Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar - 4/28/25: Trump 100 Day Approval Tanks, MAGA Cope Over Market Crash, Shein Prices Skyrocket

Episode Date: April 28, 2025

Krystal and Ryan discuss Trump's 100 day approval, MAGA voters cope amid market crash, Shein prices skyrocket.   David Doel: https://www.youtube.com/@therationalnational Siddharthya: https://x.com/siddharthyaroy?lang=en    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. Others dismiss as niche, we embrace as core. There are so many stories out there. And if you can find a way to curate and help the right person discover the right content, the term that we always hear from our audience is that they feel seen. Listen to Good Company on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. network delivers the facts, the voices, and the perspectives that matter 24-7 because our stories deserve to be heard. Listen to the BIN News This Hour podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. What up, y'all? This your main man Memphis Bleak right here, host of Rock Solid Podcast. June is Black Music Month, so what better way to celebrate than listening to my exclusive conversation with my bro, Ja Rule. The one thing that can't stop you or take away

from you is knowledge. So whatever I went through while I was down in prison for two years, through that process, learn. Learn from me. Check out this exclusive episode with Ja Rule on Rock Solid. Open your free iHeartRadio app, search Rock Solid, and listen now. Hey guys, Sagar and Crystal here. Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election, and we are so excited about what that means for the future of this show. This is the only place where you can find honest perspectives from the left and the right that simply does not exist anywhere else.

So if that is something that's important to you, please go to breakingpoints.com, become a member today, and you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad-free, and all put together for you every morning in your inbox. We need your help to build the future of independent news media, and we hope to see you at breakingpoints.com.

Good morning, everybody. Happy Monday. We have the incredible Ryan Brim in this morning for Sagar and Jetty. Great to have you, Ryan. Left-wing populist takeover. That's right. Actually, we are going to have Emily join us, though, so that we can reflect on Trump 100 days and not have total left-wing Trump derangement syndrome over here. Get our snark in now before Emily shows up. Yes. Exactly. And for those of you who are wondering, Baby is not coming yet that we know of, at least this morning. But Sagar is having to deal with a few things there. So he'll be in later this week, assuming that, you know, things hold in place. A lot of appointments the last week or two. Indeed. Yeah. A lot going on. So also a lot going on in the world. We are going to dig into all of

the polling that has come out with regards to where Trump is as he hits 100 days this week, both on the top line numbers, where he is economically, the way things have moved even on issues like immigration, how his own supporters are thinking about the first 100 days. We're going to take a look, of course, at the latest with the trade war. Sheehan prices are up and shipping traffic is way, way down. So, you know, Americans starting to feel the pain at places like Timu and Sheehan. See how that reaction goes. We wanted to cover some of the things that have happened with regard to immigration deportations. That Wisconsin judge was arrested last week. There's also some additional things that we've learned. ICE

having deported several U.S. citizen children as young as one, two, four years old, one of them suffering from cancer. So we'll dig into that. We also have Bernie clapping back at Alyssa Slotkin and Justice Democrats revealing their first candidate this cycle, something Ryan had sort of exclusive access to or early access to. So we'll talk a little bit about that. We also have a bit of an international flair in the show today. This is also partly because Ryan is here and he has done such incredible reporting in Pakistan. But also this is an incredibly important story for everyone. India and Pakistan inching closer to potentially a war, both of them, of course, nuclear-armed superpowers.

That is certainly something we want to keep our eye on. And Canadians going to the polls today as well. So we're going to have David Dole join us to break down the twists and turns in that race, which has been really centered around our own president here, Trump. Yeah, and for the India-Pakistan story, we'll have Siddharthi Arroy, who wrote a really prescient investigative piece for us about Jammu and Kashmir a couple weeks ago at Dropsite. And we'll also have, I pre-interviewed Waka Sakhmed, who a lot of you know is a terrific Pakistani reporter who's here in exile in the United States, just to talk about whether or not we're going to get a nuclear war out of this. Seems like an important discussion. Yeah, I think that's rather important.

Before we start on that, because we won't have time to talk about the latest updates in Israel-Palestine, over the weekend, the murder spree has just gotten out of control. And people in Gaza are saying that, and it's easy to get cynical about this, but people in Gaza are saying that the amount of slaughter is at a scale on like it's been previously. Like I think 53 people killed on Saturday, more than 50 killed on Sunday, just 17 killed overnight into Monday morning. Meanwhile, Netanyahu gave a speech where he insisted that Israel will not accept an Iran nuclear deal unless there's a complete obliteration of Iran's civilian peaceful nuclear program. It's like, this is a U.S.-Iran nuclear deal.

Right. Well, we'd like to pretend it is anyway. We'd like to imagine that it is. So, but the question is, can he actually bomb Iran without U.S. support? And according to Tulsi Gabbard and Michael Waltz and all these other intelligence officials, no, they can't successfully pull it off. So it actually isn't up to him. Yeah. Well, we were talking before the show, you know, Shia LaBeouf and Ephraim, who we've described as a liberal Zionist and had on this show. He has been slowly sort of evolving in his views. And he even just now came out and said,

listen, it's undeniable it's a genocide. And basically what tipped him over, and personally, I think at this point, there's no real serious debate that you can have about whether or not it's a genocide. What tipped him over in particular is here they are just outright starving, however many people are left in the Gaza Strip. You now have dozens of people who have already died of starvation. We know Abu Bakr was suffering malnutrition. I'm sure there are so many people in Gaza, potentially basically all of them,

suffering from malnutrition at this point. You know, the food and the aid remains blocked. The Trump administration does not appear to be applying any pressure, regardless of what their State Department spokesperson may say, in order to allow that food aid in. And so, I mean, the clock is ticking on, you know, an escalated extermination campaign. And that's where we are right now. Yep.

So, all right. Well, without that grim update, no pun intended, out of the way, I want to go ahead and get to the very latest with regards to where the Trump administration is at this morning. And as we said, we have a special guest joining us to help us understand what has happened in this first 100 days and how the public feels about it. And that is our own Emily Jashinsky. All right, guys, so Trump administration officially hits 100 days this week. I think we have a fancy graphic we can put up on the screen there with the count up, I guess, through 100 days. I think we're officially at, what, 98 today or something like that. But all of the polling outfits, 99, 100 days, all of the polling outfits have done

their official 100 days, where's he at, digging into the top line numbers, also where he is on an issue by issue basis. So let's go ahead and put up on the screen this graphic that we made with all of the different outlets and where they see his approval at this point. Just a note, the one on the end there, that's the Harvard Kennedy School. That's just 18 to 29 year olds. So that's why the numbers there look a little different. But very noteworthy among that age demographic, which had been sold as, you know, really shifting to the right and, of course, voted for Trump in more significant numbers than young people had voted for previous Republican candidates in the past, including Donald Trump himself in 2016. But I mean, overall, the picture here is not a pretty one. If you are the current president of the United States,

