Now your host Ken Brew on news Radio seven hundred w welw come on in.
We don't play well we did years ago, but we beat the rap. Welcome on in to another Saturday Afternoon extravaganza.
It has been a week. It has been a week, and so.
Much has transpired, both on the national and international stage, that it's often difficult to keep up from things that are occurring globally with the President to things that are occurring right here in our country.
The shootings in.
Portland and Minneapolis involving ICE agents, and all of the rhetoric nonsense, most of it from politicians that abound.
It's hard for me to believe that any.
Of these people that are speaking out against ICE really care about the woman that was killed, whether she was in the right or the wrong. They desperately want to change the narrative from what is a growing scandal in Minnesota, in Minneapolis in particular, involving fraud and Somalians and a fraud that may even extend here to the state of Ohio and other points in between. They want to change the narrative, and unfortunately, there was a shooting that helped them, particularly with.
The mainstream media.
Meanwhile, Internationally, you have Venezuela and Iran and Greenland. Back home, you got Scotis Supreme Court of these United States on Trump's tariffs and a number of other things in between.
It's going to be.
A tough thing to get done in the next fifteen or twenty minutes, but I'm going to try because I have a man standing by who may be the finest political mind of our time, someone who understands the inner workings of all of this. You can find him on Real Clear Politics as a number of other places. I believe we'll get into that. He's a good guest of this program. And his name, obviously is kenn Spivak and Kennan, how aren't you on this Glory Is Saturday.
I am fantastic, but I would prefer sitting the expectations low so I might exceed them.
That's right, under promise and overdelivered. I got that. Welcome to radio. I'm going to be really I guess hopscotch with my questions here because there's so many. I'll start Internationally. Venezuela. We heard again this week the President say that he's not into nation building in Venezuela. But they got Maduro out. They're trying to reset the structure in there. They have nobody in charge. The vice president seems to be at least mildly corrupt because she was part of the Maduro regime.
How do we go into Venezuela, do what we do and say we're going to be there probably for three or four years, and have it not be nation building?
Help me throw that one? Can you?
All right? Well?
This is something really very very different. I want to give credit to a calling you find it real clear David de Rosis, who wrote a terrific article about the difference between going in on normal nation like what we did in A.
And this from afar.
Coercing the existing, as they say, management, the existing government of the country to do what we want. Now, we don't know if this is going to work. We know that this is avoiding boots on the ground. We know that it is so far, in a very short period of time, seeming to work. But there is no way to accomplish what we want. First, it'll stop the second we have a change in administration, unless maybe it's to another Republican and even then it might stop. The commitment
might not be the same. Second for this to work, will require continuing effort by the US, contrary to world opinion of what America should be doing. Because look, let's face facts, getting Maduro out was in many ways a law enforcement operation. We've done it many times before. But what we're doing now does involve elements of imperialists. It involves economic imperialism regarding their oil, it involves elements of healthcare imperialism regarding the drugs. This is not.
A simple one off operation.
This is maybe a very clever, less risky building.
Okay, So it sounds like that everybody is starting to feel their way through this thing, and we'll see exactly if there are outside players with all of this. I refer to, of course, the country of China. Let's hop scotch to around. Apparently there's great unrest there. The economy is in free fall, if it hasn't already crashed, and Homine is saying that, okay, these protests better stop, or
we're going to start banging heads. Trump says, you start banging heads, you might feel the wrath of the United States.
Aron's week.
We know that internally externally, how big of a situation is that and how much of a commitment do you think the United States is willing to make if that regime falls.
Obama and before him Trump.
I'm sorry Bush lost the chance to use U power to support uprisings in around. Trump is not going to lose that opportunity. And I do think we're going to see some use of force special forces, perhaps Israel, in support of this uprising. I think that Trump has a commitment to see this uprising result in regime change. I don't think you're going to see the US to see the US, at least through special forces operations effectuating the change in control and around.
Okay, all right, they may just implode on their own and then we'll see what happens in there. To pick up the pieces. There's a lot going on internationally. I want to get to Greenland. I look at Greenland. Trump wants Greenland, Greenland. He said there are military reasons why. There's also the element of minerals that Greenland has that we want in the United States. I see three options for Trump. Let me know if you think there's a fourth. He can invade it militarily. If he does, I think
that could be the end of NATO. He could buy it. Sounds like he may be trying to buy off some people inside Greenland as we speak, or he could work with the Danes for more military presence and these minerals. I would suggest door number three. But I go back to the original question. I think we talked about maybe the last time you were on much of it. How much of an immediate interest is this for Trump with all of this other stuff going on internationally?
This is crazy.
This talk of in Greenland has got to stop. And I've said that on the show before. Talking about it is almost as bad as doing it. It is contrary to all core American values. I think it's important to Trump. It was important to Trump in the first administration. Now that he had this terrific success in Venezuela, he and are back on this. What most people don't realize is we already have a treaty that gives the US troops and US forces in Greenland in as many bases as we want.
We want.
We already can do a lot of what it is that we need to do in Greenland, which is to use Greenland to.
Protect the US.
From China and Russian adventurousness. But we don't need to do it by invading a country which is part of NATO. Which is part of the European Union, which is an ally, and we need to go through door three, use a combination of economic incentives enforcing the existing treaty. And we need to stop this talk of attacking a NITO ally.
Yeah, I understand the strategic situation that goes on there, but you're right, that benefits nobody. It just makes a situation that could have a positive effect even more difficult to achieve.
All right, let's come home.
I think it was seventeen Republicans joined Democrats this week the pass in essence the subsidies for Obamacare extend them for three more years.
I think the vote was two thirty. I think they got two hundred and thirty positive votes on that. Riya's on that.
Does that survive a filibuster in the Senate? In other words, was this a show vote inside the House and when it gets to the Senate, it's not going to survive a filibuster, And then in essence put us on a road perhaps for another governm and shutdown.
It's not going to survive a celibuster. It was a mistake. Those Republicans should not have done what they did. A six month extension fine, a one year extension even I could understand that, but a three year extension for subsidies that were never intended to be part of the program, that are subsidizing millionaires and billionaires, that are undermining ability to control health care, and that go against the policy
of an administration that they're trying. It was a terrible mistake, but it will, in hindsight, have been show votes.
Yeah, what does that do for a potential shutdown?
Though?
I mean, because this was the big folk rum right back in the fall.
Yeah, was so if I'm not mistaken, and place correct me if I'm wrong that we run out of money allegedly at the end of this month, don't we?
Right right.
On, I learned that it was better to give predictions that no one will know if they're true or false for at.
Least a few years.
This one's last twenty seven days away.
I don't think there.
Will be another shutdown, but this vote made one more likely because it gives cover to the Democrats that there is by partisan support for.
What they want to do. So I had the vote not.
Gone this way, I would have ruled out a shutdown with this vote. I think it's unlikely, but it's not impossible. I do hope that there's another shutdown that Trump this time more fully effectuates what he threatened last time, which is to use the shutdown to downsize of.
Yeah.
I think it goes back to what I believe that every Democrat in Washington is a Democrat, but not every Republican is a Republican in Washington. D see, and obviously these seventeen are scared to death about re election in November as opposed to what may or may not be best for the country. That's a discussion for another day. I'm wondering we had that shooting in Minneapolis this week, we had the shooting in Portland this week, and we saw
what ensued. Where those go legally, particularly the one in Minneapolis, is not something that we know.
You and I know at this point whether the.
Officer involved, the ice officer involved, was in self defense, whether it was something else. But we did see what happened afterwards, and that were these instant, almost call to arms demonstrations that take over a city. Now I think there's a there's some sort of zone that's been set up again in Portland where I guess the mob can rule and destroy businesses. Why doesn't the president just enforce the Insurrection Insurrection Act that other presidents before him did.
I mean, JFK did it, LBJ did it, albeit a long time ago in different circumstances in Alabama and other places in the South. But my question is is he could end a lot of the stuff that we've seen in the wake of these shootings if he just said, look enough, this is what we're doing and we're in full compliance with the law. You're staging an insurrection and you will be arrested if you continue. Seems to me he has that power and he doesn't want to do it.
Can you understand why he wouldn't want to do it?
Yeah, first, I'm not so sure.
Well, let me back up.
I think that all.
Of these demonstrations and many of these elected Democrat officials are in advocating insurrection. I believe that Ice has the right and the duty to enforce US law. The fact that Biden chose to let in ten or twelve or fifteen million illegal aliens doesn't void the Trump administration's right and duty to deport those illegal aliens, and particularly those involved in criminal activity. And I strongly support the right
of the federal government to enforce federal law. And I strongly disapprove of Democrats who are using this shooting or other activities to really do nothing more than say we want the illegal aliens to come into the US and stay, and we oppose the right of the federal government to enforce federal law. But not all demonstrations and not all
talk are insurrection. Not everything we've seen is insurrection. Seen demonstrators walk up to ICE during law enforcement activities and interfere in those law enforcement activities, that is at least an element of insurrection. And that may be insurrection. When we see demonstrators not interfering in operations but merely demonstrating,
or elected officials saying stupid things, that's not insurrection. Coming back to Trump, we're already seeing, as a practical matter, the impact of federal troops or federal law enforcement in localities that don't want them there. We're already seeing the violence that's resulting from that. And I put the entire blame for that on the demonstrators and the Democrat elected officials,
and none on the Trump administration. Even if it turns out that this ICE officer was in the gray zone for whether he should have used lethal force, or even if it turns out that he made a mistake, and I think it looks like he didn't make a mistake, and I think it looks like he acted lawfully. But I agree with you, we need to see some more of the process play out on that. But I do think Trump's going to continue to be cautious about this.
