Hey, guys, ready or not, twenty twenty four is here and we here at breaking points, are already thinking of ways we can up our game for this critical election.
We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade the studio ad staff, give you, guys, the best independent.
Coverage that is possible.
If you like what we're all about, it just means the absolute world to have your support. But enough with that, let's get to the show. Good morning, everybody, Happy Monday. Have an amazing show for everybody today. What do we have, Crystal, Indeed.
We do lots of big developments. We're going to take a look at some of the Trump cabinet picks which are coming into view. In fact, we just got some updates last evening that we can share with you and Sagrel spend some time breaking down some of these fights within the Republican Party. You can explain to me and everybody else what exactly is going on there. We also have some election updates where the Senate finally landed, where things are with regard to the House, and some interesting
media reaction that we can talk about as well. Big fight breaking out between Bernie Sanders and Nancy Pelosi. She fired shots at him, he has taken some shots back. So we'll break all of that down and what it could mean for the future of the Democratic Party. We're going to break down this pugrum hoax. Sorry, that's what it is that is unfolded in Amsterdam, the way the
media reacted, the truth of what actually unfolded. Give you all of those details and also some deeply disturbing new statistics released from the UN that reveal at least seventy percent of those who have been killed in Gaza by the IDF were women and children. So we'll show you those numbers. Soccer is going to take a look at the media and how this election unfolded, what it means going forward. And I'm going to take a look at
the pod Save Bros. Revealing Biden had polling internally that said he was on track to lose four hundred Electoral College votes at a time when him and his aides were still insisting that he was the best possible candidate that Democrats could put forward. What it says about the Democratic Party and also the indications that you know, as poor as this election went from them could get a lot worse things if they don't change course, things could get a hell of a lot worse for them.
So yeah, I'm excited to hear that, though I'm sure you are great. It's just what a beautiful statistic, four hundred electoral But before we get to that, just thank you so much to all of our Premu subscribers.
You guys made our election night possible.
I mean, we had logan here, we had our partnership with Decision Discs HQ, and we're still going to be utilizing some of that in the show. And it was really amazing just to not to be able to provide like full coverage, but also just see the way that you guys reacted to it. A big part of my monologue is actually about how many Americans, hundreds of millions or tens of millions of people spent their night on election night, not just with us, but with other people online.
And it was the lowest ratings ever for election night in mainstream media. That is literally possible because of people like you. It was our biggest week literally ever in the history of the show, downloads, views and all of that. So just thank you to all of you, and we've got don't worry, we still got big things planned.
Twenty twenty six is not yet upon us.
I'm joking and joking there. We'll get there twenty twenty six. Now, I actually think it'll be an interesting year.
If we think back to it, you know, it may be some of the most policy focused show's ever been. If we think back to the first year the Biden administration, spend a lot of time talking about BBB, about what COVID vaccine mandates, et cetera. This really is traditionally the first hundred days and the first year is the real time when any of the landmark stuff usually does get past. It happened in twenty seventeen with Donald Trump. So if
you like policy, gear up. We'll definitely have a lot you know, we'll have a lot more room, We'll have time, we can bring in some analysts and some other people and really dig into it. So I'm excited about that for the next year. So sign up Breakingpoints dot Com if you want. It's gonna be a very different show, but a good show.
You know.
We'll stick with the news and in some ways, you know, honestly, that's.
What I prefer to talk about.
Anyways, It's not just damn elections all the time, So I'm excited.
Yeah, the horse race definitely sends up a lot of oxygen. So and listen, I mean, one thing you can say about Trump, he certainly it'll be crea. It's a lot of injury.
He will create a lot of content.
I'm sure. I have no doubt there will not be a dearth of things for us to discuss here and.
Ket exactly all right, already the show is too damn fall. So that's where we're at. Okay, let's start with the Trump personnel and how the transition and the cabinet is beginning to shape up. So we're starting to get some interesting signals. To put this up there on the screen. This is hands down the most important one from Donald Trump. He says, quote, I will not be inviting former Ambassador Nikki Haley or former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to
join the Trump administration, which is currently information. I very much enjoyed, appreciated working with them previously. I would like to thank them for their service to our country make America great again. So obviously, those are two of the most prominent neo cons who previously worked in the Trump administration who had not yet I guess denounced Donald Trump. You know, it's there were many other much worse ones, people like John Bolton wasn't coming.
Back, right, Bolton's not coming back? Who did he?
I think he wrote in John McCain or something like that for president, according to him in his latest CNN interviews. So someone who I think he might have it was either McCain or Paul Ryan or something like that.
It was ridiculous.
Oh no, sorry, I'm thinking of Jodah Goldberg, who wrote Paul Ryan a very serious political intellectualist everyone definitely spend their time listening to anyways. So this is important because this was a big fight in turn of the transition. There was a lot that was a lot of ammunition against Haley. It was a lot easier because there's quite a bit of bad blood inside the Trump team over Haley.
In that last week of the campaign where she denounced, I don't.
Think anyone really expected her to be there.
Right, But it was one of those where I honestly think she might have had a chance if she had not gone on TV the week before to criticize the campaign over MSG and to very publicly kind of make a bet that she thought that the campaign was going to fail, because there's no reason to do that unless you thought that the campaign was going to lose.
If you did genuinely have a concern, you'd pick up the phone.
Pompeo is.
Honestly, that shows a real victory I think for the online right, in particular, because there was a very coordinated campaign by you know, a lot of the Mega America first types online who were like, Mike Pompeo cannot be picked.
He's somebody who he never like. He ever went as far as Haley.
He had little signals that he would give about how he didn't necessarily support Trump, but he attended the rallies, you know, if Trump shouted him out Previously. Ben Shapiro actually gave an interview a couple of weeks ago. He's like, have absolute assurance Mike Pompeo will be in the next administration. So that is the most high profile like pickoff for the neocons. I don't want to get too carried away.
There's still quite a bit of people that need to get picked and we're going to get into some of this. But in terms of the most influential positions, I think we say relative confidence these people not only not going to be back in the admin, but being a Neocon specifically very very very hawkish on the outer bounds on Ukraine. That is going to be a bit of a problem for you. So that's one thing we can say it with relative confidence. Let's move on to the next one.
This was an interesting choice and announcement as well. This was the first one on November seven, so a two. Please, we'll put it up there on the screen. Trump announced that Susie Wiles will be appointed the White House Chief of Staff. So Susie Wilds is very much like a kind of a non ideological just like campaign operative. She has an interesting history actually, so she ran the Trump floor to operation in twenty sixteen. Then she joined Ron
DeSantis's campaign in twenty eighteen. But then DeSantis fired her and kind of made it created a jihot against Susie Wilds.
And so I got the details.
I don't remember the exact details.
I think there was a lot of beef around the narrow margin of victory for his campaign and whether Trump was whatever.
There's a lot of personalities involved here.
And so the point is is that after DeSantis jettison Wiles from his campaign, she then decided to go and join the Trump side and Trump obviously she worked for Trump back in twenty twenty, and then from that point forward she also had a real gi hut against Ron Desanta's her former boss, and so there's quite a bit
of beef and stuff like that behind that. I would not read all that much into this in terms of ideology from those who I have spoken to, Susie Wiles is a person who is very much a behind the scenes hatchet person in terms of execution. So you're like, hey, I want this to be don be like, okay, mister president. Sounds good. That's generally what it seems to be. She doesn't really bring a lot of her own like thoughts
to the table. She's very much just like an organized like make sure the flow chart and all that other stuff is working. That's how she appeared to operate on the campaign, and by all accounts, she has good rapport with Trump enough to be like, hey, you need to.