I think the best ratings you've got there are about 11 points underwater. You've got him dipping into the 30s in at least one of these polls. You know, all of them seem to be clustered around low 40s in terms of the approval rate. Really, effectively, Emily, I think at this point you can say pretty officially the honeymoon is over. This looks very much like Trump polling that we saw in the first term. And he came into this office with, for him, you know, fairly positive approval rating. It was roughly around 50-50, even had a little bit of an edge, you know, above water in some of the polls early in his term. Now, with a combination of tariffs and even things that had previously been strong points for him,

like immigration, going sideways and receiving net negative approval ratings, he is left in a position of unpopularity, which is one that he will be familiar with from the past. Yeah, that's a good point. I mean, first of all, that graphic is so helpful and incredible. I like that we're now aggregating the poll aggregation by Politics and New York Times. But what's particularly bad news for this administration is that those numbers are not like new dips. If you go and look at these charts, what they reflect is an X. It's almost you could map the RealClearPolitics aggregation onto New York Times aggregation somewhere around March 10th, 11th. Trump crosses the 48 percent approved,

disapproved sort of watermark and then keeps moving in the other direction. So he starts above water and is dipping. And then he starts, his disapproves start to go up as the approves start to go down. So this is, that sounds very obvious, but the point is, this is a steady trend over the first 100 days of decline. And Crystal, before we got going, you sent a chart that was also really interesting, which aggregated Trump's polling numbers on particular issues. Basically, the only one that he is remaining at a decent level on is immigration. And even that, he is below water. Now, the only other thing I'll add is people in the administration are hearing a lot, and we've talked about this on the show, about Ronald Reagan in 1981, granted Trump doesn't have to

run again, although God knows he may, but he's the second term president. So you expect to see a little bit more thicker skin to public reaction. But in this case, they're also really hoping that they're able to land the plane at some point when it comes to the politics of public opinion, that right now what they're doing is dramatic shock. They had the mandate. And so they're shocking the country, not just on tariffs, but on everything. But the numbers are not reflecting a positive, obviously, political reaction to any of that. Man, I'm really sorry to hear that, because I was wondering, too, that whether or not they were starting to think of Reagan in his first term and think like, you know what? OK, yeah, we are actually going to drive the economy into recession,

but that's OK because because Reagan did it, too. Now, of course, in 82, Democrats had this massive wave. And then, yes, then there was a giant landslide that reelected Reagan in 1984. The difference, of course, is that Reagan was elected, you could argue, to do something about runaway stagflation and inflation. And in combination with Volcker, I don't think he was totally happy with everything Volcker was doing, but in combination with Volcker, that was aimed at addressing something that voters did say that they were upset about. Now, voters have said that they're upset about the collapse of manufacturing over the last 50 years and the hollowing out of the middle class. And we talk a lot on this show about how at least Trump was acknowledging that concern. And the proxy for that acknowledgement was him talking about tariffs. But then when he comes in and does it this way and drives the country into recession,

it's not exactly what people were hoping was going to happen. And so a lot of the conversation seems to be like, did people vote for this or not? Like, is this what people had in mind? Let's put up Nate Silver. And this is one more chart that suggests, no, this is not exactly how people felt like this was going to go. So how are people squaring that? Are they really saying to themselves, eh, all right, we can actually blow the economy up because Reagan did and Reagan was fine. And he was fine. That's right. If that's your model, you're like, yeah, you actually can survive. And just before you grab that question, Emily, one thing to add to that is it's the polar opposite. People voted. The number one thing they said is we want inflation to come down. Yes. And Trump's like, how about price increases?

So, you know, I'm sure I also think in some ways I find the question of like, you know, is this what people voted for or not to be a little bit silly because, you know, voters like there's a whole basket of things that go into their vote. I think to think of it as like, you know, here's my checklist and this is specifically the issues on which I am voting is just not a realistic assessment of how most voters go about casting their ballot. So I find the question itself to be a little bit silly. But to the extent that people were casting a ballot on one issue in particular, inflation was certainly among the top, if not the top issue. And instead, not just on tariffs, but on, you know, on the immigration policy as well. These are inflationary policies that are almost certain to raise prices significantly, at least in the short term. Because the tariffs were such a dramatic, I mean, this administration has been doing all kinds of like generational projects of the conservative movement that are dramatic. And, you know, conservatives will quibble with the process, even though Trump is sort of finally handing to them on a silver platter what they've been asking some Republican president to do for decades and decades. So a lot of this is like dramatic. It is radical. And people would say that. But the tariffs in particular, because the markets and the sort of material effects on people's conditions, they are going to be remembered as the thing that maybe changed the trajectory of public opinion on Trump.

But actually what we've seen in these charts and you can you can see it if we put the last one back up again, the Nate Silver one, that's that's an X. And the X starts to happen before Liberation Day. It's right around like March 10th, March 11th. That's New York Times has it on March 10th. The RealClearPolitics one has it around the same time. So that's before Liberation Day. This trend was happening for Trump very steadily before Liberation Day. Yeah. Yeah. And so April 1st, I'm there. Right. Yeah. The gap opens up definitely around Liberation Day. But the point I'm trying to make basically is that the group of people who are independents, who aren't hardcore partisans, who showed up and voted for Donald Trump because of inflation or because of immigration, frankly. That's the group of people that probably is looking around and saying, I voted against Joe Biden. I thought Trump would make the economy better. I thought that he would be the only one

who had the sort of political guts to take care of what they saw as a wildly out of control immigration system. And they're looking around now and they're like, OK, so those deportations don't seem to be going well, whether you're from the left or the right. Maybe you even want master deportations. And you're like, well, that doesn't mean sending people to Seacott. And on top of that, the market has been in flux. There's precarity, uncertainty, layoffs. So you can see how that one-two punch is catching up with Donald Trump, with that group of voters who's not the partisan left or the partisan anti-Trump or the partisan pro-Trump. I think you make an important point, Emily, which is I do think the tariffs are the least, like the most unpopular, and they're so

traumatic, and they directly impact people's material well-being. And you have huge numbers that say, my personal financial situation right now is getting worse. You have majorities who say, I expect it to get even worse over the coming years. People are expecting price hikes. Like, I do think that probably in terms of the souring of public opinion is the most important thing. But I also do think the fact that he has taken on so much water on what had previously been his most popular issue, which is immigration, because there was so much conversation about these, you know, the horrific deportations to Seacott and the, you know, just total, like, erasure of any sort of due process, the revelations that, you know, they can't really produce evidence that any of these people so far that we've learned

about who were sent there were actual hardened gang members. And then specifically, the conversation around Kilmar Abrego Garcia. And if you pull people on the handling there, I mean, it's a landslide in the direction of this should not have been done and this man should not be disappeared and they should bring him back, etc. I do think that bringing him underwater on even his most popular issue has also been an important part of the acceleration in his favorability decline. And so, you know, we look at that like April 1 demarcation, that's Liberation Day. But April is also when we start to really focus in on some of these stories around immigration that people are frankly horrified by. Let's put up A5 while Emily answers there.

Yeah, this is quite an interesting chart to look at. And I think that's an important point because this administration is stealing themselves and they sort of know and they went in. They had this totally contradictory narrative. On the one hand, they had a mandate. On the other hand, handling that mandate could be pretty unpopular.