He's also bought decisions go against the federalization of the National Guard, even when being deployed to protect federal facilities. On the other hand, the Ninth Circuit did allow him to deploy the National Guard for that purpose, and he was allowed to do it in Washington, d C. So not all the decisions have gone against him. To end this fairly long answer, I'm not so sure that what we're seeing is an insurrection from a legal point of view.
But what we're seeing is certainly a political insurrection from people who think it's okay to use violence if they don't like federal law.
Yeah, I don't know how these guys with ice do their job. Then, particularly in Minneapolis and Portland, Chicago, some of these other places, there's little if any cooperation with the local authorities there, so they're basically sitting ducks and anybody that that what happened in Minneapolis was not going to happen at some point simply was not paying attention. And I don't know what the answer to that is,
because Trump's not going to back down. We do have ten I think the number is greater than ten to twelve million, but who knows, let's go with that number. They're here for a reason, they're here for a political reason more than anything else. They're votes. That's the way Democrats they'll eventually be votes. And so because of that, these guys with ice are just sitting out there and they're on an island. So I don't know what the
answer is. Maybe you do as to what happens in the cities where there's no cooperation.
Well, Chicago, Minneapolis, Portland, Seattle have all given orders to police forces not to protect ice. That means ice, which is not trained in riot situations, has to protect itself, and that's when what happens in Minneapolis happens. That's we saw another shoe also happened with border patrol. It's going to happen more and more if the police don't step in.
It's going to happen more and more. If Democrat officials don't get their act together and understand that saying that ICE is ripping apart families and that you get the f out, none of that is helpful. ICE is enforcing federal law, and federal law was violated when Joe Biden let in whatever number of millions of illegal, unvetted, illegal
aliens he allowed in. He allowed in Chinese military troops, he allowed in drug dealers, he allowed in rapists, he allowed in people from all around the world without any vetting. And this notion about aligning with our values. People who come here whose goals and values are antithetical to American values don't need to be coming here.
There are probably are.
A lot of immigrants who are good people who if it come in legally, I would be delighted to have them here. But they didn't come in legally, and we don't know that because there was no process.
Or vetting exactly exactly.
And I do think we're going to see more of this, and it's not good.
No, it's not.
And I don't think a lot of these politicians really give a rats rear end about that woman that was killed. I really don't. I don't mean to be callous about it. Anytime life is lost, it's a tragedy, particularly someone young
as she was. I think Tim Walls jumped on this and the mayor of Minneapolis jumped on this because they desperately wanted to change the narrative which has been in there about the fraud that goes on in that state, and they use I think this woman as a pawn just to get the conversation away from all of that.
Tim Walls certainly fray the mayor, maybe not phrase the radical left mayor, who I think believes what he's saying. I think he is overently opposed to limits on immigration. To Trump and to Ice. Tim Maall's is a different story in Tim Wall's clearly was using this to try to move the narrative along. Well. One point that's important is we don't need to wait for all these illegal aliens to become voters for them to move the election toward Democrats because they're counted in the census. Now Trump
positioned in executive order not to count them. That's also moving itself through the courts. But over the last thirty forty years, illegal aliens have counted in the census. The census is used to allocate Congress people, and so depending upon where these people live, they can increase the number of Democrat representatives in the House even before they can vote.
Yeah.
Well, yeah, I know people that have been commissioned by the Census Bureau and they're fighting the same thing people that have been a guest on my show. But Kenn Spivack, it's always great to how can you bring great perspective to things that seem out of control? You're at RealClearPolitics dot com and of course on Newsmack you're a star
of your star of untold proportions. At this point, I'd like to think maybe appearing on my show has helped out along, but that would be egotistical on my part, and I'm not about to walk down that road other than to say, I hope you have a great weekend and you'll answer the phone when we call again.
We will, and your show is always the high point.
I love being on it.
Thank you all right, to stay well, Kennon Spivac, RealClearPolitics dot com. It's coming up on twelve twenty seven. It's Saturday afternoon. It's you and me seven hundred wl W twelve forty one on this Saturday twelve forty one. Welcome Back seven hundred a WLW Kenbrew right till Xavier basketball later on this afternoon. I'll be a three thirty Airtime four o'clock tip Byron and Joe with old play as someone either Xavier or you see looks for traction. In
this particular season, Miami is playing exceptionally well. Northern Kentucky is doing okay, but two major universities inside the greater Cincinnati area not so good.
We'll see if that particular fortune changes here later this afternoon.
By the way, I mentioned that it was twelve forty one, but as you and I both know, it's five o'clock somewhere. It's one for you, it's one for me. Oh, that's one for the ages. This is moonshine, isn't it. Well, I'm not saying it's like illego. Just hold me.
I've just got time for one.
More ABV seven hundred. Oh, that could be a problem. What happens in Aja.
I'll be gone and you can let some other pools sit down.
Oh, we're going to get into what happens if the Supreme Court knocks down Trump's tariffs this coming week. Apparently the fourteenth is the date where the Supreme Court will.
Rule on that.
Well, what happens economically, The market is just exploded, and so if you're invested, it's great.
If you're on Main Street and you're not, or.
If you're looking for your first house, or particularly for the gen Z crowd, the economy isn't all that great and the job market over the course of the last year has not been good. Now, a lot of that is what you inherit and a lot of it is what you try to do. And Trump has gone down this tariff road and it's created a lot of uneasiness, shall we say, with the economy, we'll get into one o'clock what happens if the tariffs get shot down? And then why is Main Street and Wall Street so disconnected?
Two o'clock the Vake Ramaswami has made his selection his running mate, and it sounds like it was a bone to the current governor of Ohio, Mike the Wine, And I don't know if that's good or bad, but we'll find out. Rebecca Downs from the Daily Signal is going to join us. She covers Ohio politics and does it
as she does better than anybody know. But We're going to get her opinion on all of that, and also what Amy Actin, the presumptive Democrat nominee, what she did with David Pepper this week and did that really help her ticket? Amy Actin, maybe other than Mike de Wine, maybe the most divisive politician that's out there right now, largely due to the way she did what she did with shutdowns and whatnot during COVID. But the dem seem to think that they got a chance to take that
governor's seat and that's who they're running with. So does Pepper help her or not? So on the show today, it's a blockbusters show every single time it comes into our city. I'm talking about the Elvis Tribute Spectacular. Oh it's tonight at the Aeronov Center. Elvis tribute artists including Sean Clush, will be on stage. Also on stage is a guy who has been joined at the hip with Elvis. You'vehamistically speaking since Elvis left the building in nineteen seventy seven.
But his backup singers were the Stamps Quartet, led by J. D. Sumner, who had one of the lowest, the.
Lowest, the lowest, the lowest voices in recorded history.
JD.
Is no longer with us.
He's left the earth, but the guy that's now in charge of the Stamps core Tet Elvis's backup singers will join us later on the program.
Ed Enoch in.
Town for the show tonight as well. Did you watch the game last night? Did you watch Indiana systematically pick apart Oregon right from jump to the National Championship game with a fifty six twenty two win over the Oregon Ducks. This game was even more lopsided than the final score
would indicate. For Ernando Mendoza Heisman Trophy winners, seventeen of twenty one hundred and seventy seven yards five count them one two, three, four, five, five touchdowns spread out over one two three four different receivers, and Fernando Mendoza, with his performance last night, was absolutely astounded. Now, after the game, the head coach was corralled on the field by whoever was part of that broadcast crew and was doing the on field interviews, and she asked Kurt Signetti, the guy
that never seems to smile. She asked him whether he was, you know, looking ahead already to that championship matchup against the University of Miami here's coach Signetti. Listen to the question.
I know you're thinking about the next game, but when will you stop and appreciate how special and how historic all of this has been.
I'm really not thinking about the next game.
I'm thinking about cracking open a beer.
There you go.
That's about as humorous as it gets for Indiana. But they don't need humor. They've got a great football team. And if I had a make book right now, I would ride on Indiana. All due respect to the you, and they're playing very well. I would ride on Indiana. Mendoza especially, this is a guy that, let's face it, he has gotten better as the season has progressed, so much so that he has won the current Heisman Trophy. Here's Mendoza after the game and just his journey this year.
Yeah, I would say I have came a long way from you know, being here in January, being Game one came on through your pass. I was trying to be superman, and then the coaching staff settled me down. He's like, hey, you don't got to be superman. We have a great defense and a great superstars, you know, playmakers and alvisly on offense, so just do your job. So my job is to be effective with making you know, really accurate
balls and really great decisions. And that's why i pride myself on every single play and so I'm glad those results of game.
However, none of that matters. All that matters right now is National.
