2:00

Who is Tony Heathcliff? So Tony

2:02

Hinchcliffe is very surprised because Tony

2:04

Hinchcliffe has had something of a,

2:07

um, I guess

2:09

I wouldn't quite say Renaissance, but a,

2:11

a good year for the past year,

2:13

because he, um, he

2:15

had a star making turn at Tom

2:18

Brady's roast, um, and, uh,

2:20

just a lot of people who have

2:23

to blow into a breathalyzer to start

2:25

their car were like, who is this

2:27

hilarious guy? It became new Tony fans,

2:30

but for people who don't know, um, Tony

2:33

Hinchcliffe is, if

2:36

there aren't Enron investigations, Enron

2:38

type investigations about the Tony

2:40

Hinchcliffe bubble in three years,

2:42

then all institutions are forfeit.

2:45

Um, he is the host of a show

2:47

called Kill Tony, which is sort of like

2:49

Drueskis could have been auditions, but not funny.

2:52

He's one of these guys that

2:54

like, um, this crew of comedians

2:56

who like followed Rogan to Austin

2:59

and ever since Rogan's like more explicitly

3:01

right wing turned, they've all like added

3:03

political material to their repertoire. So Tony's

3:05

old thing used to be like on

3:07

Kill Tony, it was like a gong

3:09

show type thing where they would have

3:12

someone come up and

3:14

do like two minutes and

3:16

the panel of hilarious comedians

3:18

would, uh, you know, would

3:20

judge them with hilarious lines.

3:23

Um, but ever since Rogan started,

3:26

you know, having Ben Shapiro and

3:28

everyone on like Tony

3:30

and David Lucas and all these guys do

3:33

like, they're doing political

3:35

material, but it's so like

3:37

wildly uninformed and hackish that

3:39

it just, like

3:41

I heard one thing from David Lucas,

3:44

who's a Kill Tony regular and it

3:47

was Biden's whole cabin sucks.

3:51

He's like sub

3:55

literate people, uh, attempting

3:57

to kiss up to Rogan. But.

14:00

normal Trump campaign back when Republican used

14:02

to do that. But, um, the,

14:04

the line I've seen from just like, you

14:06

know, freelance, uh, defenders of the campaign has

14:08

been, Oh, well, he's a comedian.

14:11

And it's like, sure. But you lose,

14:13

you kind of lose some of that

14:16

license when you're going to a presidential

14:18

candidates rally and like, and

14:20

endorsing them and doing your, doing your

14:22

whole shitty act under the veil, it's

14:25

a vote for this guy. That's

14:27

way different than just doing your, your set.

14:29

There was a, there was a story I

14:31

saw that, that right before we started recording,

14:33

uh, I think it was the guardian that,

14:35

um, in, in his material, that it was

14:37

approved by the campaign. He w

14:40

Tony was going to call Kamala Harris a

14:42

cunt, but they, they vetoed that. So,

14:44

I mean, I guess there was some quality control

14:46

there, but like, are they approved everything else? Yeah.

14:49

Right. Heck yeah. It's cool. Black guy with

14:51

a thing on his head. What the hell is that?

14:53

A lamp shade. Look at this guy. I'm

14:56

just kidding. That's one of my buddies. He

14:58

had a Halloween party last night. We had

15:00

fun. We carved watermelons together. It was awesome.

15:02

I, I, I, you talked about Dave, you

15:04

talked about closing messages and I

15:06

guess like that's sort of what I

15:08

want to ask here is that like, this is

15:11

the last week of the campaign and we've, and

15:13

Dave, like being on the show, you've talked about

15:15

how like the medium of Trump's campaign is like

15:17

the podcast election. Like, you know,

15:19

young men who are like, you know, feel

15:21

politically disenfranchised and like listen to podcasts like,

15:23

you know, Theo Vaughn or Joe Rogan or

15:26

this Tony guy, but like, what

15:28

is, what is the message? Like what, what

15:31

was the message of the Trump Madison square

15:33

garden, garden rally and what is like in

15:35

the waning weeks of this campaign, what is

15:37

the Trump campaign's closing message to the American

15:39

voter? It's a lot of just, we

15:42

can make it 2019 again. That's been

15:44

his theme. Uh, he has that there's

15:46

one phrase they're supposed to be rolling out this week

15:49

and he used it once in New York, which was

15:51

Kamala broke it. I can fix it. So

15:53

the premise is remember how everything was amazing,

15:56

not for the last year, me being president, but everything for that,

15:58

before that, I'm going to just, I'm going to go. back

16:00

and fix that. Everything else

16:02

feeds into that because he's promised all these tax cuts

16:04

that and that we're gonna pay for him with tariffs.

