Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar - 10/15/24: Is Kamala LOSING Last Path?, Early Voting Data Revealed, Kamala's 'Black Male' Voter Plan and Potential Joe Rogan Appearance

Episode Date: October 15, 2024

Krystal and Saagar discuss the latest polls showing early voting data and if Kamala is losing her path to victory, Kamala's plan to win over "black male" voters, and the rumors that Kamala is potentially going on Rogan. To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show AD FREE, uncut and 1 hour early visit: www.breakingpoints.com   Merch Store: https://shop.breakingpoints.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an iHeart Podcast. Camp Shane, one of America's longest-running weight loss camps for kids, promised extraordinary results. But there were some dark truths behind Camp Shane's facade of happy, transformed children. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually like a horror movie. Enter Camp Shame, an eight-part series examining the rise and fall of Camp Shane and the culture that fueled its decades-long success. You can listen to all episodes of Camp Shame one week early and totally ad-free on iHeart True Crime Plus.

So don't wait. Head to Apple Podcasts and subscribe today. I know a lot of cops. They get asked all the time, have you ever had to shoot your gun? and subscribe today. Taser Incorporated. I get right back there and it's bad. Listen to Absolute Season 1, Taser Incorporated, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Clayton English. I'm Greg Glott. And this is Season 2 of the War on Drugs podcast. Yes, sir.

Last year, a lot of the problems of the drug war. This year, a lot of the biggest names in music and sports. This kind of starts that a little bit, man. We met them at their homes. We met them at the recording studios. Stories matter and it brings a face to it. It makes it real. It really does.

It makes it real. Listen to new episodes of the War on Drugs podcast season two on the iHeartRadio app, Apple podcast, or wherever you get your podcast. Hey, guys. Ready or Not 2024 is here, and we here at Breaking Points are already thinking of ways we can up our game for this critical election. We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade the studio, add staff, give you guys the best independent coverage that is possible. If you like what we're all about, it just means the absolute world to have your support. But enough with that. Let's get to the show. Good morning, everybody. Happy Tuesday. We have an amazing show for everybody today. What do we have, Crystal? Indeed, we do. We got Logan back in house to give us the latest update

on his model and also some new polling developments, both with regards to the presidential race in Pennsylvania specifically and with regard to Senate races. Texas may be more interesting than people previously thought, so we'll take a look at all of that. Also, Kamala Harris yesterday announcing her policy plan for black men, and it is really something. Apparently, I don't know. Well, I'll just save all of my commentary on that for that. It involves weed. It involves weed and crypto and male mentors. And it's the most neoliberal thing I've literally ever seen. So we'll dig into that. Also, might be going on Joe Rogan, Kamala Harris.

Certainly possible. Yesterday we covered that Trump may be going on with Joe Rogan. And today, so we felt the need to get this into the show today. But apparently her people are in talks. So that would be interesting. I'm hoping. I think it'd be fun. Clearly, we're trying to make a pitch-for-the-mail vote, bro vote, with all this crypto and Rogan doings.

So we'll dig into that. We also, Trump making some truly wild comments that we wanted to make sure and cover and what that could pretend in terms of Election Day and a future Trump possible administration. We're also going to take a look at this supposed third assassination attempt on Trump, which appears to be nothing of the sort. We'll bring you all of the details there. We also wanted to take some time out to take a look at the real estate market in Florida. Florida experienced this massive during COVID and post-COVID boom. Many people moving to the state, you know, Ron DeSantis and other politicians really, really bragging about that, very proud of that. Some of that may be reversing now. So we're going to dig into the real estate market there, especially exacerbated now by the state being hit by two very severe hurricanes. We've got some, once again, horrific updates for you out of Israel as well,

including a New York Times report about how Israel has been systematically using Palestinians as human shields. Well-documented, sourced actually to the soldiers themselves who are engaged in this practice. So we'll break all of that down for you as well. That's right. Before we get to any of that, make sure you go and subscribe, BreakingPoints.com. You get access to our exclusive election content, including one of our segments today with Logan. So if you want to be able to watch that and everything, the show Uncut AMAs, you can take advantage. BreakingPoints.com, become a premium subscriber. Let's get to Logan.

Joining us now, Logan Phillips, our exclusive election forecaster. Logan, we love seeing you here at the desk. Welcome back, man. Hey, love to be here. Awesome. All right, let's dig into it. You've got your forecast race to the White House. Let's go and put that up there on the screen. We've only got 20 days until the presidential election. You currently have it, actually, it's narrowed a little bit since we talked last time. You have it 55-45 for Kamala Harris. Effectively, in my head, that's like a toss-up, right? You know, with only 5% margin or so. So talk to us about some of the movement within that why things have maybe tightened with a little bit

With less time to go now before the rate Yeah, there's two reasons Donald Trump's gained a little bit in the national polls Um, we seem to see more movement in the national polls that we do in some of these swing states Yeah, but you know Harris's lead is crept a little bit under 3% nationally The other thing is we had a Russia poll showing Trump ahead in Michigan and Wisconsin now, right? Some of these were lower quality polls, but they're enough of them that they, at least for me, and I think for everyone else, they kind of pulled it a little closer. So whether that's true or not, we're going to get a better sense in the next few days, but it's certainly a canary in the coal mine for

Harris. Got it. All right. Well, let's, oh, sorry, go ahead, Carousel. Yeah. You got it. All right. Well, let's continue. Let's continue then on the electoral college, because this is where, what you were just talking about with the swing states, this stuff really matters. So A2, please, if we can put that up on the screen. Here you have in the overall seven key swing states, you actually have Trump up by 0.5 there in the state of Pennsylvania, arguably the most important one. Wisconsin, though, you have Harris up by one. In Nevada, I want to come back to this because you have Harris up by 1.6. It's a little bit different than what I've seen elsewhere. Trump up in North Carolina, and then you also have Wisconsin pretty well close there. So maybe explain a little bit of where things are here in the forecast.