Championship the National Championship Game, and the National Championship Game is coming up on the nineteenth between the University of Miami and Indiana. Like I said, if I had to make book on it right now, I would ride it on IU. But you know, you can't get caught up in the moment. Miami played very well the other night against Ole, miss not as well as Indiana played last night. So uh Duke Tobin, the de facto general manager of your Cincinnati Bengals, held a news conference yesterday. It's fun
to watch Twitter leading up to it. Breathless were some of the tweets, both from people that report on the Bengals and people that are just fans, like this was going to be akin to what Winston Churchill was going to say to the Supreme Allied Command before D Day. And anybody that's been around and watched how the Bengals operate knows that This was not going to be anything that would reveal any way that would provide a window
into the way the Bengals operate. Anybody that thought Duke tobd was going to come out yesterday and say, you know what, I've screwed up this thing six ways till Sunday.
I'm going to resign, it wasn't going to happen.
Anybody that thought Duke Tobin was going to come out yesterday and say, the problem is Zach Taylor doesn't know what to do it crunch time. He just doesn't know what plays to call, and he's under the gun and he better go five out of the shoot and qualify for the playoffs in twenty twenty six wasn't going to happen. If anybody thought he was going to say, you know
what the problem is here. We have enough scouts, we have enough people looking at talent, and that's why sometimes we make draft picks that confound even elementary school children. Wasn't gonna happen. Duke Tobin did say yesterday that, yes, the season, this past one was a disappointment.
It was frustrating, it was challenging, it was disappointing for all of us. But More importantly, it was all those things for our fans. We feel that that weighs on us. It hurts us because we know that they have high expectations for us. We embrace those high expectations. Believe me, we have high expectations for this football team as well.
Yeah, you could have rolled him out there at any point and he would have said the same thing. They're going to roll him out of the combine, He's going to say the same thing. I think the whole thing yesterday was theater and it was basically to appease the fan base that it is a complete disconnect between what the Bengals do and what they're fans that actually support that team monetarily and otherwise what they expect. So they rolled the guy out. It's not like he's been around
for six minutes. He's basically at his hands on the construction of this team since the turn of the millennium.
And yeah, I.
Understand where he thought. It was a disappointment, and I understand why the fans thought it was disappointing to hear him say this about his scouting department and how, let's just say, how thin it might be.
Our scouting staff in my opinion is it is the size that it is because I think the collaboration.
Is better at that size.
We have never lacked for information on a player. There's never been a player selected that we didn't know anything about. There's never been a player selected that we didn't have multiple reports and large background on. It's not about the volume of information we have. If we make a mistake, it's because at the decision point we made the wrong decision. But it wasn't because we didn't have information on the player. We have information, and we have plenty of opinion.
On the and they also have a lot of clunkers. I mean, just go back to twenty twenty. You take Berwin Higgins one two, I mean, anybody could have made those picks. Logan Wilson in round three, a Keen Davis. Gathery's still in the leg, serviceable but hardly a star. And then of course it completely fell apart with Khalid Kareem and Hakeem Dientity. I mean they'd played a dentergy a while a tackle. He's there was nothing special about him. Twenty oh one, twenty twenty one, Chase, anybody could have
made that pick. Jackson Carmen in round two clunker. After you get past Joseph Asai and Cam Sample. Pretty good guys, pretty good players. Carmen Osai's going to make a boatload of money this offseason. Tyler Shelvin Huh, Dante Smith. What they did get McPherson. They also got Wyatt Huber and Chris Evans. I mean, I could go on and on in these lists. You're you're you're going to look at the body of a draft and what you got out of it and then see if you exceeded what the
norm is for the NFL. There's only about thirty to forty percent of NFL draft picks ever make an active roster forty percent of your picks, you get that you're about at league average, But how many actually become a major contributor. There was a study that was out that found about thirty two percent of drafted players become major contributors. Now that would be like three and a half seasons, a certain number of snaps. I'm not defending Duke Tobin.
Duke Tobin is what he is, and this team is what it was or has been over the course of his tenure. Here some good years, some bad years, But I don't think if you have a robust scouting department that does due diligence, that you wind up taking players like Jermaine Burton, like Jackson Carmen. Remember Carmen was an early Day two pick in twenty twenty one. That guy
couldn't block a doorway. I think if you do due diligence, you don't draft Cedric o'bahe and think, Okay, we're fine replacing perhaps the guy that maybe the best second best tackle in the history of your franchise.
I question about that. I know everybody likes to be lean and mean.
Best question of the day was asked by Jason Williams of The Inquire and he asked a very simple question. Understanding that you think everything is fine, that the coaches did a good job at the scouting department, is the right size, and everybody has to play harder, why are you still here?
Yeah?
You know.
If your question is do I have confidence in myself?
I do?
But most importantly I've got confidence in the people here.
I really do. And I've got.
Confidence in the processes that we have here, and I've got confidence in our ownership. I've got confidence in the players we have. We have very good players. It's not up to me to determine whether I'm here or not.
I've been doing this my whole life. It is my life.
NFL football has been a part of my life since I opened my eyes. That is what I do. So I believe I know this game. I believe I know players, and I know for a fact that nobody works at it more than me.
Okay, so the coaches, the scouting department, the players, everything's fine. There Again, why are you here? And how much of a heat factor is there for you and for tailor for next year? You'll never know because Mike Brown will never say. And at the end of all of it, it's still Mike Brown's team, a man of immense patients, immense loyalty. So anybody that thought yesterday was going to be some sort of revelation day.
It was never going to happen. It's twelve fifty six straight ahead.
What happens if the Supreme Court tells Trump your tariffs and oh good, they're done.
What happens to you, me and everybody else?
Because it sounds like the economy, which is burping right along, may go straight into the abyss. We'll talk about that next seven hundred WLW.
Now your post, Ken Brew on news radio seven hundred WLW, Welcome.
Back on this Saturday. Yes, yes, yes, Saturday in Cincinnati.
Who would like that?
Sounds like a perfect day for me. Even if outside it's not all that swift, doesn't matter. That's how we'd like it in January. We like it as long as it's not snowing in January as.
What we like.
Nevertheless, for whatever reason, the Supreme Court decided not to rule on Trump's tariffs that was expected to come down last Thursday or Friday. It now is supposedly going to come down sometime this week. And what it does, and the Supreme Court is more than likely going to rule against Trump and his tariffs, it will throw for the I think, for the moment, certainly, at least the near future, the economic development and the economic strategy of this administration
into a bit of the unknown. And that's to be expected, I think, because Trump's tariffs have been controversial from the start. But what happens if they do decide the court I'm speaking of now, what if it does decide to do away with the tariffs? What then becomes of the economic growth in this country that everybody I think wants to see. Twenty twenty five was an awful year for jobs. According to stats just released, about five hundred and eighty four
thousand jobs were created in twenty and twenty five. Two million jobs were added in twenty twenty four and twenty twenty three under the previous administration, four million in twenty twenty two. Now, a lot of that was because of the economy coming back from COVID, but the jobs that were added in twenty twenty five five hundred and eighty four thousand seems extraordinarily low. So what's going on here? And why is Wall Street so out of sync with
what's going on? With Main Street? Standing by to join us? Is Dan Varoni, highly regarded economic strategist, two time author, and the number one best selling book on Amazon dot com Rethinking Economic Growth? And Dan Varoni, how are you on this glorious Saturday?
I'm terrific, Kenada.
Although it's raining outside, its sunny inside.
God bless you for that. It should be sunny for everybody that's still walking around and breathing and sounds like both you and me are okay? What happens if the Supreme Court, I think as anticipated comes back this week and says, you know, mister President, these tariffs they're simply illegal, and you've exceeded your authority with them. What happens to this country at that point economically.
So, based on what I'm reading and what I'm hearing, it sounds like the administrator has a Plan B of Plant C and a Plan D, and that Plan B, Plan C, Plan D will really be delivered on the basis of what the Supreme Court says. The Supreme Court.
Could say the following.
They could say, mister President, you've exceeded your authority in the executive branch and from now on you need to get the legislative branch to sign off on these. Or they could say, mister President, not only have you exceeded your authority, but you got to give the money back. There could be any number of things.
They say.
My sense is the reason for the delay can and I've been thinking this through a lot. They may be looking for a way. Back in my days, ass city councilmen.
Back in the day, we.
Used to have a strategy called we got to find a way to cut the baby in half right away that makes this thing work. It might be that they come up with a definition for what tariffs are, what they should be, and who has the authority to develop and implement them, And at the same time say, mister President, you have in fact exceeded your authority. The tariffs that were in effect can stay there, or something.
Along those lines.
But I think they are looking to write an opinion that gets them to a middle ground that causes the least possible disruption.
Well, it sounds like from what you just said that the Supreme Court would then be writing policy, which is, as you mentioned earlier, a job for the US Congress, for the House and for the Senate. That to me would seem a little dangerous.
Is that what you're suggesting, Well, not suggesting, the suggesting that that's what they're probably thinking through right now. You know, what should that role be? What is it we should say? The third option could be that they just push it back to the administration and say you've got to go to Congress and figure this out. I think they're looking at any number of scenarios, and I think that's why there is a delay.
Well, if they have to get if they rule that he has to or we have to give the money back, that's disastrous. I don't care how many ways to slice it In an economy that has been at very kind sluggish since the president, the current administration took over, if he's forced to give the money back, that really would shake Main Street to its core, would it not?
