Chapo Trap House - 456 - Beltway Garage: Avengeance Protocol feat. Don Hughes (9/22/20)

Episode Date: September 22, 2020

We’re back gettin’ hot ‘n greasy in the Beltway Garage, gauging the pressure on SCOTUS appointments, kicking the remarkably stable tires on the presidential race, and selling you a slew of useless upgrades on this year’s contested Senate races. Check out Bad News Hughes' podcast You Can't Win: https://www.patreon.com/youcantwin Follow Bad News Hughes on Twitter http://twitter.com/getfiscal

This is Bad News Hughes with your American election update. We're in the final weeks of the American election, and it could well be the final days of America. A lot has happened in the Great Satan since the last time we've talked. Thousands of Americans have died of a deadly disease. There's street violence everywhere, and the economy has collapsed. It's everything I've ever dreamed of. So why do I feel depressed?

The truth is, it's because of how bad these candidates are. Joe Biden says he wants to be the president for all Americans. All Americans, have you seen these people? You want to work for every Q&A on Facebook psycho and gun-toting fascist e-girl? Joe, you helped write the crime bill. Don't let us down. Abolish the police and create a new order, so terrifying that the surviving members of Congress will envy the dead.

Niche, all this talk of compromise and dialogue and get real. Who want to spend all day listening to people who think face masks are a Muslim plot? Or do you want to arrest every Fortune 500 CEO at once? Don't overthink it, Joe. Just do the right thing. President Trump has been a real disappointment. It reminds me of my friend Mao in his final years. His heart's just not in the game.

Where's the wall? Why isn't Hillary Clinton in prison? Does he even care about crushing the deep state anymore? I thought all this chaos would make me happy, but it's all empty calories. I need vitamins. Where's the coup d'etat? Where's the nationalization of industry? I never thought I'd say this, but Trump is getting boring.

He needs a new hobby. The minor parties don't inspire much hope either. The Libertarian Party has put up Joe Jorgensen as their candidate. The Libertarians try to present themselves as the party of guns, drugs, and cryptocurrency. Look, if you've ever tried to finance a revolution, you know that's exactly the sort of thing you need to scare up some cats. But Jorgensen wants to privatize Medicare and Social Security. Joe, the guns are for taking rich people's wealth, not to make us all poor.

How are you on team legalized cocaine and still end up a nerd? Howie Hawkins is the Green Party's eco-socialist alternative to Joe Biden. He's selling himself as the lesser of three evils. People say it's safe to vote for him in blue states. How the hell did we end up wanting safe socialists? If Howie had any principles, he'd be campaigning from jail. Wait, that's wrong. If Howie was good enough, Biden and Trump would be campaigning from jail.

We just can't support Gloria Lariva of the PSL either. The party for socialism and liberation doesn't even control a single state. A revolutionary party without a base area? Where are they launching attacks from? Do they even have an army? If you want some credibility, run up a flag and take a few regions under your control. At least Kanye West has a compound. It's not quite a whole state, but it's a start.

You know, maybe I'm looking at this the wrong way. None of these candidates appeal to me, but what if they work together as a team? Sort of democratic avengers, is that so far fetched? We could take Joe Biden's love of mass incarceration and join it with Howie Hawkins in his anger at big polluters. Then we could match Donald Trump's love for federal secret police with Gloria Lariva's support for a socialist economy. As for Joe Jorgensen, she could meet everyone at Kanye West's compound with all the guns

and drugs she can find. Then maybe the country has a fighting chance. Thank you. LeMond died today, or yesterday maybe, I don't know. I got an email from the Democratic Party. It said oops. R.I.P. Matt, I know you've been very upset, past few months.

She was a girl boss, what can you say? She was all of our bosses. What can you say when a girl boss dies? I don't know. I mean, it's like you just have to keep plugging away, you just have to keep doing your job. I mean, I like to think that she's watching, and that's what gets me out of the bed every day is knowing that she's going to be watching me pod from heaven in her box seats with Antonin Scalia and Otto Scorsini and Alan Dulles and Countess Elizabeth Bathory.

Elizabeth Bathory. Yeah. And they're all telling me that I could do it, and if they believe in me, then I can believe in me. Well, I think that if we're going to talk about a Supreme Court justice dying this close to the election, we ought to make an honest podcast out of it. So let's put on our blogging aprons, don the punditry goggles, and ride the service elevator all the way down to the Beltway Garage.

Well, when garage will come in, they're going to find out what's going on with Scotus Pitt and Electoral Trick, who gives a shit we're all going to die Beltway Garage. Welcome to the Beltway Garage, where you can climb the ladder of advice, stumble on the paint cans of consent, and leaf through the box of old nudie magazines starring Fawn Hall, Donna Rice, and Fanny Fox. I'm Virgil Texas with me as always, legitimate businessman, Matt Christmas. The first body in our shop today, Democrats received some good news as long as long time liberal Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away within the one year election window

where it would be improper for a replacement to be appointed by Republicans. Oh, good. That means that there's no chance of that happening. Or is there? What? I wait a minute. I'm confused. I think we had all established the precedent last time that within a year of an election,

you don't fill a Supreme Court seat because you want to give the voters a chance to speak on the matter. Yes. Yeah. Right, exactly. That rule we were all familiar with, that was named after Joe, Amtrak Joe. Yeah. I buy it by the daily.

Apparently the refs got together and determined that actually the Biden rule only applies when the president and the Senate are from different parties. Ah, shit. Which as you know is not the case right now. So question one, will Trump nominate a justice and will Republicans seat them? Uh, I'd say yes, but not before the election. I think they're going to do it in the lame duck, which will be the most amazing balls out maneuver they could possibly do.

They will be saying, the only way that you can negate this is by doing something we know you're not going to do, which is pack the court or impeach the existing justices or something. Yeah. You're not going to do it. So that means we could sit here, even if we've lost the Senate and it would be even, oh, it'd be so sweet. It would be just so rich and delicious if they did it after losing the Senate, which

could very well happen. But yes, I think they do it before the calendar year is out. Okay. So your call is that irrespective of the outcome of the presidential election, that they aid a nominee, but Trump said he will nominate a justice this week. Maybe hearing start, but the actual confirmation would take place between election day and inauguration day. Yes.

And fingers crossed it's Jeanine Pirro. Now here's an interesting question. Within that window, in the middle of December falls the constitutionally mandated date when the electors meets and actually cast their electoral votes and that is a critical deadline in terms of the electoral process, in terms of the presidential election, which we found out about in the year 2000, of course. Yes. We got some electors meeting.

You got to hurry up. Wrap it the fuck up. In the year 2000, of course, Florida was, you know, they were recounting their votes. They were about to meet the constitutional deadline to recount all the votes and figure out who won the election so they can get the right electors to cast their votes in the state capital until the Republican Supreme Court stepped in, issued an injunction, stopped the count, and then said, well, you know, it doesn't really matter because, you know, even if we ruled in Gore's favor, even if we let you keep going, there's no way you

could finish the count in time and, you know, this is the deadline. So Bush wins. Oops. Sorry, guys. So this time around, there are eight people on the Supreme Court, five are Republicans, three are Democrats, but it's very possible that this election will come down to a similar decision. It will go to the Supremes who have to figure it out and, you know, let's live in a world

for a second. I don't think this is the case. Let's live in a world for a second where John Roberts would vote with the three Democrats. Like maybe he's been, he's been, he's been fully bimbo-fied. Yeah. I don't think so. I think the deal with, with Roberts, well, that's interesting with Roberts because clearly Roberts is the smartest of them.

