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. We have an amazing show for everybody today. What do we have, Crystal.
Indeed, we do lots going on here and abroad.
So some big political news.
President Biden actually hitting the campaign trail, unusual for him, speaking to a labor audience and claiming once again with some disputed facts there, that he's the most pro union president in history.
We'll get into all of that. We also have some interesting word.
Clouds how people feel about all of these men who are running for the presidency. We got some new polls out that show where DeSantis and Trump and all the rest stand within the Republican Party and how that is going. We have Tony Blinken overseas in China. We will tell you the results of that big meaning, much anticipated, long awaited Fox News and Tucker Carlson War kicking up to the next level or whatever. We'll break that down for you.
And this is really interesting. So biggest streamer in the world, xQc, is making a big move away from Twitch. We'll tell you what that means for the entire video streaming landscape. And we have a guest on from No Labels. They are planning a third party bid, much of the consternation of a lot of Democrats who are concerned that this might take away from Joe Biden's prospects of re election. So we're going to talk to them about exactly what
it is that they are up to. But before we get to any of that, guys, we are getting extremely close, dangerous to a million subs on YouTube, very very close. And I also have to let you in on the fact that Sager is planning to go away and actually get married.
That's right, I'm going to India in a couple of week or it's actually two weeks. Wow, it actually keeps saying a couple of weeks. So if you could help us hit a million while I'm still in the country, that would be great.
I don't want to wake up, you.
Know, jet lagged at three am in the middle of an Indian hotel room and just be like, oh gosh, we finally hit a million.
Be a little anti climatic, right, subs If you're not here, so it would be great if you got us there beforehand. Nice little wedding gifts for Sager and billion as well, So anyway, we're pushing for that. Also news in terms of thank you guys for your excitement around the merchandise, we got a lot of requests from our neighbors up north when they would be able to order merchandise as well.
Well, good news guys.
You can order your new Breaking Points logo merchandise if you are in Canada too.
Now that's right.
It's everything down on the shelf below. It's also on our website, breakingpoints dot com. You can also become a premium member there if you are so inclined. But why don't we start with the most pro union president in American history?
Oh you know this one really or it takes me Okay, So Joe Biden has not done much of anything since officially launching his re election campaign, but he decided to truck to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to speak to a union audience and to tout his economic and labor record.
There, let's take a listen.
And I'm more excuse me being a little emotion, I'm more honored by your endorsement than than you can imagine coming this earlier. It's going to make a gigantic difference in this campaign. You know a lot of politicians in this country you can't say the word union because you know I'm not one of them. I'm proud to say the word. I'm proud to be the most pro union president in American history.
I promised to you I would be.
But what I'm really proud about, what I'm really proud about is I mean re elected the most pro union president history.
Obviously, this makes me want a puke for a whole variety of reasons. Yes, he can say the word union, but I apparently can't do a whole lot to bolster union membership outside of listen things that I've given him credit for. His NLRB has been genuinely useful in terms
of the burgeoning grassroots movement. But as we'll get to in a moment, obviously there have been many failures and broken promises with regards to unions, and at this point to claim he's the most pro union president in history is just like, I mean, that's just an outright, live factual inaccuracy, et cetera. What he's referring to there in terms of the endorsement. Put this next piece up on the screen is the afl CIO did officially vote to
endorse President Biden for re election. Now important to note this isn't the membership, the rank and file of the afl CIO. This was the general board, the head haunchos of the afl Ciole me read you a little bit of this. They say, representing sixty unions, more than twelve point five million workers voted today to endorse Biden and Harris for reelection.
The endorsement vote marks.
The earliest the AFLCIO has ever voted to endorsement presidential election, triggering an unprecedented mobilization that will engage millions of working people, et cetera, et cetera. Let me give you a little bit of the quote here from new AFLCIO president Liz Schuler.
She says, there's absolutely no question that Joe Biden's the most pro union president in our lifetimes, from bringing manufacturing jobs home to protecting our pensions, making historic investments in infrastructure, clean energy, at education.
We've never seen a president.
Work so tirelessly to rebuild our economy from the bottom up and middle out. We've never seen a president were forcefully advocate for workers' fundamental right to join a union. Now it's time to finish the job. The largest labor mobilization in history begins today. And I actually have to say, Sager, sadly, it is probably correct that Biden is the most pro union president in my lifetime, in history. No ridiculous, absurd, disgraceful.
But given the fact that Democrats and republic have joined in many instances with Republicans to crush union or at least let them watch them as they wither on the vine for my entire lifetime, the fact that he says union, the fact that he you know, has passed a few things that may be useful to that and included some provisions and like the Inflation Reduction Act to try to
boot bolster union membership. Those small, you know, peanuts that he threw at the union movement probably pathetically does constitute the best labor president in history. But it is woefully less than what is needed and woefully less than what he promised when he was campaigning last time around.
Right, So we're comparing Biden to the neoliberal era, but you know, comparing him to previous presidents like FDR One of the books behind Us Freedom from Fear, or even Harry Truman. Well, Truman, I guess is more complicated in terms of breaking and all that. But anyway, at the time, union membership was, you know, sky high. It was something that was dramatically encouraged by the Roosevelt administration, even in the Johnson administration as well.
Really, when union.
Membership combined with the nineteen fifties kind of middle class dream,
President Biden does not in any way to that. And actually, I think the decline in overall union membership with the lowest level in over a century, combined actually with the fact that when you look at the way that the union vote has begun to split dramatically away from where it used to be almost monoloith towards Democrats, that in and of itself, crystal is part of the realignment that we've talked about here now Since the very inception of
even our past show Rising, we were constantly looking at the way that membership union membership specifically broke in twenty sixteen and continued really to break in twenty twenty.
Yeah, that's right, And let's talk about the most blatant betrayal here in terms of Joe Biden and the labor movement.
Put this up on the screen.
He had rail workers who really weren't asking for a lot. I mean, this had to do with their own health and safety, has to do with all our of our health and safety, wanting just the basics of paid sick lot leave.
And what did Joe Biden do.
He sided with capital, He sided with the rail bosses. He made it, he imposed a deal through Fiat, through Congress on these rail members and the rail unions were furious with him, as they should be, and anybody I think who supports labor was furious with him. Here's one of the quotes from Hugh Sawyer, treasurer of Railroad Workers United.
He said, Joe Biden blew it. He had the opportunity to prove his labor friendly pedigree to millions of workers by simply asking Congress for legislation to end the threat of a national strike on terms more favorable to workers. Sadly, he could not bring himself to advocate for a lousy handf handful of sick days. The Democrats and Republicans are both pawns of big business and the corporations. But that's far from the only failure or broken promise from Joe Biden.
When it comes to unions, he famously, you know, he ran on the pro Act, which would be significant in terms of helping to bolster union membership and helping to reverse this decline that we have seen over decades in union density and union membership.
He sort of floated it and then immediately backed off of it.
We haven't heard anything about the pro Act in months and months, and labor unions, especially AFLCIO, which again this endorsement comes from the top, not from the rank and file. These unions used to pretend like this was really important to them and that they were going to really hold politicians to account if they didn't get the Proact pass. But now they're, you know, they're just pretending like none
of that ever happened. Apparently, And then you also had when Biden was running for President Sager, he pledged that he would end every contract to union busting companies.
Well, it seems to me.
Like the federal government is still doing billions and billions of dollars in business with Amazon, which has aggressively looked to union bust, you know, the workers who were organizing at their at their warehouses across the country. So yet another failure there. So it's really sad on a lot
of levels. I mean, listen, is Joe Biden, no question, he's better than Trump and better than DeSantis would be in terms of unions, just in terms of who he would put on the National Labor Relations Sports that I want to make a false equivalency here, but for the AFLCIO to come in early in this way and by the way also and this was real, uh, you know, really sad for the last to see the National Nurses United, who have backed Burning before because of his support for
Medicare for all, they also endorsed Biden, a man who has said he would.
Veto Medicare for all.
It just shows you that, you know, it's not enough just to have unions. You have to have unions with democratic representation so that rank and file workers actually get to have their voices heard.
In terms of union leadership and the lack of representation, at least democratic representation within the unions has always caused a lot of consternation within their membership. A lot of them also have been upset in the past about the way that they've inserted themselves, like you said, almost on the side of the establishment Democrats, and that manifested, you know, in a Trump vote last time around. Let's put this up there on the screen. This is the exit polls
that actually show union membership. Households with a union member forty some percent voted for Trump in the twenty twenty election. It was actually a little bit higher in twenty sixteen, only fifty fifty seven percent. If you compare that to households without union members, of course Trump won dramatically more of the vote, but we are comparing this to monoliths like Democrats. John Kerry, I was just looking at the
results of the two thousand election of al Gore. Al Gore only you know, sorry, George W. Bushlany won some twenty something percent of union households in two thousand. So compare the doubling effectively in just sixteen years over that time period, and that's insane. It also explains how huge portions of the industrial Midwest felt left behind by establishment Democrats, especially Hillary Clinton, around issues like tpp dre deals, NAFTA, USMCA.
Trump also culturally is.
At least in touch with you know, a decent portion of some of these people. And so, you know, we talk a lot here about when you strip away some
of the economic message, you only leave culture. Well, then people who are union members and they say, well, now of these guys are really going to do a damn thing for me, or at least very much on the margins, I might as well vote for the guy who agrees with me on the second amend cultural Yeah, exactly so, And a lot of people vote that way, and I'm not going to tell them not to.
That's the death of material politics, is what you're speaking to. Where it's like, all right, well, both of you are going to be a disappointment. I don't expect either one of you to actually materially improve my life life. So yeah, why shouldn't I vote on the cultural issues that I care about? I mean, I think it is important to note looking at those numbers that whether or not you're in a union, or whether or not your family members a union in a union is still one of the
primary determinants of which direction you're going to vote. But there's no doubt that over years, over the neoliberal era, and especially with the realignment that's occurred under Trump, you have much less strength among union households for Democrats. And I think Biden's pitch here is a case in point of why, because it's not like he's even running on any affirmative agenda.
Right.
All the talk of like I'm going to increase the minimum wage, I'm going to pass the Proact, I'm gonna cancel union busting contracts, that's all gone. Now what he's running on is haven't I done a great job on the economy?
Good luck? Good luck?