Also, I misspoke. I apologize. Pennsylvania, you have Harris up by 1.3. Just explain a little bit here, this margin, some of the movement again that we've seen here, and your theory of whether they'll all move together or they won't. Yeah, to some degree, they definitely will move together. But there still can be that gap. And if the election is as close as the polls suggest and there isn't a big polling list, you could absolutely see division, right? But if either candidate overperforms even by, like, one and a half points, they could sweep all of them potentially. Yeah. And I think there's something really interesting going on right because like the last honestly like at least since 2012

We've seen Midwestern states that are a little bit more white like shift Very very fast towards Republicans Yeah And Democrats start to zoom forward in the Sun belt so fast that states like Georgia that weren't even close to in play You know are going for them if they win the popular vote by enough But this year it seems like the breaks have been stopped on both of those trends and maybe even reversed. And I'm wondering if that has something to do

with the strategic objectives of both parties. The iceberg for the GOP is their low performance with non-white voters that will kill them as the country becomes majority minority. And for Democrats, the short-term iceberg, the one that almost cost them in 2020 and did cost them the election in 16 is their poor performance with white voters.

And so perhaps this is both parties achieving their goals to some degree, which has caused the map to kind of shift a little bit in the other direction where Democrats are doing better than they did in the Midwest last time relative to the national vote and actually maybe even worse in Georgia and Arizona. Yeah. So sticking with that point, you're specifically talking about Democratic gains with white voters, probably white college educated voters, and then Trump and Republican performance with black and Latino voters, specifically men, which we're about to get to in a little bit. Yeah. Yeah. And we'll see how much it goes in reality. I mean, there's a constant trend of polls underrating Democratic support of black voters. And, you know, New York Times, Nate Cohen went into this recently as one of the

possibilities, right? Is that some of the supporters that are some black voters that say they're going to support Republicans don't often vote necessarily. They're low propensity voters. Yeah. So it hasn't always shown up. Part of that is due to habits. Some of that is due to the GOT efforts. In the black community, you're often targeted more towards Democratic groups, right? True.

And Republicans haven't really put much effort or resources in. They're just starting to, but they're not going to catch up in one cycle. Yeah, we're going to cover in the next blocks on Kamala Harris's effort to reach men in general, black men specifically. And I've had the same question in my mind because back in 2020, there were also a lot of polls that showed like, oh, Joe Biden might underperform with black men. But then when it came to Election Day, he had the same performance as Democrats typically have. So I think that's a big question mark. We wanted you to dig into a little bit of Pennsylvania because I imagine your assessment is the same as ours, same as a lot of other people that Pennsylvania may be effectively the whole ballgame. There's some interesting early voting data that I wanted you to take a

look at and tell us what, if anything, we should make of it. Tom Bonior, who's with Target Smart, which is a Democratic-aligned firm, but, you know, I mean, their data is just data. It's just data. Taking a look at it. So let's put this thread up on the screen. Let me show you a few pieces of this. So he says, if you look at the vote report in Pennsylvania so far, Democrats have a solid advantage in terms of party registration, though the gap is smaller than it was in 2020 at the same point. But that doesn't tell the whole story. Go ahead to the next one here. We can take a look. He says, let's look at the early vote by modeled partisanship. So not just what people self identify, but what their target smart modeling suggests their vote will be. It shows a wider

Dem lead than at this point in 2020. Why is that? The answer is simple. The model believes that the unaffiliated voters are more Democratic than they were in 2020. If we could go to the next one as well, he's been pointing out that there appears to have been in multiple states a huge surge in Black women registering to vote and so far also turning out to vote. He says, looking at the racial breakdown of women, early voters in PA, we see the biggest increases among women of color, especially black women whose turnout is 248% of their turnout at this point in 2020 compared to 146% for white women. So women in general turning out at higher rates than they do in 2020. What, if anything, do you make of these numbers? How should we think

about these things? Yeah, I don't know if it can tell us too much about who's going to win because it's so hard to interpret early vote accurately, especially given how much the electorate is changing with their early voting habits post-COVID. That being said, it does tell us a story of what the parties are trying to do and whether they're being successful. Republicans were trying really hard to reverse some of the fears about early voting and voting by mail. This suggests maybe they've made some ground on that front. That doesn't mean they're gonna win the election. Some of these guys would have voted on election day. But it's a lot easier when you have a GOTV operation

to get people to vote early because you don't have to then worry about them in the final stretch and you can focus your resources elsewhere. You can kind of check them off and focus on the people who you're still working to persuade to turn out. Exactly.

And then on the Democratic front, right, as we were just talking about, the fear is, are they going to have the same level of turnout with black voters, especially in Philadelphia and Milwaukee? And so we're seeing some good signs in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin on that front for Dems. And, you know, turnout was high across the board. It was a little lower in some of these cities in 2020 relative to the rest of the state. But Democrats managed to win anyway. And they're hoping that that doesn't happen in 2024.

And this is a sign that their plan to change this is working. And the Harris campaign, everyone says, has a pretty great GOTV operation. I think there's a question mark on Trump's because he has had his super PACs take the lead on that. They're using some new strategies and it could work out. It could also kind of blow up in their face. And a lot of GOP operatives are worried about that. I've seen that. Well, Elon is a big part of the turnout operation in Pennsylvania, is he not? Yeah, it's the America PAC.

Yes. Yeah. So sometimes innovation in politics is very important and can work. And Elon himself is kind of interesting because the guy either kills it or it fails. That's a good way of putting it. That's a very good way of putting it. Can we put the New York Times poll up on screen? I want to talk to you about this. A4, please. Mystery repeats.

Harris up by four in PA, according to the New York Times. Trump up by six in Arizona. So there was a previous theory that all seven swing states would either go one way or the other way, kind of how they did in 2020. This time, like you just said, we see a bit of a reversal in that trend as both of the parties are fighting to accomplish the two things that cost them previous elections. Is that what you see going on here? What are the key characteristics of why and how there could be a 10-point spread

between these two critical swing states? So I think it's unlikely it's that big, but it's possible, right? It's probably the biggest spread pollsters had, or at least any I can think of off the cuff. But the New York Times theory of the case, and they're smart, so maybe they're right, is that Democrats are genuinely doing better with white voters, especially white college-educated voters. And that is enabling them to do better in the Midwest, but they are losing ground with non-white voters and therefore underperforming in the Sun Belt. So they see the national vote being worse for Democrats and a lot closer than

