and produce a lot of jobs, and it's good and
Speaker 9: great people working here too.
Speaker 4: Leading for you, Yes either way. Will you accept the
Speaker 4: results of the election?
Speaker 9: Yeah, sure, if it's a fair election.
Speaker 1: Always I would always accept.
Speaker 9: Different ways to be a fair election. We're leading in
Speaker 9: all the balls, then we're leading in every swing state,
Speaker 9: doing well, and it's now and I.
Speaker 5: Think so think so.
Speaker 4: In fact, I just had an RCP.
Speaker 9: I said, you're ninety three point percent chance of winning,
Speaker 9: and I think that's pretty good.
Speaker 4: So if it's a fair election, Hill support it.
Speaker 1: Also, you we're going to talk tomorrow about polymarket and
Speaker 1: the way that that the numbers there have been juiced
Speaker 1: by basically one or potentially for four.
Speaker 4: Yeah, well, well there are.
Speaker 3: Some intentions one, but yeah, that it.
Speaker 4: May be one bord of it in any case.
Speaker 1: And then you know, and you can see how this
Speaker 1: is useful to Trump in terms of and then he
Speaker 1: points to you know this, I don't know what he
Speaker 1: was pointing to, says we have a ninety three percent
Speaker 1: chance of winning. And this is what he did last
Speaker 1: time too. Is especially he used that red mirage effect
Speaker 1: where it looked like Republicans were winning early in the
Speaker 1: night to say like it must have been stolen, and
Speaker 1: he's already laying some of the groundwork for that.
Speaker 3: Now.
Speaker 1: Of course he has a very good chance of winning
Speaker 1: the election outright, but this is also laying the groundwork
Speaker 1: for if he doesn't get a result that he if
Speaker 1: he doesn't get the result that he wants, saying, look
Speaker 1: at polymarket, look at this analysis. This that I had
Speaker 1: a ninety three percent chance of winning wherever that comes from.
Speaker 4: And of course, of course.
Speaker 1: It had to have been stolen because I was I
Speaker 1: was a lock, I was ashoe in So you're that
Speaker 1: rhetoric and then of course you know can't even commit
Speaker 1: to raising the minimum wage.
Speaker 4: This is the guy who made you.
Speaker 1: Guys may remember Andy Puster, the former CEO of Hardy's,
Speaker 1: the labor secretary who was like horrible for workers' rights,
Speaker 1: both in his capacity as the CEO of Hardy's but
Speaker 1: also in his capacity of labor secretary. So on the substance,
Speaker 1: obviously I think he's a total fraud. But again on
Speaker 1: the political theater, I think it's a major win for
Speaker 1: as well.
Speaker 11: Well.
Speaker 3: Look, one of the lessons is that people don't care
Speaker 3: about that, right.
Speaker 2: Unfortunately, we live in a world where people or like
Speaker 2: you've got more people who are voting Trump or at
Speaker 2: least seem to be voting Trump pro Trump who are
Speaker 2: low wage workers and or unions, mostly on the issue
Speaker 2: of immigration.
Speaker 3: And look, I've said this before too.
Speaker 2: For Republicans, all you have to do is look at
Speaker 2: the minimum wage numbers that passed. It was at twenty twenty.
Speaker 2: I think it was a super majority. I want to say,
Speaker 2: in the state of Florida that passed fifteen dollars minimum
Speaker 2: wage at the same time that Trump won the state
Speaker 2: by three So actually more people both voted for the
Speaker 2: minimum wage and voted for Donald Trump in the state
Speaker 2: of Florida. You can actually have a red state that
Speaker 2: did that. Arkansas, I believe, also raised I think twelve
Speaker 2: dollars an hour. So anyway, if anybody wants to go
Speaker 2: out there and look at the data on all this
Speaker 2: for minimum wage and whether you can be like a
Speaker 2: real Republican, there's plenty of real Republicans out there who
Speaker 2: vote for it all the time.
Speaker 3: So just put that.
Speaker 1: Let me just preview a segment we're going to have
Speaker 1: in the show probably tomorrow with Matt carp from Jackman
Speaker 1: in the Center for Working Class Politics.
Speaker 4: They did a big poll of voters.
Speaker 1: In Pennsylvania, and you know, they have a class so
Speaker 1: they were looking very specifically at number one, what type
Speaker 1: of occupations are people in versus what candidate they're supporting,
Speaker 1: and also where do they fall in terms of income level.
Speaker 1: And what was interesting is actually the lowest wage individuals
Speaker 1: were more Democratics supporters. It was those you know, blue
Speaker 1: collar working class individuals who tended to be strongly in
Speaker 1: the Donald Trump camp. And then if there's also a
Speaker 1: big divide between you know, the sort of like hard
Speaker 1: hat using your hands. Type of blue collar workers versus
Speaker 1: service sector workers tended to be more democratic. So there's
Speaker 1: some some interesting fishers there. But just stay tuned for that,
Speaker 1: because I think looking at some of those numbers, someone
Speaker 1: confirms what you might have suspected, but showed a you know,
Speaker 1: an interesting breakdown between the different class statuses and occupational
Speaker 1: statuses amongst voters.
