Very pleased to be joined on this episode of The Warning podcast by the host of The David Pacman Show, David Pacman himself.
This is the Warning.
Today is the vice presidential debate. It is the last major event contact, if you will, between the two sides before the final month of the campaign. We wait for the October surprise, whatever that may be. But until then, there's a lot of campaigning to do.
David, welcome, Thank you.
What are you looking for tonight as we get ready for this vice presidential debate?
A couple of things I'm interested in seeing tonight. Number one, as far as Jade Vance goes, is he going to show up and kind of be the alternative to Trump in the sense of going towards policy, going away from personal attacks, or is he going to join Trump in the at kind of haphazard, a brazen style that includes more recently saying Kamala Harris is mentally disabled, et cetera. Like.
In other words, does jd.
Vance want to show up and say I am Trump plus one, or if you don't like Trump's politics, I'll do the buttoned up policy discussion. That's one thing I'm interested in seeing. Number Two, I expect that JD. Vance will try to make his opposition to Harris Walls partially along the lines of we're against the elites, We're against
these East Coast liberals, et cetera. And of course Tim Walls is not that, and so I'm very curious whether Tim Walls, as the Midwestern I know how to fix a clutch guy, is going to be able to repel that from JD. Vans and actually show listen Vance is more of that than I am, for sure, and so I'm interested in seeing that dynamic because they they have a hammer. Vance has a hammer, which is we are not like these coastal elites. Tim Walls is not one
of those coastal elites. So I'm interested to see kind of how that dynamic plays out.
When you think about this debate, do you think that JD. Vance is going to come out hard on Waltz's military record.
I think that that's very risky and that he almost certainly will not, because you know, Rolling Stone has a peace out. Now about turns out jd lied about the poor upbringing. It was pretty middle class. There was substance abuse, but it was pretty middle class. JD. Vance in his book describes his time in the military doesn't lie about having seen combat, but he describes it in relatively more
dramatic terms than what he's more recently acknowledged. So I think there's risk to JD that that gets turned around on him as well.
When you think about his liabilities your governor Walls coming into this debate, you are debating somebody who I think made one of the most astonishing concessions of my thirty years working in politics, which he says in an interview with Dana Bash, Hey, it's okay if we make up the story about the Haitians eating the cats eating the dogs in this town because the town was ignored by the national media. The town has a problem. Even though
the lie is a lie and it's sensational. Now the national media is focused on the town.
How do you.
Engage somebody who said that, what's the right approach into that? If you are advising Walls, or even from your perch just analyzing this this tonight, what are you looking for there? This is certainly going to be front and center in the debate tonight.
The first thing is I would go in.
You know, I sometimes get calls from people in my audience who say, you know, if if Kamala Harris just said X, or if Tim Walls just said why, they'd have no retort.
They'd be dead in the water.
We've got them, and I always explained, you might think that, but they have a plan, they have the you know you're not going to catch them off guard. So, first of all, the approach from Vance is going to be when I talked about creating stories, I didn't mean I fabricate facts. What I mean is there's something happening that the media is not covering, and therefore I'm going to create more interesting language or insist on talking about it
so that media stories are created. It's splitting hairs. But his argument is going to be I didn't make up the facts. I am creating a media story around something that's being ignored, now, don't I don't believe that that comports with the facts, obviously, but he'll be prepared to splice hairs.
I think for Walls, the.
Key is to know exactly how to bring it up in the way that in the debate against Trump, Kamala Harris she had her prepared moment about bored people leaving Trump's rallies.
It was rehearsed. She knew she was going to do it.
She had it in her pocket, and it was just about finding the right moment to do it. And it worked so well it sent Trump for a loop, wildly triggering him, and he never recovered in the debate for walls, it's knowing that Vance is going to be ready to split hairs in this way. About creating stories doesn't mean you make up the facts. It means you force the corporate media to be accountable or whatever. He needs to
know the exact right. I mean, I would be rehearsing exactly how to bring it up and to make a point of you can't believe anything this guy says. He went on National TV and with a straight face, looked at Dana Bash and said, I'm going to keep creating these stories and just know when to deploy it.