And Trump is having historically a shorter honeymoon than other presidents. So some of these trends we're talking about are totally normal. You know, you start pretty high and then steadily decline throughout your presidency. We're talking about a steady decline over the first 100 days, not the entire presidency. And so to some extent, the Trump administration and people involved in this steeled themselves because they knew they were about to do some pretty dramatic policy changes. And on the other hand, I don't know that the public thought that the drama would go beyond, you know, this kind of common sense policies on immigration or common sense handling of the economy. And I'm saying that regardless of whatever particular policy, that Donald Trump is the

alternative to Joe Biden because he has this like in the minds of some voters, he's not the guy who was responsible or oversaw the inflation or oversaw the big immigration numbers. And so Trump will look around and say, I'm cleaning up Joe Biden's mess. But what happens now is Donald Trump and Republicans are just consistently betting on Democrats being even less popular than they are. This is a trend of the Trump era that Donald Trump is so polarizing that they just need basically like a second term Joe Biden or they need someone who is as uniquely unpopular as Hillary Clinton. That's their only path to the White House in the

Trump era, as long as Trump dominates politics, because he is so polarizing. And to some extent, that becomes a bubble, right? Because you lose the will to recapture significant swaths of the public. High key. Looking for your next obsession? Listen to High Key, a new weekly podcast hosted by Ben O'Keefe, Ryan Mitchell, and Evie Audley. We got a lot of things to get into.

We're going to gush about the random stuff we can't stop thinking about. I am high key going to lose my mind over all things Cowboy Carter. I know. Girl, the way she mind over all things Cowboy Carter. I know. Girl, the way she about to yank my bank account. Correct. And one thing I really love about this is that she's celebrating her daughter.

Oh, I know. Listen to High Key on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I always had to be so good, no one could ignore me. Carve my path with data and drive. But some people only see who I am on paper.

The paper ceiling. The limitations from degree screens to stereotypes that are holding back over 70 million stars. Workers skilled through alternative routes rather than a bachelor's degree. It's time for skills to speak for themselves. Find resources for breaking through barriers at taylorpapersilling.org. Brought to you by Opportunity at Work and the Ad Council. She was a decorated veteran,

a Marine who saved her comrades, a hero. She was stoic, modest, tough. Someone who inspired people. Everyone thought they knew her, until they didn't. I remember sitting on her couch and asking her, is this real? Is this real? Is this real? Is this real? I just couldn't wrap my head around what kind of person would do that

to another person that was getting treatment, that was, you know, dying. This is a story all about trust and about a woman named Sarah Kavanaugh. I've always been told I'm a really good listener, right? And I maximized that while I was lying. Listen to Deep Cover, The Truth About Sarah on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I can understand why so much of the public didn't expect Trump to make these kinds of

moves when it came to immigration, because I think back to, Emily, remember that zero hedge debate that we hosted on immigration? It was Robbie Suave and like the libertarian presidential nominee on one side against what, Jack Posobiec and some other- And Ryan Gerduski. Ryan Gerduski. He's like far, far right dudes. And I remember being surprised myself at like how bonkers they were. They were like, they're like, we need to go to war with the cartels. We need to, you know, deploy the army in American cities. And I knew that that those views were out there, but I'm like, oh, these are,

these are fairly influential people who will have the ear of even more influential people like Stephen Miller, you know, if, if Trump wins. And so despite doing news shows basically every day, I hadn't quite absorbed, you know, how committed and how radical they were until, I think, until that debate. And so then seeing them actually execute it, it's not surprising that the public is recoiling. But I'm curious, as you talk to people in that universe, do they feel chastened at all? Or are they more like Stephen Miller was over the weekend, giving who, I don't know if you guys saw this rant he gave where he's like, we need to get these communists off the court. And if you think that they're going to stand in the way of President Trump getting the terrorists out of your neighborhood, you know, you've got another thing coming. Like he was just like full on, like, you know, maniacally we're, we're, we're full steam

ahead on this. So it, are they checking themselves at all based on these numbers or is it no, like this is, this is our shot to carry out a revolution and we're going to do it. The Stephen Miller clip is very representative. The one that you're just referencing is very representative. And, and Ryan, well, I mean I mean, so this hardened core absolutely is. I remember Ryan walking out of that debate and just like taking a deep breath and being like, holy shit. So even you were surprised by like, yeah. It was a lot. It was a lot. But, you know, I think that's exactly what we're talking about here, is that the Trump administration felt it had the wind at its back with the public on immigration and on the economy to the extent where they said this is a

generational opportunity to take dramatic steps, corrective steps in their mind that further the like broader conservative policy, broader conservative project, which is pushing back on a century of, as they see, like Wilsonian administrative sprawl. And so they right now feel as though because the public gave them this permission that this is exactly like that. And to some extent, this is going to be controversial. They're kind of right. Right. Like if the alternative if the alternative is totally open borders, as people see it, as people see it, or Stephen Miller. Some people are still going to be siding with Stephen Miller and the public because the other policy is so awful. And that's what gives them this idea that they can keep digging further and further,

pushing further and further. And that's obviously where you end up alienating the public because at some point the policies of Democrats are not that bad compared to sending people to seek caught. So they are like that because that's, this is the hardened core who now feels like they have been vindicated. They are absolutely riding high. They're feeling like they should be dunking on reporters left and right every single day. And they're ready to do battle. And I think that that may come back. And I shouldn't say may that will come back to bite them because the public you have to be able to sort of absorb where the public is if that's part of your goal. Well, I mean, this relates to

actually the other conversation we were having before this started, which is this revelation of these, you know, signal chat groups, Chatham House, Ben Smith did the reporting. And you've got, you know, David Sachs and Tucker Carlson and all these like right wing media figures and all these right wing tech billionaires all inside of this chat group. And basically, you know, David Sachs sort of threw a fit about some of them having, quote unquote, Trump derangement syndrome and like exited the chat. But to me, that's emblematic, first of all, of how captured right wing, quote unquote, independent media is that they're just like, you know, propagating these narratives that are being fed to them directly by billionaires. But in addition, it's also emblematic to me of what an increasingly tight bubble they are keeping

themselves in. So, and that has been kind of, you know, an intentional project of Trump 2.0 is if there's anyone out there that even may disagree on anything we're doing, we don't want anything to do with that. And you pointed that out, Emily, with regard to the trade agenda. You don't have Bob Lighthizer in there anymore. You've got Peter Navarro, right? Because Lighthizer is, you know, yes, he's a protectionist, but this is, you know, someone who has his own ideas about things and is intellectual and would go about this in like some sort of an intentional way, potentially. And instead, you have Navarro, who's fresh out of prison and who is an absolute ideologue, unmovable ideologue, driving the train with regard to tariffs alongside, you know,

Trump himself. That seems to be the one part of the agenda that Trump himself is really taking ownership of. Meanwhile, I think the whole immigration portfolio and foreign policy apparently, too, has been outsourced to Stephen Miller. You know, so you have these and then all the Doge piece, whatever that was, of course, outsourced to Elon Musk. So you have sort of these incredibly ideological off the rails type figures who are completely managing whatever their, you know, ideological hobby horses. And as I said, they're, you know, the whole intent of Trump 2.0 is to make sure that there is no one in the room who's going to say, this is a bad idea. This is illegal. This is unconstitutional. I'm not going to do this. I'm going to resign. Like that has been a concerted effort to make sure that's the case. And so, yeah, they're in a complete and total bubble. And I think they also, you know,

they feel like, well, they were the pollsters were wrong about us before and the economists were wrong before. And so we're there's no external feedback that is going to really move us off of whatever our, you know, wild ideological project happens to be. I think that's a really good point that because there's such like limited trust in media feedback and perhaps reasonably so in that point and polling that people don't, they're like, well, what we're doing is popular. You know, this is exactly what everyone voted for. So, yes, we are going to keep sending alleged MS-13 people to El Salvador. But on that point, this is really interesting what you said, Crystal,

