The Megyn Kelly Show - Independents Go Blue, Trump's Announcement, and COVID Lockdown Harms, with Victor Davis Hanson and Jennifer Sey | Ep. 434

Episode Date: November 14, 2022

It's Monday, and the Democrats are expected to keep the Senate and GOP expected to slightly edge out the House. Megyn Kelly is joined by Victor Davis Hanson, senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and author of "The Dying Citizen," to talk about the issue of mail-in voting and the election still not called in many races, what Trump gets right and wrong about mail-in voting, what the polls missed this year, the voting bloc of single women and the issue of abortion, how independents shockingly broke for incumbents this year, whether DeSantis can unite the two sides of the GOP, if Trump should announce his presidential run tomorrow, the tragedy of Trump, what Dave Chappelle got right about Trump, and more. Then Jennifer Sey, author of "Levi's Unbuttoned," joins to talk about the lessons she learned since she left her top job at Levi's after speaking out on COVID lockdowns and school closures, billionaire FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried and the reputation laundering, the trouble with "woke capital," the joint but different success of DeSantis in Florida and Polis in Colorado, how COVID lockdowns and learning loss played a role in the 2022 midterms, who was most harmed by closing schools, and more.Follow The Megyn Kelly Show on all social platforms: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/MegynKellyTwitter: http://Twitter.com/MegynKellyShowInstagram: http://Instagram.com/MegynKellyShowFacebook: http://Facebook.com/MegynKellyShow Find out more information at: https://www.devilmaycaremedia.com/megynkellyshow

Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show, your home for open, honest and provocative conversations. Hey, everyone, I'm Megyn Kelly. Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show. And happy Monday. There is a lot happening today. NBC News now projecting that Republicans will take control of the House of Representatives. Just barely. To win control, a party needs 218 seats. NBC expecting Republicans to end up with 219. My goodness. Remember this time last week when we were talking about some projections that they would win maybe 40 seats.

Win by maybe 40, 30 to 40. Now NBC is suggesting they will win by one. I'm sure the thought is a win's a win, right? That's better than a loss, but certainly not what was expected in some of the key House races that will determine control. However, votes still barely trickling in. In one House race in California, only 47 of the vote has been counted. Nearly a week later, that's where we were on Friday. What, did they take the weekend off? What are these people doing?

Get to work. And the counting remains ongoing in Arizona's gubernatorial battle between Katie Hobbs and Carrie Lake, although the margin may be too much for Carrie Lake to overcome. She is looking less strong than she was about 72 hours ago. Officials in Maricopa County taking to Twitter to openly mock upset voters

in defense of themselves and their process. Why would they defend a process that takes a week to count the vote? Just shut up and do better. Count faster and then apologize. And by the way, Maricopa County has nothing to mock anybody about given what's happened with their voting machines, right? Just take a seat. Take a seat and do better and don't point outwards for your own incompetence.

Tomorrow night, former President Trump is still expected to make his big announcement, which we think will be a presidential announcement, but with Trump, who knows? Plus a must- see Dave Chappelle monologue from over the weekend. He encapsulates what's going on in the country and in particular with Trump. And, you know, he's just got this way with words and with seeing the seam in the story. So we'll play it for you and see what you think. Joining me now, speaking of somebody who's got this way with words and can see the seam in the story, Victor Davis Hanson. Victor is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. He also hosts his own

podcast, The Victor Davis Hanson Show. And he is the author of several bestselling books, including his most recent, The Dying Citizen, How Progressive Elites, Tribalism, and Globalization How progressive elites, tribalism and globalization are destroying the idea of America. Victor, you are the person I have most wanted to talk to since Tuesday. I keep Googling every day. Victor Davis Hanson, midterms, midterms, just wanting to see your thoughts. I saw you did one bit, but you just today dropped your big thought piece. And I'm so happy that you're here to share it with us before we get to. Yeah, my pleasure.

Before we get to that. So there we have it. The Democrats won control of the Senate over the weekend, making Georgia still relevant, but not as much. It's going to be at best for the Republicans what it was before. 50 50 Senate with Kamala Harris casting the deciding vote. And it could go even 51-49 if the Dems win Georgia, which is better for the Dems, because then if you have a peel-off like Manchin, they can handle it. They don't need every single

member. In any event, so the Dems take the Senate. It looks like the GOP takes the House. And what is your reaction to that news? Just barely, by the skin of their teeth, taking the House. Well, it's a non-godly disaster if you think about it. Just because a first-term president loses on average about 22 seats, no matter if he's popular or unpopular. But Joe Biden was a force multiplier of that effect. He was very unpopular, 38 to 42 percent. None of the issues that he enacted as policies had 50 percent support. So they should have had at least 20 seats and two or three Senate seats, and they didn't. And what's depressing about it, Megan, is that when you look at the disaster, there's so many factors and they all went against the Republicans. So on the one hand,

you had Donald Trump before the election attacking DeSantis, DeSantamonious, or trying to preempt the attention by saying he was going to have a big announcement that may have turned off DeSantis voters from Trump-supported candidates, or it may main energized left-wing people that were so angry that Trump was going to run, they thought, but he should have kept quiet. And then you have Mitch McConnell when you say, well, Trump's not the person, let's turn to the Republican establishment. And then you have Mitch McConnell pouring money into Alaska to adjudicate two Republicans and one that's more conservative, and he's attacking her and not putting the full amount. And then you think, well, he didn't put the full amount of money in, and he didn't,

to say Blake Masters. But then you look at Donald Trump, he had $100 million. He was very stingy with it. So then when you think, well, that was a problem, then you say, you know, but almost every Democrat, with the exception of the Nevada governor, wins, loses on Election Day and wins afterwards. So there's something about the mail-in ballot. It's one of the greatest revolutions in American history, I think, because we went from Election Day of about 70% participation before COVID to many, it's down to 30%. And the Democrats that have the money and the tech savviness, they have mastered that art. And that's the good take on it. But every day, as you pointed out, that the ballot is delayed, the count is delayed, then there's more avenues for, you know, suspicion. And so if the Republicans don't address mail-in balloting,

they're going to lose, lose, lose. They've got to find an establishment that knows how to win. And then they had a mistake when they were very good at pointing out what was wrong with Joe Biden, but almost none of the candidates would say gas prices are horrible and therefore I'm going to open up ANWR, Keystone. We're going to have legislation going on the first week, sort of like they said in 94 with the contract America or inflation. We're going to have a ballot balance budget. We're going to build, let's say, 100 miles of wall. Even if they couldn't do it, given the veto of Joe Biden, they could have given constructive solutions to these problems. And then finally, they were caught off guard.

I think I was, too, when I heard Joe Biden with his Phantom of the Opera speech about semi-fascist on America. And I thought, that is so patently crazy. And the idea you tie the attacker of Paul Pelosi, who was a homeless nut, nudist, had BLM and pride flags, and you tie him to Maggie R fourth or fifth concern of voters on exit polls. And, you know, Will V. versus Wade just turns it over to the state. And many of the people who oppose abortion were not going to outlaw it if a woman is raped or a victim of incest. So that there was a lot of complacency. But that worked. That demonization of the Republicans as election deniers or insurrectionists or un-American was very effective for Joe Biden. And he never defended his record. It's like, I'm bad, but these guys are worse. So all of those together explain it. I don't know the degree to which each

is a contributor and factor, but they're so multifarious, it's hard for us to get, you know, to address all of them at once is what I'm saying. So what happens, everybody picks and chooses. If you're a Trump supporter, you blame Mitch. If you're a Republican Romney-ite, McCain-ite, you blame Trump. If you didn't really get the message at the RNC, then you bring the candidates rather than the RNC that should have had a holistic approach for solutions. And then the state secretary of states, as you say, they don't take responsibility, especially in red states, that the balloting has been hijacked. It's not, election day doesn't exist. Election night doesn't exist. It's just a continuous, monotonous process, amorphous. We don't even know what's going on, whether it's majority voting in Georgia or

rank voting in Alaska or here in California. Everybody gets a ballot, whether you request it or not. There's no audit. Or they have this curing process where if you have a ballot that's rejected, you get another chance maybe to add your address if it's not valid. So it's just it's a mess. Yeah, it's a mess. Trump is just truthing on his social network about this very issue. And typical Trump terms, which is to tell you what he's saying. I assume everyone's watching Arizona as the great Carrie Lake's easy election win is slowly yet systematically being drained away from her and from the American people. This is a very sad thing to watch. Mail-in ballots, long election counts, many day elections, machines that very few people understand, massive counting centers and more are an American disaster. Our elections have become an unreliable joke and

the whole world is watching, he goes on. Even Jimmy Carter, in his and other highly respected politicians and professionals report, said mail-in ballots cannot be trusted. There will be massive cheating. A 10-year-old child would understand that. When will Republicans learn? If they don't stop this mail-in scam now, there won't be any Republicans left. Get rid of McConnell. He never should have accepted what was sent to him by Mike Pence.

