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 2: coverage that is possible. If you like what we're all about,
Speaker 2: it just means the absolute world to have your support.
Speaker 2: But enough with that, let's get to the show. Good morning, everybody,
Speaker 2: Happy Thursday. We have an amazing show for everybody today.
Speaker 2: What do we have, Crystal?
Speaker 1: Indeed we do because soccer is back. Congratulations, my friend.
Speaker 2: Appreciate you still getting used to this wedding ring? I'm
Speaker 2: not so sure.
Speaker 1: Yeah, a little weird? Looks goody weird?
Speaker 2: What do we have?
Speaker 1: Notice? Is there? Very all right? So a lot to
Speaker 1: get to you in the show. Biden gave his long
Speaker 1: awaited I Guess address last night, so we'll give you
Speaker 1: some highlights if you want to call it that, from
Speaker 1: that very brief interesting break that down for you. We
Speaker 1: also have new polls helping us to understand where Kamala
Speaker 1: Harris is in the presidential race visa v. Joe Biden.
Speaker 1: A though I Still it's a little bit early to
Speaker 1: see how all of this is going to settle out,
Speaker 1: but we're going to dig into how she's doing among
Speaker 1: different demographic groups, vis of you, Biden. We're also going
Speaker 1: to take a look at I wanted to specifically get
Speaker 1: saggered away in on this, the Republican attacks against Kamala
Speaker 1: Harris and how those are going. You have the whole
Speaker 1: Dei thing. You had a comment about her being the
Speaker 1: quote original hawk Tua girl. You now have the added
Speaker 1: attack that she is insufficiently pro Israel, this one coming
Speaker 1: from Trump himself and Lindsay Garceta. We'll go through them
Speaker 1: and talk about all of that. We also have the
Speaker 1: latest in terms of her deep steaks. Now that she
Speaker 1: is effectively the presumptive nominee, who is she looking at?
Speaker 1: What are their strengths and weaknesses? Who is most likely
Speaker 1: to make the cut. Yesterday, Baby Net yahoo in town.
Speaker 1: He's actually still in town today. He's meeting with Biden
Speaker 1: and Harris. But yesterday he gave his big address to Congress.
Speaker 1: It was, in my opinion, disgusting. But we'll show you
Speaker 1: some of that as well and the reaction to it.
Speaker 1: And we also are taking a look at the latest
Speaker 1: revelations with regard to the attempted assassination attempt, attempt at
Speaker 1: assassination attempt, the assassination attempt on Trump's life, and what
Speaker 1: we are learning from now the FBI director about the
Speaker 1: stunning security failures. Earlier this week, the Secret Service director
Speaker 1: finally stepped down. It was insane that it even took
Speaker 1: the length of time that it did. So we'll bring
Speaker 1: you all of those details, which just continue, honestly to shock.
Speaker 2: The entire thing is. While it's one of those stories
Speaker 2: that I actually was unable to unglue myself from it.
Speaker 2: When I saw that clip of Rocanna and her and
Speaker 2: she didn't know what happened with the reken director, I couldn't.
Speaker 2: I was like, this is the most insane thing. And
Speaker 2: then more and more of the details just absolutely stunning,
Speaker 2: top to bottom failure.
Speaker 1: The agents needs to be good, wouldn't answer any just
Speaker 1: basically how many agents were there? Won't say why wasn't
Speaker 1: there someone there, won't say how many bullet cases were
Speaker 1: I mean, it's just insane.
Speaker 2: We're getting more detail only from the FBI director, luckily,
Speaker 2: and I'm sure as the months go on, we're gonna
Speaker 2: learn even more about it. Thank you to our our
Speaker 2: premum subscribers. We appreciate you. We are gearing up. We
Speaker 2: are so ready for the DNC. We're gonna be on
Speaker 2: the around exclusive coverage the entire crew there. So sign
Speaker 2: up Breakingpoints dot com. We're gonna have some exciting news
Speaker 2: soon for premium members. But let's go ahead and start.
Speaker 2: As Crystal said, with Joe Biden, he finally broke his silence.
Speaker 2: We hadn't heard from him in quite a long time.
Speaker 2: He issued a letter, he called in. There was a
Speaker 2: lot of speculations to his health condition, etc. He's actually alive.
Speaker 2: What's happening. He's given us proof of life a couple
Speaker 2: of times. We finally appeared on camera to make his
Speaker 2: announcement about why he is not running again. Very brief remarks,
Speaker 2: and you can see his age really shining through. We've
Speaker 2: cut a little bit of that announcement and we're going
Speaker 2: to talk a little bit about what he said. Let's
Speaker 2: take a listen, my fellow Americans.
Speaker 3: I'm speaking of tonight from behind the resolute tesk in
Speaker 3: the Oval Office, in this sacred space, I'm surrounded by
Speaker 3: portraits extraordinary American presidents Thomas Jefferson wrote the immortal words
Speaker 3: that guide this nation. George Washington, who showed us presidents
Speaker 3: are not kings. Abraham Lincoln, who implored us to reject malice,
Speaker 3: Franklin Roosevelt, who inspired us to reject fear. I revere
Speaker 3: this office, but I love my country more. It's been
Speaker 3: the honor of my life to serve as your president.
Speaker 3: But in the defense of democracy, which is at stake,
Speaker 3: I think is more important than any title. I draw
Speaker 3: strength and I find joy in working for the American people.
Speaker 3: But this sacred task of perfecting our union, it's not
Speaker 3: about me. It's about you, your families, your futures. It's
Speaker 3: about we, the people. We can never forget that, and
Speaker 3: I never have. So I've decided the best way forward
Speaker 3: is to pass the torch to a new generation. That's
Speaker 3: the best way to denne our nation. You know, there
Speaker 3: is a time and a place for long years of
Speaker 3: experience in public life. There's also a time and a
Speaker 3: place for new voices, fresh voices, yes, younger voices, and
Speaker 3: that time and places. Now, I'd like to thank our
Speaker 3: great Vice President Kamala Harris. She experienced, she's tough, she's capable.
Speaker 3: She's been an incredible partner to me and the leader
Speaker 3: for our country. Now the choice is up to you,
Speaker 3: the American people. Nowhere else on earth could a kid
Speaker 3: with a stutter from modest beginning to Scranton, Pennsylvania, Claimont,
Speaker 3: Delaware one day sit behind the Resolute desk in the
Speaker 3: Oval Office as President of United States. But here, I
Speaker 3: am that's what's so special about America.
Speaker 2: I mean, this is incredibly stunning, Crystal. I mean, just
Speaker 2: to reflect a little bit back on the history of it,
Speaker 2: I've been thinking a lot about that. The nineteen sixty
Speaker 2: eight parallels are out of control.
Speaker 4: Here.
Speaker 2: We literally have an RFK in the race, a one
Speaker 2: term Democratic president deciding at the last minute not to
Speaker 2: run for re election. He's endorsing his vice president. The
Speaker 2: vice president now has the noose around the next possibly
Speaker 2: running better than the current president would have, but has
Speaker 2: to contend with unpopular foreign wars and the domestic turmoil
Speaker 2: that has been wrought under their presidency. I haven't gotten
Speaker 2: yet a chance to even just consider how historic and
Speaker 2: crazy it actually is. I know that things have been
Speaker 2: moving so quickly for everybody here at the desk, But
Speaker 2: let's take a moment and pause that this is a
Speaker 2: shocking turn of events. Theodore Roosevelt, London B. Johnson, and
Speaker 2: now Joe Biden. You know, the three presidents who meaningfully
Speaker 2: could have run. I guess George Washington too, meaningfully could
Speaker 2: have run for another term, and choosing not to do
Speaker 2: so is a stunning admission, at least in the two
Speaker 2: cases of LBJ. In here, I could not win. I
Speaker 2: am not the best standard bearer. And I know you've
Speaker 2: waited on this too, but I can't tell you how
Speaker 2: annoyed I was reading all this hit. What a stunning
Speaker 2: and heroic There's no heroism in dodging the primary, and
Speaker 2: you know by your own incompetence and arrogance agreeing to
Speaker 2: an early debate, then being forced out by Democratic primary elites,
Speaker 2: not actually Democratic voters, who then you have the anointing
Speaker 2: of your vice president that nobody's actually cast any real
Speaker 2: votes here before you're even going into the convention, So
Speaker 2: it might be as anti democratic as a process as
Speaker 2: it is. I am glad that he's gone. I mean honestly,
Speaker 2: even watching that, I was cringing the entire time. I said,
Speaker 2: this man needs to go today, Like this is an
Speaker 2: urgent national security crisis. Now, he continued throughout it, saying, Oh,
Speaker 2: I still am up for the job. I'm gonna continue
Speaker 2: the world. I'm like, dude, you got to go. Like
Speaker 2: his decline just in the last two months is out
Speaker 2: of control, just truly stunning.
Speaker 1: So, to be honest with you, I felt like a
Speaker 1: sense of relief watching it that I didn't have to
Speaker 1: like hold my breath as much from at least there's
Speaker 1: a short time frame left for this guy to be
Speaker 1: president of the United States. And I suspect that a
Speaker 1: lot of Democrats felt the same way because this was
Speaker 1: a short this was twelve minutes off of teleponpt Like
Speaker 1: this should be a gimme for any replacement level politician
Speaker 1: out there. And still it's tortured. Still, there were times
Speaker 1: where he's struggling to get the words out, struggling to
Speaker 1: read the teleprompter, and so you know, at the same time,
Speaker 1: he's not saying anything about the real reasons he left.
Speaker 1: Number One, that he was absolutely pressured out, dragged, kicking
Speaker 1: and screaming to this decision. It was only when he
Speaker 1: realized that Pelosi, Obama and co. Were not going to relent.
Speaker 1: In her words, we can do this the easy way,
Speaker 1: or we can do this the hard way. That he
Speaker 1: finally gives up the ghost. So he's not acknowledging that.
Speaker 1: He's certainly not acknowledging the fact that his decline became
Speaker 1: so manifestly clear that you had an overwhelming majority of
Speaker 1: Democratic voters who were like, dude, come on, hang it up.
Speaker 1: So none of that is outwardly acknowledged, and yet it
Speaker 1: clearly hangs over this speech, in the quality of his
Speaker 1: voice at this point, in the energy level of the delivery,
Speaker 1: in the inability, even in a short speech like this
Speaker 1: that he clearly, you know, spent days preparing for, to
Speaker 1: deliver it smoothly with any sort of life and vitality,
Speaker 1: even though it went unspoken, those things were all very clear.
Speaker 1: I mean, obviously, this is his attempt to try to
Speaker 1: define his legacy, right, This is his attempt to lean
Speaker 1: into the story of his great selflessness and heroism, which
Speaker 1: is preposterous because if you truly were this self sacrificing
Speaker 1: person who cares first and foremost about defeating Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: even if you, if you accept that frame, he has
Speaker 1: put his party in a very very difficult position in
Speaker 1: order to do that because while we'll get to the polls,
Speaker 1: Kamala Harris already performed better than he is, she is
Speaker 1: still one of the weaker candidates that Democrats could put forward.
Speaker 1: And so not only did you forestall did you completely
Speaker 1: block any sort of a democratic primary process that would
Speaker 1: have enabled Democrats to evaluate their choices to side for
Speaker 1: themselves who would be the strongest candidate to go up
Speaker 1: against Donald Trump. But then you anoint perhaps the second
Speaker 1: weakest candidate to go up against Trump. So, even by
Speaker 1: your own match of like it's all just about preserving
Speaker 1: democracy defeating Donald Trump returned to normalcy, even by that metric,
Speaker 1: you have done so much damage to your own parties
Speaker 1: and your own stated cause. And then, of course, I
Speaker 1: mean the atrocities in Gaza go without saying in terms
Speaker 1: of this being a great moral, compassionate, selfless blah blah blah.
Speaker 1: But you know, even by his own standards, he has
Speaker 1: dealt his party such an incredible blow.
Speaker 2: The party, the blow, the country a blow too. It's
Speaker 2: genuinely dishonest and insane that you were functioning at this
Speaker 2: level that the people around you in betrayal. It is
Speaker 2: a betrayal of everything. I mean and if you continue.
Speaker 2: For people who watch the speech, he said very clearly,
Speaker 2: I believe that I have a legacy that I could
Speaker 2: run for another term. He's still to this day is
Speaker 2: not accepting his own limitations. I mean, the arrogance of
Speaker 2: this man is just so unperilous. Part of the reason
Speaker 2: I really didn't ever believe he would drop out. I
Speaker 2: guess what I didn't factor in was the level of
Speaker 2: effort that Nancy Pelosi is yea and the donors actually
Speaker 2: were willing to exercise. It's also interesting too, because there's
Speaker 2: some differences I think between the Republicans and others where
Speaker 2: the party institutions in the Democratic Party, when they want
Speaker 2: to be are very strong. When keeping Bernie Sanders out,
Speaker 2: they're like, hey, this is not happening period. We will
Speaker 2: rig this thing til the end. Same here anointing Kamala,
Speaker 2: I mean, Crystal, how nuts is it that they didn't
Speaker 2: even have a semblance of an open primary. You basically
Speaker 2: had Kamala and then boom, it was like all these
Speaker 2: members of Congress, Nancy Pelosi came out Obama, a few
Speaker 2: others haven't done so, but so many others were pressured
Speaker 2: into where why is why? Wasn't a Gavin Newsomb or
Speaker 2: a Josh Shapiro or an Andy Basheer or any of
Speaker 2: these folks even allowed to throw their hat in the ring.
Speaker 2: I mean, I personally, if I were the Democrats, I'm
Speaker 2: picking Andy Basheer at Gaffin. I mean, I think both
Speaker 2: those guys could win by a couple of percentage points
Speaker 2: if they wanted to. Kamala. I mean, I'm still putting
Speaker 2: her around forty percent right now. We'll talk about this
Speaker 2: throughout the show. Definitely better than the ten percent I'd
Speaker 2: give Biden. But I mean, you know, do you.
Speaker 1: Want to go all in with a forty percent hand?
Speaker 2: I don't. I certainly don't.
Speaker 1: There is no doubt that, just judging based on the
Speaker 1: data past performance, that Democrats have many stronger candidates that
Speaker 1: they could put in. And I mean, let's not pretend
Speaker 1: like an open convention is like a democratic process. But
Speaker 1: at least there's some ability for people to evaluate and
Speaker 1: put pressure on those delegates and some sort of transparent process.
Speaker 1: I mean, I think it's a couple things like, Yes,
Speaker 1: the party apparatus in the Democratic Party has shown itself
Speaker 1: to be more coordinated and more powerful than the Republican
Speaker 1: Party apparatus. But the other thing is, like, if we
Speaker 1: think about, you know, an attempt to displace Trump, Trump
Speaker 1: has a genuine, gross rates grassroots movement behind him. Joe
Speaker 1: Biden does it. He never has, like he's there because
Speaker 1: of elites. And they decided to pull his card and
Speaker 1: that was that because there wasn't going to be any
Speaker 1: sort of outcry from the people or whatever. None of
Speaker 1: the powerful politicians behind the scenes, Pelosi and Obama primarily,
Speaker 1: they had nothing to fear from going hard against him,
Speaker 1: and he had nothing to fall back on. So, yeah,
Speaker 1: there's numbers out there now ninety percent of the public,
Speaker 1: including roughly similar numbers of Democrats, Republicans, independents, are glad
Speaker 1: he stepped down ninety percent. So you know, if it
Speaker 1: was if you can imagine the situation unfolding with Trump
Speaker 1: and they attempted in twenty sixteen to do something kind
Speaker 1: of similar and obviously it didn't work and it would
Speaker 1: provoke a massive, massive backlash. I think you also have
Speaker 1: a situation where your average Democratic base voter. And by
Speaker 1: the way, I think that this isn't just on the
Speaker 1: Democratic side. I think there is an openness to anti
Speaker 1: democracy and authoritarianism that has taken hold in the public
Speaker 1: because of their sense, whether you're on the right or
Speaker 1: the left, of the existential nature of the stakes right now.
Speaker 1: But I think your average democratic voter has become very
Speaker 1: comfortable with the idea of ditching democracy in service of
Speaker 1: saving democracy, which obviously is insane and blatantly hypocritical and
Speaker 1: goes against you know, the your suppose and believe in democracy.
Speaker 1: But I think they have been persuaded of that case,
Speaker 1: which to me is deeply sad. But it's why you
Speaker 1: know Republicans who are trying to pitch a fit over
Speaker 1: the process right now and oh, this is anti democratic
Speaker 1: or the aocs of the world. First of all, where
Speaker 1: were you when any sort of actual democratic process was
Speaker 1: blocked from unfolding. He didn't care. You obviously didn't care.
Speaker 1: So you know, the notion that you're upset now that
Speaker 1: Biden was removed by anti democratic means please, you don't
Speaker 1: care about democracy either. The time for those concerns was
Speaker 1: a while ago, and there wasn't a public outcry about
Speaker 1: the lack of a democratic process. Even I had a
Speaker 1: majority of democratic voters who said they would like to
Speaker 1: have choices but at the end of the day they
Speaker 1: were like, I guess we're just going to take what
Speaker 1: we're given.
Speaker 2: I'll tell you what too, I'll eat it. I'll eat
Speaker 2: a proverbial stock here in terms of being wrong, what
Speaker 2: I usually say debates don't matter.
Speaker 1: Well, there's a tail, right, there are exceptions to the rule.
Speaker 2: So if we have learned anything from this is have
Speaker 2: the debates even if nine eight percent of the time
Speaker 2: they don't matter. Could we not have a single debate?
Speaker 2: I mean the conventions what we have a couple of weeks.
Speaker 2: It only takes a couple of days to put this
Speaker 2: thing together. Get Kamal on the stage, get Gavin, get job,
Speaker 2: get everybody up there, the open thing, and let it fly.
Speaker 1: Let's see, let's actually see what happens.
Speaker 2: And if you can't do that in the same way
Speaker 2: that Joe Biden's presencey was destroyed whenever he was okay
Speaker 2: on a teleprompter but fell apart under challenging questioning, what
Speaker 2: lessons should we draw from that, folks, is that we
Speaker 2: have to have the process that at least the very
Speaker 2: basics and the minimums to vet the person and allow
Speaker 2: it to come and then look if she wins from
Speaker 2: there cool, I don't think anybody could be upset about that,
Speaker 2: but rigging from the very beginning, it's very, very troubling,
Speaker 2: right because, as we said, there is a couple of
Speaker 2: there are two people that will be on. It will
Speaker 2: be on then Joe Biden for to getting everybody in
Speaker 2: this situation if Trump wins, but it's also going to
Speaker 2: be on the powerbrokers and others that didn't call for
Speaker 2: the quote unquote mini primary. Even Jim Clyburn called for
Speaker 2: a mini primary recall only two weeks ago, but he
Speaker 2: didn't immediately comes out and endorses Harris. And I think
Speaker 2: that's a big mistake. It's a big mistake.
Speaker 1: You know, it's interesting too because Democrats thought that they
Speaker 1: were protecting themselves by blocking a primary process, an actual
Speaker 1: democratic primary process back you know, after the midterms, when
Speaker 1: such a thing would have really started up in earnest.
Speaker 1: They thought they were protecting themselves. But the reality of
Speaker 1: the situation is they incredibly they created an incredibly difficult situation,
Speaker 1: incredibly difficult landscape where now you know, Kamala Harris comes
Speaker 1: in hobbled behind the eight ball, She's got momentum right now,
Speaker 1: like she's doing well, she's doing better on the polls
Speaker 1: than Biden. But there's no doubt in my mind they
Speaker 1: could have come out with a stronger candidate. And if
Speaker 1: you had had Joe Biden having to debate primary contenders back,
Speaker 1: you know, much earlier, and the possibility of an actual
Speaker 1: Democratic primary process playing out, they wouldn't be in this situation.
Speaker 1: The other thing, you know, with Kamala Harris, now, I
Speaker 1: still think even if you had this mini primary or
Speaker 1: however you want to phrase it, going into the convention,
Speaker 1: all this is obviously moot point because she's in. She's in,
Speaker 1: it's done and dusted. But I think she would be
Speaker 1: very likely to come out the winner of that process.
Speaker 1: If you look at the polls, you know, right after
Speaker 1: Biden dropped, you had a pretty strong consensus from Democrats
Speaker 1: that Kamala was their top choice. She's the sitting vice president.
Speaker 1: She has a lot of advanta advantages going in, but
Speaker 1: she would also have additional legitimacy conferred on her, and
Speaker 1: she would be strengthened by having to go through that
Speaker 1: process and you know, get sharp again and be a
Speaker 1: little better thinking on her feet, and those sorts of
Speaker 1: things that she struggled with in the past, So I
Speaker 1: think it's I do think it's a mistake for Democrats.
Speaker 1: I don't know that it will you know, it doesn't
Speaker 1: end their chances of winning in the fall, but there's
Speaker 1: no doubt they could have gone forward with a stronger
Speaker 1: candidate that Kamala Harris, given her how we've seen her
Speaker 1: perform in the past, given the fact that she is
Speaker 1: tied to an administration that has been unpopular, and she
Speaker 1: is implicated in a tremendous cover up of Joe Biden's
Speaker 1: decline that is a betrayal legitimately is a betrayal of
Speaker 1: the American people, and so all those things give her
Speaker 1: a tough tougher hand to work from going into the question.