Because yeah, you've got your talking points about job creation and no doubt the mix the economy is a mixed picture. You do have a tight labor market. But you ask workers, You asked the American people, are you on the right track or the wrong track? Overwhelmingly wrong track. You ask them how they feel about the economy and wait and see how they actually because it is not matching up with your rhetoric here about mission accomplished and we're doing
so great. So this shows you why you have that erosion in Union support for Democrats because ultimately he doesn't even feel like he needs to run on anything. And you know what, it might be the right bet because it's not like they ran on anything in the midterms, and with Trump being out there and very likely to be the Republican nominee, you have, you know, people have very hardened the very negative feelings about him, and god knows,
there's good reason there. They're disgusted with extremism on you know, abortion, on stop the steal, et cetera. In fact, in the midterms, Soger, part of why Democrats did better in the industrial Midwest than they had been is actually on the issue of abortion,
not a lot to do with economics. There were some, you know, some factors there that may have made the Midwest stronger for Democrats in terms of economics, but most of the movement had to do with abortion and not anything that he's talking about here.
Yeah, exactly.
I mean, I think unfortunately, I'm ping my home monologue on this day about the rise of the new culture war kind of what indicates and where the culture is headed and all of that in the direction. But the point being stilled is that that is the reason why the Democrats won in twenty twenty.
It wasn't because of anything that they delivered.
If they did have an economic message, it was mostly I will not take away your Social Security ACTA yeah, your Medicare. But it's like not taking away something is not a I mean, yeah, I guess like it's a fine reason to vote for somebody, but you know, if you look at the grand scheme, it's not the best reason to come in and say, well, that person is not going to do this terrible thing that I don't like. It's almost like a negative orientation of politics rather than
a positive orientation. We haven't had a positive orientation actually for quite some time.
That's right.
Yeah, So let's get to how the American people are feeling ahead of this election and what they think about these general various gentlemen that are running. Put this up on the screen from the Wall Street Journal. They're calling this the election of dread, and they say, no, no one is looking forward to the twenty twenty four presidential election. Trump's indictment and a low approve rating for Biden are leading to voter dread with sixteen months to election day.
They've got a lot.
Of you know, great quotes here from actual voters about how they all feel about this. None of this will surprise you all because you probably feel exactly the same, which is looking at the choice of if it's going to be Biden versus Trump, just pure discuss disillusionment, disappointment. There's nothing hopeful about a rematch between these two elderly gentlemen.
I mean, neither one.
Is going to run on a really affirmative agenda. It's all just existential politics, all be a bulwark against the other side. And there's you know, these are aged individuals. You already know what you're going to get with both of them. So any of that sort of excitement, hope, optimism that frequently does exist in American politics as you head into a presidential election season.
Has just been robbed from people.
Here's what they say in this piece say the two men are universally known robbing the electure to the potential to fall in love with someone new. We know, based on past performance what you're going to bring to the table. There is nothing more to learn. Said Patrick grayat Democrat in Base Cady, Michigan. I'm tired of it already. Within their own parties, they say Biden and Trump stoke plenty of anxiety to match whatever enthusiasm they can generate from
the faithful. Polling suggests a stantial majority of Democrats do not want Biden to run for office again. Trump remains the dominant force in the Republican Party, but many say they are open to someone who knew, who does not bring the President's combative divisiveness or the distraction of a
grueling court battle. And no one can claim with the straight face that Biden at eighty or Trump at seventy seven represents the youthful vigor or embodiment of America's bright future that many have found appealing in past presidential candidates. I mean, I think for Trump, there's still plenty of enthusiasm for him within the Republican pape There's.
No doubt about it.
I mean, I don't know that it's like the level of rock stardom and just you know, over the moon excitement that he had in twenty sixteen with the base, or even in twenty twenty, but they still are psyched about Donald Trump with Biden. His big problem is with the Democratic base that are just like, really, dude, you're.
Not going to hang it up.
Trump's bigger issue is in the general election where you have more than a majority of the country. That is just like, we want nothing to do with you, Like the chaos were exhausted. You're a criminal, you're indicted, Like why are you even running. You've got a majority of the American people who say it should drop out of the race because of the indictments. So that's the landscape that we're looking for.
My favorite quote was actually this from a voter in Michigan. He says, quote, we know, based on past performance you're going to bring to the table. There is nothing more to learn. I am tired of it already. He's talking there about Biden and about Trump, saying about both, And I actually loved that quote because it's with Trump. There's how many people in this country are undecided about how they feel about Donald Trump. He's dominated our lives for
almost seven years. Yes, Biden too has been on this has been our vice president. I mean, if you think somebody like me, I saw Joe Biden when I was in high school.
I'm thirty one years old.
He's been literally at the forefront of our politics since then.
Amost Yeah, basically half of my life and then.
You're my entire life is yours. He's been a.
Vice president or at the center or the president. And when you consider Washington, I mean that is actually, I believe, the vast majority of the lives of the entire American electorate. So when you consider it that way, like, look, it's been in office since nineteen seventy something. He has obviously, you know, he ran for president before I was even born.
In the eighties. He had his own you know, scandal.
He has had several moments at the very fourth like how can you possibly at this point not know how you feel about President Biden? And same about Trump? And that's part of what I think leads to the doom loop is you are not going to change how you feel. Mostly you're going to get to the election. You're going to get to the box, and you're just gonna be like, which one can I stand? The le you know, can I which one can I least stand? And then not for that person. Yeah, that's unfortunately, it's.
Just really depressing because it speaks to a country in decline. Yeah, I mean that's what it is. You look at this in your life, I guess this is where we're at. I guess is this is the election that our country deserves at this point, is you know, kind of the overarching sense. And there's another focus group that sort of echoes what a lot of other focus groups who covered here have to say about this matchup. Put this up
on the screen. Axios covered this. This was with swing voters in North Carolina who voted for Biden, that they voted for Trump previously, they voted for Biden this time around. And all of them are say that they are concerned about Biden, that he looks exhausted, that they lack confidence in them whenever they watch him trip over his words or over a sandbag. They say, there's really nothing that he could even do at this point to ease their
age worries. But although they are hyper focused on his older age, nine of the eleven said they would still vote for Biden in a rematch against Trump, who turned seventy seven on Wednesday. Now, Biden did not win North Carolina and it is unlikely that it will be a top target for Democrats this time around. So and if they held on to all eleven of the focus group participants, they're probably coming up short in North Carolina. But yeah, none of this speaks to an election where people are
affirmatively voting for their candidate of choice. It's all just lesser of two evils, and which one can I which one.
Do I hate the least, basically is what people are looking at.
And we've seen the same dynamic play out in multiple focus groups all over the country, where people have all kinds of concerns about Biden, but then when it comes down to it, they're like, well, on go, see's better than Trump.
So I guess I'll suck it up here.
Yeah, it's really pathetic, Crystal.
And also, I mean, you found this phenomenal graphic of word clouds showing how voters feel about the focus groups and voters and how they feel about our various candidates. Put the first one up there on the screen about how people view Biden. What's that word cloud of when they're asked to describe him in a single word?
Oh, old number two, incompetent. I also love all of the other ones surrounding it.
Corrupt, bad, failure, idiot, puppet, smaller type, trustworthy, helpful, adequate, but also I mean effective kind of small pedophile I guess is on there.
That's interesting? What else do we have that I could see? Weak? Useless.
I mean, clearly people are not that happy. Now, you know, I don't want to just cherry pick. There are some honest, some competence, some leaders, some presidentials that do make it. But overwhelmingly, what's the word that comes through old and then second incompetent. That's why I think the word cloud and the averages of how these people responded in this poll are so important.
You know, what was funny with Biden and we'll get to they did ones with DeSantis and Trump as well, and they broke it out by So the word cloud you're looking at here was among all voters, and the number one word is old.
Even if you.
Break it out by just Democratic voters, that's still the number one word. Whereas yeah, whereas actually guys put the Trump one up on the screen, that's the third one in the list. So with Trump, amongst all voters, the number one word is criminal. I can certainly, I certainly sympathize with that take. You also have liar, evil, dangerous, crazy, asshole, and then the smaller type.
The positive words you have here.
Are leader, patriot, strong, awesome, businessman. And so what's different here is actually if you look at independent voters with Trump. It's a very similar word cloud cloud, You've got criminal, liar, evil, et cetera.
If you look at Republican voters, though, they.
Have very positive associations with him still so they I think some of the top for them were like patriot leader, businessman, awesome were some of the strong the strongest ones for Republican voters of Donald Trump, whereas again with Biden, even with Democrats, the number one word was old. And what that shows me is not that, oh, that means Donald
Trump's in stronger position than Joe Biden. It just is again reflective of the fact that Trump has much more enthusiasm among his base and his core group of supporters than Joe Biden does. If Biden wins this general election coming up, which I think there's a good chance that he will, I still think that he is likely the favorite, just because of incumbency and because people are so done with Donald Trump and he's under multiple indictments and all
that stuff. But it won't be because people are super psyched about.
Another term with Biden.
It will be basically a vote against Trump.
I mean.
And that's what is so obnoxious about our politics is everything is just about how do you feel about the human being named Donald Trump. It really is not much about the issues, not about what anybody's going to.
Deliver for your lives.
As we discussed earlier with the union messaging and all of that, it's just literally a referendum.
How do you feel about Donald Trump?
Yeah, unfortunately, and that's the Trump effect really on our politics.
But it's also the most likely speaking of the.
Trump effect and how it is all manifesting in our polling, well, guys, let's gohe and put this up there on screen, almost a little bit of a counter what you were just talking about.
Crystal from Newsweek.
A new poll showing that former President Trump holds a sizable lead over Democratic President Joe Biden actually in a hypothetical twenty twenty four election mashup, so that actually was carried out after Trump wasn't dieted specifically. That's part of why the poll is so important. This is a Harvard
Harris Pole, pretty reputable pollster. From June fourteenth to June fifteenth, of the forty five percent said that they would vote for Trump, only thirty nine percent that they would vote for Biden in the race if it were held right now now. Importantly, of course, fifteen percent of the people in the poll said that they were not sure which candidate that they would vote for. Currently, the voter support for Biden and Trump actually decreased from the overall poll in May.
I found that pretty interesting that people.
Who had supported Trump before in May had gone down slightly that.
