After Party with Emily Jashinsky - Mamdani Wins, What the Right Gets Wrong, PLUS MTG in the Lioness Den, with Victor Davis Hanson

Episode Date: November 6, 2025

Emily Jashinsky is joined by Victor Davis Hanson, Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, to discuss the Democratic victories in Tuesday night’s election, who New York City mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani really is, the controversial election of Jay Jones in Virginia, Jennifer Welch’s ridiculous comments about white people, and why Vivek Ramaswamy and Vice President JD Vance have a winning message if Republicans want to win in 2026 and beyond. Next Emily discusses the infighting among conservatives over Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuentes, The Heritage Foundation, and a powerful article in City Journal by Christopher Rufo. Then Emily details how she spent election night, the lessons learned, why Georgia Rep Marjorie Taylor Greene’s comments on The View about QAnon should NOT be a surprise, plus Emily’s thoughts on The Morning Show, and more. Masa Chips: Go to https://MASAChips.com/AFTERPARTY and use code AFTERPARTY for 25% off your first order.  Aware House: Visit https://awarehouseshop.com/discount/PARTY & use code PARTY for 15% off your first order. Vandy Crisps: Get 25% off your first order | Use code AFTERPARTY at https://vandycrisps.com/AFTERPARTY Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Welcome to After Party. It is the day after election day, and we are joined tonight by the one and only Victor Davis Hanson. How exciting is that? I can't wait. We're going to break down all the election results and zoom out for some historical perspective on Zoramam Dani, J. Jones, and where the Republican Party goes in the future as Donald Trump nears the second half of his second term in office. So we are, you know. they're going to break all of that down. I also have some thoughts on the morning show and Marjorie Taylor Green. And when I say the morning show, I don't mean generically any morning show. I mean the show called the morning show. It's taken a surprising turn this season. And whether you watch it or not, I think you'll find it interesting, not getting enough attention from my perspective. So, let's go ahead and start just by everyone. Reminder, subscribe. I'm really bad at reminding people to subscribe. So please, please subscribe if you haven't yet. Subscribe over on the YouTube channel and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. If you subscribe on the podcast feed, that's where happy

hour is delivered. It doesn't matter if it's Spotify or Apple. Happy hour comes out on Fridays, and it's just me talking with you guys basically through the questions that you send in on everything under the sun. So go ahead and subscribe on Apple or Spotify if you haven't done that yet. It's audio only, only on Happy Hour. And in just one moment, we will be joined by Victor Davis Hansen, But of course, first, I know you all know this. Those chips, delicious chips, they used to be cooked in delicious, delicious beef tallow up until the 1990s when corporations swapped that tallow for cheap seed oils, which are disgusting. Now those oils make up 20% of the average Americans daily calories and are linked to inflammation and metabolic issues. Somehow, of course, that got sold as healthy. Believe it or not.

But Masa chips is flipping the script. They use just three ingredients. You can look at the back of the bag and see this. It's amazing. Organic corn, sea salt, and 100% grass-fed beef tallow. No seed oils, no fillers, just bold, flavor, and serious crunch. Strong enough to scoop guac without crumbling. Snacking on masa is a whole different vibe. You feel satisfied, light, and energized with zero crash bloat, or, of course, that gross, sluggish fog. And beef tallow is the secret sauce. It keeps you focused, full, and not mindlessly munching. You really, really can taste the hallow. It makes a difference just in terms of the flavor, too. My favorite type of Masa chips, I think probably the lime, but I love the chero flavor. I love the spicy flavor. I honestly love all

of the flavors. So if you're ready to give Masa try, go to Masachips.com slash after party and use code after party for 25% off your first order. That's after party. That's code after party for 25% off your first order. So if you don't feel like ordering online, that is totally fine. Masa, that's very exciting, is now available nationwide at your local sprouts supermarkets. So stop and pick up a bag before they are gone. All right, let's go ahead and bring in the one and only Victor Davis-Hansson, senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. Victor, thank you so very much for joining us tonight. Thank you. Thank you for having me.

Of course. I wanted to start. I thought you would be the right person to ask about this. In his victory speech last night in Brooklyn, Zoran Mamdani, the incoming mayor of New York City, who ran on a Democratic socialist platform, cited Nehru. He cited U.S. Debs, just in this victory speech alone. So I want to go ahead and roll this clip and maybe get a little bit of your reaction to it, Victor. This is S-1. Standing before you, I think of the words of Jawal al-Neru. A moment comes but rarely in history when we step out from the old to the new.

When an age ends and when the soul of a nation long suppressed finds utterance. Tonight we have stepped out from the old into the new. The sun may have set over our city this evening. But as Eugene Debs once said, I can see the... No, Victor, there's a raging debate about what kind of democratic socialist Zoroamamdani is. Is he at his heart a Marxist? Is he a third-worldest, as some have posited? Is he merely sort of social Democrat of the type you might find in Norway?

way. If you ask Bernie Sanders, that's how he explains social democracy and democratic socialism. So who is Zeramam Dhani from your perspective? Well, I think you had it the first two times. He is a socialist. They all, to get power, all socialists say they're democratic socialists at one point, otherwise they would never be elected. They would just have to have a communist revolution. So they always usually come in legitimately. Fidel Castro did. Chavez did, Maduro did, the Bolshevik seized power, and they said they were going to have elections, they never did. And then the other thing is he's a immigrant, but he's a very strange immigrant because he's an Indian implant into Uganda, his family is, and they were very, very affluent.

So when he says that Israelis or settler colonists or something, he was a, he was a, he was a, he was a, from a he was an Asian that went in as a an elite into Uganda and uh he is as legitimate or as illegitimate as Europeans are who settled Israel which he always criticizes and then his family came over here and his mother was a very affluent filmmaker his father was a endowed professor and they were very controversial his father wrote a book in 2004 you know defending suicide bombing, among other things. And when you see clips of him speaking in Uganda, he has a completely different accent.

He sounds like he's from India. When he mentions Eugene Debs, I mean, of all the people that think that you would have been elected, why wouldn't you mention Lincoln or JFK? Eugene Debs was a hardcore socialist in the Depression era. He ran, I think, for president, four times. and failed every time. Third party candidate.

So he's not a model of success. He never was, I guess you'd never say he led a national movement. I don't know why an American would appeal to Nehru if that's who he's appealing to in India, the Indian nationals. It has no relevance for almost anybody who's listening to him. So I think what we're seeing

is somebody who worked for his mother, who was pampered, very affluent, came to the United States, and under the protocols of DEI or whatever, he felt that it was very advantageous to play that side of the binary. And then he was very smog, he's very charismatic, he can ad-lib very well, extemporaneously. And he captured a certain zeit-gast, two things, three things made his, four things made him possible.

because he has no experience other than just minor legislative career. There's been a radical demographic changes. Almost a half million to 700,000 Jews have left New York. And we have a lot of people who were foreign-born in New York, 65 of whom apparently voted for him about, or more so. And then in addition to that, it was an off-year election. It wasn't just a mid-term election. It was a odd year where there was only.

these few states that had offices. And so you were going to have a low turnout, which favored him. Then there was never a Bloomberg or Giuliani candidate that people could rally around as an oppositional. Instead, they bifurcated, they divided, trisected the field with Eric Adams and Cuomo and Silwa. And all of them had baggage. Nobody really, so they never united around.