Speaker 2: Now, you know, people forget this, but there was a
Speaker 2: real primary back in two thousand, Bill Bradley, that former
Speaker 2: NBA player, and I forget New Jersey. That's right, he
Speaker 2: was from New Jersey. He challenged Al Gore. Al Gore won,
Speaker 2: by the way overwhelmingly, He won like eighty percent of
Speaker 2: the vote, but that mattered because Al could say, Hey,
Speaker 2: I actually challenged and won this nomination. I'm just getting
Speaker 2: anointed because I'm the former Vice President Hubert Humphrey also
Speaker 2: ran a real primary process in nineteen sixty eight. Now
Speaker 2: would he have beat RFK No, I don't think so
Speaker 2: at all. But at the very least he was able
Speaker 2: to coalesce the party to try and bring some consensus
Speaker 2: going in with Vietnam and all the other tearing apart
Speaker 2: of the process, and there were civil rights and all
Speaker 2: of that.
Speaker 1: And I think he emerged strong enough for it.
Speaker 2: Now, he ended up going on to lose, but there
Speaker 2: was a lot that was going into that, and if
Speaker 2: you look at the popular vote and others, he came
Speaker 2: relatively close. He could have won the election quite easily.
Speaker 2: Democracy and democratic action like debates, primaries and others. They
Speaker 2: there's a certain anti fragility to it in that it
Speaker 2: creates and stress tests you up to the top. And
Speaker 2: I've never actually believed more in that system than I
Speaker 2: have now, just to show where I didn't think it mattered.
Speaker 2: But we've never had an eighty one year old who's
Speaker 2: on the verge of dementia running before, and that is
Speaker 2: literally what the process is designed. Another thing I think
Speaker 2: Americans have been robbed of is that I think it
Speaker 2: was George W. Bush and Obama, who both echoes something
Speaker 2: similar where they said, one of the benefits of the
Speaker 2: eighteen to twenty month campaign is that everything will come
Speaker 2: out everything in that you will be tested, you will
Speaker 2: have your debates, you will deal with the press, you
Speaker 2: will deal with the swings and the ups and the downs,
Speaker 2: and that the process of self prepares you. We're not
Speaker 2: getting that with kam Law And it's not fair. How
Speaker 2: many debates are we going to get with her and Trump?
Speaker 2: Maybe one? Maybe one up two if we're lucky. No,
Speaker 2: we should have five. Actually, because you're so late in
Speaker 2: the process. More so, we haven't had the ability to
Speaker 2: stress this woman for real, in a real campaign process.
Speaker 2: If I'm her, I'm not debating very much and I'm
Speaker 2: just going to stick to the stump. She seems fine
Speaker 2: in a teleprompter and she does pretty well, you know,
Speaker 2: for donor calls and all that. But I don't think
Speaker 2: that's fair to America to have a very little amount
Speaker 2: of time when Trump. I mean, if anything, he's been
Speaker 2: out there for almost two years now and he's running,
Speaker 2: and so there is an inherent unfairness I think to
Speaker 2: Americans here. But the problem is is that voters, as
Speaker 2: you said correctly. They are very willing to just sit
Speaker 2: and eat it right now because they hate Trump or
Speaker 2: they hate you know, KAMMLA or whatever. They'll just sit
Speaker 2: there and be like, it's cool, I'm fine with it,
Speaker 2: and we should get away with that. If she loses,
Speaker 2: I would hope the Democrats learn that lesson, I really do.
Speaker 1: What do you make they want? Spoiler lie? I know
Speaker 1: they won't, which some people were there. Some people their
Speaker 1: fear of democracy and their desire to control everything from
Speaker 1: the top down ends up really damaging their own political prospects.
Speaker 1: Will they learn the lists? Of course they won't, but
Speaker 1: they should. They should have already learned that lesson, just
Speaker 1: from the fact that they put themselves in this horrible
Speaker 1: position from forestalling any kind of an earlier primary process
Speaker 1: when this really should have unfolded. I wonder what you
Speaker 1: make of the fact there's a lot of like I
Speaker 1: think New York Posts was reporting some rumors about Obama
Speaker 1: and why he hasn't endorsed Kamala now. Their claim is
Speaker 1: basically like, he doesn't think she can win. He's mad
Speaker 1: that Joe endorsed her on the way out, and so
Speaker 1: he you know, was sort of like holding off out
Speaker 1: of his anger and hope that there would be some
Speaker 1: ability to have a different process. I don't know if
Speaker 1: I really buy all of that, because at this point
Speaker 1: the writing's on the wall, like he's clearly going to
Speaker 1: endorse her. And also, if he really wanted things to
Speaker 1: unfold that way, he could have said, he could have
Speaker 1: done a lot more to put forward like you have
Speaker 1: to put forward an alternative.
Speaker 2: I'm not sure I buy it either. That said, I
Speaker 2: trust out of all of them, I'm going to trust Obama.
Speaker 5: Right.
Speaker 2: This is a man who actually got himself elected president.
Speaker 1: On the other hand, he's the one who anointed Hillary
Speaker 1: and so when his political instincts outside of himself have
Speaker 1: not been that.
Speaker 2: Great, I could waffle it either way. I would just say,
Speaker 2: there's a Napoleon alleged quote, if you're gonna take Vienna,
Speaker 2: then take Fienna. So in my opinion, if you're gonna
Speaker 2: kick Biden out, then do it, then go. If you're
Speaker 2: gonna kick Biden out, let's go for broke and let's win.
Speaker 2: That's what with the mindset would be. I don't know
Speaker 2: why they chose this crazy half measure. So if I
Speaker 2: were Obama, I'd say all right, Well, if we're getting
Speaker 2: rid of Obama, if we're getting rid of Biden, well
Speaker 2: then let's let's put somebody in who can win. Let's
Speaker 2: put in a Gavin, let's put it in the gretch,
Speaker 2: and let's put in a Shapiro. And even here, all
Speaker 2: four of those people would run more than Kamala Harris.
Speaker 2: I mean even Gretchen Whitmer. And by the way, I'm
Speaker 2: not fans of any of these people. I don't like
Speaker 2: any of these people, but I can read a poll
Speaker 2: and I can understand too where that breadth of fresh air,
Speaker 2: that ability to I mean, look at the enthusiasm that
Speaker 2: hasn't been engendered from Kamala. Now imagine it times fifty.
Speaker 2: I think for somebody who literally came out of left field,
Speaker 2: I think it would be even more. For Democrats, people
Speaker 2: would be excited, especially if you were able to put
Speaker 2: a ticket out there. So I think it was a
Speaker 2: huge missed opportunity. But you know, I don't know, do
Speaker 2: we go to the next element.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think Jean Pierre doing her hearing.
Speaker 2: Here's Karen Jean Pierre being asked why if Biden is
Speaker 2: going to resign or if Biden is not going to run.
Speaker 2: Why doesn't he just resign? How can we have any
Speaker 2: confidence that he can even stay in the job. Here's
Speaker 2: her word, solid of an answer.
Speaker 5: The President believes that it's best for the country that
Speaker 5: he not being in the oval office for another four years.
Speaker 5: How can you assure the American people that he's up
Speaker 5: to be in the office for the next six months.
Speaker 6: Well, first I would say is that and I've heard
Speaker 6: these suggestions out there. This is not an answer to you.
Speaker 6: This is an answer to the suggestions that I've had
Speaker 6: have heard about him resigning from office. We believe and
Speaker 6: any suggestion of that note is ridiculous. It is not
Speaker 6: what we believe the president. I just laid out what
Speaker 6: the president has been able to do in almost four years,
Speaker 6: and it's been successful. He's been able to do more,
Speaker 6: again than any president has been able to do in
Speaker 6: two terms.
Speaker 1: He's been able to do that more in one term.
Speaker 6: And he wants to finish the job that he started
Speaker 6: and bring more historic results for the American people. And look,
Speaker 6: he didn't step down from campaigning or from running because
Speaker 6: he didn't believe he can serve in.
Speaker 1: A second term.
Speaker 6: That is not why, and what I would say is
Speaker 6: I just finished my opening. I would say, tune in,
Speaker 6: tune into what he has to say tonight, and he
Speaker 6: will lay that out for three you all and the
Speaker 6: American people as to why he made that decision.
Speaker 2: So yeah, that's their line. It's not that he couldn't run,
Speaker 2: and it's not that he if he was elected, he
Speaker 2: couldn't serve. It's just that he decided not to run
Speaker 2: because everyone said that you can't run and you can't serve,
Speaker 2: and he can't win.
Speaker 5: Oh.
Speaker 2: I mean, the tortured logic of this is just absurd.
Speaker 2: And I don't know. I mean, at a certain point,
Speaker 2: what the next six to seven months are or is
Speaker 2: it five months? I think until January, right, something like that.
Speaker 2: Let's go with that.
Speaker 1: Nobody checked my overuntil January.
Speaker 2: Or yes, until he was actually gonna present until January
Speaker 2: twenty eight. Yeah, I mean, this is like an Edith
Speaker 2: Wilson situation. Honestly, like just at the very end of
Speaker 2: Drow Wilson's second term, where he's basically totally incapacitated, all
Speaker 2: the people around him are running the entire government. Every
Speaker 2: once in a while, the old man will show up,
Speaker 2: like today for his meeting with BB I mean, his
Speaker 2: old instincts will show up, be like, oh we love you, Bbe,
Speaker 2: you know something like that. Yeah, no nobody stood, now
Speaker 2: did you in the world will be safe if it
Speaker 2: wouldn't for you personally, BB, And everyone's gonna be like,
Speaker 2: oh my god, And that's it. That's who are who's
Speaker 2: running our country. So let's all hope and pray that
Speaker 2: everything works out for the next till January, because I'm worried.
Speaker 2: I'm frankly more worried today than ever before in terms
Speaker 2: of if he's truly unshackled. I mean, what are his
Speaker 2: real instincts here on Ukraine on Gaza? I have no idea.
Speaker 2: And that's actually, frankly a more terrifying concept.
Speaker 1: I think we've seen his true instincts on Ukraine and Gaza.
Speaker 1: And that's the point, is like, that's it's already been
Speaker 1: disastrous because I am very much of the view that
Speaker 1: he doesn't have anything really to do with domestic policy.
Speaker 1: He really doesn't care about the host policy at all.
Speaker 1: You can't like drag him to talk to about it.
Speaker 1: Kicking Instraight doesn't even know his own housing policy that
Speaker 1: he was floating. If he was going to continue his reelection.
Speaker 1: He's checked out on domestic policy and whoever the agency
Speaker 1: heads or his top aids or whatever are running the
Speaker 1: show there. He has kept his grip on foreign policy
Speaker 1: with regard to Ukraine and NATO and Israel in particular,
Speaker 1: and it has been it's been disastrous. It's been utterly disastrous.
Speaker 1: And a part of that does come from this rigidity
Speaker 1: of his old age and inability to process new information
Speaker 1: and a new landscape, et cetera, and weakness and feebleness
Speaker 1: when it comes to his dealings with Benjamin Netniahu. So
Speaker 1: it's already had a very damaging effect. And the other
Speaker 1: thing I would say, yeah, I'm curious your view on this.
Speaker 1: Sober again to the oh, he's such a hairines blah
Speaker 1: blah blah. I actually think that if he resigned, No,
Speaker 1: that's heroic, that would be. That would be And if
Speaker 1: you're goal is for Kamala Harris to win, I think
Speaker 1: that would benefit her too, because one of the challenges
Speaker 1: of any candidate, but especially a black female candidate, can
Speaker 1: we see her in the role and you know the
Speaker 1: fact she's vice perriendent. Okay, that helps, but let's be honest.
Speaker 1: They've basically hit her for three years because they were
Speaker 1: afraid after the less Hold interviewed, and it goes so
Speaker 1: well of what she would say, which I have to say,
Speaker 1: seeing her now and how effective she's been, especially since
Speaker 1: the Biden debate happened, I think that was a mistake
Speaker 1: because she's better than they seemed to think that she was.
Speaker 1: But in any case, she hasn't been in front of
Speaker 1: the public wearing that mantle of vice president in all
Speaker 1: these very public meetings with fourid heads of states, etc.
Speaker 1: Which is what gives the vice president typically such an
Speaker 1: edge in electoral contest because even though they weren't the president,
Speaker 1: people kind of can easily see them in that role.
Speaker 1: She hasn't really had the benefit of that. So if
Speaker 1: you really wanted to set her up for success, if
Speaker 1: you really wanted to be some listen like, you know,
Speaker 1: past the torch, et cetera. He would resign now on
Speaker 1: a reflection of his own decline and inability to do
Speaker 1: the job, and out of a desire to you know,
Speaker 1: allow people to imagine her in the role and to
Speaker 1: test the metal of her in this capacity as well.
Speaker 1: But obviously he's not going to do that, So we
Speaker 1: have a lot of polling to indicate early early days
Speaker 1: what this matchup is going to look like, and the
Speaker 1: TLDR from all of the polls that have come out,
Speaker 1: which there have been a number that have come out
Speaker 1: since the Biden dropout, but only in select few where
Speaker 1: they were in the field wholly after the dropout. Basically,
Speaker 1: what it looks like is Kamala Harris is doing better
Speaker 1: than Biden, but she is still not winning the race.
Speaker 1: It's either a toss up or she's slightly behind Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: CNN had a really interesting poll. There's just go and
Speaker 1: put this up on the screen while I talk about it.
Speaker 1: Part of why this pole in particular was so interesting
Speaker 1: is because they pulled a lot of the same people.
Speaker 1: They pulled like the same panel that they had pulled
Speaker 1: previously when it was Biden, So you could truly see
Speaker 1: was their movement even among these same individuals, and there
Speaker 1: was Trump in The overall number is at forty nine
Speaker 1: percent support among these registered voters, Harris is at forty six,
Speaker 1: so again still losing, although I believe within the margin
Speaker 1: of error close there too, but that is closer than
Speaker 1: an earlier contest which found Trump with a six point
Speaker 1: margin over Biden. Keep this up on the screen. Let
Speaker 1: me just talk through this. So when you dig down
Speaker 1: into the demographic groups, you could see the areas where
Speaker 1: Kamala improves on Biden's performance. She is doing better among
Speaker 1: young voters, she picks up eleven points. She's doing better
Speaker 1: among black voters, she picks up sixteen points. And she's
Speaker 1: doing better among female voters, she picks up five points.
Speaker 1: Now I believe she also sees some erosion among those
Speaker 1: like older white voters who have been riding with Biden.
Speaker 1: And so we'll talk a little bit more about this
Speaker 1: in a moment. But this represents kind of a reversion
Speaker 1: to the expected Democratic coalition versus rumbarsacer We were looking
Speaker 1: at these polls where like Biden is doing terribly with
Speaker 1: young people, but old people usually vote Republican or voting
Speaker 1: for the Democrat. It sort of reverses some of those
Speaker 1: stranger elements that had manifested themselves when the contest was
Speaker 1: Trump versus Biden.
Speaker 2: I don't know, there's so I think I'm just going
Speaker 2: to put my flag down and just say it's too
Speaker 2: early because America has not seen enough yet. All they've
Speaker 2: seen is the name we haven't seen the speeches. We
Speaker 2: haven't really frankly even seen much of Trump, right, we
Speaker 2: just had the R and C. I heard the speech
Speaker 2: was long. That's what a lot of friends told me.
Speaker 1: When it was very long.
Speaker 2: They're like, well, it was good for the first ten minutes.
Speaker 1: I was like, well, how long was it.
Speaker 2: They're like, oh, an hour and twenty. I was like, oh, man, okay,
Speaker 2: I think it.
Speaker 1: Was more than that. Actually that's been felt.
Speaker 2: Like I saw statistic as the longest speech is nineteen
Speaker 2: fifty five, which is certainly something. So okay. So we've
Speaker 2: got Donald Trump, and Trump is basically back, I would say,
Speaker 2: to the mean, just the last night, I believe he
Speaker 2: was like I said, I was going to be nice,
Speaker 2: but can I not be nice tonight? And I was like,
Speaker 2: here he is, he's back. So Trump in advance, let's
Speaker 2: see what how they're going to react, because we haven't
Speaker 2: fully gotten the Kamala stuff. They were very very much
Speaker 2: hoping that Kamala or that Joe Biden would not drop
Speaker 2: out of the race. That was their hope and their prayer. Yeah,
Speaker 2: and I mean they were correct in that assumption. I
Speaker 2: would say, I'm just back to where I was pre
Speaker 2: debate for the Democratic chances. So before the debate, I said,
Speaker 2: I think Biden's got a forty percent shot, and I
Speaker 2: think Trump's got about sixty. I think I'm back to
Speaker 2: that now after the debate, I would have said Trump
Speaker 2: has a ninety percent shot. Yeah, and you know, so, look,
Speaker 2: it's better. It's definitely better. I would rather be Harris
Speaker 2: and I would be Biden. There's still a lot stronger
Speaker 2: Democratic candidates, and there are a lot comes down to choices,
Speaker 2: as in, what are the coalitions, who are we trying
Speaker 2: to win? If I am them, I'm not going to
Speaker 2: get pie in the sky and crazy. I'm going for
Speaker 2: two hundred and seventy one electrawlve votes and that's it,
Speaker 2: and that's all I care about. I don't even care
Speaker 2: about the popular vote. I'm going for Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin.
Speaker 2: If we win Georgia, that's great, that's great. But I
Speaker 2: am going all in on those three. So that's going
Speaker 2: to talk a lot about how their VP selection is. Now,
Speaker 2: VP selection usually doesn't matter. I think it will matter
Speaker 2: much more in this case in terms of who you
Speaker 2: pick and what you're trying to do. But I think
Speaker 2: it also comes back to who she is and what
Speaker 2: she's trying to do. Her case against Trump, her strongest
Speaker 2: case goes back to a so called cop days and prosecutor.
Speaker 2: I actually think there's something to it. We've always said here,
Speaker 2: you know, for a lot of normies being a quote
Speaker 2: unquote convicted felon, it's a problem, like, let's be honest,
Speaker 2: it is a problem that's suburban moderate voter. I also
Speaker 2: think the row row row your vote is going to
Speaker 2: be more salient than ever before. So there are two choices.
Speaker 2: This will either be the immigration economy election in a
Speaker 2: Trump win, or it will be the abortion and economy
Speaker 2: election and there will be a Kamala Harris win. Both
Speaker 2: are actually quite narrow and how they will look on
Speaker 2: the electoral map. But if I am Kamala, it's all
Speaker 2: abortion all the time to bat our economy. They will
Speaker 2: battle it out. Trump generally has the edge on the economy.
Speaker 2: He's got a lot of people have very good feelings
Speaker 2: about the economy from back in twenty nineteen. Kamala also
Speaker 2: has the noose around her neck quite literally, of Biden
Speaker 2: inflation and of a lot of the policy that most
Speaker 2: people objectively did not feel like. Things were going so well.
Speaker 2: That's part of the reason. If I were the Democrats,
Speaker 2: I would have picked somebody else, because I don't want
Speaker 2: somebody with that baggage who could present a real thing.
Speaker 2: But I want to see how she goes up on
Speaker 2: the air. She's got a ton of money. Now, she's
Speaker 2: got a ton of enthusiasm. Yeah, that's huge. I want
Speaker 2: to capitalize the hell out of that, and I want
Speaker 2: from them. I'm just going all in on abortion. Where
Speaker 2: we're running the twenty twenty two playbook and we're going
Speaker 2: all the way to the end.
Speaker 1: She is a much so her strengths as a candidate
Speaker 1: are She's a much more credible messenger on abortion. She's
Speaker 1: comfortable talking about it.
Speaker 2: Yeah she is.
Speaker 1: Joe Biden, he didn't want to talk about this, but
Speaker 1: he doesn't even agree really on the issue. He just
Speaker 1: you know, I mean, he's always been basically anti choice,
Speaker 1: pro life Democrat up until there are recent times when
Speaker 1: that was no longer sustainable, very uncomfortable talking about it,
Speaker 1: not credible on the issue. Kamon aras much much better
Speaker 1: messenger there. And our gender is a real asset there.
Speaker 2: I think that's actually where it is a real app Yeah.
Speaker 1: It's a genuine asset. And you know, we'll get into
Speaker 1: some of the attacks, but you know, the one of
Speaker 1: the better attacks. I think that their main owners like oh,
Speaker 1: radical California, et cetera, et cetera. It lands a little
Speaker 1: bit different when the culture war landscape now in the
Speaker 1: most dominant issue is one where the majority of the
Speaker 1: voters agree with the war liberal take. So it's not
Speaker 1: as effective a hit as it could be in a
Speaker 1: different culture war landscape than we're seeing right now. I
Speaker 1: agree with you. I think it's too early to say
Speaker 1: where we are. Vis of you, the polls the most
Speaker 1: hopeful case for Democrats, and I think there's a lot
Speaker 1: to this. By the way, is the big thing that
Speaker 1: was holding Biden back was just he's two frigids old.
Speaker 1: I brought it up a million times. Those were clouds.