Cut some of this shit out.
Now.
We're also talking about Donald Trump, so it's not like anybody can control him, but people around him are very happy with that choice. They've got a good rapport from the successful campaign. Some of you may have seen Susie on the election night around like two or three in the morning. He was like, Susie, come up here, come take the mic, and she was like, no, I'm not taking that. She was like, let Chris Chris Lasovita the other campaign manage it.
Yeah, take the mind. I mean, this is a very like, you know, standard longtime GOP Apparachick. Yeah, works for Bush, worked for what McCain. Yes, she you know, was a corporate lobbyat a bunch of like Pharmer clients, et cetera. So that's, you know, she comes from a very establishment GOP background. I was just looking up what caused the
split with her and DeSantis. It says they began to fracture because the speculation ranges from her taking too much credit for DeSantis's victory that would be a big problem for Trump speaking too freely to reporters, and another concern she was too close to her former client Rick Scott. And then I think apparently she also didn't get along with Casey DeSantis and his chief of staffs, so that there were just some like interpersonal issues there as well.
So anyway, that seems to be the cause of this whatever that is with her DeSantis.
Yeah.
I mean, as I'm looking at all these Trump cabinet and personal pics or whatever, one of the things I'm thinking about is how many of these people are going to end up like denouncing him, leaving the White House, like joining the you know, anti Trump side. She seems like one that could be possible, just because she is such a kind of like standard.
GOP figure, if only if he humiliated her, which by the way, is very possible.
I would not would never say.
I think. The only reason I say.
That STARTI rode the campaign.
The only thing I the only reason I say that is because we can cue up this statt and will come back to the element before this, the A two B. But apparently she's telling people like she's going to keep the clown car away from Trump or whatever. It's like, good luck. You know how many people, how many people have thought they were going to be able to control this person, keep them on the rails, keep them from doing the most insane things like that's not going to happen.
So I still think that there are a lot of people who delude themselves into thinking that if they're there, they can, you know, keep things headed in whatever direction. They think is productive. Here's Laura Ingram. This is a three. I think talking to Tulci Gabbard about those comments from Susie.
Wiles, Congratulations to Susie Wiles. She is fantastic. I've so enjoyed working with her. She is a straight shooter, and I'm looking forward to seeing her as chief of staff.
Well, she her source was close quoted as saying the clown show is basically not going to have access to the Oval office. Essentially, I'm paraphrasing, but the words clown show was used.
Is that a good thing?
Yeah?
You know, she works very well with President Trump. I think she did. She is of great credit to winning this campaign and being able to make sure that the train didn't go off the rails, and so, you know, I think she's going to do a fantastic job is White House Chief is staff. President Trump seeks counsel from those that he wants to but but Susie Wilds will provide a great leadership on his behalf.
I have to yeah, I have to think that those comments are specifically about people like Laura Lumoer. Yeah, well from there was like a specific like you know, fight that she waged to try to keep Laura lumor appear to remove Laura Lumer from the Trump in orbit. It does appear that she was successful.
After Laura made it on the plane, she was able to offload her from the plane. Now you know, who knows how that will work out. Look, I tend to agree Trump is a figure who is on the phone basically all day long whoever he wants and when he wants something, and especially whenever he feels like his advisors are keeping him from something. It's almost like childlike where he's like, well, and then I need to see that person.
I elevate that person. I need to get them in here to the White House.
I really saw this in the latter days during Stop the Steal, when a lot of his advisors would not give him what he wants. Then he was like, Okay, I'm just going to invite them privately or through the campaign, and they would end up in the Oval office, you know, like a lot of these crackpots who eventually pled guilty were literally in the Oval with.
Yeah, and despite.
You know the efforts of the White House counsel Pat Sippoloni, who tried desperately to keep them out. So in general, Trump is Look, he's a seven year old man. He's gonna do whatever he wants to do. I guess the real question is how much interest that Trump even has on policy, Because if he doesn't have as much interest on policy and he just leaves it to Susie Wilds and the people who he points honestly, it could be
a good thing. But the other side of that is that if he does decide to intervene, it can really throw an entire wrench into the process. So look, it very much remains to be seen. Continuing on the personnel front, let's go to the next one.
A two B.
Please Trump has offered a least dephonic the job as US ambassador chat the United Nations. Yeah, I mean, look, it's a coalition party, Crystal and pro Israel is definitely a muwe part of the cold.
I mean, that's the thing is she won this position by you know, being the chief instigator of the campus anti Semitic like yes, the freak out, the freak out, yes, which makes her, you know, one of the most woke people in the coalition, actually worried about microaggressions, wanting safe spaces for these students. But I mean it says a lot that the chief qualification she has here is that she you know, stoked this whole anti Semitic like panic
thing and is super pro Israel. And I'm sure she'll be there at the UN to give lots of time. I was covered to Natyato and you know, back them up. So basically Israel now has two UN representatives. Of course they already do, yeah, they already did.
But in this case, I mean, look, there's good and there's bad.
Good.
Is UN ambassador is one of the dumbest jobs in the entire United States government. You're technically part of the cabinet, but you know whatever, you live in New York.
You had to live in some fancy thing.
And what's the only thing Nikki Haley did in office this She's raised her hand a couple of times in.
Very high profile kind of like glamorous, right, But it's bullshit. You don't do anything.
It's like you literally read from prescripted remarks to the Secretary of State gives you.
So you have very little power.
On the other hand, you can have a lot of power, especially this time, and this is one where I am almost betting the farm that the pro Israel donors really boosted her. And the other thing to understand about Stephanick is not only did she gain a lot of she came like more comere nationally prominent, prominent with this whole Israel thing, But prior to that, she was a big Trump loyalist. She made her bones on the second Trump
impeachment and she made her speeches for him. She went all in on defending Trump so much so I thought she was a real contender for vice president because Trump loves to her. He would always bring it to mar A Lago, and I remember it was like twenty twenty two or something, He's like, this lady's going to be president. So as usual with Trump, like as long as you're personally very you know, if you are willing to defend him,
then that's the thing that matters the most. So that's one where at least dephonic we can learn, you know, that's again she does. She's not going to have a lot of power, but she will probably be high profile, especially with respect to anything Israel related. And this is almost one hundred percent a big like, uh, what is it like an olive branch to the donors for what
they want? It could be right, hopefully in my estimation, that they give it something like this to her, it's like a meaningless position, but it's something in the un But then the more important ones like Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense, you pick somebody who is going to be less hawkish. All of that very much remains to be seen. I want to be very very clear about that.
So what do you think was most influential in spiking Mike Pumpeio, Because Pumpei was like traveling with Trump at the end of the campaign. Trump was talking him up on Joe Rogan and Sea. Who do you think was.
Massing Don Junior?
So Junior, as it's very interesting, Junior has taken a major interest in the transition this time around. And actually Junior, unlike most of the people around Trump and very specifically like Jared Kushner, is ideological in a much more America first way. So, for example, if you look at his Twitter feed, Dave Smith, you know, put out a clip and he's like, let's make sure Pompeos first, Let's keep all the neo cons out. Don Junior was like, I'm
on it, don't worry about it. Previously, Junior was very impactful on picking jd Vance as the vice president. He also is a major player in nuking all of the people who worked on Project twenty twenty five and on the people who's taken a real interest in the transition. Trump and him appear to have been become closer at least like politically this time around. And Don Junior also kind of keeps his finger on the pulse culturally. In fact, I would be, you know, remiss if I didn't point
this out. It's really because of Don Junior and his friendship with Dana White and UFC and all these comedians and a lot of this podcast stuff even kicked off. You know, Don Junior's been at these UFC fights for years now. He's somebody who's already friends Dana White because his dad was. But he you know, I mean, Andrew Schultz has talked about this. Him and Schultz were friends.
