Speaker 1: Hey, guys, ready or not, twenty twenty four is here
Speaker 1: and we here at breaking points, are already thinking of
Speaker 1: ways we can up our game for this critical election.
Speaker 2: We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade
Speaker 2: the studio ad staff, give you, guys, the best independent.
Speaker 3: Coverage that is possible.
Speaker 2: If you like what we're all about, it just means
Speaker 2: the absolute world to have your support.
Speaker 3: But enough with that, let's get to the show. Good morning, everybody,
Speaker 3: Happy Thursday. We have an amazing show for everybody today.
Speaker 3: What do we have, Christal deed, we do.
Speaker 1: Lots of things happening here and around the world. We are,
Speaker 1: of course looking towards New Hampshire. Does anyone Niki Aeli
Speaker 1: or Ron Desantas have any shot at defeating Trump at
Speaker 1: this point? And in a sign that the answer is no,
Speaker 1: the beepstakes have already started. Yeah, So we'll get into
Speaker 1: all that. We're also going to take a look at
Speaker 1: the economy, little vibe check. How are people actually feeling
Speaker 1: about the economy as we head into the general election.
Speaker 1: There was an election in Taiwan that may have a
Speaker 1: lot of broader implications for their relationship with China. For US,
Speaker 1: as well, so we'll take a look at that. We're
Speaker 1: also following big updates out of Israel where night Yaho
Speaker 1: is proclaiming this thing could last for years. Of course,
Speaker 1: as we've been discussing for a while now, he has
Speaker 1: every incentive to basically make this war on Gaza and
Speaker 1: on Hesbla and whoever else he wants to take on
Speaker 1: last indefinitely so he can maintain his grip on power.
Speaker 1: And this comes as the Hufies are striking back after
Speaker 1: the US decided to redesignate them as a terror group.
Speaker 1: Also excited to have an Australian journalist in the show today,
Speaker 1: Anthony Lowenstein, who is taking a look at the way
Speaker 1: that Palestinians are used effectively as guinea pigs for testing
Speaker 1: out new weapons systems. So a lot to get to
Speaker 1: this morning.
Speaker 2: Yeah, there's certainly so going to be interesting. I'm actually
Speaker 2: excited to talk to him. But before we get to that,
Speaker 2: we do have an election discount. Let's go and put
Speaker 2: this up there on the screen. So we've got twenty
Speaker 2: five percent off on our yearly subscription. That's at breaking points.
Speaker 2: Dot Com, you guys can help us out. We've got
Speaker 2: the RFK Junior rescheduled focus group because of the weather
Speaker 2: that is coming up, and we've got all kinds of
Speaker 2: plans that we're going to be debuting very very to us,
Speaker 2: you know, quickly, I guess, as the season continues. So
Speaker 2: if you can go ahead and help us out, sign
Speaker 2: up Breakingpoints dot Com. We've got a lot of fun
Speaker 2: things for this election season. We want you all to
Speaker 2: help us be a part of it. But let's go
Speaker 2: ahead and start, as we said, with the New Hampshire primary,
Speaker 2: and let's actually just check in, like what the hell
Speaker 2: is going on over here. Let's go ahead and put
Speaker 2: this up there on the screen. This is just a
Speaker 2: sign of, I guess, the dwindling nature of the entire race.
Speaker 2: CNN and ABC News have both pulled the plug on
Speaker 2: the GOP primary debates in New Hampshire after both Trump
Speaker 2: and Nicky Haley critically have bailed Crystal.
Speaker 3: This is all part of Nicky Haley's bizarre.
Speaker 2: Attempt to spin her third place finish in New Hampshire
Speaker 2: as a two person race. So she's like, I will
Speaker 2: no longer debate Ron DeSantis, I will only debate Trump.
Speaker 2: And obviously Trump has not participated in a single debate,
Speaker 2: and so she effectively withdrew from the debate. Now, I mean,
Speaker 2: I'm not quite so sure how much it matters. I mean,
Speaker 2: this is a five day basically last gasp at any
Speaker 2: attempt to try and win. We did see a single
Speaker 2: poll conducted the day of the Iowa of Iowa which
Speaker 2: actually showed Nikki Haley, you know, within striking distance of Trump.
Speaker 2: Not don't know how much to even put in stock that,
Speaker 2: and obviously there's a lot of rapidly shifting and changing dynamics,
Speaker 2: but it does show her that like this is this
Speaker 2: is it for her last five days. I mean, yeah,
Speaker 2: Frankly DeSantis too, although I'm not quite so sure he
Speaker 2: realized it because he didn't have the same expectations of
Speaker 2: New Hampshire. He may actually be shifting all his focus
Speaker 2: towards South Carolina, and I guess make that his last dance.
Speaker 3: We'll have two last stands. I guess in South Carolina.
Speaker 1: There's a lot of Pete Bootage edge energy here with
Speaker 1: Nikki Haley. You'll recall that he just like declared victory
Speaker 1: in Iowa and then pretended like he was the guy,
Speaker 1: and the media sort of went along with it, and
Speaker 1: you know, to be honest with you here with Nikki,
Speaker 1: like we can't say it's not working. The media is
Speaker 1: sort of going along with it. And to be a
Speaker 1: fair to her Ron, Desanta's put all his eggs in
Speaker 1: the Iowa basket. I mean, this man spent tens of
Speaker 1: millions of dollars in that state, did a massive number
Speaker 1: of events, like they were broadcasting and telling the press
Speaker 1: that they were going to make their stand in Iowa.
Speaker 1: His surrogates were all declaring, you know, they're going to
Speaker 1: win Iowe et cetera, et cetera. So it is a
Speaker 1: bigger disappointment for him to finish such a distant second.
Speaker 1: Then Nikki has always put all of her eggs in
Speaker 1: the New Hampshire basket. So basically she's saying, look, I
Speaker 1: did okay in Iowa. Let's just pretend that didn't happen,
Speaker 1: and let's move forward to the state that I actually
Speaker 1: care about, which is New Hampshire. You know, in terms
Speaker 1: of backing out of the debates, obviously, from a democracy standpoint,
Speaker 1: I think all of these candidates Trump included, Biden included,
Speaker 1: should have been required to do debates all along. I
Speaker 1: think it's disgusting that people feel like they can just
Speaker 1: you know, back ound of the democratic process. However, is
Speaker 1: a tactical move. I think it's probably smart. I mean,
Speaker 1: number one, I don't think that it's kind of a
Speaker 1: waste of time at this point, not that many people
Speaker 1: are watching, not that many people care. But also, she's
Speaker 1: clearly versus Ron in the driver's seat in New Hampshire,
Speaker 1: and so why give him any oxygen and any chance
Speaker 1: to make up some ground and you know, the score
Speaker 1: some sort of a blow on her in that format.
Speaker 1: So I do think that again from a tactical perspective,
Speaker 1: it's probably a clever move. And you know, while she's
Speaker 1: running out a runway. And I mean, as I said
Speaker 1: last time, I think this primary is basically over. But
Speaker 1: for Ron, the landscape is even more grim because you
Speaker 1: already lost the state that you put all your eggs in.
Speaker 1: There is no other state on the map where it appears,
Speaker 1: including your home state, where appears that you're going to
Speaker 1: perform better than you did in Iowa. So like, what's
Speaker 1: your plan here?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean to that point about why the debate
Speaker 2: would probably hurt, it just opens her up. And then yeah,
Speaker 2: last time, actually because we had that parallel Trump town
Speaker 2: hall versus the debate.
Speaker 3: The town hall got over double.
Speaker 2: It had like four point four million people watching, and
Speaker 2: the debate had like two some millions.
Speaker 1: And Ron had pretty decent in that last debate. That's
Speaker 1: right that they thought we won, right.
Speaker 3: So why would she give him that now?
Speaker 2: Again, I agree they should be required to debate period
Speaker 2: in the past. I mean, if you'll recall Mitt Romney
Speaker 2: and all them, they were debating all the way into
Speaker 2: South Carolina. That was some crazy stop. They had fifteen
Speaker 2: almost nineteen debates the Democratic debate. Even though Obama basically
Speaker 2: won after South Carolina, Hillary and him kept on going
Speaker 2: for a long time. So it's actually sad to see
Speaker 2: like the total collapse of all this. To bolster your
Speaker 2: point about how some of the wagons are now circling
Speaker 2: within the GOP anti Trump direction, let's put this up
Speaker 2: there on the screen. The Wall Street Journal put an
Speaker 2: editorial board out on Tuesday saying that President Trump sweeping
Speaker 2: win in Iowa quote should push Governor DeSantis to drop
Speaker 2: out of the GOP presidential race and give former UN
Speaker 2: Ambassador Nikki Haley a chance at beating the former president.
Speaker 2: Mister DeSantis faces no clear path to the nomination. He's
Speaker 2: well behind her in New Hampshire and South Carolina. If
Speaker 2: he believes, as he says, that Trump cannot win in November,
Speaker 2: he should leave the race and give her a chance
Speaker 2: to take on mister Trump one on one. So, I mean,
Speaker 2: to a certain extent, I kind of do see their point, Crystal,
Speaker 2: this is probably the only chance you have to have
Speaker 2: any meaningful blow. But DeSantis himself, I mean from a
Speaker 2: self interested point of view, like, why would he do that?
Speaker 3: For him?
Speaker 2: He's he did get second in Iowa. He has no
Speaker 2: reason that he necessarily has to drop out. I mean
Speaker 2: everyone's like, oh, you have no chance. I mean, you
Speaker 2: don't know until the votes are cast. It's one of
Speaker 2: those where it's up in the air. I don't think
Speaker 2: it's gonna work out for him, but you know, I
Speaker 2: guess we'll see. And then it all comes back to this.
Speaker 2: They say, they say things, do they really believe them.
Speaker 2: Like for DeSantis, DeSantis raised his hand at every debate
Speaker 2: and he said that he would support the GOP nominee.
Speaker 2: So when Trump wins, is he going to endorse him? Yeah,
Speaker 2: he already said he would. NICKI Haley too, I mean,
Speaker 2: by all means, it seems as she's campaigning for a
Speaker 2: vice president. There's been actually, interestingly enough, I spotted an
Speaker 2: instance where Jason Miller, who works for Trump, the day
Speaker 2: before the Iowa Caucuses, he was asked, well, vag Ramaswami
Speaker 2: ever vi president? He said no, I don't think So
Speaker 2: they said what about Nicki Haley? And he said, well,
Speaker 2: we'll see, So he kept it. He kept the door open.
Speaker 2: There's previous leaks and all that. I don't know, there's
Speaker 2: gonna be a big fight within Trump world. I wouldn't
Speaker 2: personally bet on it. But for this woman, I mean,
Speaker 2: ambition is everything like and she also doesn't believe anything
Speaker 2: that she says. Like now she's against Trump. Previously she
Speaker 2: walked back her January sixth criticism, and then before that
Speaker 2: she was.
Speaker 3: Against him for January six She's all over the place and.