because I think about even the fact that Peter Navarro was in prison and how that changed this second Trump administration after all of the investigations and escalations in the lawfare. It's like they are applying these litmus tests for loyalty that from just a pure like management standpoint, if this were not the United States of America, but some type of corporation, you would be like, okay, what you're doing here, maybe there's some management logic to it because the litmus test is saying you are not countersignaling. This is to the point that they've excluded, not executed yet, but excluded people from the circle that are critical. They see that as counter signaling. And their litmus test is total loyalty, because if you don't pass that litmus test, you're a

potential vulnerability in the administration. You're a potential squeaky wheel. You're the potential, you know, Cassidy, was it Cassidy Hutchinson, who, or whatever the other girl was, who came out in the January 6th hearings. Liz Cheney, by the way, was someone who was really close with Trump circles and Trump 1.0. You're the squeaky wheel that can get us in trouble down the road. And so because of that, they've really purged people who are willing to be internal critics because you don't pass the litmus test. And when there's that genuine hesitation to criticize internally even the trajectory, then you end up with a chilling effect and you end up with everyone just hopping on the bandwagon of every idea that Stephen Miller

has or that Donald Trump, frankly, has. What I also found interesting about this first 100 days is what Trump didn't do, which is basically pass anything through Congress. He did the Lake and Riley Act in the first couple of days, which is, you know, Democrats just gave him whatever they wanted when it came to immigration, because they're really on their heels. But since then, it's probably been the least productive, kind of, it's definitely been the least productive first hundred days of any new president who controlled Congress in, like, modern, you know, in memory. Instead, he's focused on executive orders and he's focused on kind of concentrating power in the executive by going after law firms, going after, you know, gutting, trying to gut universities, you know, rounding up students,

the trade war, things that he can do on his own. And then having his top administration officials complain that the laws are such that they get in the way of him being able to do it legally, like this J.D. Vance saying, look, what do you want us to do? All these people came in and now it's really cumbersome to get them out. Meanwhile, of course, though, there is progress being made legislatively. The reconciliation package is moving. the budget, you know, continues to move. Do you do are you impressed by what you've seen moving through Congress? And do you think do you think he's going to be able to, like in the longer run, get this reconciliation bill, the tax cut bill through and and divert? You know, he's trying to divert tens or maybe even hundreds of billions of dollars over to ICE. Their current budget is something like $9 billion. He wants to put that up somewhere

between $300 and $500, which is like silly. Like they don't have the capacity to spend that amount of money. The point is they would have more money and money would be no object for, you know, what they're trying to accomplish. Do you think that they're sufficiently committed to that, that they're going to get some of these things done? This is a really quiet source of tension on the right, because a lot of people who are sort of architects of unitary executive theory, which is where this administration has spent the bulk of its first 100 days focused, meaning they're trying to retake power that they feel has been wrongly delegated to bureaucrats and the administrative agencies, people who support that also say that's going to require a lot of codification through Congress. You can't just do this. We've seen this come up in certain court

cases time and again, that this has to be done through Congress. If you want to get rid of USAID or the Department of Education, you can't do it with an executive order. You can't just dismantle the agency. You can dismantle it in certain ways, but ultimately you have to pass an act through Congress. And they're all pretty, I mean, everyone you talk to in Trump circles is pretty sure the midterms are not going to go well for them, that they're probably going to lose the House. And that's where it's sort of 2025 is such a different year than before Congress got sclerotic and did absolutely nothing. That's downstream of our politics. We could probably talk about Newt Gingrich for a long time and how that came to pass. But the point is,

I mean, this should be a robust legislative agenda that they should be able to be whipping up bills and getting them through Congress. They don't even have to be big like omnibus type bills, but they can't because they're stuck on these stupid budget battles. And because so much of the energy right now is in taking power back from the executive branch that they can't even augment that with Article 1 type of activity. So I think there's actually going to be a bigger tension in the next 100 days of the Trump administration, because a whole lot of the people who are the policy architects here are going to want to see stuff go through Congress before the midterms. High Key. Looking for your next obsession? Listen to High Key, a new weekly podcast hosted by Ben O'Keefe, Ryan Mitchell, and Evie Audley.

We got a lot of things to get into. We're going to gush about the random stuff we can't stop thinking about. I am high key going to lose my mind over all things Cowboy Carter. I know. Girl, the way she about to yank my bank account. Correct. And one thing I really love about this is that she's celebrating her daughter. Oh, I know. Listen to High Key on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Stereotypes that are holding back over 70 million stars. Workers skilled through alternative routes rather than a bachelor's degree.

It's time for skills to speak for themselves. Find resources for breaking through barriers at taylorpapersilling.org. Brought to you by Opportunity at Work and the Ad Council. She was a decorated veteran. A Marine who saved her comrades. A hero. She was stoic, modest, tough. Someone who inspired people.

Everyone thought they knew her. Until they didn't. I remember sitting on her couch and asking her, is this real? Is this real? Is this real? Is this real? I just couldn't wrap my head around what kind of person would do that to another person that was getting treatment that was, you know, dying. This is a story all about trust and about a woman named Sarah Kavanaugh. I've always been told I'm a really good listener, right? And I maximized that while I was lying. Listen to Deep Cover, The Truth About Sarah on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Go ahead and put A4 up on the screen. this shows the historical context of, you know, Trump is the most unpopular. He's actually beat his own record for being the most unpopular president at 100 days in modern history. Now, of course, you know, our politics has changed like these Harry Truman style, almost 90 percent approval ratings are just not really on the table at this point in time. But, you know, even if you look at Joe Biden at this point, he was in the 50s. You know, Barack Obama was was extraordinarily popular in the first term. In the second term, he was we think of that as being a time when there was a huge backlash against Obama. He's still at 50% there. You see, you know, George W. Bush not doing too well there in the second term,

but obviously very popular in the first term. So in any case, even by modern, you know, equivalent standards, Trump is sort of uniquely unpopular. But, you know, I want to transition to, we have this great clip from Frank Luntz, one of his focus groups, where he was speaking to Trump supporters and asking them specifically about the tariffs and their concerns about the economy, if they have any concerns about the economy. And this has been the consistent source of Trump's power. You know, he's always been, compared to other presidents, relatively unpopular. But he has this group of voters who are ride or die and will never leave him no matter what.

And that is certainly evident in this clip that you'll see where every single one of these Trump voter focus group participants is like, it's fine if my 401k goes down. I'm not worried about it. I support what he's doing. I think this is a masterclass, et cetera. Let's go ahead and take a listen to that. I need to ask you an issue that no one's brought up. And that has crashed your 401ks, most of you, which are tariffs. Stock market is way down.

It needed a correction. Oh, so you support it? Yes. You bet. Yep. And I have to tell you, my 401k wasn't impacted at all. First off, how many of you did not lose any money over the crash of the stock market? Stock market.

One individual, two people. Absolutely. The Biden administration, I lost more money than the Trump administration by far. In 2020, they crashed it by 25%. Yeah. For the whole year. No one's upset over this? No. Nope.

No. Nobody. If people just get in and stay the course, they'll be just fine. Yeah. And I was about to say, I'm not a day trader. I try not to look at it very often, which is, I think, a good thing. But I also trust that Trump and all of his advisors that are involved with the tariff issue know what they're doing. So I'm just going to hang on. I know it'll correct at some point.