And the thing that Republicans hate about him and are mad about, first of all, I think that's mostly for show. They're not really mad at him at the elite levels. I mean, but then again, the, the, the lunatics are taking over the asylum. You can't even tell the difference anymore. But anyway, because Adam, because Roberts realizes that in, in the current moment and especially in the future, the, the, that the way, the only real way to guarantee that you're going to be able to prevent any kind of political change in this country that is going to become

more and more dramatic as things get more and more disastrous would be with the court standing in the way. And for that to happen, the court has to be a, a, a live political player. And that's why he is very careful about spending the court's capital in the public domain. Like that's why he will vote for Democrats once in a while, always on the most, always on questions of like social policy, the kind of stuff that rings alarm bells in the popular consciousness, never on things like corporate control or, you know, labor power, things like that.

He's very, very consistent reactionary. But he knows that there's going to be a big case someday and they're going to have to break in case of a fire, break glass, they're going to have to open that to get the Supreme Court to put the brakes on some sort of radical change that's going to disrupt power distribution in this country. At least that's the fear. And he wants the court to be there. And if he blows the court, if he makes every liberal in this country hate the Supreme Court

the way conservatives do, eventually the, the Supreme Court comes into play as a institution. And he is preventing that from happening by being fair-minded. And the question is, does he see something like a Trump-Biden presidential race? Does he see that as the reason that he's there? Or does he see it as a great way to buy goodwill for future knee-capping of American social democracy? And I'm not sure. Well, it's, it's, it's an open question.

And right now, in the case of a tie in the Supreme Court, the tie goes to whatever the decision that was appealed to the Supreme Court was made. So here's my question to you. You believe that sometime between election day and the inauguration day in January that Republicans will, they'll get their fifth justice or their sixth justice on the court. Do you think they would do it before that December elector deadline, maybe a few weeks before that? Or do you think it would happen after that?

I guess you're saying to like, would they, would they want, would they try to get someone on the court in order to decide a court case? Yes. And in order to steal the election, much like they did in 2000. Yeah. I mean, the thing is, is that they have time to do that, I think, I mean, like the minimum amount of time it takes to ram through a justice, if they're all on the same page, would, would be, would be not that difficult to make for them, considering that the Democratic Party

has essentially ruled out any kind of procedural effort to slow the workings of the Senate. Pretty much. I mean, it seems, that's what I'm getting, that's what I'm getting from crazy Nancy. Well, I do want to know that, and let's put a clip of this in here, Nancy Pelosi had some hot stuff to say on television the other day, he had some strong words about the possibility of, say, trying to gum up the works in the Senate by just sending a bunch of impeachments there. Let's, let's hear that.

So what can you do then? Some have mentioned the possibility, if they try to push through a nominee in a lame duck session, that, that you in the house could move to impeach President, President Trump or Attorney General Barr as a way of stalling and preventing the Senate from acting on this nomination. Well, we have our options. We have arrows in our quiver that I'm not about to discuss right now. But the fact is, we have a big challenge in our country.

This president has threatened to not even accept the result of the election. Is this, this is a different clip, right, where, of the one where she just glitches out and forgets where she is or what day it is that she just had. She's very glitchy in this clip. Yes. But to be clear, you're not taking any arrows out of your quiver. You're not ruling anything out. Good morning, Sunday morning.

We have a responsibility. We take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. Okay, good. She's, she's clipping here. Yeah. I mean, that, that's reassuring to me that, that all of our top leaders are just glitching NPCs. I love, I love living seriously.

This is the gerontocracy of the late Soviet Union. Yeah. A bunch of fossils. Show it now. But now how Schumer ruled out, you know, coming up the works, you know, because there's a lot, there's a lot they can do to actually just slow every goddamn thing down and, you know, probably make it impossible to put someone on the court. It's, it, I guess it's possible.

I just, it seems to me that if there's a, there's a court case that'll go to the court that would decide the election, I, I don't think, I don't think they need that for that last justice. You think they've, they've just with the five that they've gone on, that's enough. No, I think between the five, I think that they, they have enough other things to do. They have enough other quivers. They have enough arrows in their quiver as it were. I mean, they're willing to do things like I say, have a Brooks Brothers riot.

We know for a fact they're willing to do that. And they're 20 years farther developed. 20 years more of norms have eroded. They have enough things that they can do that I don't think they necessarily need to, but I don't, I don't really know. I don't, I don't know. It's going to come down to, to tactical questions that are going to be closer to the moment than I can sur, surmise from this position if there's too many flapping butterfly wings.

So I don't know. Well right now, one of the explicit justifications, and of course this in the past, this is the kind of thing you, you whisper or you wink at, but now they're just explicitly saying it. Well, the elections, you know, it's pretty close, isn't it? It's just going to come down to Supreme Court. They're going to have to install the new president. So we got to have nine people on there, right?

Yeah. Doesn't that, doesn't that give away the game a little bit for you? I mean, what do you think the odds are that the Republicans mobilized to seal the election and this would require them using their entire, you know, their entire structural power that, that as it exists. Oh, I don't think they're going to do that. I'll say, I'll flat out say they're not going to do a thing where, okay, we're now going to steal the election.

I don't think they're going to do that. Now, I do think what's possible is you could get in a situation like in 2000, where in the aftermath of a election that is botched through the concrete decisions of Republican policymakers and regular old incompetence and our general infrastructural failures in nation, we get a tipped ball, as it were, that they will do everything it takes and more to ensure that they win and that would basically amount to stealing the election. But I don't think there's going to be a Republican party wide effort to steal the election because I'm not sure if there's a wide enough belief in a part in Republican official circles yet

that the reelection of Donald Trump is the existential question that they pose to their idiot Rube followers. Well, let's say this, you know, right now, right now, Biden has a single-digit lead in what looked to be the most critical swing states, you know, place Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan. And we know from opinion surveys that Democrats are substantially more likely to be voting by mail this election, at least that's what we think right now that might, of course, this might not end up being the case, but it seems like they're more likely to vote by mail. And of course, Donald Trump has been telling people not to or telling people to

vote. I don't really know what kind of messaging is coming out of there, but he's hostile to the vote by mail people because, you know, he knows that most of them are Democrats compared to Republicans. So let's say on election night, you know, it's 4 a.m. Trump has, you know, he's leading, he's up by like 5% in Michigan, 5% Wisconsin, 5% Pennsylvania. And then they don't even start counting the mail votes until the next day. Pennsylvania is not even going to start counting them until three days after election day. Not even going to crack them open. And then each passing day, Trump's lead goes down. At some point, do you think at some point