They never got together and said, We don't want a socialist, communists, let's unite around somebody. And he took advantage of that. Almost the first thing he said as well in that speech, but more importantly, all along the campaign, he doesn't understand American history at all. So he was talking about nullification. He said, I want to tell you that the federal government

is not coming in here in ICE, and we're going to not allow ICE deportations. He also said he was going to arrest Benjamin Neti Nahahu. What he's basically saying is that I'm going to order the New York PD to tell ICE they can't come in here when they are federal agents enforcing federal law under, and he has no idea of the Article 6

of the Constitution, that's the supremacy clause. It says, in matters of federal jurisdiction, federal officers and take precedence over state and local law. And he has no historical sense because that's exactly what happened that caused a civil war. I mean, slavery was a root cause, but the federal government said we own Fort Sumter. And South Carolina says, I don't care. It's in our area of jurisdiction. And they said, well, we're monitoring the federal waterways and they fired on it.

And then additionally, Lincoln said to them, you don't own all of South Carolina. there's federal post office there's federal armories what i'm getting at is he doesn't understand our system of federalism there's federal post offices there's federal offices there's federal parks in new york there's federal agents FBI ice you name it and they have jurisdiction there it's not his city completely um but if he's going to do that then you can see what would happen if he said well, Mr. Mayor, there's ICE agents at their headquarters on Broadway, and they are going out and they're bringing, they've got arrested people. And he said, stop them.

And then you would have armed federal agents confronting armed. We almost saw that in Chicago. And Nancy Pelosi said that she would, that they could arrest ICE agents. So we're getting to a point is what I'm getting at is the 1850s, when John Brown and all of the preliminaries to the Civil War. And these people are ignorant of history, but it's nullification of federal law. It's illegal. I wanted to ask you about this moment from Jennifer Welch,

who's an increasingly popular, ascendant, progressive podcaster, sort of proudly vulgar and obscene, but also had this moment from live, from the Mamdani victory party last night. Let's go ahead here and roll S6. It was all white people here right now. They were ignoring a shoot. If it was all white people here right now, it would be boring. Everybody needs some spies to color in their lives.

Life's a list thing about America. It is the coolest thing about it. America. Well said. And we need to teach people how to praise that. These press-ting white people, they can work out of their crisis. So the stream didn't have the best audio, but probably the most interesting line she used there, Victor, was Americans have no culture except for multiculturalism. And then Medi Hassan agreed with her aggressively. What do you make of that?

It's just more sign of ignorance. We have a rich literature. We have, you know, Thomas Wolfe, Hemingway, Scott Fitzgerald, Thoreau, Emerson. We got one of the richest literatures in the world. We have the only consequences. of its kind in the world. We don't have the parliamentary system. So no president can be in the White House, and as he's elected, unlike the prime minister who can, his party can depose him and get another candidate without the people even voting on him. Most countries don't have a bill of rights.

There's a rich tradition of American music that predates Mr. Mondani and that. and we have a unique American, I don't know, it's a middle-class culture. I mean, people mock it, but there's the idea of the American vacation, the American summers, the American do your own thing. And so when she says about white people, she doesn't know anything about white people, I think she's a former interior decorator, and she's hung out with wealthy white people. I live in southern Fresno County, and it's mostly Hispanic now, but it's the,

the scene of the Oklahoma diaspora, the Jodes of novel fame. And I can tell you, there is, these are the people of East Palestine, Ohio. She's never seen poor white people. And in actual numbers, maybe not percentages, they're the largest group of impoverished people in the world. So then you basically have an interior decorator who gets on social media or a podcast and spouts filthy words and gets a following. and then she thinks she's the spokesman for white people

because she feels that people who are not white will patronize her and she, virtue signals and performance are her guilt. But she has nothing in common with the kind of people I farmed with for 30 years. I mean, I couldn't tell, when I see a person on a tractor who's sweaty and dirty and has no money,

it was just as commonly Mexican or Filipino or Armenian or white or whatever, But she's, this is part of the whole binary that Barack Obama inaugurated, where he refashioned affirmative action from a black, white binary to diversity. And he said, anybody on the 30% line that's not white is a victim and impressed, and anybody who's on the 70% white. And then he threw out all class considerations. So you have the Obama's and four mansions that are oppressed now. or you have Indian Americans. When Obama said,

Mondani said, I'm going to tax the more affluent and white neighborhoods. First thing came in my mind, he has no idea about the census. The census said of all 35 ethnic groups, the wealthiest per capita were Indian Americans from India. So I thought, wow, you're going to tax your own ethnic group because you, by statistics are by far the wealthiest and most privileged group in America. But under the Obama diversity idea, no, he's a victim. And he represents somebody who is non-white, but it's nothing to do with class anymore.

And that's what's weird about it. Yeah, that's so interesting because Vivek Ramoswamy and J.D. Vance, I thought, had two of the more interesting reactions to the results last night. And I don't think anybody's surprised that Democrats did well in three pretty blue areas, Virginia, New Jersey, and New York City. I think the margins were larger than expected in New Jersey and in Virginia referring to the governor races and the Attorney General race, certainly as well. But let's roll this clip of Vivek Ramoswamy because he had two major lessons from it. J.D. Vance had, I think, three. But let's start with Vivek because one of them gets at what we were just discussing. This is S2. We got our asses handed to us in New Jersey, Virginia, and New York City. Democrats swept all three. There's two key lessons for Republicans.

Listen carefully. Number one, our side needs to focus on affordability. Make the American dream affordable. Bring down costs, electric costs, grocery costs, health care costs, and housing costs, and lay out how we're going to do it. And number two, cut out the identity politics. It doesn't suit Republicans.

It's not for us. That's the woke lefts game, not ours. We don't care about the color of your skin or your religion. We care about the content of your character. That's who we are. So Vance, in his reaction, this is F1, we can put up on the screen that he posted to X, agreed on the affordability question. Even Donald Trump himself has echoed that just in the last couple of hours as he's interacted with the press. And J.D. seems to agree in his third point, basically about infighting, which has been rampant on the right over the course of the last week and seems poised to be rampant over the least this week that we're in right now and possibly next week, too.

it sounds like they're alluding to the the groipers scandal it sounds like the vague ramoswami might actually even be talking about people making attacks on momdani for being Muslim that's kind of what I took from that attacks on him for saying that he's Muslim I don't know Victor what did what did you make of those responses today I don't think they addressed the problem The problem was, first of all, the Republican Party did not understand the purpose of the shutdown. It was completely incoherent, and they kept trying to find a reason. And they kept trying to say, well, they've signed on to these continuing resolutions X number of times in the past. Or this was a Obamacare subsidy that they voted with a window when it would shut down.