Speaker 1: So we did where the number one thing people said old.
Speaker 1: And you look at every single Democrat running in the country,
Speaker 1: and they are outperforming him. Whether they're a great candidate
Speaker 1: or a bad candidate, or a middle of the road candidate,
Speaker 1: whether they're progressive or moderator, wherever they are, they are
Speaker 1: all outperforming Joe Biden. And so the hope is that
Speaker 1: you know, yes, Kamala has her weaknesses, but maybe just
Speaker 1: having a sort of like replacement level decent okay, can
Speaker 1: formulate a sentence, can deliver a teleprompter speech candidate, that
Speaker 1: may be enough. And I don't think that's crazy. I
Speaker 1: think the data actually would indicate that probably is where
Speaker 1: this election is the reason I would say to hold
Speaker 1: on these polls and see where things shake down in
Speaker 1: a couple of weeks. This has been an insane few
Speaker 1: weeks of politics. Insane, like I think you would struggle
Speaker 1: to find another historic period where as much has unfolded
Speaker 1: in so short a time period. So on the one hand,
Speaker 1: you have Kamala Harris what the Trump people put on
Speaker 1: a Mama saying she's having her honeymoon period, right, And
Speaker 1: I think that's true. I think people are projecting on her,
Speaker 1: including lefties, including the K I like everybody is projecting
Speaker 1: on her, who's left of center, whatever they want her
Speaker 1: to be, right, that is going to come into contact
Speaker 1: with reality at some point, and she's common here, She's
Speaker 1: going to have some moment that's awkward and not good
Speaker 1: and shows her not put in a riddle that those
Speaker 1: things are going to happen. So I do think she's
Speaker 1: in a honeymoon period. True, Trump is also in a
Speaker 1: sort of honeymoon period post assassination attempt and post RNC. Right, yes,
Speaker 1: the speech was long or or whatever, but parties candidates
Speaker 1: almost always get a bump coming out of their own convention,
Speaker 1: and Trump has his approval ratings right now are the
Speaker 1: highest they've like almost ever been between the you know,
Speaker 1: the way he looks strong coming out of the assassination
Speaker 1: attempt and the rally round the flag sort of a
Speaker 1: dynamic there, and coming out of his own parties convention,
Speaker 1: et cetera. So he also is in a sort of
Speaker 1: honeymoon period. So you know, once you get in to
Speaker 1: the slog of the campaign season, how do these things
Speaker 1: shake out? And the truth of the matter is, we
Speaker 1: really don't know at this point.
Speaker 2: Period of uncertainty today is just as high. I was
Speaker 2: talking with the crew and I said, this is probably
Speaker 2: the craziest twenty five day period or whatever since nine eleven. Now,
Speaker 2: nine eleven was definitely crazier. Don't worry. But my point
Speaker 2: is that a paradigm shift, I mean, everything literally changed.
Speaker 2: Historic events happened day after day with almost very little
Speaker 2: time of reflection. Right. Part of the reason I'm actually
Speaker 2: kind of happy I wasn't there is I actually got
Speaker 2: to sit and think, and I was like, this is crazy.
Speaker 2: I was like, this is this is actually what it
Speaker 2: was like to get married or and take some time
Speaker 2: off or whatever on nine seventeen or after nineteen sixty eight.
Speaker 2: You know, my sympathy to all those people at that
Speaker 2: time because you're just sitting there and thinking, you know,
Speaker 2: especially for somebody who's success with history like me, and
Speaker 2: I'm going back to sixty eight in my head, and
Speaker 2: I'm going back to nineteen twelve or whatever in my
Speaker 2: head and thinking about third party candidates and the convention
Speaker 2: and all of the But then, you know, overlaying social
Speaker 2: media on top of that, the assassination attempt, and I mean,
Speaker 2: have we really grappled with the fact that Trump was
Speaker 2: inches from death, Like not really and what what the
Speaker 2: you know, the true decision tree from that looks like.
Speaker 2: And then on top of old news, it literally is
Speaker 2: already old news. I mean, he's already a back out there,
Speaker 2: he's already on campaign trails, like barely even mentioning it.
Speaker 2: I mean, to a certain extent, there's a strength of democracy,
Speaker 2: right is that everyone's kind of just like, yeah, that
Speaker 2: was crazy. Hope we create some security, but you know,
Speaker 2: the show must go on. I think that's good. But
Speaker 2: let's also sit and must ruminate a little bit and say, wow,
Speaker 2: we have a new candidate here for president. Literally everything
Speaker 2: is on the table. That's part of the reason why
Speaker 2: there is a honeymoon period, because we don't know a
Speaker 2: lot about this lady. I mean, she ran in a
Speaker 2: machine state in California. It takes some positions, but not
Speaker 2: really you know, as a center let's be honest, like
Speaker 2: you don't really do much. Anyways, she wasn't there that
Speaker 2: long and then she was the vice president. She's been
Speaker 2: in a closet for three years. Last time a star
Speaker 2: on the stage was during the Democratic debate. Didn't do
Speaker 2: so well then, So it's like, now, what you know,
Speaker 2: who are you? And I think that's a real question
Speaker 2: too for Kamala And this is part of the reason
Speaker 2: that I think one of her political strengths. I don't
Speaker 2: think this lady believes it basically anything, And actually I
Speaker 2: think that's to a benefit. You know, where you can
Speaker 2: become the chameleon for the moment of what you need
Speaker 2: to be well. And that is where I really want
Speaker 2: to see. Does she have good instincts or not? What
Speaker 2: are you going for? What are you going to try?
Speaker 2: And do you have to navigate some very tricky problems here?
Speaker 2: We've got Israel, Gaza, We've got abortion. How do we
Speaker 2: talk about abortion? How are we going to quote unquote
Speaker 2: prosecute the case against Trump? Are we gonna do it
Speaker 2: with the cringeway. Are we gonna do it the way
Speaker 2: that a lot of normies do right this little bit
Speaker 2: of overlap, or we're going all in on MSNBC democracy stuff.
Speaker 2: Are we looking at our polling? Are we gonna make
Speaker 2: smart choices and our candidates now there's a countervailing evidence everywhere.
Speaker 2: Are we gonna pick good people? It's one of the
Speaker 2: most important things. She's had crazy staff turnover. One of
Speaker 2: the things I think against Kamala is this lady as
Speaker 2: bad judgment whenever it comes to staff.
Speaker 1: Her campaign, you remember all those stories was a mess?
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, total mess. Well, her staff is the highest
Speaker 2: staff turnover in the West wing. So I mean these
Speaker 2: are not good things, you know, for a chief executive.
Speaker 2: And they also tell us about what it means whenever
Speaker 2: we start to run, you know, in the actual election too,
Speaker 2: and who were annoying to who are going to pick?
Speaker 2: What's our process look like? These things really matter at
Speaker 2: the highest level.
Speaker 1: In some ways, this contradicts a little bit of what
Speaker 1: we said earlier about how Democrats would be in a
Speaker 1: better position if they had actually had a democratic I
Speaker 1: still believe that because I think they would have had
Speaker 1: a chance of picking a better candidate than Kamala Harris.
Speaker 1: But if you were going to end up with Kamala Harris,
Speaker 1: this is kind of an ideal scenario for her, I
Speaker 1: totally agree with because the short time frame benefits her. Right.
Speaker 1: Obama's magic was that ability to maintain the illusion of
Speaker 1: I will be whoever you want me to be. That's
Speaker 1: who I am.
Speaker 2: Yes.
Speaker 1: Do I think Kamala is Obama level talent?
Speaker 5: No?
Speaker 1: I mean Obama was a you know, historic generational level
Speaker 1: political talent. Whatever you think of him, And you guys know,
Speaker 1: I'm not a big fan, but in terms of political talent,
Speaker 1: this man is very talented. He was able to continue
Speaker 1: and maintain that mystique even for even really into his
Speaker 1: presidency and into his real life.
Speaker 2: Hey, the man won all that actually and that is.
Speaker 1: A remarkable talent and skill. Does she have the skill? Now?
Speaker 1: Can she maintain the sort of magic trick of illusion
Speaker 1: for three months? Maybe in a very tightly you know,
Speaker 1: going out and giving her speeches and very tightly controlled
Speaker 1: you know, they're not going to put her out to
Speaker 1: the wolves in terms of interviews. They're going to send
Speaker 1: her out to friendly people, et cetera, et cetera. So
Speaker 1: there's that. There's also the fact, as you said, where
Speaker 1: did she fail in the primary part of it was
Speaker 1: she was a terrible manager, and she could not put
Speaker 1: a campaign team together that could stay together, and she
Speaker 1: could not settle on a message. She doesn't have to
Speaker 1: do that. She has a campaign and she's taking over
Speaker 1: the Biden campaign team, right She's taking on the campaignage.
Speaker 1: So the HQ, the money's coming out, everything is just
Speaker 1: like campaign in a box. Here you go. They've already
Speaker 1: decided what their messaging is and it's not hard to
Speaker 1: figure out they're going to do basically like these people
Speaker 1: are fringe, extreme, dangerous and abortion. And she's also trying
Speaker 1: to lean into some like you know of the Biden
Speaker 1: is like I'm going to be a candidate for the
Speaker 1: middle class she's talking about that as well. She already
Speaker 1: has a message set because that was the other knock
Speaker 1: on her campaign. Legitimate is that like she changed her
Speaker 1: campaign slogans every season. Remember when he first campaign it
Speaker 1: said that is every season we had a new campaign slogan.
Speaker 1: So she eliminates the risk of that, like this is
Speaker 1: your message campaign in a box, Ready, set go. So
Speaker 1: I think all of those things are are to her
Speaker 1: benefit now. I just talked about how she's outperforming where
Speaker 1: Joe Biden was with young voters Israel, Gaza. How she
Speaker 1: handles that is one of the big big question marks.
Speaker 1: Everyone's reading the tea leaves right now, they're reading the
Speaker 1: BB visit. We'll talk about that. The VP pick could
Speaker 1: have ramifications there. People are giving her a lot of
Speaker 1: grace right now, but even so, she's still underperforming where
Speaker 1: a Democrat should be with regard to young voters, and
Speaker 1: there is a lot of risk that she could screw
Speaker 1: up the You know, right now gen Z is like
Speaker 1: in love with her and meeting her like crazy, et cetera,
Speaker 1: et cetera. There's a lot of risk there that that
Speaker 1: relationship could turn sour. So harry Onnsen broke down some
Speaker 1: of the data herealistic elisia what he had to say.
Speaker 7: So, I want to take a look at Trump versus
Speaker 7: Democratic margin. Just remind folks where we were at the
Speaker 7: end of the twenty twenty campaign. Joe Biden won voters
Speaker 7: under the age of thirty five by twenty one points.
Speaker 7: What do we see with Kamala Harris. Well, she's still ahead,
Speaker 7: but the margin here is significantly less than what we
Speaker 7: saw with Joe Biden back in twenty twenty. She's up
Speaker 7: by just nine points. You may make the argument that
Speaker 7: was better than Biden was doing before he got out,
Speaker 7: but compared to that democratic baseline where Democrats have historically
Speaker 7: and presidential elections at least this century, been carrying that
Speaker 7: young vote by twenty or more percentage once, she is
Speaker 7: way down from that. So if this is unique support
Speaker 7: among young voters, I would like to know what non
Speaker 7: unique support? Is it even worse than this?
Speaker 2: Is she doing better than Biden?
Speaker 7: Was this she was doing slightly better? Maybe Biden was
Speaker 7: up by you know, like six on average or five.
Speaker 7: This is maybe slightly better, But this is not game
Speaker 7: changing stuff. Mister Burnma, all right, what have we seen
Speaker 7: in terms of motivation?
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 7: So you know, the other thing is we talk about
Speaker 7: vote choice, right, but let's also talk about motivation, right,
Speaker 7: because it's not just who you would support, it's whether
Speaker 7: or not you'd come out to the polls. And this
Speaker 7: I think is rather interesting. Do Democrats say they're more
Speaker 7: motivated to turn out after Biden left the race? Well,
Speaker 7: we do see a significant portion of Democrats who say yes,
Speaker 7: thirty nine percent. The thing I was interested in was
Speaker 7: it disproportionately younger voters who said that they were more
Speaker 7: likely to turn out or more motivated to turn out.
Speaker 7: And what we see here is it's forty two percent.
Speaker 7: Not a big difference between forty two and thirty nine percent.
Speaker 7: So this idea again that the vice president has unique
Speaker 7: potential to dig in and get young voters to turn out, John,
Speaker 7: it's just not there in the numbers, despite all the
Speaker 7: Internet memes that are going around.
Speaker 1: So still a lot of room, you could say, still
Speaker 1: a lot of room to grow. Maybe if she, you know,
Speaker 1: continues to do improve her position with with young voters
Speaker 1: and make some savvy moves, or people just you know,
Speaker 1: really decide like I can vote for Trump. It seems
Speaker 1: like right now some of what's happened. R Junior's numbers
Speaker 1: have fallen off. The third party numbers have fallen off.
Speaker 1: Like people who were disgusted with Joe Biden over Gaza
Speaker 1: are giving Kamala Harris a chance. Some of that is
Speaker 1: going on. Or they were discussed with Joe Biden just
Speaker 1: because it was so frikin old, and now they're like,
Speaker 1: all right, well, this lady's not really old, so this
Speaker 1: is great, but there's still a lot of question marks
Speaker 1: there about whether she can truly put back together like
Speaker 1: the Obama style coalition that would be more her strength.
Speaker 1: You know, you said something about if you were her,
Speaker 1: you would go for Pennsylvania, you would just like go
Speaker 1: all in on the industrial Midwest. I'm not one hundred
Speaker 1: percent sure because the demographics in those states they were
Speaker 1: good for Biden because he outperformed with like older white voters.
Speaker 1: Kamala's got a different got a different coalition mix, and
Speaker 1: you know she already we're seeing some numbers that show
Speaker 1: she's more in contention in those sun Belt states where
Speaker 1: Joe and Georgia in particular, where Joe Biden was not
Speaker 1: really and they basically all but written it off. So again,
Speaker 1: I think it we have to see Holving shake off
Speaker 1: shake to see where her best tell you what potential path.
Speaker 2: My real thing is that if you look at the
Speaker 2: economic approval in Georgia and in Arizona, Biden Harris was
Speaker 2: underwater by some twenty five points, and I just don't
Speaker 2: think that's possible to come back from it. Sure, you know,
Speaker 2: are there a lot more black voters in Georgia who
Speaker 2: might be able to come out and save her? Yeah, certainly.
Speaker 2: I mean, And look, you've got Warnock and as Off
Speaker 2: that are barnstorming the state for you. I wouldn't counter out,
Speaker 2: but I'm not going all in. And so when you
Speaker 2: look at the math and you look at the margins too,
Speaker 2: we have some state by state polling, maybe we can
Speaker 2: actually put this in afterwards. I'm just going to reference
Speaker 2: this is a new Hill Emerson Pole. It kind of
Speaker 2: bears out what I'm saying. If you look at Wisconsin,
Speaker 2: this has just came out this morning. They were in
Speaker 2: the field after the Biden drop out. Trump and Harris
Speaker 2: are tied in Wisconsin. Trump is up by five in Arizona,
Speaker 2: He's up by two in Georgia, up by one in Michigan,
Speaker 2: and up by two in Pennsylvania. The tightest margin is
Speaker 2: in the industrial Midwest. You've got whit Merge. You can
Speaker 2: try and hold down the fourth there. In Michigan, you
Speaker 2: don't have the Gaza sink that you used to maybe,
Speaker 2: you know, if I were rum all away from it,
Speaker 2: you know, honestly, try not to even take a position
Speaker 2: that's gonna be tough. But you know, if anybody could
Speaker 2: do it, it could be her. If you picked Shapiro
Speaker 2: or somebody like that for Pennsylvania. He's enormously popular governors.
Speaker 1: The Gaza thing, that's sure problem for her there.
Speaker 2: How many people Arabs and dearborn are you really going
Speaker 2: to vote on the VP pick like, look like it's complicated.
Speaker 2: We'll see. I think she's gonna get more grace no
Speaker 2: matter what.
Speaker 1: Right, we'll talk about that more of the vpoplet right, Yes.
Speaker 2: We get Shapiro there, we can hold down Pennsylvania. You've
Speaker 2: only got to win it by point one. That's the
Speaker 2: only thing that actually matters. And then say Wisconsin. Biden
Speaker 2: was tied with Trump in Wisconsin, so Wisconsin has always
Speaker 2: been I mean, remember this, what did he win it
Speaker 2: by a couple ten thousand votes or something? In twenty sixteen,
Speaker 2: it was close, so you know already you had Biden
Speaker 2: roughly there. So if I'm Harris, I'm feeling more confident
Speaker 2: we can get some people to turn out in Milwaukee.
Speaker 2: Uh and you could try, you know, things there and
Speaker 2: we'll just see how things go. Whereas Georgia the Sun Belt,
Speaker 2: I just think the Sun Belt economically, there has never
Speaker 2: been more pessimism the Sun Belt today. And if you
Speaker 2: think too about who these new voters are, all the
Speaker 2: people who moved to Arizona, Georgia, Texas, and all these
Speaker 2: people are all blue refugees from New York and California,
Speaker 2: They're all going to be voting red. I think at
Speaker 2: least they're going to be voting red. And so I
Speaker 2: wouldn't I wouldn't go all in there, but I need
Speaker 2: to see too some polling. I mean, I think Georgia.
Speaker 2: Georgia is the one state where I think it was
Speaker 2: totally lost nor Biden and is winnable now under Harris.
Speaker 1: But remember too, because she does better so far. Again,
Speaker 1: this is all so early, but she also appears to
Speaker 1: do better among Latina's. Let's put this next piece up
Speaker 1: on the screen, just because one of the questions is
Speaker 1: how much, Okay, how much of Biden's lag was his
Speaker 1: policies and how much was just his age very undefined question.
Speaker 1: And then the other question is how much are Republicans
Speaker 1: going to be successful in tying Kamala to Biden?
Speaker 2: Right?
Speaker 1: And they want to do that, They're already trying to
Speaker 1: do that so far. The early indicators, the early data
Speaker 1: is that while Harris is seen as a liberal, she
Speaker 1: does enjoy perception advantages over Biden. Even when you look
Speaker 1: at the issues, they view her as closer to their
Speaker 1: views than Biden on inflation by ten percentage points, government
Speaker 1: spending by ten percentage points, immigration, I'm actually surprised by
Speaker 1: this one by fifteen percentage points, abortion by eight percentage points,
Speaker 1: and even corruption plus thirteen. We can go to the
Speaker 1: next slide. This is from this same analysis of where
Speaker 1: Kamala Harris performs well on the issues and where she struggles.
Speaker 1: It's not going to surprise you. The best issue for
Speaker 1: her net of trust Harris over Trump is reproductive rights
Speaker 1: than climate and environment, improving the healthcare system, reducing racial
Speaker 1: tension in the country, making sure everyone can get a
Speaker 1: good education, protecting social security like sort of a typical
Speaker 1: list of liberal priorities, and then at the bottom those
Speaker 1: same issues that dogged Joe Biden, securing the border, immigration, police,
Speaker 1: and crime, although she's only minus two on that, which
Speaker 1: a little bit surprised about there as interesting. Maybe it
Speaker 1: goes back to her kut mala cut maladay.
Speaker 2: We talk about any credibility she still has on that one.
Speaker 1: But in any case, you know, I thought the comparison
Speaker 1: with Biden was really interesting to me that people had
Speaker 1: separate views from her, at least at this point than
Speaker 1: they had on you know, with Biden on inflation, et cetera.
Speaker 1: But I also am fairly persuaded that the biggest issue
Speaker 1: Joe Biden had wasn't really an issue problem. It was
Speaker 1: an age problem.
Speaker 2: I think age it's like bone marrow. It was at
Speaker 2: the center of everything with the conversation with Biden. Now
Speaker 2: that said, I mean, the economy is still bet like
Speaker 2: I think, it's bad for the average middle class person.
Speaker 2: So that's why I would never have picked the incumbent
Speaker 2: vice president. I want to pick somebody from a more
Speaker 2: dynamic and an interesting state that genuinely understands some of
Speaker 2: the middle class like economic concerns, and I want to
Speaker 2: pick somebody who's got a real track record of at
Speaker 2: least trying to work on that. I've seen Kyle talk
Speaker 2: about Tim Waltz. I mean, these are people that I
Speaker 2: would really want to work for, right and I would
Speaker 2: really want to I would want to put that forward
Speaker 2: because that is a contrast to the Trump, you know era,
Speaker 2: and to a real vision also post twenty twenty four,
Speaker 2: where with Kamala it's like, what are you gonna do? Biden,
Speaker 2: Plus it's like, okay, I mean, look great, but that's
Speaker 2: not anything all that interesting. And so for her, I
Speaker 2: think it's I think it's just like I said earlier,
Speaker 2: it's gonna be the immigration economy election or it's going
Speaker 2: to be the abortion economy election, and it's gonna be
Speaker 2: a slog and it's gonna be a battle to the
Speaker 2: death between those two. And the definition wars, I mean
Speaker 2: the amount of money that's going to be spent on
Speaker 2: Kamala crime, Kamala borders are Kamala open border on the
Speaker 2: Republican side, That's what I would do too if I
Speaker 2: was going up against her, because it is also probably
Speaker 2: the area where they genuinely disagree the most. And then
Speaker 2: you flip it on abortion. And you know, you've got
Speaker 2: JD who's got pass comments on abortion, and then you've
Speaker 2: got Trump who literally had Roe versus Wade overturned and
Speaker 2: appointed those people. That is as good of a contrast
Speaker 2: as I could ask for. And that's also where you
Speaker 2: can make it. There's a famous you know, Barry Goldwater quote,
Speaker 2: the time for choosing that moment. This is a time
Speaker 2: for choosing on those two issues. So whichever you can
Speaker 2: get people to care the most about and define the other.
