The David Pakman Show - Republicans get nightmare poll as Trump goes completely off the rails

Episode Date: September 29, 2026

On the Show: -- Dmitri Mehlhorn, an attorney, Democratic strategist, and co-founder of the Atoll Society, joins us to discuss the possibility of Donald Trump running for a third term and the risks of artificial intelligence -- A new poll shows Florida Democratic gubernatorial candidate David Jolly leading Republican Byron Donalds 48% to 46% -- House Speaker Mike Johnson claims local community opposition to artificial intelligence data centers stems from a Chinese psyop -- Donald Trump repeatedly closes his eyes and struggles to stay awake during an Oval Office announcement for a $15 billion Iowa steel plant -- House Speaker Mike Johnson states that Republicans will maintain their current legislative approach if they keep their majority -- Donald Trump calls Canada one of the worst countries in the world and again promises $5,000 tariff checks to every adult citizen -- Former White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt claims Democrats want to abolish private property and says Trump will start campaigning -- On the Bonus Show: The Supreme Court chooses its next cases, OpenAI scraps its new model release over safety concerns, Tennessee is set to execute a woman for the first time in 200 years, and much more... 💳 PDS Debt: Get your free assessment & find the best option for you at https://pdsdebt.com/pakman ✉️ ProtonMail: Sign up today for FREE at https://proton.me/pakman 💻 Try Aura free for 14 days at https://aura.com/pakman 🐶 Sundays for Dogs: Get 30% OFF with code PAKMAN at https://sundaysfordogs.com/pakman 💻 Sponsored by Private Internet Access: 83% OFF + 4 months free at https://www.piavpn.com/Pakman 🔬 Freedom From Religion Foundation: Text DAVID to 511511 or go to https://ffrf.us/david 😺 Smalls cat food: Use code PAKMAN for 60% off & free shipping at https://smalls.com -- Become a Member: https://davidpakman.com/membership -- Subscribe to our (FREE) Substack newsletter: https://davidpakman.substack.com -- Get David's Book: https://bit.ly/m/attention -- Send David a text: [phone] -- TDPS Subreddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/thedavidpakmanshow -- David on Bluesky: https://davidpakman.com/bluesky -- David on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/davidpakmanshow (00:00) Start (01:20) New Florida poll shows Byron Donalds trailing (08:24) Mike Johnson blames data center backlash on China (20:39) Donald Trump dozes off during Oval Office event (29:26) Mike Johnson promises same agenda if Republicans win (38:54) Dmitri Mehlhorn Interview (59:49) Donald Trump gives rambling Oval Office comments (1:10:00) Karoline Leavitt outlines midterm campaign strategy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Coming up today, Donald Trump struggles to keep his eyes open again in the Oval Office, but this time the White House cuts away. And somehow reporters still aren't asking the very obvious questions about what's going on here. We then get an absolutely bizarre series of answers, including attacks on Canada, promising $5,000 checks again, and warning that Democrats are going to open up the water. I don't know what that means. Now, meanwhile, while Republicans got a stunning new poll out of Florida, where Donald Trump's handpicked candidate for governor is trailing and the Senate race is now down to one point. Democrats weren't supposed to have shots at either of those races. We then get Speaker of the House Mike Johnson blaming

data center opposition on a Chinese sciop. And finally, the very same speaker of the House has asked, what are Republicans going to do if you do get another two years of control of the house. And his answer is we will do exactly what we have been doing. Make that a campaign ad. All of that and more on today's show. Please remember to review my new book pay attention on Amazon. It really helps. Something very strange and delightful is happening in the state of Florida and Florida. It's actually happening in both. This is a state that Donald Trump won so easily in 2024. We were starting to believe Florida was gone. That dude is gone. But all of a sudden, we have new polling and it is titillating. I know some people are feeling a tingle run down their leg right now.

Democrats are within striking distance or leading in both of the major statewide races. These were supposed to be no chance races for Democrats. And all of a sudden, it is not looking so good. We have a brand new poll from change research. We have Donald Trump's handpicked candidate for governor. And it's not just that he's struggling. He is losing. Now, big, big disclaimer. This is one poll commissioned by a Democratic aligned group. Other polls say the Republican is ahead. But we're going to look at this carefully. If the election for Florida governor were held today, Who would you vote for? The Democrat, David Jolly, former Republican, by the way, but the Democrat, David Jolly, 48.

Donald Trump's endorsie, Byron Donald's 46. Now, 5% aren't sure. 1% wouldn't vote, but then they wouldn't be included. So, okay, anyway. But as of right now, the Democratic ticket of Jolly and Graham are leading by two in a race that was supposed to be a runaway for Byron Donalds. Now, I don't believe we can look at this and go. Democrats are definitely winning the gubernatorial race in Florida.

You can absolutely say this would have seemed ridiculous not long ago, which is Florida is back in play. Florida was supposedly gone from Democrats. It's just the changing demographics and the evolving politics. It's out of play for Democrats. And all of a sudden, it is very much in play. Now, remember who Byron Donald's is. This is like a big Trump guy, big, just like a super big Trump guy. Trump endorsed him for governor early.

Byron Donald's has been one of Donald Trump's most reliable defenders. No matter what he does, Byron Donald's will defend everything. And look at what's going on. Byron Donald's was forced to remove multiple references to Trump from his campaign website, including Trump's endorsement, a picture with Trump. a section called enact the Trump agenda. Now, when his campaign was asked, why did you remove all that stuff about Trump? They said, oh, we just want to play up and emphasize Florida issues.

We're not distancing from Trump. We love Trump. But it's very interesting timing because a lot of candidates are doing the exact same thing. And now we have Trump's approval in this very same Florida poll at only 46%. favorability at only 43%. Donald's himself 38% favorability. And now we see that Donald's is losing here. Now then we go to another race, which is the Senate race. This one again, there was no chance for Democrat Angie Nixon.

It's a lost cause. She can't possibly do it. This poll has it. Angie Nixon 47. Republican Ashley Moody 48. Now again, it's only one point. So even if this were the most accurate poll, it's still within the margin of error. And this is a Democratic leaning poll.

We know that stuff. But stop and appreciate what we're talking about for a second. Republicans have won every statewide election in Florida since 2018. Ron DeSang Dementie. Nasty guy. Dustbin of history, okay? He won reelection by 19 in 2022. Trump won Florida by 13 in 2024.

And now we have a poll showing Dems within a point of a Senate seat and two points ahead in the governor's race. Now, we, I don't want to mislead people. Okay. I want to be real. We have conflicting evidence. There's a recent Stetson poll, which has Donald's up in the gubernatorial, 51 to 39. That is a big lead in a completely different poll for the Republican. There's another recent St. Pete poll survey, which had it tied 44, 43, essentially.

So we're not cherry picking this poll, but the point is bigger picture, it is a race that Republicans should not even need to worry about. And it should be totally safe. Florida's put away. Democrats are spending money elsewhere. Republicans are spending money elsewhere. And instead, you've got a real affordability problem in Florida. Byron Donald's is campaigning and he's got these questions he can't really answer.