How much do prices have to go up before you say, this is not that good? I'd rather not buy from China. I'd rather pay more money and buy American. Same. And prices only go up if demand is inelastic and if there's no alternative supplies. And they're doing a brilliant job. They're surrounding China with countries that want to manufacture stuff as well. And we do need to bring the stuff back, the strategic stuff, for sure. But but China is going to be in the soup if they don't knock it off. Every article of clothing I have on is probably made in China, Malaysia or somewhere else.

OK, retailers, give me something made in America. So, Emily, Trump has definitely lost ground with independent voters. I mean, the numbers there are pretty extraordinary. And he has lost some high-profile supporters, or at least not necessarily lost them, but some people are starting to express concern. Joe Rogan has done so. Candace Owens just came out and said, I can't believe I'm saying this, but I'm siding with Harvard over Donald Trump. So you have a little bit of cracks at the kind of elite level. There's no sign of that in the polling among Republican-based voters who still very much trust Donald Trump and very much support whatever it is that he's going to do whenever it is he's going to do it. Well, and this has always been Trump math is that you have this base and it's actually not even

a majority of the Republican Party. It never really has been a majority of the Republican Party. It's about 30 to 40 percent of Republicans who are just they will leave the Republican Party if Trump leaves the Republican Party. They are just Trump first, and then the party, then conservatism. Trump is their sort of politics. He is the party. And so to that, and so, yeah, that's the Trump math is always that group of people who will turn out to the polls. And then you have to put on top of that, some group of people that is just plainly voting against the other side. They just think the to put on top of that some group of people that is just plainly voting against the other side. They just think the other side is so awful that they will swallow

all of the sort of stylistic issues that they see with Donald Trump or any of the liabilities that they see with Donald Trump and say, all right, he's less bad. And that's not exactly what happened with Barack Obama. It's not exactly what happened with George W. Bush. You had a big group of people that were voting of independence who said, I'm actually voting for this person or swing voters. I'm actually voting for this person, not just against the other person. And that's how Trump has always been able to get through. It doesn't translate for Republicans after Trump. And that is what they have to reckon with when they see a Joe Rogan as a canary in the coal mine, is that this guy gravitated towards Donald Trump. As soon as Donald Trump starts to like screw things up, that doesn't mean he's going to ever be around the Republican party again. So how do you sort of be able to weather the storms of Donald Trump and come out? Like, does that mean

you need to start speaking out against what's happening in the universities? And nobody's going to do that. But these are the thoughts that are going to start bubbling up in their heads in the next 100 days for sure. And if we could put up a that shows how deep in the minority these kind of hardcore Trump supporters are, is 72 percent of people expect a recession, and the vast majority of them believe that Trump is doing this, that he's driving us into recession, that this is not some external shock to the economy. 34% approve of Trump's tariffs. In this country that is so divided by tribe, by party, it's very hard to get anything under like 45. Like if your side supports it, then at least 45% of the country is going to

end up supporting it, even if it's the most idiotic thing ever, until it starts to have material bite. And I think that's the only thing that can kind of push through the partisan divide here. So you kind of wind up with Trump in this trap where if he wants validation, which as we know that is the thing that he lives on throughout the day, throughout his life, he can find that validation in that focus group. And from people like Frank Luntz was talking to there who were like, yeah, this is all great. There's a plan. Trust the plan.

Just don't look. It's all going to be fine. So Trump can find that. So what could shake him out of this? Is it – and it sounds like the – The bond market. Yeah, yeah. The bond market.

Wall Street. The target Walmart and Home Depot CEOs coming to tell him the shelves are going to be empty, shook him out of it. And he's like, OK, fine, we're not doing 145 percent. And then everybody sighs and they're like, OK, somebody got through to Trump. This is all going to be OK. And then he's like, it's only going to be 50% to 60%. And it's like, bro, that's the same. Once you're over like 10-ish percent, like you're shutting down global shipping, which is maybe fine if you have some plan B for what you're going to do when global shipping shuts down. But moving it from 145 to 60, it's like, oh, he didn't really get it. So he sort of absorbed it when he heard it from those CEOs. Now the shelves are actually potentially going to be empty. So will that resonate at all?

I mean, it depends because if you've purged internal critics and people are walking on eggshells to say, hey, sir, you're your own supporters, you're working class supporters who paid money to get to another state to go to a Trump rally. Like these are the types of people right now who are really unhappy. First of all, does anyone in the circle have the sort of courage to say that to make that point without being blacklisted? I don't know. It seems like the people who did in that case were people outside of Trump's circle that were able to get through to Scott Bessent. And then Scott Bessent was able to take the message to Donald Trump or that he heard directly from these guys on Wall

Street. I mean, Trump is here. If this is hopeful, Trump is a savvy politician to the extent that he knows people's material conditions are a big driver of their politics. And, you know, the whole thing we haven't talked about here, that's maybe the biggest elephant in the room is the fact that this guy might want to run for a third term. And I say run. I don't know what that means. There's someone in a Trump 2028 hat over there now. As Steve Bannon has said, I don't know who Scott Bannon is. It's a combination of Steve Bannon and Scott Besson that is an interesting hybrid in the MAGA zoo, if you want to imagine that. But Steve Bannon has said there could be different avenues for that. And I just think that is a really important elephant in the room right now that changes everything we just talked about and the way that they see this internally, too.

Yeah, and previously they're right. Oh, you libs are Trump derangements. Of course, he's just joking about that. No one's saying that shit this time. No one is saying that this time. They're like, oh, I guess he wants to run again. We'll see how that goes. We can't tell what's a joke or not anymore.

It's not. None of it's a joke. Clearly, none of it is a joke. 28 is more likely to be his approval rating, but still. Yeah, true, true. So one thing I also wanted to not skip over, and actually, can we go back to A5 and put this up on the screen? Because there's a bunch that's really interesting and noteworthy in this New York Times Siena poll of the different issues. First of all, immigration is his top issue. He's still underwater there. But then if you look at his worst issue, it's the case involving Kilmar Obrego Garcia, which I think is vindication to people such as myself who have been saying, no, you should be talking about this case, because that is going to pull down all of his numbers on immigration, which is his strongest

issue. You want to go after his strength, et cetera. Putting that aside, look at what his next worst issues are, the war between Russia and Ukraine and foreign conflicts in general. And Ryan, I don't want to skip over that because I think when we did our focus groups and talked to those AOC Trump voters right after the election, almost all of them cited, hey, I think he's going to be better for peace. I think he's going to be better for ending wars than Biden-Harris. And now, you know, when Trump makes this outlandish promise, oh, I'm going to resolve the Russia-Ukraine conflict in 24 hours, always preposterous. But, you know, he says it was such, he repeated it so much that I think a lot of people did feel like, okay, maybe not 24 hours,

but he's going to be able to bring this thing to a close. Obviously, the Gaza ceasefire completely collapsed. Now you're looking at just complete, you know, extermination campaign and starvation within Gaza. And so, you know, that was another piece that I think is really important as well. There was this preposterous framing of him, in my view, as being this like anti-war peace candidate that truly won over, you know, some chunk of independent voters. And that piece has also just completely, completely crumbled. And he has really nothing to show for a foreign policy agenda at this point. Yeah. And Emily, before you answer that, Amir Tabon at Haaretz over the weekend had this really interesting column where he said there actually is a war that Trump can end with a tweet. And he's referencing this kind

of really pathetic post on either Twitter or social from Trump where he was like, Vladimir, please stop. What are you doing? Vladimir, stop. It was like just humiliating himself. If Trump did that for Netanyahu and said, and this is what Tabonid wrote was, Bibi, stop, get the hostages out. Like if he did that, the next day, the bombing stops, the talks resume seriously. And within days, probably the hostages are out. Like there actually is a war that he can end if he chooses to. Instead, he's not ending the one he's focused on. And the one that he promised he would end, which is Israel's assault on Gaza, he ended it on the inauguration day. He got his little headline. And then six weeks, eight weeks later, allowed Israel to start it up again. And he's also saying that

Netanyahu needs to be kind to the people in Gaza. That was roughly his quote on Air Force One. Meanwhile, Netanyahu is not allowing any food in and hasn't since March 2nd, which if your stated preference as Trump is not the one that Netanyahu is following through on, doesn't that make you look weaker than Joe Biden? Like Joe Biden, when he would tell them, you got to start letting aid in, they'd go from like, you know, 300 trucks to 350 trucks. Like he could at least move the needle. Right. Trump is claiming that he wants food to get into Israel and Netanyahu's telling him to F off. Like, is there any point at which this is embarrassing to him?