Speaker 2: On economy, I think they're kind of washed, frankly for
Speaker 2: both because you've decent hits against both. You know, Trump
Speaker 2: on TCJA and extension, but he didn't have inflation. Kamala
Speaker 2: you've got you know, whatever she's promising middle class agenda.
Speaker 2: I don't know how much you believe that, but maybe
Speaker 2: and then you but you've also got inflation. On those two,
Speaker 2: I think they relatively cancel each other out. So those
Speaker 2: are the two issues that I think are define this elet.
Speaker 1: I would I would throw another one into the mix.
Speaker 1: I mean, the midterms turned on the reason there wasn't
Speaker 1: a red wave, even though all the numbers seem to indicate, like, oh,
Speaker 1: they've got a big problem on inflation and immigration. It
Speaker 1: was abortion and it was extremeistly a good point. It
Speaker 1: was the sense of like, these people are really fringed,
Speaker 1: they're weird. You know, they're saying stuff that's just out there,
Speaker 1: and you know, that was what ended up being the
Speaker 1: really determining factor in the midterms. And so I think
Speaker 1: that's what that's what the Democrats are hoping. Those are
Speaker 1: the still the issues that control and end up being
Speaker 1: the most persuasive to swing voters, you know, wherever they
Speaker 1: may live. So I want to move on.
Speaker 2: We do have.
Speaker 1: Let me just show you this Pennsylvania poll real quick.
Speaker 1: B seven. You already refer to some battleground polling, but
Speaker 1: this was another poll. This was actually commissioned by Republicans,
Speaker 1: which is interesting but and it's I think a B
Speaker 1: rated polster, so not an A rated polster, but still
Speaker 1: not bad. You got Trump winning, but only by two
Speaker 1: better than what we've been seeing from Biden recently. You
Speaker 1: have Bob Casey the Democrat, holding an eight point advantage
Speaker 1: over McCormick. Dave McCormick is that his name? The Republican,
Speaker 1: So again you still still see swing state democrats out
Speaker 1: performing the top of the ticket, but it's a little
Speaker 1: better than what they were doing with Biden. It gives
Speaker 1: them a shot put b eight up on the screen.
Speaker 1: This was an analysis from Nate Cone over the New
Speaker 1: York Times, their data guy, how Kamala Harris changes the race.
Speaker 1: One thing she's it is a good piece. Three things
Speaker 1: that he points to. Number one, the original dynamic was
Speaker 1: Trump being a change candidate Biden being very much not
Speaker 1: change candidate. Harris, he says, Democrats will have another chance
Speaker 1: to make the case they can improve the nation's fortunes.
Speaker 1: For one, she's neither Biden nor Trump. Two figures have
Speaker 1: been in public life for decades, So she feels like
Speaker 1: a breath of fashhair. That's my He didn't say that,
Speaker 1: I'm saying that. For another, she's not the president. She
Speaker 1: might be burdened by voters perceptions of mister Biden's record,
Speaker 1: but she'll have room to distinguish herself. She even has
Speaker 1: room to argue for a new direction. The other thing
Speaker 1: he refers to is the return of the usual demographic divide.
Speaker 1: That some of what we've been talking about is she's
Speaker 1: returning to more of the Obama coalitional mold, better with
Speaker 1: young people, better with black voters, better with Latino voters.
Speaker 1: And he said, they say the return of issues. You know,
Speaker 1: with Biden, the whole thing was just about like his
Speaker 1: age basically. And now there'll be a little bit more
Speaker 1: space than the conversation for an actual conversation about how
Speaker 1: these candidates would govern and what that governing agenda would
Speaker 1: look like. So we may see more talk of that
Speaker 1: with comm.
Speaker 2: That is the greatest gift that Biden's resignation is gift
Speaker 2: than Democrats. Was the worst issue, and it was it permeated,
Speaker 2: like I said, everything, it was the bone marrow. And
Speaker 2: now when that's gone, I mean, look, it opens up
Speaker 2: a little bit of space. Now to what extent how
Speaker 2: are they going to work with that, how are they
Speaker 2: going to define things. I'm actually quite curious, you know,
Speaker 2: to see what the moves are in the next couple
Speaker 2: of days. But overall, I would say she's played her
Speaker 2: hand like pretty well from what I've seen so far,
Speaker 2: there's been a lot of Row versus wide. I think
Speaker 2: the campaign ad course speech is not bad. I think
Speaker 2: that the you know, the rally speech from what I've read,
Speaker 2: or at least of the excerpts and look normal. Her
Speaker 2: very first ad is now out. It's called Freedom. It's
Speaker 2: got Beyonce's Freedom or whatever, and it's all about you
Speaker 2: guessed it, democracy and abortion, which and Trump being a
Speaker 2: convicted felon. So the playbook is here. Yeah, and you've
Speaker 2: got a ton of money. I also think I did
Speaker 2: we talk about the enthusiasm gap, because that was actually
Speaker 2: maybe it'd be the biggest change. The biggest change here,
Speaker 2: by far is the eight hundred and ninety six thousand
Speaker 2: people who donated to a Democrat for the very first
Speaker 2: time since Biden dropped out of the race. That's one
Speaker 2: in two hundred and ninety six Americans like, that's crazy,
Speaker 2: and famously has the most dedicated political coalition of all
Speaker 2: time in modern politics. Now Kamala has got the ladies,
Speaker 2: and I'm never betting against abortion ladies at all. These
Speaker 2: people will and did crawl over broken glass to vote
Speaker 2: in twenty twenty two, and now they're you know, Biden
Speaker 2: is gone. The biggest worst deficit to them actually having enthusiasm.
Speaker 2: So now generic d that has real power. And if
Speaker 2: I'm Republicans, I'm worried as hell about that because this
Speaker 2: get to the ballot box, row row, row your vote.
Speaker 2: I mean, if you're in you know, northern Virginia suburbs
Speaker 2: where I am. I mean, these people are fired up now,
Speaker 2: they are ready to vote. They hate Trump with a
Speaker 2: passion that many Republicans have discounted.
Speaker 1: Now, for several years, I have never seen Kamala Harris
Speaker 1: better than she's been in these past few weeks. And
Speaker 1: not just since she became the you know, presumptive nominee,
Speaker 1: but since the Biden debate debacle. She has had a swagger.
Speaker 1: She has been genuinely charismatic on this. She has been good,
Speaker 1: like from a just sheer raw political analysis. Now she
Speaker 1: hasn't had to do the things that are difficult for her, right,
Speaker 1: she hasn't had to do the interviews and be caught
Speaker 1: off balance. She has been very good. And the other
Speaker 1: thing she benefits from is she's not eighty years old,
Speaker 1: and the bar has been set. Think of the Biden
Speaker 1: speech last night, right, and then compare that to Colma,
Speaker 1: You're like, holy shit, this one's amazing, Right, But that
Speaker 1: gets he set the bar below the floor. So when
Speaker 1: she's able to deliver competently a democratic message and a
Speaker 1: democratic attack on Trump, with some energy and some vitality,
Speaker 1: and you have people who are actually excited to hear
Speaker 1: from her. It feels so incredibly different than how things
Speaker 1: were before. And so I yeah, underestimate her at your
Speaker 1: peril because we all know what the weaknesses are. But
Speaker 1: Trump is now, Trump's age becomes in it, like he
Speaker 1: is an old man. He's almost eighty years old, right,
Speaker 1: and he's been in the public eye for a long
Speaker 1: people who are sick of he's got negative approval writing
Speaker 1: like he's got all the baggage that Trump comes with.
Speaker 1: So you know, there is she's got a genuine enthusiasm
Speaker 1: behind her. And Ryan Mede at this point, I think
Speaker 1: he's right in a sense, the fact that she is
Speaker 1: a black woman. It's a benefit to her because Americans
Speaker 1: want to believe the mythology about you know, marching towards
Speaker 1: progress and equality, and they want to see themselves with
Speaker 1: the type of people who would vote for a black woman.
Speaker 1: And this was ended up being a benefit for Obama too,
Speaker 1: and so and I think we'll talk more about this
Speaker 1: than the next block. But I think Republicans are a
Speaker 1: bit imperiled by how much they want to fixate on
Speaker 1: her race and gender as a negative, and so part
Speaker 1: of the enthusiasm for her is the sense of like,
Speaker 1: oh my god, like a black woman, and I see
Speaker 1: myself in you know what this means for the country,
Speaker 1: and what this means for you know, how we conceive
Speaker 1: of ourselves. That's definitely a part of this, and it's
Speaker 1: a part of what makes her feel like this huge
Speaker 1: break from the Biden and Trump's blog that we were
Speaker 1: all looking towards space.
Speaker 2: I'm not so much sure I buy that. I think
Speaker 2: that's true for a certain subset of the liberal white
Speaker 2: population who fetishized like voting for black people and makes it.
Speaker 1: Now have you seen the like have you seen the
Speaker 1: black organizing culture?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean that's great, But that's the true whenever
Speaker 2: they had Obama. I mean I remember I went to
Speaker 2: an Obama rally in twenty twelve. It was the same
Speaker 2: vibe there. So I don't think it's all that unique.
Speaker 2: I just think it's any time there's so but that was.
Speaker 1: Good for Obama.
Speaker 2: Okay, sure, good for him.
Speaker 1: I mean I'm saying that's the opposite. It's the opposite
Speaker 1: of the like, oh, the country's too racist and sexist
Speaker 1: to elect a black woman.
Speaker 2: We've already thought that's stupid.
Speaker 1: It's the opposite of it. But that's what I'm saying,
Speaker 1: is like, you know, that's the way oftentimes this is framed.
Speaker 1: And I do think there's an added challenge of like
Speaker 1: envisioning her and the role. But I actually think I've
Speaker 1: come to believe net the level of aspiration enthusiasm that
Speaker 1: is wrapped up in that identity and image, I think
Speaker 1: that actually is a benefit to her campaign.
Speaker 2: Like I said, forrest subset of liberal white people, I
Speaker 2: think that is true. I would hope for most people,
Speaker 2: you don't have to care about who whatever the race
Speaker 2: is of the president. I certainly don't care what the
Speaker 2: race what.
Speaker 1: Sorry listen, obviously for me, the policy controls. But you
Speaker 1: can't deny they did an organizing call with black women
Speaker 1: that had forty thousand people on it. They did one
Speaker 1: for black men that had fifty thousand people on Like
Speaker 1: the level of enthusiasm and willingness to organize, and they
Speaker 1: raise millions of dollars on these calls. Like, you can't
Speaker 1: just hand wave that away and say, well, it doesn't
Speaker 1: matter to me, so it doesn't matter to anyone else.
Speaker 1: It doesn't matter to some people, it doesn't matter, like
Speaker 1: they're excited about this person looks different than what I expected.
Speaker 1: I didn't know if this would be possible. And I
Speaker 1: think Americans, like you said, including white Americans, like the
Speaker 1: idea of themselves as someone who's not racist and not
Speaker 1: sexist and would be willing to vote for this candidate.
Speaker 1: And so I don't think you can say, like, oh, this,
Speaker 1: I think it's I think it's a benefit to her
Speaker 1: her identity characteristics, which is the polar opposite of the
Speaker 1: narrative you normally get about the country's two racism.
Speaker 2: Oh sure that's actually a Median Arab and I think
Speaker 2: that's false. Is two thousand and eight, and I think, sure,
Speaker 2: that's good now. I mean, yeah, it's great. I would
Speaker 2: want it. I'd rather have it than not. But you know,
Speaker 2: there's a lot of white people in the country too,
Speaker 2: so if I was, I wouldn't necessarily I don't know.
Speaker 2: I just don't think it really matters. Like if I'm
Speaker 2: looking at it from who, it all is going to
Speaker 2: come down to who you're going to raise the most
Speaker 2: money from, Like, I don't think it's going to be
Speaker 2: what black sororities or black women organizing calls. I'd rather
Speaker 2: have the money than not. But it's not necessarily like
Speaker 2: going to turn anything. Will it have a lot of
Speaker 2: media attention paid to it. I just think it's a wash. Yeah, absolutely,
Speaker 2: especially with Trump. I mean, look at the amount of
Speaker 2: enthusiasm he gets amongst white working class voters. I'd have that.
Speaker 8: Now.
Speaker 2: Would I rather be Harris than Biden? Yes, absolutely. You
Speaker 2: know he's not getting that level of enthusiasm. But if
Speaker 2: I were her, I mean, I don't think the election
Speaker 2: is going to turn on black voters. I think it's
Speaker 2: going to come down to, like I said, suburban women.
Speaker 2: So if I were her, I'd be getting my ass
Speaker 2: out there in Detroit suburbs and and Milwaukee and everywhere else.
Speaker 2: I use the two together.
Speaker 1: I have really been gaining some ground among black voters,
Speaker 1: and Trump was really banking on continuing to eat into
Speaker 1: those margins in a way that is significant in a
Speaker 1: lot of states. And so you know, I think she
Speaker 1: we already have the numbers, like she definitely reverses that trend.
Speaker 1: She reverts more back to that Obama coalition with regards
Speaker 1: to black voters. And so yeah, I mean I don't
Speaker 1: think you can just say, like her identity doesn't mean
Speaker 1: anything in this race. You can see from the Republican
Speaker 1: reaction like obviously it has. It has resonance good and
Speaker 1: bad among different segments of the population. But my only
Speaker 1: point is that the notion that we've been sold, we
Speaker 1: were sold after Hilly Clok the country's too sexist to
Speaker 1: vote for her, you know, we were sold during Obama
Speaker 1: like all the country maybe too racist to vote for him.
Speaker 1: That was obviously not true, and they did vote for
Speaker 1: him twice twice. Hillary Clinton was not sexism. That wasn't
Speaker 1: the rest I was on sexism. That was the reason
Speaker 1: Kamala didn't do well in her primary. I think it's
Speaker 1: exactly the opposite. I think it's I think it's a
Speaker 1: benefit to her that she appears to be visually and
Speaker 1: her identity is such a break with you know, just
Speaker 1: the surface level identity of the contest as it was
Speaker 1: originally formulated. That that's that is part of why you
Speaker 1: have this flood of enthusiasm, donations, organizing all of those
Speaker 1: things that you're seeing right now.
Speaker 2: Her identity is part of that, I'm sure sure, I
Speaker 2: think is part of it. I think it would be
Speaker 2: roughly equal for aggression with Merrick Avenues. I think that's
Speaker 2: really so much of it is just he's not He's
Speaker 2: not Biden like that is a massive part of it.
Speaker 7: All right.
Speaker 2: So Crystal was very kind and she wanted me to
Speaker 2: weigh in on some of the Republican attacks on Kamala Harris.
Speaker 2: Or We're going to start with one that has been
Speaker 2: making the rounds. Kamala is allegedly quote, what is it,
Speaker 2: the original hawk to a girl? This was on Fox Business.
Speaker 2: Let's take a lesson.
Speaker 5: Yeah, and then there's the DEI press secretary telling you
Speaker 5: that the DEI vice president is the future of the
Speaker 5: party here and so the future looks kind of dim
Speaker 5: for the Democrats here. But this is no shock or either.
Speaker 5: Kamala harris 's the original hawk to a girl. That's
Speaker 5: the way she got where she is, and the party's
Speaker 5: going downhill if it's in her hands.
Speaker 2: That was tough? Was that was That was harsh? That
Speaker 2: was harsh. Look, I would just say this, let's just
Speaker 2: not go into it, all right.
Speaker 1: In general.
Speaker 2: I talked with Emily about it. I have annoyance with
Speaker 2: some of this because some of this it's like, well,
Speaker 2: what is allowed to be talked about? It not So
Speaker 2: with Trump, it's like, okay, well, we have now spent
Speaker 2: years litigating did he have sex with Stormy Daniels up
Speaker 2: until the point of what I'm not not going to
Speaker 2: go into. Let's just say the very personal details of
Speaker 2: Donald Trump's anatomy, what the exact sexual encounter was between
Speaker 2: the two That was a key like thing against him.
Speaker 1: So well, it was in the context of a campaign
Speaker 1: payment her up, that was the context there, Okay, but then.
Speaker 2: The Karen McDougall thing. Also, you know, many of Trump's affairs,
Speaker 2: so Trump's sex life was like totally out in the open.
Speaker 2: So it's like, oh, well, we're not allowed to talk
Speaker 2: about Kamala like basically having an affair with a very powerful,
Speaker 2: you know, a relationship with a powerful San Francisco mayor,
Speaker 2: and clearly how that, you know, contributed to her rise
Speaker 2: to the top. I would say, it's fine to talk
Speaker 2: about I wouldn't talk about it that way. But in general,
Speaker 2: let's just take it back to where we were in
Speaker 2: the beginning of this Uh, in the beginning of this show,
Speaker 2: which is if we're talking about suburban women in abortion,
Speaker 2: I would probably just avoid was.
Speaker 1: Going to say, I say so, I would incur Republicans,
Speaker 1: Please continue this line of attack, Laura Lumber, please continue
Speaker 1: talking about Kamala Harris's uterus and theorizing about her entire
Speaker 1: Please the other thing about this Sager, and this fits
Speaker 1: with the the DEI hit as well. This shit is
Speaker 1: so online and so to people that understand it, it's repellent,
Speaker 1: right like even the Fox Business lady there is like
Speaker 1: repelled by it. And he's been pulled off there. He
Speaker 1: hasn't been seen since he is.
Speaker 2: Making it explicitly sexual. And that's part of the thing
Speaker 2: that I'll get into with the de I think, which
Speaker 2: is part by the way. I don't think anything should
Speaker 2: be off women's I think it's fine. I think it
Speaker 2: is weird that when she was twenty nine she's dating
Speaker 2: Willie Brown, I think very obviously for political purposes. I
Speaker 2: think that's weird. It tells me a little about her
Speaker 2: sociopathic personality that basically is required to become president. So
Speaker 2: I think she is just like anyone who wants to
Speaker 2: be president. Many of these people are willing to do
Speaker 2: anything in order to ascend a power, and that's basically
Speaker 2: a requirement for the arrogance to think that you should
Speaker 2: be president. Okay, so let's leave it at that. Now.
Speaker 2: I didn't say that in a sexist way. Note that
Speaker 2: I just put it in exactly the same terms of
Speaker 2: many people who want to climb to the very top
Speaker 2: are willing to do anything to do that. So I
Speaker 2: think in that context it's fine. Now, I would not
Speaker 2: put it in explicitly sexual terms the way that I
Speaker 2: don't know who that guy was the Fox Business his analyst.
Speaker 1: Let me tell you what his Twitter profile says, because
Speaker 1: you'll enjoy that, please. It says a father of four,
Speaker 1: host of first class fatherhood.
Speaker 2: All right, yeah, see, would you talk about your daughter
Speaker 2: that way? You know, would you want to talk about
Speaker 2: women that way? In general? Like I said, this whole
Speaker 2: like sluct shaming thing, I wouldn't do it personally. I
Speaker 2: think talking about it in in terms of what it
Speaker 2: reveals about character and background, I think that's totally on brand,
Speaker 2: And I think fine, you know, in the same way
Speaker 2: that I think the talking about Trump and his sexual
Speaker 2: promiscuity are, especially with sexual braggadocio in the past, reveals
Speaker 2: like obviously something insecure about him and about.
Speaker 1: His love of the tabloids and all of that. So
Speaker 1: in general.
Speaker 2: The reason why I don't trust Republicans to talk about
Speaker 2: this is probably the same reason and Mike Johnson's told
Speaker 2: them not to talk about DEI. It's not that it's
Speaker 2: not legitimate, it's that can we really trust the people
Speaker 2: who brought us Todd Aiken and who was the other
Speaker 2: one who made the comments about rape Indiana? I'm forgetting
Speaker 2: as say. Sure, it's something, it's totally on the top
Speaker 2: of my head. But my point is is that can
Speaker 2: we really trust like these boomers who are you know,
Speaker 2: or even people who are making hawk tool comments on
Speaker 2: national television talking about the vice presidential canon? Can we talk?
Speaker 2: Can we trust them to talk about it in a
Speaker 2: nuance and I think in a way that could possibly
Speaker 2: make it a hit for the American people. No, I
Speaker 2: can't trust them about it, especially on the sexual thing.
Speaker 2: I would just let it be. I mean, look, like
Speaker 2: I said, when we've got Trump on the ticket to
Speaker 2: let's all just let's all call it even.