16:07

He's got a really good deal I think

16:09

from the 50% of voters choosing it

16:11

because none of it none

16:14

of it hangs together that well and we're gonna

16:16

go back to 2018 but also he's gonna have

16:18

a completely different governing team they did before. Hey

16:23

if you think he's gonna be a dictator he wasn't

16:25

like that before but also he's not gonna hire a

16:27

guy like John Kelly he's gonna hire Stephen Miller and

16:29

Mike Davis and these people but

16:32

for your average person who's just frustrated about prices

16:34

it's don't worry Trump's coming back and he's gonna

16:36

lower the prices everything's gonna be fixed

16:38

by by kicking out the immigrants and the other thing

16:40

they were doing it's not really the closer but they're

16:43

trying to bring it back because Democrats

16:45

are there because of this Bob Woodward

16:47

book because of former Trump staffers saying

16:49

act I worked for him and he

16:51

was a fascist they're trying

16:53

to bring back that you can't criticize Trump

16:55

like that if you do you're encouraging assassination

16:57

this they're really there I get it they're

16:59

trying to have it every way like we're

17:01

promising everything and if you criticize him like

17:03

you want him to die that's their closer

17:05

like the week before the Madison Square Garden

17:07

rally like the the sort of discourse about

17:09

Trump was it was going off these like

17:11

recycled John Kelly quotes for the Woodward book

17:13

right yeah he loves Hitler's generals he's a

17:15

fascist he's going to be a fascist and

17:18

then when this Madison Square Garden rally was

17:20

like you know announced or whatever people were

17:22

like you know drawing the historical parallel to

17:25

the fascist Nazi rally that

17:27

took place at Madison Square Garden I think

17:29

was it the 1930s and the original Madison

17:31

Square Garden yeah yeah it is one

17:34

of those things I think you're Rachel Maddow's had like 20

17:36

episodes about it it's it's a very it's a big it

17:39

could happen here touchstone that event yeah well you know

17:41

I mean if you were if you were inclined to

17:44

you know scoff at that kind of line of thinking

17:46

as like I have certainly been want to do on

17:48

this show you like

17:50

I was given some pause because like seeing seeing this

17:52

rally it was just sort of like oh they that's

17:54

exactly what they're doing they leaned into that right because

17:56

one of the yeah I mean it seems like they

17:58

were like They were daring you to

18:01

say it was fascist. Yeah. You're

18:03

going to call us fascist and then we're going to mod you and we're

18:05

going to get your face and prove

18:08

that nobody actually cares about your stupid

18:10

lib takes on this stuff. That's

18:13

why I bring up the ... I'm not trying

18:15

to overcomplicate it. Bring up the ... whenever liberals

18:17

go after them, they say that they're risking Trump's

18:19

life. But that is the whole

18:21

... the Joker, the first ... the Michael

18:24

Keaton Batman putting on glasses and saying, it wouldn't be

18:26

the guy ... wouldn't it? Yeah, yeah. You do that

18:28

a lot. Of like, we are allowed to ... we

18:30

are allowed to say anything and we have the right

18:32

to say anything if you don't want us to say

18:35

anything, you suck. But if you criticize Mr. Trump, you

18:38

are putting his life at risk. And he has a young son who

18:40

could see this. He's better to see it was

18:42

watching you do this. This

18:45

is the risk that they can get knocked off ... I mean,

18:47

Trump can get knocked off message very easy. Even

18:50

if you ... I was looking at his final

18:52

month rallies from the last couple cycles. 2016

18:55

was pretty easy because Hillary had a WikiLeaks drop every day

18:57

and he would ... that was half the speech. 2020,

19:00

it was a lot of Biden's ... Hunter

19:03

laptop was part of it. And with this

19:05

time, it's ... it's ... he just keeps

19:07

going off because he finds Kamala so irritating

19:10

that he will bring up stuff ... he can't

19:12

say she has no crowds because she has big

19:14

crowds. He'll try. And then he'll bring up stuff

19:16

like things that were memed on the right, like

19:18

Patrick Bat-David talked about a lot from Kamala rallies,

19:20

that no one who doesn't listen to Patrick Bat-David

19:22

has heard of. And

19:24

he really is easily distracted from this, this main

19:26

close. And the people around him are just

19:29

... I think they're better at sticking on message and saying, yeah,

19:31

he's going to bring the prices back. He

19:33

can go off into space. It's kind of a problem. I

19:35

don't know if it's been a problem because they're doing fine.

19:37

They're in a better position than they were a month ago.

19:41

But the whole premise is he's going to say some stuff. He's

19:43

going to go off script. Don't worry. The

19:45

economy is going to be back to ... remember how cheap

19:47

the value menu was in 2019? It's coming

19:49

back. He ... he'll

19:51

go a day and maybe talk about that

19:53

twice. But his campaign is talking about it.

19:55

Yeah, I have just a question for Dave

19:57

here personally because you've covered the Bernie campaign

19:59

a lot. actually

22:00

making any meaningful changes or like running

22:02

any kind of campaign where

22:04

like they can't like say oh we're actually missing

22:06

like voters and X or Y demographic because that

22:09

would imply that they haven't had enough voters so

22:11

that like they can only really say like oh

22:13

we need to get like new demographics I haven't

22:15

voted before like young men because that allows them

22:17

to actually run a campaign that like does things

22:20

other than what they've just done before while

22:22

also not really stepping on any toes on saying

22:24

that like you didn't win the previous election it's

22:27

like a kind of a perfect middle and the

22:29

logic to that just leads them to what we

22:31

saw yesterday yeah like you've

22:33

already won you already know you're gonna win you just

22:35

say whatever you want it's kind of dangerous the last

22:38

thing I'll say about the Trump Madison Square Garden rally

22:40

is Elon Musk

22:43

how does he keep trotting this dipshit

22:45

out there he fucked up the USA

22:47

you guys see this he was like

22:49

USA USA ah he like he did

22:51

like a little soy squeal

22:59

after the USA ah somebody

23:02

point out to me when he does that jump

23:04

he's trying to make an X with his body

23:06

which I never understood like I slowed the video

23:11

no I really I really hate that

23:15

does it make me happy I don't

23:17

like knowing that he's something

23:19

I was thinking about with this a lot

23:21

and I was interested in what you

23:24

guys would think about like the first part of this

23:26

which is I saw both of

23:28

you guys talking about how like the 2017 through

23:30

2020 resistance was sort of a

23:34

historical aberration it was

23:36

created by a confluence in

23:38

like trends in

23:40

media and just

23:43

a very unusual political environment and

23:45

it resulted in these very this

23:48

very unusual level of energy and

23:50

types of energy and you

23:52

know it resulted in suburban voters

23:55

you know reading bell hooks and all this

23:58

weird stuff that probably won't be repeated And

24:01

how if Trump wins this time, you're

24:03

not going to see an exact

24:06

repeat of that. The classic resistance

24:09

and like the same enthusiasm isn't

24:11

there. Media is in a

24:13

far worse position. They've sort of, they

24:16

squandered the immense gains that they made

24:18

during the Trump years. Some would say,

24:20

um, but

24:23

seeing Elon up there, I, it

24:27

did make me think that like,

24:29

whatever whatever form opposition would

24:32

take during the second Trump

24:34

administration, it would be decidedly

24:36

different in tone from the classic

24:39

resistance, but it would be more

24:41

centered around like, I

24:44

don't, yeah, just how annoying these guys

24:46

are. I think, I think,

24:48

um, a big part of it that like, I think people are, I

24:50

think, oh, and people say like, um, there's like

24:52

a big theory of like among like these like dirt

24:55

bag of liberal people who had like this whole line

24:57

yesterday, like after some, the USA Today put out a

24:59

headline that was just very neutral about Trump's rally. Instead

25:02

of saying Trump was a racist freak. This is

25:04

like Trump talks about immigration and the economy. So

25:07

a bunch of these fucking people were like, the media

25:09

loves Trump and wants him to win. And they just

25:11

repeated that over and over, like abolish ICE or whatever

25:13

in 2019. And the theory behind

25:15

that I've had some people accuse me of doing

25:17

this back when I said Biden, I

25:19

thought was going to lose. Uh, they

25:21

said you, all you media people, which I guess

25:23

like included me at the time, includes me now,

25:26

you just want Trump to be back in office

25:29

so you can get like subscriptions from liberals. And,

25:32

uh, like you are trying to manifest that

25:34

by saying Biden's tool or whatever. And

25:37

like, I think, like what Dave and I think we're

25:39

talking about is that that's a real misunderstanding of why

25:41

people were so interested in the media during the first

25:43

Trump term, because that was like a very open story.