Speaker 2: She's like, I want to call my friend President Trump
Speaker 2: to clear the air. This is before she decides to
Speaker 2: run against him. So I wouldn't put it out that
Speaker 2: all of them are just in a self interested you know,
Speaker 2: like march towards us and they are just looking out
Speaker 2: what's good for them. I'm not convinced that it would
Speaker 2: be the best thing for DeSantis to drop out, because
Speaker 2: then the Trump people would say, oh, well, he tried
Speaker 2: to help Nicki, you know, the Edmond He would only
Speaker 2: increase They don't believe what they're actually saying here.
Speaker 1: So for Nicki and Ron, in terms of their self interest,
Speaker 1: there are two possible tracks to pursue. One is the
Speaker 1: try to stay good with the megabas track. I think
Speaker 1: Ron DeSantis is probably more likely to go in that
Speaker 1: direction because he even though he's been a little bit
Speaker 1: critical of Trump, like the Republican base still likes him.
Speaker 1: They don't see him as a never Trump figure. You know,
Speaker 1: he maintains a war. If Trump were to drop out
Speaker 1: of the race, I think Ron would you know, go
Speaker 1: to prison, da whatever for whatever reason he disappears. I
Speaker 1: think Ron DeSantis would be way better positioned to pick
Speaker 1: up his support, certainly than Nikki Haley. So I think
Speaker 1: he's probably more likely to go in the direction of like,
Speaker 1: what am I going to do to make sure the
Speaker 1: Republican base still likes me, that I still have a
Speaker 1: future in Republican politics given that Donald Trump is still
Speaker 1: the man? How can I get back in Donald Trump's
Speaker 1: good graces? So he's not just like, you know, being
Speaker 1: mean to me all the time and humiliating me all
Speaker 1: the times. I have some chance in the future in
Speaker 1: Republican politics. I think that is more likely the track
Speaker 1: that Ron DeSantis is going to go on. The other
Speaker 1: possible career track is the one that I think Nikki
Speaker 1: Haley is more likely to pursue, which is the let
Speaker 1: me be the darling of the media and the donor
Speaker 1: base and let me, you know, maybe on position for
Speaker 1: more board seats and make it more money. Maybe on
Speaker 1: position for some future never Trump or anti Trump lane.
Speaker 1: Maybe on position for a CNN gig or other mainstream
Speaker 1: press gig. And she because she has taken on almost
Speaker 1: like an anti Trump Chris Christie vibe with the Republican
Speaker 1: base in this primary, in spite of her very conservative
Speaker 1: records bye the fact that she also was very gentle
Speaker 1: with Trump. That's the way she's beginning to be seen
Speaker 1: among Republicans. I think she is more likely to pursue
Speaker 1: that track. Now, what does that mean exactly in terms
Speaker 1: of her calculation for when and how she gets out
Speaker 1: of this race. I think it's a real open question.
Speaker 1: You know, I hadn't really thought about this thought through
Speaker 1: this until yesterday. But there is some chance that between
Speaker 1: even if she loses North New Hampshire and even if
Speaker 1: she loses South Carolina and even and she's going into
Speaker 1: Super Tuesday and she's way behind, there is some chance,
Speaker 1: you know, zero point five percent or whatever, that there
Speaker 1: is about black swan event and Trump is taken out
Speaker 1: of the race, and that there's some benefit to donors
Speaker 1: of having one of their representatives as like the last
Speaker 1: persons standing point. So I think, you know, that may
Speaker 1: be a calculation that she makes where even though it's
Speaker 1: completely humiliating to get blown out in all of these
Speaker 1: races by like sixty percent, but she may stay in
Speaker 1: there even you know, and accept that level of humiliation
Speaker 1: just because that's what the donor class wants her to do,
Speaker 1: to be where they want her to be, just in
Speaker 1: case something unforeseen happens.
Speaker 2: I mean, remember Hillary stayed in until June of what
Speaker 2: was it to June of two thousand and eight, months
Speaker 2: and months after it was clear that she wasn't going
Speaker 2: to win. I mean, I guess she was banking more
Speaker 2: on super delegates at that time, but you know, the
Speaker 2: same kind of case was there just in case, you
Speaker 2: might be able to know to do that, and that's
Speaker 2: something that Ted Cruz and John Kasick. As we all
Speaker 2: can recall, he stayed all the way until the end
Speaker 2: of the primary. So if a vike Ramaswami, obviously we
Speaker 2: covered the news on Tuesday dropping out of the race
Speaker 2: on Monday night in Iowa after he only was able
Speaker 2: to get eight percent finished fourth, immediately not only endorse Trump,
Speaker 2: but is now actively joining the campaign. He campaigned with
Speaker 2: Trump in New Hampshire, now taking to the airwaves, mostly
Speaker 2: on Fox, calling on rohnd De Santis and Nikki Haley
Speaker 2: to drop out.
Speaker 3: Let's take a listen to what he said.
Speaker 4: I think that you guys may have seen some of
Speaker 4: the rally that we had and the response was overwhelmed.
Speaker 4: And I think it's very clear who the Republican primary
Speaker 4: electorate is saying that they want to be their nominee.
Speaker 3: I ran to be that person. They sent me a
Speaker 3: very positive message.
Speaker 4: But the very positive message they send to all of
Speaker 4: us is that Donald Trump needs to be the nominee
Speaker 4: of this party. And I think Ron Santas and Nikki
Speaker 4: Haley would actually at this point do this country and
Speaker 4: this party a service. By stepping aside to make sure
Speaker 4: that we're focused on not only nominating Donald Trump, but
Speaker 4: getting this country back and reviving those founding revolutionary ideals.
Speaker 4: And I think we do live in that seventeen seventy
Speaker 4: six moment right now. We need to win.
Speaker 2: You're calling on Nikki Haley and Ron De Santis to
Speaker 2: drop out right now.
Speaker 4: I am, and I do think that would be healthy
Speaker 4: for this country. And I think that, you know what,
Speaker 4: especially Ron De Santis, at least of the two of them,
Speaker 4: will have an important role to play in the future
Speaker 4: of this country and leading this nation. I do believe that.
Speaker 4: But I think that the right thing to do right
Speaker 4: now is the people of this country through the Iowa Caucus.
Speaker 4: It's the most grassroots process I've seen. I personally did
Speaker 4: over three hundred and ninety events, built great relationships and
Speaker 4: good will, but the message they sent was clear. I
Speaker 4: think it's time to actually make sure we elect the
Speaker 4: right president.
Speaker 2: So to underscore your points as well, Crystal, with that,
Speaker 2: let's put this up there on the screen. The Rhonda
Speaker 2: Santis super pac is actually having layoffs on the very
Speaker 2: same time that he would try to win in New Hampshire.
Speaker 2: They appear to be putting all of their efforts. As
Speaker 2: we said on South Carolina, they're basically writing off the state.
Speaker 2: Nikki Haley's got much more, not only never Trump type
Speaker 2: Trump anti Trump sympathetic voters, but New Hampshire's got the
Speaker 2: open primary process, and since we don't have an active
Speaker 2: Democratic primary, or do we which we will get to
Speaker 2: just in a second, it's one of those where we
Speaker 2: could see some crossover voters who come in and support
Speaker 2: her as some sort of last ditch effort. So all
Speaker 2: of this is kind of pointing to the fact that
Speaker 2: it's do or die, you know, for Nicki Haley, and
Speaker 2: Trump is basically treating it that way. He's not even
Speaker 2: really paying attention to Rondasantis. Let's put this up there
Speaker 2: after following on he had originally had a birth attack
Speaker 2: on Nicki.
Speaker 3: Now he's going with this.
Speaker 2: Anyone listening to Nicki Nimrada Haley, it's actually nim Ratha
Speaker 2: whacked out speech last night, would thinks she won the
Speaker 2: Iowa primary. She didn't, and she couldn't even beat a
Speaker 2: very flawed Rna Sanctimonius who's out of money and out
Speaker 2: of hope. Nikki came in a distant third. She said
Speaker 2: she would never run against me. He was a great president.
Speaker 2: She should have followed her own advice. She's now stuck
Speaker 2: with weak policies and a very strong MAGA base.
Speaker 3: There's just nothing that she can do.
Speaker 2: So look, he seems to be treating it as a
Speaker 2: one on one and actually the Trump people are on
Speaker 2: the ground in New Hampshire. They seem to be feeling
Speaker 2: good about it. Let's just underscore the one chance Niggi has,
Speaker 2: which is she's got a hell of a lot of money.
Speaker 2: She's got more money than Rond DeSantis right now, She's
Speaker 2: got the billionaire class behind her, and she's got the possibility.
Speaker 2: I mean, at this point, it's not even fair to
Speaker 2: call it a black swan event because it's totally predictable.
Speaker 2: It's like a white swan. It's just like when is
Speaker 2: it going to flap its wings? And that's Trump's legal problems.
Speaker 2: To what extent are they going to be there? Nobody knows.
Speaker 2: Just to give everybody an idea, you know, Trump currently
Speaker 2: is fighting his second defamation case against Egene Carroll.
Speaker 3: We can put that up there.
Speaker 2: That's happening right now actually with a federal judge actually
Speaker 2: coming down on Trump. They're saying that you can be
Speaker 2: kicked out of this trial if you keep making disparaging
Speaker 2: comments that the jury could hear.
Speaker 3: Then he's been putting.
Speaker 2: Stuff out on truth Social as well. Previously, she'd already
Speaker 2: sought and won damages against him. Now she's going for
Speaker 2: it a second time after I believe it was a
Speaker 2: previous truth Social case that came out afterwards.
Speaker 3: I mean, obviously you know her.
Speaker 2: I believe her case is being bankrolled by what is
Speaker 2: his name, reed Hoffman, the Democratic billionaire. Regardless, it obviously
Speaker 2: worked already in terms of the defamation against him. Now
Speaker 2: we're getting to the second case that's against him. She's
Speaker 2: basically trying to bleed money from him and just keep
Speaker 2: him tied up in court.
Speaker 3: But that's I mean, that's the least.
Speaker 2: Of his problems. Money he at least has, or at
Speaker 2: least appears to have. Everything else Like, that's not necessarily
Speaker 2: one you can just pay your way out of. You've
Speaker 2: got the Georgia case, although you know we've got problems
Speaker 2: there which we've covered. We've got but I mean, I mean,
Speaker 2: at the same time, I also have to come back
Speaker 2: to the documents, so I have to remind myself as
Speaker 2: you did the last time we were discussing, that that
Speaker 2: one is just open and shut, Like there's just no,
Speaker 2: there's no January sixth, like first en Men's Supreme Court,
Speaker 2: Like not even the court can save you on that one.
Speaker 2: And that's why Trump his last truth actually just this morning,
Speaker 2: was about how the president should have total immunity while
Speaker 2: he's in office, because I think he does seem to understand.
Speaker 2: It's like, look, he's got a chance on jan six
Speaker 2: he's got it at the court. Not necessarily with the jury.
Speaker 2: He's got a chance ish, I guess with election law
Speaker 2: and free speech.
Speaker 3: And all that.