Speaker 1: I mean this argument that he made on Fox Business,
Speaker 1: which I've seen made, He's not the only one. This
Speaker 1: is being made, you know, online incessantly. The DEI thing,
Speaker 1: obviously is being made by members of Congress and op
Speaker 1: ed writers and whatever, like his argument about her is
Speaker 1: that she's black and she's a whore. Like again, if
Speaker 1: that's if that's where you want to go with this,
Speaker 1: good luck, because the other thing is part of how
Speaker 1: you know this is not an effective attack is Trump
Speaker 1: is not engaged in any of this, you know. But
Speaker 1: here's the thing, No, here's the thing that's ogur Like,
Speaker 1: let me put my moralizing aside, because I do think
Speaker 1: this is a disgusting thing to say about anyone. And
Speaker 1: I said the DEI thing too, well, I'm sure talk
Speaker 1: more about this, but whatever original like good faith critique
Speaker 1: of DEI programs that existed, which I share some of,
Speaker 1: by the way, Like it's clearly just become a term
Speaker 1: for a slur for like a black person with the job,
Speaker 1: and that's the way it's been used typically. But the
Speaker 1: bigger problem with both the Hawktua thing and the DEI
Speaker 1: thing is it reveals this like super niche, overly online
Speaker 1: type of brain. That was why Vivek didn't do well
Speaker 1: in his campaign. It was why Ron de Santis didn't
Speaker 1: do well in his campaign because they had these like
Speaker 1: niche online fixations, including a bizarre terminology that wouldn't even
Speaker 1: be familiar to most Americans, Like to the extent that
Speaker 1: most Americans would know the term DEI, it would be
Speaker 1: like black people who find it to be basically a slur,
Speaker 1: Black people who were increasingly open to a Republican message,
Speaker 1: by the way, or people are just like what do
Speaker 1: you I don't even know what that means, Like what
Speaker 1: are you even talking about? So that's why Trump never
Speaker 1: uses He never talked about ESG, he never talked about DEI.
Speaker 1: He made fun of the fixation on wokeness because he
Speaker 1: saw it for being this like overly niche online concern
Speaker 1: that doesn't land for normi Americans. So outside of the
Speaker 1: fact that I think they're certain demographic groups that will
Speaker 1: find this type of language in tech repellent, I also
Speaker 1: think it's just like way too online.
Speaker 2: I'm not willing to go there on DEI yet, because
Speaker 2: dei is a term that actually means something. Now, personally,
Speaker 2: I would not use de I. Would just say a
Speaker 2: firmative action, which is far more accurate and I think
Speaker 2: correct about who she is and about that both why
Speaker 2: she was picked for the vice president, etc. But that
Speaker 2: is like I don't know, I'm let's think of a
Speaker 2: leftist equivalent, where just because somebody has used the term improperly,
Speaker 2: does that mean that you just stop and it's become
Speaker 2: publicly defined or used as something else? Does that mean
Speaker 2: you give up on the term?
Speaker 3: Like?
Speaker 2: I don't think so. I mean DEI is a real thing.
Speaker 2: It basically means affirmative action for minority groups. It embodies
Speaker 2: the whole equity versus equality. And that's a mindset and
Speaker 2: philosophy that Kamala believes in, including putting out equity cartoons.
Speaker 2: So calling her a DEI candidate is empirically true. She
Speaker 2: was picked for her race. She was picked because she
Speaker 2: was a black woman. If you look back at the time,
Speaker 2: Amy Kobachar, Gretchen Whitmer and her were on the final list,
Speaker 2: m madness was happening. Jim Clyburn says, you got to
Speaker 2: pick a black lady, and he picked a black lady
Speaker 2: even though he didn't like her and she wasn't all
Speaker 2: that politically effective and failed in the primary. That is
Speaker 2: literally the EI.
Speaker 1: Here's what I would say. Yeah, the vice presidential pick
Speaker 1: is almost by definition a DEI pick. Joe Biden was
Speaker 1: put on the ticket with Barack Obama because he's a
Speaker 1: white dude, like you're always picked. I mean, what are
Speaker 1: we talking about with regard to who Kamlo will pick,
Speaker 1: Like it's going to be a white guy?
Speaker 8: Yes?
Speaker 3: Is that a de I?
Speaker 2: Yes, that's my point.
Speaker 1: But here's the thing. Here's so, here's the thing that
Speaker 1: did None of these people and you, by the way, too,
Speaker 1: you would never talk about them that way. You would
Speaker 1: never use the term DEI to describe them, even though
Speaker 1: they're also being picked for their race or other demographic characters.
Speaker 1: Mike Pence picked because he's an evangelical with you know,
Speaker 1: ties into that community. No one called him a DEI pick.
Speaker 1: And that goes to my point of what this has
Speaker 1: come to mean. Whatever you might mean when you say
Speaker 1: it would, it has come to mean is a black
Speaker 1: person with the job?
Speaker 2: Okay?
Speaker 1: And remember how they used it with the Baltimore mayor, right, sure,
Speaker 1: the democratically electing mayor on Twitter?
Speaker 2: No, but it doesn't.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but you know that this is not just one
Speaker 1: idiot on Twitter. I mean that's how they're using it
Speaker 1: in this context too, and it's not used consistently. Joe
Speaker 1: Biden was a DEI vice presidential pick. Mike Pence was
Speaker 1: a DEI presidential pick, a vice presidential pick. Jd Vance
Speaker 1: was picked because of his you know, unique ties in
Speaker 1: the Russ Beelder or is he a DEI vice president pick? No,
Speaker 1: of course they would never talk about them that way
Speaker 1: because it's only used to talk about black people. But
Speaker 1: let me just say again, I encourage you to continue
Speaker 1: this line of attack. I encourage you to continue in
Speaker 1: this direction because not only is it off putting for
Speaker 1: a demographic group that you know was starting to be
Speaker 1: like somewhat open to Republicans, and I don't think just
Speaker 1: black people like Also, you have a lot, as you
Speaker 1: were saying before, you have a lot of like suburban
Speaker 1: white people who don't want to see themselves as racists.
Speaker 1: If they're going to vote against Kamala Harris, they want
Speaker 1: like a non racial based or gender based reason to
Speaker 1: vote against her. So, you know, not only is it
Speaker 1: off putting, but again, part of the problem for Republicans
Speaker 1: in twenty twenty two was the sense of like, you
Speaker 1: guys are just out there, like you're weird. You fixate
Speaker 1: on this fringe stuff and all this DEI esg all
Speaker 1: this hyper online fixation. Talked to a girl like do
Speaker 1: you think my mom knows what that is. No, she doesn't, Okay,
Speaker 1: So I encourage Republicans to continue in this direction. I
Speaker 1: think this is going to work out very well.
Speaker 2: I'm not defending hawk too, but here is why. And
Speaker 2: this you brought up an important point. So let's think
Speaker 2: about the history. Affirmative action was literally created for black people.
Speaker 2: There's a reason why the term is extricably linked.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 2: Part of the problem with affirmative actions.
Speaker 1: That's what So that what makes it an explicitly racial
Speaker 1: But this far I'm saying, the problem with affirmative action
Speaker 1: is that it became dei, which became an all encompassing
Speaker 1: term that got fused with bipoc esg all of this
Speaker 1: like minority obsession.
Speaker 2: So whites are by definition not I min which is
Speaker 2: why the term is not traditionally used with that Now
Speaker 2: as a mindset itself, by the way, I opposed racial preferences.
Speaker 2: I appose opposed voting for people because of race, And
Speaker 2: I don't believe in racial exceptionalism or any of this stuff,
Speaker 2: and I would have opposed it back in the nineteen
Speaker 2: sixty two. The policy has been a disaster for the
Speaker 2: United States, which is why I think striking down affirmative
Speaker 2: action was a good thing. Now calling her a DEI
Speaker 2: candidate again is empirically true when you utilize your race
Speaker 2: in the midst of the greatest racial hysteria in this
Speaker 2: country since the nineteen sixties and use that to cost
Speaker 2: your opponents, when your own record itself is one of
Speaker 2: political disaster in the campaign and you failed with black voters.
Speaker 1: Amy Cony Barrett Trump had said he wanted to put.
Speaker 2: On that's an affirmative action pick. That's correct.
Speaker 1: Yes, do any of these people ever talk about it?
Speaker 1: People all that right?
Speaker 2: Actually did call Amy a Cony Barrett?
Speaker 1: And I've never heard any of these people her being
Speaker 1: a DEI affirmative action candidate? It is, And you just
Speaker 1: said it's an explicitly does it was developed it would
Speaker 1: be okay, okay, but that's what's the argument. But I'm
Speaker 1: just saying you're making an explicitly racialized argument. Then that
Speaker 1: the problem with Kamala Harris is based on her race.
Speaker 2: And her tender that's that problem. That's a that's a
Speaker 2: fair attack. Okay, you didn't earn because of your race,
Speaker 2: which is true.
Speaker 1: But the same is true of Joe Biden. The same
Speaker 1: is true of the vice presidential pick. It's not admit,
Speaker 1: nobody earns it. They get plucked down of wherever for
Speaker 1: their demographic characteristics and who what group people think they're
Speaker 1: going to appeal to. So I'm not saying you can't
Speaker 1: say it, say it, please go ahead, make the case,
Speaker 1: go for it. I'm saying I do not think that
Speaker 1: this is a wise direction for Republicans to go in.
Speaker 1: Because let me let me just add to this, because
Speaker 1: I was thinking about, all right, if I was gonna
Speaker 1: go after Kamala Harris, like, how would I do it?
Speaker 1: What would be the most effective thing? Because I think
Speaker 1: that we, you know, we have sort of a model
Speaker 1: for that because of the failure of her twenty twenty
Speaker 1: presidential campaign.
Speaker 4: What was it?
Speaker 2: She believe that?
Speaker 1: What was that was a problem for he It was
Speaker 1: it was a couple of things. It was that she
Speaker 1: believes in nothing right, She's just decipher She's like, you know,
Speaker 1: just will say whatever's convenient in the moment. So she's
Speaker 1: a political chameleon. And the sense of incompetence that came from,
Speaker 1: like the inability to run a campaign, her stumbles on
Speaker 1: the trail, et cetera, et cetera, so make that case,
Speaker 1: those things don't have anything to do with her being
Speaker 1: a black woman or a slut, right, this has to
Speaker 1: do everything with her own capabilities and where she's been
Speaker 1: and how she's been all over the place, And that
Speaker 1: rings a lot more true. The other thing that, you know,
Speaker 1: this is very predictable, like the thing Trump is actually
Speaker 1: going with is ooh, she's radical left, she's radical liberal, etcetera.
Speaker 1: I think that's probably has more traction. Definitely does, and
Speaker 1: it's more over the target of of what would make sense,
Speaker 1: but it also effective. Attacks really have to ring true.
Speaker 1: And what rings a lot more true with Kamala Harris
Speaker 1: isn't that she is some hardcore, committed lefty ideologue. It's
Speaker 1: that she doesn't believe in anything at all. So if
Speaker 1: I was going against Kamala Harris, I would leave her
Speaker 1: race and gender beside, because, like I said, people who
Speaker 1: want to vote against her, most Americans don't want to
Speaker 1: see themselves as explicitly racist or sexist, right. They want
Speaker 1: to have some other reason that they can point to
Speaker 1: that they're voting against her, other than that she's you know,
Speaker 1: a whore or a DEI pick. They want to have
Speaker 1: something they can point to that absolves them of any
Speaker 1: potential implication of racism or sexism. So that's why I
Speaker 1: think these attacks, you know, I think they're just instantly repellent,
Speaker 1: off putting to certain groups, and I just don't think
Speaker 1: it's the most effective direction for Republicans to go to
Speaker 1: in terms of making a case against her. And there
Speaker 1: is a very clear case that can be made against I.
Speaker 2: Don't disagree with the case you're making, but let me
Speaker 2: case make the case the dei affirmative action thing. Nobody
Speaker 2: suffered more in this country of bi affirmative action than
Speaker 2: white working class voter. So this is the white working
Speaker 2: class selection voting for Trump. Well, no, not necessarily. Joe
Speaker 2: Biden was breaking what thirty percent forty percent white working class.
Speaker 2: I mean, it's like with blacks, margins matter black voters.
Speaker 2: Ninety ten and eighty twenty is literally the difference between
Speaker 2: four hundred electoral votes and what two hundred and sixty, Right,
Speaker 2: That's part of the reason why Trump's meaningful gains. I mean,
Speaker 2: he's winning like eight or he's winning like fifteen percent
Speaker 2: of the black vote, but that's still a lot more
Speaker 2: than ten. So if the affirmative action line can you know,
Speaker 2: mobilize white working class voters in the industrial Midwest. It's
Speaker 2: not a bad thing. And if you look at Hillbilly
Speaker 2: Elogy and what is it's the history of the Scotts
Speaker 2: Irish people. I'm forgetting Jim Webb's book. If you look
Speaker 2: at those two things, a core theme is about racial
Speaker 2: discontent and the obsession with Democratic elites of affirmative action.
Speaker 2: And so I think JD as a line in Hillbilly
Speaker 2: Lergy something about you know, people on the floor being
Speaker 2: upset because somebody got promoted because they were black or
Speaker 2: Jim Webb has talked a lot about this in the past,
Speaker 2: by how affirmative action is one of the reasons that
Speaker 2: he left the Democratic Party. Then, pointing to the person
Speaker 2: who is literally only in I mean, can we acknowledge
Speaker 2: Crystal that she would not win an open Democratic primary
Speaker 2: like from in twenty and twenty.
Speaker 1: I mean, obviously in twenty twenty, I think in twenty
Speaker 1: I think this time there's a decent chance she would
Speaker 1: have just because of her position as.
Speaker 2: VI after select that's great.
Speaker 1: Again, that's like almost definitionally the case of every vice
Speaker 1: presidential candidate. So I mean, listen, if you want to double.
Speaker 1: The case you're making is let's like double down on
Speaker 1: racial grievance. That's not It is true. It's obviously a
Speaker 1: racial grievance. Like even if you say it's a legitimate
Speaker 1: racial grievance, it is a racial grievance. It is white
Speaker 1: working class feeling like black people got things they weren't didn't.
Speaker 2: Deserve that that minority groups because they weren't necessarily taking any.
Speaker 1: Morality out of that. It is definitionally a racial grievance.
Speaker 1: I don't think that that is an effective strategy at
Speaker 1: this point in time, and it's not the coalition that
Speaker 1: Trump is trying to go after this time. I mean,
Speaker 1: they've really been trying to expand into a more diverse coalition.
Speaker 1: They have a lot of problems with suburban women that
Speaker 1: they know is going to be a major issue. So,
Speaker 1: you know, I think the jd Vance vice presidential pick
Speaker 1: was a foolish one for this exact reason, because it's
Speaker 1: also just doubling down on a base that is already
Speaker 1: with you, Like you already have the enthusiasm of this group.
Speaker 1: And again, to me, the fact that Trump, who is
Speaker 1: not you know, he is not above saying anything and
Speaker 1: you know, everything all the time when he thinks it
Speaker 1: serves him that he is not making these arguments, I
Speaker 1: think tells you a lot about the political foolishness of
Speaker 1: us going in the story.
Speaker 2: It's only been five days, right that Trump has been
Speaker 2: on the election one rally since, but we know that he.
Speaker 1: Has showed all this DEI esg woke like he has
Speaker 1: a shoed all of that language very clearly and even
Speaker 1: like made fun of Ronda Santis.
Speaker 2: And I think that's just and I don't disagree with anything,
Speaker 2: and that's.
Speaker 1: That's a big part of the what the rock that
Speaker 1: Ronda Santis crashed in to is his fixation with these
Speaker 1: things that are like hyper online and somewhat niche and
Speaker 1: just feel like weird in fringed to a lot of
Speaker 1: Norman Americans. Putting aside, like you know, the debate we're
Speaker 1: having about the moraleity and whatever.
Speaker 2: I think if I were Trump, I don't think it's
Speaker 2: a bad attack, like I said, with winning white working
Speaker 2: class and trying to now let's say I would use
Speaker 2: the term affirmative action, because I think it's also the
Speaker 2: most accurate. Now I'm also going to object though that
Speaker 2: you can't just make these throw these claims out, because
Speaker 2: notice who I'm not going to call a di i cannet,
Speaker 2: Barack Obama. Barack Obama rightfully won the presidency and his
Speaker 2: primary election on the strength of his own name. And
Speaker 2: I don't think if anything, you know, if he had
Speaker 2: racial headwinds or whatever, it was far stronger in two
Speaker 2: thousand and eight, and he blew it out of the water.
Speaker 2: I don't think he was a de i cannet. He
Speaker 2: was never selected, he was never anointed, he was never
Speaker 2: given a position. He fought the Clinton establishment and he won.
Speaker 2: That's actually an inspiring racial story, and that's part of
Speaker 2: the reason why you can connect to that. That's why
Speaker 2: white working class people can connect to that. Obama grew
Speaker 2: up his background, that was everything. Kama is a different story.
Speaker 2: I mean, she was selected because of her race, right,
Speaker 2: And I'm not gonna give I'm not going to just
Speaker 2: put away and say we're not allowed to say that
Speaker 2: that in my opinion.
Speaker 1: You're allowed.
Speaker 2: Okay, fine, but listen, but that won't be potent.
Speaker 1: Joe Biden was also selected for his right.
Speaker 2: But it's not the same because at least at that time,
Speaker 2: at least at the time, they would lie about it
Speaker 2: and they said it's first four.
Speaker 1: But hold on, it is like, it's almost exactly the same,
Speaker 1: fear matters, it's as exactly the same because he ran
Speaker 1: in that primary and he failed miserably, and it was
Speaker 1: he multiple times failed miserably. So because this is the
Speaker 1: thing on you know, the knock, the legitimate knock on
Speaker 1: Kamala is like, well, you ran and you failed and
Speaker 1: then you just got plucked out. Well, it was literally
Speaker 1: the same thing with Joe Biden. But that was never
Speaker 1: that was never used against him. He was never called
Speaker 1: you know, his credibility, his you know, legitimacy in the
Speaker 1: position was never called into question. And Kamala Harris, I mean,
Speaker 1: you know, she won statewide in a large, very diverse,
Speaker 1: very economically powerful state multiple times. Okay, so yeah, I'm
Speaker 1: not going to believe that what's his name, Willy brown
Speaker 1: Willy Browning, This one man cannot possibly be responsible for
Speaker 1: every single thing that happens every election that occurs in
Speaker 1: the state of California, like at some level, to the
Speaker 1: extent that there's any democratic process at play. She earned
Speaker 1: her stripes in the state of California. She won primary,
Speaker 1: she won statewide multiple times she served in office. People
Speaker 1: got to evaluate her credentials, et cetera, et cetera, and
Speaker 1: she got put in as vice president in the same
Speaker 1: way that every vice president gets picked by nature of
Speaker 1: her demographic characteristics and who they thought she could appeal to. Now,
Speaker 1: I don't support I think it is racist to assume
Speaker 1: black people are going to vote for a black person
Speaker 1: just because of their identity. I think it is way
Speaker 1: more complex than that. But you can't deny that. The
Speaker 1: whole discussion we're having around Commlin Harrison how she'll pick
Speaker 1: her VP is about their demographic care who they'll appeal to,
Speaker 1: and what their background is and all of those things.
Speaker 1: That's like just how vps get picked. So I don't
Speaker 1: think that's fair. I don't think it's fair for that
Speaker 1: to be held specifically against her when it's not held
Speaker 1: against anyone else who doesn't happen to be black. And
Speaker 1: I also, like I said, I hope Republicans continue in
Speaker 1: this direction because I think it's a very ineffective, off putting,
Speaker 1: overly online attack. I think if you polled most of
Speaker 1: the public, they don't even couldn't even tell you what
Speaker 1: DEI even means.
Speaker 2: I agree, but they might know what affirmative action means,
Speaker 2: and they are two sides of the same coin. So
Speaker 2: I'm just gonna look, we'll see, we'll find out in November.
Speaker 2: I think, as a person who is a minority, can
Speaker 2: I play my minority card? Now? If I ever got
Speaker 2: promoted or ascended or whatever because of my rate, I'd
Speaker 2: be mortified because of it.
Speaker 1: So anybody who's out there who supports this type of.
Speaker 2: Crap, you're just shooting yourself in the foot, in my opinion,
Speaker 2: and I think it's the stupidest thing. Now. Again, part
Speaker 2: of the reason why I connect with the affirmative action
Speaker 2: message is explicitly because I despise people who's only characteristic
Speaker 2: about them is making it all about their race. That's
Speaker 2: not interesting, Like what color you're born is not interesting
Speaker 2: at all. What you believe in, what you're gonna do
Speaker 2: for others. That's again why I at least revere Barack
Speaker 2: Obama as a political animal, using his background as both
Speaker 2: a black man as a black man and also his
Speaker 2: white mother and his grandparents growing up in Kansas to
Speaker 2: create a story that everyone could connect to that was
Speaker 2: genuinely inspiring. I I remember thinking about it at the
Speaker 2: time and to this day is one of those where
Speaker 2: everyone can But that's not necessarily unique about his race.
