The Young Turks - Hour 3: TYT GEORGIA SENATE RUNOFF ELECTION COVERAGE

Episode Date: December 7, 2022

Hour 3: Join Cenk Uygur, John Iadarola, Michael Shure, and Dr. Rashad Richey as they cover the Georgia Senate Runoff Election between Rev. Raphael Warnock and Herschel Walker LIVE. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

You're listening to the Young Turks, the online news show. Make sure to follow and rate our show with not one, not two, not three, not four, but five stars. You're awesome. Thank you. All right, back on the Young Turks selection coverage of the Georgia runoff. Jake Hugar, John Irolo, Michael Schurr with you guys. Also, Scott Dunn, Reggie Simmons, and Alex McLean, all excellent names. They just joined by hitting the join button below the video on YouTube instantly becoming American heroes. We appreciate it. I can't do the show without you guys. And we'd like to think that we give you an interesting perspective.

And so now, we're- Do you think they're all excellent names? I do. Alex McLean's a strong name. Strong name. Reggie Simmons, strong game. Very strong, yeah. Scott Dunn, okay. It's fine, right? It's understated. Yeah, Scott Dunn's six, seven out of ten. But in a room with those guys, with Simmons and McNeil, on his own, he's strong. Yeah, on his own, he's strong. Yeah, yeah, exactly. You're right, you're right. But together in the same room, all of a sudden, they're very powerful.

Exactly. Okay, now, so we have this curious situation. Let me give you the numbers and the status right now, and then we'll get back into discussing, what do we learn from this, what's our takeaways, et cetera. But first, as things stand now, we have the curious situation of Raphael Warnock with a 0.22 lead, 50.11 to 49.89. Well, it's just changed actually. It's now a 0.12 lead. Okay. Nice. And it's 89% reporting. Yet everyone is convinced, and I believe them, that Warnock is going to win to ease them. So only 11% left.

It's tied, but it's been called. It's been called by a couple of, by the way, not by everybody. New York Times has not called it. I have not called it. John has called it. If this tightens a bit more, I think Warnick may have a mandate. I called it. Michael's called it, but folks who do this for a living, and we do it,

we do commentary for a living. So when John says, hey, I'm not Cornacky, John is infinitely about, in Kornacki, but what Kornacki does have is he sits with the numbers of the particular counties in a way that he can see more clearly the numbers, right? And so that's what we mean by, hey, we're not doing that. So when you hear us calling it, it's based on our experience, got instinct, et cetera, right? And obviously the numbers that we're looking at. But we don't have microscopic details is my point. We don't. But we have percentages in strongholds and we can look at the map and we can see where votes are in.

We can see where expectations have been exceeded or underperformed. And you can make in this race certainly a pretty safe call. Yeah, and again, for what it's worth, Dave Wasserman, an election expert, he's called it. So, you know, it's- I say we're election experts. Yeah, but- No, I know what you're saying. These are people who run numbers and do maps and yeah, I'm-

Exactly, yeah. And so, and I got no love for Wasserman at all, okay? Okay, but he does have access to numbers that I don't have access to right now in terms of votes by county. Okay, so that's why that's relevant. He's super smart on this stuff. Yeah, I get it, I get it. All right, so one thing that I want to go kind of back to discussing is what, so let's assume that Warnock wins by about three or four, which is what the range of expectations here. as the night is winding up, but again, he's tied with 11% left.

I don't, that 11% has to almost go entirely to Warnock, which it might. It might be, you know, Fulton County going 8218 for Warnock. That's where Atlanta is. So it's 81.19 there now. Yeah, yeah. After the 68% count. So let's call 3% win, right? Are we happy with that?

So we, in a sense, we've discussed that throughout the night. but if I'm if I look at that now we're feeling a tiny bit more comfortable that Warnock is going to win I look at it and go yeah there's there's something wrong and in that case the Democratic Party what do you got you walker's up now walkers up I think that's a Georgia drubbing I think that's a Georgia drubbing yes at at 3% in a race in a state where no Democrats win statewide and haven't for a long time until John Moss off and Raphael Warnock show up, that to me is a drubbin. Can I see a question?

