Julian Dorey Podcast - #268 - MAGA vs. MSNBC SHOWDOWN: Big Pharma, Border Crisis & WW3 | Spear & Adeoye

Episode Date: January 21, 2025

(***TIMESTAMPS in description below) ~ Mike Spear is a trial attorney and conservative scholar. Currently, he is an active member of the Ancient Order of Hibernians and a strong supporter of the Fraternal Order of Police. Previously, he played Division-1 College Football Rotimi Adeoye is a political strategist, commentator, and writer currently w/ MSNBC & The Daily Beast. Previously, Rotimi worked for the ACLU and as the Press Secretary for the Congressman Dan Kildee (D-MI), the Chief Deputy Whip of the House Democratic Caucus. PATREON https://www.patreon.com/JulianDorey FOLLOW JULIAN DOREY INSTAGRAM (Podcast): https://www.instagram.com/juliandoreypodcast/ INSTAGRAM (Personal): https://www.instagram.com/julianddorey/ X: https://twitter.com/julianddorey GUEST LINKS X: https://x.com/_rotimia?lang=en IG: https://www.instagram.com/_rotimia/ LISTEN to Julian Dorey Podcast Spotify ▶ https://open.spotify.com/show/5skaSpDzq94Kh16so3c0uz Apple ▶ https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/trendifier-with-julian-dorey/id1531416289 JULIAN YT CHANNELS - SUBSCRIBE to Julian Dorey Clips YT: https://www.youtube.com/@juliandoreyclips - SUBSCRIBE to Julian Dorey Daily YT: https://www.youtube.com/@JulianDoreyDaily - SUBSCRIBE to Best of JDP: https://www.youtube.com/@bestofJDP OTHER JDP EPISODES MENTIONED IN THIS EPISODE: Episode 125 - Rotimi Adeyoe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gClLOaMS_u4 Episode 39 - Mike Spears: https://youtu.be/xXcHjZD_vYw?si=IYKf5P4Xsq5YnZg4 Episode 77 - Mike Spears: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKsJKQBNsCo&t=176s Episode 128 - Mike Spears: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5KVwdw7x1U ****TIMESTAMPS**** 0:00 - Trump Winning Reactions, Democrat Failure 9:51 - Democrats Similar to Republicans in 2012 20:01 - Democrats Need a Bill Clinton (moderates) 30:09 - New DNC Chair Selection, Joe Biden Failure 38:17 - Trump’s Ability to Communicate & Connect with People 47:39 - Next Successful Politician (New Style of Politicians) 59:02 - Trump’s Upcoming Cabinet 01:08:43 - Immigration, Eric Adams, Sanctuary Cities 01:18:35 - Campaign Targeting and Ability to Deliver/Big Pharma Issues 01:26:03 - Anthony Fauci and Throwing Them in Prison 01:35:25 - Policy Choices; Greenland, Billionaires Becoming Cool, Elon Musk 01:51:45 - Elon Buying Twitter & Free Speech Argument (DOGE) 01:59:23 - Social Security & Issues w/ Eliminating It/Handling Debt Situation 02:10:11 - Taxing Billionaires/Ending Wars 02:21:15 - Rotimi & Spear ready for round 2 CREDITS: - Host & Producer: Julian Dorey - In-Studio Producer & Editor: Alessi Allaman - https://www.youtube.com/@UCyLKzv5fKxGmVQg3cMJJzyQ Julian Dorey Podcast Episode 268 - Mike Spear & Rotimi Adeoye Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

I think that's why he is obsessed with attaining Greenland, which I think is like... I love that. I think it's like... So here's the thing. If the people of Greenland want to become a part of the United States, then they should be a part... Then, you know, they should be allowed to become a part of the United States. Dude, they do.

Have you seen the videos? You know, I think there's like... I'll push back on it. I actually don't think they want to be. Based on what? I think there was a Fox News video that just came out. They were going around and people were just like, no. But then I saw like, you know, the NELC guys, like Kyle, and they went and some people guys,

some people were like, yeah, we want to be in Greenland. But, you know, I want to see some polling first. I want to see, I just want to see like more information about that. We're going to send you there. You come back and tell us. Okay. It's like a war hawk's wet dream. You know what I mean?

You know? It's like the Cheneys are buying condos. Mike Spear, or Timmy Adeoye. What's up, man? Welcome, boys. Hello. Interesting times right now, fellas. A lot of stuff's going on, man.

A lot of stuff's going on. And I actually wrote to me, this was your idea to do this. You and I talked literally, I think, like a week after the election. It was a very refreshing conversation, too. We'll get to all the background with you and things in the past. But like Senator Mike Speier, welcome back to the podcast. Thank you. As well. It's back to the podcast. Thank you. As well.

It's great to be back. Yeah. Old fan favorite, episode 39, episode 128. People know Mike Speier likes to throw down, so we'll have fun. And then, Timmy, you were on episode 125 as well. That was right. We put that out right when the midterms were happening back in 2022. But obviously, the world is a very different place now.

And I really, if you don't mind me opening this, just to give you a little context from my end, I really, really liked your tweets that started immediately after the election happened. Because for full background, Mike, you are a very conservative guy, or Timmy, you are a liberal guy. And obviously, the Democrats got killed in this election. It was not a good showing for them. And I think one of the things that when you and I spent the day together a couple of years ago that I was thinking is that you, like pretty much everyone now, I would say in both parties, but for a long time, it was more of a problem on the left side. You felt to me like

any time you were going to think something that was different than the party line, you felt pressured not to do that. So when I saw you after the election, thinking for yourself with common liberal sense, like the kind that I like to see, I really like that. And I think this is a positive time for young leaders like you, when the Democrat Party is essentially where the Republicans were in 2012, having their dark moment to see people like you have more of a voice at the table. So I think today we can accomplish some of that for sure. Sounds good, man. All right, cool. So let's just get started off with this election. Spear, did you see this coming? No, I didn't. Initially, I thought, you know, the Trump era was over.

You know, it's CC, candidate and culture. So the Democrats failed. They ran the wrong candidate and the culture that they put the forefront of their campaign didn't resonate. At least that's my take on it. And it took me a while to realize it. I didn't think it was over until I was watching the news. I got, I voted. I voted the Revolutionary History Museum. It's the only time I go there until I'm like 70 and get a discount. That's i was watching the news i got i voted i voted the revolutionary history museum it's the only it's the only time i go there until i'm like 70 and get a discount that's the only time i'm gonna go and i got home and it was msnbc we were talking about it and it was just this fever of they're still voting the lines are around the corner in philadelphia there was not a fucking

person in line before me to vote and that's when i was like okay i'm like this doesn't feel the same uh that's really when i knew for the first time i was like oh he's winning you know what about you wrote to me yeah you know i think there are two really good books i'd recommend for anyone who wants to understand uh the election uh the first one is called uh expanding democratic majority by root election. The first one is called Expanding Democratic Majority by Ru Teixeira. Second one is called The Last Politician. It's about Joe Biden.

And I think the first book is important because it basically is this vision that democratic strategists put out after Obama won. And it was this idea that essentially the country was gonna become more diverse. And since the country was gonna become more racially diverse, you would basically win unlimited elections, and you never have any problem. Obviously, that book is like basically ridiculous now. And the whole thesis is like bullshit. But I think it's important for people to read because you kind of understand

why things are so bad. And the second book about Joe Biden is really interesting because it really breaks down, I think, how his ego really informs a lot of his decisions. And for me, the biggest reason why the Democrats lost were those kind of two things crashing together at the same time, this focus on racial politics and using that as a strategy to turn out voters and it failing. And then also I think Joe Biden's ego and his refusal to step aside and have a primary process. I think there's so many like, you know, I think I joined in this online too. Like there are a lot of Democrats that are online talking about like the party needs to go more left or right or moderate. And I think like all those conversations are like fun

and fine, but like that's what happens during a primary. Yes. And so like when you never have that primary, you get the result that happened. You know, Kamala Harris ran a 100 day campaign that was like very hap, like thrown together. It didn't really make a lot of sense message wise. And so we got what we got.

And you know, I think this is a really instructive moment for Democrats to sit back and listen to voters and try to figure out how can we actually be a party that wins. Yeah, there's two points in there that bear a little more analysis. So number one, what was the name of the book you said they wrote after Obama? So it's called Expanding the Democratic Majority. Okay. Yeah. So what the way I translate that based on what they're talking about America becoming more diverse is

that that then became the basis of what turned into say like woke politics. Totally. And I think what happened there is it's, it seems obvious now is that you saw a lot of people from all different races eventually turned off by the constant reminder of their race or their gender or their sexual orientation to the point that they're like that's not you know all right great we're that whatever insert is here but like that's we care about the economy we care about not having endless wars we care about the border being secure and suddenly it's like that the democrats message was woke and abortions which you know they have a point on the abortions thing just because Roe v. Wade was obviously the law of the land for a long time. But that got interesting.

The second thing is that when you look at the Democratic primary process, the last three, it's reasonable to say they basically haven't let it happen. Bernie we know got pushed out from the wiki leaks leaked emails and everything and then he got pushed out again in 2020 right when the when the pandemic started and all the candidates dropped out and endorsed joe biden and then this year you didn't even let it happen and i know like rfk was had some controversy around like some of his stances on things but you have a kennedy here a true old school moderate liberal who people liked and if they had opened up the primary process even if around like some of his stances on things, but you have a Kennedy here, a true old school, moderate liberal who people liked. And if they had opened up the primary process, even if that wasn't the DNC's favorite candidate, they could have had a different outcome here. Don't you think? Yeah. So I think something that I've been really trying to push folks that I know that are working

for the DNC is trying to restore some of that process. One of the biggest issues that really stood out to me was usually the first state in the Democratic primary process is in Iowa. And that's a really important state because those are voters that tend to just really vote for politicians that speak to them and reach them for their concerns. So you get candidates like Obama, you get really like Obama, you get really these star-studded figures that really don't, you don't think are gonna win the election,

but they pop out really well because they reach voters. And what the Democratic Party did with Joe Biden this time around is they put the first state to South Carolina. The reason why that was really disastrous for me, from my perspective, was because you have a lot of political leaders in that state who are very, very much kind of have this hold on how primary voters vote. So once you make the first state South Carolina, which I think it still is, you basically are telling all the voters in South Carolina that the precinct leaders are going to pick the person.

And so, you know, I think it's just an example of how they're trying to control the process. And that's something that I think they really need to change. And I think if they don't change, you're going to keep getting more Joe Bidens. And I mean, this sense, this like establishment figure that no one really can relate to because they're picked by the Democratic establishment. Yeah to because they're picked by the Democratic establishment. Yeah. And they also picked the guy. I mean, he was he was gone. He was he was going in 2020. And that's another thing that I think has really offended the intelligence of the general public in that you had all these Democrats right when the election

was going the wrong way, suddenly being like, oh, my God, he can't do it. And people are like, where have you been? Like, you know, he was tripping over words five years ago and i always tell this story for context the last time i stood by joe biden was in 2014 because i used to caddy for someone close to him all the time at willington country club and so i see all the secret service golf carts coming up he's the vice president so i know he's there we're down on the practice tee on a saturday morning there's a ton of people there and i hear this guy behind me like hey jim how's your ass like you know fucking talking everyone up and it's joe biden and he walks up and i'm looking at him like this motherfucker's like 70 71 years old but he's like kind of yoked he gets up there striping

it 240 240 250 250 and like talking to people in between. And I was thinking to myself, I'm like, damn, like he's old, but like he can run for office. And then I saw his first opening speech in March, 2019, I believe it was, which is like not even five years later. And I was like, he must've had like 12 brain aneurysms, like something was wrong. So, you know, if you're going to be the Democrats and you're even going to like get around the primary process, you got to pick someone who's like a functional fucking human being. You know, there were better, like even that, even a newer guy, like that guy from Maryland. What's his name again? Westmore, Governor Westmore.

Yeah. Fantastic guy. Fantastic guy. He has one, like one brain cell in him has more IQ than Kamala and Biden put together. You know what I mean? Like, Mike, do you think, do you think the Democrats are, I i had said it earlier but you think they're in a pretty similar spot to republicans were in 2012 no but let me you gotta go you gotta go back first of all joe biden was the remember the member berries south park episode classic joe biden was

the member berry for the democratic Party when he first ran. So what he was was stability in the face of what was just a politically polarized society. There was turmoil. There was protesting. So he was the member Barry. You know, let's remember the Obama years. We had stability. Honk for Biden. Largely uncriticized. I don't want to start with my Obama shade, but largely uncriticized president, especially after he left. So I think he was the right candidate at the time, but then you subvert the primary process. You roll out a candidate, which I hate to admit,

well, I don't have to admit anything, but I hate to tell you, if she had another 365 days, it wouldn't have helped her. We would have known her better, which wasn't helpful. So, you know, I think that they're going to, the Democrats will learn. And, you know, I'm concerned because I think that it's from the ashes type of moment for them. And, you know, we'll see what they roll out next.

I couldn't tell you. Yeah. Do you guys think – I'm always curious on this. Like I don't like the two-party system, right? But if you're going to have it, there's the yin and the yang, the push and the pull, the check to the balance on either side regardless of like who's in power. Like the one needs the other to exist but it's such a strange psychological phenomenon that each party has the the goal of like hoping that the other didn't exist so like right now the shoes on the foot of like the democrats are in a weaker spot four years ago the shoe was on the foot the republicans were on the weaker spot. But like, I'll start with you, Rotimi.

Do you think it is necessary? Like it would be a bad thing if suddenly the Democrats ruled everything, even if they did a lot of things you agreed with? Do you think that would be a slippery slope to like, I don't know, like human instincts? Yeah, I think, you know, something that, and a lot of people don't like the two-party system,

and I have issues with it too, but I think something that's good is a check on a party, because it kind of brings you down back to earth a little bit, and it forces you to be like, okay, like, I made the Democrats happy on this XYZ policy, but I need to go out and talk to folks that aren't Democrats and see how I can get them on board back on my side with policy. So I think this is an issue, for example, on immigration. I think Democrats have really missed the mark there for a long time. And I think the main reason being is that you have a lot of advocacy groups that are much more on the far left side of the party that push politicians to take unpopular stances on immigration. When common sense legislation,

such as having the border closed, deporting criminals, even though that's a crime under law, but it needs to be more enforced clearly, that's something that I think- Wait, what do you mean that's a crime under law? Well, I think, you know, it's already illegal, you know, to be in the country and to be undocumented and to commit a crime. That's obviously illegal.