What about insurance costs? What about Trump's unpopularity in this competitive political environment and Latino voters, which have shifted more, more, more towards Republicans and Trump over the last few years seemingly shifting back to Democrats? So this is now a real issue for the Republican Party. And Donald Trump isn't also a fascinating issue for Byron Donald's. Donald's built his profile as a Trump ally. Donald's wouldn't even be as well known if he hadn't sucked up to Trump to a degree that

Donald Trump started bringing him to rallies and talking about how great he is. So Trump helped make this guy, the Republican nominee. But Trump's numbers are increasingly trash in Florida. And so the association with Trump, which seems completely unavoidable, becomes a bigger and bigger problem for Biden, Byron Donald's. I think that's really the big story here. Now, I am not here to go, Democrats have Florida. We don't know that. What I can tell you is that six weeks before the election, we have polling where Trump's guy is fighting for his life in a state Trump won by double digits. And Florida was not supposed to be competitive. Permanently red was the story that we were being

told. And now they're fighting for it. And even as I say before, even if Republican, Republicans ultimately win, you know, some of these races. If Paxton ultimately wins Texas, but it's not looking good for him, but if Paxton ultimately wins Texas, if Donald's ultimately wins Florida, if Ashley Moody ultimately wins Florida, the fact that it's this close and Republicans have to spend resources defending it is still a good thing. But we're thinking bigger than that. We're thinking of actually winning. Now, there's a guy who is having a real problem with the fact that things aren't going so well for Republicans in the House and they are likely to lose. He happens to be the Speaker of the House. Speaker of the House, Republican Mike Johnson,

had one of those moments where you really see him realize in real time how badly Donald Trump has effed his party and has boxed Republicans in on the issue of data centers. Republicans have a real problem. Data centers are very unpopular. And they're very unpopular in all sorts of different communities around the country. It's not just Democrats that are worried about data centers. Republicans are too. It's not just urban voters that are worried about data data centers. Dator. Suburban voters and rural voters are also worried about data centers. And people are worried about them because they're worried about their electricity bills. They're worried about water consumption and water quality. They're worried about noise. They're worried about mass.

industrial buildings moving into their communities. And they're also worried about whether they as taxpayers are going to be subsidizing the infrastructure to build these data centers. They're worried about whether they as utility rate payers are going to be subsidizing the utilities for some of these ultra-rich technology companies. And Donald Trump's response has basically been, these people are stupid. You're wrong. We need the data centers. If you don't want to be poor, If you don't want America to be poor, you will support the data centers. And it's not working. So now Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson goes on Fox News and he seems to have figured out why so many Americans disagree with Trump.

It's a sciop by China. I know. It doesn't make any sense. But here he is. Explaining is not probably the right term. but okay, he's trying to explain. I mean, do you think that this with regards to China? I mean, I've had several tech executives and lawmakers to be clear

say that the information against data centers, that pushback against data centers, that is coming from China. Yes. They believe that. The Democrats are seizing on this, though. They're making this, their messaging. They've been very clear they're going to take this into the midterms. How do you fight that?

This is what Democrats do. Every election cycle, they find something to, you know, glove on to and say that this is doom and gloom. Everyone will die if we don't win. Don't buy it. It is a Chinese sci-up. I really believe that. It's not a conspiracy theory.

I think- I really believe that the reason Democrats and Republicans alike for completely valid justifications are against data centers is because China has tricked them with a sci-op. And that is not a conspiracy theory, he says. There's a little problem. This isn't Democrats manufacturing an issue. You look at polling and you find massive opposition to data centers in people's own communities. And this includes Republicans.

This includes Trump voters. This includes people in red areas. And I think Republican politicians know this. Republicans in Texas have completely turned against data center projects to the point that Greg Abbott, the governor, is now restricting new projects. He used to celebrate them. And now he has realized that this isn't something Republicans want. And so Greg Abbott is against it.

That's Republicans. This isn't Democrats. Republicans in Congress have come out in favor of legislation that is meant to protect the people who are paying the utility costs, the ratepayers, from any infrastructure costs being wrapped into rates associated with data centers. So what is Mike Johnson saying? Greg Abbott fell for a Chinese sciop that is about targeting Democrats? Republican members of Congress have fallen for the Chinese sci op. Their own voters fell for the Chinese sigh up, give me a break. And this connects directly to what I've been telling you about Donald Trump's approach about AI. Trump is all in. And we played a couple clips of Trump talking about AI,

which he doesn't understand over the last week or so. And he says these are massive economic engines. These are big industries, as he says. They're investments. It's enormous buildings and big, big girthy checks are being written and massive amounts of electricity. And more importantly, we're going to beat China with all of this stuff. And Trump has also made the same suggestion. China wants to trick Americans into opposing data centers at our own expense. But what Trump seems to be, I don't know, I never know with Trump if it's unable or unwilling to grapple with is that most people against data centers are not saying stop AI. They're asking completely reasonable questions. Hey, a super profitable tech company wants this to make money. Who's going to pay for building out the

electricity infrastructure? What will happen to my utility bill? How much water is this thing going to use? How much? How loud is it going to be? Am I going to hear a whining, droning hum for the rest of my life after you build this thing? How many permanent jobs will be built? I know that there will be temporary construction jobs to build it, but how many permanent jobs will remain? And if you're If some of the richest corporations in human history will make billions from these facilities, why should we subsidize them? That's not a Chinese sci-op. And listen, I am not someone that supports any of these authoritarian propaganda regimes.

Does, do Iran, North Korea, Russia, and China have beliefs they would love to push on Americans in order to either destabilize our democracy or just damage the country. Of course they do. Of course they do. And I am not a supporter of any of these authoritarian regimes. But the concerns that Republicans and Democrats alike have expressed about data centers have nothing to do with that. And it is not because of a Chinese side of its citizens going, hey, what is going to happen

in my community? And this is putting Republicans in a tough position where some Republicans have realized our own voters hate this crap. And they're saying, we are going to protect your electricity bill and your water and we'll make sure big tech pays its own way. But you've got Trump standing here going, we need more data centers everywhere, beat China. If you don't want them, you don't understand what's required for us to prosper. And you want the United States to be poor. And so now you've got Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, a big Trump suck up. But he also recognizes we're all up for re-election in November and we're about to get crushed, how do I reconcile these things? And his answer is

you've been manipulated by China. Your electric bill goes up. It's China. You're concerned about a data center. China has tricked you. China got to you somehow. Now, Mike Johnson can blame Democrats or China or a sciop. But there's no escaping the basic political problem of this, which is Trump has gone all in on data centers. And a bunch of Republicans aren't following him. They don't want it. And it is at their own peril to now go. All whole, uh, all bets are off. No holds barred with AI. No holds barred with data centers. Just allow absolutely anything. And anything short of that is you falling for Chinese propaganda. Very dangerous play in advance of midterms. They are likely to get destroyed in. If you're in debt before you decide another month of minimum

payments is just the price of getting by. Take 30 seconds and find out what your options are. Our sponsor PDS debt gives people a free personalized assessment to show them a path forward instead of guessing. PDS debt helps people with unsecured debt like credit cards, personal loans, collections and medical bills. They'll review what you owe. They'll look at your budget, your priorities, and match you with a customized solution that is designed to reduce what you owe. Instead of bouncing between creditors and due dates, what they can do is combine all of your unsecured debts into one lower monthly payment. There will be a clear timeline in how you get out of that debt. No minimum credit score required. And savings can start the day you complete

the free 30 second assessment. Lots of people in my audience use PDS debt. And we looked at the numbers for people coming just from my show. It turns out the average. David Pakman show viewer who uses PDS debt saves an average of $24,994. PDS debt is the top rated in the industry. They've got thousands of five star reviews and an A plus rating from the Better Business Bureau. Get your free 30 second personalized assessment today at PDSdebt.com slash Pacman. The link is in the description. Most people think of email as a utility, but your inbox can be a source of noise, tracking,

data collection. Proton Mail takes a different approach. Our sponsor, Proton Mail, will give you the tools to keep your inbox organized, but privacy is number one. Incoming mail can automatically be sorted into folders. Newsletters can be unsubscribed from in a single click. Trackers are blocked so senders can't follow what you do after opening a message. The bigger difference is the business model.