He met Rogan. I mean, if you check out his Instagram feed, like he's Tony Hinchcliff and all these they're all swimming in the same ether.
So was apparently influential.
Baron was more of the gen z Aiden Ross exactly, but Junior is like he's the bridge to the millennial comedians, I guess, and so I think he was probably the most influential on that and is being very influential in terms of the transition. So you know, I take some heart in that, because again, if you literally just look at his own public remarks, I don't think you would deny any of this.
He's he is.
Somebody who is very ideological on the subject of Ukraine and also on the subject of at least as far as I can tell, on terms of war with Iron I mean, anybody Republican figure who's engaging with Dave Smith. I mean, we all know Dave is as legiti as it gets on this subject. So that seems to be a positive indicator. But let's put the Reuters piece up on the screen. This floats some other names that are in there. In terms of the secretary's Treasury Secretary, it's
almost certainly going to be some Wall Street figure. Trump is obsessed with this idea that you need to have a billionaire like Wall Street financier in head as head of the Treasury Secretary because he remembers the Reagan times and he wants to he wants to bring some of that back. So people like John Paulson Scott Bessen.
Arry Kudler is still getting to mention in here.
Yeah, I don't think Larry would get it just because it seems I mean, no offense to Larry. But like treasure sect is a real job. You know, It's like you're not just on TV talking. You actually have to really know what you're doing and be like a very high, high competent figure. You know, say what you want about Steve Mnusan, but you know, when time came, he actually did a pretty decent job, at least in terms of the small business administration stuff during COVID. Robert Leitheiser, it appears,
has been tapped as US Trade Representative. Lightheiser is very very strong on tariffs. He was the architect of the Trump tariff policy. He I thought, hey, you might be in charge and then the running for secret of State.
But we don't have any of that right now.
But I can tell you, you know, Leitheiser very legit guy, not only in the subject of China terrace, but he designed USMCA with Mexico. Him and Trump have a very very strong relationship. Trump strongly trusts Bob Leithheiser and actually would empower him. Usually the trade trade representative does not
have quite a lot of power. And also the best thing for Lathhauser this time around is that Jared Kusher is not coming into the ADMIN, and last time around he would do all these ad hoc negotiations which would undercut him.
I saw Vivac is a potential for secretary stage you buy that.
It's difficult to believe simply because we're about to talk about the Senate math. I don't see it for vic I just don't see how you could take somebody who is not I'm not saying it would be a bath secretary, so actually be good. But the issue is going to be do you really think John Thune is going to vote for him? Do you really think John Cornyn? Do you really think I don't know, I'm trying to think of Lisa Murkowski or I don't think lisam Mkowski would vote for a vivege in college they have.
A three Well, first of all, I mean they're talking about doing recent appointments anyway. Yeah, we'll be able to get people through, you know, even who wouldn't be able to garner the majority. But I don't see if a VAKED failing a confirmation, it.
Would be difficult just because he's an unknown figure and these people are Washington Creek.
To like part of somebody gonna get who Trump want.
So somebody I spoke to you yesterday said that internally that there is a real graybeard like bias for the big four, and the big four are like Secretary of Treasury, Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, and Chief of Staff and then all of those in general. Look the average as in the Senate, it's like sixty five vagas of what like forty three. You know, it's like, yeah, to get somebody through like.
That is going to be hard. I don't know, I mean, don't get my hopes up.
I would like I listened, Hey, I think you'd be the best cabinet I all think.
But well, why don't we talk about the next part and then we can continue this conversation in there because it has you know, relates to this like Senate leadership fight and all of those things.
Yeah, that's a good point, So let's move there to the big Senate leadership fight. So this is like a big war going on right now over who should be the next GOP leader in the Senate. Mitch McConnell is retiring, and stepping down from leader. And so the three candidates are Rick Scott, John Thune, and John Cornyn. So John Thune and John Cornyn are more establishment types. They were already number two and number three in the Republican Conference. Rick Scott has become like a Maga rallying cry.
So let's put this up there on the screen.
For example, from Tucker Carlson, the most prominent to tweet this out, he says, what the hell is going on in the US Senate? Hours after Trump wins the most conclusive mandate in forty years, Mitch McConnell has engineered a coup against his agenda by calling early leadership elections. Two of the three candidates hate Trump and what he ran on. One of them, John Cornyn, is an angry liberal whose
politics are indistinguishable from Liz Cheney's. The election is Wednesday, it's by secret ballot, and it will determine whether or not the new administration succeeds. Rick Scott at Florida is the only candidate who agrees with Donald Trump. Call your senator and demand a public endorsement of Rick Scott. Don't let McConnell get away with it again. That is Honestly, the big question is what why Rick Scott? And I got to be honest, I don't get it at all.
For example, because Rick Scott was the guy who was in charge of the Senate leadership campaign, the what is it, the NRSC. He was the head of the NRC in twenty twenty two, which was a disaster. Remember he went to the Amalfi coast on a yacht.
He put out that whole like policy friend that called for Medicare and Social Security to be sunseted every what like three years and have to be revoted.
Biden campaign ran on and was a huge boon. Remember whenever Biden gave his the only frankly good speech he gave his president whenever he was giving a State of the Union, and he was like, oh, so you agree we're not going to cut social security?
Got it right? No, it was a real up around Republicans neck, I mean, Democrats across the country ran on that plan. Because when you have the guy who's running the Republican campaign putting out like, hey, we're going to get rid of Medicare in a couple of years, that's such a slam dunk, and everybody a lot of him like political acumen. I guess we would say I don't get it.
I mean, I'm assuming there must have just been some behinds seems to deal with Trump and Rick Scott, where Rick was basically like, yes, sir, I'll do whatever you want, you know, whereas John Thune and Cornyn I'm not saying they won't do it, but it's just different. Like these guys are Washington creatures. They've been in office since George W.
Bush.
You know, They've seen presidents come and go. They know how to slow shit down, they know how to do things if they need to, to obfuscate or to stop things from coming to the floor. And traditionally this is something about the Senate as an institution. Traditionally, the Senate
as an institution revers its own independence. And so what they are very what they love more than anything is their ability to do and take as much time as they want to get what they see as important done, whether it be confirmation, legislation, etc. That's literally their role in the democratic process. And so it's understandable, but the Senate always chafes at presidential control. The other thing about you know, Rex Scott is last time I checked and
Michael Tracy flag this. Let's put this up there on the screen. Rick Scott is a freaking Ukraine kahak. I mean quote from Tracy. Rick Scott has consistently denounced the administration for not arming Ukraine aggressively enough. His argument is that Biden has imposed successive constraints on Ukraine and their ability to defeat Russia. As Tracy says, I've interviewed Scott myself multiple times and he's never been anything but consistent
on the subject. So when Magas declared that Scott and Trump are in firm agreement, Ukraine would presumably have to be one of them, correct. I mean, look, as usual with all these actual parsing the details is very inconvenient, But that's an important thing, you know, in terms of Ukraine, that's one of those that Trump has made a flagship promise to end the war in Ukraine. He's spoken now with Vladimir Putin and woo Zelinsky will maybe talk a
little bit more about it tomorrow. But you know, if he does end up approving more weapons to Ukraine and continuing this war and not bringing it to a close like he did with Afghanistan despite his promise, that would be a huge betrayal honestly of a lot of the promises that he made. So open question that Senate race is on Wednesday, it's actually by secret ballot. That's kind of interesting. And also the battle lines are very odd.