It's because the people who are making the policy itself, who are executing the policy itself, are not with Trump on those points about how Israel needs to be kind to the people in Gaza. Trump, at the very least, I guess you could say has like maybe more of a realist perspective than the Mike Huckabee. Huckabee on his first night as ambassador posted a picture with Netanyahu. I mean, Trump himself obviously posted on True Social a couple of weeks that they are on the same side of every issue he and Netanyahu after they had a phone call. But, you know, this was everything we were talking about with Dan Caldwell being purged from the Pentagon, from Pete Hegseth's circles. Like, yes, that sort of exasperation with the Israel hawks in the Republican Party is real in Trump's circles, but it's not nearly as powerful as the sort of holdovers, the, you know, policy or the buildup, the residue of decades and decades of GOP bear hug Israel, bear hugging of Israel at every turn.

And so even if Trump, as you were saying that, if Trump posted just BB STOP in all caps like he did to Putin, I was imagining him being subverted, like what would happen immediately after he sent that to social. People would people who are in the administration doing sort of like daily policy would immediately if he even did that hypothetically would immediately be trying to find ways to support Netanyahu that are like under the radar. So that's that's not conspiratorial. It's just that there's an internal war between people who thought like even people here in D.C. who look at Donald Trump and say, well, maybe this is the best chance to sort of end the dead foreign policy consensus in a good way. You know, they're constantly being, their efforts are constantly being like frustrated and thwarted

by the majority of people in professional Washington foreign policy circles who have learned that they can, you know, continue to have jobs by saying nice things about Donald Trump. I'm thinking specifically of like a Mike Waltz here, by the way, and be in positions of power. And then they can all they had to do was like sort of take that pill of swallow the pill of take the medicine of saying, oh, yeah, Donald Trump is great. Make America great again. So, yeah, it does look weak. It absolutely looks weak. But it doesn't really get framed that way among his supporters. It also imperils the negotiations with Iran as well. So I mean, there's, you know, the coddling of Israel has reverberating impacts that don't just just stay limited to, you know, the horrors that are unfolding in Gaza with our taxpayer dollars,

which is increasingly wildly unpopular with almost the entire population, with like the exception of boomer Republicans effectively at this point. The whole nation has turned on this, you know, on this project of perpetual war crimes. I do want to touch on immigration again really quickly, just because we have some really interesting numbers there that show, you know, people can evaluate how things are going and change their minds. On the Democratic side in particular, there seems to be this assumption that show, you know, people can evaluate how things are going and change their minds. On the Democratic side in particular, there seems to be this assumption that like, well, if a poll says people think this, that's it. There's no change in their minds. It's over. We better just not talk about that topic or we better totally, you know, adopt a different view

on that topic, et cetera. And immigration is like the primary case in point. Take a look at A9. So this is just on how people feel about whether or not immigrants benefit the population. And you can see this huge surge in the number of people who now say immigrants make the country better off and a dramatic decline in those who say that immigrants make the country worse off and relatively flat on the ones that say it doesn't make much of a difference. If you go back and look at the numbers on immigration during Trump 1.0, you have almost never in history had a more pro-immigrant population than we did at that time because they were looking at what Trump was doing and they were saying, I don't support this. I don't like this. And that's how you end up with Democrats, you know, reading those polls and then, you know, doing their high

school Spanish at the debates and, you know, positioning themselves in that way. So we're seeing a similar radical shift in terms of people's views on immigration. And go ahead and put a 10 up on the screen. You can see independents in particular who have shifted quite dramatically. The 56% overall disapprove of Trump's handling of the issue. 62% of independents oppose removing foreign students. 52% oppose renditions to El Salvador. I would personally like that number to be a lot higher than that. But anyway, and only 21% want Kilmar Abrego Garcia left in this prison. So, you know, to me, this was predictable that, you know, in theory, people say, yeah, OK, let's, you know, Trump's saying these people are all criminals. Yes, let's get the criminals out, et cetera. When you're actually met with the

reality of, oh, these are human beings who, you know, many times they are not the caricature that they've been made out to be. And then you also have the Trump administration, you know, many times they are not the caricature that they've been made out to be. And then you also have the Trump administration, you know, engaging in these outrageous tactics, which they themselves, you'll clearly paint a picture of, hey, today it's Kilmar Abrego Garcia, tomorrow it can be you. We want to go after the homegrowns next. So immediately they're helping to make the connection between the loss of rights for this immigrant population and the loss of rights for the entire population. You know, it's not surprising to me to see that immigration, even on the issue of they don't even necessarily trust public opinion anymore because they saw that happen in the first term and then saw him get reelected several years later because the Biden administration's policies were so unpopular. stake of misreading that mandate as an embrace of your policy rather than a rejection of your predecessor's policy. And I think there's some of that happening. And the other part of it is that

because they feel they have the mandate, they are sort of isolating themselves or insulating themselves from even critics on the right who say you're going to hurt your ability to do quote unquote mass deportations if you're focusing on these cases where you actually made a mistake and doubling down. In the case of Kilmer Abrego Garcia, obviously the man who admitted the Trump administration made a mistake was fired, but the administration doubled down on it and didn't concede that there was any error whatsoever. And it became a public spectacle that resulted in public opinion shifting, just as you showed, Crystal. And so, you know, it's sort of from both sides. There's this criticism that people, because of those litmus tests in the administration, are basically insulated from. And it will not make their policies more popular, that's for sure.

I think it's Stephen Miller. I think the public sees Stephen Miller on TV, and they're like, whatever that guy's for, I'm against. He is a relatively repulsive figure. And he's single-handedly driving an entire country's views on immigration. He fades, and people are like, yeah, I don't like immigrants anymore. He comes back in, they're like, God, I love immigrants. Like, if it's immigrants or this dude, I'm with the immigrants. Team immigrant all day long.

Well, I mean, he just reads. He is an extremist. Like, he is. Trump thinks he's an extremist. There's that amazing anecdote where he's making fun of Miller for being a racist, saying that, like, if it was up to you, Stephen, you know, everyone in this country would look exactly like you. Yeah. Yeah. Like, too racist for Trump.

I mean, which relates to. Well, not too racist because he's happy to have him around. Right. Exactly. Yeah. I'm happy to give him control of the entire portfolio. And it relates to, you know, they've been tracking the stock market performance when it's Peter Navarro and Howard Lutnick, whose name is mentioned more in the news, versus Scott Besant. So, Ryan, you may be on to something there in terms of the spokespeople for the Trump policies.