25:47

It was not a story that had kind of

25:49

had a completion. It was a big shock. People

25:51

had it. The whole thing that all the resistance

25:53

people said was that they hadn't followed politics closely

25:55

before that. Trump winning was

25:57

the start of their kind of political

25:59

involvement. Each week's sort of

26:01

scandal was like a new episode for the

26:04

story. There was like a very, there

26:06

was going to be some way that it ended either

26:08

he would be shunted off the jail or kicked out

26:10

of office or that he would win. And we were

26:12

going, we were getting closer and closer to a conclusion,

26:14

like, which with each week we got closer to like

26:16

the end of his first term. With

26:19

Trump winning now, he would be term limited

26:21

and it would be just the end of

26:23

that story of Trump. He's got a presidential

26:25

immunity. All of the court cases that he's

26:27

in would be frozen. He wouldn't go to

26:29

jail. Like the whole

26:31

saga would just end with him winning. There

26:33

wouldn't be a question of like, like,

26:36

will he get away with it? Because the answer to that will

26:38

just have been yes, he did. And like,

26:41

there'll be stuff that people will be engaged.

26:43

People probably will still be outraged. They'll dislike

26:45

what he does while in government. He'll probably

26:48

be unpopular. They'll probably be high like turnout.

26:50

But people will be like, there'll be more

26:52

of a sense of frustration, I think, or

26:54

depression instead of mobilization. And

26:57

a lot of it, I

26:59

think, will be blamed on the media, which we

27:01

saw during like the Biden Death Watch Month news

27:03

cycle. People were hysterically

27:05

angry at the media, just your average

27:08

liberal thought that they were trying to

27:10

totally ruin his presidency. And what

27:13

I think is really interesting is that

27:15

like there may be an effect of

27:17

this on how much they trust established

27:19

news cycles, because there was, I think,

27:21

like a graph that came out a

27:23

couple of weeks ago that showed by

27:25

YouGov, that showed response rates to pollsters,

27:27

which is usually a heuristic for how

27:29

much people trust institutional, like mainstream political

27:32

commentators. So historically, during the Trump era,

27:34

Republicans have not responded to pollsters or

27:36

Democrats have responded a lot. That's been

27:38

the cause of survey error. It was

27:40

like probably the main reason why Biden

27:43

really had polls that were better than the actual results in

27:45

2020. And it's caused

27:47

a lot of heartburn. What YouGov has

27:50

seen is that roughly since like the

27:52

beginning of this year, the number of

27:54

liberals responding to their surveys has gone

27:56

down precipitously, especially around July when the

27:58

whole dropout period started and who knows

28:00

what the reason for that could be

28:03

but like I like it

28:05

may be a sign that liberals are really like

28:07

disenchant with these mainstream outlets in a way that

28:09

won't cause a repeat at least of the media

28:11

environment and maybe not I mean I would guess

28:13

the political environment would be similar but it's not

28:15

as simplistic as I think a lot of people

28:17

are making it out to be the story is

28:19

just totally different. So I mean I think that's

28:21

I think that's a good segue into the other

28:23

big like media and politics

28:26

story of this past week and

28:28

I think it was interesting what

28:30

you said about like how in

28:32

2016 when Trump won then we got like

28:34

the resistance and a big feature of the

28:37

resistance was how important journalism and the media

28:39

is and like they were that

28:41

they were the check on like having an

28:43

authoritarian president and then Biden won in

28:45

2020 and they were like oh they did their

28:47

job we'll never have to think about Trump again

28:50

well surprise surprise you would do you do have to

28:52

think about him again and it looks like he could

28:54

win this election and then we're seeing

28:56

not just the media having failed to

28:58

protect America from like an authoritarian

29:00

you know fascist president or Donald

29:02

Trump winning reelection again after losing

29:05

already but they are you know in the

29:07

eyes of liberals are like capitulating in the

29:10

saga of the Washington Post and the

29:12

LA Times refusing to endorse editorially a

29:14

presidential candidate Dave used to work at

29:17

the Washington Post what did like how

29:19

do you see this Washington Post

29:22

within their apparently at Bezos's

29:24

request the newspaper editorial section

29:26

will not endorse a presidential

29:28

candidate which you know liberals

29:30

are viewing as a tacit

29:33

endorsement of Donald Trump yeah that's that's

29:35

the killer part and what made it

29:37

terrible for the paper was Marty Barron

29:40

who was the editor most time I was there

29:43

legendary editor at least Robert Blasim and

29:45

spotlight he came

29:47

out and said it was cowardly but Woodward and Bernstein said

29:49

it was cowardly it's because of

29:51

that's a rich picture the whole thing but

29:53

because of the timing if they'd said in

29:56

June hey hey guys we're

29:58

not gonna endorse this year we're gonna endorse lower

30:00

races, a lot of people would

30:02

have agreed with them. I think I would have agreed with them because my

30:05

take is that reporters who cover

30:08

local politics, they can tell you which

30:10

alderman is good, which one is going

30:13

to be indicted in six months. That's useful.

30:15

If you're just voting down the ballot. The

30:17

president, we all know what you think,

30:20

who cares. But doing this and having

30:22

the paper's reporters who have been very

30:24

honest about this saying, actually, Bezos intervened,

30:27

he didn't want an endorsement.

30:29

That's what made people despair.

30:31

You can read their takes.

30:34

All the people who've canceled have said, I

30:36

don't trust them to stand up to Trump

30:38

anymore because their owner said you shouldn't stand

30:40

up to Trump. That's pretty hard to refute.

30:42

The only take in the alternative

30:44

has been, yeah, it's not the reporter's fault. The

30:46

reporters are actually... The reason

30:48

you know Bezos did this is because the reporters

30:51

did this. But this is some context about me

30:53

at the Post there. The

30:55

Bezos ownership thing was an issue if you worked

30:57

there. You got dinged a lot and people would

31:00

ask a lot, oh, did Bezos assign the story?