So like I'm pretty sure Josh Holly has not supported Rick Scott this time around.
But I mean anytime in one of these bodies, you're going to have things that are non ideological, that are just like personal beefs. Yeah, there's so and so didn't respond to you know, I mean, so you just don't know who's who's done a better job like making friends and being a nicey nice one.
Well, see, that's one reason I think Rick Scott may have a problem is he pissed a lot of people off last time because he ran against Mcconnaldy. Yes, he's not particularly popular at least as I understand it within the conference, you know, Thune and Corny and look, I don't agree with these guys on basically anything. There is like opposite as me as it gets on like every subject and even on America first. But there is a real bias in the Senate to just being around forever
knowing everybody having everybody's phone number. They've been the whip and the number whatever the whip in the what's the number one leader or something for you know, over a decade, so they've been on the phone.
They know what pet issue.
Oh, Susan Collins wants a bridge in fucking Maine or whatever.
I raised money for you. I showed up, I called in this favor, I got this donor to whatever.
Yeah, corny, I mean, he controls a ton of oil money in terms of the donors Thune. He's also very popular on the big donor circuit and a lot of these establishment types. That's a big question for Rick Scott. I mean, can he raise money? Like I said, he didn't do a very good job last time. One of the reasons McConnell had such a stronghold on the conference is he was kind of like Pelosi.
He was the conduit for billions.
Of dollars that were flowing from him.
So it is a big question. I have no idea how it will go. I guess it's I mean, it's possible. Ran Paul has come out for Rick Scott, but there's enough of them that are silent that I'm wondering whether they go in a different direction.
To be honest with you, I don't think it really matters. I think Trump has thoroughly bent the party to his will. I mean, as evidence by we're about to talk about, Trump is saying, Hey, anybody who's going to be majority leader, they got to do recess appointments, which basically means that you are giving up. If you are the Republican majority leader, a big part of what your power and prestige is,
which is to oversee these confirmation hearings. And all three of them instantly were like, Yep, we'll do that, no problem. So I don't know that. I mean, I just think it's probably at this point a distinction that doesn't really make a difference. Yeah, they're going to do what Trump wants them to do because they see where the party is, like, there is no room for bucking this man when he
decides that he really wants something done. I guess the case the opposite case is that there are many things that Trump doesn't really engage on, and that's where perhaps it makes the difference. But I just I don't know that this fight is ultimately that important. In my opinion.
The case really matters is stuff like when Trump remember pressured Mitch McConnell to nuke the filibuster to get the border to bill through, stuff like that. Right where I think Dune and Cornyn would be much more an institutionalists, like we're not going to touch it, Whereas I think Scott, at least from what I can tell right now, I mean clearly like he's made a deal with Trump and he's like, I'll do whatever you want.
It would be an interesting thing though.
Actually if he does, this would be the first Senate leader to really be in subservience to the president you know, a long time. You know, if we think I'm trying to think back, I think it would have to be back in the Reagan era. Maybe it's been a while since you've had somebody totally in locks with that. Let's go to the next part here. Oh yeah, this is John Thune. Everybody will love this. He was on CNBC and he's like, you know, Trump, I think he needs to stay out of the race.
He shouldn't endorse at all. Let's take a lessen.
Is President Elect Trump involved and does he have a chosen.
Preference in the Senate?
Do you do you know, senator?
And will that come into play?
I don't. Well, I don't know that he does. I'm staying in regular contact with him and with his team, and you know, obviously, if he wants to, he could exert a considerable amount of influence on that. But honestly, I think my preference would be and I think it's probably in his best interest to stay out of that. These are Senate secret ballot elections are probably best left to senators, and he's got to work with all of us when it's all said and done. But whatever he
decides to do, that's going to be his prerogative. As we know, we're going to have that election next Wednesday and we'll have a new leader.
Right, So he's like, hey, I should stay out of it, you know, just for everybody's best. Now, this gets to what Crystal talked about. Let's put this up there on the screen. Trump tweeted yesterday, any Republican senator seeking the coveted leadership position in the US Senate must agree to recess appointments, without which we will not be able to get people confirmed in a timely manner. Sometimes the votes can take two years or more. This is what they
did four years ago. We cannot let it happen again. We need positions filled immediately. Additionally, no judges should be approved during this period of time because the Democrats are looking to ram through their judges as the Republicans fight over leadership.
This is not acceptable, thank you.
Now, as Crystal said, all three of the candidates said that they agreed. But you know, there's a lot of logistical hurdles that can come in.
I mean, and I'm not exactly.
Sure how it would all work because Schumer still does technically like control the Senate and so different now, so he would have to acquiesce. There's no way the Democrats are going to let that go through, right. They want to reprove as many of these federal judges as possible. This is game time for them. I also as this is very nerdy, so I apologize. But there's something called like pro forma session, which they're in right now, which
specifically prevents recess appointments. So you would have to get the Senate majority to you know, agree to change the parliamentary rules. I mean, look, it's theoretically possible. I guess if Rick Scott did win the election, maybe he could do a deal with Schumer. I don't really know. Why Schumer would do it.
But anyway, yeah, and well, previously Obama used the recess appointment's powers and it was deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court the way that he executed it. So I mean, listen, it's a different Supreme Court now, so who knows. They may well be like, whatever Trump wants to do, we can basically do. But to me, it was also like, you have a fifty three forty seven majority, like, who is it exactly that you don't think they're that you want that isn't going to get confirmed because I just
think he has such a grip on this party. Now, you know, maybe Lisa Murkowski votes agains are Susan Collins, but two votes, but you still have a you know, three vote margins. So I think it's I don't think he's going to have any problem with There's always wild cards.
People like people that nobody's ever heard of, Todd Young, right, the guy who voted for empreachment, you know, from Indiana.
I don't know. And it's just he's so like at this point, it's just so clear where the party is.
I don't disagree with you, but that's looks the Senate. This is part of the reason that people have hated the Senate for two centuries because they're annoying. Like, who else, who's the doctor, the one who also voted for impeachment?
What's his name? The guy from Louisiana. I can't even remember, so.
The doctor, you know, whoever, however, the doctor votes Haggarty.
I think is his name.
I'll remember it in a second.
But there's just this wild cards all over in terms of who they are. Barrasso, right, you know, you've got folks like that who you know, sometimes they're maga, sometimes they're not.
They all have their.
Own individual constituencies.
So I would not bet one hundred percent that Trump is able to get everybody who he wants. I mean, for example, from the reporting I've read like Trump wants to appoint RFK Junior to HHS secretary, but he's like, I don't know if he'll be able to make it through conform So that is one too where you could see, right, you could almost see like a weird right wing case against Art where they're like, oh, he's just.
Liberal, and my god, the thing is that he's done before is then okay, if they can't get confirmed, I'll just make them acting Secretary and just basically leave them there appartment.
He can, but it has a lot of legal problems in terms of their authority and all that.
You can try and get around it.
No, I'm saying in terms of the agency, it causes real chaos and there's a reason why, you know, people wanted to get done. But we will see it is Look, if they do go with Rick Scott, I think it's a very positive sign for exactly what you're saying in terms of Trump being able to get who he wants through and a lot of personnel decisions will flow from that, and also will flow in terms of whether they do recess appointment or not and all of that.
So everybody stay tuned.
This stuff, I know can get a little in the weeds, but it's very important because this is how the government's actually gonna get run.
