Ep. 2075 - I Just Got Another ASTOUNDING Email From The Washington Post

Well, folks, five days until the big selection of our lifetime will bring you all the news in a moment first. Your reminder, not only is MI-RACES the number one documentary of the decade it is streaming now exclusively at Daily Wire Plus. If you're not a DW Plus member, you need to go check it out right now at dailywire.com slash subscribe. Use code DEI and save 35% off your new annual membership. Take a look at the trailer for MI-RACES right now.

I feel a cringe about it. White straight cisgender man is the top of the pile. So I'm on the top of the pile. It's me. Yeah. I just proposed a toast. Raise a glass if you're racist. To racist. That was really weird. Don't deny that you're racist. Try not to be racist, but don't. But also don't realize that you're until we're willing to talk about these things. He won't really begin. It's my daughter's four years old. She's still watching Disney movies and she's using a white princess. Have you talked to her about that? All of the time.

Yes. Yeah. Probably. Yeah. Joining us now is Matt certified DEI expert. Did race exist as a reality before we made race exist? Does that make sense? What are you doing? Is your stretching out of your white? It's more for you unless you. MI-RACES now streaming only on Daily Wire Plus rated PG 13. Go check it out right now. The movie is so good. And there's a bunch of extras just for you when you become a member.

I got a message from the New York Times in which they essentially were attempting to pressure YouTube into censoring all sorts of conservative podcasts, videos, everything else. The claim was that I was engaged in election misinformation. And then the entire email was all about how I essentially needed to be shut down by YouTube. Because if you're demonetized on YouTube, they also do.

So shut down your reach and all the rest. We talked about that a couple of days ago. Well, in case you thought that was not a coordinated hit yesterday, I received the following email from the Washington Post. When I say that there is a Democratic media human centipede, it's because there is. It's because there is. And the entire goal of that Democratic legacy media human centipede is to shut down anyone who disagrees with them.

So media matters have brought out this study apparently behind closed doors, and they fed it to the New York Times who then attempted to get comment from people like me, from Tucker Carlson, from a bunch of other people on the right in which they were essentially attempting to elicit the response, suggesting that we are all elections and I. And engage in misinformation so YouTube could shut us down. The Washington Post literally within 48 hours sent me this email yesterday.

So hi, Ben, I'm a tech reporter at the Washington Post. My colleagues and I are working on a story that examines the role podcasts are playing in casting doubt on the integrity of the 2024 election. The piece includes interviews with researchers who say podcasts are an especially effective medium for such claims because of how technically challenging it is for companies to do content moderation.

So what does that mean? They're saying the suggestion here is that companies ought to be doing content moderation, which companies, while presumably social media companies ought to be shutting down once again shows like this one YouTube ought to shut down this show according to the Washington Post or perhaps she's talking about Spotify or perhaps iTunes or perhaps she's talking about advertisers.

Because they can't do content moderation on shows like yours and you are an elections and this is what the Washington Post reporter is saying quote a Washington Post analysis found that the Ben Shapiro show is one of many nationally prominent podcasts that have aired these claims. Our analysis based on your October interview with former president Trump, where you referred to Democrats as professionals at ballot harvesting and Trump referred to them as cheaters.

Could you please let me know if you have any comment. My deadline is 5 p.m. Eastern today. We received that early in the afternoon yesterday. So notice the claim. Okay, the claim is that I was engaged in election misinformation by referring to Democrats as professionals at ballot harvesting. That apparently is election misinformation. Here is NBC news quote Democrats for their part have long enjoyed success successes in male voting fueled in part by ballot collection where it is legal.

The Democratic National Committee said it plans to spend tens of millions of dollars in support of voting programs like male and early voting. NBC news you election deniers you engage in election misinformation every day apparently NBC news. Of course they don't believe that I'm engaged in election misinformation. The thing they're mad about is that I had on Donald Trump. It's not just me they want a sensor. They also want a sensor Trump.

They believe that it is some sort of informational crime for me to have on the former president of the United States and likely future president of the United States. That's insane. It's totally crazy. And again, the claim is again that we are supposed to censor president Trump that I can't say things that are perfectly true about ballot harvesting, which is one of most corrupt practices in America. It's legal but corrupt.

Republicans are doing it now also because if that's the process that's the process, but it is very bad. I do not like ballot harvesting. I do not like it all Sam. I am it's bad. Okay, but apparently that's election misinformation sufficient that we should now be silenced. Remember, that's the Washington Post. Now the Washington Post has become a joke so much so that Jeff Bezos had to issue an editorial just a couple of days ago titled the hard truth Americans don't trust the news media.

And which you recognize that according to Gallup Americans just think the news media stink. Well, maybe if Jeff Bezos actually wants to correct things at the Washington Post is not enough to stop them from endorsing Kamala Harris on the editorial pages.

Maybe he ought to look to his reporting staff who are now doing the bidding of places like media matters and coordinating obviously with the Democratic apparatus to unleash two separate stories that came out almost simultaneously one from the New York Times and one from the Washington Post today. And both of these stories say the same thing. They say that conservative media ought to be destroyed.

So that New York Times piece finally dropped and the New York Times piece has of course a big graphic and the graphic includes people ranging from Tim Poole to Rudy Giuliani to Tucker to Michael moles to me talking in the background. And the title is election falsehoods take off on YouTube as it looks the other way. YouTube is not censoring things the way the New York Times would like YouTube to censor things. Just think for a second how sick this is truly sick.

You have members of the media members of the press people who are supposed to be about the dissemination of speech actively asking YouTube to shut down people they don't like. And again, this is not about election misinformation because included in their litany of sins is me saying things like for example Democrats set the rules on ballot harvesting and mail-in voting which is true. It was reported by the New York Times.

They quote me saying the Democrats rigged voting rules in 2020. What I actually say is that your party rigged many of the voting rules in advance in order to advance mail-in voting and ballot harvesting. That's true. It was reported by both the New York Times and CBS news in Nevada. That's what happened. The Trump campaign tried to challenge it and they were enabled to the challenge fell flat.

That happens to be a reality. Here is what Nico Grant, the ridiculous reporter at the New York Times writes quote in June 2023 YouTube decided to stop fighting the most persistent strain of election misinformation in the United States. The fall so the president Biden stole the 2020 election from Donald Trump within months. The largest video platform became a home for election conspiracy theories, half truths and lies.

They in turn became a source for revenue for YouTube, which announced growing quarterly add sales on Tuesday. So again, the theory here is that YouTube is making money off elections and aisle. Now, why would you quote me in that context? This is how you it's the dead giveaway. I'm the dead giveaway in the story. Why? Because I never said that Trump won the 2020 election.

I've said repeatedly that Joe Biden won the 2020 election, at least by the counted ballots by the state certification procedure. In fact, I challenged between November and January Trump's claims that he had the legal capacity to overthrow the election or that might pen stood. And yet they include me in the article anyway because it's not about election misinformation. It's about destroying everyone on the right. That's what the New York Times wants to do.

The New York Times writes, well, media matters is a partisan organization that regularly criticizes conservatives, reporters and academics frequently cited as a source on YouTube misinformation because it devotes significant resources to tracking the vast platform. The New York Times independently verified the research examining all of the videos identified by media matters and determining whether YouTube placed ads or fact check labels on them.

So this is them attempting to justify precisely why they just cribbed media matters is worth. My favorite part of the story from the New York Times is as you know, I put up a thread on on X. That thread received tens of millions of views at this point, I believe. And and and Tucker Carlson also released a screenshot of his replies to the New York Times reporter basically telling him to f himself, which coincidental is what I told the New York Times reporter.