And thank you so much for joining us this morning. We appreciate you. And great to have your views on this first very, very consequential, very fast-paced, momentous, we'll certainly say extraordinary first 100 days of this administration. Thanks for having me, guys. Yeah, our pleasure. I always had to be so good no one could ignore me. Carve my path with data and drive. Yeah, our pleasure. rather than a bachelor's degree. It's time for skills to speak for themselves.

Find resources for breaking through barriers at taylorpapersilling.org. Brought to you by Opportunity at Work and the Ad Council. High key. Looking for your next obsession? Listen to High Key, a new weekly podcast hosted by Ben O'Keefe, Ryan Mitchell,

and Evie Audley. We got a lot of things to get into. We're going to gush about the random stuff we can't stop thinking about. I am high key going to lose my mind over all things Cowboy Carter. I know. Girl, the way she about to yank my bank account. Correct.

And one thing I really love about this is that she's celebrating her daughter. Oh, I know. Listen to High Key on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. She was a decorated veteran, a Marine who saved her comrades, a hero. She was stoic, modest, tough, someone who inspired people. Everyone thought they knew her until they didn't. I remember sitting on her couch and asking her, is this real? Is this real? Is this real? Is this real? I just couldn't wrap my head around

what kind of person would do that to another person that was getting treatment, that was, you know, dying. This is a story all about trust and about a woman named Sarah Kavanaugh. I've always been told I'm a really good listener, right? And I maximized that while I was lying. Listen to Deep Cover, The Truth About Sarah on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. We now have the Trump trade war officially showing up in numbers in terms of shipping and news media starting to cover it. Let's take a listen to MSNBC

talking about a 50% year-over-year drop at West Coast ports. You are looking at a 44% decrease in vessels year over year coming in. And what's really key here, Alex, are the people that move the containers. You need people to move trade. If you have 40 percent less containers coming in, that is going to impact the people that are the truckers, the railroads, the warehousing. This is more than just us consuming and us bringing in orders. There's an entire supply chain here that is connected to jobs. And so the longer this goes, Alex, we're going to see some significant impact here in terms of employment. In fact, the Port of Oakland, which is a huge, huge port that relies

on both imports and exports, they're very, very balanced. They've got a 50-50 split. They already started warning on Friday about the detriment when it comes to jobs and the exposure with this. Even if a deal is reached soon, are we in for at least some troubling times ahead? I believe we are. And the reason why is that trade takes time to move and you also have to order it. The fact that we've had a pause in all of these manufacturing plants, I have had sources tell me in China that there are factories that have literally shut down because they're not making any products for the United States. So if you think about it, remember with COVID, everything shut down and then everything ramped back up. And so what happens is once you hit that unpause button, it's going to be that

rush to make the materials and then get the product on the vessels and back here, which causes congestion and raises freight prices. And the West Coast ports are not only gigantic, they're also the first places where these massive disruptions would show up. I think we all got a real lesson in supply chain logistics during COVID and how, you know, once these things start to unravel. Apparently not all of us. Apparently not all of us. There are cascading effects that you cannot just snap your fingers and things go back to normal. Even if Trump today comes out and says, guess what? Trade war over. We're back to, you know, wherever the previous tariffs were with regard to China.

If you could put B2 up on the screen, because I thought this was a remarkable visible representation of just how screwed the supply chain is at this point. So this is a map. You can see China on one side. You can see L.A. on the other side. And the blue dots are all of the ships. Now, normally there should be roughly even distribution across this map. And you can see because so many companies in the US that were planning on importing goods from China said, I can't pay this 145% tariff. This is an impossibility. You have all of these ships and this cargo just stuck sitting in China right now. And that's the state of affairs that Walmart and

Home Depot were warning Trump about that, hey, we are weeks away, days away from starting to have our shelves be light, starting to have things that are just out of stock. And also many people have been taking note. Ryan, B1B, you guys put this up on the screen. We are also now officially at the point where Shein, the low-cost retailer that many Americans appreciate, is massively hiking their prices. So up to 377% price hikes over at Sheehan. You know, not everything is at that level, but the thick kitchen cleaning towels have now gone up from $1.28, which is unbelievable they cost that, to $6.10. Whatever, blinds, air conditioning, gap brush, that's gone up 219%. So the price hikes are

starting to hit. I can tell you, I personally have seen prices jump at Amazon just over the past couple of weeks as well. And I know there were reports, Ryan, about Amazon sellers starting to take into account these price hikes. Yeah. And the risk for the world is that all of those ships that you saw kind of hanging out off the Chinese coast, they got to go somewhere at some point. And so other countries are afraid that now there's going to be a bunch of Chinese dumping. Like, okay, well, we made this stuff. It's sitting in the ship.

Can't sell it to the United States because they're doing their thing. Who wants a towel for $ you know, $2? And Columbia would be like, all right, we'll take, you know, a million towels for $2 or whatever, or a Colombian company. And then the company in Columbia that makes the towels, they go under. So, like, there's a risk. Everybody's kind of holding their breath over, like, how this is going to play out. Meanwhile, this Ken Griffin, you know, Trump supporting Ken Griffin, this answer that he gave at a recent conference, I thought kind of nailed the problem that the U.S., what would you call it, the U.S. political

economy faces coming out of this. Because the thing that really nailed Biden, like you said, was inflation from when the supply chains restarted. Because of all of the bankruptcies and all of the clogging, it takes a very long time for that to start running smoothly again. Now, you've also implicated treasury bonds and the dollar. So what is that going to do if and when that starts flowing again? Let's roll, Griffin. Markets are obviously not liking what they're hearing. Treasuries in particular have seen a lot of volatility and worries about dysfunction in the market. What is that doing to the American brand? Well, okay, you actually picked exactly the right word, the American brand, right? The United States was more than just a nation. It's a brand.

It's a universal brand, whether it's our culture, our financial strength, our military strength. America rose beyond just being a country. It was like an aspiration for most of the world. And we're eroding that brand right now. And if you think of your behavior as a consumer, how many times do you buy a product with a brand on it because you trust that brand? You know you could buy a similar dress with no name for less money, but you want the dress that you think is going to not fall apart in two weeks.

You want the handbag that you think is well made. You want the television that you know that when you turn it on it's going to work perfectly. You want the car that when you turn the engine, it's going to work perfectly. You want the car that when you turn the engine on, it's going to run. And when it comes to money management, for example, there are many great American institutions whose the power of their brand, that they will deliver a fair service at a fair price, that they'll do well by their investors and put their investors' interests first, whether it's a BlackRock or Fidelity. These are global brands of immense power. But in the financial markets,

no brand compared to the brand of the U.S. Treasuries. U.S. Treasury market, the strength of the U.S. dollar, and the creditworthiness of U.S. Treasuries. No brand came close. We put that brand at risk. And as you and I both know, it can take a very long time, very long time to remove the tarnish on a brand. And the U.S. being the kind of reserve currency and this kind of global empire has a lot of downsides, also has upsides for Americans. You can imagine a world in which

the strength that comes from that could be the basis for reform and revitalizing the country. Instead, you're kind of getting rid of it without replacing it with anything else. Right. And also destroying tourism, which is nine plus percent of GDP, which is just an absolutely huge number. And much more significant for certain places, many of the red states like Florida and the Gulf Coast in particular. Nevada is like reliving 2010 and 2011. Yeah. I'm seeing lots of TikToks about that. And for no reason, like the amount of pain that ripped through Vegas in the wake of the financial crisis is hard to bear. And to see it now happening for no reason,

just because, is hard to watch. And was part of a shift to the right in Nevada because of the carnage from COVID and the perception of Democratic handling of that. And in spite of the fact that you have very strong union organization there, you know, you still saw significant shift to the right in Nevada as a consequence of, you know, the shutdowns and the COVID fallout. So, you know, you can only imagine with this where the blame is 100% with Donald Trump, like there's no argument otherwise what the fallout could be. And that's a good point. They suffered through the COVID lockdowns. So first they suffered through financial crisis and real estate collapse. Oh, that was brutal.