everyone else is showing right now. And they show, but they still have Democrats winning through that Midwest path. And that would be a 2022 scenario, right? Because that's what we talked a lot about yesterday, times both budding on this political realignment. In this scenario, would you expect Arizona, Georgia, and Nevada to all move similarly? Because I saw it in your forecast, you have Nevada, Harris up, but I've seen Trump up there almost by six points in some places, which is a crazy reversal. When's the last time Republicans won? I want to say 2004? It's been a long time. I saw the same poll, and I think that one was an ally. I'd be shocked if you won. I wouldn't be shocked if you won Nevada, but I'd

be shocked if you won by six. I think that Nevada is probably a little easier for Dems than maybe even the other three Midwest states based off the current polling, but it's a hard state to poll. And the GOP, it's been their white whale and it's not because it's an uncatchable one. They're barely losing. Yeah. Every time it's like this close. So they could win it. I mean, in 2014, they just, Democrats went completely AWOL in the state and POP won the House seats by a combined 18%. I think they won the governor race by 40. So you can't rule out Nevada. There's a reason it's on the swing state list.

Yeah. I mean, it's such a unique state demographically and also just with the union density and the nature of the culinary workers union and how much the service sector dominates. So it's not like hard hat construction unions, which have really shifted towards Trump. It's the service sector unions, which have stayed more in the Democratic camp. But still, you have a state where it was hit very hard by COVID, where economic concerns are really paramount, where the demographics may not, at this point in time, particularly favor Democrats in terms of some of the realignments and some of the shifts. But to go back to your point about if the New York Times theory is correct about the

shifts in the electorate, if Kamala Harris wins those quote unquote blue wall states, but loses all the other ones, she wins 270 to 268. Like, I mean, right? Am I doing that math right? Yeah, you're doing the math right. As close as it could effectively possibly be. With Nebraska. With Nebraska. Which kind of terrifies me, just given the way that the post-election last time went

with all the conspiracy theories and all of the, and January 6th and all of the chaos. Like if it is that razor thin, I think we're in for, I won't ask you to opine on that piece, but I think we're in for some very troubled times post-election day if it is that razor thin, I think we're in for, I won't ask you to opine on that piece, but I think we're in for some very troubled times post-election day if it is truly that narrow of a margin. I know what you're talking about, Chris. So I think everyone in the country will handle that very peacefully. I agree. Everyone's going to be like, okay, we're so great. We congratulate our new presidential victor. We'll all move forward. I wanted to add, I did want you to opine though on this quote-unquote trash polls and whether you think that's a real thing. We could put the RealClearPolitics average up here. These are all of the recent Pennsylvania polls, and many of them

are favoring Trump, but also many of them are partisan polls. A few of them are ones that I think you could classify in that junk poll or trash poll status. So talk to us about the rise of some of these new pollsters and how we should be thinking about that in terms of these states and these numbers. Yeah, well, you know, I don't usually like to talk about this to my fellow pollster, poll averages out there. But RCB does have a bit of a tendency to include some of the GOP internal polls and manage to take off some of the high quality polls that might show the Democrats ahead sometimes. So it might be a little

skewed. I think there is some concerns, especially with Rasmussen, Trafalgar. Rasmussen in particular, they had a poll a year ago that they put out that they said proved that Dr. Fauci had killed more people than anyone since the Holocaust. So there's 538 been them them, I banned them.

It's not exactly like straight shooting with that. I don't ban almost anyone, right? Like, I might lower the rating, but like, it's a high standard for me. But Rasmussen has kind of met that and vaulted over it. So, some of these are a little less reputable than others. Okay. Well, my question, though, and the reason why I'm focusing on it, is that this was such a key part of the 2022 story. Is that if you had, and I put this out like a couple of days ago, and one of the common responses

I got is, look, you know, even by Republicans, they're like, look, liberals are not wrong, that there were a lot of crappy stuff in the overall polling averages leading up to 2022, which led to a false picture, where if you scroll down and you look at Marist, New York Times, Sienna, they all mostly had Fetterman up by a couple of points. And they were right, right? And so if we want to – for the viewer out there who doesn't just – who wants to look for themselves and try and figure this out, not necessarily rely on a weighting measure, how should they think about it? Like how do you think about it when you're rating different people? Is it just accuracy?

Is it, you know, like samples? Just talk to us about that because I think we have an audience that really wants to get in the weeds here. Yeah, yeah. I think accuracy is a big part of it. And, you know, just because you got it right one cycle doesn't mean you get it right the next cycle, right? And a lot of these pollsters have a tendency to miss a little to the left, a little to the right. And it makes it harder. Sometimes they change their approach. Emerson used to miss to the left. Now they appear to be to the right of most pollsters. They change their strategy. So that makes it a little harder.

I would say the overall— Are they one of the ones that's shifted to the self-identification of, like, you know, how you voted last time? I believe that Emerson uses that, but I'm not 100% sure. They definitely include that in all of their polls. Yeah, and that's also—that's a really good point, right? Like, that's the gamble pollsters, some pollsters are taking. Some are like the, maybe they're not like New York Times or Marist, like the top ones, but ones that are still reputable. It's sort of like a shortcut.

They're saying, okay, if the electorate's like, it's actually like 2020, how are these voters going to vote? But we know for a fact the electorate's not going to be like 2020. Right. Because that was the highest turnout election in American history if we, unless we go back to before women had the right to vote. Right. And which I don't think we should. Well, you said previously you talked about how you think turnout will be a little bit less this time around. So where do you think things will be around 2016, 2020?

Like what are our benchmarks here? You're making it harder for me. It's a lot easier to be right if I just take less than the highest turnout ever. Yeah. I don't really know to answer that question. That's such a hard one to estimate. And that is why pollsters' job is so hard, because you have to get a sample of the electorate with people who aren't responding to phone calls as much to get an idea of both how likely they are to vote and who are they going to vote for instead. Yep. likely they are to vote and who are they going to vote for instead. Honestly, the best approach are ones like Salzer uses in Iowa, where you just call people

on voter registration files and you ask, you figure out how likely they are to vote by asking them some questions and then you can project turnout. But even then you get, that's part of why polls are a lot more accurate at the last second, because it's not just that people change their mind, it's that people might commit to voting or not voting. Yes. Yeah. That's such a key point.