Proton Mail doesn't scan your inbox to build an ad profile and it's zero access encryption means even Proton can't read your messages. Their servers are based in Switzerland. There are really strong data protection laws there. And Proton Mail's easy switch just makes it easy to switch over no matter whether you use Gmail, Outlook or some other provider. Stop giving big tech companies free access to your data in email. Proton Mail offers a real alternative with over a hundred million users.

users get started for free today at Proton.m e slash Pacman. The link is in the description. Every few weeks, there's another headline about a massive data breach, your bank hospital, a retailer you shopped with five years ago, and chances are that your passwords and personal information have already been leaked in a data breach like this or that they will be. This is why I use ORA, one of our sponsors. Orra is all in one digital security. to help you stop identity theft before it happens. They will continuously monitor the dark web, alert you if your email, passwords, social security number have been exposed. They don't stop there. If someone tries to use that information to open a credit card or access your accounts, you will

get a real-time fraud alert. And ORA also includes powerful antivirus protection of password manager 24-7 US-based support if something ever does go wrong. And if the worst does happen, ORA still has you covered with up to $5 million in identity theft insurance. I don't want to leave myself or my family vulnerable, which is why I use ORA. You can try it free for 14 days at ORA.com slash Pacman. 14 days is more than enough time to let ORA show you if your personal info is already out there and what to do about it. The link is in the description.

I hope to see you Saturday, October 3rd at 6 p.m. at Springfield Symphony Hall in Springfield, Massachusetts. I'm doing a joint book event with our friend Jessica Tarlov. It is free and open to the public. Capacity is limited. But my understanding is that these rarely sell out. It's a very big venue. Jessica and I will have about an hour conversation. And then we will both sign books. You can get more info at David Pakman.com. slash attention. Let us know at info at David Pakman.com if you are showing up. No need to. You don't need to RSVP. We're just curious whether whether people in the show audience are going to be there. Looking forward to seeing a lot of you on Saturday. Donald Trump is once again struggling to keep his eyes open in the middle of the day. And this time, the White House decided to cut away.

This is absolutely fascinating. Now, I want to come back to another question in a moment. And that question is, why is not a single reporter asking Trump about this? Watch what happens here. Trump is struggling to stay awake on camera. We've got two feeds here. On the right is the press pool feed. That nasty press pool showing Trump sleeping. The White House feed is on the left.

And what you will notice is that when it becomes inevitable or undeniable that Trump is falling asleep, the White House cuts to a wide shot where Trump is almost relegated to the background and you see more of the people around Trump. The White House trying to hide that Trump is sleeping. Take a look. And then they meet up together with some of the best entrepreneurs in the world on planet Earth, just on my right right here from SR, who are many businesses around the world. Cut. That leads to a giant investment to re-industrialize America, a win for American national security and a massive economic win in vote of confidence in the fabulous state of Iowa. So the White House is trying to protect Trump. They see that he is falling asleep. They see he

can't stay awake as energy secretary Chris Wright is speaking. Trump's eyes close and the head starts dropping and he is fighting, fighting for dear life to stay awake. And they cut away. Now, of course, We cannot make a medical diagnosis from this video, but we can tell you what we see. And it is the oldest president ever who talked about how Joe Biden couldn't stay awake, unable to stay awake yet again in the middle of the afternoon. His schedule has been reduced to a pathetic 12 to 5. Biden could only do 10 to 4. Well, you're only doing 5 hours.

And he still can't stay awake during that. Just days ago, when Chinese President Xi Jinping, was at the White House? Trump's eyelids getting heavy. They are getting heavier and heavier. And the head is drooping, drooping lower and lower to the point where you can. Oh, sorry, I almost put myself to sleep there. It's happening just about every day. And we've seen many versions of this. Here is another, another moment as you take a deep breath in. Trump unable to stay awake once again. American ore carried on American railroads to an American steel plant powered by American energy built and operated by an incredibly hardworking and talented American workforce.

Mr. President, this plant will use the latest technology and will compete head to head with any steel plant in the world on size, quality, and on cost. How are we supposed to look at this and go, there's no story here? Now, before I get to all of the ways in which the legacy and corporate media have completely failed us on this last year, the Washington Post did an analysis of a video from another event and they found Trump spent about 20 minutes in this sort of liminal state between being awake and being asleep. And the White House immediately said, nope, he was just listening.

So here is what I don't understand. And I genuinely don't understand this. Where is the coverage of this? I cannot remember seeing this treated as a significant story on the nightly network news. I don't remember a single White House reporter standing up and going, sir, you appeared to fall asleep again just now. And you did it yesterday. And this is happening a lot.

Are you having trouble staying awake right now? Sir, are you tired right now? How much sleep did you get last night? Are you too tired to do the job? Imagine these questions actually being asked. Now, we know how it worked during the Biden administration. If Biden looked in the wrong direction and waved to someone that was off camera, it was, oh, my God, he's waving to imaginary people.

25th Amendment right now. And it was every moment that Biden even seemed tired, although Biden wasn't sleeping in public, became this bigger discussion with headlines about age and panels on the ability to do his job. Now, the scrutiny was legitimate at the top level. The president of the United States should be scrutinized. If a president is unable to stay awake during public events, reporters should ask about it. But that's what's happening with Donald Trump. Now, the answer might be mundane.

Imagine that Trump goes, you know, he could turn it into, if Trump were smart, he could turn it into something positive. You know, Caitlin, if it was Caitlin Collins who asked the question, I am working so damn hard for the American people. I am working so hard that I am running myself into the ground. But my commitment to you and to the American people is that I will do what it takes to stay awake until the job is done or something like that. Or he might go, oh, yeah, no, I sleep during events now. I mean, that would be interesting too. I don't know.

We don't really know what the explanation is. And that is why journalists are supposed to ask. You just were asleep, sir. What happened? What did your energy secretary just say? And instead we get these videos every single day, it seems. It's probably two to three times a week. We all see them.