That's the key.
You think Wallas is going to call him a weirdo to his face.
I think he probably will at some point in the debate. Yeah, and I and I to be honest, I hope he does, because it doesn't really seem to have I'd be curious what you think, but I don't think there's a downside to him deploying that either, because it seems to be working really well.
Yeah, no doubt, I think he is. I think it's going to be a big moment, and if he does it the right way, it's gonna be a it's gonna be a tough punch. I'm close friends with Tim Ryan, and Tim Ryan of course ran against Jadie Vance and Vance wins that race by five points or so and the top of the ticket loses by twenty six points, which made it very very difficult for Tim Ryan. But
Tim mauled jd Vance in the debate. He was extremely aggressive, held him to an account, and I imagine that's how Walls is going to come out of the come out of the gate today. He's gonna he's gonna come out like a like a football team, very very aggressively in the in the first minutes after him trying to rattle Jade Vance, who doesn't seem to do very well uh in these interviews when he's questioned, Uh, he gets rattled pretty easy. He contradicts himself, uh pretty often. And so
it's going to be an interesting debate. I prepped was one of the people who prepedic Cheney back in the day against John Edwards, and that was a vice presidential debate that was devastating in that when you walked out, you were just say, wow, that's wow. Right, you know, one person just clearly won the debate. And and that's what I think Wallas is going to be going for for here tonight. He's gonna you know, particularly, you don't want to take it. You have you have competition right
between the principles. You know, she crushed Donald Trump in the in the debate. Now it's his turn. Really after the convention, speed try. The vice presidential candidate has only one more official thing to do, and this is it, and so you want to do really well at it. Dick Cheney prepared for this debate one night for over a year, five to six hours every Sunday religiously of prep, rehearsal, practice,
getting ready for this, for this debate. So you know, Wall certainly didn't have that amount of time and prep. But since he's been selected, you know, if you're going to be the VP nominee, you have this coming right. This is you know, it's like a wedding, right, You're gonna have the rehearsal dinner, You're going to have the you're gonna have the ceremony, you're gonna have the reception after and this is part of that.
This is part of that process for him.
So in your experience, is it considered that there's an asymmetrical risk to the VP debate that if you do well, the upside is smaller or is that It seems to me that that would be the case, But I don't know that.
Well.
The VP debate has served in some ways as a circuit breaker, right. One of the things that's really unique about this presidential cycle is the total disruption of the fall campaign because of the absence of four debates, three presidential and one vice presidential. So if you go back in that Bush debate, Bush does terrible in the first debate.
The VP debate is the second debate. It's like a circuit breaker, right, because Cheney wins that debate, it calms the waters coming into the rematch, and it's like a
baseball game, right, it's the best of three. Even in a presidential debate, if it's Romney against Obama and incumbon presidents, clearly, UH have an issue when it comes to prepping for the debate because they all do very, very poorly in the in the first outing but but even in a debate where the presidential candidate completely boots, it's just like a sporting event where it's a it's a best of
three series, they're gonna get two more shots. So the vice presidential debate, if it went completely off the rails and it became a distraction for the presidential campaign, meaning for the for the for the presidential nominee, I think that's the most you can you can hope for, generally speaking, even debates like the Dan Quaile debate, which was one of the most devastating moments, if not the most in a in a in a national debate, where Lloyd Benson looks at him and says, you.
Know, I knew Jack Kennedy. You know Jack Kennedy, and.
He looks so warly wounded by it all. Even that, in the end is not something that factors in very much in the voting. Did decision as a singular aspect in the choice.
That makes a lot of sense, And I think with Trump there's another aspect to it, which is Trump doesn't want to be embarrassed by Vance, but he also doesn't want to be outdone or outshined by JD.
Vance, And so Vance.
Also needs to do well, as Trump would see it, without doing well in a way that now Trump feels like he's being upstaged because of his ego and the personality driven aspects of how Trump functions. So needless to say, I don't envy jd Vance's position, although I hope that he does not do well.
You could see the look on Trump's face. I mean Trump was out there during the convention evaluating everybody.
He was judging them.