That last poll.
It was forty percent of responding saying they would back Biden forty seven Trump. So you can say that this pop pole may have a bias towards Trump.
It's certainly possible. Not going to say that it is representative.
But as you look at it, it does show the tremendous weakness where yes, the country may be sick of Biden, but also everybody is not sick of sorry, sick of Trump. The country may be like fed up with Biden. I think he's old. They are willing to vote for him because they are annoyed so much by Trump and the chaos. But you're only one event away from people also holding their nose and voting for Trump as well, or the twenty sixteen effects.
We're staying home or staying home voting third party exactly.
I mean, there's a lot of options when you get to that ballot box, you know, if you even decide that it's worth you showing up. And I think it's always important to remember yes. In these focus groups, over and over again, you have voters, the majority of the ones that voted for Biden last time saying I probably as that could up and vote for him again.
This was a really narrow election.
He really can't afford to lose anybody from those focus groups. So this poll, you know, this is maybe a bit of an outlier, but it accords. We've seen other polls that have Trump up as well. Basically, if you look at the over we're all polling, if you look at the averages, it's effectively a jump ball right now. And that's embarrassing for Democrats because we had four years of Trump.
We know what that looked like. It wasn't fun.
And this is a man who again is under multiple indictments. And you know, even if you have some principal position about like you know, former president shouldn't be indicet or should be handled by the political process or whatever, no one can really defend the actions that he was taking with regard to the documents and lying about it and covering it up et cetera. So the fact that it's at best a jump ball for Joe Biden at this point is really pretty pathetic.
Oh, it is pathetic.
And also, I mean, here's the other reason why we have to spend so much time talking about this. All of our current indications so far are that Trump is doing better in the Republican primary. Let's put this up there, because in the same poll they also tested Republican voters and they show DeSantis at or below fifteen percent with Republicans in the twenty twenty four race. That's actually worse
than RFK Junior is going against Joe, they say. The new pole shows him actually with his weakest support yet, Trump boasting fifty nine percent, DeSantis staggering forty five percent points back at fourteen actually losing two percent. In the same one behind DeSantis is Mike Pence at eight percent. He shows his he actually showed his doubling from four percent that he was last time the poll was taken. And then Nicky Haley at four percent leading the rest.
Of the field.
Look, I mean, how can you possibly look at this and say that this is the best. Also, Crystal, in terms of their second choice, one of the problems for DeSantis is while he remains at forty one percent, the majority second choice, Mike Pence, Nikki Haley, and Vike Ramaswami are also nipping away.
He doesn't even have the majority.
Second choice amongst Trump voters that are there right now. Again actually showing you the diluting effect of Mike Pence, of Nicki Haley, and all of these other candidates in the field. They're not taking away from Trump overwhelmingly, they are taking away from Ron DeSantis. Sandas was unable to make enough of a case to say I am the only in the clear alternative.
With all of these other people jumping.
In, they're nipping away at his potential support, his donor base, and just making it even more likely that Trump is probably going to win the nomination.
Yeah, I mean this poll, it's an outlier, Will, let's be clear, but it's not that much of an outlier. I have the real clear politics averages in front of me. The poll before this was from the Message Jor and Harris X, and it has Trump at fifty three and Desanta's at seventeen. The poll we just showed you had Desanta's at fourteen. So it's not that much of an outlier, and the one before that was Quinnipiac and it had
DeSantis at twenty three and Trump at fifty three. There has been certainly no bump for Desanta since he launched, if anything, you know, post launched, and especially post indictment. It seems to be eating into his standing here with that.
Harvard Harris poll that we just showed.
I mean, not only is he at fourteen, he's not even that much an out of my funt hence who's at eight. So I just think this is a very difficult landscape for DeSantis or anyone to be able to overcome because you've still got the guy who defines all of our politics. He's still there. Republican base still loves him. He can get away with, you know, all sorts of
things that other candidates can't get away with. He's able to position himself on abortion and other issues in a way that Ron DeSantis, for example, is unable to sort of finesse and get away with. And with more indictments likely on the horizon, this is just the dynamic between now and when people actually start voting in the primary, so very difficult at this point. It is not in
Ron DeSantis or anyone else's hands. If Trump is going to be knocked off, it's going to be some external factor that we can't even think about or can't even predict right now.
It have to be something like that.
Otherwise there is no like messaging path to defeating this man.
I just don't see it.
And let's just say that's not a terrible thing to you know. Trump has a lot of risks, got the DOJ on his back, He's got to all of these potential indictments, like, he's obviously facing serious legal challenges. He's old, Like, you can't write these things off. It's still not a bad bet for Ron DeSantis, but it is still a bet where the odds are severely stacked against him, and I always think it's important to.
Take that away.
DeSantis, though, is trying his best right now in terms of his attacks against Donald Trump. One of the ones he's really pursuing is kind of a Ted Cruz strategy. Don't forget Ted Cruz did come in second in the GOP primary in twenty sixteen. DeSantis is effectively running to Trump's from the right, saying that Trump is not a
true conservative, He's not with the real movement. DeSantis actually just came out in a new interview with an evangelical channel to call out Trump on the issue of abortion.
Here's what he had to say.
You know, right to life. We were able to deliver the heartbeat bill, which was a big, big deal. And you know, while I appreciate what the former president has done in a variety of realms, he opposes that bill. He said it was quote harsh to protect an unborn child when there's a detectable heartbeat. I think that's humane
to do. I think pro lifers have been wanting to see, you know, good pro life protections, whether it's Florida or IOW under Kim Reynolds, very important that you're able to get this stuff done.
You mentioned abortion.
Do you feel the former presidence going soft then on abortion a little bit, especially in this area that you mentioned, Well, I think so. I mean, I was really surprised because he's a Florida resident, and I thought he would he would compliment the fact, you know that we were able to do the heartbeat bill, which I pro lifers have wanted for a long time. He never complimented, never said
anything about it. Then he was asked about it and he said it was quote harsh, but you know, these are children with detectable heartbeats, and I think to do that was very humane and I think it was something that every pro lifer appreciates that we were able to get that done.
So what do we take away from that?
How many times did you say the word pro lifer over and over trying to identify himself with the pro life movement? Smart play actually because they're so active in the GOP primary, but specific in the state called Iowa. And that's also why he kept noting that's the same build that they have in Iowa where Kim Reynolds, the
Iowa governor. He's betting the house on Iowa. David Brody, the interviewer there from CBN, was actually an interesting figure because he's evangelical media, but he's also kind of a Trump booster. So for him to give airing to DeSantis on this issue of abortion, specifically targeted to the most evangelicals who would watch his channel and who consume that content. I do see that as significant, at least that the peral life for seeing some sort of betrayal by Trump.
Now at the same time, Trump is on the right side of majority public opinion, but not necessarily even GOP primary public opinion.
So I would say this is probably.
The only real, the only real what would I say, like, the only vulnerability that Trump may have. I'm only gonna say may because at the same time, he still has the ultimate Trump card. What can he say, I'm the one who got it done. Yeah, you would never have ROVERSUS way destroyed without me, which if you look at the polls and the who Evangelicals are supporting, majority of them still support Trump in the primary.
Yeah.
And it also because it has been made so clear that positions like the one Ron DeSantis has staked out with the Heartbeat Bill, that they are wildly unpopular with the general electorate.
It also eats into his electability case. Yes, is true, which is part of why.
You see Republican voters, I mean, Ron DeSantis's strongest pitch is like, you know, Trump without the chaos, and I'm the guy that can beat Biden.
Republican voters don't actually see it that way.
A majority of them still think Donald Trump is their most effective candidate to attempt to win back the White House. So it's not working out well in that regard. And then the other thing that I found really noteworthy that we cover last week of the week before is some of DeSantis's own internal polling that was leaked showed that yes, voters do actually they've taken in the messaging that he is very conservative, that he is more conservative than Trump.
But guess what, even voters that identify self identify as very conservative, the majority of them are go for Trump.
So even though he staked out the ideological ground, which is a hit to his electability, even though people have taken this in like Okay, yes, we see what you're doing, we see that you are to the right of Trump, doesn't matter because ultimately the very conservative voters, they're willing to give Trump a pass on this issue and a variety of other issues and still stick by his side even though they feel like ideologically maybe DeSantis more line
voters just don't frequently vote with like a checklist of like let me go through issue by issue and see which Canada is closer to my position. It's a much more complex process that has a lot more to do with vibes and do I like the affleticts of this person. Do I get the sense they're a fighter, sense they're going to fight for me than it is this sort of like issue by issue checklist that a lot of politicians DeSantis included.
Sort of approach it at right. DeSantis is prosecuting like a conservative policy case. Let's put the next one up there on the screen, please, because it's important as well. You can see he says, quote me, LUs repeal the jailbreak bill that allowed this to happen. He was linking to a Fox articles saying that a terrorist financier released under the First Step Act says that he would be proud to fund terrorists again. So this is a part of a new case that I've been seeing bubbling up
against Trump. Ryan Gerdusky actually in our panel brought this up in terms of Trump's major you know, accomplishments. Was one a major tax cut for the RISH too, was
the First Step Act, a criminal justice reform. What's interesting to me, Crystal, is how much they are calling it and messaging on using this by tying it actually to a rising crime wave, which of course GOP voters are very upset about and are not not just GOP voters, But you know, I could say more animated about talking specifically about the criminal justice reform and actually tying Trump to the issue. The problem actually for Trump is that he himself has refused to defend the law in the past.
Anytime he's been asked about it, he said, oh, I did that for Jared because that was part of Jared Kushner's big push in the White House. Jared Kushner teamed up with Tim Scott to go up against that. Interestingly to me also is that DeSantis can run both against both Tim Scott, who something we haven't noted is that while he doesn't have a large amount of support in the current polls right now, he has a very high favorability rating for Republican politicians.
Amongst the GOP base.
He's actually the only politician other than Trump with an overall positive trend. It's DeSantis, Trump and Tim Scott. So it's a smart play to be able to go against the only other two people in the race who have a high favorability rating over like forty five percent.