Yeah, and notably, you could put a nine up on the screen elon coming in for Rick Scott. Yes, for Senate Majority Leader. But yeah, so I mean a lot of people closing ranks. The one thing that the other guys have going for them is that it's a secret ballot. So you know, anybody who votes against the will of Trump and Musk uh, you know, as long as it
doesn't get out, they won't necessarily be punished. But like I said, my assessment is basically like these guys have already all been like, Okay, we'll do recess Appointment's no problem. So I just think they're going to do what Trump wants anyway, any of the three that gets put in there, yeah.
Very possible.
At the same time, there's still quite a few people in the media who are trying to grapple with the election results. One of them Sonny Houston over at the View her explanation for the big Latino shift to the right misogyny, racism.
Let's take a lesson what is wrong with this country that they would choose a message of divisiveness, of xenophobia, of racism, of misogyny.
Over a message of exclusiveness, a.
Message for the people, by the people, the people.
What the problem is in the publicular vote?
Sorry, but their Democrats have always been for the working exactly, and the Republican.
Found it elitist.
You don't have that in the society.
But when you look at the.
But Joy, it's it's condescending. There is a there is a condescending the way that the.
Left speaks to its voters.
It really is a message of joy and inclusiveness.
No, the message of not being educated, being dumb, and what's wrong with America?
This is that that, Sonny?
Just what is wrong with America? Harris?
No, no, No, My point is, I don't blame Joe Biden. I don't blame Kamala Harris. Go back as far as you want.
I believe I.
Blame a messaging within the Democratic Party. You don't believe the Republic And I just finished my point. Please, I obviously have a problem. Anyone has a problem with Donald Trump. The bear question should be yes, Sonny, why did they vote for him in sweep?
Be interesting?
No, No, we need to be.
Introspective if we voted for Kamala Harris, we need to say what didn't resonate with the voters.
So that's we're currently at.
And that's just one of many clips that we could have shown you about where things are right now.
There's been a competition to figure out I don't know if you guys thought there was a an Onion video about like the race to figure out which minority group to blame Democratic laws, and I was like, Wow, you guys really are meeting the moment with that one, and it's there's a whole content like, you know, white people obviously voted for Trump by the largest margins, so they could be to blame, but you know, men could be to blame. Young men could be to blame. And it's like,
you know, I think it's reasonable to suggest. In fact, I think it's true that gender in particular plays a real role in electoral politics. But if you are just if your instinct is to blame the voters and not do any sort of reflection on like the multi billion dollar consultant grift complex that fails, or the Democratic leadership which is consistently failed, or the people who circle the wagons around Joe Biden even though he was on track
for a four hundred electoral College vote defeat. Like, if that's your instinct, just get out of politics. You're not If you think you're all been the Democratic you are not. You are not helping the Democrats just by being like, oh, it's because Latinos are sexist. Some of those theme Latino mann who voted for Donald Trump probably voted for.
Heller Cullinton back in twenty Not only not some of them, almost all of them did vote, especially in those like one of the places that she shouted out where Hillary won by fifty and Trump won by now seventy five and twenty twenty four literally voted for Hillary and they actually voted for even higher margins for Barack Obama. So it's like, come on, man, like what are we doing here?
This is the whole thing is ludicrous. And it's like you said, this is just a way of not even look at a certain point, Sonny is a pundit, right, so maybe that's just like how she that's how.
She sees the world.
And I guess, like, okay, fine, but it's something because that is an obviously ingrained part of the analysis of a lot of the Democratic Party elite. And it's also deeply convenient to the Grift complex, to the leadership and to others, because then it's the voter's fault and it's not ours.
Fine, it's not the Lowsy, it's not Schumer, it's not Jamie Harris, and it's the voters. And like I said, like, in a sense, I'm sympathetic because I understand that a lot of women looking at you know, the policy landscape. Of of course, Kamala Harris herself being a woman, and people like Nick Fuenta is out there being like yay, your body, my choice forever. Like I understand that sense of like, wow, maybe this country just hates women, Maybe
they just don't really like women. And like I said, I'd be lying if I said that I didn't think gender played any role in this. But you also have to you also have to really think about what moves us forward, who is actually to blame for this state of affairs? And if you're just you know, voters are irritumably sexist and racists, then you may as well just throw your hands up and give up, because in the sunny hawse and worldview, those are like immutable characteristics that
can't be changed no matter what. So what are you going to do?
I agree, and look on the gender cooint like you just said, you know, for anybody out there's like oh they just hate women, it's like no, it's like they think about things very differently than you. And then maybe you need to do a better job of onder standing. I mean I felt that way right going into twenty twenty two and I go who out there is a Number one issue is abortion? I was like, you know, what world are we living in Well, there are a
lot of people. Okay, So clearly I'm like, okay, as a man, you know whatever for all these people, not really something that I get. So that's not something like, oh, these people only care about themselves. I'm like, all right, I could emotively understand that.
Well, you should think about the.
Other way for people out there who are like, well, you know, not necessarily. One third of the people who voted for Donald Trump are pro choice, a full thirty something percent of the people. He won the popular vote in a country where there's some sixty five seventy percent approval for roe versus weight as the consensus.
So how did that happen?
Is that because people hate women? Or are they multifaceted? And they make choices based on the higherarchy of needs and about which in way that they think is most important and what's going to be the most impactful. And so your job is to flip it around and say, here's why this is important. Anyway, Let's get to the congressional map and let's put this up there on the screen, because I want to give everybody an update. So this
is currently where things stand right now. The projected number of CT is two hundred and twenty seats for Republicans two hundred and fifteen seats for the Democrats. This honestly might be the most interesting result because it does show Republicans only one, you know, two seat majority there. That's kind of a nightmare considering what's been going on right now, all the Mike Johnson the speaker election which was crazy,
and you know, Matt Gates. And this gives a lot of power to the Marjorie Taylor Greens.
Of the world.
It also actually gives quite a bit of power to some of the swing state Republicans in New York and elsewhere who barely hung on because they are gonna The reason why I'm saying this is when the policy fights come. This is where you are going to see that flex. So for example, the salt tax and the salt capital the New Jersey, New York people who, let's be fair, you know, Trump just ran the ballot up dramatically in all of the New England states, like they're going to
have a big bargaining ship for them. They're like, hey, you got to give us something to go back to our people. You're going to see the same in any of the swinging districts. I think in what is it in Orange County and elsewhere in California where you saw some swing state races, You're going to see that in Nebraska. I bet you that Don Bacon guy who held on he's gonna whatever he wants.
In Omaha, I guarantee you he's going to get.
So there's gonna be quite a bit of jockeying and stuff like that in the House. And it also will be very precarious for the way things look policy wise, because even though they do technically have a united government, it will not be it will not be how it traditionally is, which is very narrow Senate margin, very big House margin. It's actually be flipped and that has very interesting dynamics because the House is also where all the
revenue stuff has to originate from. So you're going to see, you know, taxes, houseways, and means Committee where you have a very very narrow margin. It will look differently and a lot of the fights and the choke points are going to be more in the House this time around.
Let's go and put up the Senate projections. We got some final calls in these races, so we now know for sure what the Senate map is gonna look like. So in particular, you have Reuben Diego, who was able to hold on narrowly win that Arizona Senate race over carry Lakey. Also have Jackie Rosen over I always forget the name of her freaking opponent, Sam Brown. Sam Brown, I always want to say, Scott Brown's that guy from MATS Justice.
Anyway, Do you mean Biden's ambassador to Australia?
Is that what he ended up in Australia? Didn't that? Anyway? Whatever, So Jackie Rosen wins a narrow victory in Nevada, which means that, you know, outside of Pennsylvania, which was very close and I think headed to a recount with Bob Casey. But I mean it looks like McCormick was able to defeat.