Speaker 3: Well, that's important, and we talk here.
Speaker 2: I just said low wage work, it doesn't really mean anything,
Speaker 2: you know, in terms of what type of wage what
Speaker 2: you do for a living. There's a big difference actually
Speaker 2: between like the bottom quinn and then the second lowest quintile.
Speaker 2: So that's like people were basically below the poverty line
Speaker 2: and then you've got people flirting with the poverty line
Speaker 2: slash lower to slash lower to middle class. Those are
Speaker 2: very different economic realities. They're very different people buy and
Speaker 2: large for people who like actually work and what type
Speaker 2: of jobs they do, whether they have a permanent career
Speaker 2: or not. So anyway, stay tuned for that. As you said,
Speaker 2: let's get to the Arnold Palmer thing on this one
Speaker 2: took over the airwaves. Let's take a listen.
Speaker 8: This guy, this is a guy that was old man.
Speaker 8: This man was strong and tough, and I refused to
Speaker 8: say it. But when he took showers with the other
Speaker 8: pros they came out of there, they said, oh my god,
Speaker 8: that's unbelievable.
Speaker 3: I had to say it. It was actually longer than that.
Speaker 3: For anyone asking about strategy, there is no strategy. To
Speaker 3: the extent that there is a strategy.
Speaker 2: It goes back to what we were talking about with
Speaker 2: the whole camp and making jokes about it. I mean,
Speaker 2: this thing was all over cable news of a Speaker
Speaker 2: of the House get asked about it.
Speaker 3: I don't know. I don't have anything deeper to say.
Speaker 2: That's the deepest I can go is that the camp
Speaker 2: e er he gets, the more funny or whatever he is,
Speaker 2: the harder it is to imagine him as like some
Speaker 2: dictator who's going to take over the country.
Speaker 4: This is why the weird framing was good for Democrats.
Speaker 3: You think so, yes, I don't even know that's weird.
Speaker 3: I think it's funny.
Speaker 1: I mean, talking like objectively, he talked for like ten
Speaker 1: minutes about Arnold Palmer and then you know, got into
Speaker 1: the sidetrack about the size of a stick. By the way,
Speaker 1: there was a you know, very serious journalist who looked
Speaker 1: into the size of Arnold Palmer stick and says, the
Speaker 1: evidence suggests this is actually false misinformation. Don't they possibly
Speaker 1: get that apparently there was some sex, Yeah, but they
Speaker 1: got a lot.
Speaker 3: Maybe he shorted them. You know, you never know.
Speaker 1: You could do your own investigation if you'd like soccer
Speaker 1: and debunk the debunking.
Speaker 4: I had a Palmer Dick's story.
Speaker 3: As the guy.
Speaker 2: I've been to the Arnold Palmer But can you shout
Speaker 2: out to a restaurant, the Arnold Palmer Restaurant in Palm Springs, California.
Speaker 3: Absolutely fantastic, Highly recommend it.
Speaker 4: But what did you have to say about his guys?
Speaker 3: Well, I'll ask him. I'll next time I go, I'm
Speaker 3: going to ask him.
Speaker 1: In any case, this is part of why I think
Speaker 1: the weird framing that Democrats have kind of abandoned was
Speaker 1: more effective in a sense. I mean, I think you
Speaker 1: have to also lay on that the legitimate dangerous, but
Speaker 1: also people already sort.
Speaker 4: Of feel that.
Speaker 1: But yeah, this is like, this is just kind of
Speaker 1: a weird thing to be talking about a campaign rally
Speaker 1: going on an extended die tribe about a guy that
Speaker 1: died how many years ago this golfer.
Speaker 4: I guess he was from the area where he was
Speaker 4: speaking in or something like that. Is how this armor,
Speaker 4: I don't know. In any case, there you go.
Speaker 1: If it's domind Trump talking about some dude stick for
Speaker 1: an extended period of time whatever, right, well, you.
Speaker 2: Know it's not a first brand me off. Of course,
Speaker 2: Marco Rubio started it. I guess to be fair, that's
Speaker 2: what we have. If you remember from the twenty sixteen campaign.
Speaker 2: At the same time, there was something that the campaign,
Speaker 2: the Harris campaign, has been seizing on. Let's put this
Speaker 2: up there on the screen. This was a report from
Speaker 2: Politico and it said, quote an exhausted Trump said know
Speaker 2: to another interview. So they highlighted and we talked about
Speaker 2: this as well. Trump had planned sit downs with NBC
Speaker 2: in Philadelphia, squakbox and sixty minutes.
Speaker 3: Why does it keep happening?
Speaker 2: The Trump campaign had backed out of a couple In response,
Speaker 2: a Trump advisor apparently told the Shade Room producers, that's
Speaker 2: one of those black audience. We showed a clip for everybody. Yeah,
Speaker 2: from that where they said he quote was exhausted and
Speaker 2: refused some interviews. But that could change at any time.
Speaker 2: So yeah, I mean you could take from that what
Speaker 2: it is. They don't name the person, but I do
Speaker 2: certainly think it's a I don't know. I mean, there's
Speaker 2: been a lot of I've seen Democrats try to rehab
Speaker 2: the whole like Trump Age conversation, and this really shows me.