31:02

Is Bezos preventing you from covering this? I covered

31:04

the Bernie campaign. It came up, Bernie would not

31:07

deny me access or something because of Bezos,

31:09

but he'd bring this up. He would bring

31:11

up all the times that Post columnist attacked

31:13

him and people, he could say, hey, Bezos

31:15

didn't tell us to. I

31:17

went and covered the Amazon Union

31:20

Drive in Mississippi back

31:22

in 2021 and that was going to

31:24

hurt Bezos' bottom line. Nobody

31:27

said anything. Bezos never complained when

31:29

me and Liz Berenig were writing about

31:31

DSA and socialism. We kind

31:33

of wondered, we would get asked, hey, is

31:35

Bezos telling you not to do this? Nope,

31:38

never did. Him intervening, period,

31:40

that's what made this so

31:42

terrible for people who work in the paper because you

31:44

used to be able to say, yeah, we

31:46

have a rich guy who owns this, rich guys own

31:49

lots of things. They're not telling us not to publish

31:51

something and now he has. That's why

31:53

it's bad. For that kind of resistance

31:55

liberal, I met a lot of those people in

31:57

2017 because I'd work for the paper and I'd

31:59

cover Bernie. very

36:00

like decrepit establishment class, which

36:02

will create like I think

36:04

this very and even like

36:06

stronger dissonance than they

36:08

had during the Trump era when like because at

36:10

least like they understood they were like

36:12

really in favor of the establishment liberal powers,

36:15

but it was cohesive. Now they're hating the

36:17

liberal writers while loving the liberal politicians who

36:19

have both failed on their own ways, but

36:22

one gets all the blame and one

36:24

gets all the love. And I'm

36:26

not really certain how that ends up working

36:28

out. It's obviously not something that'll make any

36:30

sense to people outside of their world. A

36:32

blue people's daily. Yeah, basically. That's what they

36:35

want. But

36:37

with like, if they can get the

36:39

like the wise elephant stories, they could

36:41

do really well. Yes. That would be

36:43

so good. Like, like, like, like, segation,

36:47

segaceous raccoon draws Trump's Trump's

36:49

tax returns. Yeah. Twigs. A

36:52

hundred fifty year old out

36:54

the lights villagers with stories

36:56

about rural electrification. And

37:01

how this was because of like FDR.

37:04

I mean, honestly, that would be a huge

37:06

improvement. I would love to see more segaceous

37:08

elephant stories in the national press. Yeah.

37:10

But to turn things

37:13

over from Trump's week,

37:15

I'd like to ask the same question about

37:17

the Kamala Harris Tim Walls campaign. Starting

37:20

with you, Josh, what is

37:22

the Harris Walls campaign's closing argument to

37:24

voters in the last weeks of this

37:27

campaign? Because this one is a little

37:29

harder to discern than Donald Trump's. Yeah.

37:31

So there is one story in The New York

37:33

Times that I thought was very, very, very illustrative

37:36

here that was about not

37:38

about their campaign, but about the future

37:40

forward political action committee, which is this

37:42

gigantic super PAC that has like hundred

37:44

million dollar budgets. I think they have

37:46

six hundred million dollars, mostly from Silicon

37:48

Valley, like California. Billionaires

37:51

are putting money into that and

37:53

they are have a tremendous influence

37:55

on the campaign. And it's it's

37:57

an interesting sort of dynamic because on one hand,

40:00

That is obviously not what's on track to happen

40:02

now. They would probably best case scenario, they got

40:04

like 54 seats, he was gonna say they were

40:06

gonna hit 60. But

40:08

not exactly the best track record in

40:11

the world. I think he famously said

40:13

that he would rather

40:15

live in a world where CO2

40:17

rose by well above the Paris

40:19

limit than one where China was

40:21

a global hegemon. If

40:24

that happens, no one will be living in this

40:26

world. So good to tell. Yeah, yeah, thanks David.

40:28

Real quick Josh, does this polling

40:31

outfit, do they do polls about how voters

40:33

feel about Israel starting World War Three? Well

40:35

one of his things that I remember him saying

40:37

was quite convenient. Like he said that anti-Israel

40:40

messaging was the least popular messaging you

40:42

could do of any issue ever. Wow.

40:45

Yeah. What a coincidence.

40:47

Yeah, it's really crazy especially given that

40:49

like another poll conducted by, like

40:53

earlier this year found that supporting at Armisen

40:55

Fargo could give a generic Democrat the biggest

40:57

boost of like pretty much any other position.

40:59

It gave them a six point boost relative

41:02

to supporting the government. But I'll just assume

41:04

that that was just a good faith difference

41:06

in survey conducting techniques and not think anything

41:08

more of that. But he has

41:10

been in charge of a lot of their messaging.

41:13

And it's interesting because you do

41:15

have a difference between him

41:18

and the campaign. Where

41:20

the campaign is kind of very

41:22

hyper reactive to every Trump scandal.

41:25

I think they made like an

41:27

ad about the Kelly, like the John

41:30

Kelly comments or like some other scandal.

41:33

No, it was about like Trump insulting Detroit.

41:35

And they made that with like an hour

41:37

long turnaround and they made stuff about like

41:39

for online media and like other Twitter accounts.

41:42

But these firms like largely

41:44

have focused on like economic issues. They

41:46

have all these like surveys that show

41:48

that talking about how she's gonna support

41:50

Medicare for income care or whatever other

41:52

sort of like small ball kind of

41:55

like left wing economic policy is like

41:57

really the most effective thing you can

41:59

do. Well like talk

42:01

about Trump's fascism or whatever like the

42:03

list chani stuff is very ineffective And

42:07

this it's interesting to note that The

42:10

future Ford people actually did play something of a role

42:12

as far as I can tell and getting biting kicked

42:14

out of the campaign Like I had somebody told me

42:16

they were putting out surveys that showed Biden only up

42:19

by three in New Jersey And

42:21

we're testing alternatives showing him doing way

42:23

better So there's a bit of like

42:26

a war like between like the Liz

42:28

Cheney like campaign and the scoop Jacksonian

42:30

Democrats at future forward that is having

42:32

kind of like different messaging here that

42:35

it's very subtle But like

42:37

there's not much beyond that narrow band

42:39

of like kind of the small

42:41

bore Expanding Medicare stuff

42:43

are like just talking about

42:46

Bob Woodward books Their

42:48

messaging has not gone far beyond that for the

42:50

final weeks and Dave like on

42:52

the ground Like how do the

42:54

people like how do how do the average Democratic

42:56

voter or the voters that they're seeking to engage?