He should have fought like hell, like the Dems would have. Losers are losers. That will never change. Just another giant election scam. Wake up, America. All right, putting the typical Trump rhetoric aside, the point on mail-in ballots, I mean, he's seeing exactly what you're seeing. It doesn't mean that Kerry Lake's election is being stolen, right?

We don't have evidence that it's actually being stolen. Yeah, I think that's a really good point so what you read from trump was 75 accurate until the last 25 about mike pence and everything and it applies to 2020 that election i wrote a column about it in march and april of 2020 that election was lost when uh the the dnc and activists went in to these key states, about nine or 10 of them, you know, they went into Arizona, they went into Pennsylvania, they went into Michigan, and in various ways, they overturned the will of the state legislatures and law in the books, either by, you know, saying that you don't have to have your complete name, or you don't have to have your complete address, or you can mail, your mail-in ballot on the day of the election will count or even in

some states after election day will count. So it was a radical change. It was all designed to eliminate election day. And it worked. And Donald Trump knew that. And he had a lot of money. And there were people saying, why don't you get your legal team to go into these states and fight, fight, fight? Because they're cherry picking judges or they're doing it by administrative edict. And the result was the RNC in general and Trump in particular got sandbagged. And that was really the issue. When he says there was fraud, it is in a way fraud, but it was done legally early on.

It wasn't computers were communicating with China or it wasn't that. But had 70 percent of the people voted on Election Day, which usually happens, I think Donald Trump would have won. But that decision was made, unfortunately, in March and April when nobody caught it or they didn't want to spend the money to challenge the Democrats. And now in Arizona, you're seeing Carrie Lake's lead disappear. He's right about that. Slowly but surely, she's going down and down and down in the count. And people are suspicious. As of 10 a.m. Saturday, Katie Hobbs, her opponent, had 50.7 percent of the vote.

Carrie Lake had 49.3 with 88 percent of the votes in. Hobbs is in the lead again as of Saturday with by 34000 votes. That's a lot. David Axelrod saying that Carrie Lake needs bigger numbers to catch up with Katie Hobbs. Arizona is coming up big for sanity, he says. It doesn't look very good for Carrie Lake right now. And the problem there is that not only do they have the mail-in ballots and they had all the problems on voting day with the Maricopa County machines in more red-leaning places, but her opponent is overseeing the whole vote counting process. That's in defense of all election deniers. This smells. No, you can't do that. And, you know, what's sad is I think all of us are mystified. I'll give you an example. I have a lot of confidence in Robert Kahaly and the Trafalgar Poll, but I remember the week before he had Kerry Lake up by an astounding margin, eight or nine percent, finally. And more importantly, I was just in Sunday, this weekend at the David Horowitz, and there was a very inspired presentation by a congressman from Arizona. And he pointed out there were 800,000

ballots left to be counted. And by all estimations, 57 to 61% would be traditionally Republican, and she only needed 40%. So this was a done deal. And what I'm getting at is there was this assurance, this certainty that this wouldn't happen. So I'm wondering, so we really need an exegesis. What happened? Why did these pollsters that had been so reliable were so off? Was it the mail-in balloting or their voters didn't turn up or was it they misinterpreted the abortion issue or they didn't really think that these 30-something people who voted 70% against Republicans would have been influenced by the student loan amnesty? Or I don't know what it is,

but nobody's quite found the answer why traditional ballots that should break one way not just didn't break toward Kerry Lake or Blake Masters, but they radically broke in the opposite direction. So it's either faulty data or people are bewildered and they got to find out. But nobody has come up with a holistic explanation. In Arizona, it would be especially suspicious if this were the only race in which that were the dynamic.

But of course, it's not. It's happened across the country, especially in a state like New Hampshire, where they were putting her. It wasn't just Trafalgar, but St. Anselm College had a poll that put the Republican, I don't know, I think nine points ahead and lost by nine or 10 points. So it was like a 20 point swing in the wrong direction. And I know that Trafalgar and Kahali, he inflates the Republican vote in his polls. He's been, I don't know if inflate is the right word, but that's essentially what he does because he thinks there's a hidden Trump vote. And he thought this year that there would be a quote, submerged GOP voter that would be even more reluctant to tell a poster

they were going GOP between the dark Brandon speech, the Trump stuff, election denialism, how much Republicans have been demonized. It turned out to be very wrong. If anything, there seems to be some sort of submerged Democratic vote this time around because no one was showing that like Maggie Hassan up 10 points over Dan Bolduc in New Hampshire. Not that I recall. And the Real Clear Politics average of all polls did not show anything like what ultimately happened either. So it wasn't just Trafalgar, like something went on in the polling this year, but for a couple of pollsters that misled us. Yeah, I think a lot of I think that you're on to the submerged voter. I think a lot of college students that had said in August and September they weren't interested or single women, they just didn't. I think the abortion issue, the way that it was played up by the Democrats, I mean, what

they did was pretty nefarious, but it was effective. They basically said that Roe versus Wade was not turning that decision over to the states and therefore to democracy. People could, individual states could vote by a majority vote what type of abortion policy they wanted. They just said every woman is going to die in America if she doesn't get an abortion. That was their message.

And to a college student or a single woman, 70% of single women voted for against the Republican. And so I think they energized them with that issue and they energized them to extent. I didn't think that would happen, but the student debt, even though it hadn't been inactive, we don't know where it's going to end up in the courts. That was effective. And there was a message that you young people have to stop these crazy MAGA insurrectionists, these un-Americans, these semi-fascists. And that really resonated.

You know, I work on a campus and you could really see it happening that these students were starting to organize in the student plazas. And that hadn't been true in August and September. So I think there was a late October surge that the pollsters didn't quite catch on. And it was a quiet vote. Absolutely. And people came out in droves that we didn't think would be of influence to do so. contingent of the GOP, which is maybe 30 percent that that wants it outlawed, except in cases of rape or incest or the life of the mother. They they were very motivated to see Roe overturned, to see a Republican president and Republican senators in place so that they could create a

Supreme Court that would overturn Roe. And in a way, they were they were pilloried for their success because they got what they wanted. And then it went back on those state ballots. And it was, I mean, democracy in a way worked the way it's supposed to, right? It went back to the states and the voters are having their say, no, we don't want to go back to a pre-Roe standard or no, or yes, we do whatever. It's working the way it's supposed to, but Republicans are seeing, you know, actual voters tell them in many states, we do not want what that core 30% of Republicans want. We want abortion to stay legal in most cases through the first trimester. My own take on it is, and I'm no political pundit, but my own take on it is the Republicans would do very well to settle on something akin to the Florida standard. 15 weeks with those exceptions I just mentioned. And that's it. And put it up to a vote right now, well in advance of the say, incest and rape, then people would listen to them.

And if the left stayed away from a partial birth abortion or abortion on literally the day of delivery, they stayed away from that, then people would listen to them. And there was this large area, and you mentioned it, how many weeks that it would be permissible or months. But what happened this election, it was almost as if when Republicans used that argument that these people want to have abortion all the way to the end of a pregnancy, they said, yeah. I mean, and so the extreme left position is not as toxic as the extreme right position. So a lot of people weren't bothered. They just said, we need abortions and I don't care what it is. We don't want any restrictions at all. I think the Republicans

thought that would be so absurd. So when they started making these arguments, either they weren't replied to or the Democrats went mute. And a lot of it was also, and that brings up another topic, we're self-selecting in these states now. So when you get three or four hundred thousand leaving New York to go to Florida or leaving Illinois flocking to Tennessee, flocking to Texas. And what it means is that people are, I think, everybody talks about the candidates and that's important. But is it that important? I mean, John Fetterman won after the worst debate in history. And there was a person who wasn't even alive that won in Pennsylvania. So I think a lot of people now are just voting a straight blue or red ticket regardless. Because when you look at Carrie Lake, she was so much more charismatic, dynamic, aware of the issues in homes.

And it used to be in American politics, if you wouldn't debate your opponent, you were considered cowardly or you weren't transparent or you were an F. That doesn't apply anymore. She just said, I don't want to. She's an election denier. Why vote? And I think people just voted a straight, what the Democratic Party told them or the Republican Party. And it works the other way. I don't think Beto ever had a chance. And Charlie Criss never had a chance. And Stacey Abrams never had a chance. And part of it was candidates. But I think we're getting down to the point where we're really two nations now, 50-50. And we've got to realize that I know everybody blamed the Trump candidates.