Trump is just going to step in and say, no, you know, this is bullshit. They're still in the election. They might do it that night. That night, he'll just say, well, I won. Look, see, it's 4 a.m. clearly won. And he's going to use the precedent that that's the way it's always been in this country. You've always had it, except for 2000. And even then there was a declared winner for a for a minute. We don't we get a winner on election night. And blah, blah, valent ballots, blah, blah, blah, winner on election night. So the winner on election night should win

because if you've already claimed that they're trying to rig it, then and that you've called things like vote harvesting, which is a crucial component of of count of doing like a a recount, for example, certainly of mail in ballots is you just say, oh, they're just writing ballots out of thin air. They're just making these in a in a in a DNC laboratory somewhere. 40% of the public will believe you 100% on that to the point of like biblical certainty. And of course, everything else will be horrified or not being attention. It'll come down to what the court says because he'll declare as a winner. The Democrats will say no, we have to wait. And then there will be some court case in some state saying stop counting

these ballots, and it'll go to the courts, and then they will make a decision. And since Trump has appointed basically the entire federal judiciary in the past four years, thanks to Mitch McConnell, there's a very good chance that whatever ridiculous, tendentious, unconstitutional read they have in the situation would be considered correct and and and and constitutional. And what would anyone do about it? Exactly. Exactly. That is the that is the scenario and that is stealing the election. Because of course, we have precedent for this because they did it in 2000, recounting a vote is is perfectly legitimate. But the Bush campaign said, no, no, no, they're they're they they they they hinted that they were rigging the thing. They

made a more complex legal argument at the time. But this time around, they're just saying explicitly, no, no, no, this this this process of counting mailed in votes. No, that's that's all legal. That's all you can't do that. Yeah. Yeah, they'll pull out anything they want. And there'll be nothing anyone can do about it. And it'll be awesome to if the court does the same thing. I mean, the the the fraud, the fraudulent illegality of 2000 should be exempt pretty clearly exemplified by the fact that the Supreme Court in its decision says this case will not count as precedent in any future fucking decision. Yeah, because it's made up. They're going to do the same thing with this. They're going

to make it up. And and the fact that we already did it once should tell you that we should all know what would happen if it's going to happen again. Democrats will be indignant for a little bit. And then they will say they're looking forward to working on the president to challenge the entitlement problem we have and the the the deficits and such. So you under this scenario, which you believe is unlikely, I mean, you got to have a lot of coins turn up heads in a row for that to happen. Well, it's a coordination problem, right? Because it's like Trump saying something and someone like like Matt Gates, saying, yeah, yeah, yeah, that's true. That's not enough. Yeah. But you know, getting Kevin

McCarthy and Mitch McConnell and like thousands of Republican hundreds and thousands of Republican state legislators to say, OK, yeah, no, this is right. This is right. We're all going to do this. Like that's that's a different story. And that's that is essentially what is required for this to happen. See, I don't know if it is. So you get it. You get some yahoo is going to do us a do us court case. Once it gets to the courts, the only coordination has to be these Republicans acting like Republicans and being aware that all of these are political questions, that there's no such thing as neutral arbitration. And that's that's rubate and rule in the position

in the direction that will help their party maintain the presidency. Well, there is a question that it does itself. It's it's it's a self fulfilling coup. Well, there is a question. I mean, you know, again, earlier, we're talking about John Roberts and this idea of, you know, maintaining the courts legitimacy. Like, you know, you get one, you know, like, you know, you're going to pick your shots, you're going to you're going to you're going to build the capital and you're going to spend it at some point. There is I mean, there is a limit to how I think how ballsy you want to be about stealing an election. I think, you know, with 2000, I mean, OK, that one was, you know, it was

legitimately close election. If it look if it's looking like Biden in the final count is up with 7% in Michigan, 7% in Pennsylvania to OK. Now, see now we're talking where it's not that's not this situation where this happens necessarily. This happens in a situation where the lead is small or maybe it's Trump's or something like it and that that requires an election in which it's closer than that. So there's a very narrow band of possibility results where this could plausibly happen. If if Biden wins outright, if like the polls as they stand now are reflect, end up reflecting the final vote count, I think he wins regardless no matter how much Trump wants to whine or do some half-assed media quasi coup or pronounce

theamento. Biden, they will be, it will be, it will be nashed over and it will be a big drama and all the liberals will piss themselves. But at the end of the day, he will hop and puff and go home. So because he doesn't want to get dragged out by federal marshals. But if it's closer than that, then I really don't know. It is it is a unprecedentedly chaotic situation. Yeah, yeah. Well, I'm saying what we're in for is not an election night, an election week where every single day Trump's lead erodes to the point where at some point, the state start flipping that map is the map starts out all red and it starts going blue. Yeah.

And there's gonna be, I mean, in this particular, particularly paranoid moment in American history. I cannot imagine how that is going to feel for the not just, you know, the the MAGA morons, but for the the Republicans as a as a collective, for the right as a collective to kind of slowly watch this happen. You have to think they're going to want to do something, you stop the counts, either go to court and get an injunction to stop the count or I don't know, just storm a fucking elections office in Madison. Well, yeah, I mean, you had a situation in Michigan earlier this year where there was a takeover of the state capital because of the mask protests. If the same people and

they would probably be very much the same people and like literally showed up at a county courthouse or a county facility. I don't think that there would be much that could stand in their way because the police sure as hell wouldn't do anything, even if even if it's a quote unquote blue state. Another, you know, another factor here is, you know, these primaries over the past few months have been conducted by mail to varying degrees of competence. We know that in every single one of these primary elections, substantial numbers of mail in ballots have been invalidated. They've been thrown out. They've been counted for for tiki-taki shit like signatures, checked

the wrong box, but it wrote OK and do not write here in the space. That kind of thing. I've read that in in at least one district in Brooklyn during the New York primaries up to 20 percent of mail in ballots were. Oh, that's a lot of ballots. Your vote counts, though, and it really matters that you vote and please go vote. Nancy Pelosi told you to vote. But something you said earlier, I think is I think is very important here, you know, in the nightmare scenarios, like we can think about like we have no idea what the Republicans are going to do. Sure. But the real question is what the Democrats will do, and especially

what Joe Biden would do. We know what Al Gore did in 2000. He gave up and he said, you know, it's more important that people believe that this this democratic process is legitimate. Then it is for me to win. Yes. Then it is for someone to get, I don't know, called out for stealing the election. Now, what are the odds that Joe Biden would should the election be stolen from him, start a government in exile? Zero percent. Zero percent. Not going to happen. Really? No. Well, you know, Biden's been running on this whole, you know, we've got to restore faith in American institutions, you know,

bullshit. Yeah. The past few months, that's the best way to do that will be to rise above petty partisanship and step aside for the greater good of this country and preserving its institution. That's what I'll say. So you're not seeing you're not you're not seeing Biden leading a color revolution. He's not going to Juan Guaido it. No, no, no. That would be very funny. I would like to see him tooling around the Potomac and a little dingy. Listen, Jack, it's just doplering all around. I do have I do have one interesting note, you know, and I'm sure later this week we'll be talking more in depth about the Supreme Court nomination, which is probably coming

this week. Trump said that he will nominate a woman. This is the Supreme Court and the top two names I've read. What's her name? One Amy Barrett. Amy something Barrett. Maybe something Barrett. Yeah. Who's like a federalist society. She's a Catholic psycho. Yeah, right. They love them. They want that the entire it's the we're creating a guardians council, but for Catholics instead of 12 or Shia basically in this country, you know, there aren't that many Catholics in this country. I mean, they're not George, not remotely. Well, as I have said, though, they're of the right wing. They're the only right wingers who read. So they have to be the ones who go to the Supreme Court because the Protestants are all are all fucking

doing multi-level marketing scams on each other and writing all emoji email to one another. How are the fundamentalists okay with this? Because they're hate Catholics. They're they're Hicks. They hate Catholic. They take care of that. It's all been subsumed by politics. It was that they squash that beef with a moral majority. Whoever, whoever cares about their culture or shit is who they like. They don't give a fuck. And the other one is I'm just going to look up her name real quick. Barbara Lagoa, who is Latina wise. Oh, I could see him doing that. That'd be a clever. That would be a clever move. She's gonna be just classic, classic. That's West Wing shit. Yeah, Latina.