But I think something that Democrats forgot is talking about how that's wrong and how if someone is elected president as a Democrat, they're going to actually make sure they're going to carry out deporting people that are committing crimes in the country. I think Democrats very much stopped talking about that because you had far left interest groups that were pushing some politicians to take unpopular stances. That's something that you saw in the Biden administration on immigration. And so kind of to get back to your main question, I think that's why it's kind of good

to have a good party system because if you have a two party system, excuse me, because I think if you just had Democrats controlling you know controlling everything you would get really really i think like kind of out of touch uh policies that might be good but uh that don't speak to people that might be in the middle sure i think that there's also you know you talk about like far left groups entering that chat, so to speak. The narrative shifted so much from even the fact that like people like Hillary and Obama were saying things that were extremely similar to what Trump says as late as like 2014. And I'm not even faulting Obama for this. They called Obama like the deporter in chief.

And I don't, from a human rights perspective, you never want to see any of that violated. You like to see things done the right way. But we've also, like, I've had so many guys in here who have either worked on the border or reported on the border, all these different things who have been telling me about this now over the last couple of years. And it's like, the system is so fucked up that people even before the first Trump administration were in a horrible position. And so when you then make it like when you start screaming that any deportation is going to be like racist or something like that, it's actually racist to not look at it as something that we got to fix because when you allow the border to be so open, you're creating human trafficking, humanitarian crises. I mean, some of the stories that I get and some of the pictures I've seen offline that we can't show on YouTube that some of my guys have seen is harrowing. And like some of these far left groups, I'd look at them and say, you're preaching being human and love first. And this is a story that's not showing humanity and love, but simply because

orange man says that you have to take like the opposite stance. Can't you be common sense here and not have Trump derangement syndrome on it? Yeah, I think that's something that I've really has frustrated me a little bit. Now, I think a lot of Democrats had this view on immigration that was very much stuck in the 2020 world, which was like, you know, we were having this moment, George Floyd murder, horrific. And so I think a lot of, some Democrats basically just decided that we were gonna have positions

that were really out of step with the American public. And that bleeded into some of the discourse around the 2024 election and the positions they took. But I think, or I hope that after this election, Democrats go, okay, like, let's actually, like, go back to common sense immigration reform, which is, like, having a secure border. Don't skip the line. If you want to come to this country, you got skills, you got talent, like, we want to bring you in, but, like, you can't skip the line.

And that's an important rule to have because people don't like disorder and we shouldn't want disorder at the border. Um, so I hope we get back to that. Um, and I think there are candidates that are going to come up that will realize it. And yeah. Yeah. And I hope that again, when I talk about like younger voices who are willing to speak up, you know, on either party becoming the rising stars, maybe someone like you, I hope that this is a moment where that's allowed to happen because I feel like two years ago, you would have been in a position where you wouldn't be able to say something like that out loud. Yeah, I do think that there is, well, I think there are kind of two things happening in the party. There is a gerontocracy problem, gerontocracy.

So it's kind of this idea that you have a lot of older folks in the Democratic Party that are very much like kind of have a grip on it and are refusing to let it go. This is geriatric fucks. Yeah, basically. Isn't that what he said? Yeah, basically. And there's actually this really – it's kind of interesting. There's a book about Jimmy Carter where – there's a book about Jimmy Carter where there's a section where Joe Biden basically is thinking about primarying Jimmy Carter. And he's like, Jimmy Carter is this

nice guy, but I'm a young Senator and I have to stand up because I don't want to lose this election. And so he flies to New York and he meets with this young Senator who just won his election, that guy's Chuck Schumer. And they basically talk about taking over the Democratic Party as young electeds, basically being like, we have to get rid of the Carter era. And every time- Shoes on the other foot now. Exactly, now, every time I read that, I'm like,

oh, so Joe Biden wouldn't want me to be nice to him if I was in his place. He wouldn't want, I guess, the young Democrats to kind of just be like, oh, we're him if I was in his place. Like, you know, he wouldn't want, I guess, the young Democrats to kind of just be like, oh, like, we're just gonna let you guys like do whatever. So that's why I've been really clear, I think, with young folks that I know is like, you have to stand up and take the party back. Because at this point, it's just we're in a tough spot. Spear. If you were a Democrat for a second, I know that's impossible for you to imagine, but I want you to try.

How would you fix the current Democratic Party? Generally, we're not talking about the border. You can talk about whatever you want, bro. Well, I feel like you need an identity. Even like when we're talking about the border, I was thinking to myself, Democrats don't even know why they care about the border anymore. Is it human rights? You have the one lady on The View who jumps out and says, yeah, we're going to lose all of our maids. I mean, what, you know, really, what are they looking to accomplish here? If it's a human rights issue, they failed. And it's, I get it, it's bipartisan, and it's very difficult to address these issues.

But I think they have to, generally speaking as well, figure out what is their identity. If it's a youthful identity, that great i mean if that's the route they're going to go um i think if i was a democrat how i would fix the party is understand that we're not all poli-sci majors we're not all and i'm not i'm a poli-sci major i'm sure you are too yeah he's a he's an african-american studies minor i'll i'll bring you up to speed on the culture. I may need some help. But seriously, I mean, I think they need a fresh new identity.

And when you say the youth, it concerns me because a lot of my friends, I shouldn't say a lot. I have friends who lean left and who are democrats and um i mean they have great ideas they have great talking points and generally it's all about it's all about the money it's all about stimulating the economy it's all about making more affordable uh to move into the house their parents moved in for ten thousand dollars you know it's i think that's the way the democrats can really impress the rest of this country. So I'd like to see that shift. It's the whole Clinton identity, I guess. But I think that's the route.

I say this often. Bill Clinton is very entertaining, first of all. But I would not call him a good guy. I'll put it that way. But when you look at his presidency and you look at presidents over the past you know century he is literally the most moderate guy who was ever in there because he was he was you know he's a fucking backroom politician and he knew let's make a deal baby right right and at the end of the day like the 1990s were a really fucking good time because of that you know and and i think to that and you can look at all the other stuff with the Clintons and everything, but there's something to be said for that because it got more down to business.

And yet it feels like in society, we've reached a point where it's like tacky to talk about the economy being a main issue. The fact of the matter is if I'm looking at a single mother who's working two jobs and suddenly groceries cost $125 instead of $100. Well, now maybe her kids don't eat, right? So when you go to that person and you say, I want you to care about abortion, or I want you to care about endless wars, even like something important like that, that's not necessarily what she's going to care about. She's going to care about more like, all right, how the fuck do I pay this on Monday? And who's going to be the best opportunity there for that to happen? Yeah, no, that's interesting.

And there's now one story that comes to my mind. I was in Bucks County where I grew up knocking doors for Vice President Harris during the campaign. And I get to the store. It's a really nice lady. And she realized I went to CBS. So we're making small talk. And I bring up like, you know, Harris campaign. And she goes, I was actually thinking about voting for Harris.

But I saw her campaign with Liz Cheney, and I lost my son in the Middle East. So I don't think I can ever bring myself to vote for someone that associates with that family. And I just remember being like, you know, I kind of can't blame you, like, and she closes the door and I went about my day. And I now looking back, I'm like, I should have realized that's when he was going to win. But I think that for me was, for some reason, Democrats have become more like culturally close with the Cheneys instead of poor people and working class people. And this like old era of politics and that attachment, I think, has been politically damaging. And we need to get out of that. And I think the biggest way to get out of that is a lot of the folks from the last generation and that have been controlling the party, I think, need to step aside.

But I do agree that talking more about the economy, talking about how you're going to make sure that people can afford to go about their day-to-day lives afforded by house. I think that's one reason that Trump had a good campaign because he was just talking about doing that stuff. And I mean, we got to see what he can do, of course, but I really think he did have an economic message and kind of had a story that made sense. On the other hand, I think Kamala Harris's message was this weird, like the economic message was this like very

confusing, like opportunity economy thing, which didn't make sense. But I think Donald Trump's story of the economy was the Democrats overspent. They overheated. I'm going to come in, make everything simple, going to turn down the heat, and I'm going to make sure you have more money in your pocket. Simple message. Yes. And so I think we need to get back to that common sense economic message.

Absolutely. I think that's a great point. And you also raised the point about like Dick Cheney. This is where it felt like it was a giant troll on me. And I thought like fucking Ashton Kutcher was going to come out of the bushes and say, you're punked. But like you had the Democratic Party bragging and this happened in like a one week period, I think. You had them bragging about a Dick Cheney endorsement an irs endorsement and a diddy party clients endorsement and i'm like that's try like you just hit the trifecta right there

it was almost like you know i had this crazy theory that even i didn't believe and to this day i don't even think i believe this but i had this crazy theory back in september 2020 i was talking with my dad and knew trump was going to lose. And I looked at everything that was happening. I didn't know what was what I didn't know what was, you know, total conspiracy versus like things that were actually happening that he was responding bad to. But I said, you know, this guy is good for business for, hear me out here. He's good for business of the media. Their, their ratings are up 10,000%. You know, the media everywhere from every direction has some hand in hand with like intelligence and stuff like that so they can get messaging out and he's also really good for like

the schumers and pelosi's of the world because they have a foil they get to be the we're fighting the power or whatever we're fighting the bad orange man or what and they get more attention and i'm like so what if all this is like people thinking why have eight years of trump when you can have 12 because he was still the main story for four years that ended up becoming true and then you see over like when that guy obviously january 6th there was a lot of misinformation that happened there not saying it was a good day i thought trump was very stupid to like do that event that day because only bad things can happen. But obviously like a lot of that was completely mismarketed. That said, on January 7th, he was the lowest peg you can possibly be. All the Democrats had to do was just like back up, let him leave, right? They didn't have to say anything, nothing.

But on January 8th, they kicked him off all the internet. A year and a half later, the FBI knocked down his door and stole his wife's panties. The next year, they put him on trial. Then they shoot. Not necessarily them, but you get the point. Then he gets shot in the fucking face. And probably, like, regardless of where your politics are, the most goosebumps moment I've seen in years. Like, it was, that was just a human moment. It was fucking insane how he responded to that.

And then they convict him of felonies that objectively like were complete and utter bullshit. It's like they made the guy a victim. They did everything they could to take him from a guy who was not sympathetic to a guy who became the underdog.

So like, is the joke on me or are they just so deranged that they had to do that? You know, I think something that I've been realizing is like when you keep the volume at 10 constantly, it's going to sound like one after a while. You know, they were just going out, I think, Democrats and you're calling this guy Hitler.

You're calling him all this stuff. After a while, it just sounds like, OK, like what like what does this mean? And that's something that, you know, even looking back, like the video of, you know, Obama and Trump at the funeral and they're like, you know, they're laughing, you know, they're hanging out. And it was like funny to me because I'm like, one, you know, I like Obama and that's great. And I'm like, part of me is like, I'm happy you guys are bringing Trump into the like, you know, the presidential fraternity because I think he has felt excluded. And I hope that him like being brought into the fold a little bit makes him like appreciate the office more as an institution. And I think it will. But also it's like, you know, you guys were running around the country, telling people this guy was like going to be the worst

thing in the world. And now you guys are like sitting at a funeral and laughing. People obviously are going to see that and be like, wait, so I guess he's not that bad. And so I think we have a lot of trust as Democrats. We need to build back with the American people. But I do think the way that we have kind of, you know, the term like Trump derangement syndrome, it's like it's like I don't like it, but it is kind of true. Like some people have really been obsessed with the guy for so long. long um i think you know the way that you have hyped we've hyped him up uh i think a lot of the democrat media establishment has not uh helped out in any way 100 what do you think the theory is incredible i never thought about that um until you just said it but if it's true they really just the the mental abuse of their own constituents because trump derangement

syndrome is real i have i have family members despite what you know insidious purpose the media might have i mean they are just different people they look at politics differently they look at um i mean everything every facet of life race differently uh gender and i'm not saying you know we're not talking identity politics but just the way that they react uh to just about everything is now kind of geared toward this how is this either a trump message or a message that's supported by his his loyal followers and mean, if the media has this goal of creating this aura around Trump, I mean, they sacrificed their own people to do it. I mean, it's really damning. You know, we're now just looking at your average American and their reaction, a lot of their

reactions to who he is and what he's done. I'm not saying, real quick, Rotimi, I'm not saying that that's not the case. I've seen it too. I know exactly what you're talking about, but I do want to be positive for a minute. Something happened here, maybe because of all the victim moments that Trump had along the way that some people just got exhausted. Great point, wrote to me. They got exhausted by the 10 volume and they're like, all right, deep down inside, even the people that hate him and don't stand for anything that he stands for, there's a part of them that's like, well, he was president four years ago. He wasn't Hitler. So when he won, me and my buddy Joey Deeth and Matt Ferrara were in New York City three days later. And we sat outside.

It was like a decent night. So we sat outside at the bar and we were just like we had walked through all that we walked probably like a mile through the city saw nothing just watching the streets and everything not one yeller not one protester not one sign nothing everyone going about life and i was actually like you know what i'm proud of america for a minute because if you remember 2016 you know know, there was like riots. And I remember those, there were riots in the streets right away. So maybe, like, all this shit that happened to him, now he's gonna come into office, we're gonna see what happens there.

But it's like, maybe the temperature just came down a little bit, because things got so out of whack economically and foreign policy wise that people are like, well, it can't be worse. Yeah, I do think there's kind of this. And I was listening to yesterday. So the Democratic Party right now is picking a new DNC chair. It's like an executive of the party. It's not like, you know, this isn't like the next president or whatever. But they had a candidate forum with the folks that were running. And it was interesting listening to the folks that are running for DNC chair,

because a lot of them are talking about economic policy. Who's running? You know, there's a couple guys that really stand out to me. One's Ben Wickler, former chair of the Wisconsin Democratic Party. He's a really talented guy. Ken Martin, also kind of the same, former state party guy. And there's one guy I actually know pretty well, his name's Fize. He was Sanders' advisor and is like definitely more on the economic populist way of kind

of fixing the Democratic Party, which is interesting. I don't know if he has a shot because he jumped into race so late. But one thing that stood out to me listening to this candidate forum was there's a candidate that's running that I don't think is a shot. But he basically went on this like rant talking about how the media attacked Joe Biden. Ridiculous point. I mean, everyone in the room is cheering. And that kind of concerned me because I'm like, wait, so like are like is the base of the party, like the folks that are in the room that are like the DNC members voting, like they actually feel like the media, the establishment media was like change the results, which I think is just a ridiculous assertion.