But I thought actually Tudor Dixon and Smiley and other candidates were pretty good candidates. Lee Zeldin. I know they were. Yeah, Lee Zeldin. They were not experienced in the statewide election, but they were pretty good candidates. Lee Zeldin. I know they were. Yeah, Lee Zeldin. They were not experienced in the statewide election, but they were pretty good. I just don't think no matter how effective you are, if you're a conservative, it's going to be very hard to be a governor of Washington or a senator of Washington or Michigan or New York. Because people have the demography is so fluid now and things are getting redder and they're getting bluer and they're getting less purple. And I think long-term it helps

the Republicans because if I want to be crass about it, people who are having more children and traditional families and two-parent households and stability, they are the red states and their growth rates are much larger. And what we're seeing now in the blue states are these hollowed out cities that are, you know, they're civilization in reverse. And people, the stereotype of those cities are young hipsters that are not getting married to their 40s or maybe having one child, et cetera, et cetera. So they're shrinking in a variety of ways. And the red states are dynamic and robust, but we're not there yet. So it's it's the numbers, as as put out by Tom Bevin, who's he runs Real Clear Politics. And he took a hard look at why things were off.

You know, the RCP averages were off and certainly Trafalgar was off. And he said, the more you dig through the numbers, the more stunning the election looks. GOP moved the national vote roughly seven points in their direction from 2020, but will gain only a handful of House seats and make no gains or may even lose a seat in the Senate. He goes on to say, point out that those who rated the economy not so good overwhelmingly voted for democrats including in all the major senate races uh and then he says to me the biggest stunner was independent voters who went for the incumbent party by two points 51 49 after four straight midterm cycles of breaking in favor of the out party by double digits. So not only did

they not break for the out party, they went for the in party by two digits. And then he points this out. On average, Dems voted three points more along partisan lines and battleground Senate races than the GOP did, made a difference in GA in in Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada. I think that's fascinating. The Democrats did vote partisan lines, and the GOP did too, but the Dems did it a little bit more. More GOPers wavered on these elections than the Dems. Yeah, they did, and they're more effective. And I think a lot of us, when we look at the youth vote, we think that people wouldn't fall for this. So in the last 60 days, the youth of America said, I'm going to cancel a lot of your student loans. We thought, oh, that's just

pandering. Nobody would believe that. And then they said, we're going to give you amnesty for marijuana conviction. Oh, who cares about that? It won't affect that many people. Or these people are going to take abortion away from you. And those issues for this, that rubric, and they're galvanized on the campuses of that half of the nation that goes to college. They just were overwhelmingly deleterious to the Republican cause. And I don't know how you ever, I don't know how you get them back or whether you want them back or how do you counteract them with other constituencies. I know here in California, we had about 40 to 42% Mexican American voting Republican. And in a usual election, because they've lost the white working class, that would have been fatal to lose 42% of the Mexican,

and it didn't, it didn't't hurt them and in some of these races they're not called yet but it's because they're they're getting overwhelming response as you say from these these single women and young people are voting in in a way that we don't really know why they're they're voting we think they're voting against their own interests, given gas prices and food prices and the border and all of these things and crime. They live in big cities or on university campuses or places like University of Chicago or Berkeley are not safe. And yet we think, why wouldn't they want to vote that way? And I think we don't understand the effect of these rhetoric and these things that Joe Biden did. Even draining the strategic petroleum reserve probably brought gas prices down

about $0.10 or $0.15 a gallon, and that apparently might have worked. So what we consider pandering and demagoguery, or whoever believed that Phantom of the Opera speech that Biden gave that was so obnoxious and repellent that actually worked. What about, what about, because, you know, it makes me wonder, so if the Republican problem today is how do we get those, how do we get those 3% or so who deviated from the GOP and voted Dem back on our team? And how do we get those independents who normally would have gone double digit for the out party,

but went two points for the in party? How do we get them on our side? And, you know, we talk about the Republican message. It was considered smart strategy to make it a referendum on Joe Biden. The argument in favor of not really putting out a specific agenda was don't make it about us. Just keep the laser beam on the president whose approval ratings are at record lows because traditionally that has worked. And, you know, obviously not this time. So the, so this is where the John Podorac of the world come in, you know, who's writing another front page article for the New York post every day about how it was all Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump, election denialism, bad candidates who were Trumpy, too Trumpy. And that's, you know, he and many other even Republicans are saying, that's how you get those people back. What do you make of it?

In some ways, but I think the problem, he's off on that, because I think the problem was really that once you are being called an election denialist, or un-American, or a semi-fascist, and that's an effective propaganda, and you're on the other side saying Joe Biden is non-composimentous, he doesn't, he's shaking people's hands that don't exist, or the border, or crime, and it's all an attack on Biden. And they're saying, these people attack, they attack. Then it becomes even more important to have a positive message. So what I'm getting at is, if all of these candidates that Podhoretz doesn't like, say, just take Blake Masters, and he was very good on the attack. And a lot of these Trump candidates were very good. But what if they had a unified message that said, okay, as I said earlier, this is what we want to

do to help people. We're going to do the following five things to get gas prices down. Or we're going to do this for inflation. Or we're going to do this for crime. But they didn't do that. And so they thought by attacking Joe Biden in negative terms, all justified and all true, they were going to reduce him into a caricature of a caricature. But what it did was it amplified the democratic message that these people are shrill and they're angry and they disrupt elections. I think that was more of it. The other problem that Podhoretz doesn't understand is, okay, we go back pre-Trump, and what do we go to? We go to John McCain and Mitt Romney, and the Republican Party has not won 51% of the popular vote

since George H.W. Bush did it in 1988 against Mike Dukakis, and it lost, I think, six out of the last seven popular votes, whether it was Trump or whether it was George W. Bush in 2000 or whether it was John McCain or Mitt Romney. So what is his solution? Because if he if if let's say that he wants DeSantis and I, I, I really impressed by DeSantis, but nevertheless, there's going to be enormous pressure on DeSantis for all the Romneyites, all the McCainites, all the never Trumpers to come back and say, this is our mainstream silk stocking, traditional Republican, and we're all going to unite. But that didn't work because seven to eight million people in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, sat out in 2008. They sat out in 2012. They sat out in 2000 because they're not going than vote for what they call a rhino, a Lisa Murkowski or somebody like that on the national scene.

And so you've got to get a Reaganite effective governor or senator with effective record that understand and is charismatic to bring those two constituencies together for a time. Maybe DeSantis can, I think the biggest mystery about DeSantis is that because he's come on this stage so quickly and so effectively, half the country, half the Republican Party said, well, this is kind of like a Reaganite guy. He takes the fight. We had reservations because we didn't know if he had fire in the belly. He took the argument to the opponents like Trump did, but he does, and he lacks Trump's cul-de-sac spats. So he doesn't tweet. So he's the ideal. And then the other half said, well, wait a minute. We don't know whether

he's really going to stand up to the pressure or not. He might be the perfect candidate like Scott Walker was, purple state governor at the time, took on the teachers union and what happened in 2016. He was devoured by Trump on the debate stage and he kind of fizzled out. So I think that's what people, they want a unifier, they can bring these. But if Poehler thinks we're going to go back and ignore the Trump base and just write them off as a bunch of crazies, he's talking about 25 to 30 percent of the Republican Party that will never vote. They're never going to they're going to sit out rather than vote for a Romney like candidate. That's right. And that's this is what I've been pointing out, too, that

a lot of these voters, millions of them came to vote for Trump off of the sidelines entirely. It's not like they they had been, they had been Republican voters that sometimes voted, or they'd been Democratic voters. A lot of these, the Trump core faithful were non-voters. He got people registered for the first time. They were excited about a candidate who was speaking to their issues. And to think that those people are easily pried away from Donald Trump, the guy who got them off of the bench entirely. I just I mean, I'll believe it when I see it. Wait, let me stand you by because there's so much more to get to.

And we've thankfully got Victor for another two blocks. I'll squeeze in an ad and we'll pick it up right there as Trump is now tweeting out about his announcement tomorrow night. Truthing out, I should say. Stand by. Just to update the Carrie Lake, Katie Hobbs data. Now there's 93 percent of the votes in, according to The New York Times. Hobbs is still up by about 26000 votes. She has 50.5 percent. Lake has 49.5. Again, with just 7 percent of the votes outstanding we continue to watch it um so trump just truth doubt um this quote hopefully tomorrow this is when his announcement

is hopefully tomorrow will turn out to be one of the most important days in the history of our country exclamation point he's going to announce from the sound of it and there was a report um just this past couple of days of by people close to trump saying indeed that but uh two sources close to trump told fox news uh he is about to announce and um you know basically there's no stopping the announcement it's happening and that i'm trying to look for the exact words yeah just that two sources close to the former president tell fox news he is going to announce on tuesday irrespective of the advice from some people in his former orbit not to do it prior to the georgia run runoff i mean he he made the announcement that he was going to announce even before we knew Nevada

had gone blue. So I don't think he cares about the runoff. And, you know, as the man who literally wrote the book, The Case for Trump, what do you think? Is it a good idea for him to run? And is it a good idea for him to announce now? It's not a good idea, I think, to announce now. I think he needs to digest the midterms, not interfere. I mean, Georgia was in 2021. That special election really hurt him because he turned off his base by doubting the legitimacy of the Florida ballot counting and those Senate races. And then he offended swing voters and they did the unthinkable. They elected two socialists in red Georgia. And so he's got a bad reputation. What he should do is keep quiet right now and just digest the election, and then take that of his

$100 million plus in his pack, write a check for $10 million to Herschel Walker, tell everybody in the country to vote for Herschel and keep repeating that message nonstop and don't get on a stage with him. And then if he were to win, I think he can win, then Donald Trump would get a lot of credit for that. And he could start rebuilding the damage that's happened to him. But he's a tragic figure, Megan, because he has two of the three essentials for a leader. He has a program and an agenda that was revolutionary, that mega agenda. Just those four or five issues of the border and re-industrializing the Midwest and the working classes and the border, tough on China, et cetera, energy independence, that blew away his opponents. And then he had the other essential characteristic that he wasn't scared, that he was blunt,

that he called our attention to a lot of really bad things in this country, whether it was the media bias or whether it was the elite, bi-coastal, wealthy people who had made out like bandits in globalization, often at the expense of fair trade and by pushing unlimited free trade. So that was a good agenda and it worked. But the third essential was that you don't want to be vindictive. And if you get all of the right, you're right on all the major issues. It's just important to be right on the minor issues. So you don't go in and say that Anthony Fauci throws a ball like a girl. There was no need for that. So, and that's the problem.