There had to be a residual effect for something like that.
You know, it's interesting because you know, ninety seven percent of small businesses export products outside the United States. But at the same time, you know, depending on the sector and small business you talk to, it's been brutal for some, favorable for others, and it's been a dynamic debate. Yes, it has caused uncertainty. I can tell you that for
a fact. I learned that in my book Interviews. But what I will tell you Ken is that this is we are in uncharted territory, and because we're in chartered territory, no one really knows what the Supreme Court is going to say or what it's going to do. But on the basis of the Supreme Court majority, my sense is that they are strict constructionists, meaning that they will stick to the letter of the law in the Constitution as best as possible and will find a way to make
this work work. Meaning cause the least amount of disruption.
Well, we'll see, as a couple of lawyers that I raised once told me the only thing that is more difficult to handicap than a jury is handicap what a judge will do. So yeah, I think that there's I think that there's great anticipation on this from a number of different levels. Let's take it down to the guy walking around the street here in Cincinnati. Five hundred and eighty five thousand jobs created in twenty five In twenty
twenty five seems like an inordinately low number. Now we know that a lot of that not certainly not approaching two million, but a lot of those jobs were eliminated by DOGE, and a lot of those were eliminated by other cutbacks inside the federal government. I think unless you work for the federal government, there are not a lot
of people weeping for those jobs going away. But there were those jobs that were created in the latter stages of the Biden administration, and when he put five hundred and eighty five thousand up against that, it looks a little weak. Was it all because Biden was rebuilding or enjoying the effects of a rebuilding economy After COVID or is there something else at work here?
So here's what I think it comes down to a couple of things. One is, Biden had a highly regulated economy and we had regulations that were imposed that cost one point four trillion dollars. Those are job killers. They do not incentivize businesses to hire workers. So small businesses, who are the big hiring part of the US economy, they hire two of three new private sector jobs. Hiring becomes a disincentive because your cost to comply with.
New regulations are expensive.
Inflation grew to nine point one percent, and again for small businesses, it was very difficult to make a profit. So I think the last administration had policy put policy in place that served as job killers that were just as simple as that. And the third thing I'll say is that the cost of money, the cost capital, grew to be too expensive. So small businesses who aren't sitting around with big piles of cash going out to try
and get loans. It was expensive to get loans. So when you put those three things together, that's really what you're seeing. At the same time, you had major corporate layoffs to the tune last year, I think of over a million and those corporate layoffs. You know what did they come from, Well, they came from high cost of doing business, uncertainty around the consumer, what was going to happen with the consumer? And then uncertainty what would happen
in the new administration. But I will, But what I want you to know is that when you look at those things, productivity in our economy has searched almost five percent.
That's the highest it's been in almost six years. The cost of.
Employing people is lower.
We're looking at at growth. GDP growth was four point three percent the third quarter, could be over five percent in the fourth quarter from last year. But the issue is, the big issue is is this going to be a jobless recovery? And your timing for this conversation is impeccable because I spent the entire morning during research.
I'm writing an up that article asking.
The Federal Reserve to come to their senses and reduce interest rates by another seventy five basis points.
And here's why.
So they cut them three times total of three to twenty five basis point last year in the third and fourth quarter. But here's the bottom line. Bottom line wasn't enough. The cost of capital is still too high. If you want the economy to grow, you've got to bring your tart target federal fund rates down another seventy five basis points. And they're worried about inflation. But here's what we know
about inflame. Inflation fell. We heard in November. In December, from what happened in November two point from three point zero to two point seven. The core inflation rate fell to two point six percent. Those numbers will be updated next week, I think Tuesday or Wednesday, and my senses those numbers will be low again. The issue is the
Federal Reserve must aggressively pursue its dual mandate. They're better on inflation now it's about employment, and in order to get the employment machine going in small business, they must reduce interest rates by a notice seventy five basis points.
Well, yeah, I was just going to say, I think they will because you're going to get Jerome Palell out of the.
Way here in the next several months. And you know his economic philosophies I think or are not this is a good word progressive in this sense.
They're not progressive. Just thinks he's using tactics that might have been in vogue in the seventies and the eighties, and this country and this economy is nowhere close to where it was back then. I think you got to get this guy out of the way before we get to what you want, which is seventy five basis points, which is a significant cut, as you well know, Yeah it's.
A significant cut, but I will tell you it will bring the rates down to like the target rate will go from like two and a half to three percent.
Right now it's about three and a half to three point seventy five.
And we want small businesses to fully leverage the Big Beautiful Law and the first year one hundred percent expensing for plants and equipment. If they do, more buildings will get built, They will hire people, more equipment will be purchased. As they're purchasing equipment, the people building that equipment will have to hire more people. This has a tremendous magnifier effect.
And honestly, I feel like the Federal Reserve is constraining employment that this time with the rates where they are, and as I've been thinking about it since the jobs numbers came out yesterday, I feel like you're looking at.
The wrong data.
The right data is small business jobs. They were down last year. They had a rebound in December of last year, and the way to get the biggest possible bounce in jobs is to cut those rates. Small business will lead hiring as it has historically.
Yeah, I think the majority of businesses anyway in this country are small businesses. It's the business that you pass on main Street on your way to the big box centers. Absolutely, but there is Dan Varney is our Gas Economic Strategists now founder and CEO of Potomac Core Potomac Core Strategy
Planning firm. Here's the one thing, and I don't want to harp on these numbers too much, but in December, most of the gains were in food service, healthcare, social assistance, and the losses were in not only detail trade, but manufacturing. And we got to get back in this country to making things we had. That's that is the gut of our economy, and it just seems like that's been a problem, not just with this current administration but the last couple of people that have been in the White House.
We got to make things again in this country.
So you're absolutely right.
Manufacturing jobs serve as a like whenever they create a job, they create two or three jobs, and the manufacturing job two or three new jobs are created in the service sector. What I like about the Big Beautiful Law, Ken is that it has the intention and the pieces to a puzzle that reindustrialize the US economy.
And that's what that expensing in plants and equipment is all about.
I did a look back on the Reagan tax cuts, and I compare them to the Big Beautiful Law, and I'm telling you that they are far more geared to getting the manufacturing economy going a lot faster than even the Reagan tax cuts did. And the Reagan tax cuts were amazing, but they were for manufacturing. They came in over and they were phased in over three years. These come in as a first year investment. So now I'm
going to tell you why I'm excited about this. So I worked for Nut Gingrich a couple of years back in twenty nine and ten. And when I first went to work for him, came into my office and I had a big whiteboard in front of me, and he said, so, we're going to write a tax plan for small business today.
And I said, and he and I argued the.
Reagan accelerated appreciation versus the one hundred percent expensing, And he said to me, Dan, if you really want to get jobs growing again at a substantial level, it's the one hundred percent expensing first year right off. People will invest, they will buy, and it will create jobs throughout the economy. So when this was included by by the President and by Treasury Secretary Bessant, I was overjoyed because I learned over a decade ago this is a way to really grow jobs.
Well, I share your optimism about twenty twenty six, and I hope it reaches down to all levels of the various age groups that we have, particularly the younger group gen Z, because I think there it's vital that they have a chance to get out of the gate in a strong manner. And I think it's vital if you're the Trump administration that that happens if you indeed want to keep what he has got going now is going past when his term is up. But Dan Varney, our time is up. Tom mccore dot com is where you
can find him. And as always, Dan, we we thank you for your time. Stay well and you know we'll be calling again.
Thank you. Look forward to it.
Dan Varney, coming up on one twenty four on this Saturday afternoon Radio seven hundred WLW one thirty seven News Radio seven hundred WLW. Welcome back, I am ken Brew as we cruise to use Xavier basketball at three thirty this afternoon, Joe and Byron all the play by play and then the tip at four between Xavier and Prominence. Xavier and Prominence at the Cinta Center right here on seven hundred WYLW. Down the road, Rebecca Downs the Daily Signal. Okay,
Vivek has made his choice for his running mate. Was it a bone to Governor Dwine? And what about David Pepper running with Amy Acton? Does that really help the ticket? We'll get into that with miss Downs from the Daily Signal at.
Two six today.
Twenty twenty five, it was just a horrible year for the restaurant Cracker Barrel. We all know what happened with Cracker Barrel in twenty twenty five. They brought in some woman who thought she was going to turn that restaurant chain on its head, and instead she.
Took the thing off a cliff.
It crashed and burned, and all of a sudden, the changes that Cracker Barrel made, well some of them were completely undone. I don't know if that woman still works for Cracker Barrel or not. Her name is Julie Fel's Messino. She and the consulting firm profit were the ones that thought they had all the answers, and it turns out they didn't even know what the questions were.
Nevertheless, Cracker Barrel did not get all of the things undone until this past week. This past week, I said, you went to Cracker Barrel this past week. You know this already.
But if he did not, two of their great comfort food menu items were back on the menu. Hamburger steak and eggs in the basket, both comfort food staples of Cracker Barrel, and the dining public loved them.
But the the.