It's like a very wild assertion. One, because the folks that you would need to vote for the Biden-Harris ticket or whatever. They weren't listening to the establishment media anyway. So if the establishment media was putting out the talking points that you wanted, it wouldn't have changed the result. Also, Joe Biden was mentally like struggling. It was obvious to anyone. They didn't like, yeah, like anyone that had-

No shit. Yeah, it's like, you know, so that seeing that at the forum and some of those comments, I feel like we are still dealing with a lot of the residual lies that were told by the establishment. I think that some Democratic primary voters are still kind of stuck and that concerns me. Spear? I don't want to throw fuel on the fire but they did turn on him at one point. They did. I don't want to throw fuel on the fire, but they did turn on him at one point. I remember it was about a week, maybe two weeks,

and that was right before he stepped down or was pushed out, whatever you want to call it. So at one point they did. He had the same reaction with Hillary when Comey reopens the investigation. It was a big surprise. I mean, they definitely did turn on him. But no, the campaign was insulated. You know, the news protected Joe.

And again, it was about Trump. It was about ratings. Talking about Joe, you know, isn't exciting. And it's not good policy if you're talking about this guy's struggles, you know, mentally, cognitively. Even though I think most of the White House doctors said he was fine cognitively, right? Isn't that what the... Yeah, that's what they were trying to say. And that's the thing. And it really is a scandal. People even talk about like the end of Reagan's presidency, where he was losing it, and they covered that up. And it's right to talk about that at the very end. But like Biden, you had it the whole way. And the cover up of that and we're not even – let's even use a lighter word. The not being willing to ask the questions about it, say, no, average person i don't even get like think

this is a bad way to put it but think of like the dumbest person you know there's certain things from a human element that everyone's got a bullshit meter for right and like someone sees that guy tall he's oh you know you know the thing and they're like that guy should be in a nursing home but you know it's derangement syndrome. I'm telling you. First of all, I don't know. Jon Stewart, I don't know if he was back at the time, but maybe it was whoever filled in for him. I know they rotated people for a while. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

But they were just mocking the media coverage after the first debate. It's like, yeah, Joe, he woke up today. He walked to the stage. He opened his mouth. And he walked out. And no one helped him. And it was just like he did phenomenal. And I had friends and family members saying, wow, he really smoked him.

I'm like, what the fuck? And honestly, the debates were the reason. I say it to everyone. That was the reason why I did not think Trump would be reelected. They're eating the dogs they're eating the cats you know i think something funny that now is like um i remember like having a bunch of folks over to watch the uh biden trump shit show which was just like uh i mean we had fun we just drank a ton of wine it was great yeah exactly. And I remember like finishing it and I kind of sat with this.

I was like, Trump might be president again. Like, time to think about that. But I really was, and I think that's what I'm disappointed to see is that I don't think there's enough frustration with the Democratic Party staff and the folks that hid it for so long. Because as a Democrat, I feel as if the people in my party have lied for so long. They lied about his mental ability to run a race. And there was a really interesting story that came out today with the New York Times that basically showed that there were members of biden's staff that had him uh pollsters had him at less than a five percent chance of winning and they didn't

tell him yeah um oh they didn't tell him at all they didn't tell joe biden so schumer maybe he wouldn't remember but i said 95 five percent or two percent milk apparently schumer went to joe biden was like hey man uh has your staff told you you're uh 5% or 2% milk? What are you talking about? Apparently Schumer went to Joe Biden and was like, hey, man, has your staff told you you have a 5% chance of winning? And then Joe Biden was like, wait, I have a 5% chance of winning? And it's funny, but it's like, damn, this dude, no one told this guy? And so, you know, I think there's just so many people that need to be removed. And I hope they never work on a campaign today. On the record, I hope you never have another job in a Democratic campaign, a lot of those Biden folks. And yeah, I just think because they created

this environment. I mean, it is Biden's fault a lot. But like, you know, when you're a politician, you are essentially operating in a world where you are making so many decisions that you have to rely on your staff a lot. I worked for a member of Congress. I was a speechwriter. And, you know, he was doing so much stuff that I was basically tasked with giving him information. And a lot of the folks on his team were hiding the information. I don't know if they were, like, caught up in their own grandeur of, like, whatever, but they hid the information. I don't know if they were like caught up in their own grandeur of like whatever, but they hid that information.

I think, you know, I don't think Biden's on Twitter, like reading the tweets being like, oh, that's how people think, like, you know, I don't think. Yeah, so. That's what you mean. You don't even know what Twitter is. Yeah, like I think so staff, I think is partly responsible for this as well.

And, you know, I think now that we look at the Trump administration and Trump, I think Democrats for a while, we're doing this whole thing where they're like, you know, Trump is also mentally declining and yada. But I'm like, you know, I will say, I think Trump is obviously a little bit, uh he likes to talk about where he's going off. It's like he looks like he is in command of the room because he understands the issue. And he's rambling like an old guy. But you could tell that this guy knows what he's talking about. Like, but he's rambling. Biden just seemed like he didn't really have a clue. And that's scarier to me.

Yeah. And I think, you you know and you kind of started to say this earlier but the thing about trump looking at the last nine and a half years or whatever it is of him being a political figure now is that yeah he talks like this simpleton caveman but it's on purpose and it's genius because he's talking to the average person on a level that they can understand and where they feel like he's like a part of their world. This is mind you, this is a fucking billionaire real estate guy from from New York, who was able to and I'll say legitimately convince coal miners in fucking Altoona that he understood their world because he did he went to them there for so long. And this was a Democrat and Republican problem. All these people in DC and the Uniparty, they looked at these people who lived in, you know, fucking middle America. And they're like, ah, they'll figure it out. They're falling behind the times. They'll learn to code. Right. And then you had this guy in a suit who fucking flew out

there on Trump force one and said, no, you've been forgotten about. I'm going to talk to you. And what was he talking to him about? Those exact economic issues, those, how do we get more money in your pocket? How do we bring some jobs back here? Stuff that people want to hear. And that actually like some of it, he was able to deliver on. I'm not saying I like the long-term implications of some of those deliveries, but the intentions in that part in his first presidency, we're good. I like that. Yeah. I mean, you obviously are different because this is interesting to you. You have aspirations, political aspirations. You worked in campaigns, but it was shocking to see that a lot of liberals, they couldn't even

articulate his policy. I mean, I know he struggles at times. Obviously, there's gaffes and both sides have them. But they couldn't even articulate his policies. And you have to remember, he's going out to these areas. He is policy-driven. It's not this rah-rah speech about it is policy-driven. And these voters, more informed than I am. I mean, I talk to people who don't have a college education. They are in tune with the policies. They know how they're going to be implemented. And I'm sitting I mean, I talk to people who don't have a college education. They are in tune with

the policies. They know how they're going to be implemented. And I'm sitting there saying, shit, I'm like, I'm just like country before God now, you know, but, but, you know, so it shows that it's just the electorate. It's just, it's just crazy how it's switched. And I don't know if, if the left had the same type of political IQ. I don't know. Yeah, go ahead. Yeah, I think there's, and this is a kind of longer issue I think the party's having, is there is fundamentally a lack of trust in institutional lead media.

There has been for a long time. And I think there are a lot of voters that don't look at stuff anymore. They're listening to other places and where they're getting their information from is giving them more in-depth conversations, podcasts, longer YouTube videos, things like that. So people aren't tuning into the five minute,

the MSNBC, like, you know, roo-rah, we're gonna go and like sit around a table and all these pundits are gonna yell. People are tired of that. So I think something that I've really been hoping that Democrats are trying to do is actually build an information structure where they're talking about the work that they're doing, the policies they're doing. And, you know, I don't think that's going to fix everything. I think at the end of the day, you still have to battle on

who has the best idea. But I think once you actually create a media ecosystem that's outside of establishment media and stop being so like obsessed with the New York Times and like who's on CNN and like chasing those moments and actually building an ecosystem that's genuine and real, you can actually start to talk to some of these people they have been reaching for so long. And you know what? There was a huge phenomenon in this election that was like a part of my industry which is that you had independent media played the biggest role they had ever played in any election period let alone a presidential election and you know kamala was unwilling to go on a lot of these shows they all asked her i know that and it's like even with rogan the lack of being able to read the room. I remember when I read the first report from the New York Post about her team met with Rogan's team. And like, if you know how, I don't know Joe Rogan personally. I know people who do and everyone out there listening who's listened to his show, they kind of know what he's about. The instant you start talking about like, oh, my team, my people are going to meet with, that's not what he does. He's a fucking cage fighting commentator who's, who does comedy at night, right? Like he

doesn't like, he's like, let's sit down and talk. Trump came in there and talked with him for three hours. So Kamala was like, yeah, you know what? It's not on my schedule. I can't be there. You got to come to me and it's only going to be an hour and we get final cut. And I don't blame him for saying, fuck you. Right. But when you look at this, the, the autopsy I was seeing right away with some of the talking heads on the leftsy I was seeing right away with some of the talking heads on the left, not from you, but from some other people was that, oh, Democrats need to invest in a giant political infrastructure to get to get their own Joe Rogan and stuff. And I'm like, wait a second, you're totally missing the boat here. It's not money. The

reason that Joe Rogan and Theo Vaughn and these guys work is because they built it genuinely and they didn't build it being right wingers. They built it to the point that like eventually no one on the left who was running for office would come onto their podcast because they were so afraid of this new medium. So when you talk about like, oh, we're just, when I hear the Democrats like, oh, we're just going to buy our way into our own structure like that. I'm like, no, the fuck you're not. The reason that people listen to my podcast, some idiot from New Jersey who no one gives a fuck about over all these celebrities with tens of millions of followers who try to start a podcast for a month and can't get anyone to listen is because I'm a real guy. No disrespect to them,

but it's like, I'm a real guy and people just want to hear a real conversation. The Democrats think some of them, not all of them, some of them seem to think that it's just throw money at the problem, and it's not. No, I definitely agree with that. I mean, that is something I think, you know, I used to work for a member of Congress as a speechwriter and a comms guy. So, you know, Congressman Dan Kildee is retired now. He's a great guy from Michigan. And one thing that stood out to me, always being a press secretary and being on Capitol Hill working for Democrats is a lot of comms folks, communications folks in the democratic world always are very much afraid

of letting their boss or congressman go into these places like this, or go into places where you're having long form conversations because they're like really cagey. And it's kind of just like, I don't know if the personalities of the people in these jobs are like the kids in high school that were just like really annoying and obnoxious about politics. And like, we're thinking about becoming president at 12 years old. And when you have someone in that job that thinks like that, they're like, I got

to make sure I'm all bunned up and I got the talking points here. And that's, I think, a culture of the party. And I think the candidates that don't have that are going to do really well. Like, for example, Governor Westmore in Maryland. I've seen him on some stuff. Fantastic guy. And because he's genuine. You see him at the Baltimore Ravens game. He's on the sidelines with his son, drinking beers, like hanging out. It's like, that's a normal person. He's a veteran too, right? Yeah, he's a veteran, you know? And I think having more people like that, there's genuine that aren't so like,

I gotta have my talking points and I gotta read them. Like people see through that bullshit and a lot of people are tired of it. Guys, if you're still watching this video and you haven't yet hit that subscribe button, please take two seconds and go hit it right now. Thank you. A hundred percent.

And I think there was also, you know, when, when you're talking, when you're looking at the people who have done this, who's a guy who for the last eight years, basically, or whatever, probably four or five years has consistently done this on the left. Bernie Sanders. He goes into all these plays. He doesn't care who the, oh, you talked to Trump yesterday. I'll still come on. He doesn't care.

And I respect, listen, you don't have to agree with Bernie Sanders politically. I respect the fuck out of that. And like people, you know, I always talk about that 2016 Harbinger or whatever the word is like the, the signal it was. It's like, when you look at the fact that Sanders was probably going to win that, that would have meant the two candidates who were going to win that year, we're going to be Sanders and Trump who politically, when it comes to their, the ways of getting things done could not be more opposite, but when it comes to putting boom finger on the problem Understanding the pulse of the people and exactly what's wrong

Those two guys got it better than anyone because they spoke to the average person and it's interesting that they're also the guys who are So willing to go on any of these platforms, but the buttoned up people you talk to are not you know i need more i need more mike spears on the left side it will just go on there and fucking let it fly for three hours i hear you i mean it's it's we'll disagree eventually but i agree i agree with you we'll get there we'll get there we're desensitized so uh you know my wife my wife. He hasn't dropped the Michelle Obama joke yet. That's why. Oh, yeah. I may need to jump in there. You know, my wife was telling me, we have to fact check it, but she was talking about,

she's like, you know, they discovered a new moon. You know, I don't know the context, but we can look it up. Yeah. See the new moon. But when I said it, she's like, and no one really gives a shit. And I was like, you know, you're right. I haven't heard about it. We don't talk about it. And I think the same goes for, you know, our politicians, you know, we've seen so

much of each other's lives through social media. Um, the way the media just treats everybody now, um, nothing shocks us. So the fact that the Democrats who were the cool party can embrace it is shocking. I mean, it's just shocking yeah something i've been thinking about um and this is like a very off the cuff thought but three new moons by the way we have it on the screen scientists have discovered three new moons you come to my house you get my wife's name right it's christina oh damn go ahead anyway um no but something i've been thinking about and i don't know if it's like uh i don't know if it's like going to pan out. But I think like the next, there's going to be a successful politician down the road that is willing to fully kind of come out and reject this idea of how I think social media has made a lot of people feel.

This kind of like, there's like a word for it. I think it's like attention capitalism, like this kind of thing where like, we're all like really so attached to our phones, social media. You're seeing how it's really like phone bans in schools are becoming like a very popular thing. And I think across the board, everyone loves it. And I think there's going to be a politician soon that is like, I like reject this kind of obsession with social media, this like technology, the way that it's

taken over. I think that type of politician is going to be really successful. Yeah. Yeah. That's a good point. I also think, you know, if you're talking about style of politicians, that'll come up. One thing I noticed when Trump came up, I would not say it was this way before him, but when Trump came up and this kind of comes back to like the Trump derangement syndrome, obviously the thing that was most endearing about him to people is that the dude is fucking funny. It's hilarious. Everything he does when he – I would watch him read the phone book. I mean like I remember on January 7, 2021, I'm like he's still the funniest dude ever. That's not changing.