And why is that a problem? Because there's about 15% of the electorate that the Republicans cannot win. They have about 48. If everybody's united with the base and this traditional Republicans, they can get 45 or 48, but they need, I don't know, three to 8% of these swing voters. And that issue turns them off. And so that leaves us with this dilemma. Will Donald Trump, basically in his mid-70s, if he runs, will he be able to change? Will he be able to say, you know what?

I'm going to have discipline. I'm going to have a filter on my Twitter if I'm back on Twitter or my truth social. I'm going to not just do it in the middle of the night. It's going to be grammatically correct. It's going to be spelled correctly. It's not going to be ad hominem. I think we know the answer to this. I think we know the answer to this, don't we? That's a rhetorical question.

So, but this is the problem for the GOP, because it is those swing voters and those two, those three percent of Republicans who voted them this past time and those swing voters, they probably would like a John McCain. Right. But the core that then you lose the core MAGA faithful, the people who are on the bench you know you've got to find somebody who can get them both that's why people are looking so closely at the santas when you you look at the santas and you ask yourself about these three core abilities does he have a good mega program yes and he he tried to prove to the country when he took on Disney or the school boards or busted, that he's willing to do what it takes to incur criticism from the left, but on principle, and that was the second.

And the third is, can he unite the swing voter and without selling out or without turning off the base and saying, you know what, he's a globalist or he's a McCainite. And we'll see. But I don't think at this point everybody should just say Trump should get out or DeSantis should be president or DeSantis doesn't. You've got to let the people decide. And there's a process and it's called primaries and votes. That's why I'm a little critical of the Republican establishment when they say, well, these candidates that Trump selected, he didn't select them. He endorsed them. The people voted for them. They may have voted stupidly or they may be influenced by Trump, but that's how the system works. And some he endorsed after they won the primaries.

Yeah. And they had some candidates that I thought were really good, Mira Flores and others in the House that were supposedly the future of the Republican Party that Kevin McCarthy poured millions of, and they didn't win. And so we don't know. I mean, if we were having this conversation in late 2015, if I had said to you, Donald Trump is going to be the nominee and win the, nobody would have believed that. I didn't know. No way. Until later. And if we had said Scott Walker was going to implode or these great candidates like, you know, Marco Rubio or Ted Cruz.

Or Jeb Bush. Yeah, Bush, Jeb Bush. Remember it was Jeb exclamation mark and people had, he had all this money and he was supposed to be. So we don't know what's going to happen because we don't know the human factor, how people will perform on a debate stage or how they react with criticism. But it does seem that DeSantis is really smart and not replying to Trump because Trump, it will be like a boxer who's punching himself off against a rope adult. All DeSantis is doing is saying, keep going, keep going, because the more you attack me, the more you attack my wife, the more you attack Mitch McConnell's wife on maybe racial terms, the lower your percentage and the less appealing you're going to be, and it's going to magnify me. But at some point, he's going to have to, you know,

he's going to have to get out there if he's going to run. I don't think he can wait and say, I don't believe that he can say, well, it's not my turn yet. And Donald Trump will only be here for four years. I'll support him because he's at his zenith right now. He could be a Chris Christie if he waits. Absolutely. And it's either he goes now like Obama chose to go or he's going to fade. And he's going to have to make that decision. And he's got a lot of pressure and expectations on him because people are saying to him, we want you to have an effective governance like Trump did. We want you to go after the left for what they've done to this country. But you've got to be wise and select your targets

and not waste your ammunition on irrelevant people like Donald Trump. And that's what's tragic about it. I know I've kind of run that simile into the ground, but when you look at Sophoclean tragedy, and there's a lot of people in the classical Greek stage, Oedipus or Ajax, Antigone, or you look at the searchers or Shane or Magnus, you see this character again and again, this typology that people, when they get paralyzed, as we were in 2016, and they want somebody to come in with a different skill set, different experiences, and they start to really affect change because they have a type of personality or they're blunt or they're black and white or they're Manichaean.

And that's necessary because we're not that way. And then when they start to be successful, those methodologies become more predominant and people say, oh, not in my name. And then the tragic hero says, but look, I got your gas prices down. Look, I got the Operation WorkSpeed. And you said, yes, but everything is going well. And now I have the laxity because things are going well to look at other things, how you're doing it. I don't want you to have a six gun.

I do not want you to use foul language. I do not want you to tweet on. And so that's the tragedy of Donald Trump, that tragic heroes have a certain time and a certain place and a certain mission. And the more that they're successful in fulfilling that mission, and they do it by unorthodox means, the more the unorthodox means can draw the attention of their beneficiaries. And I think that's what's happened to Trump. People are saying, you know what? He did a lot of good, but it's been four years, five years, and I'm exhausted.

And he can't change. And that's what's tragic about him. He knows what he has to do, Megan. He knows that the mega agenda is fine. He knows that his combativeness is necessary. But he knows he can't stop tweeting, as you said but he knows he can't stop tweeting. As you said, he knows he can't stop making fun of Mitch McConnell's wife. He knows he can't make fun of Youngkin's name if he wanted to. And at that point, the people are not going to put up with it anymore.

In very provocative ways, too. Like, why does he continue calling Elaine Chao Coco Chao? He's spelling the last name c-h-o-w that it's spelled c-h-a-o honestly i asked my team like what is that a derivative like what's that from is that some well-known slur i don't even know we couldn't even find it we found some food truck that's called coco we found coco can sometimes be used as a derogatory word for people who are Asian or maybe even Hispanic because of the skin color. I have no idea. And to think that Trump has thought it through is probably being too getting too analytical. But yeah. But then like to point out that young kin that sounds Chinese, like what's he doing?

He's acting like a child. It's not that this is unprecedented for his tweeting. but if anything, he's going in a more provocative, more unhinged direction. Especially when he he was, you know, I thought it was because there's such a thing as a Spanish flu or the Ebola virus that have toponyms that that's fine. So when he said the China virus, I thought, well, that's OK. And then the left is going crazy. But the point is, he knew that people were sensitive to that and they had been attacking on that. So you don't think he would double down and then let the left say, well, you know, maybe the China virus could in theory not sound racist. But look what he's doing now. And that shows you why he used it. And that's what he does. He he gives ammunition to his critics when he has the benefit of the doubt, when he's all done. He himself shows you there's no benefit of the doubt.

And that's what's tragic about him. And, you know, there's such great Westerns. I remember The Searchers. I don't know if you saw that John Wayne movie. And he's the only one that can bring back Natalie Wood. But he is so crude and he's so rough that once he brings her back, everybody's celebrating and he just walks out the door in that John Ford and he's out the door and he goes away because he can't change. And he can't, all the skills that are necessary at a particular time

when the mission is solved. And I think Donald Trump's mission was to recalibrate the Republican Party and make it into a populist nationals. And he succeeded in ways that nobody ever dreamed of. And then to actually have a Republican go in there and start to build the wall and stop illegal immigration. When he went out of office, or at least before COVID, we were energy independent. We had low employment. We had record minority low employment. We had low inflation. It was wonderful. But there were things that he was doing to enact that agenda that the more it

was successful, the more we thought, well, you know what? I would rather pay more for gas and read another tweet. At least I'm speaking now as a Romney, and that's what's tragic about it. And he can't change. And I wish he could, but I don't think he can. Yeah, you write in your latest piece, which people have to read, it's at American Greatness, called Tragically Trump, you write as follows. One explanation of the Trump dilemma is that like all classical tragic heroes and Western gunslingers, Trump solved problems through means unpalatable to those in need of solutions beyond their own refinement. It is the lot of such tragic figures to grate and wear out their welcome with their beneficiaries, but only after their service is

increasingly deemed no longer needed. Stand by, Victor. Let me squeeze in a break and we'll pick it up right there after this. Wow. There's only one Victor Davis Hans while you're there. Audio podcast as well. We release it later in the day. You can follow and download Apple, Spotify, Pandora, Stitcher, wherever you get your podcasts and they're free. So you have that added benefit. And if you are a serious XM subscriber, you can listen to it right after, like immediately after we air. Sometimes if I want to listen back, I go there. Victor, I mean, I love the analogy and thinking about sort of the tragic hero and how not to be so tragic. You know, there's a scene in which he could ride off on his horse and be a kingmaker and help Republicans get elected and become adored. January 6th fades and so on. And Dave Chappelle was on SNL this weekend,

sort of making us remember about why much of the country did fall in love with Trump, despite all of the flaws. You know, there is room for us to remember all of those great things and continue the relationship with him. I don't know whether we can remember all the great things and vote for him when there's another alternative like DeSantis sitting right there. But I want to take you to the Dave Chappelle monologue just at the piece on Trump, because it was pretty powerful and it was a good reminder of what a formidable candidate he was. And let's face it, is likely to remain. Watch this. Declaring the end of the Trump era. Now, OK, I can see how in New York you might believe this Watch this. He's very loved. And the reason he's loved is because people in Ohio have never seen somebody like him.