Speaker 2: But the Document's case, I mean, that's one where after
Speaker 2: he was president, so he no longer has the same
Speaker 2: level of immunity.
Speaker 3: And given the fact that his.
Speaker 2: Own administration argued against the same classification standards that he
Speaker 2: is trying to prop up for for like why he
Speaker 2: didn't do anything wrong, it's going to be a problem.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean you just have to like, there's different
Speaker 1: factors in all these cases. The Florida one he does
Speaker 1: have going for him that it's not in DC. You know,
Speaker 1: we could get a more favorable jury pool. He seems
Speaker 1: to have a judge who is much more sympathetic towards him,
Speaker 1: So he had some things going for him there, not
Speaker 1: really in terms of necessarily winning. But his whole strategy
Speaker 1: is to drag this out so that he has a
Speaker 1: chance to win at the ballot box and then get
Speaker 1: himself out of all of his legal trouble that way.
Speaker 1: The DC cases, you know, they are trickier from a
Speaker 1: legal perspective, but he has less friendly judges and you know,
Speaker 1: a potentially less friendly jury pool, and so I don't know,
Speaker 1: we'll see. I mean, the big question with all of
Speaker 1: these things is the timeline. And the other question is
Speaker 1: when you have so much legal jeopardy in multiple states,
Speaker 1: multiple charges, what is it, like ninety one different charges,
Speaker 1: you're going to run the table on all of them.
Speaker 1: It seems unlikely. So that is the big thing that's
Speaker 1: hanging over all of this. But in terms of the
Speaker 1: Republican primary, it seems very unlikely that any of this
Speaker 1: comes to a conclusion before he's the official Republican nominee. So,
Speaker 1: you know, perhaps some of these trials conclude before the
Speaker 1: general election, perhaps, but I think it's highly unlikely that
Speaker 1: there is such an expedited process that any of this
Speaker 1: comes to fruition before he is a officially the Republican nominee.
Speaker 1: And so you know, that's kind of where we are.
Speaker 2: Yeah, as a Trump used to say, we'll see you
Speaker 2: see what happens. Let's move on to the next one. Christly,
Speaker 2: you flagged the story. I'll set it up a little bit.
Speaker 2: I'm really curious to hear what you think about Biden
Speaker 2: both right, Biden and the DNC honestly writing off New
Speaker 2: Hampshire bypassing it, changing their process such as South Carolina
Speaker 2: comes first, basically to rig the primary because they know
Speaker 2: that Iowa and New Hampshire actually didn't choose Biden last time,
Speaker 2: and Iowa gave him the perfect excuse there, like, oh,
Speaker 2: well it was such a shit show last time, we
Speaker 2: have to bypass it. But that didn't mean you had
Speaker 2: to bypass New Hampshire, where Biden conveniently got fifth place.
Speaker 2: But South Carolina, where we have a large elderly black
Speaker 2: population which votes very very differently than Iowa New Hampshire. Yeah,
Speaker 2: let's just throw it to them because of racism or whatever. Well, now,
Speaker 2: though it seems even though the New Hampshire primary will continue,
Speaker 2: let's put this Pollee up on the screen. The Biden team,
Speaker 2: I'm not gonna I mean, look, it seems to be
Speaker 2: panic in a certain way. They are now instant voting
Speaker 2: after Dean Phillips has announced his candidacy, a quote weird
Speaker 2: ride in campaign where they want Biden to win New Hampshire,
Speaker 2: but they don't want to seem as if they are
Speaker 2: all that invested in him winning because Biden by trying
Speaker 2: to end the quote one hundred year reign as the
Speaker 2: nation's first in the primary and put South Carolina first.
Speaker 2: Now his allies are trying to make it so that
Speaker 2: he will have a ride in campaign on a shoestring
Speaker 2: budget where his campaign is not technically involved. But they
Speaker 2: still really really want him to win because it would
Speaker 2: be embarrassing, which it would be embarrassing for you to
Speaker 2: lose to Dean Phillips, to Marian Williamson or previously RFK Junior,
Speaker 2: who had been vying for you know, I mean, if
Speaker 2: we would think about the RFK Junior case before he
Speaker 2: went independent, when he was on in the Democratic Party,
Speaker 2: his entire thing was New Hampshire because that was the
Speaker 2: one place where Biden's not competing.
Speaker 3: He's literally not there.
Speaker 2: And if RFKA was able to win for forty fifty
Speaker 2: or whatever percent, that would have been humiliating and the
Speaker 2: media would have.
Speaker 3: Had to treat that as a story.
Speaker 2: In this case, now we've got Dean Phillips, who's got
Speaker 2: i mean some momentum. It's unclear exact how much they
Speaker 2: seem to be pulling like a fast one, both trying
Speaker 2: to tell the media New Hampshire primary doesn't matter all
Speaker 2: this Biden challengers, they're fake. That's why they're rigging the
Speaker 2: whole election process and the rest of these states. But
Speaker 2: now they also do want to win to try and
Speaker 2: save face. Yeah, in terms of their headlines.
Speaker 1: Basically, by being so heavy handed and trying to rig
Speaker 1: the Democratic primaries, they screwed themselves. They really screwed themselves.
Speaker 1: They thought New Hampshire would fold and would just get
Speaker 1: in line and then they would be able to have
Speaker 1: the exact state order that they want, that they thought
Speaker 1: was ideal for Joe Biden. But they didn't think through
Speaker 1: the fact that I mean, number one, this is like
Speaker 1: a point of pride and source of identity and money,
Speaker 1: by the way, for the Democratic Party in New Hampshire.
Speaker 1: They didn't want to let this go easily. And the
Speaker 1: other thing is the New Hampshire constitution says that they
Speaker 1: go first in the nation, and New Hampshire is not
Speaker 1: run by Democrats, it's run by Republicans, so even if
Speaker 1: they wanted to change it, they're not in control to
Speaker 1: change it. So they're saying, Okay, we have to abide
Speaker 1: by our state laws, so we're going forward with this primary,
Speaker 1: whether you're participating or not. So that's what put Joe
Speaker 1: Biden in this quandary of like, okay, well, since the
Speaker 1: DNC isn't sanctioning this thing, and in fact, they're penalizing
Speaker 1: the candidates in the state. If whoever wins the state
Speaker 1: isn't going to get any delegates, so Biden can't put
Speaker 1: his name on the ballot, so they have to do
Speaker 1: this write in effort. But they're also worried that, you know,
Speaker 1: all of this anti Biden sentiment that is very clear
Speaker 1: within the Democratic Party where people really feel like they
Speaker 1: want another alternative, and which has been amplified and exacerbated
Speaker 1: by the fact that so many young people are disgusted
Speaker 1: with his unconditional support for Israel's all on assault on
Speaker 1: Gaza that has opened them up to very precarious situation.
Speaker 1: They don't want to be seen as spending any money
Speaker 1: in New Hampshire. So the State Party, which is by
Speaker 1: the way, incredibly pissed at the DNC and incredibly pissed
Speaker 1: at Joe Biden, they've sort of begrudgingly taken up this effort.
Speaker 1: It's a very low dollar amount in terms of presidential
Speaker 1: politics that they've put into this right and effort, and
Speaker 1: it's a real wild card what's going to happen here
Speaker 1: because it's hard to pull right. How do you pull
Speaker 1: what's going to happen in a writing campaign? You are
Speaker 1: are you asking people, Okay, here's your options that are
Speaker 1: on the ballot, Dean Phillips, Mary and Williamson or some
Speaker 1: other write in. Are you sort of like pushing them
Speaker 1: with the fact that you can write in Joe Biden?
Speaker 1: Are people going to be aware that that's the case.
Speaker 1: I just think it's very even more difficult to predict
Speaker 1: what will happen here, and the irony and sager if
Speaker 1: they had just played this straight New Hampshire at the
Speaker 1: front of the line as it's you know, always been
Speaker 1: in terms of the first primary, Joe Biden was gonna win.
Speaker 1: He was going to win. He's winning in every other state.
Speaker 1: He would win in New Hampshire and even you know,
Speaker 1: maybe somebody would do a little bit better than they're
Speaker 1: going to do in other states. But because they are
Speaker 1: so concerned and so nervous and so overly controlling of
Speaker 1: this process and so like so opposed to actually having
Speaker 1: real democracy and letting people have a say and like
Speaker 1: go to the ballot box and actually pick, they have
Speaker 1: opened themselves up to a vulnerability. So I genuinely don't
Speaker 1: know what's going to happen in New Hampshire for Democrats.
Speaker 1: We can put this next one up on the screen.
Speaker 1: I mean there the polls have been again a little
Speaker 1: bit all over the map, I think in particular because
Speaker 1: it's very difficult to pull this write in situation. But
Speaker 1: there was a poll that had Dean Phillips at twenty
Speaker 1: six percent. That's not nothing. I think even that level
Speaker 1: of support is embarrassing for an incumbent president versus a guy.
Speaker 1: I mean, nobody knows who Dean Phillips is, right, I mean,
Speaker 1: we've interviewed a mer. We know who he is, but
Speaker 1: he is a random congressman that the overwhelming majority of
Speaker 1: the country has no idea who he is, and the
Speaker 1: media has gone to great lengths to make sure nobody
Speaker 1: knows who he is. They've done the same thing obviously
Speaker 1: to Mary and Williamson. And then you couple that with
Speaker 1: there's also a new effort to write in just the
Speaker 1: word cease fire on the ballot to try to send
Speaker 1: a message to Joe Biden. I mean, I think probably
Speaker 1: the more effective way to send a message to vote
Speaker 1: for one of his actual opponents who's on the ballot.
Speaker 1: I think Dean and Mary in at this point both
Speaker 1: support a ceasefire and have some differences from Joe Biden
Speaker 1: on their policy towards Israel. But that just adds another
Speaker 1: factor motivating young people to go out and send some
Speaker 1: sort of a signal against Joe Biden. So it makes
Speaker 1: it a little more interesting than Iowa. Nothing happened for Democrats,
Speaker 1: but it makes it a little more interesting than some
Speaker 1: of the other states.
Speaker 2: It's more interesting because we genuinely have no idea, and
Speaker 2: like you said, it's already difficult to pull a ride
Speaker 2: in number two. People are spending any money on polling
Speaker 2: the Democratic race.
Speaker 3: We have one, maybe two.
Speaker 2: Yeah, at this point, it's you know, super packs are
Speaker 2: the only ones with any cash. I mean, if we
Speaker 2: look to history and we think about you know, it's
Speaker 2: a competitive primary even as sitting president. The last time
Speaker 2: this happened was nineteen eighty election. Jimmy Carter only won
Speaker 2: forty seven percent in the New Hampshire primary. Ted Kennedy
Speaker 2: actually got thirty seven percent.
Speaker 3: Of the vote.
Speaker 2: So let's say that Dean Phillips gets twenty six thirty.