Yeah, and Tim Scott is kind of hard to hit because he just he does have that likability factor. Apparently is well liked with his I mean, I listen ideologically, I'm obviously like in a very different place than him, but voters really like him in South Carolina. His colleagues really like him in the Senate, and I did think it was interesting. I took note of the fact that
when we interviewed her name is what Shelby Talcott. She is very in touch with, you know, a lot of the Republican aids and advisors and campaign out broduce and whatever. And at least what the Trump people were telling her, whether this is what they accurately believe or not, was that they had their eye on Tim Scott as a
potential threat as well. And so yeah, it makes sense for DeSantis to be sort of taken shots both at Trump and Tim Scott here just to make sure that he remains the top contender should Trump fall control.
I wonder if we could put the Ron.
DeSantis word cloud up that would be a seven B because I think it also speaks to some of the issues that he could have in terms of electability, which again is like really the core case here. Yes, he's positioning himself to the right of Trump in terms of the Republican base, but really the pitch is I am a winner.
I can win.
Look at the scoreboard, right, he famously said. So the views of DeSantis, amongst all voters. Not a pretty picture here in terms of if you think this is your electability guy number one is unsure. Okay, well, that's maybe hopeful because you can fill in the blanks for people and maybe you can try a positive message there. But some of the other ones that are top are fascist, idiot, racist, terrible, evil, dangerous. I like the one that just says nah an a
just like nah. So listen how we feel about Rondo Santis. Whether you think that these adjectives are accurate or the way that you would describe him, it certainly paints a picture of someone who is not a luck for the presidency, not a luck to be more electable than Donald Trump.
And that's the way the Republican voters view it. They're not confident that he actually would be a stronger general election candidate, so to the extent that that's something that they're weighing in their voting, which I've always been skeptical that that would be the top priority for the Republican base, But to the extent that this is something that people are really looking at and care about, the case is far from clearcut that Rondo Santis is the guy.
Absolutely, I think he's got more vulnerabilities certainly than people let on. He's not, you know, the golden ticket I think to election, I do still think he would be a stronger candidate, just because Trump does have so much baggage. But it's important to look at all of them, you know, on the merits, and just see what the real case and the tests would look like. Let's go to the next one here. Secretary Secretary of State Anthony Blincoln is currently in Beijing.
He's meeting with the.
Chinese president, Sheishingping after hours of meetings with the foreign minister in China. Let's go and put this up there on the screen. It was just a preview of what happened. This is a fascinating and a big development on the global stage, arguably the most important meeting Secretary of Blincoln's career so far. After months of the cold shoulder, China welcoming Anthony Blincoln to Beijing. It's the first visit by a US cabinet official to China since twenty nineteen during
the pandemic. Chinese officials currently have all played up the notion that the US is the most eager to meet, but behind the scenes, this meeting is very important because Beijing really wants Shishingping to actually be invited to an Asia Pacific leaders conference in San Francisco in November, and they also want a separate meeting with President Biden himself on US soil. Now, in terms of what they are
talking about, the meeting actually quite literally just broke. So we can get a few of the details after they're briefing the press.
Here's what they have been asked so far.
Secretary Blincoln had a couple of different initiatives that he really wanted to establish Crystal.
We should forget. We shouldn't forget that.
When the original meeting of Secretary Blincoln and Chinese President Shihinping was scheduled in February, during the Chinese balloon incidents, we shot the balloon balloon Gate. After we shot down the balloon, Secretary Lincoln he had to cancel his trip to Beijing.
It caused international consternation.
The Beijing and the Chinese called it out, saying that we were behaving thuggishly and their words and insults were flying. But I guess things are better now. One of the important things that actually happened in February was the cutoff of military to military deconfliction channels between the US and China.
Here's why that's important.
Even currently in the war in Ukraine and more, we have seen multiple near misses of by pilots, of Russian pilots and of US pilots over the Black Sea that result in potentially dangerous incidents. The same thing has happened
with Chinese overflights. So what we have always long tried to have is deconfliction military to military channels where the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs can call the head of the People's Liberation Army and just say, hey, just so you guys know, we're doing drills in this region.
Don't take it as a threat.
They have refused to pick up the phone since the February shootdown incident. Beijing has still even after this meeting. Is a bit of a snub to Secretary of blinkn refusing to set up the military to military communication channel. We should all want that, just because you don't want an accident to incite a major international incident like Hainan Island in two thousand and one.
Yeah, I always thought it was a real shame that the whole balloon situation derailed that meeting. With Blincoln, and it really did lead to a sort of downward spiral in terms of relationship and certainly in terms of communication. You'll recall also recently we had requested a meeting between Sectary of Defense Lloyd Austin and with his counterpart in China, and China was like no, yeah, they denied it, and
so real blatant snub there. But at the same time, the Chinese have a few goals here in terms of trying to thaw relationships. They really want to be able to achieve a meeting between Biden and she. So that's one thing. Another thing is they have their economies on the rocks.
Yeah, they're not doing well.
They're not doing well.
They have very high youth unemployment, they've got debt issues, They've got a lot of problems going on domestically in terms of their economy. So they're also very anxious to have economic meetings with say Janet Yellen and with Gina Raymondo.
And so part of why they wanted this thaw is to achieve some of their economic objectives, and not just with us, because in some ways, you know, Biden has already imposed some import controls, there's already an aggressive, more hawkish posture with regard to economics, in.
Particular Visa VI China.
In some ways, that ship has sailed, and I sort of feel like, regardless of other Biden or Trump or Stantis or whoever wins the next election, they're going to continue in that direction. We saw how vulnerable we were during the pandemic, the fact that all of our supply lines were overseas so far too slowly, in my opinion, we're trying to bring some of that back, and I don't see us really reversing course there. However, the Europeans have tried to strike a different tone and take a
different approach. So part of China trying to demonstrate their good will here viz. Of the US is also a message to the Europeans of like, we're good guys, you can work with us. We are actually interested in peace, and you know, with regard to Russian and Ukraine, we're interested in mutual cooperation that could be both to all
of our countries benefits. So part of the desire on the Chinese side for them to have this meeting was not just aimed at us and what they might be able to accomplish in terms of our relationship and further communications, which I think is extremely important. I'm glad to see that this happened, but it's also aimed at the Europeans to try to keep a friendly relationship there.
Exactly right.
So another update from Secretary Blinking, who's literally speaking live with reporters right now, saying that currently the US actually pushed not only for better lines of communication, but also asked for increased Chinese efforts to stop Chinese fentanyl being sent to Mexico for inclusion by the drug cartels into obviously making its way across our border and then being responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of American
citizens in the last several years. Perhaps most noteworthy Crystal right now, as the Secretary, Blincoln came out and said, quote, we do not support Taiwan independence. We do not support any change to the unilateral status quo, saying that they are concerned by some Chinese moves made against Taiwan. Here's
why that's important. It is a rhetorical gift towards the Taiwanese. Also, though without changing in a US government policy, the Taiwan Relations Act says that we recognize the current China the People's Republic of China as the only China. We do not, however, change or want any support for Taiwanese absorption into the overall Chinese state, and we still effectively support their sovereignty
without reckon them as their own nation. So it's a very convoluted system, but it is a rhetorical gift by Anthony Blincoln in order to try and set engagement by not offering up any real policy change but still coming
out and saying we do not support Taiwan independence. And it's one of those where obviously self have to read it also in the same move of President Biden's comments where he said repeatedly in the past he would actually support Taiwan if the Chinese would ever mount a military invasion against.
Them, exactly.
So the fact that you have a direct answer here, no hedge, no dodge coming on Chinese soil is significant, and you know, all indications are in terms of lowering the temperature here the meanings were successful, that they were more successful than the last meetings that happened on the
sidelines of the munich Security Conference. And there's another piece that's a part of why those conversations were considered to be not so effective is because that came at the very same moment that the US released intelligence leaked it to the press that they thought China was considering sending lethal aid to Russia, sending weapons to Russia, and the Chinese were very angry about that, partly because of what
I was saying before. They really want to keep the Europeans persuaded that they're actually interested in peace, that they're not overtly taking Russia aside, even though I think that's entirely questionable. So that was part of why those talks got derailed. There was a big question mark hanging over these talks because there's new intelligence reporting about what exactly happened with that whole balloon situation, Like was it just an accident, they claimed it was a weather balloon. Was
there really a weather balloon? I think we already know the answer to that. And there was a question of whether or not the Biden administration was going to release that intelligence. Republicans are very much pushing them to do that, and they're painting it, and you know, they're painting what is revealed in that report. None of us have seen it or know exactly what's in it. Republicans are painting it is like this was bad and this was intentional
on part of the Chinese. The Biden administration, Biden in particulars tried to downplay it as this was more of an accident than an intentional provocation, and that too helped set the stage for lowering the temperature and having more successful toxic.
Whether it's an accident or not.
The current leaks that actually have come out about the balloon, yeah, you know, look value judgment aside.
Something that drives me crazy.
Is or like, oh, it's just a balloon, you know, what could they possibly get? The current you know, actual analysis of the balloon says it was more high tech than actually anything the US has, and they were deeply impressed at the level of technology.
Well we gained something grabbing it, right.
But there is a consistent, in my opinion, under estimation of Chinese, like of Chinese.
Abilities, of their like.
I people have often, you know, said like, I have some sort of bias against the Chinese. I guess it's
possibly true only in that I respect them. I see what they have done and look at it with clear eyes and say this is not you know, some backwater almost like a racist view of like this rising nation, which is you know, operating by and some two bit pro This is a highly sophisticated technological society, deeply ideologically committed to a vision of supplanting and changing the global order, and specifically of reclaiming total sovereignty and hegemony over East Asia and.
Possibly the rest of the world.
It's a program they've laid out for decades. They write it very clearly. They also write it in English so that people like us understand exactly what they think. And instead we almost look at it as some bumbling balloon that was almost it was unsophisticated, whereas our current analysis
of it, whether it was an accent or not. Obviously, you know, technology like this will drift off cross We're apparently looking at the spy tech and we're like, wait, this is better than anything that even we have, And it's like, yeah, guys, you know, while we're spending one hundred billion dollars or so over in Ukraine, what we are currently seeing with the Chinese is they actually come to us and like, why are you predicating our relationship
on what's going on in Ukraine. They're like, we are the two largest economies in the world, our bilateral relations should rely on our economic ties and the potential of averting military conflict between our two sides.
So it's an interesting geopolitical question as well.