So it was all adjudicated. Why are they doing? They did it because it was part of a larger strategy of chaos. Bedlam. So you attack Tesla dealerships, you riot against ice, you drop F-bombs, Gavin Newsom says that he wants to punch Trump in the mouth. Nancy Pelosi says he's the most vat. You create all of this chaos. You don't have a, they don't have an agenda that most people want if you look at the actual issues. I know Trump people say they're 70, 30. They're probably 55, 45, 45, close the border most people want that.

But when they created so much chaos, the Republicans didn't know what they were doing. So basically this shutdown was to get people who are on federal entitlements in these states, very upset that they were going to lose their checks, and it was Republicans' fault. And second, the federal employees, especially in Virginia,

but also were going to be laid off or losing. And then the ICE stuff was that ICE is a Gestapo, and it's not going after criminals or people who have previous deportation orders are which 75, 80% do. But it's her Linda on her way to keep your house clean who has been here 40 years

and oh my gosh, I just forgot to fill out my green card and they hit her over the head and that's the narrative they were doing. And so the American voter was kind of saying well before Trump there was not this chaos and now everything is, there's people protesting and the congress people are using f bombs and they shut down the government and they're they're running Tesla people and that was what they wanted to create and

I will guarantee you that after these elections are over they're going to resume the government because the purpose is no longer needed to shut down and cause chaos and win an election and they know and they know what Obama said himself when they shut down the government under him that this is a renegade action, you better win elections. If you don't win elections, you try to shut down the government. And it works for a while. Then finally people say, and I think the polls are showing that there was enormous support for the Democrats, and it's gradually starting to get even or even favor.

And they're going to get to a point very quickly, and they're going to say, it's served its purpose. We created chaos. We have momentum. Let's get the government, because the longer it's shut down, we're going to be blamed. And what I'm getting at is the Republicans, they don't need to get in a big fight over the Ark of Triumph at Arlington or a chain ball and chain tearing down the east wing or all of these Twitter stuff. All it's going to be adjudicated is the economy. And they're not saying right now, if Trump had been saying, Joe Biden over four,

years had over 23% 22% aggregate 5% a year I've only been here 10 months and the inflation rate is three and I'm getting that down but that's still too I have the highest stock market everybody said we were going to have a recession from the tariffs but we don't and even with the big beautiful bill and things I had to spend it looks like we're going to reduce not a lot but a little bit the deficit because of doge and because of the tariffs and GDP had a really robust quarter. But more importantly, we have 10 to 15 trillion dollars in foreign investment. We have record level of gas and oil. We've already increased 1 million barrels of production of oil. We've already started to pay back the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which Biden drained.

So there's all these things that are good now, but they're going to get a lot better for you. And that message never gets out. He thinks, you know, He's done a wonderful job with the Middle East. He's working on Ukraine. He took out the nuclear threat. He's got seven ceasefires. But George Bush, when he won the first Gulf War, George Bush Sr., it was just ecstatic in 1991.

He had 93% favorability. That was as late as January 1990. He lost in 92. And you know why he lost? Because James Carville and George Stephanopoulos and Mark Penn and Doug Schoen said, there's a little recession and we've got to say that it's the greatest recession

since the Great Depression. And George H.W. Bush, what did he talk about? Let's privatize Social Security and capital gains cuts. And he didn't get it. It's the economy's stupid, as they said. And so they have one year to get organized and get out the vote and say,

we are going to make the American people richer. There's going to be more jobs. We're going to have fewer illegal aliens competing for your job. That's the only reason we're doing. There's going to be less fentanyl deaths, a lot less fentanyl deaths because of what we're doing, a lot less criminals, but more importantly,

these are all going to have economic aspects of affordability. And so, and Mandami, it'll take him a year or to destroy because we know the reason they don't have affordable housing as rent control and zoning and regulation in New York. He didn't say, I'm going to work with developers and build 20,000 new units and give incentives to private developers

to build them and rent them. He didn't say that. And he himself is from a millionaire family. He's on a rent control apartment. Right. So I just wish that the administration would have taken this seriously, that they want to create chaos and don't there's only really two issues and it's the economy and to a lesser

extent crime in the border and foreign policy those things but and they're doing very well but they're not getting the message out i want to ask about jones because this exit poll is getting a lot of attention showing that about 10% of people who believe the text messages that were revealed by National Review on, I think it was October 5th, showing Jay Jones wishing death and suffering upon Republicans and their children. Among people who voted and found those disqualifying, about 10% of people who voted for Jay Jones. So that's probably the best way to put it. About 10% of people who voted for Jay Jones found those text messages disqualifying, Victor. And that has been ricoishing around the internet because people are sort of scratching their heads and thinking,

well, how do we get from point A to point B on this? And people are thinking, how does J. Jones after all of this survive and win, period? Can you help make sense of that? I think I can. It was part of a larger pattern. I was watching this. And they said, wow, this candidate in Maine has an SS third Panzer Division Totenkov tattoo. And they kept saying, this is going to sink him.

No, it's not. And they said, Chorrell had done that in the stock market, and she didn't walk in her naval thing, graduation. And then they said, Jones, you know, not only wanted, talked about killing and a political opponent, the speaker of the legislature,

but the idea of killing his kids and seeing the mother that bed baby and all this. And he knew the kids. kids. But the point is these are radical people. These aren't JFK, Hubert, Humphrey, Bill Clinton, Democrats. So there is no such thing as negative advertising against this type of historically motivated socialist, leftist, communists. People are dedicated. And to the degree you think you're going to shame them with scandal, it doesn't work. So they kept thinking, we're going to find the October surprise scandal. Because these people are scandalous. And they are.

But, you know, they said to Mondami, my gosh, he said he was going to seize the means of production. It was right out of Frederick Ingalls. So they had all these things they brought out about Mondami. They were very damning, fake accent, rent control, lied about defunding the police, all this stuff. But it wasn't going to work because these people are very motivated, hardcore socialist, the base of the Democratic Party. And in this election, the base is what turned out. And his message was, if you're a minority and you're poor, you're going to get a lot of free stuff from us. And if you're Asian or white and you're an upscale professional, you have all these degrees.