She's from Florida. She's Cuban American. She's young and interesting fact. She when she was appointed to the federal bench a couple of years ago, a vast majority of Democrats in the Senate voted to confirm her. So that's not, you know, it's not going to look good if you're voting her down now. Like what was it? Well, well, presumably though, presumably though, and if they don't do this, it will be, well, I honestly think they probably won't. I mean, I'm sorry, they probably will do what you're talking about, which is skip past the question of like the validity of the process itself to like the qualifications of the specific nominee. If I'm them, if I'm actually going

to try to stop this, I'm saying they don't care about stopping this. If I did, I would not fucking talk about the specific qualifications of the fucking justice. The process is illegitimate. It doesn't matter who you could dominate fucking Merrick Garland, although, and that would be very funny too, by the way, it's a illegitimate process because as soon as you're on the grounds of the qualifications of the fucking justice, you're done. Look what happened with Kavanaugh. The expectation of passage and the thing is it wouldn't matter most of all because it's a fucking Republican Senate and all those guys, they worry about flipping like Murkowski and shit. All of the they're on record saying I won't vote in this close to an election

for to confirm a nominee. They've not said anything about specific nominees and their specific qualifications. When you're on that ground, the entire you've lost the case already. So I would, you know what? I expect them to do this tomorrow. Start talking about the specific fucking qualifications. Right, right, right. When you're talking about this individual as a jurist, then you've lost the debate and you're it's over. It's totally over then. There are two interesting points there. One, I have not parsed these statements, but to my knowledge, Romney has said I'm not going to do it until inauguration day. I'm not going to vote yes. To my to my knowledge, this might have been this might have been a like an anonymous

person close to Romney. I'm not really sure. I believe Murkowski and Collins have both come out and said not before election day. So leaving the door, you know, a little open for somewhere between election day and inauguration day. Of course, right now, right now, I mean, before election day is this is this is going to be probably the best chance Republicans have to put this person on a court because right now, assuming there are no other defections and you know, they've got the most they've got 50 votes plus Mike Pence is the tiebreaker. The only possible defector that I have heard people talk about is Chuck Grassley, the 89 year old man who is, you know, he's lately been posting about pigeons, deer, the history

channel, Dairy Queen, things like that. Yeah. I'm so I'm not really sure what the thought process is there. Right now, they have the votes. If they want to do this after election day, Arizona, the Martha McSally Center in Arizona, she looks like she's going down to defeat right now. That's a special election, meaning that she would lose her seat right then and there, meaning that it would only take three Republican defections to kill the nomination, Murkowski Collins and Romney. Well, I have a question about that. So who who swears them in? I mean, I believe it's the vice president, right? It's yeah, whoever what if he doesn't do it? Why don't he just doesn't swear him in? I don't think it has

to be the vice president. Well, okay, whoever whoever is like, you know, like just like gavling in the session. I'm just saying, but couldn't the Senate just not do it? Just don't don't make him just don't have him yet. He doesn't get the seat for a couple weeks how long it takes. Just don't don't see them. I don't know. I don't know what the law. There's no rule that says when he's got to it. I mean, everyone, I mean, I think it would take a simple majority to do that. Yeah. Well, that's what I'm saying is all this shit just takes a simple majority, which they have. So you don't have to worry about fucking astronaut boy. Bye, Astro Boy user. Another thing you said, you said you don't think Democrats want

to stop the nomination. No. Really? Why is that? I mean, they don't they don't want to set the precedent of accomplishing something. Because to stop this, they'd have to do the kind of shit that if you did it, you could get things accomplished. They don't want to set that agenda. They do not want to set that expectation. Well, why don't you do what you did last time? No, no, these things are immovable objects. They have to be. They could be they're light as a feather. You get the Republicans pick them up all the time, spin them around and put them back down. Democrats, they go and they reach. Oh, oh, God. Oh, it hurts my back. I can't only the most pure of heart can pull the sword from the stone because

if they if people see these structures moving the way they could or see these see these this party exercise any power. I mean, my God, we've had nothing but like a $1,200 fucking check and no real Corona relief at all. And they've held control of one of the houses of Congress and they just go, well, we'll see. Remember to vote. Well, I mean, what else are they going to do? I mean, they have one house, they pass their own bill and there's nothing else you can do. They could do a bunch of other things to make it to make the fight actually happen as opposed to just, okay, we're not going to get anything. We're just going to, we're going to ignore it. Like they could actually

inhibit the progression of government control funds, make the Republic, make it harder for Republicans to govern and that would make them have to deal with that. They would essentially what I'm saying is they would, they would inflict a cost on Republicans obstructing anything instead of just taking their like not pricing it like the way we don't price carbon emissions. Well, they are inflicting a cost. They're making them look very, very bad. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Very important. Okay. One last Supreme thing that will move on. Let's say Democrats, let's say Biden wins the presidency, Democrats win the Senate, but Republicans still in the lame duck session, they put the ninth seat

on the Supreme Court. There's a 6-3 Supreme Court. Do you think there is any, do you, do you think there's any, any honesty in these Republicans, these Democrat senators now get it, you know, starting to say publicly, no, if that happens, we're going to pack the court. We're going to, we're going to, we're going to stuff it with Merrick Garland's. They're not going to, they're not going to. They're like a Thanksgiving turkey. Not going to do it. Not going to happen. Not going to do it. Very low chance. I mean, hypothetically, if the, if the Libs get mad enough as like a base and like do some sort of coordinated, if they start acting like the base of a party,

acting like Republican, the Republican base does in terms of intimidating their elected officials instead of worshipfully assuming the best of them and psychologically identifying with them and bullying them and threatening primary challenges and that kind of thing, you could see an effort, but if they do what they normally do, which is just double down on their hysteria, hatred of Republicans, and of course the lib, the liberals and leftists whose purity test politics preclude them from having enough power to finally succeed somewhere and get something done, will accede to the thing as it happens. David Sarota says primary Chuck Schumer.

I honestly think that could be a lever if, because it's not out of the realm of possibility just because the Democrats have done such an intentional job of making the Supreme Court a emotional fetish object of democratic politics. Like this is the thing they care about. Like I can't remember how many, like every election comes down to yes, the Democrats terrible, but the Republicans are worse, but people should remember that the way that's almost always been framed historically has been judges, the courts, the Supreme Court. That's what matters. I remember John Kerry in 2004, think of the court, Hillary in 2016, think of the court.