42:59

Like how are they interpreting this

43:01

message or messages from the Kamala Harris

43:03

campaign? So the advertising I

43:05

see I was in Arizona

43:08

those in Wisconsin I spent a little bit time to

43:10

filly and I will always watch TV there Or

43:12

if you load up any news website or

43:14

YouTube you see the ads and the Kamala

43:16

ads are very economy focused There are a

43:18

lot of her straight to camera saying Here's

43:21

how here I'm gonna I'm gonna fight price gougers. I'm

43:23

gonna do a middle-class tax cut and you're gonna have

43:25

cheaper health care And and

43:27

that's kind of that's kind of it the ads about

43:29

Kelly and Trump is dangerous They try to work those

43:32

in but you definitely they've ever talked to ad makers

43:34

You can see the gears working because they want to

43:36

pack as much as possible Into

43:38

30 seconds and so we're gonna

43:40

rebut and we're gonna mention our top policies

43:43

and this test at 70% That

43:45

would test 68 get that out of here get the 70%

43:47

testing one They're very

43:49

careful ads and the Trump ones are

43:51

just very visceral. I think

43:53

everyone We

43:55

naturally he's the issues for they

43:57

them he's for us. Yeah. Oh

43:59

Yeah, they have done

44:02

a ton of this. Where

44:04

you watch TV in Wisconsin especially,

44:06

and it's the they, them

44:08

ads, and also the Republican candidate for Senate

44:10

there is going after Tammy Baldwin who's gay,

44:12

and has a girlfriend in finance. If

44:15

you just leave the TV running over- She's in bed with Wall

44:18

Street. That was mine. In bed

44:20

with Wall Street. Yeah, so they're just, in

44:22

my view, they're more

44:24

cutting and memorable. But what Democrats say is

44:26

like, look what happened. Kamala

44:29

had a 32% favorable rating. She's

44:31

in the high 40s now. There's been

44:33

two months of negatives and she's still hanging in

44:35

there. She went from absolutely gonna

44:38

lose to competitive because we had this boring

44:41

plotting. They won't call it boring. This

44:43

repetitive message about the economy, it's all

44:45

very safe. Don't worry about

44:47

it. We've been adding people without subtracting too

44:50

many people. Please don't talk about Michigan because

44:52

we absolutely have lost tens of thousands of

44:54

voters in Michigan but

44:56

we're replacing- Well, Richie Torres didn't turn it around.

44:58

Yeah. That was still not even- That's

45:01

fucking insane. I get not

45:03

knowing how to finesse Dearborn and Tramic.

45:05

I don't get sending in the

45:08

most pro-Israel, anti-Palestinian congressmen

45:11

there is. He's

45:13

not even, he's not relevant. He's a

45:15

fucking backbencher. He's a fucking

45:17

backbencher. He doesn't even have

45:20

name recognition outside of his

45:22

district. Like the

45:24

only reason that he has any

45:26

name recognition in Michigan is because

45:29

people are like, Oh, that's the

45:31

guy who's directly called for my

45:33

family to be killed. Yeah. That's

45:36

the guy who said my family was faking it

45:38

when they died. I like, it

45:41

is one of the most baffling choices I've

45:43

had. It's a baffling

45:45

to the point that I was wondering if like

45:47

maybe someone on that campaign is

45:49

trying to prove a point by like losing

45:51

Michigan while winning the election. Yeah. I think

45:54

that's a big one. North Carolina or like

45:56

we don't fucking need you. We're

45:59

gonna like get the- information economy people in

46:01

like the Atlanta suburbs. They really think

46:03

they can replace that. It's

46:05

hard for me to view Kamala's strategy in this

46:08

election as one that is not that is

46:10

not primarily focused on winning the election outright,

46:12

but winning the election under a very narrow

46:14

set of circumstances. Winning the election with an

46:17

electorate that they can build on going forward,

46:19

which was like, I don't know, George W.

46:21

Bush, Republicans and everyone else. Like, it seems

46:23

to me like they're trying to make a

46:25

point of like,

46:27

not just not seeking the votes of

46:29

people who are against war, but like

46:31

actively proving that they don't matter. And

46:33

they very well could be proven right.

46:35

Yeah, it's interesting because you at

46:38

the same time, it like that Dave said they're doing

46:40

like so much better compared to Biden. Just

46:43

like for a quick point about down ballot

46:45

races, we are still consistently seeing and this

46:47

could be a point that Trump is maybe

46:49

more appealing or popular than he was before.

46:52

It could be a point about how unpopular

46:54

his administration is. But what you've seen for

46:56

like the entire past year across the board

46:59

and effectively every single state down ballot Democrats

47:01

running for Senate are out running her by

47:03

substantial margins where you have like Michigan, Pennsylvania

47:05

and Wisconsin are like all down to the

47:08

wire, at least according to polling, the presidential

47:10

level, all of the Democrats running for Senate

47:12

there have been relatively safe for like the

47:14

past year. I think they're up

47:17

by like four or five points out in the Southwest

47:19

where she's had like major issues with like Latino

47:22

voters and like

47:24

maybe suburban Republicans. You have like the candidates

47:26

there are running her by 10. So there

47:28

is if she does lose, it'll be a

47:32

very distinct environment or very

47:34

distinct set of results compared to what it

47:37

was in 2016. Because in 2016, you had

47:39

Hillary lose, but you also had no other

47:41

Democrats across the country win in states where

47:43

she lost. There was only one Democrat in

47:45

every race who won in a Trump state

47:48

that year was Roy Cooper, North Carolina. And

47:50

that was a local race. You didn't have

47:52

Democrats winning in Wisconsin or Pennsylvania, Senate races

47:54

there. So there was it was

47:56

like for the party as a whole, it

47:59

was a more kind of indictment. of how

48:01

they were seen broadly and their philosophical and

48:03

their in philosophically because it wasn't just her

48:05

losing but it was also like all their

48:07

recruits they did very poorly in Congress too.