I mean he was like he was like the guy from the right up in the up in the stage with his with his with his clipboard. Jd Vance did not please Trump during his convention speech. If you have any understanding of like basic human body language and any any any registerable emotional intelligence, the weird clapping, you know, the stepping back and the impromptus, so Trump will be judging him. Uh, Trump wants to see proverbial blood on the floor, and I think he's unlikely to get it.
There's no way Trump is happy with his performance. It's inconceivable that he would. And so if after this debate, even in the circumstance you're talking about, jd Vance quits himself pretty well, all the opposition groups that go out.
There and say that JD.
Vance is better than Trump, is the better mag the leader that has the ability to destabilize Trump as well. In the final thirty days, you know when Trump is coming into a moment where you know, if you look at what he said it over the weekend, and I want to talk to you about this, the rhetoric is getting very very dark.
Yeah, and maybe before we moved to that, though, one other thing I wanted to mention was in the debate. Obviously, the economy and inflation is going to come up, and JD. Vans and Trump have been talking kind of in absolute terms. Gas is expensive, eggs are expensive, groceries are expensive, et cetera.
I'm really curious how Tim Walls will prepare to hit that head on in a way that will make sense to a viewing public that may not follow economics closely, because there's a belief among many that what we need is prices to quote go down in absolute ters, and of course that's quite rare in most Western developed economies and can set off a deflationary spiral. And while the
intuitive sense would be prices going down is good. It means I can buy more stuff when you understand that that means people wait to make purchases because they expect prices to be lower, which slows down the economy, which lead to layoffs. You have to have some way to push back against JD Vance just coming in and talking about inflation, inflation, inflation that actually will resonate with the
public and make sense. And I don't know what that would be, but I assumed Tim Wallace's people around him who will get him ready to deal with that issue in a way that's clear.
There's no question that on the question of the economy that Kim Wallash is the guy on the Democratic side that everybody is hoping can talk to people in a way that relates to them, that they're capable of understanding that he's a very middle class guy and that he has that connection.
No, without a douption, no question about that.
You know that that he's the he's probably you know Tim Wallas is a teacher. Is he able to teach basic economics?
Right?
And that's always part of a that's always part of a campaign.
Who can teach economics the best. When we think.
About media and we think about old media new media, we think about the success of your show. You look at media's story in the news. Uh Jota leaving the Today Show twenty million dollar contract. The show size has been halved in recent years, choosing to retire, you know, But all of this era of the twenty million dollars salaries,
it's all over in media. Word that really, you know, was not ubiquitous even a couple of years ago, with corporate media, and now everyone talks about corporate media, even replacing the term legacy legacy media. But I want to talk about an aesthetic of media and how you see it that drives me crazy in how things are covered and viewed, and get your thoughts on it. So I'm watching I'm watching CNN and the Sunday shows, and I'm
watching Manu Raju ask Kevin McCarthy or Tom Emmer. I forget which one, but it was Kevin McCarthy and Tom Emmer were both being grilled and the question was very predictably, what do you have to say about Trump calling the vice president mentally disabled? Do you agree with that? And when I step back from it, of course they agree with it. They support him fully, They supported him through an insurrection. They agree with everything he says and does.
And if they didn't, they wouldn't be sitting there on Sunday morning as they have been, not just in twenty four, but in twenty twenty three, twenty twenty two, twenty one,
twenty nineteen, eighteen, seventeen, and sixteen. And so my question is, coming into this final month, we have a corporate media, if you will, that Tree teach Day as an episodic event in a television series, as if what happens today is disconnected completely from what's going to happen tomorrow and what happened yesterday and the day before, or and the
day and the day before. So when I watch Tom Emmer or I watch Kevin McCarthy and they're asked a question, and the question is are you are you going to rebuke them for saying this? And the answer is always going to be no, they won't, and they'll squirm, they'll they'll do whatever. The coming question is who won the election? And we're about thirty five days out. I hate making predictions,
but I'm gonna make one. I think that the race is going to break in Harris's direction right in the next twenty days or so, and that on election night we're gonna have a pretty clear picture of who's gonna win the election by midnight. I don't think it will be a be a late night. That's how it feels to me. I could be wrong. Later in October than today, I said that Hillary Clinton looked like she was trending to four hundred electoral votes, and in that moment she was.