You went to Brown. You went to NYU. You've got letters after your name. You're an editor at Scribner's. You're an artist. You work for an NGO. You're a budding lawyer. But you're only making 80 or 100.

thousand and you can't buy a brownstone you can't get a car you can't take a vacation you and so it was a message designed for frustrated professionals young professionals who feel that they their titles or their education or their knowledge or their morality earns them a higher lifestyle that the and people who want greater subsidy and that is the democratic party today it's basically very upscale people who very wealthy but also professionals and want to be professionals and the poor and they've lost a lot of the middle class but they had a lot of what i'm trying to say not very well is that this election was not the beginning it was it was a reflection of what they've been doing and they did it brilliantly

the Hispanic vote went 49 percent trump 55 mexican-american males and yet almost every media story even though only 20% are people who do not have a criminal record or have not already had a deportation that they have, that they're deporting. In other words, if you go to the Home Depot two miles from here and you know there's a drug dealer and he's got a felony record and there's another guy with him and has already had the deportation and you arrest him and there's the third person and they say, let me see your ID and you know he's illegal,

then you're going to take him in. You've got to obey the law. then that one person represents 20% of the deportation. But that's the person that the left said we're going to focus on. He's just, they're minding his own business. You pulled him out of, and they never got the, when the administration's attitude was, well, they let in 12 million people,

so we need more deportation. We're going to do this and this. It was never, this is a very small group of people. We may get to them, we may not. We may have amnesties for the people who have never committed a crime. We've been here 10 years. But they took that narrative. So the Hispanic vote flipped to the Democrats in these two elections.

And that's really worrisome because that Hispanic vote was small, but it was pivotal in places like Arizona, Georgia, some of the congressional races in California. And they had won that, but I think there's an echo chamber on the right. It's kind of, we're going to own the libs or we're going to get on social media and attack this person. And they don't get the idea that the main issue is the economy and the left knows that. They don't have an answer for it. They don't have an answer for the border.

They don't have an answer. But they do know how to create chaos and bedlam. And then they see us, the voter, as going into a fetal position, putting our hands over our ears, and then saying, make it all go away. I don't know who did this, but Trump is in the White House. So it's got to be, I don't even know the issues. But it's just too much for me. And so I'm just going to vote for normality. And that's what they got to work on.

They have a year to work on it. The great Victor Davis-Hansson, senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, thank you so much for taking the time to be here to night, Victor. Thank you for having me. Appreciate it. Thank you. All right. So, things feel heavy right now. That's what I was just thinking. Truly what I was just thinking. Politics is divisive. The news can be depressing and it often feels like we as a society have more pulling us apart than bringing us together. But here's something simple that truly unites us all shopping small when you choose to buy from a small business. You're not just getting a product. You're helping someone's dream grow and you're investing in values that we all share. Honesty, craftsmanship, and community.

That is what a warehouse is all about. The good people at a warehouse have teamed up with nearly 100 small business makers across the U.S. To bring you handmade goods filled with heart and creativity, uniting people of all backgrounds in the singular mission. So let's choose connection over division and show small businesses the support they so, so richly deserve. This is a very cool website, everyone. It is a warehouse shop.com. So visit a warehouse shop.com and use code party for 15% off your first order.

that's a warehouse shop.com code party. You're all stuck with me for the rest of the show, which of course is exactly how I like it, how I want it. But I do have some thoughts that I want to pick up on. And I'm just planning to pick up on anyway from my conversation with the one and only Victor Davis Hansen. And sort of going off of what we discussed about J.D. Vance and Vivek Ramoswamy's conclusions coming out of the last 24 hours.

basically saying affordability, affordability, affordability. Just before we went to air here, a couple of hours ago, Donald Trump said, there's this new word, affordability. And obviously, the Republican Party right now is coalescing around this consensus that affordability has to be the centerpiece of their campaign efforts going forward. Now, we're just talking about the politics of this and the messaging right now, right? This isn't even to get to the substance, which you do have to deliver on as well. but, you know, for moral reasons and political reasons. But that wasn't really even there in the messaging as sharply focused as it should have been. Certainly in Virginia, where I was last night covering the victory party turned concession speech. And, you know, I think it showed up, Cuomo was not a Republican, but I think it certainly showed up in his very establishment-oriented response to Mamdani, which they were pretty, you know, pretty bold. on their odds of beating Mamdani. They were pretty confident about Cuomo. They continued to pour money into Cuomo's campaign.

He got endorsements, and it didn't work. It didn't work. Vivek says it has something to do with identity politics. J.D. Vantt says it has something to do with infighting, in addition to this question of affordability being front and center. And I think I want to just pick up on that point about priorities. Because if you are a political candidate, campaign, or party, you should have priorities that allow you to appeal in a way that wins elections. And if you are a movement, let's say you're part of the broader left or the broader right, you don't necessarily have to get elected right if you are at, maybe you know where I'm going with this, a think tank, for example, or a nonprofit or an outside interest group.

You might not have to win elections, but you do have to win hearts and minds. You do have to win in the battle of ideas. In fact, a lot of that is part of your job. You work at a think tank or a nonprofit. And I thought this city journal piece by Chris Rufo put the Heritage Foundation slash Tucker Carlson slash Groyper, whatever, Nick Fuentes, whatever. controversy in a good perspective. And I just want to highlight a little bit of what I liked about what Rufo wrote. His piece was titled, What Everybody Misses about Nick Fuentes. And,

you know, I think it's, without getting into everything, Fuentes, I think he makes a good point when he says, quote, the right-wing case against Fuentes should be focused on actions and outcomes. Fuentes divides the right, taps into the left-wing fantasy about conservatives as Nazis, rails against President Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance, and does not lead young men toward a better life. The incentives for Fuentes and the incentives for the right are completely opposed. If he wins, conservatives lose. This is a major test for the right and one it must win, arguing with the Nazism versus anti-Nazism frame misses the point, even if one side is correct on the merits. We need to rely on cool analysis instead of heated reaction. Instead of feeding

the Fuentes phenomenon, we should point the public in a constructive, direction and marginalize those who would sabotage the conservative cause. And this isn't just in response to Fuentes. It's in response to us now being on week two of a controversy over Kevin Roberts putting out a video with his opinion on Tucker Carlson hosting Nick Fuentes. Like we're multiple layers into the Fuentes controversy at this point. And actually today, just a couple of hours ago, Eliana Johnson got over the free beacon a leaked full video of an emotional, tear-filled Heritage Foundation town hall that took place today. And again, this was leaked.

It was after everyone at the Heritage Foundation sat in that room and asked what was going to be done about the leaking, why people were leaking. Senior people at Heritage said, do not leak, resign if you feel like you need to leak, but do not leak. And then in that very video where they're telling people not to leak, of course, it gets leak. And, you know, we could do a five-hour show, truly, we could do a five-hour show litigating everything that's happened over the course of the last week since Tucker Carlson sat down with Nick Fuentes and everything exploded. But that has been, you know, that has been digested so many times and it's still going on and there's still part of this new cycle is yet to come. I thought in light of what happened in the election, I mean, I just responded to Rufo and X and said, I agree and wanted to ask. that health care costs are about to get higher. We're seeing people plugging in there or looking at on the exchange right now.