Speaker 2: Clinton was very effective in the same thing. He literally said,
Speaker 2: like I grew up in a trailer park. I was
Speaker 2: trailer trash. And that's one of the reasons why they
Speaker 2: even called him at the time the first black president,
Speaker 2: which is stupid, but because he connected for a lot
Speaker 2: with black voters. So that's my point is that it's
Speaker 2: not about race per se, it's about connecting with what
Speaker 2: people feel icky about the other person. Now, one of
Speaker 2: the attacks against her is she was selected because of
Speaker 2: a race. He's never been truly tested in the fire
Speaker 2: of democracy. Now, I think you're one state, okay, okay, okay, politician,
Speaker 2: you have to get elected.
Speaker 1: People still have to vote for you.
Speaker 2: There's a fake primary to the post.
Speaker 1: People still get to vote in the state of California.
Speaker 1: It's not like a dictatorship. The entire time is in
Speaker 1: Alabama's and they even even though I'm not sure how
Speaker 1: long they've had it, but now they have the jungle
Speaker 1: primary where you are up against very likely a Democrat
Speaker 1: in the fall as well. I mean, listen, yeah, it's
Speaker 1: a machine state, but you still have to win vote sure.
Speaker 1: So I just think, like, I just don't think that's fair.
Speaker 1: Delaware is also a state where if you just have
Speaker 1: a d buy your name and get elected. I don't
Speaker 1: remember anyone calling into question Joe Biden's credibility because of that.
Speaker 1: So that's why I just think it's I mean, I
Speaker 1: just think it's really very unfair, and I think it
Speaker 1: is a foolish. I think it's a foolish direction go
Speaker 1: in and it makes it explicitly, it explicitly racializes the
Speaker 1: argument against her, and I don't.
Speaker 2: But then why is she allowed to explicitly racial and
Speaker 2: the meaning, Oh, it's so important to have a black woman.
Speaker 2: I'm like, I don't care if you're a black Woman's like,
Speaker 2: what are you going to do for her?
Speaker 1: I haven't even I mean, I haven't heard her say that.
Speaker 1: But to your point about Barack Obama, all political candidates
Speaker 1: except for Bernie Sanders, they use their identity, like they
Speaker 1: talk about their biography. That Trump as the business guy, right,
Speaker 1: like he uses his biography and his identity as well.
Speaker 1: Like that's part and parcel of what you do. So
Speaker 1: I don't find it, like, you know, her I don't
Speaker 1: find her talking about her identity to be some like
Speaker 1: crime against the country. I think it's far more important
Speaker 1: what she's going to do. I think the fact that
Speaker 1: she hasn't stood for anything, and even after all these
Speaker 1: years in politics, I have no clue what this woman
Speaker 1: actually believes. I think that's a problem. But for her
Speaker 1: to talk about her identity and for people to aspirationally
Speaker 1: want to yeah, I mean that was part of the
Speaker 1: appeal Baraco. Remember how excited people weren't and you was
Speaker 1: elegd in two thousand and or you were a baby,
Speaker 1: but they were excited. Even people who weren't really Democrats
Speaker 1: or didn't even vote for they were excited because of
Speaker 1: what it said about the country.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 1: She benefits from that as well, And I think for
Speaker 1: Republicans to try to make an explicitly racial or gender
Speaker 1: based case against her, I just think that will backfire,
Speaker 1: especially given the coalition they're trying to put together.
Speaker 2: I'm not sure I agree, just because we have lived
Speaker 2: through BLM madness, we lived through anti racism baby and
Speaker 2: all this. Other people are fed up with a lot
Speaker 2: of this stuff. I mean, look, I'm not saying the
Speaker 2: CRT thing was like a big winner. But I think
Speaker 2: if you look at the general trend, people are mostly
Speaker 2: gone passed, People are mostly passed. A lot of the
Speaker 2: BLM nonsense that was, you know, shoved down our throats
Speaker 2: for an entire what two or three years in this country.
Speaker 2: I can't, I'm not. I can't be the only one
Speaker 2: who was further radicalized on race as a question of
Speaker 2: that in terms of being explicitly against racialism in American politics.
Speaker 1: But that's the thing, Sager is, that's actually the biggest
Speaker 1: danger is that right now Republicans are the ones that
Speaker 1: are appear to be engaged in that racialism, because I
Speaker 1: do think you're right that Americans have an instinct towards
Speaker 1: like the color blind ideal, and so when you're making
Speaker 1: an explicitly racialized case, it flips from you know, Democrats.
Speaker 1: There was a time when Democrats were the ones who
Speaker 1: were like word policing and nanny's in PC and cancel
Speaker 1: culture and all this stuff. And then Republicans flip the
Speaker 1: script because they got so obsessed with wokeness that it
Speaker 1: seems like you guys are the ones who are obsessed
Speaker 1: with this stuff. And it's the same dynamic now, Kama
Speaker 1: Harris is out there talking about like, you know, the
Speaker 1: normal democratics, abortion and middle class, about all this stuff,
Speaker 1: and Republicans are out here making explicitly racialized case. I think,
Speaker 1: to a country that really prefers a color blind self perception,
Speaker 1: at the very least, they find the explicitly racialized arguments
Speaker 1: when they were made by democrat but now when they're
Speaker 1: being made by Republicans to be off putting, repellent and
Speaker 1: non and not appealing. That's what I think, because I
Speaker 1: do think that like the colorblind view, where you're not
Speaker 1: obsessing over these demographic characteristics, is far more salient, far
Speaker 1: more reflective of like the aspirational place Americans want to be.
Speaker 1: And so when it's Republicans who are the ones who
Speaker 1: are talking about, you know, racial characteristics, they're the ones
Speaker 1: in danger of sort of violating that precept of oh, we're,
Speaker 1: you know, supposed.
Speaker 2: To be a real I personally, though, I feel a
Speaker 2: bit gaslight on this conversation because it's like, you can't
Speaker 2: and I'm not talking about you, but I'm saying media
Speaker 2: democrats know this. You can't spend the last twenty five
Speaker 2: years of American politics making everything about race and then
Speaker 2: when people say, hey, you were select because you're race,
Speaker 2: like you're bringing up race, It's like, hold on a second,
Speaker 2: what like what just happened here? So I will I
Speaker 2: am skeptical that this will have the negative effect because,
Speaker 2: like I said, I think there are a lot of
Speaker 2: people out there. I mean, the affirmative action thing that
Speaker 2: was very popular for most people whenever it was struck down.
Speaker 1: It's actually a decent attack.
Speaker 2: I don't trust anybody who is selected by affirmative action now,
Speaker 2: especially whenever it's the most important job in the entire world.
Speaker 2: So I think that's a decent enough attack.
Speaker 4: Now.
Speaker 2: Also for now she's talking about abortion. How soon until
Speaker 2: we see explicit racialism that comes from her, about diversity
Speaker 2: quotas about the people who she's surrounded with. What percent
Speaker 2: of her staff is going to be black women or whatever,
Speaker 2: or Asian men or any of that. I mean, are
Speaker 2: we really saying that that instinct is dead in the
Speaker 2: modern Democratic Party? Like, of course not. The Biden administration
Speaker 2: has racial quotas literally for people who work for them.
Speaker 2: So this is somebody who also she always talked about
Speaker 2: her diversity in her office, Like you can't both believe
Speaker 2: in that and then get upset whenever it's used against you. Now,
Speaker 2: if I were her, I agree, I would only talk
Speaker 2: about abortion in middle class issues. But I have no
Speaker 2: doubt that she, especially if not her, the media and
Speaker 2: her surrogates will also make it into a thing. And
Speaker 2: I'm just not convinced yet that the backlash now would
Speaker 2: say used DEI I would say affirmative action and against
Speaker 2: racialism specifically, which I think Democrats are the people who
Speaker 2: mostly use that rhetoric and have dominated the conversation now
Speaker 2: for a long time. I think pushing back against that
Speaker 2: is potent, has been for I can only speak for myself.
Speaker 2: I don't I don't know. We've only been here now
Speaker 2: for a week. I find it repellent that she was
Speaker 2: selected for that reason.
Speaker 1: I think you're definitely repellent that Joe Biden was selected.
Speaker 1: But that's kind of repellent, wasn't He was selected because.
Speaker 2: Of his character? Hected was white?
Speaker 1: Do you yes?
Speaker 2: The lies we tell ourselves? Also?
Speaker 1: Do you find it she's black? Do you find it
Speaker 1: repellent that? Right now? The just bed rock assumption is
Speaker 1: Kalma Harris got to pick a white.
Speaker 2: Man's not repellent because you shouldn't.
Speaker 1: I haven't heard you say or anyone else say anything
Speaker 1: about that.
Speaker 2: I don't know. Notice when I said Josh Shapiro, I
Speaker 2: say it because he's a actually popular governor. That's why
Speaker 2: I would. I mean, we're about to talk about VP.
Speaker 2: But I'm based on your statistics. I mean I would
Speaker 2: pick Gratchen Whitmer if I were to. I wouldn't necessarily
Speaker 2: pick a white man because she's popular in the state
Speaker 2: of Michigan. You got to win Michigan. I mean if
Speaker 2: she was black, I wouldn't care either. Who's the governor
Speaker 2: of Maryland? Was that guy's name Wes Moore?
Speaker 1: Esmore?
Speaker 2: He's a decent candidate. Are you pick him too? I
Speaker 2: think you could win. I'm serious. I mean, this is
Speaker 2: somebody who's from around here. He speaks well, right, He's
Speaker 2: one of those where he does a good job on
Speaker 2: the stump. I think he's quite popular, and he do
Speaker 2: a decent job with some of these swing voters like there.
Speaker 2: I just made the case was.
Speaker 1: A repellent that Mike Pen's got pick because he was
Speaker 1: an evangelical Well, it was a smart play, it was
Speaker 1: tactically smart. This is this is my point. Sarah Panllin
Speaker 1: picked because she was a woman, and she was young,
Speaker 1: and you know, she was picked for her I don't
Speaker 1: remember anyone saying it's repellent that she was picked for
Speaker 1: her demographic characteristics. So why is it repellent when it's
Speaker 1: a black woman pick for her characteristics, and it's not
Speaker 1: repellent when it's a white man picked for his characteristics because.
Speaker 2: They conversation about race, Like I said, the media and
Speaker 2: democrats again, we were literally donning themselves in kentake cloth,
Speaker 2: putting George Floyd and BLM signs up in every restaurant
Speaker 2: in the country, and then expecting everyone to just sit
Speaker 2: there and be like, oh, this is actually totally fine,
Speaker 2: that we've completely lost our minds on all of this discussion.
Speaker 2: And then it's like getting mad whenever you say, hey,
Speaker 2: that was actually crazy. You were picked because of these reasons.
Speaker 1: Why why should we say But because it's not applied uniformly,
Speaker 1: that's my point. It's only applied when it's a black person,
Speaker 1: that's the point. But they are if you're going to
Speaker 1: make the case, if you're going to make the case
Speaker 1: that people shouldn't be picked for the demographic characteristics, I
Speaker 1: am on board for that conversation. But that is not
Speaker 1: the case that's made. The case is only made. That's
Speaker 1: why DEI has just come to me and a black
Speaker 1: person with the job. It's only made when it is
Speaker 1: black people. It's no problem when a white dude gets
Speaker 1: picked because he's a white dude, or an evangelical dude
Speaker 1: gets picked because he's an evangelical dude, or he's picked
Speaker 1: fro because he's from Pennsylvania or whatever, that's no problem.
Speaker 1: That's fine, and isn't a mark against them. And so
Speaker 1: it's just it's just a blatant double standard. And like
Speaker 1: I said, listen, you can make the case all you want.
Speaker 1: It's fine. I have no issue with it. Make the case,
Speaker 1: but I think Republicans run a real risk of being
Speaker 1: seen as the party that is racial obsessed with race
Speaker 1: in the election. And you're right, the party that seems
Speaker 1: like they're obsessed with race like Democrats did with the
Speaker 1: Can Take All and all that stuff, right the party
Speaker 1: that seems like they are obsessed with identity characteristics is
Speaker 1: in a poor position. And right now it's the Republicans
Speaker 1: who seem much more obsessed with her being a woman
Speaker 1: and being a black woman. And I don't think it's
Speaker 1: wise for them.
Speaker 2: And we'll see. I'm not going to put it past
Speaker 2: the BLM people to bring it all right back circle,
Speaker 2: especially the.
Speaker 1: BLM people actually post Kamala Harris's coronation. By the way,
Speaker 1: for what it's worth, they wanted an open convention. They
Speaker 1: put on a whole thing.
Speaker 2: We're going to object to miss bail fund, like what
Speaker 2: are we doing here? Like that's ridiculous. But look anyway,
Speaker 2: I will, I will. I'll tell you what. If Republicans lose,
Speaker 2: and they lose what even more of the black vote
Speaker 2: and suburban white vote than they did in twenty twenty,
Speaker 2: then I'll think you're right. But if they don't, and
Speaker 2: I'm gonna say, I think it was actually a smart
Speaker 2: play and I'm curious to see.
Speaker 1: How Ever, why don't you think that Donald Trump is
Speaker 1: making this.
Speaker 2: Argument because he's only it's only been out for five
Speaker 2: days because he got shot in the ear, and he's
Speaker 2: only said had enough time to stay laughing and Kamala
Speaker 2: are what is it? Lion? Kamala? It's oh yeah, okay, whatever,
Speaker 2: I think laughing is better.
Speaker 1: I mean, the rerect these these terms are. He has
Speaker 1: studiously avoided all of these terms because they sound like
Speaker 1: a secret language to like normal voters.
Speaker 2: I agree, don't use the term DEI like use the
Speaker 2: term affirmative action. That's accurate. Everybody knows what that one means,
Speaker 2: and everybody also is going to know that that's correct
Speaker 2: whenever it's used against her. But okay, I think we
Speaker 2: probably beat this convers Yeah.
Speaker 1: So the other the other argument that they've been making
Speaker 1: is that she is insufficiently pro Israel, which I think
Speaker 1: is another you know, electoral loser in terms of arguments
Speaker 1: against her. I think we have a c five of
Speaker 1: evidence of this case that's being made against her this week.
Speaker 1: Let's take a listen.
Speaker 8: This is the astounding bad decision not to appear behind
Speaker 8: BB as Vice President of the United States. This is
Speaker 8: a signal to Thomas has Blah and Iran that we
Speaker 8: literally do not have BB's back. This is really her
Speaker 8: first major foreign policy decision, and she's gotten anf already.
Speaker 5: You got a question.
Speaker 9: She will not show up for the Prime Minister's Joint
Speaker 9: Session of Congress today. She rather addressed in the summer
Speaker 9: a sorority, a cod sorority, like she can't get out
Speaker 9: of that. What she's doing is she's running away from Israel.
Speaker 9: She refuses to go to Bibnet YadA Yahu's in Washington.
Speaker 5: She refuses to be.
Speaker 9: Even if you're against Israel or you're against the Jewish people,
Speaker 9: show up and listen to the concept. But she's totally
Speaker 9: against the Jewish people. And it amazes me how Jewish
Speaker 9: people will vote for the Democrats when they're being treated
Speaker 9: so disrespectfully and badly.
Speaker 5: It amazes me.
Speaker 9: It's shocking.
Speaker 1: I don't I don't.
Speaker 9: So now we have a new victim to defeat Lion
Speaker 9: Kamala Harris, Lion.
Speaker 8: L y.
Speaker 1: So I'm not going with Lion. Lion is not his
Speaker 1: best work, not not laughing. Kamala also not his best work.
Speaker 2: Why and Ted worked because it really had this one? Yeah, laughing,
Speaker 2: I could see it. I don't know. He needs something better.
Speaker 2: He needs to bring the magic back.
Speaker 1: Also, the honestly crazy kamalas used crazy for a bunch
Speaker 1: of time. I would be probably, I think it would
Speaker 1: be better than those. But Nancy insufficiently pro Israel. I
Speaker 1: also don't think is the political winner.
Speaker 2: That Look, I don't think people care that much about Israel,
Speaker 2: especially now today. Maybe some young voters. Even then it's
Speaker 2: not the majority, So like, I don't think it's going
Speaker 2: to be the deciding election in terms of the money though,
Speaker 2: that's where a lot of money is for donors. Yeah,
Speaker 2: that's that's probably why he's doing.
Speaker 1: That's it. But it's also, like, you know, to the extent,
Speaker 1: so I think for young voters it doesn't. I think
Speaker 1: they're watching very closely what Kamala Harris does and says
Speaker 1: in these next few days, and I think that is
Speaker 1: consequential for her in terms of being able to put
Speaker 1: together that sort of recapture some of the Obama coalition,
Speaker 1: but for a broader general electorate to the extent that
Speaker 1: it matters at all, it's the sense of like, why
Speaker 1: are you fixated on these why are you obsessed over
Speaker 1: these foreign countries when you know we got a lot
Speaker 1: of problems here.
Speaker 2: I count myself part of that. I don't really care
Speaker 2: what you know about whether she's sufficiently pro is reeled
Speaker 2: or not. But whatever, Okay, we got a good conversation
Speaker 2: by VP. Let's get to it.
Speaker 7: All right.
Speaker 2: Moving on now to discussion of vice president. Who is
Speaker 2: Kamala Harris going to pick to be her candidate? Let's
Speaker 2: put this up there on the screen. There's between seven
Speaker 2: to twelve names that have been floated out there. Going
Speaker 2: to start off with the most obvious and probably the
Speaker 2: front runner, I think it's fair to say it's Pennsylvania
Speaker 2: Governor Josh Shapiro, enormously popular in the state of Pennsylvania.
Speaker 2: His high approval rating obviously did very well against Doug Mastriano.
Speaker 2: Pennsylvania is a must win state. Number two on the
Speaker 2: list is Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona. I personally, I
Speaker 2: don't think she's going to pick Mark Kelly because if
Speaker 2: he was gone, then that would open up a competitive
Speaker 2: Senate seat in a battleground state where it's been a
Speaker 2: bit of hit or miss for Democrats so far. Number
Speaker 2: three is apparently a North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper. Now,
Speaker 2: apparently her and Cooper go way back, both serving as
Speaker 2: AG's and have some experience together. That would put him
Speaker 2: possibly higher on the list, since this is such a
Speaker 2: crazy time that you definitely want somebody that you might
Speaker 2: be comfortable with comfortable with. Next is Kentucky Governor Andy Basheer.
Speaker 2: He's been all over television in the last couple of
Speaker 2: days attacking JD. Vance really auditioning himself for the job.
Speaker 2: He was also what is he the most blue governor
Speaker 2: of a red state in the whole country.
Speaker 1: He is the most popular governor Democratic governor in the
Speaker 1: entire most.
Speaker 2: Popular governor of the democratic right. But at the same time,
Speaker 2: no one's wenting Kentucky in the twenty twenty four election.
Speaker 2: But you know, maybe he could have some crossover rural appeal.
Speaker 2: Tim Waltz is apparently on the list. That's the governor
Speaker 2: of Minnesota, Illinois Governor JB. Pritzker. Pritzker is a billionaire,
Speaker 2: probably helps in terms of bringing in the money. It's
Speaker 2: also the governor of a Midwestern state. And then Gretchen Whitmer.
Speaker 2: So what are we getting. We're getting a sense of
Speaker 2: governors boring from the Midwest, people who are popular in
Speaker 2: their home states and can bring it home at least
Speaker 2: in the battlegrounds with some of these white working class voters.
Speaker 2: And we'll see. There's another list that is out there
Speaker 2: of some twelve people that are allegedly on the list.
Speaker 2: Let's see who am I missing from the list that
Speaker 2: I spoke out. Okay, so the outside team is being
Speaker 2: vetted by Eric Holder some of the other people that
Speaker 2: are on the list that I missed here, I think
Speaker 2: what was it. Tim McRaven was on the list, or
Speaker 2: Admiral he removed himself. Okay, here we go. Gina Raymondo,
Speaker 2: the current Commerce Secretary Transportation Budajig. I would not do
Speaker 2: that one, and Arizona Kelly Yes. At the same time,
Speaker 2: given his electoral track record last time in a South
Speaker 2: Carolina results, that's not some what I was gonna pick.
Speaker 2: I don't think he did well enough in Iowa to
Speaker 2: prove that he has a real constituency outside of like
Speaker 2: hardcore Democrats, he doesn't have electoral sense really in the past,
Speaker 2: and I don't think he's got enough crossover appeal or
Speaker 2: coalition support to actually bring them in the same when
Speaker 2: you compare him to a governor like our governor, battle
Speaker 2: tested in the election, high approval rating, actually an executive,
Speaker 2: someone you can picture in the job, someone who Democratic
Speaker 2: voters know I would pick a governor if I were Pete.
Speaker 1: I think you could do worse than I agree with you.
Speaker 2: You can do worse in people.
Speaker 1: I think you do worse than Pete. I think Pete
Speaker 1: has actually grown into his role as a regular he's
Speaker 1: gotten much better about, you know, the things he's doing
Speaker 1: in regard to the airlines whatever. He's very good on
Speaker 1: gable news is that's what he's always like excelled at.
Speaker 2: That's his only job.
Speaker 1: Anyway, I do think you could do worse than Pete.