That being said.
Harris, except for one thing, and we'll talk about that seems to me to be on a good trajectory. So envisioning that which seems to me much more likely than the moment that we remember from twenty sixteen, and I was on set for it, I think that it's more
likely that she wins the race. And in that instant you'll start with the conspiracy of lies, and in advance you know all of the people who will be involved in it, because there are all the people on it, all the people who have been involved in it, who are yes every week whether they'll disavow this or that that Trump did or said, up to and including the
overthrower of the government, and the answer never changes. Do you get frustrated when you watch that, when you see that, when you see the tediousness of the questioning in the corporate media about evans that at this point have the rhythmic quality of the rising of the sun in the east every.
In the morning. I mean, how do you see in process all of that.
I do share the frustration. I just am less convinced. You know. You started by saying, of course they don't disavow it because of course they agree with it. I actually think it's worse. I think it's of course they don't disavow it because even though they obviously personally disagree with it, in many cases, they've decided that in their public facing characters, they will not wrong or across Donald Trump.
So I think it's worse. Like, on one hand, it's people who have been convinced by Trump and love all of it, including she's mentally disabled, so of course they don't disavow it. Concurrent with that, you have this guy's despicable and terrible. He's lost everything or forced us to underperform everywhere since twenty eighteen. But for as long as he controls the Republican Party, even if I'm part of why he controls it, I am not going to publicly
cross him. So I actually don't believe that. McCarthy and Tom Emmer you mentioned also Lindsey Graham was interviewed about the same thing, and he said, well, I prefer to talk about issues. The weakest response you could have. I actually think they don't agree with it, but they realize until he doesn't, he has control of the Republican Party, and if they don't want to be on the outs with Democrats and on the outs with Trump, they kind
of have to just go along with it. Now, I want to say one other thing about the election night scenario you mentioned. I do think the most likely scenario is a modest win by Kamala Harris when it comes to the electoral College, but one that will be pretty clear by midnight Eastern or at the latest by that morning. I do think that's the most likely scenario. I do think that the people immediately around Trump will do exactly what you said, which is they'll come to defend him
with their irregularities and all of the different stuff. But I do think it's becoming increasingly clear to most Republicans that if Trump doesn't win, it's over for him. I know there's debate will he run again in twenty to twenty eight? Will he not run again.
If you lose? I don't think he's running again, and I think it'll be.
A self fulfilling prophecy where by the early morning of November sixth, every sane Republican defines sane however you want. But even these guys who kind of recognize the damage that Trump has done to the party, I think they'll realize that Trump has lost the power and they will start a banditing him. They won't denounce him, but I think that by the end of November sixth, if Trump loses, you are going to have a large cadre of Republicans.
They won't be praising Kamala Harris, but they're going to be ready for a completely non Trump midterm and certainly twenty twenty eight, I think it's over for Trump. If he loses, he'll say he won. Some people will try to push some kind of scheme, but I think Republicans will start dropping within twelve hours of the election results.
Okay, a lot to unpack there. I totally see how that scenario plays out. That it's like pushing a car uphill and all of a sudden.
The momentum is over.
Forward, progress is done, and it's just going to start rolling back back down the hill. Right It's just you know, it's not it's not going to not going to go up one more inch, but I'm gonna come back to that.
So I was.
I was on Script's Morning Rush a month month or so ago, and the subject came up about Trump in twenty twenty eight, And so I'm with you because I like to view myself as the sane person. Right, So, of course, right, the idea that he would run again, there's only been one person in all of American history who's ever been a four time nominee. Fdr Trump is one of three that's done it, including him, right, that's
done it three times. But when I was on television and I and I answered the question, is everybody going to go to more alago seeking his support?
And the answer is going to be, yet will he be.