I mean the AP called the race for McCormick already, right.
I think it is close enough though that it triggers a recount.
Very well if they want to, because Casey basically refused to refuses to concede.
And so yeah, there's some beef.
Going on with a lot of the Republicans right now because Joshua Peer, I think it's up to the governor's discretion too, because it costs like two million dollars if they do want to do a recount. So there's a lot of pressure on CAZy to concede from the right. I mean, he doesn't have to, don't want to, but it could be a while until they.
Got Yeah, but a down McCormick is the is the one Republican who was able to flip a swing state. Now, Republicans picked up in West Virginia, no surprise, picked up in Montana and obviously blocked any Democratic you know, Texas, Florida, Nebraska, sort of dreams. But when you look at this, the one thing that could be hopeful for Democrats and a warning side for Republicans is Trump doesn't have a lot
of coattails. You know, Republicans narrowly hold onto the House, make only one very close gain in terms of a swing state in the Senate. And you know, the people who like Carrie Lake, who were the most sort of like Trumpian in their approach to politics, they haven't fared particularly well. Like he is a singularly unique figure. And now, assuming that there isn't a constitutional amendment, this will be
his last term in office. So one of the questions for Republicans is if this politics holds up post Trump. And there are some parallels with Democrats under Obama.
Yes, so a lot.
There were a bunch I'm talking hundreds of thousands of people who voted for Donald Trump and then just left the rest of the ballot empty, which is how people like Jackie Rose and Reuben guiet Or are able to get over the top. It's basically people who voted only for Trump and no one else. Democrats faced a similar dynamic under Obama, where you'd have people who were like, yes to Barack Obama and I don't care about anything else.
And we know that with Obama. While he was very good at getting himself elected and you know, had some coattails as well, especially in two thousand and eight, he had huge coattails, he ultimately ended up being very damaging for the Democratic Party. That's when you saw massive losses in rural districts and areas. They lost the House, they lost the SEM of course, they hand up the presidency over to Donald Trump post Obama. So you know, I don't want to do like my monologue today is about
how doomed Democrats are. So I'm not doing a cope here but there is a question mark about how much this politics translates into the future when you do not have the singularly charismatic figure of Donald Trump at the top of the ticket. I think he outperformed every report publican Senate candidate in the country save for Larry Hogan. And yes, it's crazy only person I think that outperformed.
Yeah, that's right, and which makes sense.
And you know, he's a Republican running in a blue state where he's already popular, so it's a pretty different but.
Yeah, I mean, he was governor of the state. He really tried to like be very moderate, et cetera.
Which, by the way, head of that workout for him, didn't work out for Trump.
Yeah, I guess it's lost pretty ton.
I guess I am fascinated to see this in twenty twenty six because that is where usually thermostatic public opinion you have a big shift against.
The ruling pack party.
Yeah, and you're going to have a blowout election when you already have what the House right now where it is, it will be almost I mean, I wouldn't say certainly nothing, but you know, it looks likely that the Democrats would be able to reclaim it from what this map I looked at, the Senate is not in danger of flipping right now. In twenty twenty six, some truly crazy stuff would be have to happen. That said crazy stuff has happened.
Let's think back two Democrats from Georgia. That's never going to happen, right, Well, what's the world that we're living in right now, so of course things can change. Everybody said in two thousand and four that the Democrats were dead, they'll never win again. Two thousand and six would freaking blowout elections, So yeah, you never know.
Well, and everybody said Republicans were dead after two thousand and eight, right, And I mean, and they kind of worred it for a while, but then they came back. It was such a massive victory for Barack Obama. I'm going to one freaking Indiana, North Carolina, huge coach. And there were all kinds of Democratic candidates who were running like totally obscure, long shot campaigns with basically no funding, and then suddenly it's like, oh my god, I won. What the hell?
Yeah, it was Harry Yells.
Exactly in Virginia, like the Charlottesville area, and it was people like that Glen and I was another one in virgin I just happened to know the Virginia one as well, but down in Virginia Beach. But yeah, and then twenty ten was in Obama's words as lacking. So you know, we'll see. I'll save some of my commentary also for you know, it's in my monologue whatever. I'm not saying Democrats are like electorally doomed. I think they can. You know,
I think there's a chance that you have. I think there's a good chance you have a backlash to Trump in twenty twenty six, twenty twenty eight, who knows Trump won't be on the ballot. So we'll see what approach
they take. But you know, they also the alarm bells are really ringing loudly because there's been such huge demographic shifts against them, you know, and if if they don't, if they don't stop the bleed, like they will be in a position of being basically a permanent minority, because if you're only winning college educated voters, like, that's only a third of the country.
Yeah, you're father, Yeah, absolutely, I will say again, in terms of the popular opinion and all the things change a lot, you know, So I just looked at nineteen eighty two was the popular vote margin of Democrats eleven point eight percent. So in nineteen eighty two, that's crazy in terms of House. Yeah, every tip O'Neill and all that.
I mean, you look, it was only when Gingrich came in that they lost the House. That's found the entire rea in terestry. They held onto the House.
Right, So everybody just needs to remember, like things are not as clean as they may seem in retrospect, and that people in this country can change their mind a lot and wildly, and in fact, you know, the whole divided government thing, which I think is dumb, but there are a lot of voters who like it, right, because voters are like, well, I like checks and bounces. It's like, well, well, if you're going to vote for a president, don't you know want the president to be able to do whatever they.
Want to do? But whatever people like.
People like the idea that not very much is going to change, like a steady hand on the wheel, but not too much. You know, it's somebody in the other side. So we could see a swing in that direction. I will say if twenty twenty six does go the way that you were talking about or.
Are going to talk about your monologue.
That is a whole other.
Story, and that would be time for some serious retrospectives as well.
So it's possible. It certainly is.
I mean, if you don't screw up the economy, if the economy starts doing really well, but in two years and we have no war, Ukraine gets wrapped up if they if we you know, hostilities in Gaza go down, and you see gas prices ticked down, and you see the FED which is naturally going to cut rates. Anyway, I could see, you know, or a GOP victory that time around. Anything, anything is on the table. Let's move
on to another part of this. There's been a lot of discussion about some of the issues that swung people to Donald Trump. Obviously, the economy and immigration are there, but some interesting new analysis says that also it could be cultural issues, specifically transgender issues that had a major impact on swing voters.
We had a clip here from CNN.
We wanted to play the kind of highlights this fight within both elite media and elsewhere and how the issue may be talked about now in the future.
Let's take a listener.
I think there are a lot of families out there who don't believe boys should play girls sports.
They're not boys.
I'm not going to listen. I am not going to girl a boy.
When you use.
Changed boys.
I'm not gonna sit there a second, because look, this is a really heated issue, right And Michael, I know you. I know that you understand that people have different views on this, I think out of respect for Jay, like, let's try to talk about this in.
A way that is respectful.
Okay, So let me rephrase this since I'm being targeted here.
I don't know you are not, but I'm specifically saying that I know that you are not intending to be Transphoba.
He should know that.
But you want but I want you.
I want to give you regular people interpret it.
That's not just why it's not regular people. There's no consensus that these are actually boys. This whole thing about trans girls is a canard. It's we're talking about a tiny, tiny sliver of the populations. Just hold on, Just get to your point, my point in terms of its effectiveness, regular people with children look at these things and they say, you know what, this is a bit too far.
I do not agree with this.
I don't like this.
I think Democrats are going way too much to the left on social issues.
They're uncomfortable with it. A lot of people.
Believe that, a lot of families believe that. You may disagree with that reality.