Exchange is open, enrollment is open, and finding massive sicker shock with price hikes on health care costs. But health care costs are already extremely high. Republicans barely ever talk about health care costs. It's because it's hard to find a conservative consensus on what the Republican health care plan should look like. Nobody's saying that's easy. But it is one of the primary concerns of your average. voter, and it has been for years since before Obamacare, which obviously has made health care less affordable over its time. But let me keep going here. Healthcare costs are about to get higher.

Veterans are driving DoorDash to pay their bills during the shutdown. It's absolutely true. Media reports about that heartbreaking and infuriating. Snap benefits are on the line right now. Don't need to litigate the wisdom of our current SNAP program. Needless to say, I disagree with our current SNAP program, but there are we can all agree. who genuinely rely on it. Beef prices are up 50%, and as we all know, where interest rates are right now, young people can't afford homes.

Swing voters then are dipping into the news cycle to see another week of conservatives acting like a story about a man most normal people couldn't name who leads a think tank most normal people could not name is one of the most important things happening in the world. So obviously it's important to the right. It's worth talking about, I don't disagree with any of that, but the level of conversation

conversation and concern on social media, I think reflects the volume of the focus internally. Even as I've had conversations with folks over the last couple of weeks, sometimes it's hard to avoid because things keep getting leaked. And once something gets leaked, it has to be addressed. And it causes more drama and more drama and more drama. So, you know, I don't work at one of these think tanks or nonprofits. It's my job to sit back here and analyze it as somebody in the media, and it is just objectively true, the people who are leaking are making their own situation worse every single day. The people who continue to talk about saving Kevin Roberts, like it is an existential threat to America. Kevin Roberts is the president of Heritage Foundation,

which I have to explain as somebody broadcasting right now, because not everybody, even who's tuning in to a political talk show, knows who Kevin Roberts is. It's just, it's really in the scheme of things that weighs on the average voters mind every single day, not up there right now. And it's not improving the lives of average Americans. It's not. And Trump understood that was a problem the left faced in 2016. People who want to support Donald Trump might need to internalize that lesson a little bit better. When Trump was talking about getting people to the polls in the last couple of days, telling them, all caps, true socials, he was talking about energy costs. Seriously, if you look at his true socials over the last couple of days, saying, go out and vote

for Republicans. Democrats are going to make energy unaffordable. He's talking about material conditions that affect voting patterns. As Victor Davis-Hanson told us earlier in the show, the economy dominates the decision of swing voters, and voters in general. And being in touch with that is important. It's not to say any of these other conversations shouldn't happen. It's not to say that anyone is wrong to be upset about something in one direction or the other. But how absurd is it for a movement, the conservative movement, that's focused on, or that should be focused on, what? Improving the lives of the average American through, as we believe on the right, conservative values, right? We believe conservative values are what will improve the life of the average

American. It's not that hard of a sort of project or motivation to understand. There are all kinds of ways people can disagree with in that, even on this very issue, even on this very issue. But how ridiculous is it during a government shutdown when there are people? I'm not saying the think tanks can do anything about the government shutdown, although there's some argument that they could do this, that, or the other thing. But it's like astounding, astounding how much attention has been paid to one issue over, again, improving the lives of the average American. That doesn't just mean materially.

People could talk about, like, socially in ways that are material, in ways I would talk about, you know, I think marriage is something that has a grave effect on the material condition of people, especially people that you're trying to win over in this entire conversation. Housing, people's ability to afford houses. What is sending people's resentment to be channeled into the fringes of, you know, Groyperland or whatever the hell else, or the fringes of momdaniism? It's their material conditions, which oftentimes manifest in spiritual sicknesses. I think there are intense spiritual sicknesses.

And if I have to do the chicken or the egg, I think the spiritual comes first. I mean, there are studies of, I mentioned these a lot. I always am surprised more people don't talk about this. There's literally studies of indigenous tribes that have barely been touched by the modern world. And if you measure happiness, it's predicated on some pretty obvious conditions. Loneliness, you know, if you have good social, if your basic sort of Maslow hierarchy of needs are being met. So that includes health care.

But that's what makes people say. That's what makes people report outside of the modern world, people who are living without that kind of different material climate that we live in in 2025. There's studies on this. And that's what we find. So that's where I come down on the great chicken or the egg debate, whether it's economic or social, I think it is first and foremost social.

But it doesn't mean it doesn't go the other way around too, because it does. And we know that. And it's obvious. And again, it doesn't mean people who are experiencing ravages of a poorly structured, distorted, perverted economy, can't find ways to be truly content. and fulfilled. But the project of the conservative movement should be to help people live fulfilling lives. And for too many Americans right now, the entire conservative movement, and actually the liberal movement right now are sort of agreed that the goal is to assuage that.

And man, the volume of conversation about, you know, there's, I wouldn't have, I wouldn't have told anybody to turn the volume down after a couple of days or after 24 or 48 hours in that time frame. But afterwards, week two, week two, really, we're still doing this. You know, people, you have all kinds of resources, whether it's a platform or monetary resources or infrastructure that is a combination of both of those things. You should show the public. First of all, you should care about what the public cares about and needs. And you should show the public that you care about it too. And you should allocate your resources appropriately.

But we talk about social media all the time here. It's completely distorts. People who are operating in good faith completely distorts our incentives and the way that we discuss the way that we discuss these things. Because when there's that blank screen sitting in front of you saying, here, let me go on, what does it say on X? Does it say what it used to say? Yeah, it says what's happening. You go on X. It says what's happening. You get that blank message right when you log on to the feed. It's not just showing you other people's tweets. It's trying to seduce you into posting. And it does that also with the incentive system of likes and retweets. Again, this is all made to look like a video game. Notifications, as Tristan Aris talks about, are red because it's meant to trigger a response that the color red just biologically triggers in human beings. And it gets. you completely hooked on the dopamine triggers is a race to the bottom of the brainstem

to quote Tristan again. And that is, if you're aware of it, which everybody is at this point, it's just astounding the degree to which people know it and don't then change. And what does that speak to? An addiction. And it's just about everybody who spends a lot of time on X. It's about everybody in media and professional politics and people who are sort of hardcore followers of media and engages with media and professional politics. We're all in that every day. And if you're not just aggressively, relentlessly trying to pop that bubble and check yourself, it can lead down some really unfortunate roads. So on that note, let's go ahead and roll this clip of Mikey Sherrill, who is the next governor of New Jersey, who defeated the Republican.

And I want to just roll this clip of how Cheryl was campaigning in the waning days of the election. I am fighting for you. I'm fighting for affordability. I'm fighting to get your cost down. I'm declaring a state of emergency on day one freezing utility rate hikes. I said last night, I said, you know what? I'm not playing. right? I'm not doing a 10-year study. I'm not reading a strongly worded letter. I'm not going to convene a group. I'm declaring a state of emergency to drive your costs down.