Restrained enough to say, I don't know, well, to wait and see, because he doesn't have to run for president, He just has to freeze the race with a wait
and see. And my question about Trump twenty eight imagining a laws and stipulating to how completely insane it sounds, is if you could get to Trump twenty twenty four, right, if by twenty twenty four this election we're in if he didn't cross the line between twenty and twenty four of no return, meaning that if he didn't do things by the time we get to this year, that it inhibit your ability to support him, or more precisely, to say no to him, like.
No, you shouldn't run again.
Then what's going to happen that's different this time than what happened last time. With regard to someone like Lindsey Graham, you know who I spent a year in my life with traveling around America on a presidential you know, campaign airplane. I I just I think it's the great question, right, how the fever breaks? Because and I write about this obviously, and I talk about it all the time, but you just said it perfectly on a couple of minutes ago.
None of these people believe right that Kamala Harris is mentally disabled, but none of them will repudiate.
It because they're cynics. And so what you have with.
Trump in this coalition, a coalition of believers and cynics, true believers, right, true MAGA fanatics and people that think those people are crazy. But nevertheless, you know, we're all sitting around the table with each other trying to get political power in the country. So I think it's the I think it's the great question at hand is where what happens to Trump up right? Where where does he go?
What does he do? You know in the aftermath of this, if you proved to be right, and I'm with you, I think that that more likely than not that that's what's going to happen. Right, There'll be an exhaustion that sets in. But then again maybe not, because his hold on them has been has been pretty pretty strong. And you know, the reality is it's like an avalanche, right, It's like, if enough momentum gets downhill, right, it's people
get on board with this craziness. You know, if it stalls out at all early, right, you may have a break in the avalanche.
I don't know.
I think the question about the fever breaking is reasonable, and if you kind of step back, it's not unreasonable to say, well, hold on. He lost twenty twenty and said we're going to take it back and held the party in limbo and then said I am running and he still had vast majority of the support and they're not abandoning him.
Why wouldn't the.
Exact same scenario play out over the next four years that did the last four years. But I think there are differences. One is, in twenty twenty there were more people than I expect there will be this time who went with the it was stolen and we need lass suits and we need this and that Trump will try it. But with the experience that it failed in twenty twenty, I think he's going to get less momentum with that.
That'll be one difference. Number Two, there's a difference between a two time loser and a one time loser, which maybe he didn't even really lose. It's going to start feeling different. It's going to be an accumulation. And then Trump will also you know, he'd be eighty two at the time of the next one. And I think in the same way that some people felt, many people felt that Joe Biden is too old to do four or more years, you'll have a slice that thinks the same
about Trump. So I just don't believe the momentum will get going on November sixth the way it did in twenty twenty, despite anything Trump can do or say, what do.
You think that Harris has to do to close this out and put this away?
I mean, to a degree, it's like it seems if she doesn't make mistakes, she'll have a narrow electoral victory.
I don't know if I look at it quantitatively. First, it's like it's looking.
Like Trump might be able to flip Arizona and Georgia, but also maybe not, and even if he does, he still loses. So in a sense, it's almost like if nothing changes and no major mistake takes place, she probably wins with between two seventy eight and three oh six, which I believe, I don't remember if it's three oh three or three oh six, which is what it would
be this year if she had the same states. I know there's been a slight realignment of the electoral votes, but it seems the most likely outcome is a Harris victory with between two seventy eight and the low threes, with a couple states maybe flipping. So that's my instinct, which is I don't think she really needs to do anything other than keep doing rallies with the crowd sizes
that she's getting, don't make any major mistakes. But I also am not so naive as to think that nothing will happen over the next thirty days that will require something of her. That will be a departure from what she's been doing, and I just don't know what that is yet.
I think that the Haitians eating pat story is of monumental importance because if I can convince anybody that that's true, I can convince them of anything right. That's a lie of authority. It's also while ludicrous, and I certainly laughed out loud, and if someone was recording me, I don't know what my facial reaction would have been. But you know, Aamlaharis spoke for the world, right, for the country, you
know when she encountered it. That being said, it is a malicious racist lie, as absolutely vicious as anything that came out of the mouth of a striker or at gobels. It is dehumanizing. He would not have been talking about Scandinavians like this.
You know.
The picture is hordes of tribal blacks descending on this white town of Springfield, Ohio and snatching the golden retrievers out of the backyard for some.