Like the dude's fucking hilarious and somewhere along the way the left couldn't laugh anymore you couldn't have comedy you couldn't joke about things you couldn't make light of stuff i actually think this hurt obama because obama like had a decent sense of humor and now it had to be so serious every time like donald trump's gonna kill america you know and like he doesn't actually think that, but like, it's not like he thinks Trump's good, but you know what I mean? Like, like this inability, like you talk about some of your family members, Spear, that, you know, lean the other way and they can't even talk about these things. They can't, there's no smile that comes to their face.

Whereas I'll talk with people, even like when Biden was in office, who might've been more Trump people and they could be laughing they might be like ripping Biden to pieces but there's a sense of humor there and I don't know what happened because it used to be like if you're really looking at it was like the left that was funny like these guys these Joe Rogans these comedians who are now you know in this last election were like all right enough with. These were all the guys who voted for Obama in 2012. And that needs to be weighed there. Yeah. You saw a little bit of the Obama era when Biden took the Trump hat. I don't know if you guys saw this. He swapped hats. I honestly laughed and I didn't even laugh at him. I laughed because I was like, that was probably a moment

that everyone in that room felt good. Now they kind of trusted him, despite what everybody has been saying about Biden. But that was a moment. And I was like, you hadn't seen that on the campaign. You had not seen that reach across the aisle. And I'm not saying Trump did it. I don't think he needed to do it because he had the personality. But that was like the one moment where I said, you know what? If Biden had the mental aptitude or

or just his staff supported this kind of once in a while let's crack a joke you know I think it would have helped yeah yeah I I think there's um you know I like uh I'm going to mention this funny Trump joke that I've my friends talking about oh you're gonna get in trouble on MSNBC yeah did we say that on camera by the way I think that was before you're trouble on MSNBC. Did we say that on camera, by the way? I think that was before. You're now an MSNBC contributor? Yes, I'm a contributor to MSNBC. It's fantastic. Right for the website. Analyst.

Mike Spear heard that before we got on camera and looked up at me like the end of fucking usual suspects. Like we just found Kaiser Soze. He's like, oh my god. But there's a really funny Trump joke that, you know, I like Senator Warren. You might disagree, of course. I think she's done some great work on economic policy, but there's a joke that he always makes that

Trump made once on Twitter where he was like... Yeah. Looking at the arrowhead. She found it in her backyard. He gave it to julian i could see him biting his tongue she basically was like it was like some like campaign ad she did or something and he was like he she keeps thanking her like his wife her wife for being there like she's supposed to be there like why is elizabeth war Warren like faking like her wife for like showing up or husband, excuse me,

for showing up at this event. And you know, he's just like this very, I think, he was just relaxed. And I think- He's supposed to. Yeah, like, and you know, like he just like, that kind of stuff, I think people saw it and thought it was funny.

And you know, I, as a Democrat would see it, I'd be like laughing quietly. Cause I'm like, I just don't want to, I don't want to see me laughing at this but it's kind of funny yeah wrote to me like on your table it's like you used to have for example the onion no one hears about the onion anymore now you hear babylon b right right one was left one was right one is right now you know and it's like there was always the thought that like more i think it's the opposite so like right brain people are creative and more liberal left brain people are

pragmatic and more conservative in general but like you know not that that's perfect every time but like the creative people would be the ones who were funny because it requires more creativity and you wouldn't have the comedy on the other side but now like in the meme wars that's a right wing win like they get that like quick comedy so well and like you see trump even and it like he shouldn't be doing it like as a fucking president or a guy running for president but i ain't gonna lie it's entertaining as fuck like when he does like ai videos, like people making out and you're like, Oh my god, the left would never but maybe they should. Yeah, I think there's I have some friends who are like very much trying to bring back that kind of like dirtbag left, like, let's just be ourselves. Why are we so bunned up? Like, we need to stop

being the party of suits. And I think there are Democrats out there that very much are doing this. The problem is that if you act like this as a Democrat, there are a lot of older Democrats in the party that are like, stop being so funny. Like generally like stop, you need to take this seriously. This is about our country. It's about democracy and our institutions. And we love and respect our institutions.

And it's like, okay, you know what? Like, you know, people clearly are sick and tired of a lot of these institutions because i haven't done anything for them for the last 20 years yes um so stop being so obsessed with them uh but i think there is and that's why i keep going back to this there i think a lot of the older democrats have to fundamentally step aside um to really let the party have this moment i think right now the party's having this moment of chaos like no one knows who the leader is but i think it's kind of good because a power vacuum um ultimately new leaders rise yeah it's kind of like you look at traditional liberal stances right because if you look at my politics and you go through the top 200 issues like i take what's

that aptitude test that political one i actually haven't taken in like a year i gotta take it again but the one that has like the four quadrants. Yeah, the chart. Yeah, yeah. Like I don't know if people would listen to the show if they saw where I scored on that. But the bottom line, the reason I bring this up is because it's like these traditional liberal stances shifted and it feels so unnatural. So like liberalism used to be the party of no censorship. Now the shoe's on the other foot, and they're more the party of censorship.

Liberalism is supposed to be the party of my body, my choice, which they are on 50% of it, but the other 50%, when someone talks about getting a shot on something, they're like, no, no, not for that, right? Liberalism is supposed to be about inclusion, but what they've done is they took inclusion to wokeness, which creates the opposite. It comes 180 all the way around and tries to separate people out. Liberalism is supposed to be the one that's not about endless wars, and actually this is something that is still a problem on both sides to be very clear. That's – everyone's at fault there. And then liberals are supposed to care about humans and human rights and stuff. But as we already alluded to, like on the border, them, maybe with the intention of like, oh, we welcome everyone in here. We are

a country of immigrants. I agree with the intentions being good. The practice is not because I'm showing you people are trying to show you like you're creating trafficking crises and stuff like that. So how do we get like, forget the Republicans for a second. How do we get the liberals to be liberal again? That's a tough question. I think it comes down to like the talent that gets kind of brought to the front of the party. As I mentioned before, the primary change. I think that if I was like the DNC chair, the first thing I would do is like we're having the primary in Iowa again. That's the first move I'd make. The second move I'd make is that we need to cut off a lot of the

consultants in the party. Because the reason that the Democratic Party is making a lot of these moves is because there are consultants that are being paid like thousands of dollars in DNC contracts to just be like, we saw this poll, so you must do this. Instead of just like, let's actually go out in the communities that we need to win, so you must do this instead of just like, let's actually go out in the communities that we need to win, talk to people and see what works. So I think there are some changes that need to be made. And that's, I think those are two that you can make like institutionally as a party on some of those policy issues. I think it's just getting back to common sense and just giving people what they

want. There's a really, you know, James Carville, he's a former Bill Clinton guy. And, you know, now James Carville, you know, now he's, he's a little too old, but he used to have the saying, which was the Bill Clinton campaign is like, we didn't really like what we did is we went on the community, we asked people what they want, and then we gave it to them. Very simple. Instead of being like, let's like, come up with this idea idea we tested in a poll and like you got some like craving guy in DC who hasn't seen light in like five days and he's like behind his computer being like I've created the model that is gonna win me the election it's like let's just go on the community talk to people back then it was you get

a car you get a car you get a car now I agree that's a great pointdo-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do. I agree. That's a great point. Spear, what are you excited about in the incoming administration? I know Rotimi is excited about the entire cabinet. Oh, no. I mean, I think that Trump now has an opportunity to actually fundamentally change the tax code. I think he may be able to galvanize his constituents, make sure that we see some changes because it is way too complex, especially for small business owners. I mean, they had this mandatory reporting for small businesses. It was laid out under the guise of, well, I mean, I shouldn't say guise, but it was this plan, very, very simple application you have to file if you have a small business.

Essentially, the beneficial owner has to be identified in very simple form. And it was touted as this ability to look and see these terrorist cells that are operating under LLCs, under PCs, whatever it might be, find out who's really the beneficial owner, who's profiting. And even this simple idea, I mean, the courts have had a report by January, I think it was 5th. Then you didn't. Now you do. And now there's a good chance that this whole BOI, this beneficial ownership reporting is is washed away So I think I think it needs to be simplified because I think small business owners there there it makes their lives difficult

Yeah, so I'm looking forward to that. I want to see You know people get ideas and act on them, you know, like you did and you know, I I'm coming from a place of privilege But again, it's it's you know running a business that you can see it's not easy, and it's nothing that we learned about. You know, you and I both know that, that that's not a class any of us took in college. You've got to learn that in the real world. I'd like to see Trump simplify that. I think that's going to hopefully encourage people maybe, you know, without college educations with go out on their own and take a shot. Immigration reform, I think that I'd like to see because I see when it works. I have an associate

who is Russian. He did it the right way, major contributor to the firm, but again, that's a shiny example, you know, although I don't know if all Democrats would agree he's from Russia, but you know, it's, it's a, it's a, it's an example of how this can work. Um, so I'd like to see, um, you know, some common sense, sense immigration reform. Um, so I'm looking for those two things. And then, I mean, honestly, I, I, I hope, and I know he didn't campaign on it. I'd like to see him take down pharma, knock him down, you know, 20,000 pegs. What do you think of this, Ratan?

So I think, you know, any president, you really only have 100 days. I really do think that you really, 180, I think, luckily. And the reason why you have such a short time is because after that period, you got folks in the House that are gonna be up for reelection. So everything you wanted to as president, those folks are like, I gotta see how this is gonna play. I'm in a swing district.

I'm like, you know, I got a tough race. So everything starts to get a little tough. So I think for me, the things that concerns me as a Democrat and someone that, you know, cares about some of the programs we have in our government is I think that it's important to make sure we have a streamlined government and we're not overspending. But I think at the end of the day, the two biggest things we have in our government that we pay for are defense and Social Security. And if you want to go in and you want to actually cut, you have to cut one of those two things. That's really where it's going to come from. Elon Musk and Vivek have talked about in Doge, they want to cut costs. And I see Elon posting

screenshots of these, there's like a $2 million gender studies program or like $500,000, we're paying for someone to research lizards or some bizarre thing. And I'm like, you know, it's great to cut those things. But if you cut those things, you're not actually going to like lower the budget. Like it's a great line item to like parade around for, you know, folks that you want to make a point to. But if you really want to actually lower costs, you have to cut one of those two things. I think cutting Social Security would be harmful for a lot of Americans. A lot of people depend on that money to take care of themselves. So those are the things I think on the spending side I'm concerned

about. On the immigration side, I think we obviously need to get some common sense reform. But what I'm concerned with Republicans on that issue is I don't think mass deportation is a solution to the problems we have with immigration. You're not a Tom Holman guy? You're not ringing the bell for Tom? I understand Tom, I think, has had an experienced background in immigration, but I don't think his solution is actually what we need to fix our immigration system. I think we need to deport folks that have committed crimes. I don't think that should be up for debate. And I think any Democrat that wants to come out against that, that's ridiculous,

absurd. If you committed a crime, you're here illegally, you should be deported. I think at the end of the day, though, we got to realize that there are people that have been here that came through the border illegally, that have been paying taxes, that are great parts of our country. They're paying taxes? Yeah. Well, into their paychecks. Yes, you know, exactly. So that are, you know, great parts of our country that are a great part of our community that shouldn't be deported. And we should figure out how to make sure they're here illegally or legally, excuse me, and how to make sure that we can integrate them in our community.

And, you know, this isn't my idea. You know, this is Ronald Reagan. He proposed amnesty for folks that were here that had not committed any crimes, that were paying taxes. So I think it's something that I wish Republicans would lean into more because it's one, it's a Republican idea. And two, I just think the mass deportation idea is very expensive. And you're going to have to raise taxes to pay for

that. You can't pay for mass deportation without raising taxes somewhere. We don't have the money to afford it. All right, Spirit, can you respond to that? And then we'll come back to the social security defense thing. i think you you first you have to control the influx all right so i don't know that it's super productive to focus resources taxpayer dollars on on deportation uh and then not address the issue yeah um i met a guy uh down in san diego um san diego san diego, so John. And he drives, he commutes. So he comes through the border and he Ubers. He does a lot of different things.

Really, really cool dude. Every major golf course you can think of in the world, this guy has golfed at. But lives in Mexico. And he said, he's like, the shit that I see, he goes, first of all, I'm the only Mexican some days when I'm waiting in line. And I thought that was a lot of, you know, holy shit, this is like the most bullshit

thing I've ever heard. It's going to get people rowdy, you know, about the border. But he's saying it's true. So I think the first thing you need to do is address the actual border itself. I think deportation is something that we should be hyper-focused on deporting criminals. You know, that comes with challenges. You know, we're against the separation of family, but if you deport a family member who's a criminal, you know, where does things stand? If you deport – let's say it's a male. Let's go, you know, stereotypical. He's a breadwinner, you know, breadwinner, taxed through his payroll check.

What now? What are you doing with his three children and wife or whatever? So I think it's much more complicated to deal with deportation than it is to just address the source of the problem, which is this massive influx. So I would devote my energy to that. And I think that Republicans, Democrats should start there. And then on the back end, there should be enforcement. We should be able to crack down. I think sanctuary cities were a bad idea.

Yeah, they're a bad idea. I think it was in that liberal spirit. Let's create this safe harbor. But I think number one is addressing the actual influx and number two, addressing criminals, deporting them. And then I think the third is having more transparency between the local government and the feds. And that's kind of where I'm at. I'm not really up for rounding people up. That's just not where I'm at. I'm not really up for rounding people up. You know, that's just not where I'm at.

I think there's so many other issues when we talk about immigration, and that's not that high on the pecking order for me. It just isn't. Yeah, and I got this video on the screen of the Philadelphia mayor, Kenny, back like a few years ago when he comes in. We don't have the volume on, but he's like, and we're officially a sanctuary city. I hate him and i i bring this up because it's you're making a good point spirits like policies like this are part of what was the issue right in the sense that you know i had nick shirley in here who certainly leans on the right side of stuff but goes on the streets and talks to everyone and you know you can see all different types of perspectives on that and then my own producer alessi did some great man on the street content over the summer and in the fall with people in the cities and when especially talking with alessi off camera the

thing that was really eye-opening to him the most is that it was the minority communities that were speaking about immigration more than anything he's like the white guys you know they talk about economy and stuff but you know some of them would talk about immigration for sure but like he would talk to the people any minority you insert minority community here they'd be like all these fucking immigrants they're giving them free hotels and shit and we can't even feed our families and stuff and it kind of comes back to it's like these are some of the same cities that were saying these things and then then you got a mayor here in New York. I always used to say this to people about Eric Adams.