And that's just where it starts because as I'm looking to the budget, I'm increasing that first-time homebuyers program so you can get your foot in the door. Try to build your family's generational wealth. I'm taking on those landlords who are colluding to drive up your rental prices. Will my opponent do that? No. His biggest donor's one of those guys that's being investigated right now. Okay. So see what she did right at the end. She talked about corruption, right? But tied it back to the question of affordability. And God forbid I were to ever become a political consultant that would not be my chosen path in life. And I am fully aware that I'm Monday morning quarterbacking the hell out of this. But I was covering the Virginia race again last night at the Sears victory party turned concession speech. And that campaign, you know, Abigail Spanberger did some of the, was running ads on Sears' Christian position on marriage.

Marriage equality, as Spanberger, I think, mentioned. But Sears was talking a lot about culture war issues. And, you know, I made a documentary back when I worked at the Federalist on the parents of Loudoun County, the amazing inspiring parents of Loudoun County, Virginia, which actually is like the wealthiest county in the country who fought back, many of whom were not wealthy. Middle class people who had voted for Obama, whatever else, fought back during COVID on COVID restrictions. They fought back on the CRT. They were seeing during Zoom lessons. They could hear what the teachers were talking about, the insane gender policies that had taken over. locker rooms and bathrooms in Loudoun County, Virginia. And Spamberger increased the vote share for Democrats in a place like Loudoun County, Virginia.

And what that tells me is a lot of those parents who may have seen Republicans talking about Winston-Morill-Seers as sort of the future of Trumpism without Trump. You know, what is the Republican Party? What does the conservative movement look like after Trump? when you have to have MAGA without Trump to keep the MAGA coalition, as people have analyzed. When Sam Sears was seen as somebody, because Yonkin, I think, has proven himself to be someone who could step into those shoes and chart this new course. But part of the lesson here is that what looked like the future of politics during peak woke is it's, it's, it's, It's different now, right?

And so that doesn't mean you can't talk about boys playing in girls' sports. You should. You must talk about that. That is correct. And it does matter to everyday people. It matters to working class girls who lose scholarships in track and field, for example, or swimming, which they have poured all of their effort into and end up losing, for example, scholarships because they're not finishing in the races as high up as they would.

or otherwise. It matters to parents who don't have all of the money in the world, to have the best nannies who can monitor every second of their child's life for it, not that that's a good thing, but you know what I'm saying. It matters. It matters. It matters. It matters to people who are disproportionately working class who live in communities with low levels of civil society, as Charles Murray, Robert Putnam, and Tim Carney have written about. That is a class issue. So yes, it matters and it should be talked about, but it should be talked about. out in a way that is framed on people's material conditions. You should tie it back to the same clueless out-of-touch elites

pushing these wacky policies that are impoverishing you, that are creating a new feudalism, that are dividing us. Bernie Sanders has tried that line before when he's asked about sports and many sort of democratic socialists have in the past, are asked about general LGBT issues. It's an elite distraction. And in some ways, it absolutely is.

I don't disagree with that. Of course. In some ways, it absolutely is an elite distraction. But when you're campaigning, you have to make the case. First of all, not that it's just an elite distraction. Bernie Sanders can say that. It has to take the next step and say, well, it's wrong.

Right? Like, that's the basic litmus test. If you can't say men should be playing, if you can say boys shouldn't be playing a girl sports, voters are automatically going to be like, who, that's a little weird. Hmm, wonder what's going on there. But if you're not able as the right to capitalize and say, this is part of the same broader project, you can lose voters who, you know, Mamdani won 55% of people, or I'm sorry,

Mamdani won easily, people who said cost of living was their biggest, this is according to exit polls, I think this was NBC. Cost of living was the biggest reason they voted. he did not win on crime or immigration. That was the top issue facing New York City. When people were asked that, he said, if you said cost of living, then you said, then you voted for Mom Donnie.

He won those voters, and he lost people who said crime and immigration. The voters he won, cost of living, 55% of the electorate, 55% of the electorate. So my argument is not just that it is a political winner, but that it is morally right to see all of this as sort of part of the same picture. And where Zaramamandani and I depart wildly, of course, is on the role of the state. And I think, you know, there are a lot of statists.

I think this is a huge flaw in the current sort of democratic socialist worldview, which is that statism is tied to. with the kind of elite plan to curtail speech. Some of these culture war questions come from the sort of statist, you know, arguably, I mean, they would probably identify as democratic socialist, but arguably like Marxist efforts to knit together a global society where control is vested in the hands of very few. And that's an argument that the right can make.

It's an argument the right can make. You know, you don't want to see people making it cynically and then ignoring it because their donors tell them to. And that's obviously a possibility, but not even making the argument, I think, is telling, revealing, and quite a mistake in and of itself. Wow, I really can ramble when I have something to say. Let me go ahead. And we're going to talk about Marjorie Taylor Green and The Morning Show in just one moment. So stay tuned for that.

Before we get to that, though. You know that I love Vandy Crisps. Did you know? I know you know this. Talked about it earlier. Those chips and fries were cooked in tallow until the 90s when those corporations switched to cheap seed oils. And now those oils are a disgusting 20% of our daily calories and studies link them to inflammation and metabolic issues.

That is not okay. It is disgusting. But Vandy Crisps is fighting back with a chip that is made from three ingredients, airloin potatoes, sea salt, and 100% grass-fed beef tallow, no seed oils. I promise you the first time I tasted these chips. I love chips. I'm something of a chip connoisseur. I love sandwiches, and I love to pair a good turkey sandwich with chips.

I turned to the back of the bag and marveled that it was really just those three ingredients. They're so good. The tallow packs nutrients for your skin, brain hormones, and makes the tips taste truly incredible. And unlike regular trips, Vandy leaves you satisfied, energized with no bloat or crash. They're 100% American-made, no compromises. The best chip I have ever tasted truly. And that tallow keeps you from mindless binging. my go-to is the barbecue, pure perfection.

So if you're ready to give Vandy a try, go to Vandycrisps.com slash after-party and use code after-party for 25% off of your first order. That's Vandycrisps.com slash after-party and code after-party for 25% off your first order. All right, let's talk about Marjorie Taylor Green, who has been on something of a liberal media tour, much to the chagrin of some of the enemies

she'd already made by the time she went on the liberal media, to her going on Bill Maher and The View and CNN, people who were really upset at her for not being a, quote, team player on the government shutdown, for telling Republicans, as we talk about here all of the time, that the health care policy of the Republican Party or the lack of health care policy of the Republican Party is probably a better way to put it, is not good enough. Many people are about to see a big premium spike because the Biden subsidies are expiring and nobody on the right thinks those Biden subsidies are good. Marjor Taylor Green is not arguing the Biden subsidies are good.