Judges, Supreme Court, mother, father, Kerry, Supreme Court, Clinton, father, father. This is deeply imprinted. This is the Alamo. This is it. This is the keep. And it might trigger them. It might actually trip them to the point where they demand a actual confrontation instead of going back to their normal wound licking and self-deluding routine. Once again, I don't know if that's how they would react. I don't know if it's possible for them to react that way. They might be, they might have such an inborn like inhibitor on radicalism that they can't let themselves feel that way. And they immediately find a new thing to put all of that emotional

investment into away from the courts. Like they shift, phase shift immediately from the courts to something else. I don't, and I don't know. Maybe it's like a, the canceling, canceling the new elf reboot for anti-Semitism, whatever it is, they find another thing to get mad about. But if they don't, if they really do fixate on the court, then I think guys like Schumer could honestly be, be intimidated into some sort of action. Well, I mean, of course they're fixated on the court, but they don't have the same comparable infrastructure that the right wing crazies have. They don't have anything covered to the federalist society or these bespoke conservative legal theories.

No, but all you'd need is like with Schumer's case, I think all you'd need would be a plausible challenger, like a plausible primary challenger. That's hard in New York. The last, the last time there was a comparable primary challenge with Hillary Clinton in 2006 by this anti-war guy, Jonathan Tassini. And of course Democrats were, you know, hell-bent anti-war at the time Hillary Clinton had voted for the war and Hillary Clinton, you know, won by like three, four to one. Yeah. Well, that, that, yeah, but presumably the pressure would be more now because everyone's more insane and whipped into a frenzy. And look, this is the final, this is the, this

is the thing. This is the event that Democrats have been warning people about for the last 20 years. This is the ritualized apocalypse of Democratic power. This is the end state. If we don't vote for Democrats, if we don't do our duty and sail our Novinas and do a rosary and vote for Democrats, this is the end point. Ruth Ginsburg being replaced by a 25-year-old four-chan guy. That is the nightmare. And it's here. And the only thing that's, the thing that's going to determine it is going to, the thing is going to be determined, the Democrats' response, if it happens, like in the case that they get the Senate back and Biden wins, will be the degree to which the Democratic

base converts that apocalyptic emotional, that apocalyptic terror. I don't even know. I'm not one of them. So I don't know how they feel it. If they feel it is terror, if they feel it is anger, but whatever it is, it's got to go somewhere. And if it goes in the right place, it could push the Democrats to actually like put one person on the court. They would just add one person just to like, just look back to the what it was right before the Gingrich thing. And even though that's still a Democratic, a Republican, even though that's still like, there are more Republicans than Democrats, it's just, it's like canceling it.

Here's what I say. Primary Schumer, but don't expend an AOC or a Jamal Bowman on it. Don't, this is, this is, this is a preseason game. Throw in a, a Zephyr teach-outs. Throw in a Cynthia Nixon. Get, get, get Zephyr teach-out in there like Sam Darnold's suiting up every week. I would say not someone who's already fucking lost. Certainly not lost as many times as she has. I'm sorry. They got the stink of loser on him. Even Cynthia Nixon does. She got destroyed. She only lost once.

Yeah. But by a lot, you need somebody who could be a plot, who could be like the Robert Redford and the candidate, just the face, you know, somebody who could embody something. There's three other sex, there's three other sex in the city, ladies. Okay. Yeah. Maybe Kim control, I think could do it. So how about this Andrew Cuomo? Now that's a winner right there. Mr. Schumer. Look out. Let's move on. Topic number two. Can I, can I ask one, maybe Rube's question, but it might be a good segue. Oh yeah. So as long as you add honky sound effects, we got a Rube question.

I was just thinking about this earlier. Wouldn't it be like advantageous for Trump to now run on replacing a Supreme court seat? Bay, you got to vote for me if you want to get a conservative replacement in there. That's why I don't think it's gonna happen. But then he could just do it anyway in the lame duck section session, but that's the, that's the beauty is you don't say that until afterwards, you know, you just do it then. You don't have to advertise it. Then that's why I think they'll do it after because it's the best of both worlds. You get to keep them at maximal, keep everybody maximally cranked

to fill the speed and then you don't even have to worry about risking it if you lose because you're going to do it anyway. It's a good point. It's a good point. I think the calculation is maybe they think, ah, fuck it. We're going to lose this one anyway. Let's just get him on the court while we have 54 with 53 votes in the Senate and not, I mean, if they do it, if they do that, if they go up before, uh, if McConnell really pushes it to do before the election, I think it's because he either doesn't care if Trump wins or he thinks he's going to lose anyway. Yeah. I think that would be the case. Uh, let's move on. Topic number two, let's put

some cool decals on this. There's an election on age. Here about this. Early voting has started in some states, including Minnesota and Virginia. Well, absentee ballots are in the mail in others such as Pennsylvania turnout so far is high in some places in Fairfax County, Virginia. That's the DC suburbs, deep lib territory. Nearly 1500 voters brave the pandemic to cast early ballots on the first day of early voting. Five times the comparable figure in 2016. My God tells me big turnout is what Biden needs to win. Do you agree and can he get it? Uh, yes, he needs turnout. Uh, it's, it's, we're, we're, it's nothing but base elections

from now on. Everyone else is tuning out. Uh, so it's all about getting your people out there. And Biden obviously has a very big enthusiasm gap because he is such a compromised position for so many. He is not like the, the, the embodied Christ, the way that Trump is now for the democratic base. He's not even a carry, but yeah, no, not even close, but he is, but Trump's hated much more, I think than even Bush was. Uh, and that will have its own effect. And I think, you know, that the Supreme court, uh, opening is also going to galvanize Democrats. Yeah. Uh, and I think that it's up in the air. Obviously I don't know. I think there's, there's certainly

a narrative you can tell yourself that sees Biden losing just because of his failure to inspire the, the resistance of the democratic party to run the same democratic bucking, playing game plan over and over again. Uh, and you know what? Like that narrative to me makes sense. The thing perishing against that narrative that you've talked about, uh, is that primary, uh, uh, uh, voting in the last year, even after the fucking COVID started has been record breaking. You're having huge participation in primary elections. Even with disenfranchisement, even with disenfranchisement, all the stuff baked in that, that inhibits voting in, in the country as it stands, you're seeing two things. One, big turnout, especially

in the suburbs and two, those suburbs shifting to Democrats. Those are two real things that are happening. More suburbanized voting, more suburbanized voting Democrat, which of course, that's its own nightmare story, whereby the Chuck Schumer dream of a rich of the omalis being the median democratic voter, uh, will be coming true, which bespeaks a new future of, like I said, pure base elections where it's two, two subdivisions of retirees sitting on what they think is a million dollars in equity, even though no one will ever buy the fucking houses because everyone else is fucking broke, uh, fighting over whether the Woodstock was good homeowner's association versus homo's association, call the sack versus call the