48:09

This year even if Kamala does lose you're

48:11

very you're gonna see Democrats win at least

48:14

one race and almost every

48:16

single swing state where there is an election

48:18

on the ballot they're gonna win the North

48:20

Carolina's governor's race for sure they're probably gonna

48:22

win the like the southwestern swing states those

48:24

Senate races they're probably gonna sweep they might

48:26

win Ohio on top of all of that

48:28

so like

48:30

we're at a point where and this is not

48:32

entirely new if I don't

48:35

know how much they will factor it into

48:37

the results but if Trump does win there

48:39

won't be that kind of like endorsement of

48:41

his the larger Republican philosophy that you even

48:43

might have arguably had eight years ago because

48:46

there are a lot of people out there

48:48

who are maybe voting for Trump maybe voting

48:50

against Kamala but are also voting for Democrats

48:52

down ballot and that's I think is a

48:54

very concerning problem for Republicans long

48:57

term I don't know if you've seen

48:59

any of these voters Dave like Trump

49:01

Casey Trump Baldwin voters but like

49:04

it's a significant fraction of the population I've

49:06

met voters who they already made their mind

49:08

up and their vote in the Wisconsin especially

49:10

they really I'm definitely voting for gay ago

49:12

I'm definitely voting for Baldwin but

49:14

and they were still need to be pushed by

49:16

Harris when I was out with canvas or to

49:19

see that stuff but even in Texas I was

49:21

in Texas for only a couple days but Cruz

49:23

is polling worse than Trump in Texas and he's

49:25

always run a little bit behind yeah but he

49:28

his name is Ted Cruz his name is Rafael

49:30

Cruz and he's doing worse than Trump with Latinos

49:32

in Texas and that does make you think okay

49:34

there are a lot of people who just say

49:36

he's president low prices I got a stimulus check

49:38

I had all this good you know the Matt

49:40

Brunig welfare like the Superdoll that he talks about

49:43

that was in place just for Covid he gets

49:45

to take credit for all this stuff as bad

49:47

as 2020 was that people miss and no like

49:49

David Cormack doesn't get to do that this other

49:51

Republican just say yeah yeah what he said it's

49:53

like who are you you just you just showed

49:55

up like I don't there's no

49:58

video you be looking cool pumping your fists with pouring

50:00

blood you're just some guy and so the rest

50:02

of the Republican agenda is not as popular Which

50:05

is why they're still I mean

50:08

even they're kind of meaning themselves like I'm thinking this

50:10

is gonna be a Trump landslide They're gonna sweep Minnesota

50:12

and they're gonna sweep, New Jersey and then if down

50:14

the ballot It's like well, nothing else really like we're

50:16

doing pretty bad on every other race, but people people

50:18

do love President president low

50:21

prices. Yeah, all of his surrogates are

50:23

former Democrats Like his top

50:25

people like I think like if you look

50:27

at like those like like the memes like

50:29

oh It's the dream team like Elon Vivek

50:31

Ramaswami Vance J

50:33

of RFK Tulsi none of those people voted for him

50:35

in 2016. I don't think He's

50:41

the opposite of Drake I

50:46

Did that going back to the Kamala campaign

50:48

a little bit? I was curious about something

50:50

that I saw when I watched her most

50:53

recent town hall Which

50:55

I did I never got the temperature in

50:58

the room from like regular

51:00

libs on that one But I thought

51:02

it was a pretty bad performance. Yeah,

51:04

not the worst I've ever seen but

51:06

pretty shitty what accounts for

51:09

Kamala's habit of like Anytime

51:12

if any time it can even

51:14

be remotely brought up and sometimes when it makes

51:16

no sense to be brought up She

51:19

keeps falling back on not just January

51:21

6 but just in general

51:23

like Authoritarianism is

51:26

it just that one poll that said democracy

51:28

is people's biggest issue. No, that's the basis

51:30

for the entire Biden administration That's their entire

51:33

philosophy. It's how they understand themselves that their

51:35

whole like this is something There's a

51:37

very good article on this in the new left review Like

51:40

even like their industrial policy that like a

51:42

lot of left-wing left-lived people were very excited

51:45

about if you listen to how they talk

51:47

Like Jake Sullivan like Biden

51:49

himself on how they justify these Expansions or the

51:51

welfare state that they were trying to pass it

51:54

in some cases did pass It was never about

51:56

like the classical liberal kind of

51:58

like goal where reducing poverty is

52:00

an end in and of itself, getting high

52:02

growth or higher, like a more competitive labor

52:05

market is an end in and of itself.

52:07

The idea was that the end that this

52:09

is all a means to is fighting China

52:11

and it's doing this larger kind of crusade

52:14

of pro-democracy initiatives and this

52:16

larger kind of battle

52:19

of democracy versus authoritarianism that they see

52:21

is the story of the 21st century.

52:24

That's how they square the circle. I mean, if

52:26

you listen to Biden's Oval Office address on Ukraine

52:29

and Israel, like when he was trying to get those funds

52:31

approved in October last year,

52:33

he explicitly connected Israel and

52:35

Ukraine as countries that are

52:38

democracies being under attack. The

52:40

whole kind of sense

52:43

of purpose for liberalism right now

52:45

isn't really what it traditionally used

52:47

to be, which is like creating

52:49

a more just or fair world,

52:51

like the great society or

52:53

whatever their agendas could be called in the past.

52:57

It's kind of this neocon conception of what

52:59

the purpose of the American state is for.

53:02

It's like this idea. To remake the Middle

53:04

East and to remake the world as a

53:06

democratic, like this is their larger sense of

53:08

purpose. And like they're very giddy

53:11

about this. Like if there are entire books

53:13

like published kind of that are big like

53:15

fly on the wall inside reviews of the

53:17

Biden team and their whole sense of self

53:20

conception is like this

53:22

idea that they're in this battle of democracy

53:24

versus authoritarianism. And that's how they understand domestic

53:26

politics. It's how they understand foreign policy. So

53:28

it's not even that this is like something

53:30

to think is a political tactics. This is

53:32

how they feel a sense of purpose while

53:34

also being like complete ghouls or just get

53:36

checks from the UAE when they go in

53:39

and out of a public office. I

53:41

mean, that that's sort of what I mean

53:43

when I say that like they're trying to

53:45

win this election under a very narrow set

53:48

of circumstances and remake the Democratic Party electorate

53:50

so that like win or lose, win, lose,

53:52

draw. It's the project for

53:54

a new American century baby. And that is

53:56

the agenda. And there is no, there is

53:59

no but

1:08:00

they're just winning so, like they're just doing so well with

1:08:02

independence that like the race is kind of out of play.

1:08:04

It's a story with a lot of these races. With

1:08:07

Adam Laxalt, you know, my favorite bastard

1:08:09

in all of politics. Yeah. What would

1:08:11

his last name be before he got

1:08:14

legitimized? I think the

1:08:16

last name for battle, the,

1:08:18

well, that's if he

1:08:20

got legitimized. Yeah. Like, I mean, like

1:08:22

a game of thrones, a game of

1:08:25

thrones style, uh, last name would be

1:08:27

slots. No,

1:08:32

he's not a real Nevada. And it's not, no,

1:08:34

it's not, he's not a real Nevada. And he

1:08:36

lived in Virginia in between a

1:08:39

campaign. So he would be Raytheon. Yeah.