Voodoo ceremony, eating them.
And he won't stop when he finds out the hospitals are locked down, that the schools are locked down, you won't stop.
He's doubling down.
He is repeatedly talking about locking up political opponents, shutting down media organizations, revenge violence, prepping the country for the election is going to get stolen. And so I've analogized many times the race to a river, and the current only takes the water in one direction, so there's never ever going back. And I started a couple of weeks ago talking about how incendiary, how crazy, how the rhetoric is go to increase, and it's increased in that direction
substantially in the last two weeks. October is here. What do you see a head a lot of worry about about this month? That is that is going to be a chaotic month in in American life, in American and American politics.
I think it almost certainly will be.
And there's this idea of going and I'm looking for a different word than intimidating, but I think intimidating is right on the basis of the way people look looking to challenge or question people's legal voting status. This guy, Brian Glenn, who used to be on right side broadcasting, and he's moved on somewhere else. I think he's dating
Marjorie Taylor Green. He told his audience, go to the polling places and if you see something that looks out of place, if you see someone that you don't think maybe is there legally, it's obvious what we're talking about, right. It's it's not a white grandmother. That's not the image of someone that looks like they're out of place that Brian Glenn and his ilk.
Are pointing to.
He's saying, do what you can, get an observer involved, or call the police, or whatever the case may be. Trump has been talking about police at polling places in order to monitor in all of this, I'm so concerned about it that it's borderline where I'm wondering whether it will affect turnout, although I'm not yet over the line into thinking that it will, but it will certainly cause chaos.
There's Kamala Harrison to turn and face Trump and talk to the contrary and talk about the fear directly and the stakes in a way that's more vivid, and she's done.
It so far.
My biased view is that I would like to see her do that, but I always try to consider someone who doesn't work in this field, but is you know, working in Michigan and dealing with a student loan and making sure they pick up their kids, but also being on time to work. And is the economic message really the single and soul message here that is going to
be the most motivating or will you know? Because where I hesitate Steve is that if you watch your average Harris rally right now and your average Trump rally, there is a positive vision coming from Harris and a dark apocalyptic vision coming from Trump. Now, you can say it's kind of standard. When Harris is, in a sense the incumbent, she wants to argue things are good and will continue
being good. It's natural that she would have a positive vision, whereas on the other hand, Trump is trying to argue things are so bad you need to elect me. But I think it goes beyond that. I think that there's actually more to it. And I've said when I watch these competing rallies sometimes back to back, it doesn't seem to me that the apocalyptic dark vision from Trump with the lurid stories, and he had a thirty second rant about Wisconsin over the weekend that sounds like he's describing
I don't know what he's describing. I don't want to ascribe it to any particular country. But certainly not Milwaukee. Right when you listen to it, you go, that doesn't sound like Milwaukee to me, because I question whether Trump
doing it helps him convert anybody. I just don't know if Harris is better off sticking with the economic message rather than the here's what you really should be afraid of message, other than when it comes to women's bodily autonomy and reproductive rights, which does seem to have been really effective at telling people what the stakes are.
Do you have a sense with the women in your lives, with the women in your life and the women around you, about their motivation to go and vote and their reaction to Trump saying, you know, the women are never going to be happier. Hey, this is going to be beautiful, right, the states.
Have it, don't worry about it.
Right, there's going to be in all the all the trumpe and bomb bast around this, around this issue, because you know, people, I honestly don't know what to say. I don't conceivably know what I could say to a woman in America to urge him to, you know, participate and vote and stand up. You know that that adds any weight beyond the weight of the evidence around what's happening in the in the country, which is which is shocking to.
Behold, you know, at at many levels. But fired up? Are they worried?
Are they scared? Or more women for Trump than you are? You are prized about what's anecdotally.
You know, anecdotally.
I am maybe the wrong guy to ask, because I know mostly women in blue states who are on the left. And so there's two elements to that that are important. One is, they weren't voting for Trump anyway, even before all of this craziness with IVF and he's very big on fertilization and all of this stuff that you know that makes no sense, So they weren't voting for him anyway.