Here is the quote about our common quote, Mr Carlson and Mr Shapiro did not directly respond to a series of questions but attacked reporting from the New York Times. Well, I did notice that when I put up the thread and then I sent this reporter to the thread. It was an extensive thread. He could have quoted that thread, but he can't quote the thread because if he quotes the thread, it totally debunks his entire stupid story and shows the underlying motive.

Okay, if you thought that that was just a one off, it was not hours apart literally hours apart, the Washington Post put up their piece quote in the podcast election top shows cast out on integrity of 2024 vote claims aired on the free flowing and beloved medium could undercut trust in the results of a razor tight election experts say.

Experts is always they just go and they find somebody who works like Brookings Institute and get them to say the thing the reporter wants to say expert say is just a guys for the writer wants to write a thing I can find an expert to say anything in America. It's so easy super duper easy. Okay, the lead picture is a terrible old picture of me I always enjoy when I'm in legacy media because they find whatever is the worst picture of me and put it on there.

And it's kind of a music they found a crappy picture of me from 2018 I noticed it's 2024. So I was still at LA at the time. So they found a crappy picture that's the lead picture on the story is me right I'm I'm captain election misinformation according to the Washington Post. Democracy dies in darkness.

All the media do is put out misinformation I'll tell you what is misinformation the idea that your online activity is private it is certainly not the internet has changed the way everything goes they they know the ISPs maybe hackers everything you've

brows searched for watch tweeted now imagine all that data being crawled collected aggregated by data brokers into a permanent public record your record having your private life exposed for others to see was once something that only celebs worried about but in the era where everybody is online that means that everyone is now a public figure to keep my own data

when I go online I turn to express VPN not the radical left loves data collection big tech big government they would all love to track every single move you make your browsing history your location your private information they all wanted that is why I use express VPN it's why you should do the same the easiest way for these data brokers to track you is

through your devices IP address like a digital fingerprint that reveals exactly who and where you are both express VPN that IP address is hidden no more tracking no more monitoring no more monetizing a private data express VPN and crypts 100% of my network traffic

keeping my data safe from hackers the best part works on all your devices with just one tap it's that simple protect your online privacy today by visiting express VPN dot com slash been that's exp r svpn dot com slash been to get three extra months for free my exclusive link express VPN dot com slash

been also maybe the number one question I get from my listeners is how can I help the conservative fight well it's critical to know where your bucks are going most credit cards are funneling millions to left when causing candidates and they hope you don't notice but now you actually have a choice coin is America's conservative credit card find them at

c o i g n dot com with ever transaction you advance conservative causes and charities at note cost to you coin and powers us to take back our country with every single swipe and it's a great looking credit card you'll take pride in using its bright red it's got the we the people on the front coin works everywhere visa is accepted it comes with 100% US based customer service and consumer

productions thousands of patriots are earning cash back while fighting the left wing agenda that a man is so high there is now wait list there's a movement join it go to c o i g n dot com to join the wait list be sure to select a daily wire and they how did you hear about a section term supply go to coin dot com slash

disclosures for full details and get the credit card that won't be spending your money presumably unleft wing cause go ahead and over to coin dot com to join the wait list c o i g n dot com the only reference to me in the story refers to the fact that Donald Trump appeared on this program you'll recall this happened a week ago Donald Trump appeared on the program what was the big problem with anything that I said they can't they can't identify the thing that I said it's a problem because

it doesn't exist instead they just say during october appearances on the Shapiro and Joe Rogan shows Trump said the democrats were cheating and the media was interfering with the election what I have a question is it my job seriously do not have Donald Trump on the show is that is that the implication by the Washington Post democracy dies in darkness

asked for comment Shapiro and a post on x cast this story as part of the legacy media's coordinated attempt to destroy conservative media yes because that's what it clearly is when you come out of the story at the same exact time as the new times and both of your cribbing from the work of media matters and both of your lying about the purpose of your story of course it's an attempt to destroy conservative media one week out from an election

now I'm sorry I thwarted your little stupid plans to get you to shut down shows like this one five days before election I'm sorry they are little October surprise has fallen flat YouTube by the way to its credit has said this stuff is misinformation it doesn't violate our rules and so we are not going to ban it so good for you to but that doesn't mean that the attempt didn't happen and again this is all a broader part of the attempt by legacy media to

strangle in the crib any sort of competitive media and any social media structure that refuses to abide by its rules so the same Washington post ran a PC yesterday titled Elon Musk says ex users fight falsehoods the falsehoods are winning exes crowdsource fact checking program has been held as a bold idea for social media research shows it's failing at a critical moment

well well I mean if you've noticed community notes on x they're wonderful community notes one of the best features of access great for example give you a great community yesterday nicle is Christ off the awful columnist at the New York Times I know there many of them said that descriptor is not specific enough is a particular type of awful but

anyway nicle is Christ off he writes the following tweet yesterday a struggling Nevada mom suffers a miscarriage then the police show up and arrest her for manslaughter and she sentenced to 2.5 to 8 years in prison only when a pro bono lawyer steps up and appeals as a judge reverse the conviction and set her free to return to her children this is family values think about that as you vote okay so here is what the community notes then says one she smoked

methwell pregnant that is two crimes to her baby was well pass viability the autopsy said 28 to 32 weeks three she admitted she did it to kill the baby for law enforcement believes the baby was born alive and then killed five this is in 2018 before row is overturned so I mean that is a hell of a community note this is why community notes is great community notes allows the tweet to stay up and then the corrections to appear below it which is quite good

hey but the Washington Post is very angry because what they would really like is for the old Twitter regime to be in place where they just shut down anything they don't like where they ban Jordan Peterson for the crime of saying that boys are not girls where they shut off the reach of particular conservatives because they just don't like with those conservatives are saying that's what the Washington Post wants they want back their

information monopoly they want it so bad it's the most important thing to them because that information monopoly grants them also a market monopoly if social media allows for the dissemination of alternative viewpoints and these people are busy blowing the trust of the American people they lose the game and so the only way to restore their

profitability and to restore their business success is to shut down the opposition as the only way to restore it that's the entire game so they're trying to shut down X now they're trying to destroy X and its credibility the Washington Post says must has touted the crowdsourcing program called community notes as the best source of truth on the internet but the majority of accurate fact checks proposed by users on political

post are never shown to the public according to research from the nonprofit center for countering digital hate and a separate data analysis by the Washington Post by the way you can notice what the Washington Post is doing now they're going to left wing interest groups they're just cribbing their research and then and then duplicating the research as the newspaper

the consequences are potentially profound says the Washington Post false post on the service recently blamed by federal officials for hindering hurricane relief and X just poised to play a prominent role in the US presidential election now I noticed that the Washington Post was never particularly interested in policing social media when social media was shutting it was was shutting down the hundred by the laptop story

at the best of intelligence agencies and and lying intelligence officials and those they care so much about that they're busy dismissing the hundred by the laptop story themselves so this is not a pursuit of the truth this is a way of ripping Elon Musk and then blaming him preemptively should comela Harris fail and a lot of these stories are set up for that to a lot of these stories are set up for who do we blame if common loses who do we blame right it is amazing that we've reached the point American politics really over the course of the last three election cycles

it used to be when I was growing up and I think for most of American history before that if a candidate lost that candidate lost because they were considered worse than the other candidate

it was pretty simple logic if Al Gore lost to George Shalby Bush it's because Al Gore had failed because he was not a sufficient candidate in 2004 John Kerry lost because he was a bad candidate a worst candidate in George Shalby Bush in 2008 John McCain was a worst candidate than Barack Obama and yes in 2012 Mitt Romney was a worst candidate then Barack Obama