Everybody argues about him. He's resting his eyes. It's active listening, active, active listening. listening very actively and we don't get any real questions. Now, there's another element here. I've seen people say that the White House truly believes that this isn't what is happening, that when they say he's actively listening or whatever, that that's actually what the White House believes. If that was really what the White House believed, I don't know that they would be watching and immediately cut to a wide shot when truly,

Trump falls asleep. That doesn't really make sense. It does seem as though the behavior and the control of the cameras is meant to cover up what is going on here. But we go back to opacity and transparency. We have an administration that has been so hostile to news organizations. And they've restricted access to reporters and they're fighting right now in court where they said, no, CNNMS now in Politico are banned. And a judge said, you got to let them in. And then they didn't it. It's this completely insane opaque situation. And they claim that they are so transparent. They're so transparent about Trump's health and they're so transparent about what they're doing and all of this stuff. So when we see total opacity about Trump's actual state of health and then everybody notices

he's sleeping multiple times a week with the head dropping and the whole thing. And we are told, don't believe your eyes. He is simply listening. We end up with this sort of speculation about what's going on. Now, the solution to speculation, I don't believe is more speculation. Ideally, it would be journalism. Ask him. Ask the White House physician.

Ask, you know, it used to be Caroline Levitt. Sir, you appear to be asleep. You just were sleeping. Are you unusually fatigued? Are you on a medication, sir, that would make you drowsy? Should Americans be concerned about the fact that you're falling asleep in public two to three times a week? These are not outrageous questions. And he spent years calling him sleepy Joe.

Now, let's go back to why maybe they aren't doing that. Why isn't it happening? Is it that reporters anticipate they would be thrown out and banned from the Oval Office if they did that? Well, you know what? If that's the case, I would be saying, do it. That would be a phenomenal news story. I finally said to the president, you looked like you were just sleeping and then they banned

me. That's a big story. Why? I would, if I were in there, I would welcome that. because of the attention that it would bring. But they don't want to do it or they're not doing it or they're not thinking of doing it. I don't know. But we have to start asking the reporters, why won't you ask about that?

Because I is a voter. I is an American. I want to hear about it. And I want to hear what Donald Trump has to say. Mike, uh, my, Maga Mike Johnson just accidentally gave Democrats what I think is the easiest campaign out of the entire midterms. He said, uh, Republicans, if they get. another two years to control the house would do the exact same thing they've been doing for the

last two years. It is a remarkable answer. It is not here's what we will do differently or here are the lessons that we've learned. His pitch is keep us in power and we will do more of the exact same thing that we have been doing. Whoa, but that's not going so well, Mike. Let me let him explain it to you. To which I say, no, thanks, buddy.

But what we would do in the next two years is exactly what we have been doing already, and that is putting the conditions in place for a strong America can't. We restored not just American energy dominance and peace through strength, but a vibrant economy. The conditions are there for this to take off. And that's why the stock market indexes are high. That's why job numbers exceed expectations. The Atlantic Fed says 5.1% economic growth expected in the third quarter. That doesn't happen by happenstance.

It's because we did what we say we're going to do and put in progress. growth, free market principles in legislation and in federal policy. We have to continue that. We got so much more to do and we can make things so much better. That is the pitch. Look around America right now and ask yourself, do you want two more years of the same stuff? What we are seeing in every single poll is Americans going. I'm really concerned about affordability. Housing is so expensive. Health care is so expensive. I'm getting hammered. by utility bills. Trump's tariffs are making everything more expensive and most of that is passed on to consumers.

Republicans control the presidency. They control the House. They control the Senate. And Maga Mike Johnson goes, give us two more years and we'll basically just do the exact same thing we've been doing. Put that in a commercial. I think there's an even more revealing moment though because Maga Mike Johnson starts talking about Medicaid.

Now, remember that Republicans spent months and months insisting, we're not cutting Medicaid. We're getting rid of waste. We're getting rid of fraud and abuse. By the way, all the fraud they've gotten rid of fraud is a crime. Not a single person's been charged yet. Program integrity must be preserved. Listen to Mike Johnson explain what they did and ask yourselves the following question. Does anyone lie as calmly as Maga Mike Johnson?

too i mean all of the by where we're at 40 trillion right we've done program integrity work already in the big beautiful bill we looked at medicaid uh fraud waste and abuse in in particular you had young able-bodied men on medicate they were not intended to be there we had illegal aliens millions of illegal aliens taking taxpayer funds they were not eligible to have them so we did program integrity measures took those people off the system you know what it is strengthened medicate it it provided it for the people that's intended though we have to do more that work across I love how he says, we took those people off the system because they spent months a year trying to hide that that's what's going on. Now, the Congressional Budget Office projects the Republican

reconciliation law will reduce federal Medicaid spending by about $1.2 trillion between this year in 2035 and the CBO projects Medicaid enrollment will be lower by 13 million people in 2035 because of the law. Now, most of the reduction in the spending is just from kicking people off the program. Now, there is an important qualification. About 1.5 million of those people have records reflecting duplicate enrollment and they would retain eligibility where they live. They may have moved. That that is a legitimate thing.

Nobody is arguing, oh, we want Medicaid knowingly paying benefits to people who aren't really eligible. Of course we don't want that. Nobody, if a program has an eligibility system, the people who are eligible are the ones who should get the benefits. But screwing around with what it takes to prove eligibility that is not in the spirit of the social welfare program is a really screwed up way. to claim that you are cutting waste, fraud, and abuse. Now, the CBO separately estimates that the laws Medicaid provisions will increase the number

of people without health insurance by seven and a half million over the next eight years. You don't get to just wave your hands and go, we removed waste, we dealt with fraud. We strengthen Medicaid. Nothing to see here, except there will be millions fewer people who are projected to be enrolled. and then millions more projected to be uninsured. And these are the consequences of the policy. Now, then he goes, we have to do more of that work, more. And so when you put these two clips together, what are Republicans going to do if they keep

the house? They will do exactly what we've been doing already. What does it mean for Medicaid? More or the same. You're going to do stuff that will lead to even fewer people qualifying for enrollment artificially. That's quite a campaign platform. More of the same, more tariffs, more cuts in Medicaid, more people losing coverage, more tax policy who benefits, which benefits the disproportionately rich in corporations. And we are going to just shift resources up and make it harder for people to get a couple hundred bucks in food stamp benefits.

Medicaid benefits. And what's remarkable is that Mike Johnson isn't stupid. He knows that they are on a rapidly sinking ship here and en route to these midterms. But he's not pretending there's going to be any course correction. He's saying here is what we're going to do and it's basically going to be the same. So my suggestion is when the people in power tell you we will keep doing with the power, what we've been doing with the power, just believe them, believe them. And ask yourselves, am I better off now than I was two years ago? And this is one of those things where I don't even really feel the need to make the case.