But also, most.
Of the women I'm talking to have a confidence we can discuss whether it's appropriate or not that because they live in blue states.
You know.
I talk to my friends in New York and Connecticut and Massachusetts and they go, this stuff is nuts, but I'm so confident that we're going to be fine in this state. I feel bad for the women in fill in the blanks, right, And so I think that the people I'm speaking to directly are kind of in that camp, which is privileged in the sense of the stakes feel
lower on a lot of these issues. In the states that have an HDI equivalent to Norway right, like Connecticut and Massachusetts, it's a different situation than it is in Mississippi, for example. Now, one other thing I saw the good liars who do these interviews at Trump rallies.
They're really good.
They interviewed a woman recently who said she it was you know what about such and such who said, they're not even sure women should have the right to vote. At this point, I don't even remember who said it, but recently somebody in Trump's orbit suggested, I don't even.
Know that it's that good that women vote.
The woman said, if the country's taken care of, I don't care if.
I have the right to vote.
And it was this incredible moment where it's that's hook line and sinker.
These are the saviors.
And my role whether I vote or I don't vote, They're going to tell me what my role is and it's not for me to evaluate this is good or bad or scary, or whatever the case may be. And that's so different from everybody I talk to personally. That what influences the people I know personally, and what would impact that woman who said.
Take away my right to vote.
As long as we've got Trump instead of Harris, we're gonna be okay. It's hard to imagine the same campaign motivating all of those voters because their priority seems so different.
Perfectly said, it is a wild time, and I think it goes without saying that. Ten years into this and it's ten years, three election cycles, it feels like it's coming to its end to me, And it feels like that we're going to be closing the door on a generation of political leaders, many of whom are still around in their eighties. But we're going to see a lot of change in the in the immediate in the immediate future.
And we're at a moment where I think that the country is either going to pick more of craziness at an epic level or or make ready for generational change. And if passed his prologue, we're gonna have generational change. We're gonna we're gonna take the exit off of this.
Yeah, and there seems to be an accelerationism that you know, I've spoken over the last however many years on my show how I'm not an accelerationist leftist who believes that we need to dismantle the system to rebuild it better off as a social democrat, which is a form of regulated capitalism. I don't want to dismantle because I know
how many people get hurt in the dismantling. I just want to keep making improvements in the way that sort of Ted Kennedy said, let's keep making improvements in the.
Right direction rather than the wrong.
I think what a slice of those that are part of MAGA right now are starting to lean towards is the accelerationism.
It's if you know, they.
Stole it from us in twenty twenty, if they do it again, the threshold of what I'm willing to personally do changes. My hope is that the air will be let out of it, especially if Republican officials in the aftermath of a Trump loss say we're moving on.
I'm not jumping on that.
It was stolen bandwagon this time, So I hope it will be tempered by that. But anecdotally, I do see, including the people that my correspondence talk to, it rallies sort of a willinglessness to adopt some of that accelerationism by the right about if they're going to steal it from them twice, we're now willing to do a lot more.
It's also being said in the fervor of the rally with Cajun of the crowd when everyone's home staring at their phones, right and it's cold outside. We'll see, We'll see where the fervor goes if the if the fever breaks, And until then, I think we're gonna have a very very dramatic month in American politics, which is gonna have a lot of twists and turns and wild days ahead in a race that, though she is winning, is not yet over, it is not yet settled, and it is
not impossible for him to win. It's not even improbable for him to be able to win the election. But again, I think it will break in her direction in the in the next couple of weeks as the American people make their final decision, and I think, cancel a show that has gotten pretty boring.
The show has jumped the shark, I think we can.
Say, and that is a perfect place to end it. With David Pacman of The David Pacman Show, I urge you to subscribe to watch it. One of the great things about this era of transformation in the media is the creation of great news stars, and great news shows and great new sources of information. David Pakmis are only one of them. David really appreciate you taking the time to spend some time with the Warning audience today.
Thank you really appreciate it. Thank you.
I'm Steve Schmidt. This is the Warning and I invite you to join. Subscribe on our substack, on our YouTube channel, follow us. Welcome to the community.