and then 2016 happened and it broke brains because Donald Trump was so widely considered a worst candidate then Hillary Clinton by members of the legacy media by by so many in the public mind because of that when she lost everybody including the legacy media decided she had not in fact lost because she was a worst candidate then then Trump

even though she certainly was a worst candidate than Trump they simply decided that it had to be some extraneous source that caused her to lose until even living in that bizarre

bizarre world for the last three election cycles and so already the Democrats are prepping their narrative if common loses it can't be the choose worse than Trump not possible she's intersectional she is a black woman there is no way she was worse than Trump then matter she is amazing at this she is Bratches joy she is energy and you will love it and if she loses who do we blame who do we blame well probably we ought to blame social media for allowing shows like this one to be aired probably a lot of blame Elon Musk for having bought X and freeing up X to allow for the decision to be made to be a

dissemination of alternative points of you can see there are a pre-planning their defeat who they blame into feet and it's gross and it's wrong and it's really dangerous for the country because it turns out that if you blame the sources of the dissemination of information for the failure of your candidate if you do that you end up cracking down on free speech turns out when the Washington Post says democracy dies in darkness they're the ones that turning out the light

or meanwhile as for the state of the race the answer right now is nobody knows anybody who's telling you the Donald Trump is clearly going to win this election is I think hoping and we like I can have a gut feeling my gut is the Trump wins but my gut doesn't mean anything what matters is that you need to go and vote if you're in a swing state do not be sang when about this if you're a swing state you need to vote your friends need to vote everybody needs to vote even if you're not in a swing state you should vote

if you think the Donald Trump will make a better president because he was a better president and Kamala Harris you should go vote that is a thing there are a lot of tea leaves out there nobody quite knows how to read them Harry Anton CNN's election analyst he's sort of been saying this he says like if Kamala wins there were some warning signs but he says if Trump wins there are a lot of warning signs as to why Trump is going to win

registration numbers here yeah Republicans have been registered voters in big huge numbers they have been gaining and party registration versus the Democrats in the swing states with party registration we're talking Arizona I think it's a five point they've expanded

the lead from five points from where it was back in 2020 how about Nevada big Republican registrations there they like the early vote how about North Carolina big Republican registration games how about Pennsylvania we spoke about it before a few months ago big Republican party registration gains versus where from where they were four years ago

so Republicans are putting more Republicans in the electorate the Democratic number versus the Republican number has shrunk and so the bottom line is if Republicans win come next week Donald Trump wins comes next week because the banks all along will have been obvious we would look at the right direction being very low Joe Biden's appropriating being very low and Republicans really registering numbers you can't say you weren't warned

Okay so here Anton saying it's quite plausible the Trump wins based on the data that you see however it is worth noting here again I put out these points of caution just so that you don't have bad election information. Nate Silver, who again, I think is the best election analyst in the business, he says that when you look at the early voting numbers, he says that doesn't reliably predict results. You're seeing a lot of this online right now.

You're seeing a lot of people say, hey, look at those Nevada early voting numbers. Republicans are killing it in the Nevada early vote. Or you're saying, look at those Pennsylvania early voting numbers. They're doing better than they did in 2020. Okay, but we don't actually know what that means. We don't actually know what that means. Why? Because it turns out that the early voting procedures are really new. It used to be we had election day in this country.

You only voted the day of the election unless you were a veteran overseas or something. If you are living in the modern era, however, like the last two election cycles, mail-in voting now constitutes an extraordinary percentage of the vote. And so does early voting. When you're talking at this point, maybe half of all votes are going to be cast before election day. So it's very difficult to gauge where those votes are coming from.

Well, it may be very difficult to toss out exactly what's happening with this election, but there's one thing that is perfectly obvious. The IRS is coming after you if you've already not paid your taxes or if the deadline passed and you didn't do what you need to do, do you owe back taxes? Are your tax returns still on file? Did you miss the deadline to file for an extension? Well, now that that October 15th is behind us, the IRS may be ramping up enforcement.

Let me tell you, they don't play around. You could face wage garnishment for some bank accounts, even property seizures if you haven't taken action yet. Here's the good news. There is still hope. Tax Network USA has been in this game for years. They know exactly how to navigate the complex world of tax law. They've helped taxpayers save over $1 billion in tax debt. They've filed over 10,000 tax returns.

That's billion with a B. Folks, they specialize in helping hardworking Americans like you reduce those tax burdens. So don't let the IRS catch you off guard and get ahead of this right now with tax network USA. Their team of professionals will work tirelessly to protect your assets and find the best solution for your unique situation. Here's what you need to do. For a complimentary consultation, call today 1-800-958-1000 or visit their website at tnusa.com slash Shapiro.

That's 1-800-958-1000 or visit tnusa.com slash Shapiro. Today, don't let the IRS take advantage of you. Get the help you need with tax network USA. Also, you may have noticed that while we are facing a pivotal moment in American history with the election next week, there is something legacy media won't tell you. And that, of course, that Israel is fighting for its very survival right now. It's facing attacks from enemies. I'm literally all sides. You've got Pizbollah in the North.

You've got Hamas in the South. You've got the Houthis from the South. You have the Iraqi militia. You have the Iranians directly. You have Syrian militia. A ton of horrible problems over there. Ordinary citizens, just like you and me, they've left their families to defend their homeland. These brave men and women have been injured fighting for their country's survival. Their families need our help.

That's precisely why I've partnered with my friends over the international fellowship of Christians and Jews. Right now, the fellowship is on the ground in Israel, providing real help, food, shelter, security to people who need it most. Just 45 bucks, less than the cost of a tank of gas, can help provide essential supplies to a soldier's family during this crisis. So here's what I need you to do right now. To bend for the fellowship.org, that's bend for the fellowship.org to make a gift today.

In the face of these many threats, the fellowships ongoing were providing security to Israelis has never been more important. Remember, bend for the fellowship.org, that's bend for the fellowship.org. God bless and thank you. So for example, very easy question. Let's hear Republicans are out early voting what they did last time. Are those new voters who are voting early or is that voters who would have voted day of who are voting early to get it out of the way?

In other words, are Republicans cannibalizing their election day voting in order to get those early votes? We don't know the answer to that. As Nate Silver says, these are not good baselines, especially coming after a COVID election. He says in 2016, the last non-COVID election, Michael McDonald was able to track down a partisan breakdown of early voting data in 13 states. Some of it is pretty wild stuff.

Democrats led the early vote in West Virginia by 12 points, but Trump eventually won the state by more than 40. More Republicans than Democrats voted early in Colorado, but Hillary Clinton won there. More states can produce surprisingly different patterns. He says early vote returns are highly non-productive of election outcomes. On average, the D less R margin in the early vote mispredicted the final Clinton Trump margin by 14 points in 2016. So it could just be wrong.

Also it may be that all of this is accounted for by polls because it turns out that early voting is not a poll. It is just a count of a select group of people who are voting early. And we also know who anyone actually voted for. Like when they say there's an early vote, what they are looking at is the number of registered Republicans who voted early versus the number of Democrats who voted early. But that doesn't mean they necessarily voted Republican or Democrat.

They could have switched parties, for example. So it's not totally clear that party ID totally correlates with who you voted for. And finally, as Nate Silver points out, predictions based on the early vote have a really, really bad track record. So he says, you're probably better off ignoring the early vote almost entirely with the possible exception from John Ralston in Nevada to mention the Nevada early vote for Republicans are doing better in the early vote than they were expected to by far.

But he says generally, don't look at the early vote as predictive. What does that mean? It means get your ass out to vote. That's what that really means. Now with that said, apparently, there, I just warn you not to look at the early vote. Now I'm going to look at the early vote a little bit. So political has appeased today saying that Democrats are fretting over the early vote in North Carolina.