He's what I call an honest liar. That first debate, that first debate, I've never seen anything like it. I've never seen a white male billionaire screaming at the top of his lungs, this whole system is rigged, he said. And the moderator said, well, Mr. Trump, in in fact the system is rigged, as you suggest, what would be your evidence? Remember what he said, bro? He said, I know the system is rigged because I use it. I said, God damn.

And then Hillary Clinton tried to punch him in the taxes. She said, this man doesn't pay his taxes. He shot right back. That makes me smart. And then he said, if you want me to pay my taxes, then change the tax code. But I know you won't. Because your friends and your donors enjoy the same code. But I know you won't because your friends and your donors enjoy the same

tax breaks that I do. And with that, my friends, a star was born. No one had ever seen somebody come from inside of that house, outside, and tell all the commoners, we are doing everything that you think we are doing inside of that

house. They just went right back in the house and started playing the game again. So good. So good inside that house. You remember what he said with Rand Paul? That was what changed a lot of people's votes. Rand Paul, who was a, I've grown in admiration for him, especially about the lockdowns. And he said, well, Donald Trump represents the toxic brand of politics, quid pro quo. And he went on and he made some legitimate criticism. Trump didn't even blink. He said, yeah, absolutely. You came

into my office. You wanted $10,000. I wrote you a check and you've been subservient and you've done whatever I wanted since. And I thought that was just amazing to hear somebody say that. And it kind of blew Rand Paul off the stage. But it's not wise to wrestle with Donald Trump because he's actually been in a wrestling ring himself and he doesn't care. And a lot of people thought, I mean, if you look at the people like an Anthony Fauci or even a Howard Stern or the Clinton group, anybody who thought they were going to go mano-a-mano with Donald Trump and just trash him, trash him, trash him, they didn't end up as well as they thought they would. And the other thing that's ironic and it's also tragic, Megan, is that we have this group of candidates and Trump is just baying at the moon that they all owe him. So it is true that

he really helped DeSantis win in 2018. Excuse me. Yeah, he really did. And it was a very close race. Mike Pompeo will probably run, but we wouldn't have known him, Mike Pompeo, unless Trump had appointed him CIA director of state, secretary of state. He really empowered Nikki Haley by putting her in the national scene as UN ambassador, which he was very good. And he got a lot of good airplay and he endorsed Ted Cruz and made up with him. So he, that's what's sad about it. And Mike Pence, I don't think Mike Pence had a career left until Donald Trump was selected as vice president. So in a way, that makes it even more tragic that all these people are going to run against him. He's going to scream and yell that he had a hand in giving them prominence.

And they're going to say, yes, you did, but I don't owe you forever, given your behavior or what you've said. I can't condone that. And so it's just, the whole thing is tragic because we all know what he has to do and he knows what he has to do and he can't. And by the way, Rand Paul, he's going to be on the show tomorrow. So one of the things that's sad about- I really admire Rand Paul now. I mean, he's another person that after what Trump did to him like that, rather than just get irate and he kind of ended his presidential campaign, he began to see that Donald Trump had some ideas and policies that were similar to his own. And he was very pragmatic. And what he did with those COVID hearings, I thought was absolutely necessary.

He's the reason we know half of what we know about Dr. Fauci. He just wouldn't let it go. And he, as a doctor, saw it early on and the lies, the dishonesty, the misleading. Yeah, that's a separate issue, but we definitely know him. He's unafraid.

When the whole Pelosi thing happened know everybody was sending their thanks maybe it was on tour but he reminded everybody that pelosi's own daughter when he was seriously injured with lung damage and broken ribs and pneumonia she had said seems like your neighbor was right she was celebrating that and she used her not her married name, but the Pelosi name to give that message resonance. And Nancy Pelosi didn't say a word. Of course. And that was terrible for her to do that. And he brought that up and everybody said, oh, my God, he can't at this moment.

Yeah, he can do that to remind everybody that it's a two-way street. And once you break the rules, then you can't expect everybody to take you seriously as an enforcer. That's exactly right. And by the way, most people were not saying it didn't happen or that Paul Pelosi deserved it. I didn't see any person in the comments saying that. There were just questions about the story being released by the police and the FBI. And that's legitimate. But in any event, so Donald Trump is going to run from the look of it. I think he's going to run based on what we're hearing. He can always surprise you. So I want to put that asterisk on it. But one of the things that's looming out there, Victor, is

why? Why would he announce it right now? Right. It's November. I mean, I remember having been through this cycle many times as a media person. They usually come out in like the late spring. I remember on the Kelly file back in 15, we were profiling Huckabee and Herman Cain and Donald Trump and others around the spring of 15. you know the the top 10 republican candidates that fox hosted was august august 6 2015 so we knew by the late summer who the front runner was it would never not be donald trump and then it was spring so here we are fall this is very early in the electoral season for him to announce and i understand he wants to get ahead of everybody but andy mccarthy has an interesting piece in national review positing that there's something else he's trying to get ahead of everybody but andy mccarthy has an interesting piece in national review positing that there's something else he's trying to get ahead of if he's out there as a declared presidential nominee um he's less likely potentially to be indicted that you know andy thinks there's a better chance now after these midterms that he's going to be indicted than

there ever has been but could it be he's trying to say, I'm running, I'm running, I'm running to get ahead of an indictment so he can say, you see, they're indicting Biden's chief rival? Yeah, I like Andy. I know him well, but I don't believe that because I think now the Democrats, I think the DOJ is entirely weaponized and politicized under Merrick Garland. I think they're going to they feel right now that Donald Trump is a liability. And I feel it's just the opposite, that they're going to pull back in hopes that he will be the nominee.

And they're more terrified of DeSantis. And anything that helps Trump, they're going to be for. I don't think, and, you know, and the other thing is the Mar-a-Lago raid and all of that. I mean, this is just what we should expect, but I don't think they're fatal. Maybe they will try to indict. I don't think it's going to go anywhere. But why is he doing, as to your question, why is he announcing? I think the real reason is he's looking at this DeSantis phenomenon. He's looking at some of these polls, not that we should believe polls after the midterm election, but DeSantis is either running neck and neck or

ahead of Trump. And people are telling him this phenomenon is getting out of hand, this cult of DeSantis, and he's growing in stature. And we thought we were going to have a red wave that we could take credit for, and all of our accounts are going to win. But the only red wave was in Florida. And he won every statewide office. And Marco Rubio was just as impressive. People had said that he might have a problem. And this DeSantis thing is growing, growing, growing. We've got to nip it in the bud now or it will be out of control.

So I think that explains why he's going to declare his candidacy. The declaration of his candidacy is going to be synonymous with an anti going to declare his candidacy. And the declaration of his candidacy is going to be synonymous with an anti-DeSantis candidacy. He's going to try to, I think you won't hear anything about Pompeo or Haley or any other person. It will be, I am running for president and this guy cannot do the job, or he's disloyal, or he's full of ingratitude or whatever. And that's going to be a hard task for Trump because DeSantis has an actual record. And he's going to say, you know what, I'm a MAGA person, but I also have a record, I'm competent. And I pay my most attention after a hurricane to fixing things. And I've done this, and I've changed Florida. And so I think it's,

if he doesn't do it now and preempt, I don't know how you would stop this DeSantis record. Here's the latest on the polling. There's a new YouGov poll, YouGov slash Yahoo News. YouGov, it's a, for whatever it's worth, B plus rating from 538, which dictates itself as the god of polls. We don't agree, but that's what they like to say. In any event, they say that there's been a 17 point swing from Trump to DeSantis from just a month ago. More Republicans and Republican leaning independents now say they would prefer DeSantis 42 percent as their 2024 presidential nominee over Trump than say they would prefer Trump to DeSantis 42% as their 2024 presidential nominee over Trump than say they would prefer Trump to

DeSantis. So it's 42% would like DeSantis over Trump. 35% said they'd take Trump instead of DeSantis. And there was another, oh, in just days before the election, Trump led DeSantis in a different poll by 22 points, Morning Consult. That would make it a 29 point swing in favor of desantis but still still that what this says to me is 35 of the base still wants trump even after the big win by desantis and that's the big question right that is now the big question can the 35 be won over trump's going to sling all the mud he can at DeSantis. He's like shiny and new and interesting and a winner right now, DeSantis, right? But in the clutches of Donald Trump, nobody emerges unscathed. If Donald Trump would have advisors or he would wise up, he would do

just the opposite of what he was doing. He would say on his tweets and in his public appearances, he said, Ron DeSantis was a good friend of mine, and we partnered together in Florida. And I live in Florida, and I'm a beneficiary of his good governance. And he's a very good, capable, but he needs to concentrate. I'm not saying this is my view, but this is what he should say. He should say he should need. He's just had a big victory. He's helped us. He's helped the party. He needs to concentrate for the next four years. And that's what he needs to do.