The alternative, though, is horrible for people who are going to see 17% spikes in their exchange plans, maybe more for some people. And Republicans are just asking those voters to cross their fingers and hope one day the GOP is able to have so much control of the House and the Senate and the presidency that they pass. consensus health care legislation, which they didn't do after saying that they would do it, that doesn't just repeal Obamacare but replaces Obamacare and is better. That is clearly, everyone knows, not in the near-term future. So you're asking people to swallow these massive price hikes, which I agree are going to,

in a long run, make health care less affordable. But either way, you either need people to pay a bunch of money now and hope for a good healthcare solution or you can make people's lives a little bit more manageable in a deeply unjust system that everybody agrees is deeply unjust and then also do a health care solution either way you need a health care solution so it's a matter of whether people are you know being asked to swallow these crazy costs which change the way that they live their lives of course or you know just like finding a way to fix the system and giving them a break on the way. And that's the argument that Marjorie Taylor Green is making. It's definitely the argument that I've been making. And people were already upset with her

about that. They were already upset with her, certainly about Israel. She's never been the most popular member of the Republican conference, though, of course, she is one of the top small dollar fundraiser. She may be the top small dollar Republican fundraiser in all of Congress. Very popular with a base, someone who was motivated by health care, as she told, the great Megan Kelly, to end up going into politics, motivated by MAGA. She was one of those people standing at rallies. She's sort of the median MAGA voter who made their way into Congress. Now, yes, her family is well off.

They have a small business that does very well. So she's not necessarily a working class MAGA voter. But she's somebody who's like really obviously very dedicated to the cause and has a fairly normal background. So let's roll Marjorie Taylor Green, stepping into yet another space in liberal media, CNN, Belmar, and now here she is on The View, making her case to a skeptical Sunny Hosten and is like, whoa, QAnon, QAnon. She's like glitching like, I, QAnon. Here it is.

Say you don't believe in the Q&OND conspiracies anymore? Oh, I went over that a long time ago. I mean, we can- So you've changed. Well, no, I haven't changed. I was a victim just like you were. one of media lies and stuff you read on social media you all have attacked me many times on the show but we have because of things that you read about me that weren't true clips we've seen or clips you've seen that took me out of context no but hold hold not even true let's take a second yeah yeah i'm getting that oh who's saying i'm getting the rap sign oh my gosh was that uncomfortable uh this is why it's best not to spend too much time with women all at the same uh venue it gets, well, it gets a little catty.

I guess that's the history of the view. They were relatively friendly to Marjorie Taylor Green, of course now because she's sort of out of favor with Trump and the White House over the shutdown issue, and that explains the friendly reception she's gotten since departing from the party line on health care. But Marjorie Taylor Green, back in 2021,

it blows my mind. I shouldn't be surprised, but it blows my mind that people don't pay attention to this. or don't talk about this enough. She made what I think is one of the most interesting, compelling floor speeches on the House, on the House floor in recent memory.

Back in 2021. And it was explaining exactly how she got sucked into the world of Q&N conspiracy theories. And it was so interesting. She talked about how, like many Americans, she does not trust institutions, and thus her mind was fertile ground for people to plant,

the seeds of completely incorrect information that are often conspiratorial. I'll just read a little bit from it. She says, when we elected President Trump and then I started seeing things in the news that didn't make sense to me like Russia collusion, which are conspiracy theories and also have been proven. So these things bothered me deeply and I have realized just watching CNN or Fox News, I may not find the truth. So she says, I started looking up things on the internet asking questions like most people do every day using Google. I stumbled across something and this was at the end of 2017 called QAnon. Well, these posts were mainly about this Russia collusion information. A lot of it was some of what I would see on the news at night,

and I got very interested in it. So I posted it on Facebook. I read about it. And she goes on to say, you know, I didn't trust the government really because people here weren't doing the things that I thought that they should be doing for us, the things that I just told you I cared about. And I want you to know a lot about American, a lot of Americans don't trust our government. And that is sad. And she just goes on to say, when I started finding misinformation lies, things that were not true in these Q&on posts. I stopped believing it. And I want to tell you any source, and I say this to everyone, any source of information that is a mix of truth and a mix of lies is dangerous, no matter what it is saying, what party it is helping anything or any country. It's about.

It's dangerous. At the end of the speech, she said, we allow the media that is just as guilty as Q&N. Will we allow the media that is just as guilty as QAnon of presenting truth and lies to divide us? And hearing her confront Sunny Hosten about also being duped by conspiracy theories And with such a quick and clear, concise retort, Marjorie Taylor Green is speaking and picking up on because of her arc coming from actual grassroots MAGA itself, she is much more in touch with the kind of average normie Republican voter than people here in Washington, D.C., who have adopted MAGA

and wear it like a suit, of course, but privately talk all kinds of trillions. trash about Maga and Trump, that's absolutely a thing. And wouldn't be caught dead at like an Applebee's. Seriously, wouldn't be caught dead at Applebee's or wearing, you know, they're going out hunting or, you know, wearing their, their camo, unless it was, you know, in vogue. Unless it's, of course, Carrhart, then of course they'll be caught wearing it. But those types of folks, they have no idea what the experience, the news consumption experience for the average American is like. And Marjorie Taylor Green addressed that years ago, actually very eloquently.

And guess what? It never penetrated the narrative. It never penetrated the narrative. I get that Marjorie Taylor Green is in everybody's cup of tea, and I get people may disagree with her on Ukraine and Israel. I disagree with her certainly on things. things. But if you don't understand what she understands about where the average voter is coming from, you're the problem. She's not the problem. And I thought that appearance on the view and that particular exchange really should serve as a lesson to people here in D.C. who think Marjorie

Taylor Green has gone off the reservation, which question probably not allowed to say anymore, but has gone off the reservation and is no longer a team player. She's actually a canary in a coal mine. That's what she is. I get the people are suspicious when someone goes into a liberal media space. I'm suspicious of that myself. But she has defended MAGA every single time she's gone into that lion's den. When people are laughing at her for what she thinks as a Christian about aliens on real time with Bill Maher,

she gets laughed at. And she doesn't, she doesn't blink. And that's because she comes from the actual grassroots in the actual MAGA world. And so if you want to criticize her for being opportunistic and cynical, whatever, I would just ask that you watch more than the clips because she's actually being a pretty aggressive and protective. I would say steward of the MAGA brand. And she is correct. You know, there are some reports she's thinking about running for president.

I don't know that that's a good idea. But we'll see. You know, some people run for president as messaging campaigns, right, to shift the Overton window and to force the field to grapple with some important questions. That's largely why Bernie Sanders ran in 2016. He didn't think he was going to be president. He didn't think he was going to get as close as he did to Hillary Clinton twice. He was sort of this curiosity in Washington, D.C., a kind of crunchy Vermont guy who was a little bit crumaginly. And then he became like the left's grandfather.