Go go and ask yourselves. Look at your bills. Look at everything. And decide for yourselves whether another two years like the last two are what you want. You've seen what they've done. If you like it, go and vote for them. They are promising you more of exactly the same. And it is remarkable that they haven't figured out any way to get out of this doom spiral

of being able to have their words take. verbatim and translate it into campaign ads. It is remarkable stuff. What you feed your dog every day should be something you can feel good about, not a mystery hidden behind a long ingredient list. Sundays for dogs makes human grade dog food with all natural meat, along with nutrient-rich ingredients like kale, ginger, and blueberries. It's gently air-dried, vet formulated, no fillers, synthetic.

additives, no chemicals. Sundays also makes meal time easy. No fridge, freezer, prep, or mess. You just scoop and serve. You get the quality of a home-cooked meal with the convenience of the kibble and you're not sacrificing quality. A friend of mine recently started feeding their dog Sundays. He loves it. Their dog now comes running when it's time to eat. And my friend just feels a lot better about food that is straightforward and nutritionally complete and just made with ingredients that he recognizes. Make the switch to Sundays. Go to Sundays for dogs slash Pacman and get 30% off your first order or use code Pacman at checkout. The link is in the description. Most VPNs just don't give you the tools you need. If you care how your VPN connection works,

our sponsor private internet access gives you control. Private internet access lets you do things like choose between wire guard and open VPN, customize your DNS, use port forwarding. You can also adjust encryption and connection settings instead of being locked into the defaults. So it's perfect for people who want a VPN that you can custom configure. If you're not tech savvy, no problem. Private internet access is perfect for you too because by default, you can turn it on in one click and stay protected. No special knowledge required.

just works out of the box. The biggest reason I trust private internet access with my data is their apps are open source and they have a no log policy that's been tested in court many times where they simply don't have user activity logs to provide because they don't keep them. They're one of the few VPNs that can say that. One account works on unlimited devices, phone, laptop, tablet, router. You don't pay for separate accounts. My audience gets 83% of the off. So it's 203 a month plus four extra months for free. Go to PIA vpn.com slash Pacman. The link is in the description. The 22nd Amendment seems very clear to a lot of people. Donald Trump is currently serving his second term. That is it. It doesn't matter what he says about 2028, whether he's

joking or for real or tries to put his name on the ballot, he simply cannot be president again. But what about? And that is where we bring in today's guest, Dmitri Melhorn, who's an attorney, Democratic strategist and co-founder of the Atoll Society. His debut novel Archipelago of Light is out October 6th. Dmitri, great to talk to you today. Great to talk to you, David. So let's just kind of start with what some focus in. on as the technicalities. Is there a difference between serving more than two terms, being elected more than two terms,

and being on the ballot, no matter how many times you've served and regardless of the results? Are these mere kind of pedantic semantic distinctions or like, is there something to some of these questions? Those questions are really important because one of the things we've learned in the Trump era is that laws don't enforce themselves. And so the question is which laws can be enforced. And Trump can absolutely be on the ballot for the nomination of the Republican Party. The Republican Party could choose to nominate him. And once they've nominated him, it becomes very difficult for anyone to force him off the ballot or for him to be somehow invalidated. And so then you've got a

realistic chance that he could become a president yet again. So let's kind of talk through it. The end point seems to be no person shall be elected to the office of the president more than twice. That's the endpoint. But step one would be Trump goes to the Republican Party and he says, I am filing to run for reelection. And then what happens? Well, it is possible that there would be various forms of legal challenges. But the United States Supreme Court has in a couple of decisions, basically made it impossible for any state to individually block what a national party wants. And if Trump goes to the Republican Party and says, whatever he says, make something up, you know, my first term didn't count because of the Russia hoax or whatever.

And he says to the Republican Party, make me your nominee, I think there's almost no chance the Republican Party would say anything other than yes, sir. So then he's the nominee. I actually think the Republican Party would not just go along with it. But for the purposes of this discussion, let's imagine that they would because I'm concerned with legally what would happen. The Republican Party says, okay, you're one of the people. Maybe there's a primary. Maybe there isn't.

But sort of like he starts to seek reelection again. What then happens if he were to win that election in the sense that wouldn't you get to a constitutional roadblock where it's, okay, like a computer subroutine. Has this person been president twice? Yes, they have. Okay, well, then they simply can't be president again. Right. So the theory would be he waits until 2028. Early 2028, he says, I've realized that Vance and Rubio just aren't up to it for the country I need to run. The legal machinery for someone to challenge him is very slow. and no one person, in my view, would be able to defeat him and get more, can't more electors in the primary.

Then you imagine a situation in June or July where President Trump is the Republican Party nominee. That would mean that the Supreme Court would need to declare that the next president is the Democrat. I mean, that would be how it work. And my observation of this Supreme Court is there would no way. they would do that. They would say it's a political question. They would say it's up to the voters. I also believe that the Overton window moves very quickly. And so you'd have like the New York Times journalists saying, well, it's up to the voters to enforce the 22nd Amendment. So I don't see anyone who could enforce it at that point. You know, even in this scenario, as wacky as this

Supreme Court is with three justices on it that were nominated by Trump, I do think the Supreme Court in this scenario. Maybe I'm naive. I do think that they would say, no, he's ineligible. That's it. Now, you're sort of going for one of the things that I think you're right about is the Supreme Court has opted over the last couple of years to make really narrow rulings when what would be sort of logical or expected would be a broader ruling.

So like, for example, on this birthright citizenship thing, they, they issued a narrow ruling that said as conceived and presented. the president can't just do this, but here's a sort of a whole bunch of other doors that kind of remain open. So on the part that you're talking about where the Supreme Court would declare the Democrat the winner, well, I don't know that they would use that that wording, but I do seem to think and tell me if I'm naive that they would say Trump is ineligible in that scenario. So this Supreme Court has actually sometimes they rule narrowly.

they knew rule very broadly, like in Trump versus United States in 2024, they chose a very broad interpretation to essentially put the president above the law. In the immunity decision. Correct. Yeah. And the thing about this is if Trump is the becomes the Republican Party's nominee in June or July, what you'd have to imagine is that five current justices would issue a ruling that he cannot be president. And then how would that be enforced? What would that mean? Would it mean that the electors don't get sent to Congress from red states? What does it actually mean?

And de facto, what it would mean is that whoever was the Democrat would become the president. And I believe the Supreme Court, this Supreme Court, at least five justices would say, hey, that's not our job. Our job is not to decide, you know, even looking back at the language as far as Bush v. Gore, This no Supreme Court is going to step in late in the game and decide a presidential election like that. I mean, theoretically, they could, but that's, they would use the political question doctrine to say it's not our job.

It's the job of, in this case, the voters. And if five of them opt out of taking that, taking a position, effectively, they do not prevent it, so to speak. Correct. You have said that you think it's sort of 50-50. that Trump seeks the nomination. Do you believe he's made up his mind as to whether that something is going to do? Because if the answer is yes, I keep hearing him say, I'm not going to be doing it again. They tell me, you know, it would be fun, but they tell me I can't do it. So it's sort of like,

I'm curious what you think he now believes about it. Well, look, does Trump make up his mind? I mean, you of all people realize that whatever's going on in there is not particularly decisive. Yeah. I believe that he is getting very used to, he's a malignant narcissist. Yes. And he is very used to being able to use the United States government to protect himself and anybody around him from any criminal laws and also to make a massive amount of money for himself and all the people around him.