Speaker 2: I've been trying to do some retrospectives in my head.
Speaker 2: I'm like, well, what does it mean if Biden or
Speaker 2: sorry I Kamala loses, if Trump loses. And I've been
Speaker 2: really thinking about how much damage we almost have memory
Speaker 2: hold it that the Biden remaining in the race really
Speaker 2: did to the Democratic ticket. And I think that that
Speaker 2: conversation age would be so dramatically different if there had
Speaker 2: been a real primary on the Democratic side and if
Speaker 2: Biden had dropped out earlier. And you know, so much
Speaker 2: of this We're going to talk a lot about Harris's failures,
Speaker 2: et cetera, if she does lose, but I mean, so
Speaker 2: much of this is on Biden man to wait until
Speaker 2: the last minute to drop out. No real democratic process
Speaker 2: anointed Kamala ninety day sprint to the campaign trail, and
Speaker 2: the age, I mean, he nuked the vibe for the
Speaker 2: country for three and a half years, Like you can't
Speaker 2: really get over that. So I really think that a
Speaker 2: lot of this like retrospective Trump age conversation is just nuked.
Speaker 2: With so much of the populace, they have not forgotten
Speaker 2: what the Biden conversation looked like at that time, so
Speaker 2: they don't want to hear it. You know, they were
Speaker 2: comparatively strong, right.
Speaker 1: I think that it's that comparison that's important. And I
Speaker 1: do think this is important conversation because I mean, he
Speaker 1: is almost he's seventy eight. Yeah, he's going to be
Speaker 1: eighty years old in you know, less than two years.
Speaker 1: Like this is an old man. No one should fool
Speaker 1: themselves about that. He will be the oldest person to
Speaker 1: take the office in history. He's older than Joe Biden
Speaker 1: was when Biden, you know, was sworn in back in
Speaker 1: early twenty twenty one. So, you know, it is an
Speaker 1: important substantive conversation. But I agree with you, Saga, I
Speaker 1: don't think it really moves the needle because you know,
Speaker 1: in contrast to Biden, he seems so much more vigorous,
Speaker 1: et cetera. And even as he has legitimately bailed on
Speaker 1: a bunch of interviews, you know, obviously didn't do another debate,
Speaker 1: bailed on that sixty minutes interview, bailed on some kind
Speaker 1: of a town hall such a way like there have
Speaker 1: been a bunch of things, and you get his campaign
Speaker 1: even saying like the dude's exhausted, but he's still out
Speaker 1: there doing a bunch of stuff. So I don't think
Speaker 1: people have the sense of like, oh, he's exhausted and
Speaker 1: he you know, can barely function, et cetera, the way
Speaker 1: that it was very manifestly clear with Joe Biden. So
Speaker 1: you know, if Trump wins, I think this will be
Speaker 1: an extremely important storyline because I do think there are
Speaker 1: some signs of decline and age fatigue in all of that.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, time's a bit like he is
Speaker 1: getting older. He is an old man, that is reality,
Speaker 1: and not a particularly healthy one either. So I think
Speaker 1: if he wins, it will probably be an important next
Speaker 1: four year story. Do I think it's moving a lot
Speaker 1: of people in terms of the polls?
Speaker 4: Doubt it, But you never know.
Speaker 1: We may look back after election day and say, hey,
Speaker 1: people decided like, hey, maybe we shouldn't vote for another
Speaker 1: really super old guy and went with Kamlin part because
Speaker 1: she is she just turned sixty, you know, which is
Speaker 1: and she seemed vital and whatever for her age. So
Speaker 1: who the hell knows at this point, But I tend
Speaker 1: to agree with you in that analysis. And also I
Speaker 1: do think we can't lose sight of the fact that
Speaker 1: because Democrats were so terrified of an actual democratic process,
Speaker 1: they really screwed themselves.
Speaker 4: Now many of us, some of us were saying that.
Speaker 1: Along, right and arguing that they would be better off
Speaker 1: if they had an actual democratic primary process from the beginnings,
Speaker 1: they took seriously the competitors who did come into that
Speaker 1: race to challenge Joe Biden if they had, you know,
Speaker 1: not just totally put the kebash on any of the
Speaker 1: we're leading democratic policies, to the Gretchen Whimer's, the Gavin
Speaker 1: Newsom's whatever, entering that process, and then even failing that,
Speaker 1: coming down to it, when they pushed Biden out doing
Speaker 1: what Pelosi and Obama reportedly wanted them to do, but
Speaker 1: didn't expend any effort to force them in this direction,
Speaker 1: which was to at least have like a contested convention
Speaker 1: where you have people making speeches and making their cases.
Speaker 1: Because Kamala Harris is not the strongest competitor. I think
Speaker 1: everyone knew that on the Democratic side going in, but
Speaker 1: they rather just sort of default to her to avoid
Speaker 1: I guess, ruffling various feathers because it was the path
Speaker 1: of least resistance at that point, and now they're in
Speaker 1: an extremely precarious position, really truly of their own makings.