Yeah. That is a great point. All right. Let's go ahead and move on to the Senate forecast. And for those of you who are premium subscribers, we're going to have this posted early exclusively for you. We're going to have it posted later in the week for all. But if you want to get this heads up straight from Logan as soon as possible, which we know you all do, go ahead and subscribe breakingpoints.com. All right. Let's go ahead and put up this. Camp Shane, one of America's longest running weight loss camps for kids, promised extraordinary results. Campers who began the summer in heavy bodies were often

unrecognizable when they left. In a society obsessed with being thin, it seemed like a miracle solution. But behind Camp Shane's facade of happy, transformed children was a dark underworld of sinister secrets. Kids were being pushed to their physical and emotional limits as the family that owned Shane turned a blind eye. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually like a horror movie.

In this eight-episode series, we're unpacking and investigating stories of mistreatment and re-examining the culture of fatphobia that enabled a flawed system to continue for so long. You can listen to all episodes of Camp Shame one week early and totally ad-free on iHeart True Crime Plus. So don't wait. Head to Apple Podcasts and subscribe today. Have you ever thought about going voiceover? I'm Hope Woodard, a comedian, creator, and seeker of male validation. To most people, I'm the girl behind voiceover,

the movement that exploded in 2024. VoiceOver is about understanding yourself outside of sex and relationships. It's more than personal. It's political, it's societal, and at times, it's far from what I originally intended it to be. These days, I'm interested in expanding what it means to be voiceover, to make it customizable for anyone who feels the need to explore their relationship to relationships. I'm talking to a lot of people who will help us think about how we love each other. It's a very, very normal experience to have times where a relationship is prioritizing other parts of that relationship that aren't

being naked together. How we love our family. I've spent a lifetime trying to get my mother to love me, but the price is too high. And how we love ourselves. Singleness is not a waiting room. You are actually at the party right now. Let me hear it. Listen to VoiceOver on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Over the past six years of making my true crime podcast, Hell and Gone, I've learned one thing. No town is too small for murder. I'm Katherine Townsend. I've received hundreds of messages from people across the country begging for help with unsolved murders.

I was calling about the murder of my husband. It's a cold case. I've never found the murder of my husband at the cold case. I've never found her. And it haunts me to this day. The murderer is still out there. Every week on Hell and Gone Murder Line, I dig into a new case, bringing the skills I've learned as a journalist and private investigator to ask the questions no one else is asking.

Police really didn't care to even try. She was still somebody's mother. She was still somebody's daughter. She was still somebody's daughter. She was still somebody's sister. There's so many questions that we've never got any kind of answers for. If you have a case you'd like me to look into, call the Hell and Gone Murder Line at 678-744-6145. Listen to Hell and Gone Murder Line on the iHeartRadio app,

Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Kamala Harris is out with some new policy proposals. She needs to win over black voters, specifically black male voters. So she appeared on The Shade Room, predominantly black podcast. We're going to talk about that. Let's take a listen. President Barack Obama, he was campaigning for you in Pittsburgh before some students at the University of Pittsburgh, which is my alma mater. And he said some things that really ruffled some feathers in the news.

He said, it makes me think you aren't just feeling the idea of having a woman as a president. You're coming up with other alternatives and other reasons for that. We have not seen the same kind of energy and turnout in all corners of our neighborhoods and community as we saw when I was running. So when you hear those words, I'm sure you were briefed on the situation. You know, a former Ohio State Senator, Nina Turner, she came out on CNN and said, why are you, you know, putting Black men up against the wall and pressuring them into something that possibly, you know, they don't want to do if they want to vote for you or not. So my question to you is, do you think that what President Obama said was the right thing to say? Let me tell you, I am very proud to have the support of President Obama and that he is out

traveling to talk with voters about what is at stake in this election, I'm very proud to have his support. What is also important is one, to understand like as I said I intend to earn the vote of everyone including black men. Two, pay attention to everything that President Obama talked about because he also talked about at length the danger of Donald Trump. The danger. I think it's really important to focus on the stakes of this election. And there are two choices. Two choices. And I ask everyone to look at the background, look at the work, look at the words. Hmm. All right. So pretty clearly she is.

She may not be too so happy with Barack Obama. He's put her in a little bit of a bind. I mean, look, anybody running for office as opposed to Obama in his masterly sinecure, just lecturing all of us mere mortals, actually has to grapple with, like, he no longer has to get himself elected. And also, I would say, he never did that when he was trying to get himself elected. It's only now that he's influencer Netflix Obama. He did some of that back in his era, the whole, like, my brother's keeper thing. Absolutely. It's pretty consistent with his politics of, you know, black respectability. I think you're not wrong.

I guess I would just put it as like this nakedness. I mean, he literally was like, I want to speak to the brothers out there. Yeah. Like some of y'all ain't voting for women and you're making things up. I'm like, dude, you are literally trying to tell people not only what to think, but if what they think is not going along with you, that you're straight up sexist. That is an insane thing to do for any group, not just black people. I mean, if some Indian person was to my Indian brothers out there, I'd be like, who the fuck are you to be telling me how to think?

Yeah, well, I mean, I think so two things are possible. One is that he actually got crosswise with the way Kamala wanted to message this. And that's actually my guess because she has been very careful to not fall into the Hillary Clinton trap of being actively contemptful of voters or messaging like she doesn't have to earn their vote. She's just entitled to it. Also, she's really avoided, thank God, this messaging around like what's important about this election is my trailblazing status. She has dodged all of that. Even, you'll recall when she got asked that question on CNN by Dana Bash of teed her up to trash Trump over his comments about she's not really black or whatever. She's just like, same old playbook, let's move on.