1:08:41

Yeah. Yeah. Uh,

1:08:43

the Democrats have a narrow majority

1:08:46

in the Senate. Uh, come next

1:08:48

week. I think they keep in control of

1:08:50

the Senate. Is that what I'm hearing? No,

1:08:52

probably not. They're not going to win as

1:08:54

many seats as they could have lost, but

1:08:56

they're West Virginia is an automatic loss because

1:08:58

the mansion didn't run there. And he would

1:09:00

have lost anyways, and Montana, they're like, um,

1:09:02

they pulled kind of diesel at the start

1:09:04

of the year. It's just totally fallen out

1:09:06

of grasp for them. Uh, so

1:09:08

like, let's say they win all these swing states, which

1:09:10

is actually like probably they're on track to do so

1:09:12

they went Ohio, which like they could, they're up by

1:09:14

like one or two points there. It's like at the

1:09:16

very end, this is around wind Vance and like

1:09:18

Ryan's numbers totally collapsed. So if we're waiting

1:09:20

for a Moreno surge, like we're kind of

1:09:22

running out of time for that. We,

1:09:24

the polls would have already been showing that now. So

1:09:27

if they, but if they went all those states, they're at 49 seats

1:09:29

because they lost the Wisconsin race and they lost

1:09:32

Susan Collins in 2020. Uh,

1:09:34

so that cost them two states and

1:09:36

Biden, maybe Kamala States, uh,

1:09:38

they'll need to pick up one. Um, so

1:09:41

you have Texas where Cruz is under running

1:09:43

Trump, but Trump has had decent numbers in

1:09:45

Texas. And like, I think there was the

1:09:47

New York times ball that had a cruiser

1:09:50

under running Trump by six, but if he,

1:09:53

uh, Kamala got the same margin. Uh, Biden

1:09:55

got in 2020. That would

1:09:57

be enough for our red with a second.

1:10:00

swing there would be enough for him to win by half

1:10:02

a point. But the poll also had Trump winning by 10.

1:10:05

So like if Trump doesn't win by as

1:10:07

much as that one poll says, like if

1:10:09

it's more of the like the mid single

1:10:12

digits, Cruz could maybe be in trouble.

1:10:14

But the polling there has like not like

1:10:16

we haven't had consistent leads for Alred.

1:10:18

There's also Florida where like it's technically kind

1:10:20

of still polling around the margin of error.

1:10:23

Rick Scott is underrunning Trump a little bit.

1:10:25

And that one maybe on paper could be

1:10:27

their best shot. But the early voting in

1:10:29

there looks horrific for them. So then

1:10:32

that brings you to the Nebraska race where

1:10:34

they actually could pick that off. And

1:10:37

that in that case gave them the 50

1:10:39

seats. But Dan as Osborne is not promised

1:10:41

who he would caucus with. So you could

1:10:43

get a situation where Republicans have 50 seats,

1:10:45

they have 49. Osborne like

1:10:49

is an independent like he said on like a

1:10:51

Reddit AMA that he'd be like George Norris from

1:10:53

100 years ago and just be a pure independent.

1:10:55

And then like I don't know who would be

1:10:57

the majority. In that case, it's neither like side

1:10:59

would have a caucus majority in the chamber. Yeah,

1:11:03

that's the Democrats have

1:11:05

been investing more in Texas in part because otherwise they have

1:11:08

to tell their donors not going to win the Senate. They

1:11:10

won't say a Montana is gone and they're putting in

1:11:12

the money for it. But there is a chance that

1:11:14

this is a Bill Mitchell election. There's a chance that

1:11:17

Republicans get to like 53, 54 seats.

1:11:20

Unlikely, but if that happens, I think that would

1:11:22

change if Trump wins with that Senate, then

1:11:24

the question for Democrats is, okay, how do we resist

1:11:26

at all because he can appoint whatever he wants. He

1:11:28

can get anyone in the cabinet, get anyone on the

1:11:30

bench. And we can't actually win the Senate back maybe

1:11:33

until 2028. So there is a Democratic nightmare scenario

1:11:37

that they've they've they're doing pretty good job

1:11:39

right now fending off of everything everything. Every

1:11:41

poll was right today. Yeah, he's

1:11:44

right. Like they would they would they would

1:11:46

they would go down to 49 seats. And

1:11:49

that would be bad for Kamala Harris. Like

1:11:52

she'd be the first Democratic president to take office without

1:11:54

the Senate. I think in 140 years. Yeah, corporate

1:11:57

Cleveland was yeah, but but they would take that because

1:11:59

then they can they can make a run at North

1:12:01

Carolina and they can make it they could they could

1:12:03

try to win it back pretty soon. Yeah, they could

1:12:05

try to win Maine. Yeah. All right.

1:12:07

Well, let's get this gets in my mind. My last

1:12:09

question. This is like one of our last shows before

1:12:11

the election. And I guess I always put it like

1:12:13

this, like over the last month

1:12:15

on this show, I've said, look, like it's

1:12:18

this is a dead heat election. But if

1:12:20

gun to head, I'm betting on who's going

1:12:22

to win the election. I say

1:12:24

it's Donald Trump is winning this election.

1:12:26

And I base this not on anything

1:12:29

other than just watching the game, feeling

1:12:31

the vibes, you know, just sort of trying

1:12:33

to interpret the energy and these like guys,

1:12:36

I think Trump is winning this election. So

1:12:38

I guess my question is, what

1:12:40

reasons do you what reasons is that

1:12:42

wrong? Or like, are there reasons to

1:12:45

believe that Kamala is is the

1:12:47

more likely victor on come next week?

1:12:50

Yeah, well, I mean, I would still like say even

1:12:52

with the polling as the way that it is. It's

1:12:56

tough to judge, because even right now, like,

1:12:59

despite everything, Kamala actually is still like does

1:13:01

have the lead in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, those

1:13:03

are the only states she needs to win,

1:13:05

like, she just wins those. And then that's

1:13:08

270. And it's over. I

1:13:10

like think that like the kind of conceptual historical

1:13:12

case for why she should win there is pretty

1:13:14

strong. I don't think like they

1:13:16

remember dies this easily, like we've gotten so

1:13:18

far and people are so resistant to Trump, I

1:13:21

can totally see reasons why he would win. I

1:13:23

think that like Kamala has run like has

1:13:25

not addressed some of the main like questions that

1:13:27

she needed to address with her campaign. I

1:13:29

don't think she's a strong politician. And she's

1:13:32

she's made that she's made that pretty clear over the

1:13:34

past couple months, despite like how well she started. I

1:13:37

don't think that she'd like the fact that she's only won

1:13:39

two races against Republican in

1:13:41

her career is really showing like at this

1:13:43

point, she's just not battle tested the way

1:13:45

that a lot of other Democrats running this

1:13:47

year are. But we like

1:13:49

the states that she needs to win are ones

1:13:51

that have voted pretty consistently for Democrats, the

1:13:54

fundamentals that we've seen and like the way

1:13:56

voters have voted so far, which like in

1:13:58

a very polarized period do toward

1:14:00

as a modest but probably decisive democratic advantage,

1:14:02

especially among the voters that you would need

1:14:04

to win the election. So just all like

1:14:07

the signs that we see, like if this

1:14:09

is a 50-50 race and it could land

1:14:11

on either side, we see more stuff pointing

1:14:13

towards one side like in terms of the

1:14:15

raw numbers and how people have actually voted

1:14:18

in special elections and primary elections than

1:14:20

we have before. And I don't, I

1:14:22

think people are kind of internally pricing

1:14:24

in a polling error in favor of

1:14:26

Trump. I've written an

1:14:28

article about that a couple days ago, like

1:14:30

pollsters have changed a lot to fix that.