Speaker 2: I mean, that's a serious contender. But I could flip
Speaker 2: it and again just point to if Biden had any
Speaker 2: confidence in himself, he would do what Carter did, and
Speaker 2: you would try and crush your opponent in the primary. Yeah,
Speaker 2: Carter maintains he has some cope where he's like, well,
Speaker 2: Ted Kennedy really hurt me going into the election. I'm like, dude,
Speaker 2: Kennedy was at least your problems whenever it was going
Speaker 2: into nineteen eighty election against Ronald Reagan. It's not that
Speaker 2: it didn't cost too much money. Money wasn't your problem.
Speaker 2: The thing is, I actually it helped him. Having read
Speaker 2: a little bit about it, he had to hone his
Speaker 2: message both in terms of getting people to come out
Speaker 2: for vote for him, and he was in fighting shape.
Speaker 2: If we'll remember, remember Obama's first debate against Romney disaster,
Speaker 2: and the reason why was, what did all the people
Speaker 2: around him say, He's out of practice. It doesn't run
Speaker 2: for office in a long time. He's like, he kind
Speaker 2: of forgot that you need to make a case. His
Speaker 2: second debate was.
Speaker 3: Very, very different.
Speaker 2: He tried to reform his professorial tone and getting angried.
Speaker 2: That was the real Obama is the only time we
Speaker 2: ever really saw him was in that first debate, and
Speaker 2: then he put the mask back on. But the point
Speaker 2: is is that you know it's healthy, it's good for you,
Speaker 2: and it actually can make you better at overall running
Speaker 2: for office. There's also just a question about the media
Speaker 2: in this primary. We talked and had looked previously. You know,
Speaker 2: I vike Ramaswami was saying like, oh, look, they're leading
Speaker 2: me out of polls and not putting my face on
Speaker 2: the screen. You and I are familiar with this, going
Speaker 2: back to the Gang Gang. How many times Andrew Yang
Speaker 2: was left off? You know, how many times he was
Speaker 2: either blackballed or not mentioned by the media. I mean,
Speaker 2: in the case of Dean Phillips. There's some crazy stuff. Actually,
Speaker 2: let's put this up there. So Dean Phillips says that
Speaker 2: he has not been on MSNBC a single time since
Speaker 2: he has announced his candidacy. Phillips here. This was an
Speaker 2: interview with Politico. He says he may as well be
Speaker 2: calling in from the sidewalk outside of the Capitol Hill studio.
Speaker 2: He can watch fancy guests come and go, hoping in
Speaker 2: vain for Chris Hayes, Joy Reid or Jensaki to just
Speaker 2: bring him in for the from the cold. He says, quote,
Speaker 2: right wing media has actually been more than invitational. By contrast,
Speaker 2: I don't think there's an MSNBC viewer that even knows
Speaker 2: I'm a congressman, because that is what is being portrayed
Speaker 2: in design to prevent that education. Now, look, let's be clear,
Speaker 2: he doesn't have a right to go on MSNBC. But
Speaker 2: then there's a question with MSNBC. They're not stupid. They
Speaker 2: know they run the table in terms of elitemocratic opinion.
Speaker 3: You can't even have the guy on one time.
Speaker 2: So according to them, the Phillips campaign, they said that
Speaker 2: they had two previously scheduled appearances. Then this was actually
Speaker 2: on CNN. Then both of them were subsequently canceled. Yeah,
Speaker 2: MSNBC has not even reached out to the man. You
Speaker 2: have interviewed him twice, and it's just like, it's not
Speaker 2: that hard. You can just text him people.
Speaker 1: It's very available.
Speaker 3: Let's to think about this.
Speaker 2: You know, from their low rated shows even and all
Speaker 2: of that, Joy Reader and these other.
Speaker 3: People, What the hell else are they covering on the show?
Speaker 3: Why pretend just have him on? You can even be confrontational.
Speaker 2: As you were a dean. Look, I'm gonna give him credit.
Speaker 2: He sat there and he took it. You know, you
Speaker 2: went it back and forth with you guys. That's pretty
Speaker 2: rare actually for people who are running for president. I
Speaker 2: actually can't think of a better thing than to have
Speaker 2: somebody on like that, especially if you're Jen Zaki or
Speaker 2: someone challenge him to his face.
Speaker 3: What's the issue with that?
Speaker 2: They seem to be totally They seem to be terrified
Speaker 2: at even opening the door, which is a huge mistake.
Speaker 2: It's a lot of disdain for the viewer because a
Speaker 2: lot of these viewers they love Joe Biden, or if
Speaker 2: they don't love Joe Biden, they're going to be offended
Speaker 2: because they're much more institutionalist that anybody would even challenge him,
Speaker 2: So by airing him, they more likely would turn people
Speaker 2: towards the Biden campaign.
Speaker 3: But at the very least, like you got to let
Speaker 3: people talk.
Speaker 1: There's just no reason you shouldn't a guarantee. Calls went
Speaker 1: in from Biden World to MSNBC and to CNN, and
Speaker 1: I'm sure to other places as well. I mean, that's
Speaker 1: why he's getting booked on CNN and then canceled. That's
Speaker 1: why the invitation is not even getting extended to MSNBC.
Speaker 1: And the way this works is someone in Biden World
Speaker 1: calls the President Network and says, listen, we don't want
Speaker 1: this guy on your air. And if he does, you're
Speaker 1: not getting your interviews with the President. You're not getting
Speaker 1: your interviews with Kamala Harris or whoever it is that
Speaker 1: they want access to. It's not happening. And so that's
Speaker 1: the way this game works. And you know, I saw
Speaker 1: it when I was at MSNBC and I did critical
Speaker 1: commentary of Hillary Clinton before she was going to run
Speaker 1: in twenty sixteen, and someone from Clinton World called the
Speaker 1: network and that's basically exactly the message that was sent
Speaker 1: in no uncertain terms. So that's the way that this
Speaker 1: game is played. It's just, guys, it's not journalism. It's
Speaker 1: not you know, it's anti democratic, especially for these networks
Speaker 1: c and m SMEC that pretend they care so much
Speaker 1: about democracy and think about it on CNN too. They've
Speaker 1: done town halls with They did town halls with all
Speaker 1: of the Republican contenders, even the ones that were pulling
Speaker 1: at like three percent. They gave them plenty of air time,
Speaker 1: they gave them plenty of exposure. So even if you
Speaker 1: look at the pull numbers here and you're like, oh, well,
Speaker 1: Marian's not pulling that high or Dean's not pulling that high,
Speaker 1: they're pulling high a lot higher than some of the people.
Speaker 1: They put on air for these town halls and gave them,
Speaker 1: you know, plenty of space and whatever. They've just decided
Speaker 1: to pretend there are no options on the Democratic side.
Speaker 1: And I'll tell you, Soger, it's very clear from the
Speaker 1: way the Biden people have reacted they fear that his
Speaker 1: support is a house of cards. Now is it really
Speaker 1: a house of cards, I don't know, but they clearly
Speaker 1: are worried about that and there's a reason for them.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure that they're wrong, I guess is what
Speaker 1: I'll say if you genuinely had Dean Phillips, who I
Speaker 1: think persents himself reasonably well in interviews, even in you know,
Speaker 1: a confrontational or like contentious interview like I had with
Speaker 1: him a couple of times, he comes across well, he's
Speaker 1: able to handle himself. And they're worried that if MSNBC
Speaker 1: viewers actually internalize there is another option here basically like
Speaker 1: generic democrat is actually on the table for me to choose.
Speaker 1: That they may go ahead and choose that option. And
Speaker 1: I'm not one hundred percent short that they're incorrect about that.
Speaker 3: They may look, I don't know.
Speaker 2: I actually do think Biden probably would prevail in a
Speaker 2: quote unquote primary as it's currently constituted. Yes, because I
Speaker 2: think a lot of viewers are a lot of voters are comfortable, and.
Speaker 1: You know, especially an incumbent is a huge advantage, huge advantage.
Speaker 3: Yes, that's right.
Speaker 2: That said, you know, there's no reason not to give
Speaker 2: him a shot. And I think the point that he
Speaker 2: made was fantastic is if frickin' Tim Scott gets a
Speaker 2: town hall Dean.
Speaker 3: Phillips gets thank you. If Mike Pence, you can't.
Speaker 2: Even drag his ask to the finish line in Iowa
Speaker 2: to actually run and go on the ballot, gets a
Speaker 2: town hall, well then I think Dean Phillips should be
Speaker 2: able to get a town hall.
Speaker 3: It's pretty wild.
Speaker 2: It's interesting to the Biden campaign to back up what
Speaker 2: you're saying. They were actually asked for comments on the
Speaker 2: story whether they were quashing, and all they responded was
Speaker 2: quote law in all caps.
Speaker 1: It's like total disrespect at that.
Speaker 2: You know, like very arrogant behavior for somebody who is
Speaker 2: terrified and is literally rigging the primary.
Speaker 3: So look, anyways we can look at it.
Speaker 2: We could say is a possible because New Hampshire is
Speaker 2: the one place where they don't have it entirely rigged
Speaker 2: to their benefit. One thing we also know is that
Speaker 2: the New Hampshire Attorney General and most New Hampshire Democrats
Speaker 2: are so furious with the DNC. Their New Hampshire Attorney
Speaker 2: General actually is threatening to take legal action against them
Speaker 2: because the DNC keeps saying that the New Hampshire primary
Speaker 2: is not real, and they're like, hey, you're violating state
Speaker 2: law because you're denigrating or whatever our process. So there
Speaker 2: is some internal fight here, the DNC is throwing everything
Speaker 2: they are at this, but overall we just have to
Speaker 2: say this. This is really bad for the future because
Speaker 2: what it means is that if they're going to commit
Speaker 2: to South Carolina first, there will never be a Barack
Speaker 2: Obama type figure ever again.
Speaker 3: Period.
Speaker 2: There will always like new South Carolina and his political
Speaker 2: system are designed as machine politics. If that goes first,
Speaker 2: you deny the momentum stories that originally came out for Obama.
Speaker 2: And to put it back in history, if South Carolina
Speaker 2: was first, Barack Obama would.
Speaker 3: Never be president.
Speaker 2: Hillary one would have been the nominee, and who the
Speaker 2: hell knows we're gonna got freaking John mccainis break.
Speaker 3: Can you imagine that if America wouldn't.
Speaker 2: Even exist, We've been a nuclear wasteland something like that,
Speaker 2: it ever happened.
Speaker 1: So let me ask you this, Sager, what do you
Speaker 1: think how do you think the media handles it? If
Speaker 1: if Dean Phillips actually beats Joe Biden in New Hampshire,
Speaker 1: they have to cover I mean I feel that way too,
Speaker 1: like they may want to do the Blackount whatever, But
Speaker 1: you can't just one hundred percent ignore. They may doubt,
Speaker 1: they will definitely doubt. They will give you all the
Speaker 1: context in the world for why this doesn't count. Joe
Speaker 1: Biden wasn't even competing, they didn't even spend any money there,
Speaker 1: blah blah blah. But I don't think that they can
Speaker 1: avoid just completely pretending like it didn't open.