And if he leaves office, he loses all of that. And so do all of the people around him. If they commit crimes in February of 29 and they're not in. an office, they could be held legally accountable. And I believe that if he is, if he is able to keep going and if he's alive, he'll want to keep that. And the people around him will want to keep that. Do you think Trump's approval will have any impact on whether he attempts this? Because it seems that it would be tougher to pull it off if your approval's 29 and they get trounced in the midterms. Like, will the political environment influence whether he tries this, do you

think? Well, you have written and talked about how he lives in this bubble created by Natalie Harp and others. Yeah. And the question will be, does he believe that he can win? Right now, his upside down rating in public approval polls is about minus 22. And as a reminder, when he left office before after January 6th, his approval was about minus 32. So way worse than today. And so if the economy stabilizes or starts going up and the Republicans rally against what they perceive as the Democratic Party's overreach in Congress. You could easily imagine a world where he's like, heck with it. Everybody says I can't win, but I know I can't. And that's been his modus operandi for a long time. What do you, I want to bring up three names. J.D. Vance, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz. Ted Cruz,

reportedly is already sort of quietly heightened. I don't know if hiring is the right word, but quietly building a potential campaign staff to hire to run in 2028. You then have JD Vanson, Marco Rubio, who are likely going to be involved in some kind of reality show like competition for Trump's endorsement heading into 2028. It seems to me that Ted Cruz certainly would argue Trump is ineligible. And J.D. Vance and Marco Rubio, I don't know. But what do you think Vance and Rubio would do if Trump were to say, hey, I'm running. Look, I think that both Vance and Rubio both view themselves as the successors to Donald Trump. Yeah.

They also know that Donald Trump is much older than they are. And so staying in his good graces until he shuffles off this mortal coil is a far better shot for them to become the president than trying to challenge him and risk him flattening them, which is what he did to cruise. In other words, if you're Vance and you want to be the successor and Trump says I'm running in 28, rather than fighting Trump, maybe successfully or maybe not, you say to yourself, listen, if Trump does this and wins and he's the president, my time will come eventually. If he does this and doesn't win and a Democrat is the president, then I try in 2032.

too, like no matter what, I'm better off not fighting Trump on this. Yeah. And David, I've asked you this question. Is it easier now or is it easier later for J.D. Vance to say Trump should not serve a third term? I would argue it's much easier now. And yet when he's been directly asked the question, he says no comment. And so you believe that that is sort of the sign that he would take the path of least resistance and let others sort of determine the direction this goes? Yeah. I mean, the, To my mind, the only plausible challenger, because everybody in the Republican Party has made this calculation, and Ted Cruz, by the way, explicitly made it in 2016, where he said people who challenge Trump become roadkill, and I don't want to be roadkill.

The only possible real challenger to Trump would be somebody like a Tucker Carlson from outside the ecosystem. But even then, I find it hard to imagine the Republican Party, which has become stripped of anyone who is even faintly, disloyal, find it hard to imagine that any individual human being could get more Republican delegates for the nomination than Trump could himself. What do you think about this scenario where Trump is elected VP and then the president resigns? Like Trump was actually asked about it and he said, you know, it's cute, but I don't, I don't really like that.

What about that as a path? Well, the problem with that path, well, look, it's fine. But, you know, like they're not going to, they're not going to be super careful about following the letter of the law. The problem is that that doesn't really help him legally because the Constitution, I think is the 12th Amendment, says that you cannot be vice president if you're not eligible to be president. Right. And so if you're going to, if you're going to be pushing the boundaries anyway, you know, his quote unquote legal argument would be that somehow the first term doesn't count for some kind of reason. you know, and that it's not what the Constitution meant or whatever. And as long as you're in a world where they're making that kind of an argument, why not just do it directly? Right.

You got dual citizenship for your family in St. Kitts. And you've also expressed some concerns about the future of AI. Is your desire for sort of like an exit plan? Is it more based on the constitutional presidency stuff that we've been talking about until now? Is it based on AI, some combination? Well, it's definitely in part based on AI, but it's also a belief that the fight for enlightenment values is now a global fight. The central battleground for the last 10 years was the United States. But once the United States chose in 2024 to put Trump in office, especially after the Supreme Court's decision that gave him immunity for criminal acts, it seemed to me that the broader fight was a global one. And that being outside the U.S., there's plenty of examples throughout.

history of being an activist globally and also being an activist for your home country while protecting, you know, protecting your family by moving abroad. A lot of people will hear this and they'll say, hey, you know, sounds great for Dimitri, but like I don't have the resources or the possibility of, you know, obtaining citizenship or buying citizenship essentially as you can do in some other place. Should everybody have some exit plan? and what sort of exit plan is even available to people whose resources are more limited? Yeah. Well, look, I'm not going to go on long because I know this is a short show,

but my dad was a war refugee. Before he turned two, his house was bombed out of existence. He didn't get to the United States until more than 10 years later, and he had no language, no father, no money. And so the bar that I have as a Jew, looking back at the history of the is that you actually, if you need to flee, you actually fewer, you have more resources than you think. So what I would encourage everybody to do is at least make sure your passport is updated, at least be sure you're thinking about it. So that things do go bad that you're ready to do the best you can. About the AI part of it, you've talked about how simply stopping AI development also brings its whole other share of risks and possible pitfalls.

Can you talk about that? Like, I think there's been a lot said about the potential risks of developing AI. What are the potential risks of not developing it? Well, I mean, the most, you've talked about this as well. The most obvious one is that if the United States stops, then China is unlikely to stop. And there is a chance that this super powerful technology is actually the people, who have the most of it are people who are really authoritarian, like really bad. I would much rather have, you know, Sundar Pichai of Microsoft than Xi Jinping of China sort of controlling where this

goes. Which is sort of the Trump argument, right? We can't slow down because of China. Yes, it is. But as you've also said, there's a difference between stopping and choosing the way that it goes, right? So the argument to completely stop, I think is a very, very bad idea. And one of the the reasons also, and this is independent of the other thing, is that AI is the solution to a lot of the problems that AI created, as well as a solution to many other problems that pre-existed AI. For example, current AI is sufficiently powerful that it could be used to develop bio-weapons, and current AI is also sufficiently powerful that it could be used to detect and mitigate such bio-weapons. So you've got a race between good and bad applications of AI. And that actually

defines how society and industry consortiums and government should be pushing AI is to make it more available to a broader group of people and to make it very focused on preventing bad things and not just AI created bad things, other bad things like cancer. Last week I was speaking briefly with former President Bill Clinton and he has really been following the AI issue and it seems to be a great personal interest to him. He says, said he believes there should be a kill switch. And when I asked him who controls the switch, he said, well, that's kind of the complicated part. Is that a realistic idea or is it not really comporting with the way that this sort of technology works and develops? The idea of a kill switch.

The latter. It's not realistic. There's this great thinker on the subject, a friend of mine named Mustafa Suleiman, who's read his book. Yeah. And he wrote a book. It's called The Coming Wave. but the initial title for it was containment is not an option. This particular tool, there is no kill switch. If you're talking about a tool that can escape boundaries, and like with the hugging face incident, agents can go out there and commit crimes. The idea of pulling a kill switch is it's a little bit like

you stop the stuff you can control, which makes you less well equipped to deal with those stuff you can't control. So it's one, look, AI is very dangerous and it's moving very quickly. And both of those are things we cannot stop. What we can do is we can try to use this tool for good. It's like people who talk about fire. Fire can do very good things and fire can do very, very bad things. But once you discover fire, you can't undiscover it. We are going to be following that extremely closely. We've been speaking with Dmitri Melhorn, who in addition to being an attorney and Democratic strategist also has his debut novel, Archipelago of Light, out on October 6th. I really appreciate your time today.