Today, that early vote numbers in North Carolina showed the electorate skewing older and wider compared to the state's voter registration. Red flag for Democrats who need black voters to turn out in heavy numbers if Kamala Harris is going to flip the state. By the way, if that's indicative of national trends, that's a serious problem for Kamala Harris. Take Pennsylvania, for example, in Pennsylvania, most of the state just territoryally is red. And then you got Philly, right?

Philly is a huge population center, very, very large black population. Democrats need heavy black turnout in the Philadelphia area if they are going to win that election. Are they going to get it? Well, I mean, hard to say. If black turnout in North Carolina is low, is that indicative of a national trend of black turnout being lower than expected? As of Wednesday, according to political, black voters in North Carolina make up 18% of the electorate in early voting.

Democratic operatives say they have to bump that up to about 20% for Harris to even be competitive, statewide. In 2020, black voters were 19% of the electorate and Trump nearly won the state. So again, very early, too early to tell. However, there are reasons probably for both parties to be a little bit worried at this point. Obviously nobody should be sanguine about the state of the race.

When joining the line is Brent Buchan, his president and founder of Signal and International Public Opinion Pulling and Analytics firm, and of course, 538, the New York Times, they've recognized Signal as the most accurate private pulling firm in the United States. Brent, thanks so much for the time to really appreciate it. Hey, great to be with you, Ben. Okay, so let's get right down to it. What is the state of the race right now? I mean, it's the only question anybody really cares about.

Obviously, who's for sure going to win, Brent? Who's for sure going to win? Oh, what race are you talking about? Is there one going on? And I say that jokingly because there is a segment of the population that actually has that thought right now.

And it's hard to think for those of us who are in the bubble and we do and think about this every day and we live in brief politics to think that there are Americans who have decided to pick their head up and say, oh, I guess there is a race going on and I should pay attention to this. And they're not an insignificant group of the population. Our recent national poll showed that it's about 6% of Americans fall within this category.

And so when people say everything's going to come down to turnout, what they actually mean is are those people going to show up or are they not going to show up? Because many folks and we just did a focus group with y'all in the two most important counties in Pennsylvania that have picked the correct election when they're going back to Obama's first election.

And that was the sentiment on that group of persuatable voters was it was not necessarily like I'm definitely going to vote for this candidate. It's like if I decide to show up, I'm going to vote for that candidate. So I know that's a long intro to it, but I think that like people don't think about that enough of these individuals who may or may not show up. They're really not paying attention. And if you're looking at some of this early vote data, it definitely looks good for Republicans.

But what we've seen is that there's also a large chunk of young male moderate voters who would vote for Trump if they show up too. So my long-winded answer is I would say it's a complete toss up still with a slight Trump edge. Yeah, so when you look at all of that, it is kind of amazing how the narratives can be built up on the right that Trump is for sure going to win. The narrative has been built up on the left that Harris is almost certainly going to win.

What's weird about this election is that typically the line from Republicans has been that if it's a low turnout election Republicans do better and if it's a high turnout election Democrats do better. And it seems like this year that's completely reverse that Trump really needs low propensity voters to show up and Democrats are really counting heavily on high propensity voters. And the question really is who's going to show?

Yeah, I would say the narrative is probably actually somewhere in between there, where if it was a very low turnout, it would actually benefit Democrats. If it was a super high turnout, it would benefit Democrats and Trump actually needs it to land somewhere in the middle, but in the like further up the right end of that curve. And so the perfect scenario for him is somewhere in between 16 and 20 turnout levels.

So when you look at the swing states and obviously this thing is going to come down to just a handful of states at this point, yeah, it looks like Trump has enough momentum in Georgia and Arizona that he likely carries it over the finish line in those particular states. North Carolina, Harris seems to have more hopes in North Carolina, although again, I'm a little more skeptical.

So that means that if you had to gamble at this point, you'd probably say it comes down once again to the blue wall states, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, each one of those isn't just close in terms of the presidential race. They're very, very close in terms of the Senate races. One of the questions I have about the polling here and it's it is how much are the poll stars grouping, right? You're not seeing any outlier polls, which is which is weird to me.

Like why is every why is every top line result the same with widely variant with widely variant, you know, down the breakdowns? You have a widely different breakdown of what the likely voter screen looks like. And then the top line looks exactly the same. Are these just poll stars for sort of grouping because they're trying to be careful not to give an out of the box answer and then get blamed if they're wrong? I've had the exact same question of why is everything coming in 47, 46, 46, 47?

And then when you go look under the hood, which is what I always recommend people do on public polling first is start at the bottom is the partisan break, right? If they ask to you voted for in 2020, like does that make sense? And they have similar top line numbers and you're exactly right. The under the hood doesn't look the same.

And I can't remember an election where there has been so much grouping in this like race tide where everybody wants to say the race is tied so they can say that they're all correct. You know, we're currently in the field and in six of the battleground states to get our own answer on that because we just don't understand how these races are so close in states that historically have not pulled close. You know, Wisconsin was a slight Trump loss last time. It was a slight Trump win in 16.

And like I just don't believe any poll that comes out that has him up by four or down by four. But I also don't believe that it's like net even tied because there's been no polling scenario in Wisconsin, which has a trash voter file that has ever showed it tied. And so it seems like they're pulling these levers to make it look a certain way. And again, it does come to turnout and people are making assumptions in the turnout audiences for their polls.

But I just I can't for the life of me, fat, and why you have all this grouping like you said. So when it comes to election night and I know you're going to be with us election nights help us break it down. Now, what are the early things that people should be looking for as indicators as to how the election is going? I know Democrats seem to be worried a little bit about the early voting stats for black voters in North Carolina.

If those come in really low, you know, is that an indicator for black turnout in places like Philadelphia? What are your early sort of flags as to which way the election is going? I think too much is being read into early votes statistics already. The only thing that we can take away from the early vote numbers thus far is that more Republicans have voted earlier than they have in the past. And anything beyond that is guessing.

And because what normally happens is older educated, more educated people vote early. And those are also the most likely people to defect from a, you know, they're a Republican, but they're going to vote for Harris. And so we're trying not to read too much into it, though, following it. So what we're going to be looking for is who are the states that report early and even. And I think Georgia is going to be one of our best indicators this year.

Secretary, State Rathonsberger has said that they're not going to do ballot don'ts, which was a really frustrating part of trying to follow the 2020 election in a lot of states. Georgia specifically where, you know, it looked like Trump was up by three and then you'd have 400,000 ballots be counted and added to the total. So there's a lot of states that have also had changed their laws and allowed for more pre-processing of ballots prior to election day.

So I expect we're going to have a bit smoother, you know, first couple hours of the election. But I'm definitely going to be watching Georgia. I'm going to be looking at Northampton and Eerie counties in Pennsylvania. But are the numbers looking like there because they again have picked the right winners for going all the way back to Obama's first term as the race swap back from fourth to Republican Democrat. But the biggest thing is that the out West states have such heavy mail voting and MAIL.

And they don't pre-process those ballots. I mean, we may be sitting on pins and needles at two o'clock in the morning, waiting on like some of the first data from Arizona as an example. Well, the election's a mess. Brent Buchanan's here to break it all down. Really appreciate the time we'll see you on election night. This Brent Buchanan president and founder of Signal, the most accurate private polling firm in the country brand. Appreciate it. Hey, thanks, man.

Well, because this race is so unbelievably tight and it really, really is tight. Every small mistake makes a difference at this point, which is why Joe Biden the other day, obviously and clearly saying that Trump supporters are garbage, which is what he said. There was no apostrophe. He wasn't unclear about it. He said, Trump supporters are garbage. That is a problem. It's not a problem for swing voters. I don't think that a lot of swing voters are like, you know what?