I'm like, watch what he does and not what he says. Everything he says is company line. It's cringy as fuck. He'll talk about like sending vegan chicken to Philly if they beat the Giants and shit. But like the guy is like actually pretty solid. And he was – he inherited the sanctuary city policy and then he opened his mouth and and common sense got the best of him and was like i literally can't take this line anymore and what do you know he's charged like a week later yeah like get the fuck

out of here man i will say uh so i have two things that er Adams point, I'll go back to the immigration issue. Eric Adams is a very transactional guy in New York. Folks that know him in New York City, he's very much like, I will give you something if you can do something for me. And I think politicians like – A politician? Yeah, yeah, yeah. I would never be like i think a lot of politicians like that but the ones that get in trouble are the ones that are little just like way too transactional where it's like obvious that people are like buying their time like with like real cash like most you you know if you're a politician you're transactional but i think his issue is that he is so obviously transactional that he is like a breeding ground

for corruption but don't you think it's obviously like a little bit funny that weeks after he opens his mouth on this, suddenly he's charged with Turkish airline tickets? You know, I, you know, I think it's, but I think it's like, if you look at, you know, it's like you read the, you know, the case, it's, you're kind of like, I don't think New York mayor should be doing that. Like, it's like a little questionable, you know? Yeah. He's getting a pardon from trial.

We'll see, probably. And we'll see when the trial happens, it'll all come out. But he will likely get a pardon. On the, you know, on the immigration point, and I think a lot of Democrats ignored that. And I posted this on Twitter. I was, the New York Times put out a really interesting map, just raw data of counties and their switch. Basically, a lot of switches that happened from Blue to Red. And if you look at a lot

of African American communities, Kamala Harris had some of the lowest Black support since 1996. And that, if you're a Democrat, should be scary. One, because you had a Black candidate that couldn't get

Black support. But two because you had a black candidate that couldn't get black support. But two, you know, the bottom fell out. You had this whole idea that you could just run this like kind of idea of like, oh, we just, we're the party minorities and all the minorities will vote for you. That never happened. And I think on the immigration issue, that especially became clear because you have videos of, you know, black families, Latino families that have been here for years that are American citizens are at city hall meetings. And they're yelling at their elected officials being like, you know, the school in the Bronx doesn't have air conditioning. My kid can't walk down the street because there's someone on the corner that's selling drugs. But you guys seemingly are just letting

people in the country, you're giving them things. And that idea of disorder, it makes people feel like they're not getting what they're paying for their taxes. So I think it's just something that I, you know, I am as a political analyst and writer and someone that does this, I am, it's almost like I wish I was taking that more seriously uh i mean now you know we're here and whatever but um i think that's something that democrats really have to rebuild that trust because it's lost spear um you know i thought it was crazy at the end of the harris campaign they they they turned their sights on black men. That didn't help.

And I was, you know, I'm sitting there and I'm trying to wrap my head around it. You know, obviously it's very different the way I grew up and then I think the people she was trying to demonize the way they grew up. But she made it very much so about this, you know, you have a mother, you have a sister. And I'm thinking to myself, I have a mother and I have a sister. If I have a mother and if I have a sister, it doesn't mean I want to fucking vote for them. It doesn't mean they're qualified to become the president of the United States. So I think that was a big blunder. And then I can't agree with you more about how there's this visceral reaction to, wait a second, you're telling me you're bringing me with you, right?

I think that was her thing. You're coming with me. with me, you know, we're on our way there. We ain't going back. You pack your bags. And the first thing she says, we get on the buses, you know, by the way, we need to really adjust trans rights and we really need to address, you know, this influx at the border. And you're like, wait a second, where am I going here? I'm worried about, you know, Philadelphia. I'm worried about New York. I'm worried about you name it. So I agree. I mean, I don't. It was so tone deaf.

And then to turn and demonize the same people that she was misleading until. Again, I'm telling you, the voters, I think they were some of the most educated voters this year. I don't know if it's social media that makes it so transparent, the policies, but it was very impressive. And there was a bad reaction to her methodology there. The way that I want to say this, I can't say this on YouTube because we'll get demonetized, but I could say it on Patreon. So I'm going to put this the nice way. I'll say this before Harris got in there because I don't want to make this about her and her being a woman or anything like that. This was to her to remove her from this.

This was something that existed before she was in there. But the campaign messaging of the Democratic Party has become unbelievably feminine. And this is this is an issue that like when I would talk, especially like last summer, 2023, so two summers ago, when I would talk with young males, 20, 21, 22, they didn't even necessarily like Trump. A lot of them liked Kennedy, actually. But like they were so turned off by the Democratic Party because they're like, this feels like it's just a bunch of women talking. Even down to the colors, it's like light powder blue,

Beyonce going like this on stage. You know what I mean? There's something about it that I'm not saying go make it male dominant or something like that. You got to talk to everyone. But Trump was able to pull in both genders, right? It felt like a stronger campaign. And I feel like the messaging, and I think a lot of it has to do with someone tripling down on the woke stuff that you're trying to get away from. You've been talking about today.

But I think the messaging has moved so much to that that you have a feminization of the party, which like when it comes to electing people, this is not, you know, don't take this the wrong way. But not that you want to elect fucking Mussolini or like a strong man like that. But people do respond to strength. There's a reason that like short fat guys don't win the presidency, right? Because they look like, you know, they could get rolled around like the fucking Pillsbury Doughboy. But then someone else like Donald Trump, I'm not saying he's like the modicum of like being in shape, big guy, big guy, aura, dominant alpha male, right? Like people want that. They may not know they want that, but they want that. Yeah, no, I definitely think that's

something that the Democratic Party has kind of had a tough time talking to young men and men, in particular, you know, Obama is a politician I respect and have for a while. But something that really disappointed me was seeing there was a video that came out during the campaign where he was basically like talking to this like young like black guy at an event somewhere and he kind of was like it was very like talking down to this guy being like you gotta make sure

your friends and family are voting for Kamala and if they're stepping out on her because she's it's like bro what are you doing man like one like Obama like when you would you talk when you were a community organizer in Chicago would you talk to the guys you were working, like when you – would you talk – when you were a community organizer in Chicago, would you talk to the guys that you were like – you were working with like that? You wouldn't because they would have punched you in the mouth. Like that's what they would have done.

Like, you know, like – and so like I think we just have to like just like some of the way we talk to some of these guys, like younger guys, just like not respectful. It's just like kind of like trying to force like we're like the HR department and trying to be like, you have to do this. You got to do this. Just tell people what – ask people what they want and give it to them. Very simple. And I think the Democratic Party has a good economic message. I think that's what black men, young black men want. They want a way to become business owners.

They want a way to take care of their community. They want to be leaders, and empowering them as leaders in the economy is the way that we can do that. And I think also talking about how the fact that there are – I liked how you brought up the farm industry. I didn't talk about this. Oh, we got to come back to that. Yeah. Yeah, I'd love to talk about that. And I hope RFK does work on that.

Is that there – You're going to get fired, my guy, before you start everything. You know, here's my thing. Hopefully someone's listening. You know, here's my thing. Hopefully someone's listening. You know, here's the thing. Like, I think that on the RFK issue, and I'm going to go to the place. Something that disappoints me, I will say this, is that Michelle Obama spent a lot of time talking about how there wasn't healthy foods in school. And how we need to actually make sure that school lunch is better and healthier.

And everyone was like, she's like some communist dictator, like fucking coming in and like taking everyone's food. And the RFK does it. And it's like, oh, he's our hero. Like, why hasn't anyone said this for so long? And I'm just like, okay, like, you know, like that's just kind of bullshit. Like they're saying the same thing. And so, you know, I'm not sure where I was going here. But I, I think that, as Democrats,

the way that we are talking to some of these young, particularly black men, it's obvious. And I think you have seen there's been this slow chopping at like black support within the Democratic Party for years. I think this election was another hump of that. But I think if Democrats don't figure out how to talk to black men, how to talk to young black voters, you're going to see a lot of Democratic support, a lot of black folks not voting for Democrats, which is a big fear for me as Democrats. I just want to say one thing, you know, and it's not just black men, you know, everyone, every, a lot of cultures have that, you know, that mom type that's a little aggressive, that's, you know, in your face, whether it's Italian, you know, maybe it's black culture, you know, maybe it's Latino culture. You know, act, act like it.

If you want to have someone resonate, you know, and you want to take this mother figure, you know, what do young men, you know, resonate with? It's authoritarian. It's mom telling you, listen, you can't do that. You can't do this. And I'm not saying that it's got to be just that one lane. But instead of just saying, think about mom. You know, why don't you fucking act like it? Act like mom.

Look at Mayor Parker. I mean, holy shit. I don't know if you saw the most recent press conference. I mean, that was – Can you give context for people? So the – Yeah, true. Right.

So Philly, there was this major plan to, I guess, completely destroy a part of the city of Chinatown. Not completely destroy. Oh, the Sixers. Yeah. So there was this moment where the organization – it really had to do with marketing, which I don't want to go too much off on a tangent, but basically the Sixers had no marketing rights outside of the actual arena when they played. So Spectacor, which is the Flyers, they had marketing rights outside of the arena.

They have a couple of billboards. The current one in South Philly. Yeah, Xfinity Live. Right. So that's all really Spectacor is the company. But anyway, so the Sixers want their own thing. They come up with this plan to demolish city blocks, multiple city blocks in Chinatown, which is historic. And, you know, Parker, she kind of sides, I guess, with this idea.

And it's this revitalization of the community. I remember, you know, she gave this impassioned speech about how it's going to change the neighborhood. It's going to draw people back to the city. We'll take pride back in the city. And she, listen, it was a scenario where instead of, because they decided not to do it. So they're going to stay put now. And a lot of people would tuck their tail and run. She came out and was like, you know what?

I may have been promised a couple things. There may have been promised a couple things you know there may have been some uh you know some backdoor deals not nothing unsavory but like i'm going to help stimulate your economy here's what i'm going to do for your people she bought it and they flipped the script and man she took it i mean she leaned into it and it was an impassioned speech and i like her i mean as far as a democrat a democrat you know michael spear you like a democrat i do like her this this guy used to wear a god guns and infidel shirt into the bar oh man i haven't seen i haven't well i haven't seen a protest a legitimate protest since she's been elected so but i'm telling you that's the type of person you probably need somebody that's not going to tell you think

about mom act like it act like someone who gives a shit and knows right from wrong is going to try to help you i mean listen she again, you have to watch it. We don't have to watch it now, obviously, but watch her most recent press conference. I mean, it was just like, you're like, holy shit. Yeah. To go back to the pharma point, though, that you were making wrote to me, I do think that's interesting that the flip script. And I talked about that list earlier of things that used to be liberal that have been flipping. That's another example right there. I mean, you had a

Kennedy running with this, who's like a lifelong Democrat too, and they shunned him away. And it's like, you know, a big problem we have, and this exists on both sides, is that people have a lot of trouble admitting where they were wrong. That's why you've been a real heater since the election, because you're willing to do that, which is great. And people are hearing that today too, which I think is awesome. But like, you know, you got to admit that the COVID rollout, which by the way, started with Donald Trump too. This is why I really can't understand it. It was all fucked up. And like, obviously that didn't do what it was supposed to do. And the fact that people were losing their jobs, people were being kicked out of the military, people – not my – but not your body, your choice when it comes to this because fucking Pfizer is paying us.

That to me was like – looking back on it, it's obviously authoritarian. So how do you rectify that? How do you get trust back to people when it was more the left side pushing that than the right side? creating new things that actually help people. So I do, I think Operation Warp Speed was a good idea. I think the implementation is where we have the issues with trust and legitimacy of institutions. And people were forcing people to do things that I don't think they should have been. And we should have been a little bit more understanding

of how people feel about getting something jabbed in them, logically, like obviously people are gonna be skeptical of it. But I think it's- Also, why are you, I'm sorry to cut you off, but like, why were they repressing studies that could show the opposite? Why do you have the White House emailing Twitter saying, what are we doing about Alex Berenson when he's when he's publishing public studies about something that that people are going to put into their bodies?

Like, what? How do you even how do you defend that? You know, I don't think I think think for, I think, you know, a lot of the stuff that we saw where the White House was like suppressing information online, I think that's dangerous, obviously bad. But I think at this, at the same time, there was, I think, not to like excuse their behavior, but I do think when the pandemic was happening, there was this feeling of the sky is kind of falling. So many people are dying. We need to do something to help make sure that there is correct information out there. Now, I don't think that was the right way to do that, but I think they wanted to make sure that there was some correct information

going out there. I do think now we're at this place with the vaccine and kind of the rollout. And what has happened is that a lot of the institutions that were suppressing information, I think need to, a lot of the folks that are involved in that stuff, excuse me, I think need to really just admit that they were wrong.

And I think that's only the- At the very least. I think that's the only way to kind of like rectify some of this stuff. Like, and I think the American people have shown that when leaders admit they're wrong, a lot of times Americans will be like, we just wanted you to say it.

Like admit publicly that you were like wrong on this. And so I think that's what I would like to see some of the folks that were involved just being like, you know, we made some mistakes. Obviously people's lives have been ruined because of that people lost their jobs people have lost um things that they've had so i don't know if that's gonna fix it um on the pharma kind of the larger pharma point um i think that is one thing i'd like to see rfk work on i think there are extremely abusive pharmaceutical companies that are going out and ruining lives of families or in communities.

And I think it would be good if we had someone that was willing to go after that aggressively. I frankly think the only way, and I'd love to hear your perspective on this as an attorney, is I think is having actually these companies getting prosecuted is really the only way because they have so much money and they're only going to respond with force. Real quick before you get to that spear though, I think you also have to look at prosecuting people though who maybe hold power over even them. Like you have to look at prosecuting an Anthony Fauci or something because guys like this knowingly, like we can prove it lied to the american people ruined lives ruined generations of children as well for keeping them out of schools lied about the science of some of the things and i know there were things that were an emergency i lived up here when it was breaking out

it wasn't like it was fake like it was real i knew people who were dying from it it was crazy but the way that that we also treated it at the beginning was wrong like people were putting people on ventilators right away for example that's a huge mistake we we know that elon was actually one of the first guys to talk about that because he was providing the ventilators he's like wait a second you know once we learned how to deal with it more it died off and also none of us were fucking virologists back then but now everyone has some understanding of how this stuff works it's like when a virus starts it's at at its most dangerous. Then it starts killing hosts and it starts going, this doesn't necessarily apply to every virus ever, but we can point to it with this one.