And surprise everyone because he was speaking to something that people really cared about. Again, you don't have to become a statist or a protectionist or like fully. You don't have to like give your, maybe you don't agree with the ideological direction of populism. Fine, fine. But most of the people who don't agree with the ideological direction of populism, it manifests in a way that reveals they just are out of touch or have contempt for kind of the average voter. the average person, even they don't know it. That's the way it manifests. And that's really, that's really what gets me right now is that people taking shots at the populists, which is, again, like, it's fine to disagree with them. I disagree with them on many things. Fine. But they're

the ones that have the worst, that continue to have the worst understanding of the lives of actual Americans and the attitudes of actual Americans and the needs and wants of actual Americans. So I wanted to say that about Marjorie Taylor Green. And before we go, I also wanted to highlight this recent scene from The Morning Show, which is an Apple TV production, very splashy, glossy Apple TV production starring Jennifer Aniston and Reese Witherspoon, among other like top level celebrities. John Hamm is often in the show when it started. I don't want to spoil anything. Actually, I'm just not going to spoil anything, but big, big celebrities on this show. And it traces the, uh, the, struggles of a major media organization, a major corporate media organization. It's actually

very succession-e. It's more than it's like newsroomy, it's succession-e. It's probably more emphasis on the business and the news, but it's quite an interesting glimpse at the overlap between business and news. I think Brian Stelter's a producer on it, and it's loosely based on a book that he wrote. It is absolutely leaning to the left. No question about that. This season, they have a Joe Rogan type character. And it's going in some surprising directions. One surprising direction, it's difficult to watch the morning show because often it'll relitigate COVID.

So the seasons are always like a couple of years behind. And then it'll relitigate big tech stuff or relitigate in this case, in the case of this season, kind of that peak woke era of the last election. Like right now they're in the midst of the Paris Olympics and all of that. dealing with AI. And so let's watch the scene. And this is why I mean it's kind of more businessy than newsy. The scene where one of the top executives tries to debut at kind of an upfront event with the media, an AI character that can interact with news consumers. And that's why she's threatening to sit out the Olympics and why she's boycott in today's event. This is over another character's various drama, one of the other journalists, various dramas.

Well, that's Chris is great. We love Chris, but we all know DEI is dead. Also, it doesn't work. DEI's dead. Maybe it never worked, and we were all just too afraid of the backlash to say it.

Fuck. That's Jennifer is too. I need to clarify that, of course, diversity is important to us at UBS. You mean we value diversity when we need the black anchor to save the day after an Iranian athlete defects in your watch. What defection and does the IOC? That's Kara Swisher in the show.

Why? Then again, I'm racist and sexist, and I stepped over people who look like me to get to where I am. So what do I know? I'm racist and sexist. Turn it off. Can a bad person be in love and love? Turn it off. I look at Miles and I can't decide.

So the show is pretty carefully center left. And occasionally there are streaks of rebelliousness in that center-left worldview, which is my, that would be kind of my assessment of major media now with what, like a decade of experience hanging around to the journalists. That's kind of my general assessment of major media because journalists are the personality types that do not want to feel like conformists, right? Like they want to feel, Jake Tapper is a really good example of this, right? Like he has an enormous talent of picking up on where the wind is blowing. You thought maybe I was going to surprise you? I wasn't.

That's Jake Tapper's talent. And he'll say something contrarian. The moment that is becoming convenient to say something contrarian. And so I think that's the case with the morning show here. It's sort of convenient to have the reality presented that most corporate media executives probably were thinking DEI is doing more harm than good doesn't work. It's probably 50-50, but many of them. This AI was trained on this executive and her interactions, her history. And they're making this case, I think, at a time when it's become much more convenient

to see a Joe Rogan figure with nuance or to see a, to see the DEI conversation with some nuance and to turn the lens back on corporate media itself and say there are structural corruption questions, problems baked into the way major media is doing business. This is a major media network that's recently been merged. And so, again, there's a lot of succession in this show. And what it's doing is kind of turning the camera back on corporate media in ways that are occasionally very accurate and interesting. So it's curious to me. I mean, I think the morning show sometimes is two in the weeds and appeals basically to journalists and the type of people that watched like Jeff Daniels's weird larping project in the newsroom.

That's a pretty narrow audience, so maybe that's why it doesn't get talked about. But this is Jennifer acting, Jennifer Aniston, Jennifer acting, Jennifer Aniston's best performance. The writing in this particular season, I think, is pretty clunky. But if we're assessing all of the seasons, she's out acting Reese Witherspoon, who has an Oscar, she's out acting, dare I say John Hamm, who I think is very good in the show. I think it's the performance, and I know it's television, so ooh, but I think it might be the performance of her career. especially the earlier seasons. And so it's quite an interesting watch.

If you're not watching it, if you haven't watched it, which I find is true of so many people, might want to add it to your list. Again, it's kind of hard to go back and watch COVID, and the show is absolutely center-left. But every once in a while, that streak of rebelliousness, you know, the people who write the show,

produce the show, they want to feel a little bit non-conformist, right? Like, they're artists. they're writers, they're journalists, they want to feel like they're capturing something, and they're capturing something real, and they're pushing boundaries, even if it's just here and there. So those here and their moments can be really, really interesting. And we so infrequently discuss the business of media in our media criticisms. And this show is helpful for focusing more on the business than actually on the substance of the news itself.

And so even if I disagree with a lot of the conclusions that are being posited by the show, corporate media is absolutely corrupted and influenced by those terrible motivations, this bad incentive structure. And it's so one of the funniest parts of the show, unintentionally funniest parts of the show, is the self-congratulatory, self-seriousness of the journalists or like, This is media. I am a journalist. How dare you make me talk about the weather. That stuff's pretty funny. Or like the lines are like, it's, it's like if Don Lemon wrote a show about his time at CNN. It's like Don Lemon's autobiography. That's what the morning show. That's what the dialogue is. But again, it has some moments of real brilliance. Dare I say it. All right. I will wrap there for the evening because guess what, I will be back recording Happy Hour Tomorrow. That airs on Fridays. So make sure you're subscribed over on the podcast feed for that. And I don't know if you missed

this news this week, but After Party is going to be airing on the brand new Megan Kelly Channel 11, Sirius XM. It's going to be airing on Wednesday and Friday at 10 a.m. Eastern Wednesday and Friday. And then guess what? You're going to get so much more of me. Megan announced this yesterday, but the 2 p.m. hour, right after Megan, Channel 111. That's me. I'll be there. So if you have Series 6M, come hang out. If you don't have Serious XM, get it so that you can come hang out

because we're going to be there doing the Megan Kelly wrap-up show. And it's so exciting. The Megan Kelly Wrap-up Show, weekdays, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Thursday, Friday. You'll get me. Some days, twice, on Channel 11. 2 p.m. hour. See there, everyone.