And so I think it's likely that she's actually not happy about this messaging from Obama. It's also possible, though, that they feel like he has the cred to lecture black. He doesn't. Nobody does. No one should, right, to lecture black male voters. Whereas, obviously, if it was her trying to pull that off, it would go even more poorly than it did with Obama But I don't know I I thought with her pivot there. It seemed to me like she was actively unhappy about this direction When we were talking to Logan

Previously you mentioned that there is a lot of discussion online of like Oh Kamala's doing this media blitz now because their internals must be Really poor and by and large I think Logan's analysis of like also with almost Election Day election day. And like, of course, the candidates are likely to be doing media appearances. I think that's largely true, but it does seem like there is a particular nervousness around black male voters specifically. That is true. She's doing Charlemagne today. As evidenced by this podcast, Charlemagne, the, you know, the policy proposals we're about to talk about and rip apart, the Obama comments, et cetera, there does seem to be some nervousness about that specific

demographic group that they're kind of telegraphing in some of these moves. Absolutely. Because, I mean, look, it's a game of margins and it's one of those where I guess just stick on this point. Everyone's like, oh, the internals must be bad if she's going on Fox News or Rogan. I'm like, what if the internals show that it's a 50-50 race? And if I had only a 50% shot of accomplishing the single most important thing I'll ever do in my life, I would be doing some crazy shit to make sure that that got from 50 to 51 to 52. Even 50.5 is better than 50. So maybe that's just me. But let's put B2 up on the screen just to set up, again, why this policy proposal is coming from Harry Enten over at CNN.

No matter how you splice the data, Trump seems to be the strongest Republican with black voters since 1960. Young black men in particular have trended right towards Trump runs, cutting the Dem margin by 40 points from 2012. But Trump is doing historically well with black women too. So that is the key point, is that this is the biggest realignment of black voters, at least poised to be be since the civil rights era. I want to say though that I'm reserving judgment until it actually happens. Sure, fair. Because we did see these same trends heading into the Biden 2020 run where he was trailing how Hillary Clinton did and there was a big discussion about this. And on election day, black voters overall showed up for him in basically the same numbers as

previously. And there has been some polling that's been contradictory. And I put a lot of stock in the New York Times poll because they did a super sample of black voters. That means they had larger groups that were able to look more in detail at the data. But there have been other polls that have shown Kamala performing just as well with black voters as Biden did last time around. So to me, it's not definitive that this is gonna manifest, but there's certainly been a significant amount of polling data that suggests it could. And as I said before, the Kamala Harris team seems to be projecting some nervousness that this trend with black men in particular could be the case. I'm fairly persuaded with the numbers on how many new black women registered

to vote and are showing up in the early voting periods in the states that we have data to say, I don't think that she probably is gonna have an issue there with black women. We also see women in general, this large gender gap with women favoring Kamala and a large gender gap with men more favorable towards Trump. So I'm definitely more skeptical about the black women piece of this, but I think it's definitely possible with black men. Yeah, definitely. And well, again, to underscore, I guess, the policy proposal, whether it's true or not, they seem to believe it and they're acting in that way. So let's put this up on the screen. Kamala now has some new opportunity agenda for black men.

Let me just go through it. Provide $1 million loans that are fully forgivable, up to $20,000 for black entrepreneurs and others to start a business. Support education, training, and mentorship programs that lead to good- good paying jobs for black men, including pathways to become teachers. Protect cryptocurrency investments so black men who make them know that their money is safe. Launch a national health initiative focused on illnesses that disproportionately impact black men. And legalize recreational marijuana to create opportunities for black Americans to succeed in this new industry. You called it peak neoliberalism. And I genuinely do think that is so accurate because, I mean, let's just fixate on this a little bit.

Yeah. We're going to provide a million dollars in loans to specifically people for the color of their skin. Hmm. Okay. So we're going to do affirmative action. It says black entrepreneurs and others. So it's not even really clear that it's just like, okay, well, I guess then we're just cherry picking what exactly that means. Some of it will go to black people. Cool. Uh, we're going to support mentorship programs. I want everyone out there in your life to ask yourself if you want a mentor provided to you by the government. That's, That's an insane thing to do. We're going to provide government mentor. Here is your government-issued mentor to make sure

that you live a better life. And that is some pure Obama-era shit. Yeah, it definitely is. It really is. I mean, that was like his, my brother's keeper program and all of that. But yeah, I mean, I saw Perry Bacon Jr., who's, I think he's still at the Washington Post, right? I think so, yeah, he is. Previously at NBC, himself a black man, saying like, you know, I don't really love the idea being put out there that black men specifically need mentors. Right. The other one that really gets me is, okay, crypto.

Let's just put a pin in that because I have a lot to say about that one. The health one, so they describe this in the greater detail part as a national equity health initiative focused from the National Institute of Health on illnesses that disproportionately impact black men. And this is where I really can dig into how what I mean by like, this is the peak of neoliberalism. Why can't you just run on universal healthcare so that we don't have to pick and choose like, oh, if you got prostate cancer,

maybe we'll care about that and do a health equity initiative, not even giving you care, but some study at the NIH. Thank you very much. Or like, oh, if you need IVF, maybe we'll pay for that. How about we just have healthcare that would, yes, actually disproportionately benefit black men and other marginalized group, but would help everybody and

not be like pathetically inadequate and patronizing as many of these things are. And that's what drives me crazy about this is we've talked about this ad nauseum, but it's just worth reminding people the policies. I'm not saying that it is never the case that it makes sense to have policies that are specific to a demographic group. I'm not saying that like blanket across the board, but we know from history that the policies that have most improved the lives and economic status of black Americans have been universal policies, like lifting the minimum wage, like increasing rates of unionization, like, you know, in a

theoretical world where Democrats still cared about and talked about healthcare, universal healthcare. And so that's why this sort of like, let me do some niche little bullshit programs for some targeted demographic group drives me so crazy. Yeah. And I mean, again, you know, just to stick with, and this is part of why the whole equity mindset is so stupid when they're like health initiatives on prostate cancer. It's like, you know, prostate cancer is a cancer that affects most men generally, specifically people who are poor and unhealthy. Uh, well, you know, if we talk about diseases that are the worst or most impactful on black communities, it's the same statistically for people who are poor and who don't have access to healthcare

who eat a shitty diet. So it's like, it's not complicated to think about it that way. And also if you, if you put it that way, it sounds a lot better, right? Hey, all these diseases that disproportionately impact, uh, you know, men who are old, obese, diabetic, we're going to try and fix that. That'll help black people. It'll help white people. It'll help everybody. There's a lot of poor white people out there, too, who also suffer from prostate cancer, from diabetes, and from a lot of this stuff. So that's nonsense. Look, on the weed thing, everybody here knows that I'm against weed, all right? I think it's bad., if I was black and I was a man, I would be so insulted

that one of the key pillars is let's legalize weed. They're like, oh, let's give you people drugs. Is that, like, how is that not so insulting to these people? To be like, oh, they really like to smoke weed, right? Like, what the fuck? We're going to legalize drugs specifically for a specific demographic. If you want to, she didn't even mention, you know, that's one of those where, look, I don't agree with it. People are like, oh, black people disproportionately get arrested for it or whatever, or have in the past. So it needs to be, you know, redistributive of some criminal justice bullshit.