1:14:32

We saw in 2022 like they were

1:14:36

very very susceptible in narratives that like

1:14:38

Republicans were going to do well. You

1:14:40

saw even nonpartisan pollsters changing their numbers

1:14:42

basically at a drop of a hat

1:14:44

at the first sign of a pro-Republican

1:14:46

narrative. So I'm not terribly confident that

1:14:48

pollsters like are really showing

1:14:50

their whole deck here and being totally honest. I'm

1:14:53

not confident that like if this is a race

1:14:55

where she like does have a strong lead in

1:14:58

a state like they may they necessarily show that because they

1:15:00

don't want to go out on a limb and get wrong

1:15:02

like they did in 2020. So

1:15:04

just all of those kind of fundamentals based

1:15:06

signs do lead me in her direction. But

1:15:09

like again I'm not ever gonna like say

1:15:11

she actually ran a good campaign or would

1:15:13

be like my ideal candidate or that Trump

1:15:16

doesn't lack certain strengths that other Republicans do

1:15:18

lack. So I don't think that a Trump

1:15:20

victory is is incongruent with a

1:15:22

larger analysis of American politics that says that

1:15:25

conservatism is in a very weird and tough

1:15:27

spot and hasn't done well in a

1:15:29

long time. Yeah that'd be it.

1:15:31

It's just that we were talking about this before with

1:15:33

the candidates doing worse than Trump down the ballot. It

1:15:35

would be and they

1:15:37

do have a week. There's this weird tendency

1:15:40

in political journalism to just declare things over

1:15:42

I should say people always wonder who's gonna

1:15:44

win like six months out. But stuff

1:15:46

has moved in the final week like Nixon almost

1:15:48

lost in 68 because

1:15:50

of the final week's momentum. Comey lettered.

1:15:53

I'm convinced kneecap Clinton in

1:15:56

16. I mean she would have made a lot of mistakes but I'm

1:15:59

convinced. that she would have it would

1:16:01

have just been a oh she almost blew it and

1:16:03

the democratic coalition is falling apart story but you might

1:16:05

Have went to one minute one. So yeah

1:16:08

Trump being overconfident and cocky blowing it

1:16:10

the final week There are the last

1:16:13

gettable voters Democrats think are not

1:16:15

the podcast guys They're just independence

1:16:17

who are not happy with the economy But

1:16:20

when they think of Trump for four years are like not that

1:16:23

She done enough to convince them. So I think it's But

1:16:26

yeah, yeah, I keep saying bill Mitchell election if it's just

1:16:28

a polling error like like 16 and 20 The

1:16:31

reason Democrats are so confident in 16 Even

1:16:33

though Hillary kept getting and kept stepping

1:16:36

on rates and falling down sewers every

1:16:38

day for the final month which is in 2004 and 8 and 12

1:16:40

the polls were always wrong in the direction of Republicans

1:16:46

and and Obama outperformed every time and

1:16:48

that stopped happening. So that happened this

1:16:51

time. Yeah, they're fine If

1:16:53

it if it's like 2020 they're screwed and I

1:16:55

do think she right now She's closing

1:16:58

out the race better than Trump and

1:17:00

that might matter that honestly might matter Like it

1:17:02

is it is seriously not there are people and

1:17:04

I met them in Wisconsin They were

1:17:06

like well, I just need to be convinced that she can

1:17:08

actually save row if that's your issue And I met one

1:17:10

of these voters that yeah, you're probably gonna show up and

1:17:12

vote You're not gonna vote a pretty good

1:17:15

question. She needs to talk about yeah, filibuster and shit and

1:17:17

how she's gonna deal with that Yeah,

1:17:19

there's something I saw during the town hall

1:17:22

where Anderson Cooper was desperately trying to throw

1:17:24

her a softball about

1:17:26

the filibuster and also the Supreme Court

1:17:28

and She

1:17:30

briefly sounded like she was you

1:17:32

know Going to do

1:17:34

something about both of them But her answers

1:17:36

on both those things ended with and we're

1:17:39

going to have a study group about that

1:17:41

Yes, that's what Biden did. He already he

1:17:43

did the Commission on the Supreme Court. She

1:17:45

learned from the best Well

1:17:51

You know, I mean like looking forward to next week So

1:17:54

it doesn't seem like there's much to

1:17:56

look forward to in the future save

1:17:59

for this one Of

1:22:00

course, like with Kamala winning, it would be like very

1:22:02

helpful, but it still works. Yeah.

1:22:06

All right. Well, that's something to look forward

1:22:08

to. We'll leave it there for today. I

1:22:10

want to thank Josh and Dave for joining

1:22:13

us on this, our final

1:22:15

election roundup before next week. And

1:22:18

we'll see you in L.A. on Monday.

1:22:20

See you guys. Our live

1:22:22

show with episode one, Joe Biden. Joe Biden.

1:22:24

Joe Biden, they will all be there. All

1:22:27

the Joe Biden will be in our live

1:22:29

show. Maybe even the governor of Pennsylvania will

1:22:31

be there. I've heard rumors. I've heard rumors.

1:22:33

Josh Shapiro is going to be making an

1:22:35

appearance at our election Eve live show. So

1:22:37

you're not as of he's

1:22:39

a very cool new outfit. You're

1:22:43

not going to want to miss it, folks. All

1:22:45

right. That does it for today's show. Once

1:22:47

again, thanks to Josh and Dave for helping

1:22:49

us break it all down for you guys.

1:22:52

Until next time, everybody. Bye bye. Thanks.

1:22:54

Bye. Later. Welcome to

1:22:56

the new American century. Yeah.

1:23:01

Welcome to the new American century.

1:23:06

I want to be just like my

1:23:08

president. I want to make more money than

1:23:11

I can spend. I want to build

1:23:13

more bombs than I can send. Somewhere

1:23:16

I can even spell the

1:23:18

name of. Welcome

1:23:24

to the new American

1:23:26

century. Yeah.

1:23:29

Welcome to the new American

1:23:32

century.