Speaker 3: Absolutely know.
Speaker 2: I've been watching some swing state tape from the governors,
Speaker 2: because all the de governors have been going through. Gavin
Speaker 2: is so good on the stump it's unbelievable. As people know,
Speaker 2: I'm not a fan of Gavin Newsom. There's a lot
Speaker 2: I could say about the guy, but he's a talented
Speaker 2: politician man, and if he had fought for it, I
Speaker 2: think he would have won. I certainly do Shapiro, Obviously,
Speaker 2: I still think the whole Obama thing is really annoying.
Speaker 2: But he's a swing state governor. He won by thirteen points. Okay,
Speaker 2: you can't look past that, even waltst Frankly, I think
Speaker 2: he's a better politician than Kamali Marris, definitely, no doubt
Speaker 2: about it. Gretchen Whitmer, she is so utterly cringeworthy to me.
Speaker 2: She's talented. Whenever she started doing an interview where she
Speaker 2: was going back and forth about why Democrats are bad
Speaker 2: in the swing states, and she's like, you're talking to
Speaker 2: somebody who won by almost twenty points in the last stay.
Speaker 3: So she's like, don't tell me that people can't win big.
Speaker 3: And then I was like, hey, it's a good answer,
Speaker 3: and it's true, Midel.
Speaker 1: I think mayor Pete hatred is you know, I have
Speaker 1: studied solid credibility in that department, way better than common. Absolutely,
Speaker 1: he's gotten better too over the years, like him mixing
Speaker 1: it up on Fox and whatever.
Speaker 4: Yeah, he's very effectual.
Speaker 2: Poli just saying five people were better than the current
Speaker 2: Democratic nominee, which is wild. Yeah, they never really state
Speaker 2: their case. Keeping in the Trump vane he had. Elon
Speaker 2: must have really gone all in on the state of Pennsylvania.
Speaker 2: Elon is basically like running the campaign outreach there. He's
Speaker 2: got a new scheme currently happening where he's handing out
Speaker 2: million dollar checks at town.
Speaker 3: Halls that he's holding across the state. Let's take a listen, all.
Speaker 12: Right, So, uh, tonight's person is shown prayer. So by
Speaker 12: the way, John had no idea. So uh, anyway, you're welcome,
Speaker 12: Uh and uh yeah.
Speaker 13: So so so the only the only, the only thing
Speaker 13: we ask for the million dollars is that you'll be
Speaker 13: a spokesperson for for the petition.
Speaker 12: And uh, that's it.
Speaker 3: Really, that's the whole.
Speaker 13: That's it.
Speaker 3: So there we go at these events.
Speaker 2: Elon is now handing out one million dollar checks from
Speaker 2: the Super pac America pack. This has caused quite a
Speaker 2: bit of consternation as to whether it is real election
Speaker 2: law or not. But do you want to do you
Speaker 2: want to talk about it before we play?
Speaker 3: Shapiro?
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, to me, this gives like hunger games.
Speaker 1: I mean that the spectacle of the richest man on
Speaker 1: the planet dangling million dollar checks to get people to
Speaker 1: vote for his preferred candidate. As he's also you know,
Speaker 1: I mean Elon Musk himself is the recipient of tens
Speaker 1: of billions of dollars annually in federal government contracts. He
Speaker 1: also is entangled in all sorts of legal messes viz.
Speaker 1: A VI the federal government. He has been promised a
Speaker 1: high level government job that would basically put him above
Speaker 1: those regulators who are trying to regulate his companies. He
Speaker 1: runs one of the top social media platforms in the
Speaker 1: world for the service of this candidate. And I just
Speaker 1: would say, you know, if you like Elon, if you
Speaker 1: like Trump, that's fine.
Speaker 4: Just imagine if the shoe.
Speaker 1: Was on the other foot and it was George Soros
Speaker 1: on stage dangling million dollar checks to people to vote
Speaker 1: for Kamala Harris, or it was you know, Jeff Bezos.
Speaker 4: Or it was Bill Gates, or it was whoever.
Speaker 1: Right, I think this should not be a partisan point
Speaker 1: that having the wealthiest man on the planet this involved
Speaker 1: in shaping our national conversation, funding one of the two
Speaker 1: presidential candidates, and then being put in a position to
Speaker 1: effectively run significant parts of the government to his own benefit.
Speaker 1: Both from a business and an ideological perspective, I think
Speaker 1: everyone should be deeply, deeply disturbed by that. I'm very
Speaker 1: happy for these people who are getting this cash. I'm
Speaker 1: sure they're very happy. But again, the idea of dangling
Speaker 1: million dollar checks to coerce you know, the masses into
Speaker 1: voting for as preferred candidate, yeah, I think it's it's
Speaker 1: quite dystopian, and it is also possibly illegal.
Speaker 2: Right, So let's get to that. Well, let's say, Okay,
Speaker 2: so I don't disagree with the word you said.
Speaker 3: I don't like dangling.
Speaker 2: Money, especially you know, if people, if people are going
Speaker 2: to come out to this, it's like it's like this
Speaker 2: weird lottery mentality.