Fine. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me still with the current data, but I could understand that. On this one, it's literally like we need to legalize weed and we need to legalize it so that you can sell it and you can do a better job of being a fucking legal drug dealer. I'm like, how is that not so insulting to people? That is the epitome in my head of handoutism. And it doesn't get called racist or anything by the media. And that's the pinnacle of racism to me. Legalize drugs for you. What?

I support the policy, right? I support both the legalizing and I support the idea of this is the community that's been most impacted, so we're opening up this new business opportunity, like, let's do things in there. I'm good with all of that, but you're so right to put it as a specific plank framed in like, this is our blackmail agenda is really something. Yeah, here's some weed for you. Let's talk about crypto though, because there is so much going on with the fact, again, that they put the crypto plank in this particular policy proposal.

And it's no secret why. There's actually significant polling that suggests that black men are disproportionately actually holders of crypto. So that's part of why they include this plank. That's their logic. But there also has been, crypto has already won this election. Let me just say that, right? The Biden administration through Gary Gensler at the SEC, they have aggressively enforced the laws that are on the books against scams and against, you know, things, people getting scammed in the financial world in general. And crypto has been subject to that enforcement. And there has been over years now a large and concerted effort that

was very visible when it's Sam Bankman freed, but has very much continued at large scale after that. And crypto is now one of the largest corporate contributors, that industry, to the presidential campaign and down ballot campaigns in this whole cycle. This is one of the areas where Kamala has really pretty consistently signaled that she will actually be different from Joe Biden. She will be more lax on enforcement. And I was just reading this morning, Sagar, I didn't know all of this backstory, but they really made an example of Katie Porter in particular, where in the weeks before her election, a crypto-affiliated PAC dumped $10 million into ads against her. They didn't have anything to do with cryptocurrency, these ads, but into ads against her. She loses, And that ended up being like a warning shot

at all Democrats and Republicans that, hey, you better not get crosswise here. And they've wrapped it all in this language of like, oh, entrepreneurship and innovation, et cetera, et cetera. And Trump completely flipped on crypto. Kamala versus Biden, she's completely signaled that she's going to be different on crypto too. And so that manifests and things like saying that part of your blackmail agenda is, quote unquote, protecting crypto assets. It's extraordinary to see the influence of money in politics in real time. I don't know, I have a conflict of interest on this one. I like crypto. I'm a hodler myself.

Yeah, but you don't wanna get scammed. No, I actually did get scammed. As people here know, I lost $5,000 on BlockFi. By the way, I actually finally got my money back. I don't know how exactly that happened, but one day I got an email and they're like, somehow the bankruptcy clawback stuff worked. So it only took a couple of years and then being in the weeds. But as what they point out is that there are a lot, I mean, men in particular from Robinhood, crypto and all, especially back in the 2021, 2022 era, probably did buy a decent amount of crypto. I bought a lot before that. The point is, is that what they are trying to do is in, this is just handout shit. This is not anything that has to do with what is the way that we

should have a well-regulated commerce and exchange? What should the future of American monetary policy look like? How should we think about banking? How should we make sure that people are protected? This is just pure trying to get into the weeds of, quote unquote, appealing to people by talking about some tiny little specific thing, which ends up, in my opinion, being very, very patronizing. So this entire thing, you know, I'm really hoping Charlemagne has a interview with her today around like 5 p.m. It's going to be live. I'm going to be watching it. And he does a good job of cutting to the core of this stuff. So I saw him recently. He was just talking with Andrew Schultz talking about young black men and their appeal with Trump. And I'm really hoping he focuses in on that with

her and just just tries to get to the crux of what's actually happening here. And is it not very patronizing the way that you were talking, both Obama and her, in the way that this is being put forward? Of course, you've got Bakari Sellers and all these other black congressmen out there. Look at Kamala's incredible plan for black men. Again, I cannot imagine how insulted I would be if my leaders and my supported elders and all these other people, this is what they were saying is so good for you. You know, it's just, I don't know. There's so much lack of individualism in the way that you

even look at any of this. You know, Nina, we had Nina Turner, Senator Nina Turner on yesterday. I encourage you to watch her comments. Her first reaction when she, before she really read through the plan details was like, okay, well, at least they're trying to appeal to people her comments. Her first reaction before she really read through the plan details was like, okay, well, at least they're trying to appeal to people through policy. And I think that's fair, but it's also fair to look at the policy and say this is patronizing bad. Just to dig one layer deeper on the crypto thing, because I've been thinking a lot about this. Part of the reason so many black men have crypto investments is because they've been locked down that so many black, part of the reason so many black men have crypto investments is because they've been locked down on so many other forms of wealth accumulation and

wealth building, lower home ownership rates, you know, discriminated against in terms of banks and the mortgage rates that they're charged or whether they're even approved for a loan. And so crypto really offered this, you know, this utopian vision of like, well, this is the new financials. This is how you're going to make it. This is how you're going to be able to build wealth. And, you know, some of that is genuine and some of it has just been completely fraudulent

and scams. So, you know, again, to get to like the neoliberal point of this, rather than really doing anything that's going to fundamentally address that lack of wealth accumulation, it's like, well, we're just going to like keep enabling the scammers and make sure that they're regulated more lightly so that they can, so that the people who have lots of crypto or because crypto is also rife with massive inequality in terms of who's benefiting and who's on the other end, sometimes getting screwed. So we're going to make sure that those people at the top can continue to get theirs and continue to like, you know, in certain instances, screw you over. That's part of what's so disturbing here. And just, you know, the specific fight is really around which agency is going to regulate crypto and do the enforcement. And the SEC tends to be more aggressive. There's another body, the CFTC, that the crypto industry wants to be the regulator because they think that they just basically won't really conduct any oversight there. And like I said, at this point, I think