But that's why Republicans kept.
Running those ads over.
And over and over again, because they saw the metrics suggested that in those ads over and over again and using rhetoric like you just use saying this is boys playing girl sports.
Were talking about.
Talking about trans girls playing playing being allowed to play with the people who are in their gender. And if you don't believe, you don't have to listen to me, listen to the American Medical Association, the American Psychological All.
Right, so preview of what culture War two point zero looks like. Now that this has happened, let's put this up there on the screen. This is really the genesis I think of why this is even worth discussing. So this is from Blueprint, and this is we've used some of their polling and stuff before and they show the different issues that have animated different types of voters. So, for example, if you look reason to not choose Kamala Harris, the number one issue for all voters was inflation was
too high under the Biden administration. Number two was too many immigrants illegally crossed the border under Biden Harris. So that makes sense. But actually along the swing voters, this was Honestly, I was shocked by this. It says all swing voters, but specifically all swing voters who chose Trump. It said Kamala Harris is more focused on cultural issues like transgender issues rather than helping the middle class. That was a plus twenty eight score on Blueprint. Now, look,
let's be clear. People are not always the best in terms of why they vote, and I'm the most consistent messenger on that.
So I'm not going to say that this is the number one reason.
But I mean, I do think this is a vindication at least somewhat of that ad that they them add that they blanketed the entire state of Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin for considering the margin and also considering that we have some of this data here and also even some of the reaction within the Democratic Party.
So I'm curious what you think.
So I think that this type of analysis which I have myself engaged in, which is basically like, let's focus group and poll test and get the voters to tell us in this paint by numbers way what we should believe in. I think it is worse than worthless. I think if you look at the campaign that the Kamala Harris team were actually put that chart back up on the screen. They basically ran the campaign designed custom like platonic ideal of the campaign that would be designed to
try to deal with these exact poll numbers. Inflation was too high. Okay, let me talk about my price gouging plan. Let me say I feel your pain. Too many immigrants illegally across the border. Oh, don't worry, I'm hawkish on the border. Now those other things I said in the past, like forget all about that. Actually, I really am like more aggressive and hawkish on the border than Donald Trump. Is too focused on cultural issues like transgender issues rather
than helping the middle class. I am not even going to say the word transgender in my entire campaign. Is that true? I didn't know that. I mean not that. I maybe once, but not that I recall. Okay, it was certainly not. I'm not going to talk about my race. I'm not going to talk about my gender. I'm going to run around the country with Liz Cheney and try to persuade you that actually, I'm just like basically a Republican. The only way I'm different from Biden's I'm actually further
to the right. I'm to put Republicans in my cabinet. Like this is the campaign that Democrats ran, And it was an objective, clear cut, demonstrable failure. Because as much as I would like politics to actually work this way, because I have a bunch of poll numbers I could put up there about how popular Medicare for all is, and how popular minimum wage is and how popular are you even do our blah blah blah blah blah. If that was the way politics actually worked, Kamala Harris would
be headed to the White House right now. Yeah, I think that's fair. Donald Trump ran around talking about Arnold Palmer's dick, the idea Democrats are the two divisive ones? Are you kidding me? Trump is the most divisive figure in modern America politics. The lesson is not to be less divisive. The lesson is actually to be more divisive, but around the correct lines. So what is Trump's division and what does he feed the division in the world view that he feeds into the narrative that he feeds
into with everything he does. The limbus test for being part of Donald Trump's party is the problems in your lives are because of immigrants, Democrats, cultural elites. I will save I will fix it.
Right.
Those are the those are the litmus tests within the Republican Party. That is the worldview. It's one I disagree with. I've talked a lot about it, but that is the worldview and is very clear cut worldview. So when you're talking about things like, you know, transgender issues, that fits into this idea from him. Cultural elites are trying to change you, indoctrinate your kids, take over your life, preach
to you about what your values should be. When we're talking about the border, when we're talking about immigrants, these immigrants are going to come into your town. They're going to steal your jobs, they are going to drive up Again. I think all of this is incorrect, but it's it's clear cut, right, It is clear cut, and it is extremely divisive. So the problem is not the Democrats were too tagget matcher. I don't even remember the last time
Democrats talked about transgender issues at all. And it's not the Democrats were too far right or too far left or whatever. The problem is, they have no narrative. They do not have a divisive politics, at least not one that actually works. This is where Bernie Sanders was on the money. Okay, Occupy Wall Street. What's the division there? The ninety nine versus the one Bernie Sanders. What's the division the people broadly versus the millionaires and the billionaires.
That's what they need. And so you know the guy who was like arguing with your Michael on there, who I'm not really familiar with, Michaels. The part that he said that was the most important and that should be coming out of Democrats' mouths when they're being pressed on you know, transgender athletes or whatever is he said, this is a canard, and that's the important point. How does the five transgender athletes in the country, how does that impact you your ability to have a good life, earn
a good wage, et cetera. It's a distraction. It's a distraction from billionaire elites who want another tax cut, or you know, Elon and Elon musk Case want another like government subsidy, taxpayer subsidized contract. That is what Democrats should be leaning into. They should be running away from it.
They need their own divisive politics, and they need to throw out this like focused group poll tested bullshit because the paint by numbers way of like, let me just pull test my way into what I think is a popular program, utter and complete rejected failure.
So I don't think that any of that is necessarily wrong in terms of the focus group. But on the I mean, look, I mean I do think it is clear that there is a reality problem the Democrats face. So what you were saying in terms of you know, ohmala day and run on it, it's like, yeah, but in twenty nineteen, she literally did say she texted her dollars to you know, have gender transition surgery for illegal immigrants.
That's objectively an insane thing to believe. Like these people ran around all throughout the January nineteen Yeah, yeah, Okay, Well I hope he bans it, you know, right now. And by the way, it looks like that's going to be a Day one agenda and so if anything is too much an idiot not to follow through. So that's something, but really what and also that was Commin's response, It didn't work. People get tagged because of the cultural milieu,
you cannot run. For example, in twenty twenty two, if Republicans did not say the word abortion, would that not mean that they still get tagged? And rightfully so with the issue of abortion. Democrats basically completely changed their views on gender after Obergefell and tried to shove it down
the mouths of American citizens. Dominated cultural elites have tried to normalize this transgender ideology, legalize it in terms of plugging little children full of castration drugs and puberty blockers.
And then they say that it's a canard.
It's not a like thousands of children actually have been chemically castrated in this country.
That is crazy. Now, Is it the number one issue?
No, but clearly a lot of people are very concerned about it. And I think you know at this point there is a bit of a mandate on the issue because it's one of those where it gets to the fact that multi racial groups men, women, young, et cetera, do feel as if these issues are have the more
of an importance in the democratic mind. And what I would mean by that is, I remember I had this big fight with some progressive on rising back in twenty nineteen, and I was like, look, simple question, could you ever support Medicare for all if it didn't include trans answer surgeries? And they wouldn't answer the question, And like, I think that says the whole ballgame. Could you ever support medicare for all if it did not cover abortion?
That's again the same thing.
So if that's true for you, then you don't support you know, or then you do think cultural issues are the most important. If you would deny healthcare, you know, to what ninety nine point nine percent or whatever the US population and put it at risk because it doesn't support your transition surgery or abortion, It's like, well, then you do care more about the cultural issue than you do the so called economics.