Brains of Cracker Barrel decided, well, you know, that is so old fashioned. I mean, hamburger steak had been on the menu since Cracker Barrel opened back in I think it was nineteen sixty eight sixty nine. And eggs in a basket is basically an egg inside a piece of bread. I mean, how difficult can that be to make? And why was it gone? Along with Grandpa whatever he was?
On the logo and the redesign of all these restaurants makes you wonder, makes my next guest wonder just how long it's going to take for this chain to get back on its feet. I mean, the stock traded at sixty dollars a share before all those changes last week had closed it under twenty eight dollars a share. That's not exactly driving business. And kJ Blattenbauer knows it, you're saying, Ken, who is kJ Blattenbauer. Well, kJ is a public relations expert.
She has three decades of experience helping customers and companies interact their stories. And she's got a new book that's about to come out. We'll talk all about that next, but for the moment, kJ Blattenberg, how are you on this glorious Saturday.
I'm fantastic. Thank you for having me.
I'm glad you're here.
Look, the worst thing about a mistake is if you don't correct it. And Cracker Barrel has gone. I think a long way in correcting the mistakes that were made by CEO Julie fels Messino. She was working with a PR company, I think the name of it was Profit, and between the two of them, they came up with this logo makeover and restaurant makeover and menu you make over, and in doing so, they completely alienated their base and
it turned into a pr nightmare. Looking back, obviously that was a bad move on Cracker Barrel's part to partner with these people. But I think you got to give Cracker Barrel credit because of the things they've done in the wake of that disaster.
I give them credit. Would you.
Would?
I would give I would definitely give them credit. You know, they didn't fail because they changed. They failed because they changed about clearly protecting the emotional contract that they have with their customers. People didn't go to Cracker Barrel for the novelty of it. They went for familiarity, and when you disrupt that without explanation, you don't get innovation points. You get backlash. But after receiving backlash, they have at
least been smart enough to finally course correct. It might have taken them longer than customers wanted then the stock prices wanted, but they're getting there. They're making the right adjustment.
You know.
The problem that I have with that particular episode in Cracker Barrel's existence is the warning signs are all over, aren't they. I mean, we had new Coke Old Coke back in the eighties. We had the bud Light disaster with Dylan mulvaney a couple of years ago, and I think when you alienate your base to try and grab something that is out there that may or may not gravitate towards you, invariably, it's going to lead to, I think, just devastation, because if the base isn't with you, it
doesn't matter who you bring in that's new. You've lost what made you so special. Why don't companies understand that?
You know?
I think companies kind of lose sight. With the new Coke comparison, You're right on target. Right, Coke tried to replace an icon. Cracker Barrel temporarily tried to obscure its identity, and you know, without leadership willing to admit it, you can't replace your identity. Cracker Barrel briefly forgot what business
it was really in. People want to be with brands they like, they know, they're familiar with, they trust, and when you disrupt that emotional contract without clearly protecting it, customers are going to drift anywhere else where they feel their values are being met.
Now, I don't know how this works you know far better than I. But I would bet that the CEO that was behind the change in Cracker Barrel a year ago, this Julie Fells Messino character. I would bet she got the ear of certain people on the board, but not everybody on the board, and so she thought she probably had enough of a goal to do what she did or her team did.
And I think.
Dealing with these large corporations, you're dealing with a lot of different people on the board, a lot of personalities, and in a sense, you're dealing with their families, their spouses and whatnot. How tricky a road is that to navigate when you know you don't have everybody, but you just have a few people that are saying, okay, we control the purse springs, go ahead.
Oh, It's incredibly tricky.
Right.
First of all, markets hate uncertainty, especially when a legacy brand is sending mixed signals, and that's all Cracker Barrel has been doing for months. I think the bigger issue for them is that leadership as a whole altogether. Everyone in the room needs to understand brand trust is a long term asset and it's not something that you can experiment with lately, which is what they have tried to do.
The takeaway for companies big and small everywhere, I think is simple, as a result of watching Cracker Barrel, innovation doesn't mean abandoning what made you beloved. The smartest brands are going to evolve around their core identity, not away from it. When you protect what you're known for, when you protect what people trust in you, customers are going to follow you for no matter where you go.
Yeah, have you ever been to a cracker barrel? Have you ever eaten a one.
All the time? All the time.
I mean the food is not great. I think you go for the atmosphere and the comfort, and you go there because you can. If you if you have kids, or if you got mom or dad or whatever, you can you can go there and get a decent meal for a really affordable price. And things like Hamburger steak which came back on the menu this week, and eggs in the basket came back on the menu. None of that stuff is what I would call food that's going
to make it happy. But it's comfort food, and I think I think they just completely upended the comfort of their clients. So yeah, I could see where this would would be a major problem, and they lost a hell of a lot of money in doing it. I mean, my gosh, can you imagine working for a company and you go to somebody on the board and say, hey, you know that my idea didn't didn't go so well,
and you know we're out seven billion dollars. I mean, what reaction would you expect if you had to go tell somebody.
Like that, Well, they wouldn't let me in the building. I don't think that. I don't think i'd be employed. I don't think i'd be employed there any longer.
Well, let's say you do contract. This is hypothetical. Let's say your company is Heresay PR Right, I love that name. Here's a PR I loved it. So let's say that Cracker Barrel came to you a year and a half, two years ago, and I said, look, we feel that we've gotten kind of stale. Our growth isn't where it should be. We're afraid we may lose complete traction inside the food industry if we don't do a few things
to you know, freshen up our approach. You've eaten there, so your customer, you know what those restaurants are like. What would you have said to somebody that came to you from that company, if indeed they came to you and contracted.
With you, well, I think the first thing is looking at who the customers are. I would encourage them to have gotten with customers from the beginning, done some focus groups, done more research, because strong brands don't ignore feedback when it's loud, consistent, and values based, and Cracker Barrel has
that customer base. Their voices are angry and we're hearing about it because the customers are mad, they're moving away from why they trusted Cracker Barrel, and so I think the brand protection they should have started with from the beginning is Okay, we need to evolve. Here's the ways we need to evolve in these areas. Let's talk to our customers about the changes we can make or we shouldn't be making in order to move ourselves forward and the best way possible for our brand, but also for
the people who make our brand possible. Pay our bills and keep the lights on.
Well, that's empowerment, right, You're empowering the people that use your restaurant. I think a lot of times these places think, well, it's our menu, it's my money. I've invested into this business, and by god, you're going to get what I serve you. But all it takes is just a little time on
task and a little bit of that research. They would have been better if they had their store manager just go I don't how many stores they have, but the store manager in each one of their stores just work the room and then report back to whomever he reports back to. And I'm sure that person re spports back corporate. But just work the room a little bit in these places and maybe you will get a better idea of where you should take your business. I think a lot
of it is just time on task. Basically, what about you?
I have to agree with you. I think it also has created a discussion around rebranding for a company, and I think it's important to note that rebrands aren't risky by default. Rebrands that ignore emotional loyalty like Cracker Barrel did. Now, that is the problem. The rebrand for Cracker Barrel didn't fail because people hate change. It failed because the brand
forgot who the change is for the people. And so you've built your you built your business for a certain customer base, or you've attracted a certain customer base and any change you make moving forward, you have to take those people and their emotional stake in your brand in your company when you adapt moving forward.
But like Coke, and like Dylan Molvaney and l like Cracker Barrel, you know there's going to be somebody at a corporate office that does something stupid that affects.
Their restaurant or whatever. I mean, it's just it's almost built into our economy. Right, somebody's going to do something stupid in a year or two. Right, maybe then they'll call here, say.
Pr here's helping, and then they can avoid any problem.
Yeah, there you go. What's your book all about, Pitchworthy, Tell me about that.
My book is for small business owners and solopreneurs who are looking to use public relations to help move their business forward. It gives them the basic steps and tips that they can do to put themselves out there and get their brand known without paying a high cost for a public a publicist or a public relations agency.
Do you believe in advertising? I mean, I know a lot of people right now, or they'll open a place I could name you five here in the greater Cincinnati area. In the last year they open, they think, well, I'm on Facebook, and I've got a website and all this, and I'm thinking to myself, well, maybe you need to, you know, just go into a bigger tent than all of that.
But so do you. Are you someone who believes in the power of advertising?
Oh?
I believe in the power of advertising, and I love the power of public relations because it's free advertising. I think when you create a business, you open a business. Yes, you build the website, but just because you build it, it doesn't mean they'll come. I think advertising, marketing, public relations, it has to be front of funnel. No one can fund you, hire you, or visit your establishment if they don't know you exist, right.
Exactly, particularly if you're in the service industry, and it may be something else for different businesses. Business to business certainly is different. But I often wondered about that because I think a lot of businesses fail. And I know we're off on a tangent here, just a little bit from cracker barrel, but I think a lot of businesses fail simply because they don't want to spend the money
to get the word out. The person that owns the company or the business will throw everything into the business and then wonder why nobody shows up, and I guess this is in your book. There's so many easy ways to just get your product your service in front of people. Got to be creative, but I think eventually you got to tell more people about it than just the people that are already in the tent. But that's maybe that's why while I never considered PR, maybe I should have
done that. It might have been a more stable business. Who knows, who knows? All right, how do people find your business? HERESAYPR? I'm guessing it's heresapr dot com. And when they go there, what do they find? Besides I'm sure a real nice picture of view and.