sack. Uh, you know, as, as we were just talking about, you know, maybe that, maybe Trump can use the Supreme Court as a way to bring the wayward never Trump Republicans back into the fold. But at the same time, we know that Biden is weak in crucial democratic constituencies. He's weak with Hispanics. He's weak with young voters. So my question is, could the Supreme Court be, could the, you know, this, the Supreme Court seat and, you know, and of course, the, the, the specifically galling nature of having a, a, a, a lionized liberal like Ruth Bader Ginsburg be replaced by, uh, uh, Janine Pirro. Uh, is there anyone out there who had not

already made peace with Biden who is going to look at this and say, ah, well, fucking I got to vote for him. That's the thing I, I don't think, uh, I don't know if it, I don't, I don't really think it is. And the question really does come down to are the never Trumpers who are still never Trumpers, are they really never Trumpers or are they basically Democrats at this point? Just suburban Democrats. You know, that's the question. And I don't actually know the answer. I think we'll find

out. I think November will help tell us a lot of that. Like, because this is very clarifying because this is the kind of thing that speaks to you as a Republican deeper than the presidency, which is transient. You know, we under, that's why we put so much emotion in the Supreme Court. These are lifetime appointments, but there's a very good chance, in my opinion, that this circus and carnival atmosphere of the Trump presidency coupled with the disastrous last six months of America, uh, might have led these people who have already like divorced from, because remember, we've talked about how like the Republicans have become the party of Trump, like the identification is becoming deep. And that means whatever Trump sort of

believes and whatever Republicans believe, uh, that becomes what Republic, these Republican voters believe, regardless of whether it clashes with their individual, you know, opinions on discrete issues, like they might be in for Medicare for all. It doesn't matter. They're part of the greater matrix of Trump because the symbolic order resonates with them. Uh, the alienation from Trump for these suburban motors might at this point be encompassing the Republican project because at this point, how do you really differentiate it from Trump as a phenomenon? Now, Biden leads in the polls by about 7% nationally. They're about 5% in those most

critical swing states, especially the Midwest. These are healthy leads, but they're not blowout margins. And he is one standard deviation systemic polling error from losing. And of course, the comparable situation is 2016. On the eve of the election, uh, on the eve of the election in 2016, Nate Silver 538 gave Hillary Clinton something like 70, 75% chance of winning something thereabouts. This time as of right now, he's giving Biden about 77%. That's, that's pretty darn close. Uh, but I think it would, it would take a polling error and of course the pollsters have, you know, they've, you know, changed their models based on, you know, what they got wrong in 2016. They've adjusted it a little bit. Uh,

it would take one polling error to for, for Biden to lose. And what has been a pretty stable race so far. And again, voting has started in many crucial states. At this point in this race, do you think there's any, any, anything that would substantially change the dynamic? Because of course we just had one thing, one huge exogenous event, which I think the consensus here in the garage is that, you know what, it's, it's just going to reinforce the same trends. Yeah. Or be a wash. Yeah. No, we're, we're at maximal polarization at this point. We, we've, we've, the, the, the meters on, on the red, we are far in the red on this. And that's why people talk about civil civil war. You know, that's why

people talk, it's not just glib fantasizing, although that's part of it. It's a recognition just of how, how high pitched and intense the political atmosphere has gotten. And what that means is that partisans are much more committed. Uh, and that means that you might be at a point where any event that happens just takes the same people, the same raw nerve, nerve, raw nerve ending political animals and just throw some more salt in there and get some all riled up more, just gets more musk in the bull's nostrils. But it doesn't give you more votes cause they're the same people. Uh, I think we might be reaching that end point.

I want to key in on a handful of very important stays. Of course you have the, the Midwest trio, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, where Trump, his electoral, he built his electoral, uh, college victory in 2016. Does your gut say those states collectively go to Biden? The return so far out of the crucial swing suburban districts have indicated that there is a put, a move towards Biden. Uh, also there does seem also to have been in rural areas, some rural areas in the Northern Midwest, for example, uh, a alienation with Trump due to the fact that the trade with China has led to actual, uh, harm for the American dairy industry. Uh, just like with soy farmers also, like there is a disenchantment

with Trump in, in rural farm country, country, because they have actually been hurt by the trade war with China. They're not making soy faces over there. No, they're not. They're making sad faces. Uh, and the turnouts are seem to be robust. I would say, and it always turned down to people who are taking a flyer on Trump. Some of them have probably like totally invested in the, in the vote by now. I bet a lot of them haven't. I think a lot of the suburbanites seem to be switching. I, I, I'd say right now you can't say anything else. I'd say that he wins them. He wins the three of them.

Biden, I would agree with you. I would say he wins the three of them, probably best margin in Michigan. Yeah. I would guess Pennsylvania as the closest as it were right now. And I think that's, you know, obviously Biden is taking this hard pro fracking stance because he's pretty sure if he came out against fracking, he would lose Pennsylvania outright. Yeah. Well, I'm considering he has nothing else in the quiver at all. Just one more thing to fuck people with isn't going to be helpful.

Oh, did you hear about this? He's from Scranton. Yeah, it hurts. He's from Scranton and people like things that are approximate to them. Yeah. The other crucial state, and I'm actually not really a crucial state, but it is an interesting state is of course the state of Florida. I don't, a huge prize. I don't think it will be the tipping point state. I don't think it will matter that much one way or another. People's have it very close. What is your gut saying about Florida? I would say Trump wins Florida.

I would agree. I would agree, especially if he picks a, if he picks a Cuban lady. Yeah, yeah. That'll be the final little moi. But what if Trump were, I mean, what if Biden were to, I don't know, spitball on here, campaign with Juan Guaido? See, that could move upwards of five or six immediate family members of Juan Guaido. So it could be important. All right. Unless you have anything else about the presidency, one last job got towed in the Beltway garage. We kick the tires of two branches of government. What do you say

we check the air on a third? Let's get in there. Election bookies considered Democrats a safe bet to keep the house, but the Senate is an air ball. Yes or no, do Democrats win the Senate? Okay. So let me get this. I think Gideon wins in Michigan. I'm sorry, Maine. Gideon wins in Maine. Kelly definitely wins in Arizona. I think Hickenlooper wins in Colorado. Lord. So that's four.

That's three. That's three. That would get them the lead, but then again, they might lose Doug Peters or Doug Jones might lose in Alabama, although it looks very close there. The fact that he's the running against the former head coach of Auburn might actually keep him in the Senate because Alabama fans are certainly the majority in Alabama over Auburn fans and nothing defines being an all Alabama fan more than a hating Auburn. Yeah, but isn't the inverse true? Isn't this going to juice turnout among Auburn fans? Well, that's just it. They're already a minority. And so who else? Apparently the literal, your

name here guy in Michigan, who's a Democrat, is in a competitive race. Gary Peters. Yeah. I think if Trump wins, if, if, if, since I think Biden's going to win Michigan, I think he'll hold on. Yeah. I'd say, yeah, they like, they win it by one. They got one. They get 51, 49. 51, 49. Now, when I count the seats, I get to a 52, 48 Senate Democrat, but my gut tells me 53, 47. So that's what I'm going to go with right now. I think seven Democratic pickups

and one loss. I think for the GOP, Colorado, Maine and Arizona, as you said, are toast. I think North Carolina is toast. I believe Richie Cunningham will win there. Iowa probably toast as well. I think that the GOP could hold the line in both Georgia seats, but Luz Montana, where Democrats got their top recruit. And I do think there's going to be one upset. I think there's going to be one that nobody was really expecting. It's kind of competitive, but nobody's really expecting it. It could be Kansas. It could be Texas. It could be Alaska, but I think it's most likely to be South Carolina. Oh, yes. That's a close race there. Lindsey Graham.