it doesn't really matter which of these candidates wins because both of them have already signaled that they're going to do what the crypto industry wants. So anyway, that's where we are. We do have an Axios tier, so you can just put up on the screen there, B5, just to back up what I was saying before about the amount of money that this sector has donated. And they've launched this whole campaign aimed at elites, at political elites, to convince them there is a quote-unquote crypto voter who is going to be basing their vote on whether crypto is regulated at the SEC or the CFTC, that this is like the primary thing that they're going to be voting on. There's no evidence that that's really the case outside of, you know, the Mark Cubans of the world and like the people

who are kind of at the top of that industry. But I think the politicians are buying that that's the case. And they're certainly buying that they don't want to get crosswise of this industry because of the amount of money they have to spend against you if you undercut them or if you piss them off. Camp Shane, one of America's longest running weight loss camps for kids, promised extraordinary results. Campers who began the summer in heavy bodies were often unrecognizable when they left. In a society obsessed with being thin, it seemed like a miracle solution. But behind Camp Shane's facade of happy, transformed children was a dark underworld of sinister secrets.

Kids were being pushed to their physical and emotional limits as the family that owned Shane turned a blind eye. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually like a horror movie. In this eight-episode series, we're unpacking and investigating stories of mistreatment and re-examining the culture of fatphobia that enabled a flawed system to continue for so long. You can listen to all episodes of Camp Shame one week early and totally ad-free on iHeart True Crime Plus. So don't wait. Head to Apple Podcasts and subscribe today. Have you ever thought about going voiceover?

I'm Hope Woodard, a comedian, creator, and seeker of male validation. To most people, I'm the girl behind voiceover, the movement that exploded in 2024. Voiceover is about understanding yourself outside of sex and relationships. It's more than personal. It's political, it's societal, and at times, it's far from what I originally intended it to be. These days, I'm interested in expanding what it means to be voiceover, to make it customizable for anyone who feels the need to explore their relationship to relationships. I'm talking to a lot of people who will help us think about how we love each other. It's a very, very normal experience to have times where a relationship is prioritizing

other parts of that relationship that aren't being naked together. How we love our family. I've spent a lifetime trying to get my mother to love me, but the price is too high. And how we love ourselves. Singleness is not a waiting room. You are actually at the party right now. Let me hear it. Listen to VoiceOver on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Over the past six years

of making my true crime podcast hell and gone, I've learned one thing. No town is too small for murder. I'm Katherine Townsend. I've received hundreds of. No town is too small for murder. I'm Katherine Townsend. I've received hundreds of messages from people across the country begging for help with unsolved murders. I was calling about the murder of my husband at the cold case. They've never found her.

And it haunts me to this day. The murderer is still out there. Every week on Hell and Gone Murder Line, I dig into a new case, bringing the skills I've learned as a journalist and private investigator to ask the questions no one else is asking. Police really didn't care to even try. She was still somebody's mother. She was still somebody's daughter. She was still somebody's sister.

There's so many questions that we've never gotten any kind of answers for. If you have a case you'd like me to look into, call the Hell and Gone Murder Line at 678-744-6145. Listen to Hell and Gone Murder Line on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Kamala Harris is now apparently

in talks with Joe Rogan to appear on the Joe Rogan podcast. Did not see this one coming. I did not see it coming as well. I think it's a welcome development. And so just a little bit more behind the scenes. Obviously, this just broke and they didn't have much detail on it. But what they say is that, and I was actually kind of curious about this.

They're like, Kamala's representatives met with Rogan's representatives. And I'm like, which representatives is this exactly? Maybe his agent? Does that mean like Jamie? As far as I know. Yeah, like Jamie? Is Jamie meeting with? I would pay to see money of Jamie meeting with somebody from the company.

Anita Dunn or whoever. That would be fucking hilarious to me. Yeah, I think, I mean, Joe is, again, I have no inside knowledge. But, I mean, he has talked previously. He's like has one booker and one manager. So maybe it's one of those people that has done it. But regardless, this comes on the heels of Trump saying that he would be going on Rogan. We don't know if that's true, whether he had confirmed it or any, if not. Maybe it's the case that Joe was trying to say, well, if I'm

going to have Trump on, I want to have both on and extended the offer. That's what most people have done who have interviewed both candidates. They've put in offers with both and usually it's either Trump or Kamala or whatever who will accept that. In this case though, this actually now has a chance of happening. And that would be kind of amazing. And it's funny, again, I want to come back to this. There's so many people out there who are like, oh, the internals must be bad. And I'm like, again, if you are in a 50-50 race and you want to go and reach millions of people who may not be engaging with the mainstream media, why would you not go on this podcast? And look, I mean, I guess the answer is you're not confident in what you believe or in what you say. The thing is though, Joe is not, I mean, is a curious interviewer. He doesn't

usually get into some prolonged back and forth or something. He'll mostly just ask a question, sit back and listen. So if you want to explain your actual thought process, which is what Joe Rogan, which is what Bernie Sanders did when he went on, which is what Andrew Yang did when he went on, which is what RFK Jr. did whenever he went on. I can't think of a better format to go in. And also if you have somebody, so Joe is going to probably going to challenge her a little bit on some of the things that he disagrees with her on, but he is one of those people who said consistently, he's like, look, I'm mostly like liberal in many things. You know, I'm very liberal on the issue of abortion. I'm

very conservative on the issue of guns. Traditionally, like was a Democrat and all that, but I moved to Texas because of my disagreement. I mean, that would give her a format to talk to people out there who might align with his views. So I can't think of a better place to go. Not just Rogan, but any like Manosphere era stuff where you think you could get at least somewhat of an honest convo, go for it. Like if you're in a 50-50 election, you should be doing it. Everyone was dunking on Kamala for going on Call Her Daddy. I think Trump should go on Call Her Daddy. I'm serious. How would that be? Absolutely. I think you should be doing it. Everyone was dunking on Kamala for going on Call Her Daddy. I think Trump should go on Call Her Daddy. I'm serious. Absolutely. I think he should do it. He would do well. That's what I don't understand the caution. He's grew up on Howard Stern and in the New York tabloids. You think he can't handle freaking Alex Cooper? Of course he can. I mean,

what are some of his best moments in these mainstream media interviews with CNN or with MSNBC, either when he spars or whenever, you know, disarms him with a joke. So anyway, that's my opinion. I think Kamala should go on the Nelk Boys. Trump should go on Call Her Daddy. Come on with Aiden Ross. Absolutely.