Speaker 2: It looks like our I mean, everybody want to pretend
Speaker 2: you didn't exist. And they got, you know, some twenty
Speaker 2: six percent or whatever in a national poll, knock, all right,
Speaker 2: and we gotta do something on this. Even he gets
Speaker 2: to go on Fox News in all these other places,
Speaker 2: and what did he did in an interview with ABC? Yes,
Speaker 2: they edited it, they you know, sens or whatever, but
Speaker 2: the point is they still acknowledge that he was real.
Speaker 2: I think the same is going to happen with Dean
Speaker 2: if he wins. But if he loses, which probably looks
Speaker 2: most likely, yeah, well then it's gonna be a problem.
Speaker 2: But I still think if he does crack twenty five,
Speaker 2: you still got.
Speaker 3: To interview the man. You have to interview the man.
Speaker 2: You have to give him like something, because twenty five
Speaker 2: percent is a non insignificant amount of people who came
Speaker 2: to the ballot box and are actually Democrats. You can
Speaker 2: downplay it all you want, low turnout, et cetera, but
Speaker 2: you know you have to at least acknowledge his presence.
Speaker 3: We'll see, I mean, to his benefit.
Speaker 2: Right now, he's got a lot of these vcs you know,
Speaker 2: currently backing him. He's got the All In podcast Jason
Speaker 2: had Jason Calcanis, he did a Twitter spaces with Elon
Speaker 2: Musk and with Bill Ackman and with Dean Philip.
Speaker 3: Bill Ackman actually gave Dean Phillips a million dollars and
Speaker 3: then most ever off of it.
Speaker 2: That's a whole other conversation, but it's very impressionable. It
Speaker 2: is not as if you know, he doesn't have powerful
Speaker 2: people behind him ready to help if he's able to capitalize.
Speaker 2: The only question is if you know if that if
Speaker 2: that even materializes as possible, which I don't know it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, nobody knows.
Speaker 1: Well, it'll be interesting.
Speaker 2: At the same time, I wanted to take a look
Speaker 2: at the US economy, how exactly are things going not
Speaker 2: just for you, but how is it going to affect
Speaker 2: the overall election? So we have a lot of weird indicators.
Speaker 2: You could look at things a couple of different ways.
Speaker 2: First and foremost is probably this, let's put this up there.
Speaker 2: Inflation is going to be so massively determinative in the
Speaker 2: election and how people feel about where things are going.
Speaker 2: As you guys can see from the chart in front
Speaker 2: of you, technical the CPI inflation, which peaked at over
Speaker 2: nine percent and mid twenty twenty two seems to be down,
Speaker 2: but it is down to what somewhere around three point
Speaker 2: five or so percent. And I think the big question though,
Speaker 2: is that even though it may be down to three
Speaker 2: or four percent depending on the month and things ticking
Speaker 2: up in December, it's still a hell of a lot
Speaker 2: higher even in the monthly and or annual rate than
Speaker 2: where it was back in twenty twenty. We've had over
Speaker 2: twenty percent inflation or so that consumers have experienced in
Speaker 2: a very very short period of time, which is part
Speaker 2: of what is affecting the overall shock. At the same time, though,
Speaker 2: if you look at Americans pocketbooks, despite the fact that
Speaker 2: inflation is high, we do seem to be in a
Speaker 2: weird conundrum.
Speaker 3: Let's put this up there.
Speaker 2: This actually just came out a new survey which is
Speaker 2: called the Axios vibes Pole, which I love.
Speaker 3: Fines Now I don't know, I actually like it kind
Speaker 3: of nails it.
Speaker 2: It says Americans are actually pretty happy with their finances.
Speaker 2: So this is despite the fact that consumer sentiment is
Speaker 2: very weak. People in general are unhappy with the overall economy.
Speaker 2: But then if you ask them how do you feel
Speaker 2: about their overall prospects, They're like, yeah, I actually feel
Speaker 2: good about it. They say sixty three percent rate their
Speaker 2: current financial situation is being good. Nineteen percent actually say
Speaker 2: quote it's very good. Neither number is very low. They're
Speaker 2: actually in line with the average result right now for
Speaker 2: the last twenty times at Harris Harvard. Harris has asked
Speaker 2: this poll and nationally representative of thousands of people. They
Speaker 2: say sixty six percent actually think twenty twenty four is
Speaker 2: going to be better than twenty twenty three, and eighty
Speaker 2: five percent say that they will change our financial personal
Speaker 2: situation for the better. So Gristal, I mean you can
Speaker 2: put those two things together. I'm not quite sure I
Speaker 2: could see it. Like I said, a lot of different ways.
Speaker 2: We've got the inflation which is ticking up. People are
Speaker 2: still pissed off about the grocery store about gas, about
Speaker 2: the fact that they're spending more on personal household goods
Speaker 2: than they used to, but then in their personal lives
Speaker 2: they seem to be kind of happy. I don't really
Speaker 2: know what to do with that, but it would make
Speaker 2: it makes it so that the question that the economy
Speaker 2: is on one hundred percent going to be bad for
Speaker 2: Joe Biden. It doesn't, you know, the data doesn't bear
Speaker 2: that out to make it a foregone conclusion. There's enough
Speaker 2: like sticky and noise stuff within there. It actually is
Speaker 2: more up in the air than I would have expected.
Speaker 1: Especially when you consider that. I think the vibes were probably,
Speaker 1: you know, judging by people's self reported sense of the
Speaker 1: economy and how they were feeling, and also the real
Speaker 1: numbers about inflation, they were worse around the midterms, and
Speaker 1: we really thought, and a lot of analysts really thought
Speaker 1: that was going to be the determining factor for people
Speaker 1: casting ballots, and it wasn't. So I think there's two questions.
Speaker 1: Number one is how are people actually feeling in their
Speaker 1: lives on a micro sense, like day to day, because
Speaker 1: there's you know, do I feel like I can pay
Speaker 1: the bills today and I'm okay today? And do I
Speaker 1: feel a sense of comfort about the future or do
Speaker 1: I feel a lot of precarity and a lot of
Speaker 1: fear for the future, because I suspect that's a lot
Speaker 1: of what's going on and why we get these like
Speaker 1: counter indications of how people are actually doing. And then
Speaker 1: you also have the question of is it still the
Speaker 1: economy stupid when it comes to politics? And you know,
Speaker 1: as someone with sort of like democratic socialist leanings, it
Speaker 1: looks a lot at class and material analysis. I'm not
Speaker 1: sure that that's the case in American politics as much
Speaker 1: as it used to be. And the reason is because
Speaker 1: no one has any confidence that any of these politicians
Speaker 1: are going to do anything for them. So it's like,
Speaker 1: why vote on material interests when the only thing I
Speaker 1: really expect to get out of them is to, like,
Speaker 1: you know, signal on whatever cultural fights that I care
Speaker 1: most about. And so that's the way that I'm going
Speaker 1: to think about politics, and that's the way I'm going
Speaker 1: to cast by ballot. I think that's increasingly the case
Speaker 1: in American politics. And you can see that in the
Speaker 1: fact that there's this is something that Matt carp has
Speaker 1: tracked really closely. There isn't really a class realignment. If
Speaker 1: you look, working class voters are almost split fifty to
Speaker 1: fifty between the two parties. There's a class de alignment
Speaker 1: in American politics where perhaps the economy, which should be
Speaker 1: the center of a lot of concerns and traditionally is
Speaker 1: the center of a lot of concerns in terms of
Speaker 1: translating into voting preferences, just isn't the king that it
Speaker 1: used to be.
Speaker 3: It's not the king that it used to be.
Speaker 2: Twenty twenty two was the real one where you know,
Speaker 2: abortion activated so many voters and with such passion willing
Speaker 2: to overripe the interest. On top of that, you had
Speaker 2: Trump like cult of personality issues both ways that stemmed
Speaker 2: and had their issue if we take you know, just
Speaker 2: to look though, I think what we could say this
Speaker 2: it is determinative in some respects, but it's not, you know,
Speaker 2: as predictive as it once was. It used to be
Speaker 2: that you know, if there was a bad, bad economy,
Speaker 2: there was just no question about what the economic wins are.
Speaker 2: So on that front, Biden has to hope for better
Speaker 2: economy if he wants to continue these fights on stop
Speaker 2: the steel, abortion and all of that. And look, as
Speaker 2: I said too, there's some leading indicators go in Biden's way.
Speaker 3: Let's put this up there.
Speaker 2: The US consumer actually propelled the economy forward in twenty
Speaker 2: twenty three. This is from the Wall Street Journal. That
Speaker 2: actually just happened yesterday. They say how American shoppers silenced doubters.
Speaker 2: The Commerce Department said retails retail rose actually by point
Speaker 2: six percent in December, putting them five point six percent
Speaker 2: higher than a year earlier, way stronger than a lot
Speaker 2: of economists had predicted. Previously. They had predicted not only recession,
Speaker 2: which technically we were in a recession, but whatever. The
Speaker 2: whole point is, like are people spending money or not?
Speaker 2: And that on the consumer question, it seemed that consumer sentiment,
Speaker 2: while it remained low in terms of satisfaction, consumer spending
Speaker 2: remained high and high enough that actually we saw a
Speaker 2: record number for the S and P five hundred at
Speaker 2: the end of twenty twenty three. And you put together
Speaker 2: with that a couple of other things, like, well, can
Speaker 2: we expect rate cuts? We can expect a rate cut
Speaker 2: to come sometime. That means that let's say rates drop
Speaker 2: to four five, four point five or so percent. There's
Speaker 2: two and a half years of locked up capital people
Speaker 2: who are ready to go. I was just reading this
Speaker 2: morning from the Journal there's some eight trillion dollars of
Speaker 2: consumer and institutional money in money market funds because they're
Speaker 2: paying such high interest rates. Well, if you have an
Speaker 2: interest rate cut, then the prospect of actually spending that
Speaker 2: you know, that cash, some eight trillion bucks, either in
Speaker 2: housing or investing in business, whatever, something that you think
Speaker 2: is going to get a better return than when you're
Speaker 2: currently at basically completely safe in a money market. You
Speaker 2: could see that. Polling wise too, things are all over
Speaker 2: the place. So we have this, let's put it up there,
Speaker 2: just the latest you gov poll. This is the first
Speaker 2: one we've actually seen in a while which shows Biden
Speaker 2: actually beating Trump. It says Biden at forty percent, Trump
Speaker 2: at thirty eight. This isn't the national and two percent
Speaker 2: is right around where you need to be if you
Speaker 2: actually want to pull off an electoral college victory for
Speaker 2: the Democrats. If you add in rfk Junior there, it's
Speaker 2: Biden thirty four, Trump thirty three, Kennedy seventeen. Interesting to
Speaker 2: see that Kennedy actually appears to be pulling a decent amount,
Speaker 2: you know, from both sides quite equally, seven percent from
Speaker 2: Trump and six percent from Biden. This is, you know,
Speaker 2: in this poll, but you know, relatively kind of consistent.