Testimonials, they're going to find EASYPR tip. They're going to find a way to grab my book. But they're also going to learn simple and free steps that they can use to promote their business, product or service.
Simple and free. I like that. Yeah, I like that all right.
So what's your outlook for Cracker Barrel in the next six to nine months. Are they back completely on their feed or do you think it's still going to be a little bit of a struggle.
I think it's going to be a little bit of a struggle for them, But I think they're moving things forward in the right way. They're finally starting to listen to people, and I think they're finally starting to see a few customers come back around when they start moving forward, bringing back what people are familiar with and they trust, and customers see that rolling out their course correcting is going to be They're going to be perfectly fine.
Okay, that's good because come Monday, I'm going to go to Cracker Bureau for that meal over two for nineteen ninety nine.
That sounds like a deal.
kJ Blatinbauer PR Expert Pitchworthy is her book. It will be released soon. You can find her at hearsaypr dot com. Okay, kJ, thanks for your time, stay well and hopefully we can do this again.
Thank you.
Yeah.
Seven hundred million dollars is what the company Cracker Barrel spent on the rebrand that lasted all to two weeks. Seven hundred million dollars. But do a deeper dive. We don't know how much money it actually cost Cracker Barrel to emerge from that terrible business decision, but there are reports that say they suffered significant losses two hundred and fifty million dollars in stock value it's two hundred and fifty million dollars on top of the seven hundred million
it's spent. So this this pr whiz that came in the CEO and this group that she hired profit for the rebrand Julie Fells Messino cost her company nine hundred and fifty almost one billion dollars. We'll see if you're that, We'll see if that particular Jim has passed on to you the consumer. My guess is eventually it will be. We're at one fifty three on this Saturday afternoon, still to come. The Ohio Governor's race is beginning to heat up, even though we're still many months away from it. How
much does David Pepper help Amy acton? And was the only reason that Mike de Wine supports now Viveke Ramaswami is because of whom Vivek has chosen for his running mate. Rebecca Downs from the Daily Signal will join us for that and then down the road. One man that has been with Elvis Presley, well, nobody's nobody's with Elvis right now.
Unless you're in the ground. But one man who was with Elvis Presley for a long long time is in town tonight at the Elvis Tribute Spectaculars. We'll talk to him and much more as we count down to Xavier basketball on seven hundred w l W.
Now your host Ken Brew on News Radio seven hundred WLW and out Amon We go right.
Till Xavior basketball today at three thirty Savior against Providence at the Sintas Center. All the play by play with Byron and Joe right here on seven hundred WLWD. Well, this week, the Republican nominee for the governorship of Ohio, Vivek Ramaswami, made his choice for his running mate, and he selected Senate President Rob McCauley as his for a lieutenant governor. I never heard of him either, and that's
probably more on me than anyone else. But as I travel around Ohio, I'm sure you have to, it's amazing to me how people who are not from Southwest Ohio pay attention to state politics, and we here in the great state of Cincinnati, both you and me and also the media here, pay anything but close attention to what
goes on in the state capitol. It's almost like you really have to search for state politic news in the Inquirer or the local television stations, And I think it's largely reflected on the fact that we look at Columbus, whether we're on one side of the political argument or the other, with a little bit of a jaundiced eye, and so we don't pay attention to it unless some scandal breaks out or there's a controversial bill, and then
we want to know who voted for it. And even if we do that, we're surprised as to who represents us and who voted for it. But anyway, it's Senate President Rob McCauley, who's been around Ohio politics for a long time. He seems to be a well liked guy inside the GOP. I view this as a.
Guy that's with the I guess the old line GOP, a guy that would be viewed as, you know, one of the boys in Columbus.
And I view it as a bone that was thrown to Mike DeWine. Mike DeWine after this endorsed Vake Ramaswami. Mike Dwine has always said I'm going to support the GOP candidate, except he wasn't all that closed is supporting the vike Ramaswami until this. So this obviously was a bone to the wine, and the Republicans want unity in this state. The Republicans want unity everywhere, but they don't walk in lockstep like the Dems do. But this is one of those deals where it looks like, Okay, I'll
throw the bone to the governor. We'll get the governor on board, and then everybody can sing Kumbaya right up till election night this November.
Meanwhile, Amy Acton, the COVID queen.
You remember her from twenty twenty and her role in shutting things down, and it really and truly got to a point where she had to leave because nobody could stand her. Now she's the dominee of the Democrat Party, or appears to be the nominee of the Democrat Party, and she selected David Pepper to run with her this year. David Pepper a name of great note here in the greater Cincinnati area. He seems to get swatted down a
lot in statewide elections. He was successful locally here with local politics, son of the former CEO of Procter and Gamble. But the fact of the matter is he's on the ticket now with Amy Acton. So how much does how much does any this matter? This far out an endorsement by the sitting governor who's not very popular and on his way out, and the son of someone who was a big time, big city, big deal with Procter and Gamble helping the top of the ticket standing by the
way in as someone who's wondering as well. Rebecca Downs writes and writes very well about Ohio politics for The Daily Signal, and I wanted to her take on this as we're still a number of months out, but still things are beginning to come into focus for who is going to succeed the Wine as governor here in the state of Ohio. So, Rebecca Downs, how are you on this glorious Saturday.
I'm doing all right, Thanks so much for having me.
Now, I'm glad you're back here because it's been swirling politically here in the great state of Ohio. And so let's start at the top. But Viake Ramaswamy makes his choice for his lieutenant governor. It's Senate President Rob McCauley. So that's the ticket, Ramaswami and McCauley. It almost has a little alliteration going there. What do you ask, what do we know about Rob McCauley, Because quite Frankly, the media down here doesn't cover Ohio's state politics all that well.
So I actually made the prediction that Ramasami was going to pick Rob McCauley, especially because in part because I was, I think he was the race the way there were going to be other races.
Other potential picks are running for other slots. But he seems to be really well liked.
He's a trusted conservatives but also an agreeable person in this. Instead of people like him, they seem to get along with him. He's young, but he's experienced. He also brings the Ramasami campaign, and there's supporters making the case experience in the in the sense that Ramaswami doesn't.
You know, Ramaswammi is open that he is not a politician.
No, I mean, that was the selling point for him all along, even in the pres as an enter race and whatnot. It seems to me, though, you know, Mike de Wine had been sitting on the sidelines on this. He said he would eventually you know, support the GOP nominee, but he was kind of lukewarm in my opinion to Ramaswami. So is this, I guess, a deference a little bit of difference to Dwine from Ramaswami when he selects Rob McCauley.
McCauley is, you know, a very politically active and has been in this state for a while, would seem to be an ally of the wine. So did Ramaswami do this to get the wine's blessing?
I think you could absolutely make that argument. But of course I also think you could say, you know, two things can.
Mature at once, that he does that he gets an endorsement more willingly, more convincingly from Mike de Wine while not sacrificing what he wants in a running name. What you know, Republican voters, well, we'll see if stuff what they want, you know, when they go to the polls, and I may Republicans actually vote for Ramaswami and whatnot.
So I think you could absolutely make that case, including you know, I think that based on my own understanding of Ohio politics, but also you know, people people talk about these things.
Sure, I mean a lot of the old guard GOP in the state still like Mike Dwine. I think some of the Neuvo Republicans, you know, the Maga crowd, I don't think they care for Dwine all that much.
And quite frankly, that not a polite way of putting it.
Yeah, I mean, I just I just don't since he has the political clout inside the GOP that he once had, I'm wondering what the endorsement of the wine really means in this race.
Does it mean anything?
I think it means I think it would almost mean more if.
He completely quiet on it, or you know, he went and endorsed any action. I think the left and their allies, including in the mainstream media, would.
Make a ton out of it. And how could they not, you know, that would.
Be pretty awkward. You know, Oh, the Republican governor is not endorsing his heir apparents. I think that would I think so. I think it shows even yet, even if it means nothing, even if you know, like, oh, the Republican endorsed the Republican.
Well there you go.
At least it keeps that narrative out that oh dyke, you know, Republicans are at united, especially because speaking of unity, that is the main scene that I've been hearing from Ohio Republican Party Chairman Alex Chantefalo I went to an event in September in Columbus where the bag. Gramaswammi and Senator John Houston were endorsing each other, and the chairman spoke before and he focused on unity and how much the Ohio Republican Party is behind Ramaswami.
Yeah, I thought it was wise for DeWine. Look, there's one thing that every politician has, and that's an ego. Every politician has.
One, and maybe in the back of the politics, Yeah, maybe the back of DeWine's mind that there's a place for him in party politics, maybe even in a grander stage than in Ohio.
I doubt it, but maybe that's that's part of it. He's playing this much better than John Kasch.
I think that guy's completely I was thinking of.
Yeah, he's completely alienated himself from the GOP and kind of kind of looks foolish with some of the stuff he's been doing. So I think I think that this was probably a wise political move on de Wine's part. If he had endorsed Amy Acton, he'd have been dead in the water because he would never be embraced by Democrats. Maybe he'd be embraced, as you said, by the media for a hard minute, but by Democrats, he would never be embraced and he'd be ostracized from the GOP.