Yeah, I do have questions about like what I mean, I have to think it was an act because this didn't work out well for the Chinese.
You know, like Chinese system is very complicated because it's it's not like the US government. There are factions within the PLA one outright wants war. She Shengping basically is like torn between that side and then the previous economic side. There were new effectively the neoliberals of China who said, look who cares about Taiwan.
We're all in this for the money.
We're corrupt it, let's make billions, and they did, I mean, they became some of the richest people literally on planet Earth. She has effectively calm and nuked many of those people from the party, but he still has to satisfy the billionaire effectively, like if you think Chinese oligar American oligarchs are powerful, the Chinese oligarchs both are always at the mercy of literally being killed. But before that, they are i mean power center very much in their own right.
So they're they're torn in very different directions too many in many ways in comparison to the US state. It's just non democratic in the way that they operate.
Yeah, So, anyway, whatever happened with the balloon, they're trying to smooth the waters now seem to have had successful talks, and I genuinely think that's a good thing in terms of averting any sort of near term conflict.
Very much hope, so, especially we're bogged down in Eastern Europe. Right now, Let's go to the next part here Fox News and Tucker Carlson at War. This is a very actually interesting one.
It came in Chiron War.
So now that we have our own chirons, I guess I could sympathize. Although I've always shot this entire clapback Chiron thing going on in primetime is deeply silly. For example, see, yeah, you know, when we do our chirons, we just want it straight so that somebody who's watching it on their phone or their TV can just look up and have a very you know, content knowledge of like, Okay, that's what the se.
What's going on is about.
By the way, guys, in case you don't know, the Chiron is just like the banner. Yeah, you put on that says whatever you're talking.
There you go control room.
That's yeah, there's no editorial judgment in this room like Tucker. Okay, but we are being descriptive in our editorial judgment where not just we're not saying, like Tucker declares war on Fox News falsely. That's something that CNN used to do during the Trump era. They would live fact check him in the chiron or fact check you know, fake fact
checks in the chiron. And then secondarily though, there was a chiron that appeared on the Fox News program while President Biden was speaking while President Trump was also speaking after his indictment, in which they called Biden a quote wanna be dictator. That Fox News producer who made that chiron was later fired from Fox News after they had to issue an apology, and it turns out he actually
used to work for the Tucker Carlson Show. Tucker of course coming to the defense of his former staff and also viewing it as a contrast in a way to show that Fox News says gone woke and his no longer can be trusted.
Here's what he had to say beneath those videos at the bottom of the screen, Fox's banner read this way quote wannab dictator speaks at the White House after having his political rival arrested.
Those words are up for less.
Than thirty seconds, but the effect was immediate. Inside Fox, the women who run the network panicked. First, they scolded the producer who put the banner on the screen. Less than twenty four hours after that, he resigned. He'd been at Fox for more than a decade. He was considered one of the most capable people in the building. He offered to stay for the customary two weeks, but Fox told him to clear out his desk and leave immediately. Then the company issued a public apology for the twenty
seven second long Wannabe Dictator line quote. The chiron was taken down immediately, Fox's PR department said, and then added ominously it was quote addressed. That was all true, but it was not enough to save Fox News from the ensuing scandal.
So why does that matter?
Because it shows you that Tucker obviously still very upset at Fox for firing him using his position, especially whenever they are issuing cease and desist letters, and there's an ongoing legal war as to whether he's literally allowed to do that show at all. But the reason why it's important, I think is it shows a growing alliance of the online right, Tucker Carlson and also Trump against the pre
eminent conservative program that's out there right now. Let's put this up there, because Trump also joining the fray going ahead and saying that he's joining actually Fox News or started joining Tucker Carlson in going after Fox News as disgraceful, says that Tucker Carlson is right and twisting the knife after MSNBC actually beat Fox News, he quote called himself the King and demanded they bring back Trump Allies and MAGA. So the reason why again is that he says it
happened as I predicted. The golden goose that has been so beautiful is being slaughtered by fools. MAGA has left Fox for more promising prairies, love prairies and quotes.
Don't ask me why that one was in quotes, Long live the King.
The only for Foxes to bring back Trump Allies and MAGA backing no personality Rond sanctimonious has been a disaster. Also, do not broadcast negative ads against Republicans and Conservative candidates by perverts misfits like the failing Lincoln project.
Roger Ayles never allowed that. Man.
The character limit really was a blessing for Trump, these long tweets and also long treat for it. Really you know it. It requires a live editing and an economy
of words, which I find very important. But I think that the main point remains that Fox News is increasingly losing its cachet amongst hardcore GOP primary boyah who have access online down to the Tucker Carlson Show, also to Trump on truth social I'm not saying that this is going to be some great revolution, but it has brought down Fox, so they are no longer the kings of cable of which they were claimed the mantle for decades of our politics.
Crystal, I mean the irony.
I don't know that it's an irony, but the truth is Trump, right, Yeah, you know, Trump is the most singular force in American politics. I think that's terrible. I think it's bad for the country. I think it's bad for politics. I think it makes it so our politics end up being about nothing and about you know, it's just like existential lesser too evils. There's no policy. No one feels the need to run on anything affirmative.
I think that sucks, but I think it's also reality.
And you see it with CNN when they tried to pull back from you know what they had cultivated over years of this resistance focused, very Trump focused audience. When they tried to counter program that, it's been a disaster for them. And so the one channel that has stayed in the like all Trump, all the time lane is MSNBC and they have been benefiting from it. Put this up on the screen. They actually dethroned Fox News after
years long ratings dominance. MSNBC turned in a few performances that were actually higher than Fox News.
This is nearly un heard of.
Nielsen dat are regarding the weekending this past Sunday showed that Fox's primetime eight to eleven PM viewership average about one point five zero four, and the average viewership for the more left leaning MSNBC over that same primetime hours was one point five two oh so narrowly beating out the conservative network. But that's a huge deal. Fox normally dwarfs AMSNBC. It's not even close.
But guess what.
Guess why MSNBC is doing so well. It's all about Trump got indicted.
And they went all in, and you know.
CNN has sort of like broken the trust with their liberal faithful and so they migrated over to MSNBC and know they're going to get the like Trump centric coverage that they want and desire and have been trained to expect. And so you know, MSNBC ends up on top because over at Fox, I mean, listen, Fox is still very conservative.
There's still in certain ways very pro Trump. But there was an overt attempt to make a break and push Ron de Santis and that, you know, and then all the text messages that came out during the dominion lawsuit about the way they really felt about Trump and what was going on behind the scenes, the way they were manipulating their viewers. And then you've got competitors now in Newsmax and One America and also in online independent creators
who so people have choices as well. I think it sucks, But in terms of a cable news audience, if you're just looking at ratings, there's simply no doubt that all Trump, all the time, either pro or against, is the way to go.
Yeah, sad, it's very funny.
It's sad.
It also shows you that you know, Fox the biggest reason why I think that they made a big mistake is they were trying to do what they had the ability to do in two thousand and eight today. So for people who don't know, back in two thousand and eight, Fox and Roger Ale specifically said, we have one mission. We're going to take down President Obama, and we are going to guide the move against Obama and re elect
the next republic or elect the next Republican president. What they did is they effectively created the Tea Party by featuring their guests on all of the time and giving them a central platform to be the organizing face and force of the actual GOP. They also did that in two thousand and four for George W. Bush and then famously beat the war drum in Iraq that time, where they effectively had a monopoly on conservative messaging. It's just over, yeah,
and I see signs of it everywhere. I see Republican politicians going on the Tim Poole Show. I see them going on the War Room podcast with Steve Bannon. Matt Gates, sure he goes on Fox News, but he goes on a lot of other stuff too. And watching that happen really in real time has been fascinating because they don't
need Fox in the same way. And then when Fox could not really stand to lose some of its people or did not have the monopoly, it also went in for Ronda Sandys, who just simply is not the same force as Donald Trump. It doesn't have that level of support, So they tried to act as if they were still king makers for those who walked succession. There was a scene where they're like, let's go pick the next president, and I just remember thinking like, this is such an outdated model.
Of how it works.
Like cable presidents Rubert Murdoch and them, they don't pick the president anymore, and they haven't in a long time. So they're still just not waking up to reality. Maybe they're just so old that they literally have forgotten, certainly.
On the Republican side, unfortunately, I think on the Democratic side.
There still is just a lot of trust.
You might like.
Cable news, the mainstream press and whatever. I mean, we're talking about a multi decade long project to divorce the conservative base from mainstream networks, and so for Fox that makes you vulnerable to when the new upstarts come along, you being painted as the mainstream dinosaur. That your base already has a lot of skepticism and antipathy towards So yeah,
it creates a real vulnerability for them. Now, what they argue publicly, I think sometimes and definitely privately is basically, our viewership is really old and they don't even know how to find these other platforms, and so they're stuck with us. Like that may have some truth to it, but you really want to bet on that. The bottom line is there monopoly on the conservative base and on conservative viewership is over. It's a new era, it's a new ecosystem. Are they still a force.
No doubt about it.
Do politicians still want to go on there and make their case, no doubt about it. Do they still have personalities that you know, Garner views and have trust all.
That good stuff.
Yes?
Absolutely.
But you know, just like these other cable news giants, they're suffering from the same sort of managed decline and end of an era where they are just not going to be as dominant a force as they used to be in terms of American politics.
That's probably a good thing.
Yeah, No, I think that's very well said. Whistle.
All right, so we have some other really interesting media news, But now returning to the alternative media space. So this massive streamer previously on Twitch, execuc put this up.
On the screen.
He just landed a massive streaming contract worth seventy millions. Also, it's actually over the two years close to one hundred million dollars to move over from Twitch, which is right now the dominant video streaming platform, over to upstart Kick, which just officially launched a few months ago. So over on Twitch he had twelve million followers. Now he's moved over to Kick. I took a look last night he was at like two hundred and twenty four thousand followers.
So there are many, many fewer people on Kick. But Sager clearly this new platform, which is owned by like Australian bitcoin gambling concern and had originally positioned itself as like we're gonna be the free speech alternative kind of the way that Rumble positioned itself visa the YouTube, they are clearly making a big, big money play here to become a mainstream alternative.
To Twitch and not just a sort of like side project.