Speaker 2: But you have to also remember that this is an
Speaker 2: electoral college. And if we look at the electoral college
Speaker 2: and we see some of the must win states or
Speaker 2: the ones that if Biden wants to recreate his win
Speaker 2: from last time, things aren't nearly looking as good. So
Speaker 2: let's put this up there. You know, we have Georgia here,
Speaker 2: for example, in the state of Georgia, Trump is leading
Speaker 2: Biden by some you know, forty five to thirty seven percent.
Speaker 2: It said that twenty percent of candidate of Georgians critically though,
Speaker 2: we're not yet ready to support either candidate as things
Speaker 2: are shifting in that direction. So with a large number
Speaker 2: of undecided voters, guests shows us a couple of things.
Speaker 2: Trump may be leading right now, but he still very
Speaker 2: much could you know, piss enough Georgians off that they
Speaker 2: would come out and vote for them, saving Biden. Biden
Speaker 2: did barely win the election last time, but the special
Speaker 2: elections and Georgia politics since then have definitely trended in
Speaker 2: a non Trump direction. If you zoom that out, it's
Speaker 2: just funny because I really could make the case either way.
Speaker 2: I can easily sit here and make the case for Biden.
Speaker 2: I can easily sit here and make the case for Trump,
Speaker 2: Which just makes me convince that it's not only unknown,
Speaker 2: but it's a lot closer than I think either side
Speaker 2: wants it to be.
Speaker 1: Not to mention that just the chaos factor of not
Speaker 1: knowing what's going to happens between now an election day,
Speaker 1: like we had no idea October seventh was going to happen.
Speaker 1: We had no idea. You know, the way that Israel
Speaker 1: respond and this just absolutely brutal fashion, the way that
Speaker 1: would become a real center of gravity, especially in politics
Speaker 1: on the Democratic side, where the Democratic basis very much
Speaker 1: at odds with Joe Biden and young voters disgusted with
Speaker 1: his response there. But we did have another election result.
Speaker 1: You know, this is where I was because I always
Speaker 1: look at these polls. You have a Georgia Poem'm like,
Speaker 1: oh my god, Joe Biden is completely toast, like this
Speaker 1: old man who can't formulate a sentence that is like,
Speaker 1: you know, lost any sort of potential moral high ground
Speaker 1: that he may have had at one time. How could
Speaker 1: he possibly beat anyone, let alone Donald Trump, who's a
Speaker 1: very skilled charismatic performer. And then I see a result
Speaker 1: like this out of Florida where Democrats just flipped a
Speaker 1: Florida State House seat in a special election. It was
Speaker 1: a seat that Now, listen, this this cuts both ways, okay,
Speaker 1: because on the one hand, Joe Biden did win this
Speaker 1: seat by five points. On the other hand, Ron DeSantis
Speaker 1: had won the seat by twelve points. So I guess
Speaker 1: you can say it's kind of a swing districts and
Speaker 1: Democrats just flipped it in spite of the fact that
Speaker 1: I was looking at some of the online analysis there
Speaker 1: was not a strong Democratic registered Democrat turnout so early
Speaker 1: in the day, all the Democratic like polling analysts and
Speaker 1: data gurus were freaking out like all Republicans. Definitely just
Speaker 1: won the seat. But when the results came in, I
Speaker 1: guess because of strong independent performance showing up for the Democrats,
Speaker 1: they were able to pull it off. And you know,
Speaker 1: this is consistent with the trend that we have seen
Speaker 1: since the midterms of Democrats outperforming in almost every special
Speaker 1: election that's occurred. So in the politics of it, I
Speaker 1: do think, you know, I could I'm like you Sagar.
Speaker 1: It depends on the day and what data point I'm
Speaker 1: looking at. I can see it happening either direction. Just
Speaker 1: to go back quickly to the economy and trying to
Speaker 1: like sort through how people are feeling, like, I want
Speaker 1: to be really clear, I think the macro picture for
Speaker 1: Americans in this economy is incredibly dire. Prices have gone
Speaker 1: up a lot, wages have not gone up a lot.
Speaker 1: You have massive inequality continuing and becoming, you know, further exacerbated.
Speaker 1: You have critically the building blocks of middle class life,
Speaker 1: the things that make people feel like I'm going to
Speaker 1: be okay for the future, and you know what, my
Speaker 1: kids are probably going to be okay for the future.
Speaker 1: We're talking housing, healthcare, and education, all three wildly insanely
Speaker 1: unaffordable and have been skyrocketing in price for years. The
Speaker 1: things that previous generations were able to accomplish, the milestones
Speaker 1: they were able to achieve at earlier points in their life.
Speaker 1: Millennials and now Gen Z are way behind and being
Speaker 1: able to achieve those milestones. In the big picture, America
Speaker 1: is going backwards in terms of like basic levels of
Speaker 1: economic achievement, prosperity, and lack of procarity, which I think
Speaker 1: is a really important term. So I don't want a
Speaker 1: ready to think that I'm saying, oh, actually, the economy
Speaker 1: is great and that's why Joe Biden's going to get
Speaker 1: re elected. I don't think that is accurate at all.
Speaker 1: I just think that there is so much hopelessness around
Speaker 1: any of these politicians really delivering that people are evaluating
Speaker 1: their choices in the election through a different lens than
Speaker 1: perhaps they did in the past.
Speaker 3: Very possible.
Speaker 2: Like you said, I mean, maybe've they've given up. I
Speaker 2: agree completely. I mean, nobody should mistake this as us
Speaker 2: being like, yeah, the economy's great. No, structurally there's massive problems.
Speaker 2: People are very aware of them. Things that you're swimming
Speaker 2: against the tide in many respects, you know, whenever you're younger,
Speaker 2: and the deck is stacked in various different ways, regardless
Speaker 2: whether you're college educated or non college educated.
Speaker 3: As we continue to like look for.
Speaker 2: That, but as you said, people are also short term
Speaker 2: creatures in the way that they think and they evaluate,
Speaker 2: and as at twenty twenty two really did show us
Speaker 2: though that you can be materially really suffering and you
Speaker 2: will still vote sometimes in a different direction if you
Speaker 2: don't agree with another party.
Speaker 3: That's a real X factor that comes in here.
Speaker 2: So you know, the whole point of this is just
Speaker 2: to show you and prepare, since the Republican primary is
Speaker 2: effectively over now at this point, to just say, like, okay,
Speaker 2: what is actually going to impact this election? And we
Speaker 2: want to give everybody, as you know, round of a
Speaker 2: picture as we can to try and make sense of things,
Speaker 2: because twenty twenty two definitely caught me by surprise. You know,
Speaker 2: I think it did certainly a lot of people. Let's
Speaker 2: move on to China. This is a story that we've
Speaker 2: been wanting saving for quite some time. Obviously we had
Speaker 2: domestic politics and our own elections to kind of think about,
Speaker 2: but this could end up being one of the most
Speaker 2: consequential elections of this year whenever we look back ten
Speaker 2: twenty years from now.
Speaker 3: Let's go and put this up there on the screen.
Speaker 2: There was a major election in Taiwan between a couple
Speaker 2: of parties. He had the KMT and you had the DPP.
Speaker 2: The DPP kind of being the party that the Chinese
Speaker 2: Foreign Ministry and the Chinese population and government was warning
Speaker 2: the Taiwanese you should not vote for them because they
Speaker 2: are not, as I wouldn't say, under our control, but
Speaker 2: it's more so that they don't They do not favor
Speaker 2: having as much of a relationship with Beijing on Beijing's term.
Speaker 2: This new leader, I'm not going to try and say
Speaker 2: their name, but the party that China did not want
Speaker 2: to win did end up winning the election actually pretty decisively,
Speaker 2: and their new leader says that he is going to
Speaker 2: quote stick to the status quo. But as the Wall
Speaker 2: Street Journal says here, his past is what makes us nervous.
Speaker 2: So he's previously the mayor of Tainan, so he wanted
Speaker 2: to quote move a section of railway underground. Residents for
Speaker 2: whose homes would have been demolished, blocked bulldozers with their
Speaker 2: bodies and accused them of selling them out to property developers.
Speaker 2: Opponents apparently called him a dictator. To quote, he was
Speaker 2: undeterred selling them that this was crucial for the future.
Speaker 2: The reason that anecdote matters is that his quote resolved
Speaker 2: or stubbornness as his critics call it, has now taken
Speaker 2: on outside significance after he emerged victorious with some forty
Speaker 2: percent of the vote. So the reason why is that
Speaker 2: currently the current ascent of this man who is currently
Speaker 2: serving as the vice president to the top job. Is
Speaker 2: what makes Americans nervous because they see him is that
Speaker 2: he is more likely to provoke Beijing with quote envelope
Speaker 2: pushing rhetoric and draw the US into a dangerous confrontation.
Speaker 2: Beijing obviously also doesn't like him because he has openly been,
Speaker 2: you know, kind of spiteful of Beijing.
Speaker 3: He's kind of rallied the Taiwan.
Speaker 2: He's populous as independent from Beijing's extension of foreign policy.
Speaker 2: And then the issue too is that, you know, our
Speaker 2: Taiwan policy is very complicated because it's one of those
Speaker 2: where it doesn't make any actual sense unless you like
Speaker 2: have to go back to the beginning where they call
Speaker 2: themselves the Republic of China, but then we recognize them
Speaker 2: as China at the UN until we have the Opening
Speaker 2: of China, and then we no longer recognize them as China.
Speaker 2: So passed the Taiwan Relations Act, which says that we
Speaker 2: have relations with Taiwan, but we don't recognize Taiwan as
Speaker 2: its own country, and yet all of our diplomatic ships
Speaker 2: with Taiwan treat them as their own country. We have
Speaker 2: visa relations and all that. In terms of our defense,
Speaker 2: we have the strategic ambiguity posture as spelled out in
Speaker 2: the Taiwan Relations Act, where we do not support a
Speaker 2: change to the status quo, and all that means that
Speaker 2: we don't support Beijing taking over Taiwan, but we also
Speaker 2: don't support Taiwani's independence. This was reiterated by President Biden
Speaker 2: in reaction to the election results. And the only reason
Speaker 2: that we're spending even a lot of time and so
Speaker 2: much on this on Taiwan twenty four million people, is
Speaker 2: that they are one of the largest trading partners of
Speaker 2: the United States. They make some ninety four percent of
Speaker 2: the world's semiconductors that are in the super advanced nature.
Speaker 2: And if there was to be any conflict over Taiwan
Speaker 2: and a disruption to that, it would dramatically change the
Speaker 2: global supply chain and almost certainly would ignite into a
Speaker 2: regional war and possibly even a global global conflict ration.
Speaker 2: So this makes Beijing, a Beijing armed invasion of Taiwan
Speaker 2: much more likely. That doesn't mean that it's going to happen,
Speaker 2: but you have a Xijingping who is spelled out in
Speaker 2: multiple party congresses and made it you know kind of
Speaker 2: a picture of national pride for the Communist Party that
Speaker 2: Taiwan reunification reunification as they call it, is something that
Speaker 2: is very important to the party, specifically as they come
Speaker 2: after the one hundred year anniversary of the Communist Party
Speaker 2: in China and as a way to try and bolster
Speaker 2: kind of sagging Chinese nationalistic pride, which we're about to
Speaker 2: get to it a little bit.