Speaker 3: I just don't. I think it's gross to send it.
Speaker 3: It's like squid game vibe.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's just in general, like I don't like people like,
Speaker 2: you know, going just having that dynamic going on. I do,
Speaker 2: in some way almost just appreciate the nakedness of like,
Speaker 2: here's a million bucks if you go ahead and you
Speaker 2: sign this petition. We've seen some campaigns implement that previously,
Speaker 2: not near to the tune of million, but what was
Speaker 2: it Doug Burgham, He's like, I'll give you twenty seven
Speaker 2: dollars if you donate one dollar to my campaign.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's right, to get dollars to ge get on
Speaker 1: the debate stage.
Speaker 3: That's right.
Speaker 1: And so just to lay on the mechanics of this
Speaker 1: before we get and so the legal argument about whether
Speaker 1: or not this is legal. So the idea is, if
Speaker 1: you sign this petition that supports First Amendment and Second
Speaker 1: Amendment rights, then you're entered into this lottery to win
Speaker 1: a million dollars. But the reason why it is potentially
Speaker 1: election fraud is because you have to be registered to
Speaker 1: vote in order.
Speaker 4: To sign the petition.
Speaker 1: So it's effectively, you know, getting people to register to
Speaker 1: vote using, you know, the promise of this lottery, the
Speaker 1: promise of these funds, and that's what puts it on
Speaker 1: very shaky legal ground. The governor of the state of Pennsylvania, Joshapeia,
Speaker 1: of course, as a Democrat, is and this is all happening,
Speaker 1: by the way, in the state of Pennsylvania. He says
Speaker 1: that this needs to be investigated for potential election fraud.
Speaker 1: Let's take a listen to him making that case.
Speaker 10: I think there are real questions with how he is
Speaker 10: spending money in this race, how the dark money is
Speaker 10: flowing not just into Pennsylvania, but apparently now into the
Speaker 10: pockets of Pennsylvanians. That is deeply concerning. Look, Musk obviously
Speaker 10: has a right to be able to express his views.
Speaker 10: He's made it very very clear that he supports Donald Trump.
Speaker 10: I don't obviously we have a difference of opinion. I
Speaker 10: don't deny him that right. But when you start flowing
Speaker 10: this kind of money into politics, I think it raises
Speaker 10: serious questions that folks may want to take a look at.
Speaker 4: So you think it might not be legal, yes or no.
Speaker 10: I think it's something that law enforcement could take a
Speaker 10: look at. I'm not the attorney general anymore of Pennsylvania.
Speaker 10: I'm the governor. But it does raise some serious questions.
Speaker 2: All right, So, Chris Lely, you flagged this it up
Speaker 2: there on the screen from the Election Law blog. This
Speaker 2: is Rick Hassen. He's got an analysis here. He says,
Speaker 2: there are some other some in terms of the actual legality.
Speaker 2: As you said, it's all a question about whether this
Speaker 2: is interpreted as forcing people to register to vote or not.
Speaker 3: So Section fifty two USC to what is it.
Speaker 2: One zero three zero seven c Whoever knowingly or wilfully
Speaker 2: gives false information as to his name blah blah blah,
Speaker 2: or pays or offers to pay, or accepts payments either
Speaker 2: for registration to vote or voting, shall be fined not
Speaker 2: more than ten thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than
Speaker 2: five years, or both.
Speaker 3: Emphasis added there.
Speaker 4: I don't think the ten thousand dollars is going to
Speaker 4: be a big free.
Speaker 3: I mean, in some ways, maybe that's the perfect thing.
Speaker 6: Right.
Speaker 2: You're like, well, it's a ten thousand dollars fine, you
Speaker 2: pay a million bucks. So these just have to pay
Speaker 2: like what is that like less than one percent interest
Speaker 2: or something on top of that to make sure that
Speaker 2: you can pay the fine. They look at it this
Speaker 2: in terms of the DOJ says that any bribe can
Speaker 2: be anything having monetary value, including cash, liquor, lottery chances,
Speaker 2: welfare benefits, et cetera, and continues and says that it
Speaker 2: must have been intended to induce or reward the voter
Speaker 2: for engaging in one or more acts necessary to cast
Speaker 2: a ballot. However, such payments become actionable under that section
Speaker 2: I previously said if they are shared with the person
Speaker 2: that are being registered. So it all comes down to
Speaker 2: whether this was an act of registration to vote or
Speaker 2: an act of signing a petition, which would appear legal.
Speaker 2: Probably has got the legal sign over from his campaign
Speaker 2: or from his people because it's an act of a petition,
Speaker 2: and I guess they could argue it in federal court.
Speaker 2: But it is an interesting electionized I mean, the other.
Speaker 1: Thing you said maybe true too, which is maybe illegal
Speaker 1: and is a ten thousand all of fine. So who
Speaker 1: freaking cares?
Speaker 3: Right, Yeah, I mean a lot of I mean that
Speaker 3: works out.
Speaker 1: That's how CEOs think right, They think about these like,
Speaker 1: you know, SEC fines and whatever is just like a
Speaker 1: cost of doing business. And so it would not be
Speaker 1: crazy if he was like, yeah, it's probably illegal, but
Speaker 1: I'll just pay the fine and whatever.