Yeah, and that's exactly what John Keitha did. I'm sure you and your listeners recall he was invited. I think he did speak at the twenty twenty DNC. But then Democrat voters were like, well, you don't like John Keisick.
He's a Republican. Why are you inviting this guy? So a good example.
Yeah, I mean these urinating contests that that the old Reagan Republicans think that they've got with MAGA. It's like, you know, Ronald Reagan, he was a great president. He might have been the greatest president of my time. I don't know for everything that he achieved, but he's not coming back and I don't think that's coming back to that party anytime soon, do you.
I don't.
I'm I'm tickled to hear how you think he's the greatest president because I only wish I lived under Reagan.
But yes, you're in a different era. You're in a completely different era. We you know, for better or worse, it's.
The drump era now, right, And to cling onto the past when no chance of it coming back is just to me, it's just it's unrealistic.
It's like, it's right, it's like saying the Beatles are going to start touring next year.
It's they're not. They're not coming back. Let's talk about the other side of this ticket. Amy Acton and David Pepper. David Pepper is a well known Cincinnati and he's been on city council. His dad was the CEO of P and G. I mean, it's a it's a large name in Democrat politics. How much does David Pepper, in your opinion, help Amy act.
Oh I don't know if he will will help Amy action that much given his electoral history in other races. Although a local Democrat, I'm friends, but there are a few of them in my family.
Pointed out that he yep, oh, yeah.
He pointed out that he was a former DNC chair And even if you're like, well, that record isn't that great when for Ohio, he does have the connection as a former party chairman.
So my thinking is that well helped. But at the same time, I was looking at his electoral history in the same way.
I was actually looking at Jim wall Who's electoral history and how he got less and less vote each time he ran for governor.
But I don't.
I don't know if she could have picked a stronger picking up barbeade from me to giv iiodemocrats advice. I just that really surprised me that that would be the pick she went with. And I have seen Republicans Ohio Republicans just mocking him from you know here to High Heaven David Pepper and Amy action for picking David Pepper.
Yeah, I mean, well, he got his clock cleaned by DeWine. I think it was in twenty fourteen for the uh any attorney general, and then the host handled him fairly well for that open seat when he ran for an auditor. But he was he was very active and successful around here in local politics. Ran for mayor, did not get did not get elected mayor. Mark Mallory won that election back in five. I'm just wondering about the strength of
that ticket. She her political accuting, Yeah, their political accume basically began with when DeWine all but abdicated all of the responsibility to her during COVID, and I think she alienated most of the state. Now she's back as the Democrat Darling. I just I can't what would her base be other than nobody wants the Vake Ramaswami as governor. What what would her base be?
That's a good question, you know, certainly if you don't want, well, I don't want the Dake Grandma Swamy.
That crowd my other choice to ding the acting.
She seems like a nice lady in all honesty. Maybe somebody's like, I really don't like Republicans. I don't know much about any action, but she's not the Dake Grandma Swamy or you know, I trust her as a doctor.
I don't want to say that it would be uninformed people voting for her, but but you know what I mean, people who might not be so in the news about Okay, she had her emergency power stripped away, which is actually what Rob McCauley talked about on Wednesday night when he just estaped for that announcement.
He basically made his entire the premise of what he.
Was saying about how she was a quitter is not so, you know, I thought that was a very interesting take on his part.
Right, could be a theme throughout the campaign. We're chatting with Rebecca Downs the Daily Signal. We're talking about Ohio politics. You and I briefly touched on the Senate race John Houstead, who I'm sure is well known inside the GOP in Ohio. Nobody seems to know who the hell he is outside that. I think the survey that we talked about forty percent of this the state does you know who he is?
And so here he is in Washington, d C. Filling out the term of JD Vance and back in not a shame to cry, is shared Brown, and he's running against Houston. Let's just an update on that race. Brown was you know, he's been around as long as it seems like the capital has existed, and it was roundly defeated the last time out. What does he have in his favor going up against John Houston?
Shared?
Brown is a well known name in Ohio politics also outside of Ohio, So you know that could help with out of state donations, which I always have a take on is like, Okay, these people can give money, but they can't actually vote here in Ohio. So let's see
how that translates. He John Hoaston would say to that in response to, oh, he's well known, is John Houston said out a pre press conference I was at last month, Well, you know along the lines of well, he doesn't really he John Houston doesn't really want to be associated with oh He's well known in the sunset.
People really don't like Washington, DC politics. And John Houston is an Ohio guy. He told me right, He's calls all those statewide roles.
So he has the support of I mean, Chuck Schumer really recruited him.
Of course, Chuck.
Schumer has his own problems, but he's not even up for re elections this cycle. But the Democrats seem to like and he also has done well in the past with independence so called moderates because he's considered a so called moderate. I think it's I think John eastid has a good chance. But I think it's really going to be a race to watch. And if John east is losing, I think that's going to be a bell lother.
For how the rest of it night is going to go. Yeah, you know Republicans overall nationwide.
Yeah, I think it's incumbent. If Trump really wants to get involved in this election here in Ohio, and well, I guess is why wouldn't he be, But he's got to get together with Thune Trump does and figure out a way to boost John Houston's reckon just his status in the state and forty. I saw this pole a month ago. People don't know who he is. That's good, I guess, whatever picture you want to yourself. But it's also pretty darn bad for a guy that's been in
a while politics forever. So I think he has to boost his visibility in Washington, don't you.
Absolutely Trump did offer an endorsement.
I believe Jady Vance did as well.
If you said, campaign is certainly speaking to that and promoting that, but he's just, you know, there's not You have some quieter senators and some more in your faith senators, and it's okay to be a quiet senator in a lot of ways.
Get a lot done.
But it will it does present again, the campaign would call it an opportunity. That's definitely an opportunity. We'll see if they're going to see that. We're now in the new year, so let's see. Let's see how that will turn out, especially if they're going to maybe have campaign events together. He said of Gramaswami, my understanding and conversations I've had that's been at least implied that the ticket is going to kind of help each other out, and we'll see where that goes.
All under the purview of another Cincinnati guy, Alex Treantapila, who is the Ohio Republican Party chairman. It's amazing, Rebecca, how all things filter back to Cincinnati. Doesn't know what you're talking about. Whether it's politics, sports, medicine, international affairs, everything seems to filter back to Cincinnati. Rebecca down, Yeah, the daily Yes, yes, you for your time today. Keep up the good work and we'll be in touch.
Thanks, thank you. Have a great weekend, you too, you.
Too, We'll see. I don't know.
We got a long way to go before election, before the gubernatorial election in November. I don't know how much McCaulay helps with the general electorate. I certainly did inside his own party. And I have no idea about David Pepper. I just I just think the top of that ticket when you when you just peel it away is I just think she's she's very unpopular, and whether or not she actually winds up with a nomination, it would appear she would.
I don't know what kind of I don't know what kind.
Of traction she's got from an electric stamp, an electoric standpoint. Find out, that's why they play the games, right, coming up on two twenty seven, News Radio seven hundred WLW.
Now your host Ken Brew on news Radio seven hundred WLW.
Hey, we've got a little bonus coverage today, normally done three, taking it right up to three thirty. In Xavier basketball against Providence, Xavier struggling. They've lost three in a row.
They've only won twice since defeating the University of Cincinnati and the Crosstown shootout. Of course, they had that long break in December. But nevertheless, on whard they pressed today against Providence. There was a poll that was out latter part of twenty twenty five, and it caught my eye because I think it speaks to what a lot of what we speak about here on this show and certainly other shows on seven hundred a WLW was conducted by the New York Times in Ceno.
Sienna is a university. Liberal university.
I don't trust polling that's conducted in any way, shape or form by any university that's not to run down universities per se. I just don't think that polling in general has a very good track record, and then when you combine it with universities, it seems to get worse. But nevertheless, I did find this interesting. Many of us,
you and me, believe that America is too politically divided. Duh, of course it is, though some of the polling that was done in there leads one to believe that maybe we're not salvageable as a society when it comes to politics. Sixty four percent of registered voters think the country's sharp divisions cannot solve political problems, and one third of us say the political system still has merit and we can
get to the bottom of what's wrong. Now that's a huge jump from the last time this poll was done about five years ago. Forty two percent of the country Back then thought the nation was too divided to solve its problems. Fifty one percent said the country could still do it. Now it's at sixty four registered voters who think the country is divided to a point where it's unsolvable unsalvagable, and thirty three percent say the system can address the problems. It just seems like this is getting
worse and worse. So from time to time I am on a guy that I think is really interesting. I hope you find it this way too. His name is Peter Lemage. He is someone who came to this country, emigrated to this country legally. He was from Albania, which, as you know, is not a country that's very open minded, and he settled in Connecticut. He's run for political office up there in Connecticut and unsuccessfully on a number of times. He's running in twenty twenty six for the job of
Secretary of State in the great state of Connecticut. But like I say, I value his opinion and I wanted to get his thoughts on this poll and whether or not our society as a whole when it comes to politics, is saveable, if not salvageable.
So let's welcome in, Peter Lamage. Good to have you with us. How are I in this fine Saturday.
I'm doing well.
Thank you for having me.
How you doing I'm doing well too.