But you're you're actually, in a sense making my point because I do think that should be flipped. So I think the limbis here, the litmus tests in the Democratic Party should be things like billionaires should not exist, we should tax the rich war right, they should be clear like economic populist, class war. Those should be the litmus tests, and then outside of that there should be a lot
more flexibility on their ques. I'm not talking about what is I'm critiquing what is I'm saying it is the opposite of what it should be, because instead it's we're going to be the coalition of Dick Cheney and Mark Cuban and Taylor Swift and Bernie Sanders. And that doesn't make any goddamn sense. Okay, that is not a There is no division in there that makes any kind of rational or electoral sense. So on the specific question of like transgender issues, a couple things I would point to.
Number one, in states where those theay them ads ran and they were had to head. You know, these are the battleground states where the campaigns were spending all of their money and Kama's was running this actually like pretty good class Trump's a billionaire doesn't look out for you message. She narrowed the gaps significantly. She outperformed in those states where the they them ads were being run versus the
rest of the country. So there's that. And the other piece is Democrats ran around this whole country this whole year castigating college students, says too woke and too out of touch, etc. I just am not sure that there's any war to be gained from that sense of politics, sort of politics, because ultimately there's always going to be some pink careed college kid out there who's saying, like, you know, they're introducing themselves with their pronouns and doing
a land acknowledgement to be like, see, the wokeism got them again. Kamala ran the plutonic ideal of the campaign that you know, the popularists who say just avoid this stuff altogether, that they would suggest, you know, I've been saying the same thing on immigration, Like, I think it was a dramatic political and moral but political failure for them to just feed the ground to the Republican worldview and say, you know what, you're right about everything. Immigrants
actually are bad. Because guess what if that's the worldview, Republicans are going to win every single time. If the worldview is actually transgender, you know issues are the number one issue and cultural elites are trying to like trans your your little boy. If you accept that framing, guess
what Republicans are going to win every single time. How about instead saying, you know what, just like it shouldn't be the state telling women what they can do with their bodies, It shouldn't be the state telling transgender people what they can do with their bodies.
What about children? But the children is the main question, and that's it.
Families, Doc, nobody complicated. I don't think that Donald Trump, yes, they.
Actually actually you fringe character.
But even Trump, even Trump, now you know, one of his first executive orders he says he's going to is making sure that you know, all federal government forms just reflects male female and it's a biological sex. What I'm saying is that's not just about kids. That's about saying basically the message there, and I don't think it's like all that important, but the message there is that trans people are not real. They don't exist.
No, it's say, your biological sex is assigned at birth. Transgender people, what are the trans people or what are the transpropagandas always tell us, transgender people have existed forever, Well, you existed whenever the male female form was on there is it so important.
For you to have a form.
But I just finish, actually that they're the crazy people. It's not that critical of an issue. There should be flexibility on it within the Democratic coalition. But what I will not abide is people like you know, Seth Moulten and Tom Swazi who came out immediately, were like, actually, I'm on the side of the Republicans when it comes to who just their immediate instinct is to throw transgender
people under the bus. Now, think of how convenient that is for Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Joe Biden, Kamala Harris herself, the entire Democratic consultant grift complex. Think of how convenient that is. It does not hurt a single donor to throw transgender people under the bus. It does not hurt a single Democratic elite. They've been throwing transgender people under the bus for years now. At this point does not
hurt them one bit at all. So listen, I am all open to having more I don't think they should be doing the word policing. I think there should be more flexibility and cultural issues. I think the limits test should be around economic populism. That's where the divide belongs.
But no, if your first reaction is to throw some of the most powerless people in the country under the bus, you have no spine, no character, and you are running cover for the current status quo of the Democratic Party and nothing will ever change.
Okay, I just disagree with that completely.
I mean the idea that trans people are the least powerful, I mean they're the most powerful.
They ruled our politics for years.
I mean, these people are noting your fringe gieology.
Look onto all of us there to look.
At their income, look at their health outcomes, look at their life expectancy, look at their suicide rates. Like that's a preposterous view of the world.
Well, first of all, a lot of that whole, a lot of those stats around that population changes because the population is dramatically increased, and there's quite a lot of people who are either autistic or mentally ill or somehow convinced that they're trands.
So that's number one.
It's actually I'm very curious to see how the rates go whenever we actually get this stuff out of schools. My prediction it'll be just like anarexia. It'll be a social contagent phenomenon. It's going to plunge, which it was all bullshit and fake in the first place. But second is that if you look at this whole, like uh this transgender at people.
Under the bus, I mean, same thing.
It's like, if is it really quote unquote throwing people under the bus to say that you biologically however sex you're born in, that's the league of sports that you have to play, Like, how is that throwing people under the bus.
Because because you know what, I yeah, putting the how you feel about the issue aside, because I don't even this is my point. I don't give a shit about the issue. I genuinely don't. I don't think it's important at all, which is why if you are making that your main analysis of what went wrong here for Democrats, it is wildly dis honest and lacking in any sort of courage or moral character. So Seth Moulton put out his little statement and one of his staffs resigned.
The seven please will put it on the screen.
And you know what that stuffor is correct to resign. Not because of the specific position that he took. They are correct to resign because it displays such a lack of courage and character to go to the easiest, easiest, you know target here who has no defense against you. You don't have a word to say about Jamie Harrison. You don't have a word to say about the two billion dollars that are now lining the pockets of the consultant grift complex. You don't have anything to say about that.
So that's why I find this despicable. It's not even about the issue. I don't give a shit about that issue. That's what and that's what Democrats should be saying. That's what they should be saying. But it has to be a part. So I'm not even saying that transition had nothing to do with this, because Trump had a coherent frame and transgender issues and the border and all of these other things that would part of the frame. Kama Harrison.
Democrats have a laundry list of issues no one remembers and no one gives a shit about because they don't believe they're actually going to do anything with regard to those issues. They need a divisive politics. They need to be more aggressive in fighting and laying out their worldview because if you're constantly just capitulating to the Republican worldview,
guess what people are going to vote for Republicans. If you are not credible that you are going to go after the economic elites who are actually responsible for so much of the pain in the misery of this country, then yeah, they're going to vote for the side that actually does have a narrative. So that's why I say, just to go back to the original chart we put
up on the screen. You know, I am someone who like I have been that person who's been like, guys, look at how popular progressive policy issues are, Like, you just need to talk about medicare for all. You just need to talk about these things. And that is not enough. It has to fit into a clear, credible narrative with here and villains, and that is where the real problem is.
It's not some like you know, people said woke stuff and back in twenty twenty, Oh, you know we should have tacked a little bit this way on that issue or whatever. No, you are lacking a story that makes any goddamn sense to anyone in this country. That's what has to be fed.
I think I understand a bit better.
Yeah, I get what you're saying in terms of if you're going to say this as is respect to Yeah, I mean, it would be like if the Republicans lost and they're like, oh, well, Trump is the only reason that we lost, and.
I'm like, well, I think if abortion would have been a pretty big one.
It would be like the idea of trying to preserve like unpopular parts of coalition without blaming any of the people who are really responsible.
So I do understand it.
I don't know.
I'm curious because I'm not sure if any of this exists within the party, which is a good segue to the next part about Bernie Sanders.
Versus it doesn't.
It's defin for right now, I don't see a single well.
The other problem is, you know, before we even get to the whole Bernie thing, one of the things Matt carp keeps talking about is that, you know, Democrats performed what is it better with households over one hundred k as opposed to a households.
Under one hundred k? They voted for Trump.
I mean, then the truth is that people who make over one hundred k are predominantly well educated and have more far left to views on immigration transition. In fact, they think those are the most important stuff, and they don't want to hear nothing about you know, taxation or any of that. And so that actually might be one of the bigger coalitional fights.
Of course, of course, if Democrats are going to win again, they have to go to war with their donor base, and we all know how likely that is to happen.