Yeah, she should. Hey, she wants to talk about crypto. Crypto gambling. She can read a stake.com investment. You're getting the king of the bros here. She's going straight to the top with Rogan. It's good. But I mean, okay, so there's a few things to say about this.

First of all, it's not without risk, for sure. Because, yeah, I mean, Joe is not a journalist. He's not going to do the super adversary. I'm going to ask you five times, whatever. But he has made people look stupid on his show, just kind of casually humiliated a variety of people on his show. And that is not the question, because he's a good listener, and he's a good question asker. So that's a risk for her.

And we all know how she is on her feet in these interviews, even on The View with softball questions. She can definitely screw it up. There's no doubt about it. So it's risky. I hope she does it. I think it'd be very interesting to see. I think it would be smart if she pulls it off. I think it would be intelligent if she doesn't pull it off, then it will obviously be a mistake.

The other thing I just have to comment on though is Sager. You remember the way liberals smeared Bernie Sanders. Yes, I do. Yes, I do. Not so much for just going on the podcast, but Joe made this comment like, I'll probably vote for Bernie Sanders. They were like, cool. The number one podcast in the world said he would vote for me. Like, let me make a thing of that as a politician would. The number of liberals who absolutely smear how dare you platform this racist, sexist, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, who are now going to be out there like, oh, it's so great that Queen Kamala is going on with Joe Rogan. I'm here for it. I'm absolutely here for the way that these people have zero principles or values and will just turn on a dime when it suits them with their favorite candidates. So looking forward to that. Yeah, well, you can stick with that theme,

actually, because what also was announced is that she will be doing a sit-down interview with Brett Baier over at Fox News for a prolonged period of time. But I think it airs, it either airs today or it airs tomorrow, I forget. But the point is, is that previously, remember Elizabeth Warren tried to get everybody on the DNC stage to raise their hand and boycott Fox News. But now, whenever it's election time, it's like, yeah, no shit, of course you should go on Fox News. They've been loving Pete Buttigieg on Fox News. That's like one of their favorite things. Because I mean, he does,

he handles himself very well in the format. And so, yeah, they really love when he goes on there. And Bernie went on Fox. He did a whole town hall with him. Three million people watched it. That was one of his best moments. He did fantastic. He had a Fox News audience cheering for him.

And so, yeah, I mean, Brett Baer, you know, he's going to frame things from kind of like a center-right perspective. but he's not going to be like wildly unfair. Brett Baer is like a 60 Minutes style journalist. He's just going to sit there and be like, he used to say this about illegal immigrants. Now you say this, how do you square that? He used to say this and now you say this. It will be, frankly, I think better than Dana Bash or any of these other people who have interviewed her. I actually thought the 60 Minutes guys, credit to them, outside of the whole editing fiasco, but the actual journalist- Yeah, that's not the journalist.

Yeah, that's not the journalist. At least I assume so. But the actual guy who interviewed her, he did a pretty good job, right? He has a decent amount of follow-ups. That's probably what we should expect here. And in general, you should be doing more of these things. So I keep seeing this like, oh, she must be losing and all that. I'm like, well, first of all, if you think you're losing, the best way to do is do something drastic. So I think that's good. Even though I don't think it's all that drastic to go on any of the things. But you should always just be doing everything you possibly can to reach as many people that you can before an election. A lot of people make up their minds right around

right now on whether they're going to vote, who they're going to vote for. So this is it. This is what you should be doing. Trump is doing a ton of podcasts in the lead up and Kamala should be doing more. Fox News has a large viewership. It's the biggest cable news channel. Not all of them are diehard Trump supporters. You know, they've got their Kamala's doing this whole whether I like it or not.

She's doing this whole Nikki Haley, Liz Cheney voter strategy. And there will be some of those people watching Fox News. So, you know, again, it all depends. Is it a smart strategy? It all depends on how she does. I can't say that the last week's media strategy worked out particularly well for her. The 60 Minutes interview, not great. The View interview, not great. But, you know, apparently they have enough confidence that they think that these additional media appearances can help to clean things up. Definitely. All right. And oh, I'd say Jesse Trump was on Bustin', Bustin' with the Boys, which is a Barstool podcast. Oh, really? That's incredible. Wow. I mean, Josie, look, they know what they're doing. He's doing many more podcasts than he has rallies this time. This is really his strategy this time. He seems to be doing like one-on-one. Yeah, I mean, look, it

doesn't take that long to film, right? So it's like one of those where, why not? You know, you could set it up and you can actually make it and reach a bunch of people who were talking about otherwise about college football. I wonder what the crossover is between college football in the South and Trump. I mean, it doesn't take a genius to see these things. If anything, it's crazy that it took so long for politicians to embrace podcasts. It's more of a lagging thing than it is something in the former. Camp Shane, one of America's longest-running weight loss camps for kids,

promised extraordinary results. But there were some dark truths behind Camp Shane's one of America's longest-running weight loss camps for kids, promised extraordinary results. But there were some dark truths behind Camp Shane's facade of happy, transformed children. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually like a horror movie. Enter Camp Shame, an eight-part series examining the rise and fall of Camp Shane and the culture that fueled its decades-long success. You can listen to all episodes of Camp Shame one week early and totally ad-free on iHeart True Crime Plus. So don't wait. Head to Apple Podcasts and subscribe today. I know a lot of cops.

They get asked all the time, have you ever had to shoot your gun? Sometimes the answer is yes. But there's a company dedicated to a future where the answer will always be no. This is Absolute Season 1, Taser Incorporated. I get right back there and it's bad. Listen to Absolute Season 1, Taser Incorporated on the iHeartRadio app, Apple app apple podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts i'm clayton english i'm greg glad and this is season two of the war on drugs podcast

last year a lot of the problems of the drug war this year a lot of the biggest names in music and sports this kind of starts that it a little bit man we met them at their homes we met them at the recording studios. Stories matter, and it brings a face to them. It makes it real. It really does. It makes it real. Listen to new episodes of the War on Drugs podcast season two on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

This is an iHeart Podcast.