I was thinking about Kamala, but now that Biden called Trump supporters trash, I'm not, can't do it. Pull them love for Trump. It's not about that. It's about those marginal Trump voters who kind of like Trump or think about voting for him. Maybe don't vote all that often. Now they're pissed off. So that is a turnout machine for Republicans. That Biden comment is a turnout machine for Republicans, which is why Democrats are freaking out over the fact that old Joe said it.

So yesterday here was Karin Jean-Pierre lying from the podium of the White House, explaining that he'd actually called Trump supporters garbage. Who are you going to believe? Your eyes and ears? Or me? Karin Jean-Pierre, world's worst press secretary. Does he think less of Americans who support Trump than he does of those who do not? And too, why is he using that kind of rhetoric? How is that presidential? Well, so a couple of things, a couple of things.

So just to clarify, he was not calling Trump supporters garbage, which is why he put out. This is why he wanted to make sure that we put out a statement that clarified what he meant and what he was trying to say. And so just want to make that very clear for folks who are watching. And I just want to read that out to folks. So he was regarding to the comedian. And I quote, I refer to the hateful rhetoric about Puerto Rico spewed by Trump's supporter at his Madison Square Garden rally as garbage.

So she's lying, obviously. Kamala Harris had to dissociate from those comments yesterday. It was kind of awkward for her. I'm not sure what Kamala Harris' compulsion has been since the start of this election cycle where she was kind of tossed in place of Joe Biden. I understand why she's been unable to simply dissociate from Biden. That had been the easiest movement politics. They should have asked her and many people did ask her what differentiates you from Biden.

She said, listen, I agree with Joe on a lot. I'm privileged that he made me as vice president. However, I thought that we got it wrong on the border. And that is something that I've worked hard to correct and will work hard to correct his president. She could do that and she could throw Joe under the bus. She's avoided doing so thus far, probably because she thinks Joe's going to throw her on the bus. Well, now all bets are off. It's too close to the election.

She was yesterday trying to dissociate from the Biden garbage comments. I think that, first of all, he clarified his comments. But let me be clear, I strongly disagree with any criticism of people based on who they vote for. As you heard in my speech last night and continuously throughout my career, I believe that the work that I do is about representing all the people, whether they support me or not.

And as president of the United States, I will be a president for all Americans, whether you vote for me or not. That is my responsibility. And that's the kind of work that I've done my entire career and I take it very seriously. Okay, the last part of that is a total lie that the work that she has done is to unify Americans. I don't know. Throne pro-life person doesn't seem like unifying Americans saying literally last week, there should be no religious exemptions with regard to abortion.

That seems to me like a pretty divisive view. Offering giveaways based on race. That seems kind of divisive, Kamala Harris. Making room for the pro-chamaos next at the table. A little divisive. She doesn't seem like a president for all Americans to me. She was asked if she had sympathy for Trump voters who are being demonized this way and she sort of skated around a bit. She sympathized with any voters who do feel offended by or insulted by the garbage coming.

I am running for president of the United States. I will be traveling to three states today to do what I have been doing throughout. She's going to do what we have always been doing throughout and for the future and for all of time in the context of that which we most believe. Ooh, she's bad at this.

The big problem for Kamala Harris that no one believes truly, no one believes that the modern Democratic Party, which has labeled Donald Trump a Nazi and is labeled as supporters Nazis, is actually sympathetic to Donald Trump supporters. No one believes this.

We've had three straight election cycles for actually, if you go all the way back to 2008, in which the Democrats, sorry, five, right, 2008, 2012, 2016, 2020 and 2020, we have five straight election cycles in which the Democratic candidate for president has demonized the other side. Five straight, right, 2008 or Barack Obama called them bitter clingers. And then in 2012, he sort of doubled down, if not on the language, then certainly on the attitude.

In 2016, Hillary Clinton called everybody deplorable. In 2020, Joe Biden suggested that ultra bad super maga was ultra bad traitorous. And then he did that as president. And now you have Joe Biden suggesting that Trump supporters are garbage. So it turns out that Democrats really don't like their opposition very much and they don't like any of the people who vote for those people. Now, there's a big distinction in politics truly.

When Trump, people keep saying that Trump has said something like everyone who votes for Kamala's human scum, he has not said that. He has not remotely said that. What he actually said, he called his political opponents, you know, I don't love that kind of language with regard to like the actual political opponents that you have. I don't think the Trump should call Kamala Harris human scum. That's a little much for me.

However, he never said that everyone who votes for Kamala Harris is human scum. He's never implied that. Okay, but Joe Biden just said that out loud about the Trump supporters. Right, he just said right out loud that they are garbage, Trump supporters, his words, not mine. And again, this is the big problem for Democrats. Many of them believe this to be true.

Here for example, is Charlomaine at the God who two days ago was interviewing Kamala Harris saying, well, if you support Trump's rhetoric, you are garbage. I don't understand why he's walking that back because I mean, based off the examples he gave, like if you, if you, if you are a person who supports those examples that he gave, you are garbage. Okay, well, I mean, nobody supports the examples that he gave the Tony Hinchcliffe example, including Donald Trump. So, he's talking about precisely.

And of course, it's not unique to Charlolaine. CNN panelist Daniela Gibbs-Lijey. She says, you know, I don't even care what Joe Biden says because Trump's such a bean bad, very, very bad me man. Look, President Biden has a long history of making gaps. It's not a surprise. He's not on a ballot. And I think her comments were spot on. That's not how she talks. She always is about being inclusive and being a president for the American people.

So I understand why the Trump campaign is trying to make this a thing. But please miss me with the outrage from the man who consistently demeans and denigrates the American people since 2015. Please. I'm sorry. Like enough. Okay, bye. Donald Trump has in fact responded to the Joe Biden garbage comments in the funniest possible way. Troll level 1000. He did it. The absolute madman. We get to that in just one moment. First, it is Halloween and Matt Walsh's tricks against the left and am I racist?

Are your treat over at DW plus? I know you're thinking. Is that my racist really a Halloween movie? The answer, of course, is absolutely. First of all, release in theaters Friday the 13th. Matt Walsh is in such a great disguise. No one from the left could even recognize him. The top it all off, the left is terrified of it. Sounds like a Halloween movie to me. Plus, it's the number one documentary of the decade and the biggest opening day movie in daily wire history.

Best of all, it's available right now for you exclusively at Daily Wire Plus. So here's the plan. Take the kids trick or treating, grab some of their candy for yourself, watch Matt Walsh's cultural phenomenon, am I racist now at Daily Wire Plus? If you're not a Daily Wire Plus member, you've got another treat for you. Take 35% off new Daily Wire Plus memberships with code DEI at miracist.com. Use code DEI for 35% off your new annual membership.

So you got to say the Donald Trump, this is a dude who's having fun on the campaign trail. So after Joe Biden's Trump supporters are garbage comment. I don't know who is in the room to set this up. Trump will tell us the story in a moment. But he decided to get a garbage truck, slap a Trump label on the side of it, get on an orange garbage man vest, and then do a presser from a garbage truck in Green Bay, Wisconsin. Yeah, honestly, I got to love it. Yeah, I love it. This here's the thing.

Donald Trump, there's a side of Americans that is just super corny and super cheesy and Donald Trump loves that side of Americans. He loves them. Right? Really? This is why Donald Trump wears the big red tie. This is why he knows image. Donald Trump, the reason that he put on McDonald's uniform and was having fun handing out fries is because he understands that most Americans like that stuff. They find it funny and they find it charming and it's kind of hilarious.