You know, it starts going, wait, guys, stop killing the host. And it loosens up a little bit. So it's not to say like, oh, then it's fine to get it or whatever, but it's not the same as like, if you got it on fucking March 13th, 2020 versus getting it on fucking February 20th, 2021. And I think that, you know, it's a great point that there are people at, at, at pharma companies that should be prosecuted for, you know, trying to tamp down on studies or hide information or pay off the media, even in a clear open blackmail scheme to say, we're going to pull all our fucking funding on your advertisements that you know if if if you don't if you don't push this it's like yes that should

be investigated but we got to investigate the tip of the spear because these people are you know hand in hand with them i'll let you go well um i guess the there's no apology coming, number one. I'm not positioned to debate the medicine, science. I'm not a virologist. I can debate the decision-making process, which there were people in power. Fauci could be one of them. I mean, he obviously was a major factor in this rollout of, you know, which was junk science. Now we know it's reactionary science. You know, so you're not going to get an apology because they thought at the time they're making the most important decision of their lives for the rest of the country. And you're going to stick

to that decision. And I think the studies can come out and we're talking not just losing, you know, development, losing development, losing friends. People lost lives. I mean, let's call it what it is. Their health has changed now. But anyway, so I don't know that you're going to get the apology. to battle back big pharma. Anytime we talk about economic freedom, capitalism, what's a free market economy, I always look at, I guess, and I don't specialize in that. I don't give legal advice on this show.

I think Julie knows that. There's a disclaimer. Yeah, me too. No legal advice. But I think you'd probably start maybe antitrust law. Maybe we look at the patents and our understanding of patent law to find out who can manufacture certain medicines, who can distribute certain medicines. And I think that could be a way to break up this pack that obviously are dictating not only health but policy. And I think that, you know,

unfortunately, you get to a point where it's no longer, you know, free market economy, this is now, you know, you have a couple hegemons in the pharma industry, and it's a problem. So I think that's the way you can look at it through that lens, instead of ripping them out of their ivory towers and, you know, putting them on the block, you know, I think you have to look at it as, you know, really, who, you know, is them on the block, you know, I think you have to look at it as, you know, really who, you know, is this a monopoly? Yeah. Yeah. No, I, something I've been, I'd always kind of, I get it a little bit, but something that

confuses me with kind of sometimes when we talk about this is that, you know, Donald Trump was the person during the pandemic that was allowing these folks to kind of do some of this. And I think a lot of times like Joe Biden and like the Democrats get blamed. But I think if you like really do think about it, like Trump was empowering these people to make these decisions, but yet he's like somehow immune from any of this. Let me step in for one second just because I want to see how you respond to this. You are right. There is some oversight with, you know, like conveniently ignoring Donald Trump's messaging at the beginning of the pandemic.

I'll give the same argument, though, that you gave to defend some people, too, which is that you were responding to something unprecedented. You were also right, as I mentioned a few minutes ago, that Donald Trump was the author of Warp Speed. And actually, you know, he doesn't talk about it now, but like even up to like a year ago, he was like, you know, you gotta have your choice, but Warp Speed was, you know, he doesn't like being like that was all fucked up. That said, I think where people draw the line is that Biden wins the election in November and the whole rollout of what we know is like the vaccine era was them. So like, yes, I think it's fair and I want you to continue your point right here. But for context, I think it's fair. It's a very fair point to say like, all right, the tip of the beginning

began with Trump, which I've always thought is ironic that then the Democrats like stand, I thought they were supposed to have Trump derangement syndrome. They're standing the thing that he did. I'm like, wait, you know, it was like, it was like in every direction. It's like the Spider-Man meme, like, you know, why are we doing this? But people have a problem with how it was then implemented during Biden's presidency. Does that make sense? Yeah. You know, I, I agree with that. I think that is like, you know, Biden, you know, picked it up, picked up, you know, the book, kept flipping the pages, kept writing the story. So I do get that. You know, I think on the point you brought up about

prosecuting Anthony Fauci, I think, you know, I guess my thing, and this is something that we brushed on lightly earlier with Donald Trump and some of the prosecutions that were happening to him. One, I think on a lot of the Trump cases i think um the things that he did in new york are like definitely like illegal but you would not treat anyone that committed those crimes if they were just a normal businessman you'd be like pay a fine and just don't do it again like you would basically be like you're good like but you're not gonna i'm gonna side eye you know you know if someone like fills out some forms wrong like which is what trump essentially did and like fucked off some things like that you'd be like pay a fine it's like jaywalking yeah you'd be like yeah you know you'd be like pay a fine but

like keep it moving you wouldn't like yes kind of what happened yes um and so i think on some of the folks that in particular anthony fauci i think if a republican went and prosecuted Anthony Fauci, I think you are doing some of the kind of lawfare that a lot of Republicans didn't like that Democrats were talking about doing. You are essentially doing some of the same stuff, which I think would really not be the unity that Donald Trump would need right now to govern effectively. I don't want to hear that, but you have a point there. Yeah. You do have a point there. Yeah. You do have a point there. Yeah, I think, you know, I think I, you know, I hope Donald Trump's successful

because if Donald Trump's successful, my life is better. Bro, he's losing his job. Like, no, I think just like seriously, like if Donald Trump does well, my life is good. You know, I'm a young guy. I'm hoping to get married soon. So I got, you know, I got like life is happening. I want the economy to be good so I can buy a house one day.

So if he does well, things go well for me. But I think on there are issues that really do concern me with him. And I think that is one thing, the retribution politics that he talks about, that scares me. Cause I think once he starts doing that, we're gonna go back to this, everyone's in the grocery store. Like it was like, after I remember the 2020 election, you're like looking at people, you're like, someone's gonna like jump me today.

Cause like, it's just like this very intense, like country where everyone's at each other's neck. And I think if he goes in with this retribution, like I'm gonna get after like all the people that went after me, Dr. Fauci and all the, like I think we could really be at risk at really, I feel like a moment right now where like the country's kind of like, everyone's like, all right, it's fine.

Like people are definitely not happy about Trump winning, but things are calm, at least I feel like. And I think if we like, you know, if he does some of that retribution stuff, I think we really just I think it's dangerous. Yeah. Yeah. There's a lot of Trump supporters. I'm one of them. I'm not looking for the retribution tour. Yeah. This is his legacy year or four years. So I hope I hope his energy is is devoted to policy. As far as retribution, like I said, I'd hate to see him weaponize the feds. I'd hate to see him start knocking down the political opponents and adversaries.

It's not really – I don't think that's really what a lot of the voters want. I mean there are some that do, especially those who were targets themselves. You know, so that, listen, that's human nature. I can't knock, you know, some of these figures, you know, their lives were exposed. They were slandered, you know. But I don't know that, I don't think that's where he's focused. And just to go back to Trump, you know, when you're talking about the pandemic, the one thing that I think he, and it's sometimes, it kind of adores his benefit is he doesn't want to fail at anything.

So he tries to surround himself with people who are educated, who are the leaders in whatever lane we're talking. So if it's virology, you get a Fauci who's – he's been basically a portrait on the wall of the executive branch for however many years. So I get it. I get why he brings him to the table. But listen, as a supporter, I can't ignore the fact that, I mean, he did like walk away and slink into, you know, you mentioned memes like the Homer Simpson into the fucking bushes. But no, I don't think this will be a retribution tour.

And you're right. It is calm. And I'm like, I'm so thankful for it. Yes. So thankful for it. And you know what? This is actually like one of the biggest knocks I have on Trump is how he just can't avoid fucking putting his finger in the middle of the burn pit at all times. One thing, though, that I hope repeats this time that he did a nice job of last time when he came in is you remember like how fucking crazy he was on the campaign trail about like locker up all this shit about Hillary.

But then the moment he got in there, he was like giving her shout outs at the inauguration ball he's like no no we're not we're not going to do that like like he at the end of the day like whether you agreed with his policies that he wanted to enact or not he's like i want to worry about the policies and i hope there is a lot of that now because i said i don't want to agree with you on certain people because i might be like just a little angry at someone but you actually raise an amazing point there because it would be committing the same sins that i think were committed against him and the people around him the fucking paul manaforts of the world and shit like that paul manafort that's like that's

like five-year-olds pissing in a swimming pool there is not one person on k street on the left or right side of the aisle who did not do everything that guy did i'm not saying it's like legal but like they threw the guy they took the guy's life away for like seven years and he did nothing wrong effectively you want to clean it up clean up k street there's so many stories like that of people around him and like you now don't want to see that from the other side and you raised a good point spear that there is a human element to it where people who feel wrong are like i want my vengeance and we saw that with with Trump left office. And now we're seeing it now with some people. And hopefully, like, the cooler heads can prevail because here's the nice benefit here. Donald Trump never has to win an election again. This is where that might be able to help a little bit because he's like,

you know what, I don't need to worry about the poll numbers on whether people think I should lock up Fauci. Like, let's get more money in people's pockets they'll shut up later yeah i think he's and you know and and this is kind of the we're talking about this earlier i think that's why he is obsessed with attaining green land which i think is like uh i love that i think it's like so here's the thing if the people of greenland want to become a part of the united states then they should be part then you know they should be allowed dude they do have you seen the videos you know, they should be allowed to come to the industry. Dude, they do. Have you seen the videos? You know, I think there's like, I'll push back on it. I actually don't think they want to be. Based on what?

I think there was a Fox News video that just came out. They were going around and people were just like, no. But then I saw like, you know, the NELC guys, like Kyle, and they went and some people guys, some people were like, yeah, we want to be in Greenland. But, you know, I want to see some polling first. I want to see, I just want to see like more information about that. We're going to send you there. You come back and tell us. you know, I want to see some polling first. I want to see, I just, I just want to see like more information about that, but we're going to send you there when you come back. You know, okay. It's like a, it's a Warhawk sweat dream.

You know what I mean? You know, it's like the Cheneys are buying condos. I want to buy a country, but I think that's why he's thinking, you know, he's thinking about his legacy in the sense that like, you know, the presidents that like add an extra state, like those presidents get remembered. They don't get forgotten. Yes, they do. It's like the presidents that add an extra state, the ones that do like really like large policies like FDR, like the New Deal, like, like, you know, those are the ones that get remembered. So part of me is like, if he's thinking about his legacy, maybe he just doesn't want four years of people just protesting every day. Because that is like the worst legacy.

It might, here's the thing though. It might get renamed Trumpland. That would be- You'll have to say that for the rest of your life. I don't want to say that. You'll say California, New York and Trumpland. It'll be an AKA. No, I think stuff like that's kind of funny.

Like again, I don't even know the geopolitical, like how that would even work. But you know, like that's not the priority. But if you do that and there's good resources to be had, that's cool. Didn't Obama like make a joke about that in his roast of Trump like 12 years ago where he's like, what would that look?

Oh no, it was the White House. The House is the White House. So I will say on the Greenland point, something that concerns me about it, you know, the kind of the Peter Thiel folks, some of the tech folks that are in Trump's circle, they want Greenland for, I would argue, nefarious reasons. And what are those reasons?

And it's resource extraction. Because if the United States has Greenland, these companies can take the resources that are there for themselves. And the Elon Musk, the Peter Thiel, Palantir folks, there's a lot of money to be had there. Just like, honestly speaking, frankly. What do tech guys want with Greenland? They want the resources.

What resources? Like rare earth minerals? Yeah, rare earth minerals that are there. There's been studies coming out that they're minerals that could be extracted. And I think that is like, it's basically the gold rush happening, but instead it's not like, you know, Ma and Pa found a piece of gold and now they can send

so-and-so to college and buy a new house on the frontier. It's like Palantir just got a couple more millions that they can give to shareholders. So that's a part of it that I think concerns me. I don't think – if we go and take Greenland, I don't think the American people are going to be getting more money in their pockets. I think their taxes will go up because you're going to need to pay for money to actually extract the resources. And then I think the shareholders at Palantir and shareholders at Tesla are going to be able to buy another beach house because Elon and Peter Thiel made some money. So that's the stuff that concerns me about Greenland if it were to happen. Spiro, what do you think of – like you have a guy like Elon who has – he's not the richest guy in the world. Like the Saudi Arabians are the richest guys in the world.

Let's be clear. But outside of like Saudi Arabia and Vladimir Putin, he's the richest guy in the world. But he has this like Vox Populi, Vox Dei, for the people type vibe to him, which you haven't necessarily gotten from say some of the backroom billionaires from both parties that have existed for a long time. What do you think though of the broification, if you will, of a lot of billionaires now, whether it be Elon or Mark Andreessen or a guy who's not quite a billionaire like Vivek, but he's pretty close, you know, who are now like there for the everyone and with Donald Trump, when Donald Trump to his credit, even though he's a billionaire, put that aside for a second. I don't even want to pay attention to that for a second. He's run as like the everyman's guy. Yeah.

Well, George Soros did it before it was cool. Way before it was cool. I was waiting for his name. It took an hour and 41 minutes before we got Soros. I mean, that motherfucker, I mean, he got a medal of freedom. He didn't even show up. But I don't know. Like, before, I had no opinion about Elon Musk.

You asked me, I guess, 10 years ago. I have no opinion. Five years ago, probably no opinion. And then when he comes into this political theater, honestly, the only thing I thought was great. He's giving away money for votes. I mean – but if you're talking about the broification, it's a great term because billionaires are – I'm proud of that one. That was good. That's a good one, yeah.

The billionaires are all of a sudden the coolest fucking dudes in the room. I don't know. Listen, he, he's clearly interested in leaving a mark, I think, on public policy as much as he is on, I think, science and tech. He's the Mount Rushmore already, which is pretty shocking to say for somebody that, you know, you know, is still alive and we're talking about it. So I think he now wants to leave his mark on public policy not so different from what trump ended up you know doing and he you know decides at the you know tender age of whatever it was 67 68. i forget when he declared but it was 2015 and he's born in

46 so he was like turning 69. okay so that's pretty good wait for that right on brand so yeah i mean you know i i think that's what he's doing now is leaving his mark on public policy. And I think it worked for the Trump campaign. I mean, it really pulled a group of voters that I think you mentioned earlier. I don't know if we were talking beforehand or this was during the show, but you have this shift, this youth shift towards the Republican side of the political spectrum, and Musk is a huge reason why. Yeah, man. I think that that – if you're looking at the autopsy of this election, one thing we haven't mentioned directly today even though he's kind of come up is the alienization of the left against Elon Musk, which has been a slow slog over the past, I'd say, six, seven years, was the greatest miscalculation ever because he's the cool guy. He's the Tony Stark. Young men especially look up to him, not to say he's right about everything, but he's like a real guy.