And part of what I read into here put this up on the screen from Fortune is they think that there's a real vulnerability to exploit because Twitch pissed off a lot of their creators. The article here from Fortune says video game streamers are rebelling against Twitch's a lower revenue split and moving to a four month old platform run by a crypto casino operator in Australian upstart platform called Kick is emerging as a threat to Amazon streaming
Crown Jewel. I think that we're a long way from it being a real full rival, just based on the numbers. I was looking at who's on the platform, how many people are on the platform, how much they're actually watching. But part of why they think there's a vulnerability here is because Twitch changed the revenue share with their creators, basically being like, well, where else are you going to go?
You're stuck with us. Pissed everybody off.
And they also have had like aggressive content moderation quote unquote or censorship approaches that have created some tension with some of their creators as well. So they've moved to try to smooth things over. They've made it so they put the old revenue split.
Back, but just on the very top creators.
It doesn't seem to have done a lot to calm the waters and execuc trying to capitalize.
Yeah, I think it's actually fascinating.
One of the reasons we wanted to cover it too are so we're lucky to have gamers on staff who keep us updated.
I will confess I do not game.
I don't I'm not part of the live streaming Twitch culture, but I'm not an idiot, and I'm up enough with the times to know that this is obviously a dominant sector, specifically of people who are under the age of twenty five, and actually even people who are under the age of eighteen, who live and die with Twitch streaming and are willing
to watch like ten twelve hours a day. What's fascinating to me about the development here is the way that their content moderation standards has not reached the same scrutiny that YouTube and other, I guess more established forces people like us or the other political YouTubers who.
We all want to know.
Like we're long and most of our audience at this point is familiar with the content moderation issues. But I have seen people like Hassan get taken off for some ludicrous reason in the past.
I've seen other.
Political you know, people who I don't even necessarily know them, but I'll see it bubble up in my feed about you know, oh, they were taken down for next reason.
It's totally ridiculous, capricious.
Their content moderation standards are ludicrous, and of course, you know, we need to pay attention to that. If the newer generation is watching their stuff on Twitch, on this platform, then obviously how political discourse on that platform is moderated makes and is going to be very important for the future, especially as these people come to vote, but also as a source of entertainment as well. I mean, this is the new source of entertainment for a huge portion of
not just our youth, but really global youth. I find that interesting too in gaming media, that part of the reason they're able to command such high such high like dollars, is that it's not just like American teenagers or wat just like Indian teenagers, Filipino teenagers, really like anybody who speaks English across the entire world, who are also playing the same games on the same platforms, and then watching people kind of talk both play those games, talk about
those games, and then also see some of it bleed in to political commentary. So the fact that this is happening is very interesting and also our producer Griffin was telling you, Crystal about what it also may mean in terms of Amazon and it's bet for the future why they may not be as upset as they might as you might think about this deal.
Yeah, So on the business side of this, Number one, I think the mainstream press is going to start taking a lot more note because of the dollar fit. Yeah, you have to when you're talking about one hundred million dollars. I mean, just to put in context, this is the why New York Times described it. This is like the type of money that Lebron James gets, you know, this is like top tier, superstar athlete type of money. So one hundred million dollars is real money that's being thrown
here at a top creator. So I do think they'll start to pay attention a bit more because you know, they pay attention to money. The other piece that's interesting here though, is Twitch is owned by Amazon. Okay, now it appears we don't have Twitch's revenue stream and their net profits or whatever broken out to know for sure, but appears that Twitch is not even profitable. So for Amazon, this global behemoth, Twitch is not even all of that important.
What they care a.
Lot more about are like the cloud computing services that they sell and the technology that they sell also that enables video streaming. And interestingly, put this next piece up on the screen. And again thanks to our producer Griffin for flagging this Kick is actually built on the Amazon Web Services video streaming platform. This individual, Blake Robbins on Twitter, goes on to say Kick is quite literally subsidizing Twitch by paying to use the Twitch video system via Amazon
Web Services. It also explains how and why Kick has been so stable relative to their growth and scale. So basically the point here is Amazon. If Amazon wants to kill Kick, it can at any time by just pulling the cloud computing services, pulling the video streaming services. But why don't they want to do that? Well, because they're much more interested in having an overall monopoly over these
services and growing out this highly profitable business. And then they are in really investing in Twitch and caring what happens there. Put this next piece up on the screen from Rich Cabrera, He says, here for here you are for all those that think AWS is the only crowud service provider at least nine percent more than as your and by the way, YouTube and all Google services.
Run on Google Cloud. But the big thing.
Here is you have a chart that shows you cloud market AWS dominates, then comes as your then comes Google Cloud. So this is the much bigger business for Amazon. And they're much more committed to being the monopolistic player in this sphere as they are in other spheres than they are ultimately to protecting their asset.
In terms of twitch video streaming.
Yeah, it's fascinating to see it from that perspective and just be like, oh, well, maybe they don't care because as long as they own basically the pipes of the Internet and all of live streaming, they're like, okay, whatever, I'm curious to see how this plays out. I had been looking into a lot with YouTube gaming. I obviously we care a lot about YouTube is the platform that we were born on, even though exists on several others, including the especially the podcast platform.
We've seen a lot of success with YouTube.
They are investing many of their tools in terms of gaming, in terms of live gaming reaction, the chat features, the bot features, your ability to do super chat. All of that is not built for people like us. It's built for gamers. And that I didn't know is that gaming has actually been multiplying by YouTube almost by like one and two hundred percent per year in terms of the traction.
So it's a growing, massively growing audience. As people, especially younger kids, get onto YouTube and are watching and consuming that content. It may feel saturated, but it's really not. It's actually still skyrocketing. It may actually be as seeing with the dollars here the next multi hundred billion dollar industry that people in the mainstream really don't pay a lot of attention to. And that's what we're trying to do here.
I mean, my ten year old son who loves all this stuff. He and his bestie got together this weekend and they were talking about their favorite streamers and YouTube creators.
I mean, it's well, it's a whole other world. This is the other part.
Is just like the fragmentation of media and how XCUC can be the biggest dreamer in the world and like many many millions of people have never heard of him, and he can command this type of money. So anyway, it's a fascinating development for a lot of reasons, and something to keep an eye on and to see whether pick is able to you know, put any sort of challenge up to Twitch I'm sure other creators will be looking very carefully at what happens here with XCUC getting this many millions of.
Dollars Chrystal, what you take a look at?
Last week?
Sean Hannity hosted California Governor Gavin Newsom for a lengthy debate.
And look, not a big fan of.
Either one of these guys, but this was far more productive than ninety nine percent of cable news. Both functioned as respectful and effective spokespeople for their partisan teams. Here's one of Newsom's strong permoments, take a listen.
Honest way to be the first larger economy in the world.
What are you arguing for Mississippi's economic policy? Is that?
I mean literally, that's what you're asking me.
If I want a great if I want X, the Tensis policy, I mean it was.
A debacle, you know, economic growth.
Seventy one percent the gd there in America are blue counties. I would take it there one percent of the GDP in America, popular loop studies, progressive policies, Okay, that are paying high taxes.
And the country or seven of the top ten dependent state.
Let's say you're right, Let's say you know we're subsidizing your states, not because of your policy in New York, You're not subsidizing anything for your philosophy.
I'm getting the.
Hell out of New York though, Mississippi, Alabama. I'm all for it over over New York or California.
I love Missus. I mean, I'm sure.
Look, it just not personal.
Well done there from the governor, But the context for why Newsom is doing this interview and everything he can to grab the spotlight.
Is actually extremely dark.
You might have noticed the California governor has been going on his way to cert himself on the national stage. In particular, he's made a point of fomenting a big national rivalry with Florida governor and twenty twenty four contender Ron DeSantis. In the run up to the midterms, Newsom spent some his campaign war chest running ads in red states. He targeted Florida in particular, where he went after DeSantis laws on abortion, on voting rights, and on book banning.
In recent weeks, Newsom and DeSantis have returned to this feud after DeSantis pulled one of a stunts flying migrants to Sacramento, California. In response, Newsom threatened his rival with kidnapping charges and called him a quote small pathetic man. Pretty clear what's going on here. With all the positioning and media seeking. Newsom is trying to create a national fight between a man arondasantis trying to be the future of the Republican Party and himself a man who clearly
desires to be the future of the Democratic Party. It is the proxy fight that Newsom is allowed to wage as he reviews the actuarial tables and watches Biden decline.
Basically, Newsom is.
Circling Biden like a vulture, ready to swoop in the moment that there is an opportunity. He's trying to grab the lead in the shadow primary of candidates, ready to pounce if Biden dies or is otherwise incapacitated. Like I said, it's really dark. Hannity is clearly aware of this subtext. So in his debate, the Fox News host press Newsom on his own presentdential ambitions.
Here's how that exchange went.
I don't think Joe Biden is mentally physically capable of being the President of the United States. Hang on, I suspect if I took your phone and I took a look at it, not that I believe in privacy.
I would never do that. I would bet on a daily basis that there.
Are people urging you to run for president and primary him.
Am I wrong in my assumption? Well, my phone's been lighting up. How well he did with the UK Prime Minister? My phone lit up? And how he's not like that's a nice Doc McCarthy on the debts, your phone light on?
The phone lights up with Republican friends saying, you know what, despite all of the rhetoric, these bipartisan bills he keeps passing on infrastructure and the Chips and Science Act, the bipartisan work he did on gun legislation reform and around the debt ceiling make me feel maybe he's done a little bit better job.
Than So that wasn't my question. Are does your phone light up with Gavin? You need to get in this primary. He's not able to run. He's not up to the job.
Look, everybody has their quiet chatter and everybody's out there rooting for America. I'm rooting for our president. I have great confidence in his auto shop.
Newsome as a slick one and he seems to know it, insisting his phone is lighting up with praise and admiration for the president. Okay, sure, dude, we can all see the game that you're playing, play acting unfailing loyalty to dear leader while privately licking your chops and praying for the grim Reaper. It is quite something behold this level of brazenly mucky Velli imposturing, and it's as cynical as it is ultimately cowardly. I personally cannot stand this type
of slimy gameplaying politician. If you think Biden is too old to do the job, come out and say it. If you think you'd be a better president, which clearly you do, tell us why get specific, actually get in the arena rather than pretending that you're the loyal soldier
while you scheme and plot behind the scenes. Now we've made a lot of fun here of Ron Sandez, Nikki Haale and all all the rass were being too afraid to really go after Trump, bending the need to him on his indictments and completely indefensible conduct kicking forwards not sideways or whatever nicky Haley is doing.