Speaker 4: Who cares.
Speaker 1: Yeah, there was another story I just wanted to flag
Speaker 1: for you guys, because I do think this.
Speaker 4: You know, I've come to see.
Speaker 1: Obviously, billionaire influence in politics we cover extensively. We cover
Speaker 1: on both sides of the aisle. We've been talking about
Speaker 1: Mark Cuban and Reid Hoffman on the Kammala side. But
Speaker 1: I do think it's fair to say there is nothing
Speaker 1: equivalent to what Elon Musk is doing in this election,
Speaker 1: not only in this election, but potentially in American history,
Speaker 1: really is pushing the bounds of you know, billionaire influence
Speaker 1: in American politics. He is a saber reference. He's effectively
Speaker 1: running the ground game for Trump in a lot of
Speaker 1: key states, Pennsylvania in particular.
Speaker 4: We may cover tomorrow. That may not that that may
Speaker 4: not work out.
Speaker 1: Because there are some indications that that ground game effort
Speaker 1: is not going all that well. We'll put that to
Speaker 1: the side for now. But in addition to this million
Speaker 1: dollar check effort. His super pac that he funded is
Speaker 1: also running this this so they put up a website
Speaker 1: that is meant to look like Kamala's answer to Project
Speaker 1: twenty twenty five. It's called Progress twenty twenty eight, and
Speaker 1: again if you look at it, it appears.
Speaker 4: To be making the case for KAMMLA.
Speaker 1: But then they use these like, you know, caricaturist versions
Speaker 1: of her least popular policies to try to like low
Speaker 1: key show people like, oh, she's going to do all
Speaker 1: this crazy stuff when she gets elected. And they're also
Speaker 1: funding a text message campaign that does the same where
Speaker 1: if you just look at the text message, it seems
Speaker 1: like it's coming from the Harris campaign, but it's actually
Speaker 1: coming from this Elon Musk funded super pack. So they
Speaker 1: can put this up on the screen. Open Secrets did
Speaker 1: the reporting here. Their headline is pro Trump dark money
Speaker 1: network tied to Elon Musk behind fake pro Harris campaign scheme.
Speaker 1: Now this one because they disclose that you know, it's
Speaker 1: paid for by I think the thing is called building
Speaker 1: America's Future. So since they do the proper disclosures, it's
Speaker 1: probably not illegal, but it is, you know, it's pretty
Speaker 1: skeazy thing. To do to sort of posture like your
Speaker 1: your opponent's campaign and then put out this caricaturist view
Speaker 1: that's meant to dissuade people. So this is one of
Speaker 1: the other efforts that he's involved in, and we'll talk
Speaker 1: later in the show in one of the latter segments
Speaker 1: about how he's also funding these ad campaigns where if
Speaker 1: you are a Jewish pro Israel voter, he's funding targeted
Speaker 1: ads that are like, Kama's not sufficiently pro Israel. And
Speaker 1: then if you're a pro Palestine voter, he's funding these
Speaker 1: ads that are like Kamala stands strongly with Israel and
Speaker 1: always will blah blah blah.
Speaker 4: So these are some of the tactics that he is engaged.
Speaker 3: Here you go. The latter one is smart, the former one.
Speaker 12: What is it?
Speaker 2: I remember this has always been this is part of
Speaker 2: the problem with the election. Low Why is any stuff
Speaker 2: even legal? What was I think that read Hoffman did
Speaker 2: and it was it was like some fake newspaper that
Speaker 2: read Hoffman funded Alabama. I'm thinking that was it was completely.
Speaker 1: It was a bunch of them actually all over all
Speaker 1: over the place that were meant to look like they
Speaker 1: were legitimate news sources, but were just like you know.
Speaker 3: Parts, yeah, like literal press releases.
Speaker 1: So yeah, I mean, I I do think a lot
Speaker 1: of this stuff should be a lot more should be
Speaker 1: illegal than actually is. But the Elon Musk million dollar
Speaker 1: thing may actually.
Speaker 3: And the loophole of it should.
Speaker 2: Be right, and the loophole of it all so it's
Speaker 2: all coming through super PACs, and so then you're outsourcing
Speaker 2: stuff to these super PACs, so none of it makes
Speaker 2: any sense. It makes it a lot less regulated, and
Speaker 2: we don't even be really insight into even who's funding
Speaker 2: some of this.
Speaker 3: So anyway, that's exactly right.
Speaker 1: Yeah, a lot of these super pat they're called dark
Speaker 1: money super PACs because the election is such that if
Speaker 1: you're not actively making the case for a candidate, then
Speaker 1: you can avoid any sort of scrutiny. And also some
Speaker 1: of the disclosion disclosure laws are such that if you
Speaker 1: jump in a bunch of money in the waning days
Speaker 1: of a campaign, it's not even disclosed till after the campaign.