It's a surprisingly close race. Lindsey Graham is like, these are, these are Republican incumbents in red states, but who have been consistently polling under 50%. And like often in the low 40s with Lindsey Graham, there have been number of polls that show him tied at like 42, 42 with Jamie Harrison is a bonin. But you have to consider this virtual the at the presidential level, the Supreme Court issue might end up just being awash and just a more gasoline on a contained fire, basically. But in the Senate, it could provide a meaningful motivator for people to not split tickets or to make sure it's a big tension of down ballot races because of the perceived stakes

of their role in a potential Supreme Court vacancy fight. There is also, I think something that prevented the Democrats from winning the Senate last time around was the widespread perception that Hillary Clinton would win the race. Oh, absolutely. There are a lot of people to vote Republican in the Senate, even if they did not want the Republicans to keep the Senate, simply because they just have a fetish for divided government. Yeah, those people are favorite type of moron. Our favorite type of moron.

I find South Carolina very, very interesting because Lindsey Graham is one of those guys who's like, how did he get elected in, in, in, in, in, in ever is no charisma. No. He has no, see, he seems to have no political instincts. And I think he's, he is in this tight race because he has in the span of the past four years, been able to piss off pretty much everyone. I think that, you know, he has become a, a Trump toady, which of course, you know, enrages the resistance types or a minority there, but, you know, with sufficient turnout, you

know, that's going to eat into his margin. But I think MAGA people remember what an asshole he used to be to Trump. And I don't even, and, you know, Trump occasionally tweets something nice about him, but you can tell Trump doesn't give a shit about this guy. Well, that's just it. He did the worst possible thing is that he, he made a, he made a spectacle of himself opposing Trump. And then once he Trump won, he made a spectacle of himself to basing himself to Trump, which is something that no one, no matter, even if they like Trump

can respect. And so that means that no one respects him at all in the state. And that's going to hurt you. Like cause there's a lot of goofs out there who vote, I vote the man, not the party or whatever. And they see just a gutless guy. It's like, he doesn't believe anything. He doesn't have the...

He has nothing in his soul or he would not have acted that way. He doesn't have the brand or force of personality or even just weirdness of a Rand Paul or Mark Arubio or Ted Cruz. Well, it's essentially the same thing, but they've, you know, they've come out of it relatively unscathed. They could, they could put it on their own weird terms because they have their own thing that they're like speaking from. He has nothing. It's just himself. It's this sour old queen.

Awful. And you know, that is the other thing is, you know, the far right culture conservatives, they think he's gay. Yes. They don't, and they don't like that. Yes. And that is a substantial vote there. They think that he's gay.

Yes. For some reason, this guy who's, who's great friends with John McCain and just constantly wants to bomb Iran, you know, just talking about how, how, how big and burly the troops are. He loves this. This confirmed bachelor. Yes. Lifetime bachelor.

They think he's gay. They think he's gay for some reason. And I, you know, I, I, I think like, you know, I can see the stars aligning there and I can see that being a real upset. Well, if that happened, that would be an absolutely delicious end to the political career of Lindsey Graham. And that's why I don't think it'll happen because that sort of sweet come up and just doesn't exist at our Godless universe anymore.

I don't know. I think it does kind of happen to some of the never Trump guys or some of the, the, the guys who, who tangled with Trump. That's true. If anyone's going to come, if anyone's going to be fully like debased by their association with Trump, it's going to be the spineless, never Trumpers first and foremost. Kansas is another interesting one. I don't think there's been a lot of good polling data out of it, but it's supposedly

a closer than expected race. Kansas elected a Democrat governor in 2018 running against Chris Colbeck. But this summer, Chris Colbeck lost the primary for the Senate seats. Darn it. Didn't matter one that one. If you've done that, Texas is also, Texas is also an odd one. You've John Cornyne there. So of course, as you know, it's a red state, John Cornyne is probably not as polarizing

a figure as Ted Cruz, not as a, I don't know, a disgusting, malformed creature as Ted Cruz. He looks like a normal human. He's not, he's not like a, he's not a matinee, I don't know, or nothing, but you see him and you think, oh, there's a human. But he has not cracked 47% in a single poll since February. He's been getting a lot of polls that are like, I think the median here is 46%. He's been getting something 42%. His Democrat opponent is far worse off, you know, but obviously, as you know, the, the,

the rule is if you're an incumbent, you're polling under 50%. That's bad. That indicates people want to kick you out of there. And I really wonder how well, when you have so many states that are red states, but with Republican comments that are, are polling well below 50%, how well that rule is going to apply this time around. Because if this were like a 2006, 2008, those guys are all toast. Well, I think that comes down to the top of the ticket.

I think the, the presence of Joe Biden at the top of this Democratic ticket is this, it's this Paul, it's this fucking yoke. It's this, it's pestilence. It just is destroying the downstream commitment of the average voter to the Democrats as an alternative to what we have now, because things are in a situation where the Republicans run two or three fucking chambers right now, the presidency and the Senate are, they are, they have, they are the architects of the, of the current moment, you know, in a way that's pretty intuitive.

They should be being destroyed at the state and local level. And one of the reasons they're not being is that if you want to reject someone, you have to have a plausible idea of an alternative to what they're doing to you. And the Democrats under Biden are refusing and in the person of Biden, refusing to embody anything other than decrepitude, senescence and incompetence. So why are you going to vote for him? And so these guys are going to be saved by Joe Biden more than anything. Well, there is, I mean, the, you know, if, if you're a, a Democrats on a challenge of

this, you do have the benefit of getting to say, look how incompetent run, look how incompetent Washington is. They can't pass another freaking coronavirus bill. You know, this isn't about Trump. This is just about what a, what a, what a mess DC is. They get to run as the, the anti-establishment this time around. And that's a, then that is a potent message. And I think that is a big reason why these Republican senators in red states have very

low approval ratings, but it's an open question. But in order for a Democrats to win there, enough people have to split their ticket because we expect Trump to win all of these states by a decent margin. I know Democrats have, you know, they made noises about winning taxes. I don't see it happening. It might be close. It might even be Beto close, but that's still a loss. So are there, are there people coming out?

Are there people, Bernie could have won Texas. Are there people coming out saying, you know, voting for Trump, but voting for MJ Hagar in Texas? I, I can't, I mean, honestly, if they were to win in some of these states, they should have run Q people. The Democrats? Yeah. I could see it.