Thanks so much. Thanks, David. When government starts taking sides on religion, everybody loses. That is not a theoretical question. Right now, Trump's new so-called religious liberty commission is attacking church, state separation. They want more religion in public institutions. They want more religious influence in public policy. They want pressure to push a constitutional line that exists for a reason. We have to fight back, not because we're against religion, but because we understand that there is separation of church and state. Religious freedom should exist and it should have nothing to do with government promoting religion. Government must be neutral. Our sponsor the Freedom from Religion Foundation works to keep state and church separate. So you've got free thinkers,

atheists, agnostics, non-religious Americans who don't get erased from the American story. Power in a democracy should come from people, not religion. Please visit ffrf.us slash David or text my name, David, to 511, to learn more or to join. That's ffrf.us slash David or text David to 511-511. Text fees may apply. The link is in the description. I don't have a cat myself, but I have spent enough time around friends' cats to know that there are picky cats when it comes to food.

If they don't like it, they won't eat it. But one of my friends has had a ton of success switching to Smalls cat food. Before Smalls, meal time was very hit or miss. the cat gets excited now. Our sponsor, Smalls, is fresh human-grade cat food made with real ingredients, no fillers or artificial stuff, high protein, gently cooked, promotes digestion, delivered right to your door. My friend did a side-by-side with the old food and smalls. The cat went for smalls. Your cat deserves more than a bowl of processed shortcuts. Try Smalls if your cat doesn't love smalls. You get a full refund for a limited time.

My audience gets 60% off your first order plus free shipping and free treats for life. When you go to smalls.com slash Pacman. The link is in the description. If I told you that we love authoritarian China, but Canada's one of the worst countries in the world, I don't think you would assume that that's the position of the president of the United States. But that's the position of the president of the United States. Donald Trump, loosely speaking, answered questions after waking up from multiple sleeping moments during an Oval Office event.

And he said, Canada's one of the worst countries in the world. Give us credit for renaming Lake Ontario to Lake America. As soon as I end this war, inflation will be over. Everybody's getting five grand after we defeat the Democrats. But most importantly, remember the context. Donald Trump just literally rolled out a red carpet for Xi Jinping. They had people laying down on the ground smoothing the red carpet. I'm not speaking metaphorically here. The authoritarian leader of China was praised by Trump endlessly. You have 100% conviction rate and you kill drug dealers and all this stuff. But Canada, you know, our democratic ally, our neighbor, one of our most important trading partners, it is one of the worst countries on earth.

What on earth is he talking about? Well, listen to him explaining. Trade deal or bring them with Canada, or could more items be added to that list? Well, they want to have a deal with us. They call us all the time. The problem is that they've treated the United States very unfairly. They have been one of the worst countries in the entire world. We get along with China.

We get along with the people and we make good deals. But Canada has been really very, very, very. difficult to deal with. One of the worst countries in the entire world. And what is bizarre is that in the same answer, Trump goes, China we get along with. Now, this is a recurring feature of Trump's worldview that I think is one of the most important aspects of the difference between Trump foreign policy and just about everybody else for the United States.

The language he uses about countries and leaders has very little to do with whether they are Democratic allies of the United States or Democratic at all. It basically comes down to if you flatter Trump or make a deal Trump likes or if you're strong in the way that Trump respects or you give him the kind reception he wants, he will praise you. And if you challenge Trump on anything or you go, hey, you know, I understand that's what you want is the United States. We are a different country. We're going to also do what is best for us.

All of a sudden you're terrible. And our long time, Democratic ally Canada is one of the worst countries in the entire world according to Donald Trump. Now, it gets even weirder because a reporter asks, how does this dispute with Canada end, sir? And Trump goes, well, we're going to win. And Canada's going to go, sir, we are very sorry. I wish I were kidding. Trump says Canada will apologize. For what? Totally unvented. I don't know what Canada is. So, Mr. President, how does this end? How does this end to Mr. President? I think what's going to happen is over the next three or four weeks, they're going to come to us,

and they're going to say, we're going to get rid of all the terms. We're going to win everything. We even have Lake Ontario, is now Lake America. And that's been done, by the way. It's actually just got done. They told me it was just completed. But we just completed Lake America. They're going to come in.

And they're going to say, sir, we are sorry. Sir. They've treated the United States very, very badly. I think a deal will be made. Will they say it in that low energy voice? Will Carney show up and go? Sir, we're so sorry. Well, we've treated us so.

I don't expect any of that to happen. Now, Trump did issue an executive order changing the U.S. government's terminology for Lake Ontario. to call it Lake America. That doesn't mean we own it. It, it, I mean, you know, there's an international border through the lake that doesn't disappear because Trump has directed the federal government to call it something else. But the rest of it is crazy. We're going to win everything and Canada's going to apologize. Sir, we're just so sorry. Now, this is how Donald Trump tends to describe international relations over and over again. These are not alliances as far

as Trump's concern. They're not competing interests. They're not complicated negotiations between sovereign countries. It's winner loser. Humiliation. They will crawl back and they will go, sir. And then Trump tackles inflation. Now hidden in this incomprehensible gobbledi gook is that Trump does seem to blame himself for inflation. I know he's not thinking in these terms, But listen to this. What happens? As soon as that war ends, inflation's going to be eradicated totally. As soon as the war ends, inflation will be eradicated.

There is an unintentionally revealing element to that answer because Trump is arguing inflation is because of the war. Well, the war is one that Trump singularly decided to pursue an optional war, an ill-advised war, a misguided war. So when Trump goes, inflation will be gone as soon as the war is over, he's acknowledging something his administration is doing is contributing to that problem. And so it's a problem he will solve after he created it. Now, beyond that, presidents can't simply promise inflation will be completely eradicated. Inflation is a rate of change in prices. Zero inflation isn't even the target. The Fed wants about 2% over the long run.

But don't worry, because even if he doesn't deal with that, everybody's getting five grand. You're getting five grand and you're getting five grand, but only if Republicans win everything. And why can't you do it now? We never get a good answer to that. Because of tariffs, we are taking in hundreds of billions of dollars of profits. It's one of the reasons I can offer if Republicans win the House and the Senate, $5,000. to every adult. Right. And we can do it and the Democrats can because the Democrats don't have any income. And the Democrats have no income. So they can't give you five grand, but I can. This is where he thinks you're stupid. He thinks you're stupid for a lot of different reasons. He thinks you're

stupid because he thinks you'll fall for this idea that he can only give everybody five grand if Republicans win. But there's no reason for that. He could do it now if the money is from profits. He also thinks you're stupid because he wants you to believe tariffs are profits. Tariffs aren't profits any more than income taxes or profits. Tariffs are taxes collected by the federal government on imported goods paid by American importers and then they pass down 80 to 90% of that to the individual consumer. Trump turns the tariff revenue into a pitch, elect us again to do more of the same crap, and I'll give everybody five grand.

And Democrats can't do it because Democrats don't have any income. What does that mean? I have no idea. The federal government's revenue, of course, doesn't belong to the Republican Party. There's not one bank account for Democrats and one for Republicans. And if the argument is the tariff revenue can finance the five grand, show us the math. How many adults qualify? What's the total cost?