Speaker 3: I'm curious for reaction.
Speaker 1: Yeah, So, I mean, the bottom line here is while
Speaker 1: the US may frame our concern over Taiwan about the
Speaker 1: international rules based order and democracy and sovereignty, blah blah blah,
Speaker 1: like I think if anyone believes that at this point,
Speaker 1: you have to have your head examine, because it is
Speaker 1: very clear we don't care about any of those things.
Speaker 1: What we care about is what you said, ninety percent
Speaker 1: of the most advanced semiconductors are made in Taiwan. Now,
Speaker 1: why we allowed that to happen is a whole other story, right,
Speaker 1: and basically points to the utter failure of neoliberalism, where
Speaker 1: it was just about, oh, where's it cheapest to produce
Speaker 1: and where can people make the most profits? And it's
Speaker 1: a global economy and the theory of that case, in part,
Speaker 1: was that this was also going to keep us safer,
Speaker 1: this was going to integrate the world, this was going
Speaker 1: to allow peace to prevail. Instead, in this instance, you
Speaker 1: can see very very easily how it could push our
Speaker 1: you know, leaders who are clearly not afraid of starting
Speaker 1: wars in any place in the world, into a direct
Speaker 1: conflict with China, which no regular person in the United
Speaker 1: States of America actually wants. So this is all about
Speaker 1: those semiconductors. I mean, I'm over simplifying a little bit,
Speaker 1: but that's basically the bottom line. That's why the Biden
Speaker 1: administration pushed through this Chips Act to try to spin
Speaker 1: up semiconductor production here in the United States so we
Speaker 1: would have at least some domestic production. That takes a
Speaker 1: long time, that's a very uncertain future. We are nowhere
Speaker 1: near for the far enough along that path to feel
Speaker 1: comfortable about where we are at this point. And then
Speaker 1: at the same time, soager you've got to have China
Speaker 1: looking at the way that we are basically fools getting
Speaker 1: humiliated in every corner of the globe, and the way
Speaker 1: that we are completely overstretched and saying, hey, they don't
Speaker 1: look like they've got a real strong hand to play
Speaker 1: right now, So maybe now's the time to act. How
Speaker 1: much have we overextended ourselves in Ukraine? Now we're shipping
Speaker 1: all this stuff to Israel and bypassing Congress, and you know,
Speaker 1: our foolish leaders and presidential candidates and contenders and top
Speaker 1: you know, Biden and Trump and everybody else. So oh,
Speaker 1: of course we could afford wars wherever we want. No problem,
Speaker 1: it's no big deal. It's complete and utter insanity. I
Speaker 1: have zero confidence that any of these psychopaths actually want
Speaker 1: to avoid any sort of conflict. They seem to be
Speaker 1: totally happy to risk World War IIE and global conflagrations
Speaker 1: in every corner of the world. So, yes, this should
Speaker 1: make you extraordinarily nervous when you see these potential tensions
Speaker 1: ticking up.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I'll put it this way.
Speaker 2: Let's put this up there just again to bolster some
Speaker 2: of this, just to talk about how people across the
Speaker 2: globe are looking at this from Politico EU actually and
Speaker 2: say the China skeptic wins Taiwan's presidency.
Speaker 3: In a snub to Beijing.
Speaker 2: What they basically show is that this is going to
Speaker 2: lead to a series of kind of diplomatic interesting standoffs.
Speaker 2: The very first one actually just happened a couple of
Speaker 2: days ago, and I bear with me.
Speaker 3: Please, let's put this next one up there.
Speaker 2: The Pacific island nation of Nauru has severed ties with
Speaker 2: Taiwan in favor of China. Okay, why should we care?
Speaker 2: Most people don't even know that naw Ru is a nation,
Speaker 2: let alone should we care about their relations with Taiwan. Well,
Speaker 2: the reason that they did it is because Nauru is
Speaker 2: undersignificant ConTroll by Beijing, and they have major economic ties,
Speaker 2: and they are all They're a power in the Pacific,
Speaker 2: not necessarily a big power. But what the Chinese are
Speaker 2: trying to do here is to set up a diplomatic
Speaker 2: case such that breaking off relations with Taiwan leads to
Speaker 2: either Chinese bases or mutual defense agreements, or such that
Speaker 2: the Chinese navy can move through.
Speaker 3: And it's all about a chessboard, you know.
Speaker 2: The way that they think about these things is decades
Speaker 2: and how they would want to make a move, And
Speaker 2: so what do you want to do? I want to
Speaker 2: make sure that all the other people in the region
Speaker 2: no longer are either invested in Taiwan, have any relationship
Speaker 2: with Taiwan and don't care about Taiwan or the very
Speaker 2: least have decided to decide with Beijing and to look
Speaker 2: the other way. This is a whole part of why
Speaker 2: the South China Sea conflict is now mattered since the
Speaker 2: mid two thousands and why they've been moving in that direction.
Speaker 3: Now.
Speaker 2: As you said, this has nothing to do with democracy,
Speaker 2: and I would never make a case here about that,
Speaker 2: because I mean, let's be honest, this is about our
Speaker 2: eighth largest trading partner and probably the most critical trade
Speaker 2: the most critical piece of land in the entire world.
Speaker 2: Because as you said, you can have the Chips Act,
Speaker 2: that's great, it takes five years from breaking ground until
Speaker 2: you can even begin to have a chip roll off
Speaker 2: of a fab based upon people I've spoken to in
Speaker 2: the US, because of regulation and because of lack of
Speaker 2: no how and all that, it's probably a decade. So
Speaker 2: that means that for the next decade we're an incredibly
Speaker 2: precarious situation. Then you look at America and if I
Speaker 2: have the Chinese dispassionately, and I'd be like, these idiots
Speaker 2: are bogged down in Ukraine. These idiots, they don't have
Speaker 2: enough artillery to supply a third world nation in Eastern
Speaker 2: Europe let alone themselves, and.
Speaker 3: Then they've got all this Israel stuff going on.
Speaker 2: They got two carriers over there, like they're getting stumped
Speaker 2: by the hoo theyes in terms of their global trade.
Speaker 2: I mean, if you guys think of Red Sea matters
Speaker 2: to America, take a look at some of the global
Speaker 2: traffic through the Straits of Malacca, the Taiwan Straight and
Speaker 2: through the South China Sea.
Speaker 3: This is ten fifteen times more important.
Speaker 2: I'm just talking about shipping, and not even talking about
Speaker 2: the semiconductors. This would literally would reroute the entire globe
Speaker 2: in terms of how things would work. To mention that
Speaker 2: China's our third largest trading partner, Taiwan is number eight,
Speaker 2: the amount of economic damage and all that that would
Speaker 2: suffer as a result of this is just incalculable. My
Speaker 2: only point is that this level of precarity and some
Speaker 2: sort of war in East Asia would be catastrophic. And
Speaker 2: what's even more interesting to me is I sent this
Speaker 2: actually I'm not sure if you got a chance to
Speaker 2: read it, is that Kim Jong un and North Korea
Speaker 2: also appears to be preparing for something happening in East Asia.
Speaker 2: They're changing their constitution to say that they're basically they're
Speaker 2: rechanging it so that currently their declared enemy as America,
Speaker 2: they're changing it to South Korea. They actually have a
Speaker 2: huge influx of dollars into the North Korean economy right
Speaker 2: now because the Russians are buying so many weapons from them.
Speaker 2: They appear, according to some military analysts and others, to
Speaker 2: be preparing for some sort of war in the region.
Speaker 2: And the reason why that matters is that if there
Speaker 2: was some sort of conflict with Taiwan. South Korea is
Speaker 2: one of the world's largest and most advanced militaries, and
Speaker 2: they make a lot of weapons weapons manufacturer for the
Speaker 2: United States, it could be possible that he's gotten either
Speaker 2: or not or some sort of edge from Beijing, which
Speaker 2: is their main partner. They're like, hey, you need to
Speaker 2: keep South Korea or whatever busy. They also can, you know,
Speaker 2: cause major problems for Japan. Remember too, you know, we
Speaker 2: are the characters of security for Japan and for South Korea,
Speaker 2: which are also in that top ten trading partner list.
Speaker 2: So everything I'm listening here is like genuinely really terrifying.
Speaker 2: I think from an overall US perspective, and I think
Speaker 2: you're totally right, which is that America is distracted at home,
Speaker 2: America is overstretched abroad, and I mean it's a talking point,
Speaker 2: but it's also actually true. And then in terms of
Speaker 2: our manufacturing base, I mean, they're not stupid. We lived
Speaker 2: through COVID, which is their fault, and they still are
Speaker 2: the ones who sold us our masks at all of
Speaker 2: the medicines and everything, it all came straight from them.
Speaker 2: So they even know and see our critical manufacturing deficit
Speaker 2: and it's not you know, in nine Team thirty nine
Speaker 2: and through Night forty one, there was a major debate
Speaker 2: in the Japanese war cabinet and they were like, well,
Speaker 2: if we attack them, can they really attack us?
Speaker 3: And same with Hitler, you know the Nazis regime.
Speaker 2: They wrote up an internal report, they gave it to
Speaker 2: Hitler and they're like, here's what we estimate what would
Speaker 2: happen if America came into the war, and he laughed
Speaker 2: at them.
Speaker 3: He said, there's no way they can do this.
Speaker 2: It ended up actually dramatically understating what US manufacturing capacity is.
Speaker 2: This time around, they've been able to battle test that more.
Speaker 2: You can look Crystal at the Ukraine situation, at the
Speaker 2: fact that there's a fire at a plant that makes artillery.
Speaker 2: We don't have any more artillery. We make one hundred
Speaker 2: thousand rounds in a month. We used to be able
Speaker 2: to make two million in a year. I mean, just
Speaker 2: look at the scale of that. It was only thirty
Speaker 2: years ago. You look at the way that we have cars.
Speaker 2: I mean, do you know you had semiconductors shut down
Speaker 2: all new cars in America? And I've talked about here
Speaker 2: with the prospects all that stuff would look like if
Speaker 2: there was some some sort of conflagration, we could go
Speaker 2: back to rationing systems. They could take our laptops, our
Speaker 2: camera equipment away from us and dig all the chips
Speaker 2: out of this, just like the Russians have done. That's
Speaker 2: how Dyer thinks a goat and not that far you know,
Speaker 2: for the time line. So anyway, we're preparing, we're preparing
Speaker 2: people just to say, the Taiwanese people have made.
Speaker 3: Their choice, as is their right.
Speaker 2: I support their right to do so, but you know,
Speaker 2: the results, the results of that election could certainly have big,
Speaker 2: big impacts on us well.
Speaker 1: And the last thing I'll say on this particular topic is.