Yeah. I could see it. Or like just some sort of, just someone with that kind of energy, someone with insanity because the people they are putting out there, they're Democrats at this point. They are not, and like Biden, they stand for nothing. You got to have some character in there. You got to be, you got to have a presence to, to counter pose with the existing order. And now there's just this scary, terrifying, hollow absence that you're supposed to just

prefer simply because of how emotionally traumatic and horrifying the current moment is. It's like the lure of jumping on a window when you're burning to death. Well, that's why I really think, I really think Lindsey Graham is the one most likely to be an upset because I do see a lot of tickets splitting there. I do see a lot of Republicans in South Carolina pulling for Trump and then either ignoring the Senate race or voting libertarian or even just voting for a Democrat they don't know anything about. Cause fuck that guy.

Yeah. But I will say one state that will absolutely, positively not be an upset is Kentucky. No. One of the, one of the biggest, most embarrassing obungles of this cycle, sinking, what is it, $30 million in this total nobody, this total fucking. She blew up your many birthday parties, sir. That's all you need to know. She's killed people for this country.

She's best known as a loser for a fucking house seat. And this time around a, a, a, an almost certain loser for a Senate seat, yet who is still raking in big donations because people seem to think, ah, if we beat Mitch McConnell, that means all the Republican senators go away. He's like the, he's the end boss. He's the, he's the head vampire. If you kill the head vampire, everyone else turns back into a human. And she is, she is, I mean, I will say that there is, is, is a qualitative difference

between Amy McGrath and these other, you know, lesser known Senate challengers because I think the other challengers, you're kind of just playing it safe. They're not making huge noises about, you know, oh, you know, I'm, I'm a Democratic conservative crap like that. But Amy grass whole strategy is, yeah, I'm, I'm a, I'm a conservative, I'm a conservative Democrat. Yep. So, yeah, why would you not want the single most effective, the single most effective

advance of conservative goals in American government for what 150 years? Why would you want him in there? Not me. Cause I flew, I flew a boom, boom plane. And of course, you know, this is, this is perfectly, perfectly demonstrated by her tremendous bungle of the question of whether she would vote to confirm Kavanaugh, which she flipped on twice. They're this man of 24 hours, twice, two flips, let's get some honky noises there.

Why are you supposed to vote for these people? What is the actual, it has to just be that there's something wrong with Mitch McConnell as a person. Which there is. Well, obviously he's a turtle shaped freak and a drug, drug dealer, most likely. Well, that's, well, that's the cool thing about him, but what, what is it? If it's, all right, I'm more conservative than him. I don't think that's the push.

They're not really that he should do. She's more conservative. It's that she's better at being conservative than him. Once again, he's the most effective legislator since fucking Sam Rayburn. How the hell is he not the man that you want in Washington? If you want conservative government pursued, what is the point? I look forward to her completely fucking up getting asked about Trump's nominee again. Oh God, she's going to destroy, she's going to fuck the dog on that.

I do like, I do think it's really funny that the two, like the, the, the two Democrat lines about Mitch McConnell are Moscow Mitch and cocaine Mitch, which both sound cool. They both sound like a guy, they both like, they both sound like a guy you'd meet selling drugs in a European nightclub. Yeah. Like, yeah, don't go talk to Moscow. He's, he will hook you up. He's wearing a tracksuit.

Wow. I've got Molly. I've got these GHB Moscow, Mitch, thanks, Moscow, Mitch. Thanks, Moscow, Mitch. Uh, any, do we have anything else? Anything else you want to roll in the garage? I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm set. I'm ready for this bullshit to be over so that everybody can have their giant rage

orgasm and just have like a nice two week refractory period before just slowly peddling themselves up on the neck, the top of the next island of erotic, uh, frustration and, and release with politics. Yeah. Well, too bad because election day is becoming election week. Steve Kornackie is going to be pumped full of speed. He will be up for 163 hours going over every single county as the vote extends into December. Hell yes.

I want, this will actually be a good part of it. Just watching these guys who are built like race horses have to run a marathon. I have one thing. So as of right now, Virgil, I think more, maybe a little more confidently in Matt, you are envisioning a very likely scenario where there is a democratic trifecta in January 2021. I think so. Yeah.

I'd say it's possible, but it's like, I'm still talking in percentages here. I don't think it's likely or anything. I would call it, I would call it likely. I would not say that. Let's say lean pot. Lean trifecta. Yeah. What do you imagine is the first legislative goal of the new democrat?

Putting Trump in prison. What is the first 100 days? It's going, if that happens, it's going to be like six weeks of kicking and screaming and trying to sort out this whole election all the way to January. They wheelbiden up there, they get his hand on the book, they swear in the new Congress and the next day it's going to be like the biggest fucking hangover after a charity keger you threw in college ever and nobody is going to have any idea what anybody is doing with any of this shit.

A banning flavored vapes. National ban. That's going to be it. National ban on flavored vapes. That's going to be the first order of business. I picture a bill called something like the decency act and it's just an omnibus of, I don't, I don't know. I can't even picture it.

It will be presidents have to show their tax returns when they run for president. It's the law now. You know, you've, I mean, you know, you see buying ads and I kind of get deja vu to 2016 when, of course, nobody knew what the hell Hillary Clinton would do as president. Nobody had any fucking idea because she wasn't running on any kind of platform. This time around, I realize, oh fuck, I don't know what Biden would do either. I mean, the real answer is some kind of like the coronavirus bill that they should have just passed fucking four months ago.

But that's it. That's actual, you know, that's not actually crafting policy. That's housekeeping. And I mean, it's important. It's good. It needs to happen. But in terms of making an actual legislative push, like spending political capital, which Obama, Obama did on the ACA, I have no idea what that would look like if there is going

to be a big Biden, you know, a big shift. Maybe I think maybe like a, I wouldn't be surprised if it was a some sort of Paris Accord Green New Deal jackoff where it's like some, some symbolic climate action. That's always been my contention that it's going to be an attempt to do the Green New Deal entirely through tax credits. Yeah. Well, that, I mean, maybe I don't even think they, I think they consider the term Green New Deal toxic.

I think I'm not going to try to address it up like that. I think climate change is going to be a package of tax cuts and incentives. But I will tell you, every American gets a 20% coupon for an electric vehicle. But I will say, I will say this, no chance of a climate tax, of a carbon tax, no, no, no chance of a cap and trade type deal. Like they do not have no, no actual. I'll be sent to green energy and bullshit like that, which is just corporate welfare. It'll be more cylindra shit.

Well, yeah, more cylindra. Yeah. And we're a cylindra in every, in every pot and we're going to run every pot, a cylindra in every pot. And we can roll that into the decency act. Yeah. So that wraps it up. Thank you to Bad News Hughes.

Check out his podcast, You Can't Win, link in the description. And thank you, Grease Monkeys, for joining us for another sweaty afternoon in the Beltway Garage. Keep your dial turned to WCTH as we enter the home stretch of the 2020 election. We will be covering the Supreme Court confirmation hearings and scoring Trump's nominees answers on a scale of how dare you to, you don't know how bad you look. And starting next Tuesday and continuing through October, we will be broadcasting live commentary of all four presidential and vice presidential debates at twitch.tv slash chapeau trap house.

Hell yeah. And stay tuned because on the eve of the election, we will be giving you our final margin calls for every competitive Senate race and the race for the White House. Check local listings. For Matt Christman, this is Virgil Texas saying good night and good politics.