But hey, at least they.
Got the stones to actually run in the primary against Trump. Newsom is too afraid of risking his good standing with the establishment powers that be to actually do what he desperately clearly wants to do and actually jump in the race. DeSantis started selling shirts mocking Newsom that read, stop pussy footing around, and you gotta say the man has a point. It's got to be killing Newsom and pen Gretchen Whitmer and a whole bunch of other ladder climbing Democratic politicians.
They can smell the blood in the water.
Biden's terrible approval numbers his feeble public persona the overwhelming majority of Democratic voters crying out for alternatives. They seek the weakness and his pulling even against two contenders that they all consider to be un serious gad flies. They see the historic blunder Biden made by trying to put South Carolina first in the process, pissing off Iowa and New Hampshire and all but guaranteeing two early state losses. But Newsom and all the rest they cannot escape the
prison that is entirely of their own making. These are people who built brands and careers by playing for the establishment team and winning plottits from the corporate media and Democratic Party elites and their media allies have fully committed themselves to a democracy free coronation this year. The minute you dissent from that core commitment to a Biden anointment, you will be as dead to them as Marian Williamson
and RFK Junior. So the best that these people can do is to thrust themselves into the limelne and secretly harbor their morbid fantasies about the commander in chief.
Frankly, it's pretty gross.
And for all his silver talgue of skill, Newsom may find that ultimately voters are instinctively repulsed by a serpentine maneuvering his intense lust for the crowd, ironically serving as the biggest impediment to.
The title that he really seeks.
Newsom might think he's being quite clever here, but his plotting is naked for everyone to see.
And I enjoy the ex change with Nasimon And if you.
Want to hear my reaction to Crystal's monologue, become a premium subscriber today at breakingpoints dot com.
All right, sorry, were you're looking at?
Well.
Something bewildering about our culture war today is how much of it is a mix of old and new.
When I was growing up in the nineties. It is actually pretty simple.
It was gay marriage, guns and abortion. Now, obviously, the Supreme Court end of the gay marriage to eight in twenty fifteen, but guns and abortion are still with us. The crazy thing, though, in twenty twenty three, is that the issues of guns and abortion, they didn't go away, but we still have had new entrance to the discourse, mostly transgenderism, rights, racial identity, politics, authoritarian political correctness. The political valance of each of these topics is actually fascinating.
Many liberals rightfully point out that they mostly won the original cultural wars of the seventies through the nineties. As evidenced by our most recent midterm elections, the vast majority of Americans are pro choice. The majority of Americans, including Republicans, have no issue with gay marriage. The public has basically remained the same, if not slightly more liberal in favor
of gun control. On the new fights, though, it's a very different question, and it highlights what I have long identified as the new culture War, a new strain of conservatism I believe is untapped, largely unrepresented in the Republican elected base. I laid it out a few years back on the Joe Rogan podcast borrowing Matthew Walter's term barstool conservatism,
It's a very simple concept. A new strain of people who call themselves or feel right wing, are fairly liberal on gay marriage and abortion, but are resolutely opposed to transgenderism, to racial identity politics, and are pretty libertarian whenever it does come to guns. The new strain of conservative is largely secular and is probably best described as socially libertarian
combined with a deep hostility to liberal political correctness. The name barstool conservative is derived from Dave Portnoy, the founder of Barstool, but it represents just a male audience largely that gravitates towards his content and those like him in our political zeitgeist. Laying this all out because its important to the chart, I'm about to show you, how do you interpret it? New data released by Gallup shocked a lot of liberals. It shows in twenty twenty three, Americans
find themselves more socially conservative than ever before. Thirty eight percent of Americans, for the first time in years, say they are quote very conservative or conservative on social issues, five percent more than in twenty twenty two, eight percent more than twenty twenty one Meanwhile, a corresponding drop in socially liberal has occurred. Those who identify as very liberal or even liberal on social issues has dropped in twenty twenty one from thirty four percent to twenty nine percent.
The important thing to understand here is that it's not Republicans getting more socially conservative. It is actually an overall swing amongst every single political and demographic subgroup, from men to women to every racial identity. Those that have gotten the most conservative, however, are very interesting. It's older millennials and Gen X, those who are aged between thirty and sixty four, who identify as socially conservative now by double digit margins more than they previously did.
The question is important, what the hell does that mean?
Because in the very same poll, Americans, by a seventy one percent margin, as I said, they support gay marriage. A large majority of Americans say they identify as pro choice. So how can it be possible that Americans find themselves more socially conservative ever while also being more liberal than ever on abortion or gay marriage? And the answer, as I said, is that social conservative today now is a very different meaning to a lot of people.
Than in the nineteen nineties.
It has to do with the emerging fights about gender and about race than does have anything to do written in the Bible. Church membership in the US is actually at an all time low. More importantly, the trend is clear even those who grew up religious are not attending religious institutions anymore. Only twenty percent of Americans attend a
religious service weekly. The vast majority of Americans say they only attend seldom or never, with numbering at a full one third of the entire public who don't attend at all. US Christian identification is an all time low. US non religious identification is only a full twenty percent. We are still a more secular country right now than ever before,
and it happened incredibly rapidly. My biggest problem with our current culture war is how captured that I find most organizations and institutions who are actually engaged deeply in it
by the people whose actually beliefs are deeply unpopular. For example, if you're like me and transgender ideology for targeted towards children drives you crazy, how often do you find yourself agreeing with someone who is talking about it, only to then discover that in reality they're a religious zealot who you completely disagree with on almost all other fundamental issues,
or maybe you're sympathetic to adult trans rise. You think the discussion around the issue is a moral panic, and then you find someone engaged in the fight who insists it is moral and righteous for a naked drag performer to shake their genitals in a child's face. To me, the most interesting thing about all the data is how clear the recent push, mostly by the college educated elite, to police speech around gender and race while pushing their views on it from all of our higher institutions is
very clearly backfiring. Americans on old culture war issues are more liberal than ever, but their embrace of the socially conservative life shows that they find our current moment far too liberal for their liking. So what to do with this data? For me, it's actually a roadmap to settlement and a very happy medium. Whichever side wants to emphasize individual liberty for adults will win. That is why Democrats
win the abortion message. Secular Americans in particular are repulsed at having their behavior policed largely by a religious ideology that they don't agree with.
It is also why cultural.
Leftists are increasingly losing the broader public. The new culture War relies mostly on authoritarian control speech, whether it be abound race or gender, and it relies on that control and propaganda from the commanding heights of cultural power. The more people silently will get fed up if someone does not give soon, we are going to be truly doomed, though.
Because we will have a seesaw oft power.
Republicans could win on temporarily on a popular issue, but then they'll enact unpopular legislation, and then the Democrats will do the exact same thing. And the longer that that goes on, the more split that we all become. And maybe it's actually designed that way from the very beginning. So anyway, I'm curious what you think.
Of the day, and if you want to hear my reaction to Sager's monologue, become a premium subscriber today at breakingpoints dot com.
Joining us now is Ryan Clancy. He is the chief strategist of No Labels Group. Brian, it's great to see you, thanks.
For joining us, Thanks for having me all right.
Ryan, So why don't we just get to the specifics here? What are your group's plans for the twenty twenty four election? Lots of consternation around it, so get specific with us.
Yeah. So we've been working for over a year to get bat allin exos in states across the country to create the opening to nominate a unity ticket potentially next year.
There's a lot of concern from the Democratic side that your group, if you run a third party candidate, could serve as a spoiler. The idea being here that Donald Trump supporters are largely locked in that it's the Biden pro Biden anti Trump coalition that could potentially be split by your effort. Now, your Democratic co chair, doctor Ben
and Chavis recently addressed this. He said No Labels is not and will not be a spoiler in favor of Donald Trump, going on to say, if we find the polls are changed and Joe Biden is way way out ahead, then No Labels will stand down. So can you explain that because that was a little confusing to me because it seems to me like the spoiler potential would be greater if the polls are closer versus if the polls are far apart.
Sure. So, from the beginning, there's been two bars that we have to clear to nominate a ticket. One is the two major party nominees need to be considered bad enough in the view of the public, and a potential alternative ticket needs to be considered good enough that it could win outright in the electoral college. Obviously, if Biden were holding a big lead, that would probably close off the path for an independent ticket. And this is where a lot of what we've done has been so mischaracterized.
You see comparisons to Jill Stein or Nator or something like that. We will never nominate a ticket like that. Nobody wants to fuel a protei candidacy.
So if it's not a protest candidacy, let's go and put this up there on screen, guys. Please New York Times tearsheet the alarm by Democrats that we have seen Joe Manchin being held up as a potential at the top of the list here for a ticket. Why do you see this as as you called it, a unity ticket. Why is the country crying out for a Joe Mansion presidency if you will or a like minded politician.
Sure, I mean, I don't know that they're crying out for Mansion or anybody else. What I know they're crying out for in which you both know they're crying out for is something different than what they're almost certainly going to get. So you've all seen the polls. Two thirds or more people do not want to rematch the twenty twenty election, and yet our system has absolutely no way to adjust to that. So we're in this position now where the major forces into both parties are basically saying,
at two thirds of the country, tough luck. You're you're gonna have this election even if you don't like it in the and in the end, we don't even care if you like our candidate as long as you hate the candidate on the other side. More we know you'll come home to us, And we just feel like the country can do a lot better than that.
Sure, I mean, we certainly do agree with that. However, the specifics really matter because a lot of the people that are frustrated with Joe Biden, for example, they are more of the Cornell West or Mary and Williamson or Jill Stein view where they're disappointed that Biden hasn't done war on climate. They're disappointed that Biden has broken his promises with regard to the Proact or regard to the minimum wage. They would like for him to have moved
further to the left on a variety of issues. So can you get specific about what your complaints specifically with Joe Biden are and how your theoretical candidate would reflect a different policy valance than what the Biden administration, which I view is very centrist and very moderate, which is you guys's brand what they've put forward.