Speaker 1: You know, I don't think that the US is impotent
Speaker 1: with regards to Israel's government, given all the aid we
Speaker 1: send them and all that we do diplomatically to provide
Speaker 1: cover for them. However, the Biden administration has decided to
Speaker 1: adopt this posture of impotence, of feigned impotence on the
Speaker 1: global stage. Sure of like, sure we shift them all
Speaker 1: this money, but they just won't listen to us. We're trying,
Speaker 1: et cetera, like we really want them to do things differently,
Speaker 1: but they just won't. So they are publicly declaring to
Speaker 1: the world that they can't. We can't even influence like
Speaker 1: this country that was like our client state that we
Speaker 1: fund to the tune of tens of billions of dollars
Speaker 1: every freaking year. So how does that look also on
Speaker 1: the global state. And by the way, like bottom line is,
Speaker 1: these are delicate, complicated situations. The failures and the vulnerabilities
Speaker 1: were created over successive administrations, both bipartisan, Democrat and Republican.
Speaker 1: But we are led by moronic psychopaths and I have
Speaker 1: zero confidence in their ability to get us through this
Speaker 1: in any sort of a peaceful, non catastrophic manner. So
Speaker 1: that's the reason that you should feel terrified. You know,
Speaker 1: you can't have confidence in these people when you see
Speaker 1: the way that they operate around the globe.
Speaker 2: The Israel situation is very analogous because obviously we gave
Speaker 2: a lot of money to Taiwan. Yeah, they only spend
Speaker 2: two point six percent of their GDP on national defense.
Speaker 2: They basically openly have said they're like, look, if we
Speaker 2: get into a problem, it's going to be America that's
Speaker 2: going to save us. I mean, I had a lot
Speaker 2: of issues with that, and because it's like, hey, if
Speaker 2: you think you're imminiately going to get invaded and you're you're,
Speaker 2: you know, a Western style, developed, high tech democracy, you
Speaker 2: should spend a lot more money on West but to
Speaker 2: actually do something for yourself. But we never pressure them
Speaker 2: to do it. That's the Biden doctrine. He's like, yeah,
Speaker 2: don't worry, we'll take care of it. But then you know,
Speaker 2: we're also sending some stuff that would be useful to
Speaker 2: Taiwan to Ukraine.
Speaker 3: It's like we have major trade offs.
Speaker 2: As you said, like there's the level of seriousness that
Speaker 2: would you would need to approach this conflict and get
Speaker 2: out properly. On the other side is one of confidence
Speaker 2: that we have not seen in this country in literally decades.
Speaker 1: We are run by people who think it's a good
Speaker 1: idea to quote escalate to de escalate, who think that
Speaker 1: you can bomb the Huthies who have been bombed now
Speaker 1: for years and have not submitted, and that this is
Speaker 1: going to improve the situation on the Red Sea instead
Speaker 1: of just turning it into a war zone and further
Speaker 1: deterring trade, which was supposedly the whole goal of what
Speaker 1: you're doing here. So, I mean, that's the reason why
Speaker 1: all of these things are so deeply concerning is there
Speaker 1: is just I have zero confidence in our leadership, whether
Speaker 1: it's Biden, whether it's Trump, or anybody else who's a
Speaker 1: potential contender, Nikki Haley right, God forbid, we'd be going
Speaker 1: to war with China tomorrow if it was up to her.
Speaker 1: And Iran, by the way. So that's the reason why
Speaker 1: this is so concerning, is because you can see the
Speaker 1: way that US officials now and over years, every opportunity
Speaker 1: to make the wrong choice, they make the wrong choice.
Speaker 2: Well said, there's a little bit more on China. Just
Speaker 2: to put this up there on the screen. This is
Speaker 2: a point that I know a lot of you been
Speaker 2: interested in Peter Zihon been talking about it for quite
Speaker 2: some time. I do gotta say it was one of
Speaker 2: the first people I ever talked I heard speak about this.
Speaker 2: I didn't really believe it at the time, but he
Speaker 2: was dead on. The Chinese population now has fallen for
Speaker 2: a second straight year, Bert's dropping even after the end
Speaker 2: of the one child policy. The number of deaths in
Speaker 2: China rose by six hundred and ninety thousand to eleven
Speaker 2: point one million, which is more than double the last
Speaker 2: year increase.
Speaker 3: Quote.
Speaker 2: Demographers said that the rise was driven by the aging
Speaker 2: of the population as well as widespread COVID outbreaks from
Speaker 2: December twenty twenty two into February of last year. The
Speaker 2: total population of China at one point four billion, has
Speaker 2: now dropped to second place behind India according to the
Speaker 2: overall un estimate, and the major flashing red signal inside
Speaker 2: Chinese society is the falling birth rate and the long
Speaker 2: term economic societal decline. Chinese economy was built on a
Speaker 2: major increasing consumer like market and sentiment, and if you
Speaker 2: don't have more consumers, then you can't have more of
Speaker 2: a market. The problem that they have is that you
Speaker 2: have major middle class promises and others that were built
Speaker 2: upon demography overall increasing, and now the massive effects the
Speaker 2: tail end of the one child policy, the gender imbalance,
Speaker 2: the economic imbalance, and now their foreign policy plus COVID
Speaker 2: and all of that has made a significant impact to
Speaker 2: the point where this is probably the single biggest thing
Speaker 2: that they are thinking about about how to reverse the
Speaker 2: effects of the one child policy. And just to show you,
Speaker 2: you know, the economic problems that they're facing are one
Speaker 2: and the same with their demography ones.
Speaker 3: Let's put this up there.
Speaker 2: So for example, the overall economy rebounded from three percent
Speaker 2: growth in twenty twenty two, which happened because of zero
Speaker 2: COVID China according to the official number. Remember the official
Speaker 2: number is five point two. But what they say is
Speaker 2: that other economic data shows that there's major weakening demand
Speaker 2: for Chinese products, which long term is a major problem
Speaker 2: for them. On top of that, you have to remember
Speaker 2: property and home prices in China, which we covered a
Speaker 2: little bit during the whole evergrand thing, is a huge
Speaker 2: portion of their overall economy. They are rapidly declining with
Speaker 2: major bankruptcies and corruption investigations that are happening in the
Speaker 2: property sector, making the middle class dream, the Chinese dreams
Speaker 2: so quote unquote that most of the current generation and
Speaker 2: their parents really banked on not nearly as attainable. Corruption
Speaker 2: is still widespread. Then you had zero COVID, which devastated
Speaker 2: a lot of the economy, actually called into question some
Speaker 2: confidence in the government who saw a few protests and
Speaker 2: all of that there, but still incredibly rare. And really
Speaker 2: what we saw is that g at every turn has
Speaker 2: chosen a their authoritarianism over capitalism, which probably good for
Speaker 2: him in the long run, but not necessarily good for
Speaker 2: the economy. And it makes it so that this just
Speaker 2: a link back to Taiwan, which we were talking about earlier. Whenever,
Speaker 2: like nations, there's a common theory that like nations lash
Speaker 2: out and invade when they're on top, that happens sometimes
Speaker 2: kind of like America and the Gulf War.
Speaker 3: We're like, listen, we can do whatever we want, like
Speaker 3: that happens.
Speaker 2: But there's also a very likely story of when you're
Speaker 2: on the downswing, and you know you're on the downswing,
Speaker 2: you want to move when you're as close to where
Speaker 2: you're faltering as supposed when you're at the bottom, and
Speaker 2: it leads to an urgency and you're thinking where you're like, listen,
Speaker 2: our economies declining, our population, all of this, if we're
Speaker 2: going to reunify Taiwan, if we're going to set up
Speaker 2: this nation which they look at themselves as a two
Speaker 2: thousand year old people for eternity and to move on
Speaker 2: forever and have this CCP like cemented in that same
Speaker 2: way that you would look at older Chinese empires.
Speaker 3: Well, we need to do it right now.
Speaker 2: They have a much longer time scale and the way
Speaker 2: they think of their own history and their own role
Speaker 2: in it. And for them, like they've seen this story
Speaker 2: many many times before. They don't want to repeat the
Speaker 2: century of humiliation of the eighteen hundreds, and this could
Speaker 2: be in their head.
Speaker 3: The time when you want to act is now.
Speaker 2: So all of this, you know, actually links back to
Speaker 2: the urgency of the international situation and kind of what
Speaker 2: they want to do to cement their own legacy as
Speaker 2: we look forward.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's right. I mean to overly simplify things. You know,
Speaker 1: the incredible growth story of China has been built on this,
Speaker 1: you know, massive industrialization, you know, building out all this
Speaker 1: factory capacity, building out massively all of this infrastructure to
Speaker 1: the point that it you know, became like some of
Speaker 1: the projects became sort of ridiculous. Then now you can
Speaker 1: go and look at like the number of airports in
Speaker 1: these towns that don't really need airports and things like that.
Speaker 1: So fake villages, right, So that running away has sort
Speaker 1: of run out. And then the next piece was the
Speaker 1: property boom and you know, building out all of this
Speaker 1: residential real estate and not becoming like a real you know,
Speaker 1: part of like Chinese middle class identity, and that there's
Speaker 1: that has sort of run out of runway. And now
Speaker 1: we've covered all these stories about Evergran and this property bust,
Speaker 1: and so you know, the next thing would be, all right, well,
Speaker 1: we're going to move into like the US consumer economy
Speaker 1: mode and focus on services, focus on you know, our
Speaker 1: own domestic economy, buying more crap basically, and they've sort
Speaker 1: of rejected that direction. So I think there is a
Speaker 1: real awareness, both in terms of where they stand economically
Speaker 1: and in terms of where they stand from demography, that
Speaker 1: this could be very much be the peak of their
Speaker 1: you know, potential power and potential influence. So that again
Speaker 1: raises the risk that they may see it as like
Speaker 1: you know, they've made no secret about the fact that
Speaker 1: they want to reunify with Taiwan, that they.
Speaker 3: Made a pledge that they will do it. That is yeah.
Speaker 1: I mean, that's not like, you know, a secret wish.
Speaker 1: That's very much out there in the open and spoken
Speaker 1: publicly all the time. So the question is just a
Speaker 1: matter of timing. And you know, I can't get inside
Speaker 1: their has I have no idea what they're thinking, whether
Speaker 1: they feel like now is the right time or not,
Speaker 1: But there are some indications that it's possible. They look
Speaker 1: at this chessboard and they say, you know what, we
Speaker 1: could do worse than to act right now.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 3: Absolutely.
Speaker 2: I mean, if I think about it from their perspective,
Speaker 2: when's the best time to go? When we're in the
Speaker 2: middle of an election and there's all kinds of craziness
Speaker 2: going on, We're stretched, you know, militarily abroad. We've got
Speaker 2: the Ukraine situation, the Israel situation.
Speaker 3: All of that.
Speaker 2: You've got multiple carriers, you know, in the Middle East,
Speaker 2: you have all of scentcom which is like focusing on international,
Speaker 2: hoothy targets.
Speaker 3: That's exactly whenever.
Speaker 1: You want in a country that's deeply, deeply divided, deeply,
Speaker 1: divided along like very hard partisan lines. So yeah, we'll
Speaker 1: see scary situation