And I wish him well. But I'm the person who, you know, and then and then talk about his record, but not go after him like this, because what he's going to do is we've got to the point, Megan, where the independent or the mainstream Republican is now favorable to DeSantis. And we're down, as you said, to that 35% base. But that basis, he's going to chip away at that base because finally people, it's going to be like a coronation or a snowball effect for DeSantis. And he's feeding it. And he doesn't quite understand that. And if he would just give his base some ammunition so they can say, look,

Trump was nice to you. He was magnanimous. He's telling DeSantis, wait your turn and you're doing a great job. And at this moment, in this time, we need a little bit more Trump himself. And that would be fine. But when he starts using these epithets that we discussed, he makes it harder and harder, even for the base. And he says, you know, well, if I shot somebody in New York, they would never abandon me. That's never been true. Richard Nixon had a good base and people abandoned him and people will abandon a base. They can get down to 20%. George Bush had a good, he left office. Harry Truman had a good base. He left office about 22% approval rating. So the base is there. But if you keep testing it and keep trying it and keep insulting it and asking them for heroic support when you're not willing to be wise to earn their support, they will start to erode.

And I can tell you I've had maybe 50 calls in the last five days from fanatic Trump supporters. And they've all said the same thing that can be summed up, Megan, with what the hell is going on. And that's what they say. I know. They don't mean that as a compliment to Trump. They mean, why is he doing this? This is the time when we need smart action.

And DeSantis has got a Cheshire smile. It's like, okay, what's next today? Yeah, the GOP's lost now in 2018 and 2020 and now pretty much lost all the important races, even though they appear to have eked out a victory in the House in 2022. And so there really is, if there's no introspection on how to grow the party and grow the vote, then they deserve what they get. Yeah. And, you know, Trump had an argument and Roger Kimball, who's a very bright guy, pointed out in a column not too long ago that DeSantis is a MAGA person, but the Trump argument against him will be that watch what happens now as the never Trumpers, not the

extreme ones, the Bill Kristols, the David, they're gone, the bulwark people, but the other never Trumpers or the corporate right or Wall Street, they're going to see this person as a person that they can shower money on and can, you know, can reject the MAGA. And that's an argument that Trump could be using rather than an ad hominem, because we don't know. And that's why I think it's very important. I think I don't believe it's going to be under too much pressure from the corporate right. And watch out. He's going to be showered with money. And once you're showered with that type of corporate traditional silk stocking Republican money, it's very hard to have retain your independence. That would be a good argument.

But and it would be it would be persuasive to some people, but I'm not sure he can make it to put it in judicial terms. It's like what he could he could be a John Roberts instead of a Sam Alito, instead of a Clarence Thomas. He could be wooed by the Georgetown Party circuit in a way that the MAGA base would not like. And that's going to be something that we should watch with Ron DeSantis because I don't envy him because he's going to be under enormous pressure. And I can tell you, as somebody who supported Trump, you lose a lot of friends. And then you have all of these people in the mainstream Republican Party that are not MAGA. And they're, let's go back to the good old McCain or Romney days. And they have a lot of money, they have a lot of influence, and they try to persuade you,

I can't believe you would vote for Trump, that kind of stuff. And that's what they're going to do with DeSantis. They're going to say, well, you know, you were for Trump and you had a good MAGA, but now is the time to unite the party behind traditional Republican pillars of respectability and sobriety. So we'll see what he does, but he's going to be under a lot of pressure because there's going to be a lot of money. I think he's going to raise a fantastic amount of money, much more than Trump. Definitely. And with money comes obligations or, you know, loyalties.

Right. I mean, of course, Trump did it all the first time around, getting the nomination, at least, without any money or any backing or no establishment, no party leaders behind him, you know, in this insurgent campaign. We'll see. I mean, Ron DeSantis, two things I know about him are, number one, he doesn't look at polls. He thinks he knows his electorate. He thinks he knows what's best for them or what they want. And he proceeds accordingly. And number two, he does not respond to Trump.

He does not respond to Trump. He does not. There will come a day when he will have to if they're on a debate stage together. I think he has a lot of, I don't know if respect is the right word, but he has a lot of, he understands that Trump has a rare cunning and people can make fun of Trump all he wants, but he has a rare political instinct for weakness, for reliabilities, for vulnerabilities, and for the pulse of the people. And for all of his excesses, anybody right now who says Donald Trump is finished, just for the reasons that we talked about, we never quite said he's finished.

I don't believe he is. But I think he's being self-destructive and he's empowering DeSantis, and that could be bad or good for the party. But the idea that he's going to be indicted and finished or that he's just he's all through or he's going to tell us tomorrow that he's not. I don't see that because I don't see he's very resilient. He's got nine lives and he's only used about seven. He's pretty vibrant, unlike our commander in chief right now. He's still pretty youthful despite his advancing age. Victor, wonderful talking to you.

Thank you so much for being here. Thank you for having me, Megan. All right. Coming up, Jennifer Say is back. Remember Jennifer Say? She was the Levi's president who got forced out. She she refused to take the silencing money and walked out on her own accord. But that was after she pushed back against some of the COVID overreaches like school closures.

She was so controversial because she didn't want the schools to be closed. Well, she's back and she's going to talk about her exit from Levi's after speaking out on COVID and some of the latest insanity like the claim in this New England Journal of Medicine article that masks reduce racism. Okay, really? We'll go there next. Stand by. Perhaps one of the biggest stories of COVID has been parents finding their voices. It appears the Democrats just woke up this election and realized parents are an actual voting group to be courted. Great. Unrelenting in their efforts to fight back against school boards and even scientists when they felt their decisions harmed their children and were, as the left likes to say, anti-science. Parents could see it left and right and were jumping up and down about it, no matter the names that were thrown at them, like domestic terrorist. One such mom was at the top of her field,

in line to take charge of one of the biggest clothing companies in the world, until her views became too, quote, toxic for the powers that be. Her stance for public school children not only cost her a dream job, but friends and family members too. We've spoken to Jennifer Say before, but now she's back to

discuss the fallout, the lessons learned, and her brand new book, Levi's Unbuttoned. The woke mob took my job, but gave me my voice. It's out tomorrow. Jennifer Say, welcome back to the show. So good to see you. Thank you so much for having me again, Megan. I think yours was the first interview I did right after I resigned. And now here I left NBC, I was reeling, it was kind of traumatic. And then seven, eight months later, and certainly a couple years later, boy, I see it all very differently. I see myself differently. I see the country differently. You gain a lot of perspective. Oh, yeah. And sitting and writing the book in such a fast fashion gave me a lot of clarity. But it's, you know, it's been a difficult nine months and two years before that, because I was really sort of waging a war internally.

Within the company, it was really difficult. I recently listened to one of your old episodes with Bridget Phetasy. And it brought me so much comfort. Because, you know, it's not easy, even after you've decided, I'm going to do the right thing, I'm going to stand in it, I'm going to work from a place of integrity, but you lose a lot. And it's hard. It's not like I do that willy-nilly. And it's not like it's not still hard sometimes. As you said, I gave up the city I loved, a job that I loved. I lost friends and, yes, some family members through the sort of fractured relationships. And that's it's hard. So, you know, that episode, I'm sure you remember the one was very helpful to me.

I don't have any regrets at all. But that doesn't mean it's easy all the time. Yeah. Don't you think, though, there's like it's it had to happen? You know, I don't I don't know if you'd call it fate or what you'd call it. But I do think that one of the upshots of cancel culture is it separates some people from institutions from which there close to 23 years. 20 of them were really awesome. Two were really crappy. I'm going to work on forgiving those. But I feel like I was unchanged in all of that. I stayed true to the values and the principles.