And also like, you know what other things Americans like? They likely greenwood. So he plays it as rallies. You know what else they like? They like Frank Sinatra. So I play Sinatra doing my way. All the stuff that you consider cheesy because we live in an ironic era and a post authenticity era because of all of that. Trump, he totally counter programs that right? The original mag I had, I remember commenting on this at the time. Here's the thing about the mag I had. It's super ugly.

Like just aesthetically, it is an ugly hat, right? It is a red hat that is constructed like it's from a family reunion you had with your extended relations in Minnesota in 1997. Okay, the original mag I had was like Styrofoam and even had like a string across the front. And you know what? People love that stuff. They do because it's kind of Americana. Donald Trump is Americana man. There is nothing that says Donald Trump more than Americana. Here he was.

This is like perfect American Donald Trump inside the truck. Here in the garbage man vest, do an oppressor explaining why he likes Americans. 250 million people, that's what I think the real number is for making America great again. 250 million, the real number. They don't think in terms of garbage. Okay, they don't use terms like that and it's a shame. And Joe Biden should be ashamed of himself. If he knows what he's even doing and she should be ashamed because she shouldn't let him do it.

He's a nice president, but I assume she's acting as the president. She should never have let that happen. I hope you enjoyed this garbage truck. Thank you very much. And then Trump goes and he does a rally and he just leaves the vest on. He just leaves it on. There's the whole rally in the garbage man vest, which is great. Okay, here's the thing.

Nobody believes that Donald Trump gave up his job as the presidential candidate and as the head of the Trump organization, all of that to be a garbage man. No one believes that. The whole point is he's not embarrassed to put on the garbage man vest. He doesn't find that embarrassing. In the way, Kamala Harris would be embarrassed to do that. Why? Because she'd like in the back of her mind, she'd like, well, garbage man. You know, is that a real job? I don't know.

It's not a real job like community organizer. It's like Trump likes those kinds of people. He's always like those kind of people. He likes blue collar people, which is why blue collar people like him. So here he was yesterday explaining how this whole stunt came to be. And one of my people came and said, sir, you know, the word garbage is the hottest thing right now out there. The hottest thing out there, sir, would you like to drive a garbage truck?

Now, we're about, you know, 30 minutes from landing. We had to do this pretty quick. I said, it's not a cool, though, isn't it? Because, you know, and I said, you know, I think that's okay. But, you know, I don't feel comfortable wearing a suit. And they pulled up this garbage truck. I don't know how the hell they did it so fast. I have very capable people. They put a big sign on the truck. Did you see it? I think they saw it. And then they said, sir, we have a vest.

I said, well, should I leave my suit on and put it over the vest, but that doesn't look very good, right? That doesn't look good. So I said, look, let me take it off. And then I actually said, I climbed into the truck, but he said, so I said, how the hell do you get into the truck? It's way up high. It's a big one. This was a beauty. I said, you didn't have to buy it that big, right? You have to get it that big. I'm sorry. This genuine and not so authentic. And it's super, super funny.

And here's the thing, right? The final point for Trump on this is the right one, which is the reason that he can get away with this is because he actually likes people. And Donald Trump likes people. I've been on the trail with him. I've seen him interact with humans. Donald Trump likes humans. Kamala Harris looks like she has never even met a human. She lives in the uncanny valley with all of the other NPCs. She doesn't feel authentic. She doesn't feel human. And she doesn't really like people.

She just get the impression that she's not a part. She had to have her a herseled dinner just to do a donor dinner a few years ago. But they had to get her drunk just so she could get used to downing a couple of glass and wine being a normie. And here is Donald Trump pointing out you cannot lead America if you don't love Americans. And I have to begin by saying 250 million Americans are not garbage.

This week Kamala has been comparing her political opponents to the most evil mass murderers in history. And now speaking on a call for her campaign last night, Crookajobite and finally said, what he and Kamala really think of our supporters, he called them garbage no way. No way. And they actually mean it even though without question. My supporters are far higher quality than Crookajobite or Lion Kamala. Higher quality. My response to Joe and Kamala is very simple.

You can't lead America if you don't love Americans. That's true. You can't be president if you hate the American people, which I believe they do. And contrast that with Kamala Harris. So yesterday somebody put together a compendium of the speeches that she's been making on this stuff. And listen, I sympathize. I've seen a lot of politicians, particularly the selection cycle, and you got to go and you got to tell the same story over and over and over.

But if you're doing these big rallies, you should be able to mix it up. She's a totally phony, inauthentic politician. She always has been. Here are eight separate Kamala Harris speeches in which she says word for word the same thing with the same cadence. It's never again. Stand behind the wheel. Up the wheel. Never again. Never again. Never again. Eight separate rallies. Exact same warning. Exact same hand motions. Exact same. Exact same emotional affect. She's an NPC, guys. I'm sorry.

She's like the AI candidate, but the AI ain't perfect yet. It ain't that good. She also happens to be a liar. So here she was on the campaign trail yesterday just lying about everything Donald Trump has said about policy. Donald Trump's not done. He would ban abortion nationwide. Yes, even here in Pennsylvania, if he were successful. He would restrict access to birth control, put IVF treatments at risk, and forced states to monitor women's pregnancies.

Just Google project 2025. Read the plans for yourself. It's not project 2025. It's not banning abortion. It's not banning IVF. It's just nonsense. It's just nonsense. The thing is that in the selection, one of the big factors is which one is more authentic. That is a real thing. Trump is more authentic. And by the way, I'm sorry, they're attempted authenticity, which was bring Tim Walls off the bench. That's been a giant fail. Let me demonstrate for you what a fail to Walls is.

This is footage of him from the end of a rally yesterday that he did with Kamala Harris. Even Kamala Harris is irritated. By the fact that this guy is a bizarre world, wild-handed, insane person, escapee from a mental asylum. Here we go. For those who can't see, he's doing his manic hand clapping. And then he's like raising his hands, he's kicking his feet. He can't stand still. Honestly, he's getting 80 HD child.

Tim Walls waving his hand all loose, risted, waving, and pointing at people, doing weird things to his feet. And Kamala Harris is like, why am I with this weirdo? Why didn't I pick Josh Shapiro? And he's waving to the crowd. He just keeps waving. And eventually, she taps him on the opposite. Let's go. And then he turns around and keeps doing it. And he turns around and says, Tim, why are you still doing this? What are you doing? That's your pick. Solid job, guys. Really, really solid job.

Okay, well, yesterday we had the opportunity to sit down with the governor Ron DeSantis of Florida. There are two big ballot initiatives that are coming up here in Florida. It's a good window into what Democrats are trying to do nationally. Here is a bit of what we talked about yesterday. I'm here with Governor Ron DeSantis. Governor, thanks so much for stopping by. Really appreciate it. No, it's great to be here. I'm glad you got a nice Southern command down here.

You're not the first one to do it, but you've been doing really well down here. It kind of reminds me Rush had a place in West Palm, so congrats. Exactly. Well, you've drawn a lot of us here. And I want to talk about that. You're a governance style. And the fact that you've been able to change things here, but there are two big amendments on the ballot this year in the state of Florida.

They do have sort of national ramifications because whether Florida becomes a swing state or not, again, that's obviously been a democratic dream. Things have changed pretty radically down here in terms of voter registration. These two amendments are an attempt by Democrats largely in the state to regain some sort of mojo. Let's talk about the amendments on the ballot. So let's start with amendment four.

Amendment four is an attempt to claw back the heartbeat bill that you passed in the state legislature that essentially guarantees the rights of life of kids beyond fetal heartbeat. And what does amendment four do? Because I think there's been a lot of... Well, I think it does more than that. So I always tell voters, how did these amendments get here? You should... So this is the left, Soros, Planned Parenthood, 1630 Fund, which has foreign money. They've done $120 million.