Speaker 1: So these are always that billionaires get around, you know,
Speaker 1: the public really knowing how much they're in. But I mean,
Speaker 1: we don't know the exact dollar figures for Elon Musk,
Speaker 1: but we know it's a preposterously large amount, and obviously
Speaker 1: it's very visible. So to your Pointzager, it is quite naked,
Speaker 1: is quite brazen. There's really no how much he is
Speaker 1: trying personally to win this election for Donald Trump through
Speaker 1: whatever levers he possibly can.
Speaker 3: All right, let's go to Kamala.
Speaker 2: She appeared on MSNBC last night with Al Sharp and
Speaker 2: she was pressed on the blackmail agenda and whether they
Speaker 2: should vote for her.
Speaker 3: Again, let's take a lesson.
Speaker 7: Do you think some of the resistance of some men
Speaker 7: black and white is misogynists? And are you proud to
Speaker 7: see that most Americans, even being pold, have no problem
Speaker 7: supporting a woman at all. And I'm one that lived
Speaker 7: from Shirley to Kamala in terms of these campaigns, and.
Speaker 11: I have an emotional reaction to raising the point of
Speaker 11: Shirley Chisholm because it is on her broad shoulders that
Speaker 11: I stand and so many of us stand. And we
Speaker 11: have come a long way to your point, and on
Speaker 11: your specific point about including the fact that I have
Speaker 11: the support of countless black men who are in elected positions,
Speaker 11: including I'm just this afternoon and two church visits today
Speaker 11: with the mayor of Atlanta.
Speaker 3: That being said, I think that you.
Speaker 11: Are absolutely right that there is this narrative about what
Speaker 11: kind of support we are receiving from black men that
Speaker 11: is just not panning out in reality in terms of
Speaker 11: when I go to last night Atlanta and had I
Speaker 11: think ten thousand people at a rally, I will also
Speaker 11: say this, Rev. I am very clear, I must earn
Speaker 11: earn the vote of everyone, regardless of their race or gender.
Speaker 11: And what can be frustrating sometimes is to have journalists
Speaker 11: ask me this question as though one should assume that
Speaker 11: I would just be able to take for granted the
Speaker 11: vote of black men.
Speaker 3: I think that's actually.
Speaker 4: An uninformed perspective.
Speaker 3: So yeah, she's doing a pretty good job on that answers.
Speaker 2: She refuses to take the bait and have any of
Speaker 2: the Hillary stuff. So on the one hand, we have
Speaker 2: that from Kamala about I'm not going to take anybody
Speaker 2: for granted. That's obviously way better than Hillary. The deplorables,
Speaker 2: they made a couple of efforts. Look with that, we
Speaker 2: saw it with Charlemagne, was shot with here with al Sharpton.
Speaker 2: She refuses to break I think with President Obama or sorry,
Speaker 2: refuses to do what President Obama did very much. Lecturing
Speaker 2: the brothers in his language still wild. I can't believe
Speaker 2: he gets her away with this and this, and the
Speaker 2: media is are just like, oh, yeah, it's totally fun.
Speaker 3: It's actually quite normal to lecture people that way.
Speaker 2: But look, clearly the black commentariat that I've seen from
Speaker 2: Al Sharpton, Obama and others, they are worried about this
Speaker 2: issue and all of them are like grappling with it
Speaker 2: with Kamala in general and how that shape could be
Speaker 2: one of the central stories of the election.
Speaker 1: I do hate the way this is framed around like
Speaker 1: black men specifically having a problem with women. It is gross.
Speaker 1: I think she handles this question very well, and I
Speaker 1: think she is.
Speaker 3: Better than the commentators, right, that's the interague.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean better than most of the commentators. We
Speaker 1: have a wonderful Nina turner On who handles this better
Speaker 1: than anyone. But yeah, she has done well on these
Speaker 1: identity questions from the beginning. She really has. I think
Speaker 1: she learned from Hillary's mistakes. I think she learned from
Speaker 1: some of the overreaches of like peak wocism, et cetera.
Speaker 1: I think she doesn't she even learned from her own missay,
Speaker 1: remember when she was introduced as Joe Biden's vice president,
Speaker 1: you know, at the DNC in twenty twenty, I hated
Speaker 1: her speech because it was.
Speaker 4: All me, me, me. It was very narcissistic.
Speaker 1: It was that very like, it's all about my personal
Speaker 1: path to glory and my trailblazing status.
Speaker 4: And she's dropped all of that.
Speaker 1: But you know, to me, the choice of the interview
Speaker 1: venues over the past couple of weeks do display a
Speaker 1: sense of nervousness around you know, this particular demographic group,
Speaker 1: so they feel like they're having a harder time. Some
Speaker 1: of the some of the like registration data, some of
Speaker 1: the early vote data, which of course we should take
Speaker 1: with a million grains of salt, shows that their black
Speaker 1: women are really turning out very strongly, and there is
Speaker 1: less of a sense of that momentum with black men,
Speaker 1: so they're clearly trying to shore that up. How much
Speaker 1: choice reference Sharpton has at this point to help in
Speaker 1: that regard is a separate question, but you know, they're
Speaker 1: doing whatever they can figure out to do.
Speaker 4: She also got asked about, you.