You know, he's got that Asperger's, so he says whatever the fuck he wants. And, you know, he had like the most viral media moment in modern history, smoking weed like a bro on Joe Rogan. And it's like he's cool. And he's really smart. And his science and tech, like, innovations are fucking incredible. So when you see this, it's like I see like Rachel Maddow come out six days before the election and say, you know, if Trump loses, we got to cancel all Elon's government contract. Like this, this is not the way. So I'll say this on Elon Musk. There are things that I really like about him and there are things that I really, really don't like about him.

I think on the science technology front, I think the work that he's doing is great um i think uh especially if you're a liberal that's concerned about climate change um there's no way that you cannot be impressed with the work that he's done with electric cars there's undeniably you cannot say that that isn't impressive in some a way i also think like his kind of like ethos around being multi-planetary is super cool yes i think that's how i want the smartest people in the country to be thinking about the stuff I want to be thinking about. I want to be thinking about how to innovate, how to make sure America stays on top of science and technology, thinking about cool things like going to Mars and investing and thinking in that way I think is awesome. of Twitter as a political tool in the sense that if you own a platform like that and you have a really, really strong political opinion, I think it's dangerous. And I think that Democrats have done this too.

You know, I'm not going to – Of course. It would be – yeah, it would be – Spirit biting and stuff. You know, BS for me to sit here and say that, you know, like, you know, the I bet everyone already saw this already. But the Zuckerberg interview with Rogan, we talked about White House officials calling Facebook, yelling at folks like, you know, Democrats have definitely done the same thing. is what concerns me about Elon. Because when you have that much money and you're putting your finger on the scale in politics, you have more influence than any of us here who are just talking. You can actually move votes. You can change countries and the way that they move in

Germany. I'm already seeing him get involved in the election there in England. And what's crazy about his involvement in Europe is they don't like people spending all that money on elections, usually. So when someone like him comes in, and they're like, oh, I'm going to drop all this money. It's like, kind of, they're kind of like, we've actually like, what are we like, what are we going to do? So that's just what that concerns about Elon. I think, in terms of his role with the Democratic Party, it's really funny. There are like great pictures of him and Obama hanging out. They got along. Yeah, they were great friends. And Obama was like, this is a young man who's like an immigrant, and we're gonna like uplift him. And you know, I think there are a couple different things that

stood out to me in his story of leaving the Democratic Party. I think the first one that stood out to me is, I think personally, he has had, he's politically very much not, he has politically complicated views about transgender rights. That is something that I've seen. I think one of his family members, I think, is trans. Yeah, one of his sons. Yeah yeah and so i think that has caused a lot of uh i think politically he's out of step with the democratic party there but i also think um there were some moments during the biden administration that disappointed me um like there was i think it was an ai conference or something and even invite the guy oh yeah it was no it was worse than that it was like it was like an electric vehicles conference yeah and it's like you know what

i understand that you are out of step with him on a civil rights issue a social issue but he's an innovator in that field you gotta invite him also a low polling social issue i might have one of the reasons they lost the election yeah people don't care people are like all right you want to be trans go be trans well i don't need to hear about it you know what i mean and and that's another messaging point because it's like are you going to hold something like that against the guy who also like he had feelings about one of his kids that he felt like was put in a bad position to make a poor decision when they're young that they might regret later like as i'm not a father but like i totally feel him on that

and if you're gonna like if you're gonna alienate someone for stupid reasons like that you're gonna get what you deserve but you listen, listen, you do make a really good point about using the platform as a political tool, which also to your point has been done on the other side, far more. We were just talking a few minutes ago about retribution in, in, you know, trying to jail people and whatever, and having to try to be the bigger man and not do that. No pun intended, right? I've thought that since the beginning with Elon, because I'm like, I love that you took a platform back that was experiencing insane censorship to try to stop that.

Don't then use it to become some of the things that you hated. And I hear his frustration. He's a human being. He's been pushed by these people to where he is. They literally pushed him away, said you're not allowed here and say you got to cancel all his contracts on national TV. So I get it. But like, if you want free speech to win, this is a crazy thing to say, but I said this

at the very beginning when he first bought it in 2022. If you want free speech to win and that is your actual goal and you are a powerful person who's trying to enact that goal you may need to consider that in the process of trying to make that win for the whole you need to sacrifice your own which is a dangerous thing to say but i still feel that way two years later because it's like i get why you got involved maybe some of it was for the good but like if this keeps going like this how could this i don't know how it plays out but that does make me nervous yeah i mean i i'm not as i mean you rely upon these different platforms it's part of your work right this is something you do every day

you do it as well um you know more in that political um. But yeah, I don't, I don't really, I'm not a huge social media guy. You know, I look at it pretty black and white. You have these, these monsters, all private, you know, and they're deciding what to put out there, what not to put out there. They have their own rules and regulations and policies. I mean, it's, I definitely get annoyed when they pick and choose when they're going to apply it. I get annoyed when the government makes phone calls like we talked about, you know, why are you not censoring this? That's right. So, you know, I get it. I just, I'm not, I guess, as concerned about, you know about his use of it. At the end of the day, it's his toy.

If you don't want to play with him, then leave. There's not great alternatives out there. It brings up TikTok. I know there's these alternative platforms. I can't remember. My wife just rattled them all off, like read something as well. A note that was my cut my six-year-old cousin downloading me that yeah so so you know i know that i think that i think that these companies if they pick and choose how to apply the rules and regulations they're going to devour themselves i think governments are going to help

them you know set the set the match or light the match so but as far as what musk is going to do with it listen it's his toy if he wants to kind of turn the tables then fuck it let him do it rude to me how would you seeing as we've seen some of the censorship or louder speech i'll even say fall on different shoes now over the past decade especially how would you solve this would you just let it i mean first amendment's supposed to be public square speech wins and that's kind of that's what i think but would you make it would you put into legislation that the government cannot get involved like quite literally like force them by a piece of paper to be like, you cannot do this. Yeah, I think that is something that I think is, I've, I've been kind of all over the place on this as I like learn more, but I agree. I think that's where I would be on it. I think,

though, what we have to see then is social media companies have to figure out how are we actually going to like, handle like like some of the like violent and bad shit that's happening on our app and then it's like how do we define bad shit that's like you know and that's and that's a whole debate um in the sense um there's some reports coming out that he may have his own office space at the white house um of course i don't know well he is running doge i mean well so i think the interesting thing about doge is uh doge is um like they're calling it a government department but it's more just like kind of like a blue ribbon commission it's almost like the manhattan project um uh so manhattan project is basically how uh we ended up

creating oh yeah uh the nuke obviously uh but you know for you to have a government agency you need to have uh congress and Senate ultimately approve it, that legislation. And then, so it's not a real government agency. And so when- That's kind of the point though, no? Yeah, I guess. And so the interesting thing even about Doge is that it's really an idea that, and some people may not like this, it's completely stolen from Bill Clinton. When Bill Clinton was elected, and folks will not like this but look it up uh when bill clinton was elected him and al gore started a commission for government efficiency i believe it was nicknamed

npr which is funny uh and they started this commission to basically uh research government efficiency and figure out how can we cut cost um How can we make the government run more efficient? And their biggest kind of takeaway was they basically made the government like have internet. That was like their whole kind of investigation. Yeah, national partnership for reinventing government. Yeah, so it's like, you know, it's a completely, yeah, it's an idea that is good.

And so I think it makes sense. My issue is it being run by someone like Elon Musk that has his own interests and motives. At the end of the day, per US law, as a CEO of a company, his number one goal is maximizing shareholder value of Tesla shareholders. That is his priority. That's what he has to focus on. Because we're a capitalist country, and maximizing shareholder value is how we believe as a capitalist country, we can innovate for the best. Here's Devil's Advocate.

So yeah, go ahead. They've announced that they want to do, he and Vivek, they want to do a weekly podcast where they go through everything they did there for transparency purposes. Does that change your opinion a little bit? No, I think that's fine. I think as I mentioned before, I think what would happen on this weekly podcast, if I could predict,

they would be like, we found this like $300,000 program, $100 million program where someone was like investigating or researching something that seems kind of dumb. Like, you know, he'll post these things onto it. Like someone was researching lizards and like something really obscure that makes no sense. And they'll be like, we cut that program.

And at the end of the day, that is not a real cut that actually impacts the government budget because the biggest parts of the government's budget are defense and social security. You just brought it back. We got off this. Let's come back to it now. Yeah, and so I think like, if you really are going to like cut costs, you have to cut something in those areas. And those are two areas where a lot of

people in Congress don't want to touch because you cut some defense funding. You got a lot of Republican congressmen who are getting calls from Lockheed Martin and Palantir and all those guys saying, you're cutting my line item. I've had that line item for years. You cut Social Security, you got Democrats and Republicans getting calls from their constituents being like, I'm reading on the news that my Social Security check is going to get cut. So those are tough. Those are tough things. And I don't really think that they're going to be able to make the kind of impact they want to make. Because, you know, I don't know if they're focused in the right place. I think they're both smart guys.

They obviously have been doing this kind of stuff. I think Elon in the private space is good at going in and cutting costs and making companies run efficient. You know, I'll even say when he went to Twitter and he was like, I'm going to fire everyone and it's going to work. I was like, you're a bullshitter, dude. It's not going to work. And it's, I can open the app. It's still working.

And he cut a lot of people. So I do think he like does know how to do this in companies, but I just don't think it's the same way. I don't think it translates well to the government ultimately. Yeah, again, we agree. I mean I don't think they're going to be effective at really cutting the most bloated areas of the budget. I don't think they have the resources. I don't think that's the intended purpose. I think it's going to be more of – you mentioned comedy earlier and politics.

I think it's going to have that flavor. I'm not – it's not like I'm going to entertain – it's going to be more of – you mentioned comedy earlier in politics. I think it's going to have that flavor. It's not like I'm going to entertain – it's going to entertain me. It will be funny. Yeah, it will be funny. I know there's people on the left who probably are going to be crying about some of these cuts and it could be racism. It could be this ignorance of climate change. However they want to couch it. African-American studies, minor.

Yeah, yeah. But they're not going to make a dent, I think, in the bloated areas. And the other problem that we have is, again, I always wonder, you have this at the forefront. It's a talking point right now. What are they going to bolster? And are we going to know about it? And how is it going to apply to the everyday American? So I don't – again, I don't know.

This administration has made a lot of promises. But I'm just – I'm almost skeptical and wonder is there some other motive to bolster different programs that maybe the public in general isn't a fan of or they're not fans of and then use this as a platform to say, well, look over here, you know, what we're doing and all of these different cuts we're making. So, yeah. And the poison pill, which is what I'll call it of, well, it boils down to the largest percentage of government spending comes down to the two things, defense and social security. On the one hand with social security, I remember when I was on wall street, guy had a quote, and I don't see how he could possibly be wrong, and it's an incentives problem. He goes, if you want to guarantee you're going to lose your next election, if you are in any kind of constituency that's not literally 80% one way or the other, cut Social Security. You're gone.

So all these fucking people in DC are incentivized not to do that. So it's like, well, that's out. And also I understand because so many people have paid into that tax their whole life and suddenly you're going to be like, oh, you've been paying social security tax for 45 years. Fuck you. It's gone. Yeah, but there was a time where you were paying for your eventual retirement. You're not doing that anymore. So the money that you're setting aside is being used now.

So it's not like you're saving. It's not – this isn't a piggy bank. Yeah, yeah, yeah. aside is being used now. So it's not like you're saving. This isn't a piggy bank. So if you don't have enough people paying into it and too many people taking out, which is the whole baby boomer issue, it's a failed system. So instead of, again, head on, let's think of an alternative instead of just avoiding the conversation. And it brings up your point, which is, again, who's running the show? Is it the people that are about to benefit from Social Security or their friends who are going to benefit from it? So they need to think of a

creative solution that's not ignoring the problem. Yeah. Likely, if you are under the age of 40 or you're listening to this podcast, you actually likely won't have Social Security. Us in this room, we probably won't because the program has basically been funded in a way that makes it defunct um and they haven't been able to figure out a funding stream uh that actually brings in revenue so it exists for like millennials gen z um so i think that's like a real problem but i don't see either side talking about that because they're focused on like now which is like how do we like make the boomers happy? Which is like annoying. But yeah, I think that's,

I agree with your point on the social security funding problem. It's completely us just really running around, or running away from the problem on kind of the doge point. Something that's interesting, I found this out from a friend who works in the science space and completely random.

The way that they figured out how Ozempic was this changing drug that could lower, figure out weight loss is they figured out that lizards reproduce a certain type of blood in their stomach. And they took that information and used it to make Ozempic. And obviously they had to, at one point, fund a government study for researching lizards and their digestive system. And I bet if a lot of us saw that, we'd be like, why the fuck is the government spending money on lizards?

Why are we doing this? This podcast is sponsored by Ozempic. Go get it today and lose a hundred pounds and look like a gaunt face. And I think like Ozempic is like, you know, I think Ozempic is like questionable drug for moral reasons. I'm just going to caveat that. I'm not like you're saying go home and put the jab in your ass.

Like, I'm going to be honest. Like, that's not my position. But I think, you know, innovation like that is like important. And I think it's like good for us to be doing things like that. So I would caution people when you do see – when you start to see those like Doge screenshots of them being like they're cutting research here. Like it may seem like that research program is stupid in the moment. But like it could have long-term effects. Like that's how we find things in this country. That's how we innovate.

That's why we're one of the best countries in the world is because we have the resources to like play with some of that money and be like, we're just going to spend a research project here. And like I do get, though, people don't want to see their money being wasted because it frustrates you when you can barely afford groceries or you're having a tough time saving up to buy a house or saving to go on vacation. The government is spending millions of dollars researching something that appears really stupid. But, you know, these are trade-offs it's also like it's very hard to root out dead weight and what i mean by that is when you look at government jobs let's use the dmv as an example that's everyone's favorite example you have people who can get the cushy job of like making decent money, nothing crazy, but they make a living. They know they're going to pay their bills, you know, and they got this job that then doesn't incentivize them to work hard or be nice because there's nowhere to go. It's just kind of, they stay in the same place.