I didn't change, even though some people look at me, even, you know, former friends and are like, what happened to Jen? I didn't. Standing up and saying public schools should be open while by the way, private schools were opened. And they were shouting about equity and equality means meanwhile, the low income kids are shuttered at home. Like, where is the equity and equality in that? It's just so obvious. And it's this lie. And this is really what the book is about of woke capitalism that allows folks to get away with that. It's insane. You know, when we see it brought to life now with the recent story about Sam Bankman Freed and, you know, before that, Elizabeth Holmes and

the WeWork guy and like, they put forth this blustery image of we're going to change the world cultiness and everybody buys it and they forget to look at what's going on underneath the covers which is no finance no fundamentals they're not making money they're not delivering on their commitments um and they're defrauding investors and the press buys it which is really disturbing. And they put these folks on the cover of Forbes and Fortune. And I would argue, how is that different, really, than what my CEO did under the cover of COVID, laying off 15% of the workforce, bolstering the stock price, and cashing out

on $42 million in stock for himself? But he did it with empathy. So all is forgiven. You know, so this woke capitalism, it's a big con. It's reputation laundering. And I think business needs to get back to the fundamentals, offer a great product that people want at a fair price and treat employees fairly.

It's not that hard. I'm so glad you brought this up. I've been dying to talk about this case, this cryptocurrency billionaire guy. I mean, I don't really follow it that closely, but it's riveting. And it's been the front page of every single newspaper for a few days now.

But the long and the short of it is, I'm looking at Miranda Devine's piece in the Post, that Biden's second biggest donor, Sam Bankman-Fried, they call him SBF, this 30-year-old wunderkind who started this cryptocurrency group, he was a billionaire, has filed for bankruptcy just days after the election. And as Miranda says, but not before pumping $40 million into the Democratic Party to spend on get out the vote and other shadowy ballot harvesting mechanics for the midterms.

Everybody promoted this guy. He's this amazingly brilliant guy. They celebrated him. And she's got some examples in here, which are just absolutely spectacular. She talks about how this venture capital firm Sequoia, which is a big backer of this guy's crypto group, hired a freelance writer, Adam Fisher, to write a puff piece on this guy who now is now being accused of being a fraudster and uh the guy writes in in promoting him um he's a future trillionaire i don't know how i know i just do spf is a winner i couldn't shake the feeling that this guy is actually as selfless as he claims to be. The article, which was replaced on Sequoia's website over the weekend with a somber note to investors, describes how SBF wowed Sequoia's partners into giving him a billion dollars

during a Zoom meeting and so on and so forth. So yeah, this guy is a darling of the Democratic Party, Joe Biden's second biggest donor. He said all the right things. And he appears to have been, according to what I read, a total fraud, a complete fraud, just like Holmes. And and just like the WeWork dude, whatever his name is, Newman, Adam Newman. I was just yeah, I was just I mean, I know what he did wasn't illegal per se, but it was certainly immoral. And he knew the fundamentals of the business were not, you know, were not strong, he was not delivering what he said he was going to do. They both they all three had the same sort of pose as do gooders, right? So they're concealing their greed and corruption by positioning themselves as altruists, that should be an alarm bell for people. And it was all bullshit, as we

now know. And what's really alarming to me is, is the press furthers this image. The business press does not do due diligence. They say, you know, they celebrate them as heroes, they put them on the cover of Forbes and fortune and give them all sorts of awards. And they're just stealing money, basically. They're stealing money. It's gross. And I think it's important to look beyond these really extreme examples to the broader trend of woke capitalism or woke corporatism. And that's really what the book is about. And I think CEOs today, it's not enough to be super, super rich. They now want to be heralded as philanthropists and altruists, and they're not. Business is the same as it ever was. It's about making with integrity, pay workers fairly, offer a great product that lasts that consumers want at a fair price, treat employees fairly. When it veers into this other area, and it becomes this pose, it really is concealing or we should be wondering what it's

concealing. And I use it. Well, meanwhile, you've got the as divine points out in this New York Post piece, you've got these Democrats who want us to believe that they're so woke and they're so pro, you know, any downtrodden group. But secretly, they're taking money from these alleged billionaires to cover the billionaires asses. He lavished lavished his largesse pro crypto Democrats like New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, who was sponsoring a bill. Wait for it to lock the SEC out of regulating the crypto market. What a shock. He also visited the White House meeting with top Biden advisers as recently as April, according to the Free Beacon. And then she concludes, no wonder the Biden administration has been weak on regulating the crypto market. It was the goose that laid the golden egg. It's very easy to get these people to support you in the non-regulation, which is going to hurt the little guy as long as you're lining their coffers. just on with our friends over at the all in podcast, David Sachs and co. And he was saying, I could not figure out how this guy had so much liquidity, like where these guys in crypto don't tend to have a ton of liquidity, right? And this guy was the exception. And let's see whether the Democrats ask those tough questions now that his firm is totally imploded, filed for bankruptcy,

and a lot of people look like they're going to be very hurt. It just seemed, it's mind-blowing to me that we collectively keep getting suckered by these young, culty leaders. I say leaders. I'm being generous. They're not leading anything. They're just stealing money for themselves. We fall for it over and over. How did we fall for this guy right after Newman and Holmes? Same strategy, young, charismatic, although I look at them and I go, what do people see in them? They seem like frauds to me from the beginning. They seem like cult leaders. The charisma is questionable. I don't really get it. But again, I think we have to look at the issue more broadly and not just look at these three as outliers, but that it's a trend across corporate America.

You know, I'll use Nike as an example. I use this one in the book. They do all these campaigns, all these woke campaigns about Women's History Month and Pride, et cetera. In the same year, they're doing all this stuff about Women's History Month and Pride, et cetera. And the same year, they're doing all this stuff about Women's History Month and celebrating women. And we celebrate women and body positivity and all this stuff. At the same time, three bombshell articles in The New York Times about how they actually treat women in the company. They, you know, just widespread harassment, abuse of a young athlete in their running program, and discrimination against one of their paid endorsers, who was an Olympic runner, Alison Felix. So, but people buy the woke pose, and they ignore the reality. So I don't even think

people actually care. They like the pose, they like the reputation laundering, because if they actually cared, Nike wouldn't have grown 8% that year that all that stuff was exposed. That's so true. It's like Hollywood, you know, lecturing us for years about how we need to be better people and be woke and be more PC. Meanwhile, they're elevating people like Harvey Weinstein and calling him God at the Academy Awards. Like, okay. Or as Schellenberger points out, it's like, you know, all the green leaders telling us we got to stay home in a small home. We got to buy an electric car, whether or not you can afford it, but we're going to

turn your electricity off while they fly around the world and wear single use outfits at whatever kind of events they're going to. It's the hypocrisy is startling. And I guess, you know, to go back to your question from before, like that hypocrisy is something I cannot unsee now. And I've certainly rejected the Democratic Party at this point, which I'd been a part of, a registered Democrat my entire life. I would have considered myself probably left of left of center. I can't unsee this hypocrisy. Now, that doesn't mean I haven't embraced the right totally either. You're going to volunteer for Trump.

Yeah, I'm not out there doing that. I'm unaffiliated, which is 40% of voters in Colorado. So I'm in good company here. So it was interesting watching the election without a dog in the race, so to speak, because I wasn't kind of aligned with either. Wait, I want to ask you about that. I want to ask you about that. But before I do, I want to make a quick point on what you said about wearing the same outfit twice. I'll never forget Joaquin Phoenix was being nominated for I can't remember one of his many great roles. He's a great actor. And he wore the same tux like the election season and Stella McCartney, who I think designed it, was out there like, oh, praise Joaquin.

He's wearing the same outfit over and over like good for him. Now, meanwhile, it's like and I remember Janice Dean, our mutual friend, she tweeted out a picture of her husband who's a firefighter. Like, here's my husband, Sean. He also wears the same outfit to all of his awards. Don't we all? This is called being a normal person. Like, appreciate it. Okay. It's great. But like, the fact that this is a thing is absolutely ridiculous and an indictment of your entire industry.

You know, when I was at Levi's, I worked with a lot of stylists, well-known, famous stylists, and I encouraged them in their work that wasn't with us. Their celebrity work, why don't you, for a full season, have one of your celebs wear the same outfit the whole time? Change the earrings, do whatever you want, change the shoes. But you're all out there making this big statement about how green you are, and yet you dress these folks in a different outfit every time that they probably never wear again. Why don't you do that? Like a normal person does. I mean, I've been wearing the same shirt for every interview. Yes, I wear the same pants every day.

But they don't, you know, and so the hypocrisy of that, which Michael Schellenberger talks about so eloquently is it's startling. And I don't understand why people don't care. So, you know, that's primarily right. I see your point there. They're they're just want the box checking because it's like, hey, a vote's a vote. I don't care if you really meant it. Now, wait, let's let me I'd love to get your perspective on the like, why do you think

that I was talking about our last segment? Republicans, Democrats voted for Democrats, Republicans voted for Republicans, but Democrats, 3% greater stuck with their team, there were 3% of Republican migrators, and independence rather than voting for the party out of power, went for the party in power. So why do you think that happened? Yeah, I mean, I'm still making sense of it. And I'm, you know, not in that habit of prognosticating about politics. First off, I would say the pollsters, we should stop listening, right? Like that is just ridiculous. They don't know anything. Clearly, everybody has said this, it seems like at least in this election, and I know this is counter to what your last guest was saying, but in this election, Trump endorsing it was not helpful.