Speaker 1: That being said, I personally I'm hoping that he picks
Speaker 1: that she picks Tim Walls because Minnesota governor, he's got
Speaker 1: this like kind of fun grandpa that he was a
Speaker 1: high school teacher. He's a veteran, and he pushed through
Speaker 1: a you know, truly like all the Democratic agenda items
Speaker 1: on wages and schools and the whole lot, with like
Speaker 1: a one vote majority in the state of Minnesota. Minnesota
Speaker 1: is still sort of a swing state, So I like him.
Speaker 1: That means he probably won't get picked. My assumption is
Speaker 1: that the person that you know, I want to be
Speaker 1: at the least, which is probably Joshuapiro, is likely to
Speaker 1: get the nod. And I mean the electoral calculatory. I
Speaker 1: understand from their perspective like, oh, it's Pennsylvania and he
Speaker 1: won by a lot. However, I think there are also
Speaker 1: risk factors with him that they are probably likely to overlook.
Speaker 1: Which is, as I've mentioned a few times, I think
Speaker 1: people are watching very closely right now what Kamala says
Speaker 1: and does with regard to Israel. Big part of the
Speaker 1: reason why Joe Biden was performing so poorly with young
Speaker 1: people was about Israel and the genocide in Gaza. She's
Speaker 1: getting a little bit of grace on that. And Piro
Speaker 1: was very outspoken with regard to the college protests, and
Speaker 1: he took a lot of action to quash the college protests,
Speaker 1: and he compared palistating protesters to pro Palestine protesters to
Speaker 1: the KKK. That's a hard thing to get past. He's
Speaker 1: also has a lot of skepticism from unions because he
Speaker 1: was aggressively pro charter school in the state of Pennsylvania
Speaker 1: as well. So while I understand the electoral calculus with
Speaker 1: it being you know, Pennsylvania and him being popular, and
Speaker 1: he's you know, he's good on camera, and he does
Speaker 1: all the politician ethings well, et cetera. And he has
Speaker 1: some policy track record that I would be amenable to.
Speaker 1: David Sarato points as you know, track record of holding
Speaker 1: power to account at certain times, that's going to be
Speaker 1: a tough pill for people who really care about Israel
Speaker 1: Gaza to swallow. So I think there's a risk that
Speaker 1: she undercuts the high level of like excitement and enthusiasm
Speaker 1: and democratic unity that she's benefiting from her.
Speaker 2: It's possible. I just I don't want to over overestimate
Speaker 2: how much it actually is, because I think that the
Speaker 2: craziness of the election is going to just you know,
Speaker 2: in terms of the enthusiasm and in terms of the
Speaker 2: defining issues. Already, the media attention on Gaza is probably
Speaker 2: like one fiftieth of what it was previously, and a
Speaker 2: lot of people are just gonna suck it up and
Speaker 2: they're going to vote for Kamala. I think a lot
Speaker 2: of people would have suck it up and voted for
Speaker 2: Joe Biden anyways, a lot less. But now, because she's
Speaker 2: so undefined, all she has to do is like kind
Speaker 2: of not taken a real stance on the issue, and
Speaker 2: she's kind of the beneficiary of both. That's what I
Speaker 2: would do if I were her. I'll tell you this
Speaker 2: about Josh Shapiro, the man. All he knows how to
Speaker 2: talk about is abortion, and he's good at it. So
Speaker 2: my sister in law showed me his TikTok account this
Speaker 2: guy has got hundreds of thousands of TikTok followers. Every
Speaker 2: single thing he posts is about abortion, and I hate
Speaker 2: to say it, it's good. He actually does well. You know,
Speaker 2: he does the blinking meme where he's like me whenever
Speaker 2: Republicans are trying to pan abortion, he's like, blink, blink, blink,
Speaker 2: and it's got hundreds of thousands of views, and it's
Speaker 2: like me when republic are radically trying to throw a
Speaker 2: national abortion man, he's like fifty versions of that. Of that,
Speaker 2: he's quite talented at it. I mean, he's one of
Speaker 2: those where I think he messages correctly on the issue.
Speaker 2: And so if I were her and I'm just I'm
Speaker 2: focusing in on two hundred and seventy one electoral votes,
Speaker 2: I think he's probably the best pick. Especially she's less
Speaker 2: connected to Israel Gaza. You can have whitmerk and bring
Speaker 2: it home for you in a similar way, especially to Stump,
Speaker 2: you're more undefined on the issue, and you know, at
Speaker 2: the end of the day, what we're really talking about
Speaker 2: here a million people are so we're going to vote
Speaker 2: on Israel Gaza. There's probably going to be one hundred
Speaker 2: million people who cast their votes. Now, if you do
Speaker 2: it in the right way strategically, it was going to
Speaker 2: make an impact. But it's not Biden. It's just different.
Speaker 2: Whenever it's not the guy who literally, you know, Bear
Speaker 2: hugged Nanta. It's just fundamentally it's very different.
Speaker 1: I think I think it's I think it's more of
Speaker 1: an issue than than you do. But I accept that,
Speaker 1: and I regret to admit that they're probably looking at
Speaker 1: it similarly to how you are. Now, what could be
Speaker 1: more of a problem for them is that Shapiro had
Speaker 1: settled some like sexual harassment.
Speaker 2: Obligation, but it was about his staff, wasn't him.
Speaker 1: But you know, if like you're trying to make that
Speaker 1: contrast with Donald Trump and that's hanging over him, I
Speaker 1: could see that being a hang up for them in
Speaker 1: terms of the vetting process. And then I also the
Speaker 1: other thing that's that's been floated. I don't know if
Speaker 1: I really I don't really buy this, uh that he's
Speaker 1: Jewish and so you know, if you're looking for that
Speaker 1: just straight up white dude, which seems to be like
Speaker 1: the tenor of the conversation that he may not fit
Speaker 1: the bill. But I don't know that I don't think
Speaker 1: so either, But I don't know that. I don't know how. Yeah,
Speaker 1: people have been saying that, I don't I don't know
Speaker 1: if that. I don't know how they're looking at it.
Speaker 1: I don't think it matters either.
Speaker 2: But I remember the Jewish faith, I know.
Speaker 1: But what anyway that's out there the other one. So
Speaker 1: I already I like Tim Walls. Andy Sheer is interesting.
Speaker 1: I think he's an interesting contrast with Jadie Vance being
Speaker 1: from Kentucky, may you speak about Appalachia. That's the contrast
Speaker 1: he's trying to make. He's got, he's pro labor. He
Speaker 1: has had a track record, obviously of extreme success in
Speaker 1: a very difficult state. So that's that's appealing for him,
Speaker 1: even though Kentucky obviously not a swing state. I feel
Speaker 1: like Roy Cooper has a good shot at it because
Speaker 1: they have that long personal relationship. I don't know how
Speaker 1: she's looking at the choice. If I was making the choice,
Speaker 1: I would want someone that I knew and like outside
Speaker 1: of just this two week time frame. I'm not sure
Speaker 1: who else she may have that personal relationship with. But
Speaker 1: I know Roy Cooper. She's done a number of events
Speaker 1: with him here. They know each other from the time
Speaker 1: when they were ages is much more in terms of
Speaker 1: he's a very safe and cautious politician in terms of
Speaker 1: North Carolina, and he also has been very successful in
Speaker 1: a state that is pretty much read. Could they potentially
Speaker 1: put in North Carolina in play? I think possibly. Biden
Speaker 1: only lost it by like less than two percentage points
Speaker 1: least time around, So maybe with some of the demographic
Speaker 1: shifts that having Comma at the top of the ticket
Speaker 1: potentially pretends that's a possibility. The downside with him is
Speaker 1: Democrats are looking at hey, this guy could run for
Speaker 1: Senate in North Carolina, have a shot down the road,
Speaker 1: and you are taking him off the board for that.
Speaker 1: So I don't know if that's a factor. I'm not
Speaker 1: sure Mark Kelly could put D two up on the screen.
Speaker 1: One of the issues that the left and a lot
Speaker 1: of labor unions have had with Mark Kelly is he
Speaker 1: was one of the only Democrats who had not signed
Speaker 1: on to the pro Act, which is, you know, the
Speaker 1: sort of like comprehensive pro labor legislation that Democrats under
Speaker 1: the Biden administration were pushing. Now, under pressure, he's like, oh, no, no, no,
Speaker 1: I of course I support it. Of course I would
Speaker 1: vote for it. Okay, there are other reasons that unions
Speaker 1: are concerned about him as well, some nominees pro labor
Speaker 1: nominees that he voted against and had issues with, So
Speaker 1: it's outside of just the pro Act, but that was
Speaker 1: kind of the most glaring issue for him. But in
Speaker 1: terms of his pick, I think your right SoC are.
Speaker 1: The biggest problem for him is are they really going
Speaker 1: to want to take his put his seat into play
Speaker 1: in Arizona and you know risk that. I think that's
Speaker 1: that's a problem for me.
Speaker 2: Well, you know, here's a conversation we all just had
Speaker 2: which we left out the most important constituency, the donors.
Speaker 2: The donor class loves Josh Shapiro, right, this is one
Speaker 2: where he has made it a point with Israel thing,
Speaker 2: but many other issues as well. The charge school thing
Speaker 2: is a real tell right about what exactly is happening here?
Speaker 2: And if I were the donor class, we know Crystal,
Speaker 2: we know their politics. There's news out this morning that
Speaker 2: read Hoffman apparently gave seven million dollars to Kamala and
Speaker 2: was like, well, you got to fire Lena Kahan, you
Speaker 2: know if something like that happens. So they're making their
Speaker 2: plays too, and Kamala may actually be more donor dependent,
Speaker 2: maybe as much donor dependent as Trump now at this point,
Speaker 2: because she's late to the game and she's got to
Speaker 2: make up some of this cash. She's got the hundred million,
Speaker 2: but she's gonna need a billion point probably a one
Speaker 2: point five billion to contend with the Republican superPAC machine.
Speaker 2: So the money, while it is there, there are certain
Speaker 2: things that come with that price. And because she was
Speaker 2: anointed and will be a product of super Delegac and
Speaker 2: more at the DNC, those donors are probably going to
Speaker 2: have even more of an outside impact on the VP selection.
Speaker 2: So that's why, you know, if you look at their
Speaker 2: ideology too, in the way they look, that's not a
Speaker 2: bad case to make.
Speaker 1: I mean, I think if you're going with the donor pick,
Speaker 1: you're probably picking Pete True.
Speaker 2: Yeah, they love him, They do love if.
Speaker 1: Shapiro does have some track record, and I have to
Speaker 1: look back at the things David Sero has written, but
Speaker 1: he does have some genuine track record of like challenging
Speaker 1: I think tech and being a little more skeptical of
Speaker 1: corporate power. So I'm not sure that he would be
Speaker 1: as beloved I'm just not sure. I know the donors
Speaker 1: love Pete, so maybe he's got maybe he's got more
Speaker 1: of an inside track than we really think here. But
Speaker 1: it'll be interesting. Like I said, my working assumption is
Speaker 1: whoever I want the least is going to end up
Speaker 1: in it. So that would probably be Joshuah Baby Net
Speaker 1: Now who in town right now? Today's meeting with Biden
Speaker 1: and Kamala Harris. Tomorrow he's flying or tonight or whatever.
Speaker 1: He's going to meet with Trump. In mar A Lago
Speaker 1: yesterday giving a speech to Congress. There were a number
Speaker 1: of Democrats, about half the Democratic Caucus boycotted the speech.
Speaker 1: And you had a whole lot of protest activity in advance.
Speaker 1: We can put some of this up on the screen
Speaker 1: so you can get a sense. You had huge march.
Speaker 1: You see lots of Palestinian flags everywhere. You had some
Speaker 1: very you know, tense uh scenes with cups and tear gas.
Speaker 1: Here they are burning I think that maybe maybe net
Speaker 1: yahoo in effigy, and then they also burned an American
Speaker 1: flag there was, so they were they were out in
Speaker 1: full force. They've been out the day before, h inside
Speaker 1: the Capitol building as well, so they were you know,
Speaker 1: making their mark and making their statement about their upset
Speaker 1: that this war criminal was in town. We also can
Speaker 1: put this up on the screen. Some of the activists
Speaker 1: actually got into the Watergate hotel where the net Yahoo
Speaker 1: coalition was staying and put these bugs and maggots.
Speaker 2: Literally like crickets. So I was like on this table
Speaker 2: biblic That's what I'm thinking.
Speaker 1: I think they just wanted to there, what they said
Speaker 1: as they just wanted to create chaos. They were also
Speaker 1: like pulling fire alarms in the role and I that
Speaker 1: kind of stuff. So it was like a sense of
Speaker 1: like creating chaos in the in the building. So making
Speaker 1: their presence felt, to say the least. Also making his
Speaker 1: presence felt was Bibi Netanyahu himself, who received a rapturous
Speaker 1: reception from those who were in attendance. I mean, it
Speaker 1: really was wild to see the level of adoration coming
Speaker 1: to this man who's you know, israelied. CJ just ruled
Speaker 1: they have in apartheid state, the West Bank settlements are illegal.
Speaker 1: He's got ICC arrest warrants hanging over his head for
Speaker 1: the crime of extermination, but that did not slow the
Speaker 1: enthusiasm for his address to this joint session of Congress.
Speaker 1: Let's take a listen to a little bit of what
Speaker 1: he had to say.
Speaker 4: I asked the commander there, how many terrorists did you
Speaker 4: take out in Buffa. He gave me an exact number,
Speaker 4: twelve hundred and three. I asked him, how many civilians
Speaker 4: were killed? You said, Prime Minister, practically none, with the
Speaker 4: exception of a single incident where shrapnel from a bomb
Speaker 4: hit a Hamas weapons depot and unintentionally killed two dozen people,
Speaker 4: the answer is practically none. Iran is funding the anti
Speaker 4: Israel protests that are going on right now outside this building.
Speaker 4: Not that many, but they're there and throughout the city. Well,
Speaker 4: I have a message for these protesters. When the tyrants
Speaker 4: of Tehran who hang gaze from cranes and murder women
Speaker 4: for not covering their hair are praising, promoting, and funding you,
Speaker 4: you have officially become Iran's useful idiots. And as we
Speaker 4: recently learned, they even brazenly threatened to assassinate President Trump.
Speaker 4: And some of these protesters hold up signs proclaiming gaze
Speaker 4: for Gaza, they might as well hold up signs saying
Speaker 4: tickets for KFC.
Speaker 1: Chance in USA. They're a little bit weird. So I
Speaker 1: mean he lied about October seventh atrocity is a year
Speaker 1: I'm downplaying. They're the civilian deathhole smearing Palestinian pro Palestine
Speaker 1: protesters as paid viral. I mean, you come to our
Speaker 1: country and you smear our young people who are exercising
Speaker 1: their freedom of speech to give you a sense of,
Speaker 1: you know, how excited, how honored the members of Congress
Speaker 1: who attended were even John Fetterman sober put this up
Speaker 1: on the Screenman wore a suit. I can't do it for,
Speaker 1: you know, his own constituents, can't do it for apparently
Speaker 1: his wife was like embarrassed by him and wearing his
Speaker 1: like tuxedo shirt. He can't do it for his family,
Speaker 1: or's wife, or his own president or party or what.
Speaker 1: I don't know. But when Bibi Natya, who comes to town,
Speaker 1: suddenly Fetterman breaks out the suit.
Speaker 2: I have tried to tell everyone dressing life as a
Speaker 2: member of Congress is about narcissism. It is about saying
Speaker 2: that I care more about my comfort than about representing you.
Speaker 2: And when you were willing to put a suit on
Speaker 2: for the Israeli Prime minister over your own constituents, it
Speaker 2: is about serving your true master, and about signaling to
Speaker 2: the world about what you find important to the world,
Speaker 2: which was both your comfort when it's about Americans, and
Speaker 2: it's about respect only for foreign leaders, which I think
Speaker 2: is absolutely not so obviously, Look, I agree with you.
Speaker 2: I think it's disgraceful to have a foreign leader of
Speaker 2: any nation invited to the United States to openly trash
Speaker 2: American citizens. I think there is only one country in
Speaker 2: the world that is somehow allowed to do that, and
Speaker 2: that is Israel. Obviously, Natta Yahu and others. I will say,
Speaker 2: Chris Lenelis, can you make them out about this one.
Speaker 2: I wouldn't be burning American flags here in the Washington Capitol.
Speaker 2: Didn't say it should be illegal. But people will really
Speaker 2: recall that that what was the unc frat incident of
Speaker 2: defending the flag. That's going to ignite a lot of people,
Speaker 2: you know, who are going to get very upset.
Speaker 3: Now.
Speaker 8: You know.
Speaker 2: The obvious retort is, well, why aren't you as upset
Speaker 2: about Gosla or whatever. Well, you know, listen, at the
Speaker 2: end of the day, it is our country. It's about
Speaker 2: our symbols, and you can't blen Some people just don't
Speaker 2: care or they're not don't feel all that connected to it,
Speaker 2: and you can't shame them, you know, and try and
Speaker 2: change their minds by openly trying. Here, here's what I'm
Speaker 2: trying to say, those chants of USA. The biggest mistake
Speaker 2: that you could possibly make is to say that being
Speaker 2: pro Palestine is anti America itself. The positive thing you
Speaker 2: want to say is that it is to the best
Speaker 2: of America, or it is against American interests to phrase
Speaker 2: it about this country and not make it oppositional to
Speaker 2: actual American patriotism, to be opposed, because I do think
Speaker 2: that there are a lot of people out there. For example,
Speaker 2: if you don't want Joshapiro to be picked on Israel,
Speaker 2: don't be burning American flags in the middle of the
Speaker 2: US capital. It's just a foolish mistake. It's kind of
Speaker 2: like the River to the Sea thing. Can you say it? Sure,
Speaker 2: you know, absolutely, But I think Dave Smith always makes
Speaker 2: that point. He's like, guys, that's not what we're trying
Speaker 2: to do, Like, we're not trying to change minds here.
Speaker 2: So if I were them, I always think that I
Speaker 2: always think that they just go too far. A lot
Speaker 2: of the vandalism and a lot of the burning of
Speaker 2: the flag thing, it just doesn't make the point that
Speaker 2: you guys want to make, and it just makes it
Speaker 2: even more of a minority. Now the White House is
Speaker 2: out trashing you. It's just like I don't know, I
Speaker 2: don't I don't really see how that's possibly working to
Speaker 2: your benefit when I mean, all you have to do
Speaker 2: is point out the fact this guy, like the correct
Speaker 2: thing is he comes to this country undermines our freedom
Speaker 2: of speech. That's a much more potent attack. Now, I
Speaker 2: just think it's stupid.
Speaker 1: Listen on the tactics, I hate to criticize them because
Speaker 1: obviously much more discussed for bebing anyhow, I'm much more
Speaker 1: like horror at the genocide that's being part of the baby.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's just horrific. So it'll be like, oh,
Speaker 1: you shouldn't do this or that, Like I hate to
Speaker 1: do it. I think there's a you know, on the tactics,
Speaker 1: like I can't really disagree. I think what has been
Speaker 1: very effective is when you have these groups of Jewish
Speaker 1: Americans who are there, who are you know, very visible
Speaker 1: and you know, are very organized and hostage.
Speaker 2: Family walked out right, and that's that says everything.
Speaker 1: That's powerful, and that's powerful, and that's important to know
Speaker 1: that the hostage families didn't walk out, and there were
Speaker 1: some actually that were arrested for the political symbols that
Speaker 1: they were wearing. But you know, I don't want to
Speaker 1: get into this debate because I think it's such a
Speaker 1: side issue from the key point here of how disgusting
Speaker 1: it is that this invited and feted.
Speaker 2: It's at the top of every news hour, every Boomer,
Speaker 2: Fox Country, in the viewer they burnt an American flag.
Speaker 2: You gotta understand, like, it's not working here, folks like
Speaker 2: for them, They're getting mainline propaganda all day long, and
Speaker 2: you see people burning. If you look.
Speaker 1: At that, if you look at the polling, you know
Speaker 1: people have only moved more towards the pro Palestine side,
Speaker 1: but not.
Speaker 2: Certainly flight waving Hamas flags, saying Hamas is coming. I
Speaker 2: just don't understand the tactics of a lot of these folks,
Speaker 2: and I think, if anything, they might even be agitators,
Speaker 2: because I'm like, are you so dumb that.
Speaker 1: You think this is such a side over from the
Speaker 1: reality of what's happening, in the reality of what this
Speaker 1: man said. But let's just so let's talk about what
Speaker 1: else happened here with regard to this speech. We can
Speaker 1: put this next piece up on the screen. We've got
Speaker 1: Rashida Talib who mounted silent protest. She actually did attend
Speaker 1: the speech, which people were surprised about. She's wearing her
Speaker 1: scarf and she has a small sign that says, on
Speaker 1: one side, war criminal. On the other side, I believe
Speaker 1: guilty of genocide. So she did her own protests there,
Speaker 1: which I fully support. We had a large number of
Speaker 1: Democrats who did not attend. We can put this next
Speaker 1: piece up on the screen. One hundred House Democrats twenty
Speaker 1: eight Senate Democrats were present in the chamber for the
Speaker 1: Prime Minister's speech, meaning around half of both caucuses were absent.