And what they're doing is they provide a very opaque amendment. No definitions on any of this stuff. So we really don't know what some of this stuff will do. They obviously will want to have a very aggressive left-wing posture. No limits on when an abortion could be performed. It says viability, which they say would be about 26 weeks, which would mean six months in, you can have a fully formed baby, can feel pain, sucking its thumb, heartbeat. And for no reason at all can just be snuffed out.

But if you read beyond that, the way the amendments written, it really has an exception that Swalos the Rule, because it says an abortion could be performed at any time. If the quote, healthcare provider themes it's necessary to protect patient health, they do not define patient health. And we know the left would include things like mental health, which would basically mean a non-physician could green light an abortion at any moment of birth. It also eliminates parental consent for minors.

And they do it in a very underhanded way, because they say nothing can infringe on the right of the legislature to require parental notification. So people see that, oh, parents rights. But that clause back what we have in law now, which is consent. So you'll have this odd thing in Florida where they can send you a notice and say, oh, yeah, your kid is at an abortion clinic across the state. There's a non-physician that's recommending a late term abortion.

Just thought you'd like to know that without any parent involvement, you would not be able to prescribe a Tylenol to a minor without parental consent. But somehow a minor could get a late term abortion without parental consent. And then the final thing is tricky about this. It doesn't say it in there, but they did the similar thing in Michigan. They passed these things. Then they run into court and say, oh, taxpayers are required to fund the abortions because this is a constitutional right.

So that will happen in Florida. They will go try to find a liberal judge and then get taxpayers to try to fund this. And so this is the left. It's ideology, but it's also a business. Southeast part of the United States, all the states from Texas, South Carolina have pro-life laws in place. So if this passes in Florida, we will be the epicenter of abortion nationwide. And we would have one of the most radical pro-abortion regimes, not just in the United States, but in the world.

And in fact, I think it would be worse than California, Colorado, some of the nine month states because this healthcare provider, you know, people that aren't pro-life and I have a lot of friends who aren't. What they will say is, look, they don't like abortion. They think it should be rare, but they don't support legal protections for the unborn. Because they think that that should be resolved by the woman, mother, and the doctor, mother and the doctor.

Healthcare provider does not need to be a physician. So you are opening up a can of worms and why would they do that? Because I have some people who will read that, they're like, oh my gosh, that's appalling. Why is that language money? They will be able to run bootleg abortion clinics.

They will not have to have physicians on staff overseeing and they will make a lot more money and they will be bringing people in from Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, all converging in Florida so that they can prop up a failing business model. It's important for people also to know groups like Planned Parenthood, they're not only involved in abortion on demand. They're doing the gender surgeries. That's a big part of their business model now.

So all this money and potentially taxpayer money will go into that. So if you're pro-life, this is an easy no vote. But even if you're not, I haven't met very many people who think that there should be no limitations at all and that parental consent should be revoked and that non-physicians should be empowered to green light abortions up until the moment of birth. As you mentioned, I mean, the overreach is so dramatic in amendment four, but they've really been obscuring what amendment four says.

I mean, I originally characterized as a clawback, but as you say, it's not a clawback. It is way beyond the boundaries of where prior Florida law was even before the state legislature issued new rules on abortion. You mentioned money, what are the political reasons why you think they're going so extreme here? Well, here's the thing. Well, because I just think that they would never do anything more modest.

But it's interesting because they have a certain playbook that they've run around the country and usually they overpower their ways with ads. We fought back, I think, effectively. But in Florida, they're saying, if someone is raped, well, our heartbeat law has an exception for rape. They talk about it. We have an exception for incest. They talk about life and health of the mother.

We have that in the law and then they'll say if someone has a miscarriage, they would be denied care to the contrary. Not only is that obviously not prevented in Florida, a doctor would be committing malpractice if he said they couldn't treat you because of a misunderstanding of Florida law. So everything they're doing to attack Florida law is actually not in our law. They're not even running ads saying a heartbeat is too short of time. It should be extended.

That would be at least a debate that was based in fact, if that was their position. They're running on all these things that are not in Florida law, just because they know those would be unpopular if they are, but they're not. And I think that that's very telling. So this is just a regime that they want. They'll make money. They'll have political power. And you mentioned, look, this is just wrong. I mean, it's wrong to take away parents' rights.

It's wrong to have a fully formed baby snuffed out for no reason, six months, eight months, nine months. Because the media doesn't like to acknowledge this, but there are tens of thousands of late term abortions that happen in this country and the majority are elective. They are not for medical reasons. And so that would happen in Florida and people think it's wrong.

But I also from the political perspective, because you did mention it, when I got elected governor in 2018, we had 300,000 more registered Democrats in Florida than Republicans. We were the top swing state. The state had never had more registered Republicans and Democrats. Four years later, I'm running for reelection, we flipped it. We had 300,000 more registered Republicans in the 2022 election. And Democrats obviously we had a big red wave that year. Interesting.

Since at that time when we did the heartbeat bill, we've gone from 300,000 more to 1.1 million more. And so what's happened, I think, is people that are moving here, they're drawn because we have conservative policy that works. Some of the liberals may not like that because we have conservative policy that works, which is fine, but we've really created a situation. So if amendment four passes, you have taxpayer funded abortion on demand.

And then amendment three passage, I know you want to talk about a minute words, basically public consumption of weed everywhere. That is going to start to turn Florida in the other direction politically. There's just no way around it. So let's talk about amendment three. Amendment three is an amendment that would essentially legalize marijuana across the state. But it would do a lot more than just legalize marijuana. The actual practice would make it effectively on nearly every street corner.

If I'm reading the amendment correctly, might you characterize exactly what this thing says? Well, again, how did this get here, right? Start started for, because I tell people that when you're on these constitutional amendments, it's not like an ordinance in a city or a county or even a law that the legislature passed. When it's in the Constitution, it's done. The legislature cannot amend a constitutional provision through the normal political process.

So in reality, it's taking the issue away from the people and the political process and saying it's out of bounds indefinitely. And the only way to be able to address another constitutional amendment, which just doesn't happen. So when in doubt, vote no. If you're not convinced that this is going to be good, you vote no. So how did amendment three come? It came because of one mega marijuana corporation. It was written by the CEO of the corporation.

That corporation has put in $140 million into passing amendment three. And they say, well, we want safe and regulated marijuana, just be clear. We have that in Florida. We have medical marijuana program that the voters approved. I implemented it. We have almost a million people in Florida that have these cards. Do you think all million have some debilitating condition? I mean, the notion that people that really want marijuana in Florida can't get it is absurd.

Now we don't have it overrunning all our public places for good reason. So we don't want that. Nobody is in a federal or in a state prison in our state prison system for using or possessing personal amounts of marijuana. They'll also say people shouldn't be rotting in prison. They're not. And I agree. And they're not. So that's the context of what they're trying to do. Some will say, hey, free state of Florida. I don't care if people do whatever. Just understand this isn't about freedom.

They are giving a constitutional right to possess and use up to three ounces, which is about 100 joints way more than California and Colorado. But only if you buy it from them. They do not provide you with the right to grow your own marijuana. So they are creating this corporate cartel where they will be empowered to sell you weed. But it only be the select companies that have these licenses.

And what will happen is the incumbent companies will basically become monopolist because they have the head start on everything. But it's probably the most galle, and then so it's not about freedom because they don't want you to grow your own. But it's also, you got to respect the freedom of Floridians who don't want to be involved in marijuana to live their life. But they have no limitation on use publicly of marijuana. We've seen Denver, San Francisco, Manhattan. It's everywhere.