Then a nice recovery for a while. And then you got a couple of good years and then whacked by COVID. Then everybody's coming back to Vegas and partying and things are looking good. And then boom. Yep. Vegas shut down. You know, the Ken Griffin thing could require a longer exploration that maybe we don't want to get into today. But as he's talking about America as a brand, I'm just thinking, like, many of the people on the Trump team that, you know, he supported and he backs Republicans to the tune of many millions of dollars, they don't agree with that. Like, Stephen Miller sees America as blood and soil, right? So they don't see America as a quote-unquote brand. And, you

know, I think there is something to be said for a critique of the America is a brand posture. But I also think that, you know, his comments about the way that that branding, and no one would understand this better than Donald Trump himself, the way that that branding impacts, you know, our status as the global reserve currency and the flight to safety to treasury bonds, et cetera, you know, it is quite paramount. currency and the flight to safety to treasury bonds, et cetera. You know, it is quite paramount to the way that the financial system is structured right now. And so if you are going to disrupt that and move to something else, you better have a damn good plan. And there's one thing that we have definitely learned.

There was no damn good plan here. There was barely a plan. I mean, they were crafting that chart using chat GPT or however they decided to do it, leading up to the hours before it's revealed and turns the entire global economic system utterly on its head. We've got a couple more pieces here that just show the beginnings of the economic fallout. We've got B5, an Intel plant, has now been delayed years and at the cost of quite a number of jobs. It's now delayed until 2031, and in part the uncertainty over the tariffs is playing into this. We also, something that Sager had brought up before is, you know, some of these specific parts of our economy are ultra, ultra dependent on China.

You know, for new parents buying strollers, like basically every stroller is 98 percent or something made in China and many other goods that you sort of essentially have to buy when you are bringing a child into this world. And toys are disproportionately made in China as well. I can put B6 up on the screen. So these are impacts already on the U.S. toy industry. And you have to think, like, you know, for in our terms, Christmas is a long way off. If you are a toy importer, if you're a toy store, you're thinking about this and you're planning for it now. You already have some 80 to almost 90 percent of toy companies that are delaying orders. You got 64 percent of small toy companies and 80 percent of midsize toy are delaying orders. You got 64% of small toy companies and 80%

of mid-sized toy companies canceling orders. And you have almost half that say, Ryan, they will go out of business in weeks or months. Weeks or months. Right. And a lot of them are going out of business as we speak. China, meanwhile, has announced that they're going to try to help their companies, these factories that are completely shut down. They're going to try to help their companies, these factories that are completely shut down. They're going to try to help those companies, help those workers to get through this because they can do that. They have like a unified system, whereas we don't. Donald Trump would have to go to Congress and apparently doesn't feel any interest in doing that.

Real quickly on that Intel point, to preempt a counterarg argument that you're going to hear from Trump supporters over this plant. Well, let's say, well, this plant was, it was delayed previously. First, it was supposed to be 2020 whatever, and then it was supposed to be 2030. Now it's 2031. And this is, you know, a representative of the failures of the CHIPS Act and of the underlying kind of capacity in the United States to build up our high-tech manufacturing base. Okay, true. But if that's the case and you already understand that, is that the foundation on which you would launch a trade war? Like, think about that.

So according to you, and I'm talking to you, Trump supporters who are going to make this exact point about this Intel plant, that this had nothing to do with the tariffs, that force and when it comes to cracking down on these multinational corporations who would much rather do stock buybacks than actual investments. That's true. We've got to get our house in order. If that's true, then why did you just take a wrecking ball to our ability to do that? Why not fix our own manufacturing capacity problems here in the United States first and then launch a trade war so that when market conditions are made better domestically by tariffs, we have the capacity to respond to those conditions and build manufacturing capacity. That would be how you could potentially successfully do that. And the irony is we actually were doing some of that under Biden.

The charts are like shooting straight up under Biden. If you go and look at manufacturing, investment and spending and jobs and, you know, these factories were coming online. We were actually, you know, for the first time in a long time, the recovery out of COVID included more manufacturing spending. You know, the history of economic crises in, you know, modern American economic history has been that when you come out of the crisis, some of the manufacturing losses, they're just gone. They don't come back. They were able to buck that trend through the Infrastructure Act and through the CHIPS Act in particular and through the Inflation Reduction Act, which is the dumbest ever name. But anyway. Some of Trump and Biden's tariffs. Yes.

Like targeted tariffs. Putting all of those things together, you actually did have a positive trend in terms of rebuilding American manufacturing in some really key sectors for the future. And all of that, they're taking a sledgehammer to. And Trump thought all of that was stupid, Ryan. I mean, he said this. His view was you didn't have to do this industrial policy. You didn't have to give these subsidies and create these incentives for companies to build. You could just do tariffs and force them into it.

And jawbone them. Call them up and yell at them. Yeah. And you know what? The jawboning, like with a company here or there, that may work. But if you're trying to have a nationwide manufacturing renaissance in certain key sectors, you are not going to be able to jawbone your way into that. And you're certainly not going to be able to just tariff your way into that. And we know that because in Trump's first term, he did just tariffs, much more limited, but just tariffs without corresponding industrial policy. And it didn't work. Manufacturing continues to decline. Companies continue to offshore jobs. And the only way that we turned that around was through the industrial policy that was inherent in the Biden administration that the Trump people

and the Doge people are now completely decimating, taking a wrecking ball to. I'm Michael Kassin, founder and CEO of 3C Ventures and your guide on good company, the podcast where I sit down with the boldest innovators shaping what's next. In this episode, I'm joined by Anjali Sood, CEO of Tubi. We dive into the competitive world of streaming. What others dismiss as niche, we embrace as core. There are so many stories out there. And if you can find a way to curate and help the right person discover the right content,

the term that we always hear from our audience is that they feel seen. Listen to Good Company on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Stay informed, empowered, and ahead of the curve with the BIN News This Hour podcast. Updated hourly to bring you the latest stories shaping the Black community. From breaking headlines to cultural milestones, the Black Information Network delivers the facts,

the voices, and the perspectives that matter 24-7 because our stories deserve to be heard. Listen to the BIN News This Hour podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. What up, y'all? This your main man Memphis Bleak right here, host of Rock Solid Podcast.

June is Black Music Month, so what better way to celebrate than listening to my exclusive conversation with my bro, Ja Rule. The one thing that can't stop you or take away from you is knowledge. So whatever I went through while I was down in prison for two years, through that

process, learn. Learn from me. Check out this exclusive episode with Ja Rule on Rock Solid. Open your free iHeartRadio app, search Rock Solid, and listen now. This is an iHeart Podcast.