So this is something that we've been very clear about since the beginning, which is we are not doing this because of subjective judgment about how good or bad Biden is or a judgment about Trump. What we're doing is something that nobody else in the political system seems to be doing, which is actually just responding to what the
public clearly wants. Now. They have obviously different reasons for not liking Trump right now or not liking Biden, but the one thing we can anchor in is that they want a better choice and in our view, having the ballot and in July we're actually going to be putting
out some ideas. What that's going to finally do for the first time in a long time is there's this huge common sense majority in this country that gets ignored that both parties don't feel like they have to be accountable to this is actually going to force them to be accountable to them. And if in the end they put forward candidates or platforms that make it so there's no room for a No Label's ticket because they're appealing
to the vast majority. Great, We'll stand down and double down on the work we've been doing in Congress for over a decade.
So, Ryan, something I'm interested in is why not any of the current people in the field, as Chryssel mentioned, Cornell West, Mariyan Williamson, RFK Junior. He's mounting a very serious threat right now to the Biden White House, enough so that they've gotten the same Times coverage that you guys have over there. So why not back somebody who is in the race and is actually primary Joe Biden actively as we speak.
Because we're not working to undermine Biden. We're not working to intervene in the Republican primary. That's the problem. No Label's ability to influence either party primary is very limited. As you know, turn up there is pretty narrow. It's
often controlled by a lot of party officials. In the States, we're just going to buy bypass the primary is entirely and here's why that's so important and I know we haven't talked about issues much, but all these issues that we know the public wants solved, and we even know that outlines of what that could look like. You look at issues like immigration or education, we know why those
issues can't be solved. It's because people on both sides, the leaders in both parties, are deathly afraid of crossing their primary and the interest groups that have the most power in the primaries. So if you start to look at issues and you wonder, why can't we have sensible gun safety legislation even though eighty percent of the country wants it, it's because of the influence in the gun
lobby on the right. Why can't we have school choice, Why do we force kids into failing schools year after year? It's because of the influence of the teachers' unions on the left.
Well, yeah, so let's talk a little bit more policy specifics, because I think that's important. I mean, first of all, public education, traditional public education, public schools, is very broadly supported by the public. So I would dispute the fact that that's some sort of common sense majority and that that's not you know that that's entirely driven by union support. But put guys up on the screen G four, which
shows the views of Americans with regard to taxation. So you have huge majorities, I'm talking eighty three percent of Americans who say corporations they're worried corporations don't pay their fair share of taxes. Similar, vast majorities eighty two percent say that they're concerned the wealthy do not pay their fair share of taxes. So is taxing the wealthy part of your mainstream agenda given that it has eighty percent plus support among the American people, both Republicans and Democrats.
So we've got a huge section on the budget, which of course is completely out of control right now. And in our policy agenda that we're putting out shortly after July fourth, we make very clear that for any progress to be made on the budget, everything has to be on the table, and that includes taxes and that includes spending. There is no way to cut your way out of this,
to tax your way out of this. Both parties are going to have to come to the table and give things that they haven't wanted to give up until now, or we're just going to keep having these deficits which are completely unsustainable.
So your Party would commit to increasing taxes is on the wealthy, because there have been other instances where No Labels has teamed up with Kerson Cinema to make sure, for example, the carried interest loophole doesn't get closed, to make sure that pharmaceutical companies don't have to negotiate with the federal government in terms.
Of prescription drug prices.
So do you all commit to the idea, based on this common sense majority of eighty three percent, that the wealthy should pay more in taxes?
Well, wait, christ I want to correct the record there. So we never teamed up with Kirston Cinema to knock down the carried interest loophole or get rid of prescription drug negotiations. In fact, one of the things you'll see again in our agenda coming out in July is we call for more prescription drug negotiations because that's what the public told us they wanted in this megapol we did
of twenty six thousand people. I think what you're referring to with Senator Cinema, if you go back to a couple of years, Yes, No Labels did not support the partisan passage of the full Build Back Bendor Bill in the same way, we didn't worth the passage of the Trump tax cuts.
Well, let me ask you about that, because the individual elements of the Build Back Better Bill were extremely popular, including closing the carried interest loophole, including affordable childcare, including universal pre K. Each of these things was supported by an overwhelming majority of Americans, So it very much seemed like there was a common sense majority in favor of each of those elements.
So then why would you oppose that?
Well, there's two things. First of all, it's very easy to pull individual ideas in isolation. So if you ask people, do you want universal childcare? Sure sounds good. Do you want prescription drug pricing? Sure sounds good? Do you want climate subsidies? Sure sounds good. The problem is if you look at those things in their totality and what that would cost, then you can also ask the public, how do you feel about our fiscal situation? Do you think
Washington needs to be doing less spending? Do you think they need to be bringing our budget under control? And they'll tell you yes, that's a huge priority for them. So it's not something you can sort of look at in isolation. Yeah, they like some of these ideas, But when you pulled it all together. What you saw is a five trillion dollar package that was going to be
passed with one party support. And it's the same reason as I said, we didn't support the Trump tax cuts, because when you do huge policy like that, it doesn't last until two four years later the other party comes in they try to undo it.
Yeah, So it's more it's a political case I understand that you're making here.
So why do you think that your third party candidacy would be able to solve that? Like, let's say, even if you do win the presidency, you're still going to have a heart parties in Congress, of which that you best described as.
In why is this run?
It kind of the band aid that you think it is to the major structural problems that you're laying out.
Because it all comes back to who do politicians think they're accountable to? And the problem is is whether you're talking about the press, whether you're talking about House or Senate leaders, they only really care about what their primary voters think. That's all. They worry about, the narrow slice of voters who are going to put them over the top in their elections. And then they get to the general and they don't really have to worry about that anymore.
So here's how that manifests on an issue like immigration. You look at our polling, eighty percent of people would get behind a compromise that one made significant investments in border security, but two provided a path to citizenship for the dreamers. Why can't we have that? Well, here's why. Because if you're in the Democratic Party today and you're for any kind of border security, you get accused by
your base of wanting to put kids in cages. And if you're a Republican who's for anything other than deporting everybody, then well you're for amnesty. And that's why we can never get anything done on these issues.
Let me ask let me ask you about because AOC is not president and ilan oh and Bernie Sanders, they're not president. Joe Biden as president, and he has maintained actually a lot of the Trump immigration policies. And by the way, Democrats have put forward legislation which does basically what you suggest, pathway to citizenship, increase dollars for border security. So I'm just confused, frankly, why Joe Biden isn't your guy. Look, he's not my guy. I'm ideologically to the left of him.
I think he's failed on any number of promises to the working class, but not only you know, put on immigration. As I laid out, he passed an infrastructure bill with bipartisan support. He passed the Chips Act with bipartisan support. He passed the Inflation Reduction Act.
He got that through.
He was able to do the Packed Act to help toxic burn pick victims from our men and women serving overseas. So he's like fetishizes bipartisanships.
It's his whole thing.
So do you see him what is your specific events with him? Number one and number two? Do you see him as equally sort of extreme in your language as Donald Trump is?
No so, and we've our co chairs put out a statement to this effect, Doctor Benchetas Joe Lieberman headline was Donald Trump should never again be president. So we don't have any illusions about an equivalency between two of them. But again the crystal I come back to this. If you look at where the public is at, why is President Biden's approval rating is under thirty percent among independents.
It was over sixty when he was inaugurated, So obviously something has happened between then and now, and in our view when we look at our polling, some of that is he probably hasn't governed as the unifier that the public expected.
Well actually, actually, I mean when his approval ratings were the highest we're at the beginning of his administration, when he was doing the most and taking them you know, with the stimulus at the beginning, dealing with the end of the pandemic, you know, cutting checks to American citizens, That's when.
His approval rating was the highest.
When he has you know, sort of taken a step back and obsessed over bipartisanship and dougness Hea and not done a whole lot, that's when his approval rating falls off a cliff. So the idea that the move is to the center, that there needs to be more like the bipartisan infrastructure deal type of stuff, well, they already did that.
It clearly didn't give Biden much of a bump in the polls. So I would just dispute.
I think we have a very large difference of opinion about the frustrations that the American people have with Joe Biden in particular. But the other piece, you know, you've talked a lot about, you know, the American people and what they support and what they're looking for and who politicians are responsive to. Your group reportedly has a lot of very large donors. A number of billionaires including Harlan Crowe have been reported and Steven Schwarzman have been reported
as giving big money to your group. But you all want to close your donors so that people know what interest you might have at stake and what they might be signing up for if they do affiliate with your group. So will you commit to revealing your donors so that the American people can have transparency around what this third party effort is about and who it is backed by.
So first Crystal, a lot of the donors that have been reported that support no labels, they don't. I mean, I really don't know where they're getting the NIMS from, including.
Well Harlan, I mean we can can you just confirm or deny, you know, the two of them so that we can have some more information, because again, this is all based on what people are able to report out, rather than it would clear up the record if you just made all the donors public.
Now here's why we don't do that, and we never have. So we've been around for thirteen years. We're not a political party. We're a C four like AARP or legal women voters, and they don't support their donors either. Because the way this works today is a lot of the people that are attacking us, they sort of get behind the mantle of transparency and good government. They say, oh, just you know, just reveal all your donors. Of course,
they don't reveal any of theirs. What they want to do is go through a donor list and just attack those people, all the people that support us on both sides, and then try to intimidate them to leave no labels. That's how the game works. We're not going to play it. If in the end we nominate a ticket, that ticket will have to disclose everything to the FEC, just as any ticket would. So if you want to know what does no labels stand for, I'd say look at two things.
One what we've done the last thirteen years, and two, as I mentioned in July, will be out with common sense. That's going to be our policy agenda, and I think you'll see in there a broadly appealing agenda that has nothing to do with pushing special interests, corporate interests. We do not take corporate money, so we feel very good about how we handle our donors.
All right, Ryan, Well, we appreciate you joining us, talking to us little bit. Whenever it comes out in July, make sure you send it our way. Maybe we'll have a fun discussion again. I will say, though, I feel like all of you should have to disclose your donors, not just you but everybody else.
Hunter.
Maybe we could talk about that a little bit later. Anyway, appreciate you joining us.
Thank you, thanks so much.
All right, guys, hope you enjoyed it with enjoy having people there up on the big screen, having fun conversation and all that.
We will have a great show for everybody tomorrow.
And support us at Breakingpoints dot com