Speaker 1: This was really no worthy Sagura. I wonder what you
Speaker 1: make of this for Nancy Pelosi, she says, Benjamin Etnia,
Speaker 1: whose presentation in the House Chamber today was by far
Speaker 1: the worst presentation of any foreign dignitary invited and honored
Speaker 1: with the privilege addressing the US Congress. Many of us
Speaker 1: who love Israel spent time today listening to Israeli citizens
Speaker 1: whose families have suffered in the wake of the October
Speaker 1: seventh hamas terror attack and kidnappings. These families are asking
Speaker 1: for a ceasefire deal that will bring the hostages home,
Speaker 1: and we hope the Prime Minister would spend his time
Speaker 1: achieving that goal. Obviously it's Nancy Felosi, so she's clearly,
Speaker 1: we have recently learned very powerful. So the fact that
Speaker 1: she says this number one, it's noteworthy because I think
Speaker 1: in the same way when she went on Morning Joe
Speaker 1: and was like, oh, we're waiting for Joe Biden to
Speaker 1: make his decision, she opened the floodgates. She gave permission
Speaker 1: to the rest of the caucus to mount criticism of
Speaker 1: him and come out against him, and you know, really
Speaker 1: kept the flame alive in terms of pushing him out.
Speaker 1: I think this is a similar signal of like, Joe
Speaker 1: Biden's a lame duck. Now, yes, you know, so all
Speaker 1: of the impetus of we got to keep quiet because
Speaker 1: we don't want to we don't want to show up
Speaker 1: the Democratic president, we don't make him look bad, we
Speaker 1: don't want there to be any distance between us and them,
Speaker 1: I think that's kind of out the window now. And
Speaker 1: for her, who has been a staunch ally of Israel
Speaker 1: for so long to say something this stark, and she
Speaker 1: also didn't attend the speech. I do think it's granting
Speaker 1: a permission structure and is a noble shift. And I
Speaker 1: you know, also think it could be reflected in some
Speaker 1: of the ways that Kamala Harris herself tries to at
Speaker 1: least give the appearance of distance from a Biden policy
Speaker 1: that has been wildly on the top store.
Speaker 2: I think this is very effective. And this is where
Speaker 2: most normy Democrats are. They're like, I'm very uncomfortable with this,
Speaker 2: but that's kind of why I was bringing up the
Speaker 2: flag thing. I think that's very upon to a lot
Speaker 2: of people. This is the permission structure of yeah, we
Speaker 2: hate Bibe. They're like, we're not with BB. And this
Speaker 2: is where a lot of Jewish Democrats are too, from
Speaker 2: at least from what I've been able to observe, the
Speaker 2: right Nadler, Schumer, you know, a Pelosi, all these folks
Speaker 2: who are like, I am not pro BB. I am
Speaker 2: meeting with these Israeli hostages. I'm allying myself with the
Speaker 2: families and the center left parties or whatever of Israel.
Speaker 2: But I'm not like, you know, chanting from the rezard
Speaker 2: of the sea, and you know, vandalizing and burning the flag.
Speaker 2: So this is where I think if I'm Harris, this
Speaker 2: is where I'm going. I'm going straight down them to
Speaker 2: the center. And I think this is I mean, frankly,
Speaker 2: this is the political center. If you look at the
Speaker 2: polling on the issue. People are pro Israel in a like, yeah,
Speaker 2: they should have a right to exist way, but antibbe
Speaker 2: and anti prosecution of the war. This is exactly where
Speaker 2: you are. Yeah, they're pro seas fire. They're like, I
Speaker 2: think the war is bad. I think what you've done
Speaker 2: is terrible. I don't think America should necessarily be funding it.
Speaker 2: And yeah, I think that's mostly you know where we're at.
Speaker 2: And so the Pelosi thing, what can we always say
Speaker 2: about this woman. She's smart, she knows how to triangulate.
Speaker 2: So if I'm Harris, this is exactly the tactic that
Speaker 2: I'm on. And then you have Trump and Vance, who
Speaker 2: would be to the right here, And that's fine, you
Speaker 2: know for right wing boomers, okay, but you know, for
Speaker 2: anybody to be swayed on the issue, then obviously you're
Speaker 2: going to go Kamma. And if you try and capture
Speaker 2: both the left and the center, and you just leave
Speaker 2: the right to Trump, then any political benefit to Trump
Speaker 2: is just going to be money and then whatever Boomer
Speaker 2: voters who are going to vote on the issue anyway.
Speaker 2: So anyone who can be captured, I think you can
Speaker 2: get there with this.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's interesting to me too, because bbe has now
Speaker 1: a very different political landscape in front of them, because
Speaker 1: and there's all kinds of you know, if you read
Speaker 1: the Israeli press, there's all kinds of trial. Okay, what
Speaker 1: does Kamla Harris really think? And I mean this is
Speaker 1: a question with her on everything, we don't really know
Speaker 1: what she really thinks. She doesn't really think much of anything.
Speaker 1: The reason why I have been cautiously optimistic she would
Speaker 1: be I'm not listen, I'm very realistic about what's possible
Speaker 1: in the context of American politics. But why I think
Speaker 1: she could be better than Biden is because I don't
Speaker 1: think she's ideological, and I think at this point just
Speaker 1: a cost benefit a sheerly cynical cost benefit analysis of
Speaker 1: the politics, as reflected by Pelosian. What you said soccer
Speaker 1: would land you in a different place than where Biden
Speaker 1: has been and her you know, top foreign policy advisor
Speaker 1: is more of like of the Obama more progressive foreign
Speaker 1: affairs when she's already said she's gonna Sordi reporter, she's
Speaker 1: going to clean house in terms of the Biden you know,
Speaker 1: Jake Sullivan, Tony Blinken's of the world. That's all positive indicator.
Speaker 1: But like I said, it's not like I'm expecting any
Speaker 1: sort of her from Kamala. Ayris that you'll be waiting
Speaker 1: your whole life if you're waiting on that. But I
Speaker 1: think the clear eyed, reasonable political calculation at this point
Speaker 1: is that the Biden bear hug policy is doing more
Speaker 1: harm than good for them politically. And I think Nancy
Speaker 1: Pelosi that's why her comments are so noteworthy, because I
Speaker 1: think this is a sign that she also has that
Speaker 1: assessment of where the politics of this are at this time.
Speaker 2: Kamala has no foreign policy experience, right, we can only
Speaker 2: read the tea leaves. I know Philip Gordon, I've read
Speaker 2: some of his stuff. I looked a little bit in
Speaker 2: what he said in the past. I'd say it's a
Speaker 2: relatively mixed bag. I think everything here is pick and choose.
Speaker 2: So if you were an Israel Gaza person, yeah, Kamala
Speaker 2: is probably gonna better, to be honest, though, on Ukraine
Speaker 2: I think she'll be ten times worse based on her comments,
Speaker 2: maybe worse nate it well, because she would be like, oh, yeah,
Speaker 2: go ahead and strike Russia. Something that zed Jalani said,
Speaker 2: which I think is a deeper in Moscow, right, And
Speaker 2: something that zed Jelani said which is so deeply true,
Speaker 2: is that if you look at Clinton and all of
Speaker 2: the other no foreign policy experienced people, almost always they
Speaker 2: end up being more hawkish to prove to Washington. So
Speaker 2: on Israel, you're right, the consensus has moved away, right, yeah,
Speaker 2: But on Ukraine that is terrifying. On anything related to
Speaker 2: I mean, on Iran even I would not I would
Speaker 2: be worried. I actually would be worried because you know,
Speaker 2: let's look, the Iran dealer is now ed. No matter
Speaker 2: who gets elected, now they're going to have to deal
Speaker 2: with new enrichment and sanctions and all that. On Russia,
Speaker 2: I'd be worried a little bit on China as well,
Speaker 2: in terms of how it looks, especially where our domestic
Speaker 2: manufacturing is. So on foreign policy, I am still in
Speaker 2: wait and ce mode, just because it's like you said,
Speaker 2: when you're a blank slate, I'm just going to color
Speaker 2: in the lines of conventional wisdom. Conventional wisdom right now
Speaker 2: is basically where we are. I think on Israel I
Speaker 2: would see yah. But on Ukraine it's frankly worse than
Speaker 2: I think it's ever been. Now they're like, oh, they're
Speaker 2: winning and everything. So I'm still very, very skeptical my
Speaker 2: view about where it's at right. My view is on
Speaker 2: Israel she may be a little better. Yeah, On Ukraine
Speaker 2: she's probably the same.
Speaker 1: On Afghanistan, I don't think she would have don't think
Speaker 1: it's possible now, So net I will take that deal.
Speaker 1: I think, you know, on net and especially given what
Speaker 1: we know about the people that she wants to go
Speaker 1: and the people that she's surrounded herself with. Now, if
Speaker 1: we have a return to the I would one hundred
Speaker 1: percent take a return to the Obama era foreign policy
Speaker 1: over what we've gotten under Joe Biden. But you're right
Speaker 1: to say this is all guesswork because we don't know
Speaker 1: and she doesn't make it clear, and I think it's
Speaker 1: the one consistent with Kamala Harris is just that she
Speaker 1: is a political shape shifter. You know, she is what
Speaker 1: she needs to be in the moment based on how
Speaker 1: she's reading the tea leaves at the time. You know,
Speaker 1: originally she's the tough on crime lady in California. This
Speaker 1: is just emblematic of the sort of political shift she's undergone.
Speaker 1: Then she's you know, the criminal justice reformer when she's
Speaker 1: in the Senate, when she's running for present and thinks
Speaker 1: that's to her political benefit. She's for Medicare for all
Speaker 1: when she thinks she's going to try to get to
Speaker 1: the left and that's the best lane in the Democratic primary,
Speaker 1: than when donors are like, we don't like that, She's like,
Speaker 1: I don't like it either. So she's a shape shifter,
Speaker 1: and you know, it's it's all. She doesn't even know
Speaker 1: really what she thinks about it.
Speaker 2: And that's why I worry the most, because on Ukraine,
Speaker 2: the people in this in this town have lost their
Speaker 2: freaking minds. They would let Ukraine in Tonato, that let
Speaker 2: Georgia in Tonato. I mean, we're gonna go all out
Speaker 2: like Neo Khan fever dream. And so I mean, honestly,
Speaker 2: I'm I am truly terrified of what she would do
Speaker 2: on Ukraine and Russia. And I think it would be
Speaker 2: ten x more consequential than anything else.
Speaker 1: Don't know that it could be my person. What Biden's done.
Speaker 1: It seems like Christal I mean, letting Ukraine and NATO.
Speaker 1: Nobody's more obsessed with NATO than Joe Biden.
Speaker 2: But at least he didn't let Ukraine. In Letting Ukraine
Speaker 2: and to NATO will be the big policy question of
Speaker 2: twenty twenty six or whatever, whenever the stupid war finally ends,
Speaker 2: And at least with Trump. I don't think you would
Speaker 2: do it. But Kamala I think she would do it,
Speaker 2: and that is actually a nuclear war level event. But look,
Speaker 2: we'll see, you know, we'll get to I want to this,
Speaker 2: by the way, Why I want to see her do it?
Speaker 10: Damn?
Speaker 2: These are real questions, right, Yeah, in the old structure,
Speaker 2: we would have at least had a foreign policy debate.
Speaker 2: But you know, this time around, is she even going
Speaker 2: to answer a real question like we need to know
Speaker 2: the answers of these things? No doubt about it.
Speaker 1: All Right, Let's move on to the latest with regard
Speaker 1: to the attempted assassination of Donald Trump. Still stunning revelations
Speaker 1: coming out about the failures on that day. The latest,
Speaker 1: we had testimony from FBI Director Christopher Ray confirming reporting
Speaker 1: that the shooter was able to fly a drone over
Speaker 1: the area shortly before this rally. Let's take a listen
Speaker 1: to what he had to say.
Speaker 11: We have recovered a drone that the shooter appears to
Speaker 11: have used. It's being exploited and analyzed by the FBI lab.
Speaker 11: The drone was recovered in his vehicle, so at the
Speaker 11: time of the shooting, the drone was in his vehicle
Speaker 11: with the controller. In addition, our investigation has uncovered do
Speaker 11: you know what time a day he flew it and
Speaker 11: if he flew it on the days too. So in addition,
Speaker 11: it appears that around three point fifty pm, four o'clock
Speaker 11: in that window on the day of the shooting, that
Speaker 11: the shooter was flying the drone around the area eleven.
Speaker 5: That's want to be clear.
Speaker 11: But when I say the area not over the stage
Speaker 11: and that part of the area itself, I would say
Speaker 11: about two hundred yards give or take away. That we think,
Speaker 11: but we do not know. So again, this is one
Speaker 11: of these things that's qualified because of our ongoing review.
Speaker 11: That he was live streaming, you know, viewing the footage
Speaker 11: from that again about eleven minutes and around the three
Speaker 11: fifty four o'clock PM rang, two hours before. He's flying
Speaker 11: a drone in the vicinity of about two hundred yards away.
Speaker 1: Two hours before the rally, two hours before the route lange.
Speaker 2: How does nobody notice it? I was just telling you
Speaker 2: at my wedding, the photographer used a drone. You can
Speaker 2: notice the damn thing hundreds of feet away. So nobody
Speaker 2: is security perimeter is looking up and saying, hey, what's
Speaker 2: going on with this? I mean, anyone who's ever been
Speaker 2: by the White House recently, there's drones everywhere and they're
Speaker 2: all Secret Service drones, so they know what drones are, Like, yeah,
Speaker 2: they know. We know what is supposed to be there
Speaker 2: and what's not. I mean, I've even read crystal about
Speaker 2: anti drone jamming technology in war zones or being used
Speaker 2: by Mexican drug cartels, so they have better jamming tech
Speaker 2: or a prison or something like that. How do they
Speaker 2: know and have better tech than for the president's rally?
Speaker 2: That's crazy, I mean the whole thing. And then I've
Speaker 2: been reading a little bit about how the Secret Service
Speaker 2: admits that they denied resources to Trump. That's I mean,
Speaker 2: just I mean, frankly outrageous, just because when we look
Speaker 2: at now what the threat environment was like and how
Speaker 2: their level of incompetence here has been manifested with their
Speaker 2: lack of questions. The lady didn't even want to resign
Speaker 2: until now. I mean, I just think this agency truly
Speaker 2: needs to be rooted top to bottom. It is clear
Speaker 2: over the last two decades they have failed dramatically. Yeah,
Speaker 2: and every sign has been there, the Columbia Hooker thing,
Speaker 2: the multiple Obama failures where somebody shot at the White
Speaker 2: House and they didn't notice until broken glass was found
Speaker 2: later somebody jumped the fence was able to get in.
Speaker 2: I'm trying to think more. There's been a few other episodes,
Speaker 2: Carol Leining. I think over the Washington Post has detailed
Speaker 2: all of this. I think in every instance it's clear
Speaker 2: Congress has got to take over and they completely need
Speaker 2: to gout this thing.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 2: I mean, a bullet touched the former president not negotiable,
Speaker 2: like impossible.
Speaker 1: And the stone walling is insane.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: The fact that they identified this shooter like half an hour, Yeah.
Speaker 2: I know, before he's able to photo the rooftop.
Speaker 1: They saw, mississis so he tried to bring in a
Speaker 1: range fighter, they identified him, they lost sight of him.
Speaker 1: You've got ordinary people are like, there is a dude
Speaker 1: with a gun on that roof and President Trump is
Speaker 1: still allowed to go out on the stage and continue
Speaker 1: his speech. It just absolutely insane. We're also learning a
Speaker 1: little bit more about of the interesting searches that this
Speaker 1: shooter was apparently engaged in googling prior to this attempt
Speaker 1: at assassination. Let's take a listen to director right here.
Speaker 10: One of the things that I can share here today
Speaker 10: that has not been shared yet is that we've just
Speaker 10: in the last couple of days found that from our
Speaker 10: review to your point about devices, analysis of a laptop
Speaker 10: that the investigation ties to the shooter reveals that on
Speaker 10: July sixth, he did a Google search for quote how
Speaker 10: far away was Oswald from Kennedy? And so that's a
Speaker 10: search that obviously is significant in terms of his state
Speaker 10: of mind. That is the same day that it appears
Speaker 10: that he registered for the Butler rally.
Speaker 1: So how far away was Oswald from Kennedy? And then
Speaker 1: that same day he registers.
Speaker 2: For the rest. That is one IQ thing in that
Speaker 2: he thinks Oswald shot Kennedy. So Now, how smart that
Speaker 2: this guy actual so turns out he was an idiot
Speaker 2: if you didn't know that already, if you actually believed
Speaker 2: that the magic bullet theory or whatever is correct. But
Speaker 2: in his case, that's the irony of it is that
Speaker 2: in his case is that it is so obviously believable
Speaker 2: that it was a massive security failure. Now that we
Speaker 2: learn about every single instance, and the only true miracle
Speaker 2: in this shot or in this is not the shot itself,
Speaker 2: is that Trump turns his head at the last minute
Speaker 2: and survives and doesn't get his head bullet. You know,
Speaker 2: we don't get a pink misshot on national television and
Speaker 2: high definition. I can't imagine what the country would look
Speaker 2: like in something like that. I know, Oh god, God,
Speaker 2: be horrible. We also can talk about the Secret Service director.
Speaker 2: Let's put this up there on the screen, finally resigning
Speaker 2: after being pressured by the both members of the House
Speaker 2: Oversight Committee. I do want to say, I want to
Speaker 2: give commendation. You know, rarely will cheer for bipartisanship. This
Speaker 2: actually is the one moment where Jamie raskin Rocanna, you know,
Speaker 2: comer Republicans Democrats. Everybody was like, oh no, absolutely not.
Speaker 2: They're like, you got to go. Probably some of it
Speaker 2: is self interest in that all of them have also
Speaker 2: had threats to their lives, but part of it is
Speaker 2: also I mean again, like let's live in the context
Speaker 2: of the Pink misshot on TV. That's great, we can't
Speaker 2: unsee that as a nation like period. The Zuppruto film
Speaker 2: was way after. I mean to live with that, the
Speaker 2: consequence the trauma like the Greathing and the RNC and
Speaker 2: everything that would have possibly happened. I mean, I know
Speaker 2: somebody who said civil war. I don't know if that's
Speaker 2: necessarily true, but something, I mean, you know, something horrible
Speaker 2: would have happened. So I want to at least commend
Speaker 2: them for in Washington. It is so rare to see accountability.
Speaker 2: Now we don't start here. It's a good starting point.
Speaker 2: This isn't just the finishing thing or whatever. But at
Speaker 2: least they actually came together and they're like, no, we're
Speaker 2: not stand for this.
Speaker 7: We got to go.
Speaker 1: Honestly, it wasn't saying she lasts as long.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's should gone the next day, right.
Speaker 1: Though, no one should delude themselves into thinking then it's
Speaker 1: like problem solved. It was just this one, lady, she
Speaker 1: was the issue. No, there is a top to bottom
Speaker 1: issue with this age. I don't think there's any doubt
Speaker 1: about that. And so this is where the conversation should begin,
Speaker 1: not end. But the fact that she remained for even
Speaker 1: a day after this all unfolded, especially when we immediately
Speaker 1: were learning about the stunning nature of the security failure,
Speaker 1: and she had the temerity to go on TV and say, well,
Speaker 1: we didn't position eight speakret service stations on that roof
Speaker 1: because it was sloped right where there's a safety isshue.
Speaker 1: Oh my god, yeah, believable.
Speaker 2: Wait what what did you say, lady? They're like that
Speaker 2: because that's exactly where any normal person would be, which
Speaker 2: is why fluidrone, which is why as a range finder
Speaker 2: outside the premiere there are cops inside of the building.
Speaker 2: Somebody's got a picture of him, somebody's confronting him. I mean,
Speaker 2: it's just a cluster all the way, you know, to
Speaker 2: I don't know, I mean, it's certain. And this is
Speaker 2: also the problem too, with stoking conspiracy. Everyone's like, oh,
Speaker 2: we need to stop stoking conspiracy. It's like, yeah, but
Speaker 2: people believe I think rightfully that usually security is pretty
Speaker 2: good at these things.
Speaker 1: I've been to a million presidential events. It's a pain
Speaker 1: the ass sometimes.
Speaker 2: I would never, in my wildest dreams think that a
Speaker 2: gunman could get this close, having been through the security
Speaker 2: perimeter so many times, and I have experienced it, not
Speaker 2: just watching it on TV. So for a lot of
Speaker 2: people out there, I mean, it's just too shocking to behold.
Speaker 2: I don't we still need a lot of answers. I
Speaker 2: see that there's a new story out with some more
Speaker 2: details and we can take a look and everything. But
Speaker 2: I think we're still at the very beginning of this.
Speaker 11: I really do.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think that's right, all right.
Speaker 2: I enjoy being back. Geez the two hours catch up
Speaker 2: on it. I miss everybody so much. Thank you all
Speaker 2: for the congratulations. That was very very nice of everyone.
Speaker 2: And we'll see you all next week and if there's
Speaker 2: any breaking news, I'm sure you'll see us again.