I think it's important to look at the two races, my state where Governor Jared Polis won and then Florida where DeSantis won. These are the two. Not only were they decisive, I think they won each by about 20 points, which is a pretty crushing defeat. Polis is a Democrat with real libertarian tendencies. And obviously, DeSantis is, you know, the rising star, if not the star in the Republican Party. They both had more in common, although Polis took umbrage at this this weekend on Bill Maher, but they both really ran on freedom. They both ran on giving their voters more choice and more freedom and more ownership of their own decisions. And I think some might disagree, but, you know, on integrity and accountability. Polis was the best Democratic governor. Now that may be a low bar, you you know, on integrity and accountability, Polis was the best Democratic

governor. Now that may be a low bar, you can decide. But when it comes to COVID, you know, he's not implemented vax mandates and mask mandates. And he was the first to open the schools. And he really did entrust the folks in Colorado to make the decisions for themselves, which is why we came here. You know, we came here for that reason. We came from California because the schools were open in Colorado before other Democratic strongholds. Clearly, DeSantis runs on some of those same things. So they are very different stylistically. But I think there's a lesson there for the other candidates who may have, you know, eked it out in one state or another. That's reminding me of you, undoubtedly, given all your history of speaking out bravely on COVID.

Of course, you were 100 percent right on opening the schools. It's insane to me. I said this the first time we talked, that that was your, quote, you wanted the school that's what got people so upset okay sure but in any event the atlantic just did an article on uh on ronda santos the headline is um oh i can't they said it was a gamble yes but what they basically said was okay here's what he did um he gave people freedom. They were free. People were free in Florida, free to support their family, free to attend school, free to run a business, free from the constraints of fog glasses and not being able to unlock their iPhone. To that, a liberal might add, free to get sick or even die from a respiratory disease for which safe, effective vaccines are available, which is exactly the point. DeSantis, his COVID policies reassured

members of his political base that they were in control. They understood the risks and took them anyway. And although Florida had a relatively high COVID death toll, the welter of confounding factors, weather, demographics, wealth, denied liberals the smackdown they craved. Kind of interesting. It's a begrudging, like, okay. Yeah. And first of all, the headline makes me a little nuts. It wasn't a gamble. It's exactly what almost every European country did, which is in the article. Right. How can that be a gamble? We were the outlier here in the US in the hospital to have relatives with them. Like this was the humane choice. And he wasn't betting on it. He was informed by data. He did a round table with doctors. Did any other governors do that? Not that I know of. They just adopted the stance, handed down from public health. I would be willing to wager a lot that he was is more informed on COVID data than any of the other governors. But like I said, Polis also was very reasonable. He got the schools opened. He didn't mandate masks or or or the vaccine. And so there's a lot of overlap there. And so I think

they're and they were the most dominant in every race. And so I think they're, and they were the most dominant in, in every race. And Polis they're saying turned his state that was once purple blue. DeSantis turned a state that was recently purple red, but they did it in a similar way. If you think about it now, stylistically, they're very, very different. Polis is much sort of quieter and more reserved. DeSantis is not that he's, he's fiery, but it's not just fire and brimstone and screaming at people and calling them names. He actually is putting the

policies into place that the citizens of Florida want. Well, then you have Whitmer, who dominated in Michigan despite being governor lockdown, but abortion was a very big deal there. And you got Kokel winning in New York, but we're so blue in New York, it's just tough to unsee. I mean, Lee Zeldin did a great job, but it's just tough. Let me ask you about this. Some of the local races Republicans did get in in New York. And I will say one, I will make one other point is there was a real sort of trend towards school choice in this election, whether it was school board candidates or governors, even, you know, governor Hochul lifted the, whatever the limit on charters Pritzker supported private school vouchers.

So that isn't something people are talking about a ton. Corey DeAngelis is, but there is a real trend towards choice for schools for parents. And it came from both Republicans and Democrats. Now we'll see if folks like Pritzker and Hochul follow through. Yeah. I got to tip the hat to Moms for Liberty down in Florida. I spoke with this, they're beyond Florida, but I spoke to this group a couple of years ago and they talked about how they had run for school boards and they were out there knocking on doors, trying to change some of these

COVID policies and stand up for their kids on the radicalization of the agenda being pushed on them, the social agenda in schools. And one of them had dog feces slammed against her door. I mean, they were getting a lot of incoming, but they kept going. They kept going. And the GOP dominated every school board race in Florida, thanks to governor desantis's endorsement too this past there was another article in recent days i think it was the new yorker that was about the sort of school choice wave that that happened in the election they talk about bombs for liberty and basically call anyone who's for school choice a white christian nationalist so apparently that's what i am now even though i'm a jewish atheist detail stop it um okay let's talk about the latest bit of quote science capital

science new new study in the new england journal of medicine uh this is from our pal carol markowitz again new york post saying mask policies this is what it purports to show that mask policies in schools work to contain COVID. But that's not all. The authors conclude, quote, We believe that universal masking may be especially useful for mitigating effects of structural racism in schools. Really? Including my favorite potential deepening of educational inequities. And as Carol puts it, sure they do. Why not? And the next study will show masking fights climate change too. This is an absurd study. It goes back to the woke thing. You know, it's like wokeness gone wild. All you have to do is say that it fights structural racism and provides greater equality or equity.

And you don't have to defend it. They don't offer a rationale for it. No. They just say it like it's a fact. And there's a million confounders in that study, which make it incredibly flawed. And smarter people, scientists and doctors than me can get into that. But it's about time frame and, you know, other confounding factors about the populations in those, in those, um, each of those districts. But the study is far from conclusive,

but that line that it just exposes the absurdity because, and the fact that they don't even bother to offer the rationale for that statement, I'd like to understand what they think it is. I mean, honestly, and there has been nothing more structurally racist and classist than closing schools for 18 months in deep blue states and cities where within the public schools, you have predominantly low income children, black children, brown children, the, you know, the nation's report card, the facts are clear, the learning loss is devastating, not to even get into the mental health impacts. But the data from the nation's report card, it conceals the worst of it, because it's the lower income students, the black students that lost the most.

And the results are all just sort of blended and blurred. But it doesn't even get at the increased inequity that was caused by these catastrophic. They got away with it. And no one's really. One of the things that was frustrating for me in in the election is no one's really talking about what do we do now? Because this is not a lot of folks want to be like oh the schools were closed let's just kind of move on amnesty let's grant amnesty no peace these these kids are still suffering they are still chronic absenteeism in some schools is as high as in some districts is as high as 40%. There's schools, public schools, individual schools in San Francisco, where chronic absenteeism is as high as

90%. This problem is going to be with us for a long time. The disengagement is going to lead to higher dropout rates. We know what that leads to lower life expectancy um higher incarceration rates like it's not over because the schools are open now and kids are still restricted look governor hokal is still threatening all kinds of mandates um so it's not over and people tell me all the time you know just drop it it's over well it's not over no without acknowledgement the woman who wrote that piece, Emily Oster, what's her name? That's her. You got it. Right. In the Atlantic calling for amnesty for people who got things wrong and on COVID. The absurd, like if that had been done the other way, this white woman who's got a very well-paying job at Brown University, married with two kids and like the great house and, you know, very celebrated author as well, basically looked at a bunch of black and brown children who had been disadvantaged

and was like, let's move on. Amnesty. Can you imagine the blowback if she had been a Republican trying to defend some sort of Republican heirs? This is a Democrat trying to defend herself or her fellow party men who got it really wrong. Tell that to the kids that you just listed who still aren't back at school. Why should they the people who hurt them get amnesty? Well, and she's talking about one way amnesty. Where's my amnesty? I still don't get it. No, it's not about me. You know, one quick thing back to the book, though, you know, it is largely about that. But it is also a memoir just about being a woman in corporate America for the last 30 years, which I'm sure you can relate to. And one of the things I most appreciate about my situation now, and I remind

myself of this is, I'm free, I'm free to say what I want. I'm free to stand up for what I believe in. And there's not anything that can stop me from doing that. Yeah, Levi's Unbuttoned, but also Jennifer Say Unbuttoned. I like it because it's like a little saucy. You're like, oh, what? Unbuttoned. That makes me go to a different. Anyway, I love the title. No, no, I know. I know. I know. But I love it. It's a great book. And your personal story is incredible. Some of which we highlighted in our last exchange. But read the book. You will not be sorry. Jennifer's got a lot of smart things to say on a lot of issues. Levi's unbuttoned.

Check it out. All the best to you, Jen. Thank you, Megan. Tomorrow, as I mentioned, Senator Rand Paul is back with us. What does he think about what's happened in the Senate and what's next for Fauci? Download the show and see you tomorrow. Thanks for listening to The Megyn Kelly Show show no bs no agenda and no fear