What's the total tariff revenue? But the numbers don't make any sense. The estimate is that that would cost about $1.3 trillion. We've collected only a fraction of that in tariffs. But remember, we're not collecting it from China or foreign countries. we're collecting it from the importers. So what we get is vote Republican, get five grand. Now finally, a reporter asks maybe the easiest political question imaginable. What is your message to voters heading into the midterms? And Trump goes, communist and socialists. This is the best

they've got. Thank you so much. Well, you have a lot of upcoming Republican rallies. We're heading to Oklahoma. You're heading to Alabama, Ohio. What is your message to voter heading into the midterms? We have great people and we're running against communist, lunatic, socialists. We're running against people that are going to open up the water. We have a border just came out 17 months in a row. We have no people coming in zero, which is hard to believe even, but that's what it is. I don't want to open up the water.

What does that mean? He could give, you know, if he was a little more disciplined and interested, I guess, he could have some kind of closing argument for Republicans in the midterms. And it could be about the progress we've made and where we're going to go next on the economy, taxes, immigration, foreign policy. Like, I don't even know. Instead, it's communists, lunatics, socialists, and people are going to open up the water. It is all remarkable. The messaging in almost October of a midterm election year is that she is really great despite being an authoritarian lunatic, but Canada is one of the worst countries on earth. Lake Ontario is Lake America. So vote for us because of that. Canada is going to

say, sir, we're so sorry. Inflation will end after Trump's optional war wraps. Everybody gets five grand if you vote for us. And Democrats don't have income, but they're going to open up the water. That's demented, guys. That's completely demented. We should not allow that mess to be translated into normal political language. Just show people what the United States president is actually saying. Let them hear it for themselves. This is pathetic and insane.

And it should just be made into a campaign ad. Caroline Levitt has resurfaced. And apparently the midterm strategy for Republicans now is more of what Donald Trump just said the previous clips, Democrats will destroy America. They will take your private property and all of your money. What? Given Trump's kind of political situation, Democrats should consider it fantastic news that Caroline Leavitt is announcing Trump is going to be out there campaigning in October.

Remember that Caroline Leavitt left for maternity leave, briefly came back, announced she's leaving the administration, did leave the administration, and now she's back to do it. TV appearances. And here is what she has announced. Take a listen. Over the next 36 days, Republicans, and I know President Trump is going to do it, must ruthlessly prosecute the Democrats as who they are, extreme far left liberals who want to destroy our economy, want to take away your private property, raise your taxes, take your hard-earned

money, abolish prisons, abolish police. What? ...open our borders to insane people from all over this world and end America. as we know her and love her. And that is not an exaggeration. And that's what we have to focus on drawing that contrast between the common sense vision of President Trump and Republicans. Right. Over the- The stuff that she just said is not an exaggeration. It's straight-up lies. I agree with her. These are not exaggerations. Democrats want to destroy the economy. What does that mean? Now, you can argue, if you want, Democratic policy on the economy isn't good. It's not good because

it doesn't go far enough or it doesn't it's not good be you can argue that or you could say their tax policy is bad spending regularly those are real conversations. Democrats want to destroy the economy. What does that even mean? It's just an assertion that your political opponents want to make the country poorer. Why would they do that? Then we get they want to take away private property which Democrats want to do that. What piece of legislation or proposal would take away private property? There are socialists and communists who want to abolish private property in various forms. That's not the platform. of the Democratic Party. In fact, plenty of actual socialists and communists spend a lot of time

complaining the Democratic Party doesn't want to abolish private property. The Democratic Party is not socialist or communist and we're angry about that. Now, on this other stuff, you know, raise your taxes. It's kind of stripped of relevant detail. There are Democrats who advocate for higher taxes on high earners and on corporations. That's true. But that's different from from telling the average person they're going to take your hard earned money and just raise taxes on everybody. They want to abolish the police. I don't know of any mainstream Democrat that wants to abolish the police. Are there candidates who have said that? Yeah, I don't think any of them have won. Are there people on the internet who want to abolish the police? Yeah, but that's not

the Democratic policy. They want to abolish prisons. I don't know that I've heard any serious Democratic elected officials say we want to abolish prisons. I've heard private prisons for profit prisons shouldn't exist. But this stuff is all just fabricated out of nowhere. Now, if your argument is Americans should vote based on what's happening to their finances, cool, that's legitimate. But check the record. People are dealing with higher prices under Trump. People are dealing with tariffs that have raised the price of everything under Trump, a war that wasn't going to happen under Trump. So Caroline Leavitt is warning you about, you know, these hypothetical economic catastrophes the Democrats will usher in, but they are in power right now and everything's going

pretty poorly. Then she decides to explain just how disingenuous Democrats are. And she tries to use a phrase that doesn't quite work. See if you can listen, see if you can spot it. Because the Democrats are always incredibly disingenuous. They campaign as moderates. They do 360s on every single policy. policy position they have to try to appeal to common sense. They do 360s. Caroline, a 360 brings

you back to where you started. They do 360s and remain exactly consistent with where they started. I guess what she meant is she's looking for a 180. Democrats start here and then they do a 180 and then they say that they're over here. A 360. Give me a break. Now, okay, she misspoke. Not the most consequential mistake in American, American politics. But when your entire sentence is about how disingenuous they are, and then you go, they're so disingenuous, they do 360s. It's kind of weird. All right.

Then we get maybe the most interesting announcement of the entire thing. The president is ready to hit the road. And he is going to be out there campaigning, to which I say, great news if true. And that's what we have to focus on drawing that contrast between the common sense vision of President Trump and Republicans. I was with the president today checking in with our friend and my old boss. And I will tell you he is ready to hit the road. He's going to be on the road almost almost every single day in the month of October

campaigning for Republicans up and down the ballot and drawing this contrast between the common sense vision that he shares with Republicans on Capitol Hill and the far left vision of the radical Democrats who are on the ballot who we can this is phenomenal news potentially for Democrats. This is a terrible political environment for Republicans going into these midterms. And if Donald Trump continues to believe the solution is more Donald Trump almost every single day on the road, I love that. I love that.

And Trump is enormously important to the Republican base and motivating, you know, irregular Trump voters to show up in a midterm. That is a real challenge for the party. There is a rational argument you could come up with for putting Trump on the road. But he's insanely unpopular. He's the president. It's his economy, his tariffs, his foreign policy, his war, his prices, people are seeing. And you've got Republicans in competitive districts who aren't going to benefit from Trump being around. And they're still going to send Trump out there. That's great.

I hope Caroline Levitt is right that Trump is going to be out there on the campaign trail every day in October, making himself the face of the midterms. And it will be a very interesting experiment. Democrats are not going to have to spend a lot of time connecting Republican candidates to Trump because Trump is going to be out there traveling doing it himself. So Caroline Levitt resurfaces like a Phoenix rising over the horizon and says Democrats are going to destroy America. They are coming for your property, your money. They will end America as we know her. They disingenuously do 360s on all of their positions.

But we will win because we will send Trump out there. I love it. Send them out on the bonus show today. We will talk about the latest cases the Supreme Court is considering. Open AI has scrapped the rollout of a new model over safety concerns. And Tennessee is set to execute a woman for the first time in 200 years after the governor has denied her clemency. All of that and more on today's bonus show.

I hope you sign up for the bonus show at join packman.com. And I hope to see you this Saturday, October 3rd in Springfield, Massachusetts, 6 p.m. Free, free admission. Jessica Tarlov and I will be signing books and having a great conversation. Springfield Symphony Hall 6 p.m. October 3rd. Hope to see you there. And we will see you on the bonus show.