So when you're talking about cutting things, yes, you can maybe cut fine programs. Certainly they're like a total waste of money or the government shouldn't be involved in this, leave it to the private sector. But then I don't know how you're going to attack the problems head on of like incentives because the government unfortunately because you're dealing with taxpayer money and i understand this you can't suddenly become like a corporate system and say well if you do a good job you can rise and get a 50 get a 50 000 promotion from you know associate to vp they can't do that i mean the guys who get highest up in in like some of the major agencies make no fucking money jim diorio like lists off his fucking check every time like down to the cent he's in here guy rose up high in the fbi but there's

no money with it then that's also why a lot of people then go to the private sector you know and those types of parts of it but cutting the dead weight within government programs that are necessary like i don't want to admit it but like like the DMV obviously is necessary. It's tough because like you can't change incentives. Yeah, it's kind of, it's really interesting. There was this, I used to work on Capitol Hill for context. So I follow a lot of this stuff closely. There was, it's very ridiculous and dumb, but these like group of like progressive, like staffers, like put out this thing, like, we only want to work 32 hours a week. And it was just like kind of like the like dumbest crap I've ever seen.

But I think I say this because there is this like kind of thing about the government is like no one wants government staffers to be paid more. But the thing is, if you want the best talent, it's like you got to pay for it. But it's like it's kind of this like tough thing. It's like people don't want to see we're giving uh staffers and congressmen a raise uh but it's like you know if you want better talent you gotta pay for it the private sector that's what they do that's why you have these companies that are able to innovate and do this cool stuff because they're paying people well that's also the point of the second boogeyman here you were talking about we just talked about social security but then you talk about defense spending,

which is this cycle that then creates these endless wars because we keep paying what? These private companies billions and trillions of dollars to do this shit that incentivizes them to want these wars to happen. They then funnel that money back like a laundromat, pun intended, to then pay the candidates preferred that they want across the board that are gonna support this type of spending

so they continue to be able to report their good quarterly earnings. And it's like that's how you end up with these wars that politicians suddenly are incentivized not to want to stop. The people that want to stop these wars are the hardest left politicians and the libertarian right. All the other people on the left and right like yeah we have to support the good people of ukraine listen i'm not saying ukraine's not in in a sympathetic situation but there's also like some logic here where you could end this war you could stop all this killing and you could stop these fucking companies from making money every day and it's like you know not to be cynical but you think back to eisenhower's speech

when he was leaving office that That was fucking 60 years ago. And what's changed? Yeah, I mean these companies that you're talking about, I think that there's huge domestic implications by stripping them bare or I guess investigating to extreme lengths or following the money. They're employing tens of thousands of people. I think that they have some of the most brilliant engineers in the world. You know, I think the innovation doesn't stop at, you know, missiles or munition. I think that there's a lot of things that, you know, they can do to contribute to the science space and obviously military.

I think the problem is, again, it's not just the defense industry. It's pharmaceutical industry, insurance industry, money in politics. It just doesn't mix. It doesn't – generally speaking, it doesn't benefit anyone domestically other than the top, top. That's right. And then abroad, it could be, you know, devastating, you know, like what you see in Ukraine. Although that's, in my opinion, instigated by something different. But, you know, I don't look at the defense industry as a boogeyman.

I don't, I don't look at the defense industry as a boogeyman. I don't, I think that the application, scientific application is, is enormous. I don't, you know, if Musk was in defense, you know, obviously he would be in a totally different boat. But I think there's a lot of opportunity. Do we need to spend as much as we do? Probably not. But do I want to strip it down? No, no, I'm not looking to do that. So we have two big parts of the budget that are going to be hard to actually, I'm going to make up a word here, but officiatize. So how do you, and that's, I hate to be cynical about stuff, but it's like, then how do you even fix it? We just keep going more and more in debt. And that like, at some point that's got to explode. Yeah. That's something that like, then how do you even fix it? We just keep going more and more in debt. And like at some point that's got to explode.

Yeah, that's something that like, I'll be completely honest. That's something that I am like, actually right now trying to read more about. I just can't. It just seems like the debt issue we have in our country is just like a disaster that like, we're just gonna have to deal with when we're older and our kids. It's like it just seems like a very depressing slope writing down unless we cut one of those two things. So it's like or we, you know, and this is what I have. You know, this is something that Bernie Sanders and folks on the left side of things say that I really agree with is if we're actually going to fix some of these

issues, we need to maybe raise taxes on the billionaire class and folks in our country that are generating a lot of wealth and are clearly not using that wealth to innovate, which is like what they're supposedly claiming to do is they're hoarding that wealth. They're buying properties in New York City where no one lives, buying properties in cities and just like leaving it there so they have an investment vehicle. And maybe we should be taxing them to pay off some of that debt. I think that's- There's a lot of foreign billionaires doing that, by the way.

Very true. And so that's something that I think needs to be talked about more is actually having billionaires pay their fair share. That's something that Bernie Sanders has talked about for a while that I really have always thought is great. It was funny, Biden brought it up in his last speech that no one watched. And it was like, yeah, well, maybe you should have been talking about this for, you know, maybe if you could talk, maybe you should have. Also like two days after he gives a medal to George fucking Soros.

Yeah. But that's new. He didn't give it to him. Yeah. He gave it to his son. You're right. And that's something I think that is tough about Democrats on this point is, you know,

you can sit here and talk about how billionaires and money should be in politics, but when you're going out and you're giving medals to George Soros, you have corporations donating so much money to your super PACs. The message about how money shouldn't be in politics, it seems super hypocritical. And that's why I liked one guy's running for DNC chair

phase. He talks about this a lot and how we actually as Democrats need to be a party that's not actually beholden to corporate interests because people will see it. And it's just hypocritical right now. We're like, oh, no billionaires. But it's like, you guys have had George Soros donating and bankrolling all these da races across the country doing all this stuff um and now you're saying no billionaires because you lost the election it's hypocritical yeah but even at the even at like the defense side of things like you talk about that spear not wanting to cut some of that and i hear you it's like i lean both ways on this too because i want to be ready if we ever had to and then i hope we just never have to but it's like another point is that a lot of these guys talking about incentive

structures we've set it up now where they can rise up through the ranks and do like a nice job at three-letter agency x and then go get hired in the private sector for fucking 40 times the price and now be rich as fuck but but be read in and security in as a contractor where basically they keep their desk. Like if I'm at Langley, I leave the CIA, huge air quotes there. I go to Lockheed Martin. I'm now a hot shot there along with another fucking thousand CIA guys. And we get to do our jobs that taxpayers pay for but they don't realize they're paying individuals because it's all being paid to a company who distributes that by salary and then we get to impact national security by still working for our same company in this case like

the ci you see how it's like this circle and then that being like the biggest industry that pays down government it then extends to every other industry where people there's a back and forth sliding door we see it in tech we see it in ph, we see it in pharma, we see it in everything. So like, how do you get rid of that? I'll let you go. Far away. Yeah. You know, I guess my, my one thought with something I think about this sometimes with that is maybe I think it's like actually paying government folks more because if you actually raise their salaries, you don't have the incentive to leave because the big reason why

folks leave is because they want to get paid more because they want the paycheck. But it's by raising these, you know, if you're in the CIA, you're in the FBI, it's like actually giving them a wage that's like good enough and matches their their progression throughout the agency so they don't have to go to like microsoft or whatever other company or palantir so they can get the payday and then you have that revolving door and then it just all seems corrupt but it's like if you pay government staffers more they won't have to leave but then no one wants to pay the government staffers more because that just feel it feels wrong um so it's like we're in this circle of just like not fixing the problem. That's my solution.

I mean you kind of are hyper-focusing on a really – I guess it's like a morally icky type of situation. And I'm not going to sit here and tell you it's – look the other way. But again, I'm a pretty big proponent of, you know, American exceptionalism. And I think that the defense industry, you know, did prop us up, you know, for many, many years. And, you know, I think the one thing that we've reached, we were talking about billionaires, you know, we were such a competitive country, and it was everything we did was rooted in competition. And I think that once we made it, so to speak, we kind of looked around, you know, did a Travolta, you know, what's going on here? You know, it's just me.

And that's, again, why when I look at pharma and maybe even the defense industry, you know, when you get to a point where there's no longer competition, this is not – I'm telling you, this is not socialist ideology. This is true capitalist people that believe in – there's a point where it is too big. It is too massive. Rockefeller. There's a lack of competition. So I think that that should be a theme with the Trump presidency. I think that we should kind of shine a light on that sort of economic issue. And I think you'll end up getting what you want, which is you'll have new companies emerge.

You'll have government contracts spread out. And maybe you don't have two people grabbing yours and whispering sweet nothings, you'll have maybe 10, 15. You're still going to have that money in politics problem. But I think that one way you can tackle this is by kind of redistributing the opportunity. Do you think Trump can end these wars? Which? The two big ones, Israel and Ukraine.

You know, I think, no. The Israel, the war in the Middle East, it's a religious war. I think that if Trump thinks that he can accomplish this in four years, then what the left says about his ego is true. We're going to make a deal. It's just not there. I mean, I think that he should, you know, make an effort at kind of ending some of the violence, ending some of the, you know, human rights issues. It's hard to, you know, it's hard to say, though say that he's going to end it. I think the Russia, Ukraine, yeah, I think that he can end it effectively. You know, I hate to say it. It's

not a popular opinion, but, you know, I think it's with a land grab, Russia gets a piece of what they're looking for. And I think that's the way you end it. And I know a lot of people are going to say, well, it's not going to stop there. It's not going to stop there. And maybe they're looking for yeah and i think that's the way you end it and i know a lot of people are going to say well it's not going to stop there it's not going to stop there and maybe they're right but if you want to stop it now i think that there has to be concession it's territorial and you know um you know it goes back to that point it's you know every every line that you see drawn is it's been it's been bumped it's been twisted it's been shrunk it's been enlarged so you know i think that's the way you do it but it's not a popular opinion because then putin wins yeah it's been bumped, it's been twisted, it's been shrunk, it's been enlarged. So, you know, I think that's the way you do it. But it's not a popular opinion, because then Putin wins. Yeah, it's not

a popular opinion. The thing that at least gives me a little bit of hope with any concessions, vis-a-vis Russia and all that is that the difference between like Russia, if you view Putin is really bad, and I do think he's a bad guy but like the difference between them and like nazi germany is nazi germany was becoming the biggest economy in the world with the greatest innovation right and so giving them land was essentially like you know giving fucking michael jordan given kobe bryan and michael jordan and lebron james a chance to play together russia has an economy the size of italy so there's room to work with there but i understand why people have like a bad taste of like we don't want to give them anything you've got to be a little bit realistic though because frankly he did take crimea in a bullet

list takeover fucking 10 years ago so like if we could say like all right you're gonna keep that you get a piece of the donbass. And then, all right, Ukraine can't join NATO, but there's something to set up a disincentive for Putin to ever be able to do that again. You have to look at that deal, no? So on the Ukraine front, I definitely do think at this point, it does, you have to talk about a deal at some level. I think it makes sense for the lives lost in Ukraine. I think also at this point, the American people, they're feeling about the war and they are paying for it, some of it. So I think that conversation has to be acknowledged.

Got money for wars but can't feed the poor. Exactly. That man right there. Love that man. And so I think it has to be acknowledged. I do want to say on this front, Putin, when the war started, said it'd be over in a week. Now, I want people to imagine a world where basically you had Donald Trump in office saying, we're going to take Canada. And he sends – and he's like, it's going to be done in a week.

We're going to do it in a week. It's going to take Canada. And he sends, and he's like, it's going to be done in a week. We're going to do it in a week. It's going to be fantastic. And he sends American troops to Ottawa. And you basically have a situation where you have thousands of American boys dying in the Ottawa woods, just getting like destroyed constantly. You know, inflation hikes up to like 18%. And this is basically what's happening to Russia right now. You wouldn't be going, oh, like America's winning the war. You'd be like, they're getting crushed.

So I do think that Russia is losing the war. And I think it's tough for people to, people don't want to say it, but like, if he said it was over in a week and still going, losing so many soldiers that they got to bring in North Korean soldiers that are getting sent to Ukraine. And you give these guys a phone and they literally just like, wait, there's porn on the phone. And they're just like, I don't want to be involved. I want to give me the phone back. So like I think that shows how desperate they are.

So I think for me, I would keep giving Ukraine some defensive weapons, but I'd say we have to figure out a timeline to ending. And I first think the first thing I think needs to happen is there needs to be communication between Zelensky and Putin. I think that's how you start the conversation about a deal, because what is bad is when no one talks to each other, which is what's happening right now. No one's saying anything. And that is making it worse and that's prolonging it. And so I think first above anything, I hope Trump can start some type of dialogue.

People just have to start talking. A hundred percent. And like, I understand like Zelensky hates Putin and Putin hates Zelensky and whatever. It's hard to get people in a room the benefit here is though you know to me like Zelensky doesn't have much of a choice because he's a client state he wouldn't exist without us and the West so like you walk in there you say my guy you're gonna go in that room he can't he can sit there and be like no we're not guess the fuck you are because guess what you're gonna get no money if you don't and someone's got to stand up to do that if it's gonna be i don't care i don't give a fuck who it is i don't care if it's trump i don't care if it's biden on his last day somebody do it you know what i mean so you know i don't think anyone wants to see endless wars i don't think i i think there's been a lot of good established thoughts

today too by the way coming from your end as well like you know as far as like just some common sense like let's take a chill pill here and use this as an opportunity like i don't know about you but this conversation has given me like a lot of hope in or at least some like in in the future of our politics because it's just been so i mean politics is so annoying over the last decade it's just rah rah rah rah, rah, rah, rah. We got to calm the conversation. So I appreciate you guys having a lot of agreement today, by the way. It's kind of cool. This is fun.

Right? Common sense. That's what it is. We might have to do this again. I got to take the training wheels off Spear next time. I can tell he's holding back. We got to have some more. Yeah, yeah.

I'd love to get into it. We had Epstein. That was on the table and yeah yeah we'll do that again and also because i didn't do it this time because it was your first time you're popping your cherry with mike's beer but like we'll get some whiskey flowing next time it's gonna love that people never saw episode 39 or 77 or 128 now roll now roll michelle on ellen We're 127. We're 128. Now roll Michelle on Ellen. Jesus Christ. You guys might kill me.

You would have killed me. And with that, everyone else, you know what it is. Give it a thought. Get back to me. Thank you guys for watching the episode. Before you leave, please be sure to hit that subscribe button and smash that like button on the video. It's a huge help. And also, if you're over on Instagram,

be sure to follow the show at Julian Dory podcast, or also on my personal page at Julian D. Dory. Both links are in the description below. Finally, if you'd like to catch up on our latest episodes, use the Julian Dory podcast playlist link in the description below. Thank you.