I'm glad that you're here, because, as you well know, we are a country that is at each other's throats. And it's all because it seems like politics here. Now, a New New York Times siena pol that shows sixty four percent of us of voters now believe America is too divided to solve its problems. And this is a stunning drop and optimism compared to just a couple of years ago.
Sixty four percent.
Doctor, that's two and every three of us think this thing is hopeless here in this country.
Please give us some hope and tell us why. Yet again, the New York Times may be wrong.
Look, I was reading the poll, but the pool. But you have to understand one thing. New York Times has not been doing justice to conducting these polls. And I would take that with a grain of salt when it comes to the American population. But for the fact with the American people, but for the fact that the media
keeps on driving this divide between them, the academia, the politicians. Otherwise, American people ordinary posts like you and I. We wake up in the morning, we go to work, support our families. We don't think about disliking each other. Somehow, New York Times finding that people to come up with a fall that sixty four percent or sixty three to sixty four percent of the American people believe that America cannot resolve.
Its own challenges.
They forget the fact that we have faced greater challenges in the past. You can go back to eighteen sixty one, eighteen sixty five, will report a civil war.
We have the civil rights.
Movements, we have the ninety eleven attack. Somehow Americans find a way of uniting when it comes to Americanism. But New York Times, for whatever reason, you know, it's able to come up with these numbers. We still see people from all over the world wanting to come to the United States, both legally and illegally, because they see America as the exceptional nation that we are where people have the opportunity to live the American dream, to pursue the
American dream. And every time that you have American born citizens trying to promote something that is not quite American. People like me who give the United States thirty six years ago so refugee, we really are battled by it that they think that we are just another country in the world. America is that exceptional country that was founded by the founding fathers of this country, and it remains the strongest and the most prosperous and the greatest nation
in the world. And I don't say that for you just because I live in the United States. It is the fact that when I compare it with the countries that I've visited, that I've seen, that I've lived in, it is just completely different from the rest of the world, and I think that we're maintaining that position. We're maintaining that of those standards, regardless of what The New York Times is reporting on that board.
But you know, Peter is not just the Times. In April, there was a group called the Network Contagion Research Institute and Rutgers University sponsored this that had found that fifty five percent, fifty five percent of self identified left of center respondents said that it was at least somewhat justified to murder President Trump. In twenty seventeen, u goov, you know, the YouGov group, they were asked people, was it justified to advance political goals with violence? Eight percent said just
a little bit justified. Well, they come back and they do that same poll again after Charlie Kirk was assassinated, eleven percent said violence can sometimes be justified to achieve political goals. Let's let's be honest here. The left of center group is a dangerous group right now. And I think if you're getting something like what Rutger's got, and it could quite possibly be an outlier. And I don't trust any kind of a polling. I think it is
an outdated metric. But Nevertheless, I don't see how you come back from something like that. That's that's that's radicalism right there, your thoughts.
No one can deny the fact that we have been, you know, the United States has been radicalized in a certain group of or a certain part of the population United States.
One of the greatest mistakes.
That we have been making in the last I would say forty fifty years is that we have been importing certain cultures in the United States that they are not compatible with our values and what we stand for.
Violence should never.
Be justified to settle political differences, you know, in the United States or anyone else.
In the world for that matter.
But when you look at that goal, you see that the majority that the largest majority of the Republicans disagree with that. I think it was ninety percent department mistake, or even greater. It was the fringers in the United States that they believe that if you disagree with someone when it comes to certain political principles or values, violence may be justified, and that is something that we should never tolerate in United State. But that number sometimes surprises me.
That is not even higher when you see that we have professors in our institution that are promoted anti Americanism, and that they think that Republicans are evil, that President Trump is evil, that he's a notpted, that he's this fassions that I mean, the way they describe the Republicans sometimes is like, I'm surprised that the number is not even higher. You barely hear Republicans or Conservatives or common sensical Democrats, including the senator from Pennsylvania, which surprises me
sometimes the left that way. The interview that he gave last night on Parks or he was speaking somewhere and I was following that, he said, I cannot dislike or hate Republicans. I'm the only Democrat in my family. He said, these people are not anti Americans, they are not passions. They are not these crazy people that you think that they are. But then on the other hand, the Democrats
they stand there. But ninety percent of the media in the United States, they keep them speaking or promoting negative things. But Republicans and so do so do the educational institutions. Although the newspapers sometimes and these numbers come from the left, and it's unfortunate, but you know that that number is quite you know, correct when it comes especially center left with Americans that they would believe in, you know, using
violence to settle political differences. I thought that I would never see this in the United States, but unfortunately we've seen that. And we saw that with President Trump that twice there were you know, attamns on his life. We sw that with the assassination of Choraley Kurk. And when you look at all these assassinations in the United States or attempted assassinations in the United States, the.
Targets have always, with the exception.
Of JFK, been Conservatives or Republicans, and the assassins or potential assassins, they have always been on the left. And this is some this is something that the Democrat Party is going to have to come to its terms to understand that their membership has to be somehow, uh, the more understand and of the differences that the Republicans or the political differences that the Republicans are you know, presenting
to them. And unfortunately I don't see that happening soon enough. Actually, we need that as soon as possible, that that boy, he's going to have to understand that.
Doctor Peter image our guest. He is a conservative strategist. He is also a candidate for elective office in Connecticut. You know, I think about things about where all of this went off the rails. I remember the debates between Nixon and Kennedy, between Carter and Ford, between Reagan and Carter, and so on, and they were all very respectful debates. We all knew that the media, even back the mainstream media, even back in the sixties, was a leaning left operation.
It is hard leaning left right now, ABC, CBS, NBC. It's just the way they are. They're populated by reporters and strategists and editors that have come out of liberal institutions, and so it translates into what we see and here on a daily basis.
But I think this all went off the rails more I think about it.
In the twenty sixteen election, the Democrats fully believed that Hillary Clinton not only was going to be elected president, but deserved to be elected president and should have been elected president. And when it didn't happen, I think that's when all of this stuff, this Nazis and this Hitler and all that, all that diatribe that had been thrown against the right. I think it all began in the
wake of that. I don't think Democrats could handle the fact that Donald Trump, whom they loved, doctor they loved before.
He ran for president.
I don't think they could handle the fact that Donald Trump was now president of the United States and the Golden Girl Hillary was not.
Am I wrong?
No, you're not wrong.
Actually, the keyword that you used to her here is that they believed that she deserved it to be the president of the Uni States. And I think that is what we should underline, that nobody deserves anything. You walk out there, you earn it, you work for it, you fight for it, and you get you convince people to vote for you. And I think that Clinton miserably failed
to do that, so did Harris. And Donald Trump was able to convince the larger part of the American population to vote for him, and they get to the American people continue to love him. I mean, still the bas is about ninety percent supportive of what Trump stands for
and what he's doing to put America first. But when you look at the Socialist Democrats of America of America, for example, you look at the leadership that that movement had, and you look at the names over there, whether it's Receive at the leap or whether it's Omar or Bernie Sanders, Zorah Mandani. Now, I mean, you look at these people and it makes you wonder that most of them, or all of them, with the exception of Bernie Sanders, they
were not even born in the United States. They've come from countries that they were supposed to escape, or that at least we believe they were escaping these liberal, socialistic policies, and yet they come to the United States and the moment they become American citizens, they promote the exact same policies that they left behind in their countries which drove
them out of their countries. And this is something that is that the Democrat Party has allowed this left wing part of the party to take control of the party, and now the more common sensical people, including the Senator from New York, they are afraid of these people, including ocagiquarters, that they are going to primary them and remove them from power because they have garnished so much support, whether it's the youth, whether it's the minorities in these cities,
whereas the ones that they can consider to be disenfranchised. I mean, they have garnished so much support in these cities that the common sensical Democrats are scared of them.
They're going to have to stand up to these you.
Know, so forth leaders of the socialist Americans and then just dismantled their policies. They have to have to bag bone the character in the forty two to stand up with these people and tell them this is not American at all and we're not going to tolerate this.
And I hope they do that in this election.
It's been about five or six years ago, but doctor Peter Lumage wrote a terrific book. It's called My Father's Prayers, and it details coming to America, escaping socialism, and his hope for America. If you can find it, it's a tough fine, but if it's out there, it is a great read. And doctor Lemage, it's always great having you on.
You stay well. We need to hear your voice and thank you for your time here.
Thank you very much, God bless you guys. I have a great weekend.
Thank you.
Sixty four percent say it's out of our control now, it's a beast running amok. Yeah, but you know what, it all seems to come back to center eventually, the Democrats that have you believe that's when Donald Trump leaves office and rides into the sunset to never be heard from again. And the Democrats the Republicans would tell you, as soon as the squad shuts up, as soon as socialists are stopped being elected to public office, it'll all get better. The fact of the matter is, none of
that's true. It's up to you and me to make it better. That's where it all starts. And maybe next time they take that survey. Maybe next time, if there is a next time for the New York Times and seeing a college, maybe that number isn't sixty four.
Maybe it's a little bit lower, maybe it's a lot lower. That's what you've got to keep alive. That's hope.
We'll see if hope becomes reality now three twenty three on this Saturday afternoon news Radio seven hundred ALW