Speaker 1: Know, an issue that may dog her in the black community,
Speaker 1: which is this idea that you know, she's calm of
Speaker 1: the cop, that she's too tough on crime, that she
Speaker 1: you know, there was a lot of discussion during the
Speaker 1: twenty twenty primary, in particular about her locking up parents
Speaker 1: whose kids were truant, throwing people in jail for marijuana youth.
Speaker 1: Let's take a listen to how Reverend Sharpton asked.
Speaker 7: Her about this, and let's talk about blacks in general,
Speaker 7: because one of the things, you know, I've been on
Speaker 7: a non prodestan toured National Action Networking and Central Flog
Speaker 7: five Yes and others. And one of the things that
Speaker 7: reporters act said, we don't get it from the audiences,
Speaker 7: what about the Kamala the cop? And I said, well,
Speaker 7: I knew her as da you and I go with that.
Speaker 7: She was one that wanted people with marijuana arrest not
Speaker 7: to go to jails exactly. And the Attorney General wasn't
Speaker 7: even under your purview. I mean, do you think that
Speaker 7: this is orchestrated, that they're trying to find some way
Speaker 7: to separate you from some elements because you used to
Speaker 7: be attack for being too progressive as a district attorney.
Speaker 11: I know, you know. And here's the thing, Rev. We are,
Speaker 11: as of today's Sunday, sixteen days away from the election
Speaker 11: for President of the United States, and there are all
Speaker 11: sorts of people who are going to throw a bunch
Speaker 11: of things out that will include missing disinformation with the
Speaker 11: intention to dissuade certain people from voting. And that's not new.
Speaker 3: Yesterday I was in Michigan.
Speaker 11: Tomorrow be in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, and I'm leaving
Speaker 11: nothing on the field.
Speaker 2: At the same time, with Kamala we see here going
Speaker 2: in on the character question against Donald Trump.
Speaker 3: Let's take a listen.
Speaker 7: I have to ask you about your opponent. He used
Speaker 7: a very ugly term about you last night, using the
Speaker 7: S word as vice president, and how do you react
Speaker 7: to this kind of street talk from someone who wants
Speaker 7: to be president? Again? That was president. I've known you
Speaker 7: a long time and I know you have thick skin.
Speaker 7: But I'm not asking you as a person because i
Speaker 7: know you're used to that. But what does it do
Speaker 7: in your opinion to the standards we're setting for our
Speaker 7: young people all over the country when we're using this
Speaker 7: kind of locker room street talk about an opponent for
Speaker 7: president of the United States.
Speaker 11: So the American people deserve so much better. That's how
Speaker 11: I come at it. And to your point, the President
Speaker 11: of the United States must set a standard not only
Speaker 11: for our nation, but understanding the standard that we as
Speaker 11: a nation must set for the world. You know, we
Speaker 11: we as representing the United States of America, walk into
Speaker 11: rooms around the world with the earned and self appointed
Speaker 11: authority to talk about the importance of democracy rule of law.
Speaker 2: So that's what we've got right now, Crystal. That fits
Speaker 2: very much with the spending that we talked previously with Logan.
Speaker 2: That'll be for premusubscribers today, but for others tomorrow, specifically
Speaker 2: about that character question on Trump.
Speaker 3: It just give me a little bit of Hillary vibes.
Speaker 3: I'm curious what you think.
Speaker 1: I think the way she always makes this question is
Speaker 1: make it about you deserve better.
Speaker 4: Is the best way to handle it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you know, versus she could take a lot of
Speaker 1: umbrage and I'm not even sure. I think he said
Speaker 1: she's like a shitty vice presidenter or something like that,
Speaker 1: but she.
Speaker 4: Could take a lot of umbrage at it.
Speaker 1: I think that was more the Hillary route and to say,
Speaker 1: you all deserve better than someone who talks this way
Speaker 1: and demeans all of us. That way, I think is
Speaker 1: probably the best way to go about it. That being said, again,
Speaker 1: you know, I think that the Harris campaign has been
Speaker 1: intuited that people basically feel the way they're going to
Speaker 1: feel about Donald Trump. They're leaning most heavily into ads
Speaker 1: about taxation, which are less about his you know, like
Speaker 1: democracy and his character in that regard, his like dictatorial tendencies,
Speaker 1: and more about him being in the pocket a bunch
Speaker 1: of billionaires and looking out for their interests over yours.
Speaker 1: And you know, I think that's a pretty smart place
Speaker 1: for them to land and emphasize in these final weeks.
Speaker 1: How much any of it matters remains to be seen,
Speaker 1: how much paid communication. They have a massive fundraising advantage,
Speaker 1: not just the presidential level, but at the Senate level
Speaker 1: and the House level. Republicans are getting massively outspent in
Speaker 1: almost every race, every swing race across the board. I
Speaker 1: think it probably matters the further down you go down
Speaker 1: the ballot, you know, when you get to those house races,
Speaker 1: I think it probably matters a lot more than at
Speaker 1: the presidential race. So much it really is determined by
Speaker 1: just like that national meta narrative about how people feel
Speaker 1: about these candidates for whom they already have a lot
Speaker 1: of information and experience with.
Speaker 3: Definitely totally agree