But those areas actually have some restrictions. It's just not enforced. This is not providing any ability to reign in the public use of marijuana. So it'd be in the beaches, the parks, the streets, the cities, restaurant. It also the way it's written. It's providing a constitutional right to smoke, which has not ever been done. So if you're in a restaurant, can the restaurant owner tell you to leave it's your constitutional right?

The way it's written, it's not just saying the legislature shall make no law. It's basically saying you can't even have a civil lawsuit if you're smoking it. So I think it probably applies to private parties as well, which would throw a lot of businesses into turmoil. But here's the thing. And so I think you have a right to not have marijuana in your life if you don't want it. And a lot of people say, what do we care if people use it at the privacy of your home?

I honestly don't care about that, but I know this amendment will bring it out into all the public spaces. The most galling thing though about it. If you read, so the amendment, when people look at it, they get a ballot summary. That's what you see. You don't see the actual text of the amendment on your ballot. So you got to go, you got to look it up, you got to read it.

And the ballot summary doesn't tell you this amendment gives the companies total immunity from criminal, civil liability, or sanctions under Florida law. Think it immunity, no exceptions, read it for yourself. So what that means is as they sell you defective marijuana, something goes wrong, you can't sue them. And it applies to all aspects of business, including distribution, manufacturing, selling, processing, cultivating, acquiring.

So if they're driving marijuana and one of their trucks through dispensary and they run you over, you can't sue them. This is a blanket immunity shield. That's never been done before. But that's why. This is about corporate weed taking over Florida. So if you're against weed, obviously you vote no. If you're indifferent to weed, you got to vote no because this is a horribly written amendment. But even if you like weed, you will not be able to grow it in your backyard. They'll make sure of that.

You got to buy it from them and then they're protecting themselves if they do you harm, not appropriate to put in a constitution. Yeah, there are other states that have attempted something similar and the lie that's told is that this will get rid of illegal weed. That everybody will then just go buy illegally because there'll be pot dispensaries that you'll be able to access. But the reality in pretty much all those other states is that's exactly not what happens.

That it turns out that once you have monopoly pricing on things like weed, people just go out on the streets and obtain exactly the kinds of illegal weed they were before with all of the attendant danger. So even the things that supposedly it's going to protect against, it actually doesn't do anything about this. Clearly the black market in Colorado, California has grown dramatically since they've gone down this road. And look when Colorado did it, this was kind of the big experiment.

It was potentially a valid argument that maybe you would get rid of it. No one really knew, right? But what happens is when you regulate and tax it, it raises the price. The man increases because people are using it everywhere. And so the black market can undercut and they can capture massive market share. And that's exactly what's happened. So you will have more black market marijuana in Florida if this passes. There's no question.

And then they're running commercials, the company that's funding all this. There's going to be a windfall for education, funding for cops and everything like that. There's nothing in the text of the amendment that allocates any money to education where we heard this before. But here's the thing. Colorado, they did tax it. I think they made some money for a short while. They don't make any money anymore off of it. A lot of their agencies had been planning on the money and it hasn't come in.

So this is not something that will be beneficial physically. And also with Florida, we don't need it. We have a massive budget surplus. Just since I became governor, all the debt in Florida's history, we've paid off 36%. We have the lowest per capita debt in the country. Second lowest per capita state taxes. Our budget this year actually spent less than last year's budget. So we have the smallest state government per capita in the country in terms of employees. So we don't need weed money.

I don't think it would be there in the medium term, maybe a little bit in the short term and it'd be a relatively small amount. But that is really a red herring in terms of, oh, this is going to be such a fiscal boom. And for folks who haven't visited Denver recently or visited Los Angeles, I was in Los Angeles my family a couple of weeks ago. You literally cannot walk down the street anywhere in Los Angeles without smelling weed. It's just not possible.

And that's also true in Denver and a bunch of other major cities around the country that have tried precisely this year. And here's the thing. And not in a lot of those places, they do have laws on the books that say you can't do it. So this was written in a way to benefit the one weed company. So I understand why they wrote it this way. But even if they would have said, you know, this shouldn't be used in public, it's hard to enforce it because it just overwhelms once you do.

And then when you're talking about it being a constitutional right, law enforcement is not going to want to mess with that. So whatever's happened in Denver, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Manhattan, that will happen in Florida on steroids and our culture is a tourism culture. You know, we would change the character of the people that visit here, be less family friendly. I think there'd be more marijuana tourism. I don't think that would be good ultimately for our economy and our industry.

Governor Dutans, I would be remiss for the week before the national election. If I didn't ask you about what I think is what you think is going to happen in the national election on Tuesday, what are the big obstacles you see to a Trump victory? And do you think the president Trump is on track right now to win? So I think that we have an administration that has failed. And the public, you see that? They think the country's on the wrong track. They give Joe Biden very low marks.

And so the Democrats are running the vice president from that administration. So she's running as claiming she's the change agent, but yet she can't identify what she would have done different since Biden's been in. Could she not even acknowledge their border policy has failed? And she not acknowledged that it would have been better not to have 13 American service members killed in Afghanistan. Can she acknowledge anything? So she doesn't acknowledge that.

And so somehow we're expected to think that she's going to be this positive change agent. And I think what happened, and I warned people that Biden was going to be replaced. I mean, I thought that was true for a long time. But after that debate, the first debate with Trump, I said Biden's gone. It's just a matter of when. And some people say, oh, it's too late.

The money, I was like, no. However, it is they're going to get showered with money and she's raised more money than anyone's ever raised. But the media is going to do hundreds of millions of dollars in positive press. And so to me, the election would ultimately hinge on that is going to be the biggest gas lighting operation in American history. And the question is, is that going to be enough to get her or will people start to see who the real Kamala Harris is?

And I think that every interview she gives, every time she can, when she does her word salads, more and more people say, you know, she's just not up to the job. And so I think in terms of the commander in chief test, they throw all these invectives at Trump. But he was president. Like, it's one thing if he hadn't been president and you're going to try to say he's going to be the second coming of Aida Hitler. I mean, obviously that wouldn't be credible. But he was president for four years.

Okay, people can look at the record. And there's a lot of Americans that think that's better than what we've had. And if you don't like it, that's fine. But they're missing the mark, I think, on some of this criticism. So I think the fundamentals are in our favor. I think that Trump has proven to be a better candidate than Kamala. I would say the concern would just simply be, you know, to win. He can't just win Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, and North Carolina.

He's got to win one of Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan. Americans did not perform well for us in the midterms, different than a presidential election. But what was going on in those states that we did so bad as Republicans, and are we going to be able to get the turnout to be able to win one of those? You know, I think ultimately he's in a good position to do that. But that was really what the election is going to come down.

I really doubt she's going to be able to win states like North Carolina and Georgia. I just don't think so. I mean, she's the most liberal candidate that's ever been put up by the Democratic Party. When I know the demographics in those states have changed a little bit, but I just don't think that she's going to do it. So she's got to win all three of those. Donald Trump will need to win one of those. Well, Governor DeSantis, thank you so much for stopping by.

Thanks for what you're doing for the state. And continuing basis, we're very grateful to live in a state governed by you, the best governor in America. Thank you again. Well, no one three and no one four will keep us the best and the freest state. If you vote yes, I know it and they pass, then we're going to start to become California through the back door. God forbid. Well, Governor DeSantis, thank you so much. I appreciate it.

Already guys, coming up, we're going to jump into questions about how voting is going to happen when we're going to get results and all of that. If you're not a member, become a member, use coach Shapiro, check out for two months free on annual plans. Click the link in the description and join us.