Yeah. It definitely would be a drubbing if it was some random Republican state legislator who owned a car lot or something. No, no, I understand it, but because it's Walker and because- But what I'm asking is, it would seem to be less of a drubbing since it's Walker, but does it matter at all that it's Walker? Do we actually think that any of that in the end really matter? I mean, the people I speak to are voting for Walker because he's a Republican.

And because they, there are some people that think Joe Manchin could switch parties. I don't think so. I don't think that that, but, but they think that by getting closer, by having a 50-50 Senate with a tied committee, it's better than uneven committees. It does leave them susceptible. It makes it one less thing they have to do in 2024. The people that are smart on this, the Republicans that know this on the ground. And there were people at this Warner event, this Walker event who told this to me.

who know it. So yes, and I think that it's a Georgia is a red state, just because it rejected Donald Trump. It didn't reject Brian Kemp twice. It didn't, you know, reject down ballot candidates from Brad Raffensberger all the way to Bert Jones, who's a lieutenant governor there, all around the state. It didn't unelect one of the silliest members of Congress in Floyd County. Did it go for Trump in 2016? What's that? Did it go for Trump in 2016? Yeah, Georgia. Well, yeah, Georgia went for Trump's 2016, yeah. And so this is a red state and a Democrat winning by 3% over whoever the Republicans are running. It's a shame, but it is. It's a, that to me is a blowout. All right. So overall, I say no. And so here's why I say that. So I think that it's now as clear as anything in politics that Donald Trump and his candidates are costing the Republican Party in a big way.

Like, the jury was out before the midterm elections and not just generally, but for me. Like, I don't, if you had said to me, are these crazy Trump candidates going to cost the Republicans? I would have said, I don't know. And I almost tweeted in the morning of the election, here's what I'm confident of in the midterm election. Here's what I'm confident of. I have no idea what's going to happen in this election, okay?

And you know me, I don't know if I say that. Right? So, but now the jury's come in. And Georgia is actually the prime example of it. And that's why we spent most of our time on election night talking about that state. And here we are again. So in the first vote, Brian Kemp outperformed Herschel Walker by eight and a half points. That is huge. That means if you elect, if the Republicans have put up someone in a primary, that was not mentally, they very, very, very likely would have won this race. Do I believe, as Michael partly alluded to earlier, that Warnock would have run a different and stronger and tougher race if he had a more significant challenger?

No, I don't think Warnock could run a tough race of his life dependent on it. He's never shown that. I mean, Roshana earlier in the show talked about what a great orator he is. That makes sense. He's the pastor of Martin Luther King's Church, right? That's a big role in the African American community, not just in Atlanta, but countrywide. So I believe that he's an is excellent at giving a speech, but I've never seen it. And he's been on the national stage now for many years, not 20, but, you know, plenty enough.

Who, Warnock? Warnock. On the national stage? Yeah. He was a pastor at Ebenezer Baptist. So for two or three years he's been. Yeah, yeah. I thought you said 20 years.

No, I said not 20 years. Oh, oh, okay. Yeah, yeah. I said not 20 years, but two, three years enough to have given a speech that made a headline that got our attention when we cover the news every single day. Not one, not one. Why? Is he a bad speaker?

No, we know he's not a bad speaker. He's choosing not to speak. It's maddening. And if he wins, he might have been right to do that. Yeah. You know, because he, the moment he was elected to that in that special election and that runoff in, in January of 2021, The next day he began running for Senate again, he was a candidate for Senate. And two years, as we know, is not a very long time in politics.

So he had to be super careful in this very red state. He will be a disappointment if he doesn't do what you're asking him to do now. Now that he wins a full term. Well, well, let's see. He does nothing before. I mean, he will go from a backbencher to a middle or a front venture. And I bet you'll see something that you didn't see from him. It may not be everything you want to see.

It'll be too vague for a bet. So we're not going to make a bet. What does that mean? that we can notice, we'll argue forever as to what that is. He will be demonstrably different than the senator he was for two years. Yeah, absolutely not. Okay, I think he will stay completely mute. He will do no big speeches.

He will, he will not counterattack against Republicans. John, you want to be the judge? We'll put $100 on it. I think I'm somewhat fair. Yeah. Okay, so $100. $100, okay. So give it two years, two years.

So like, it's not, hey, I'm not two months. No, let him. Yeah, we're not going to see it. So we're talking about like, like what, coming up with a big, piece of legislation or be out front more, you know, use the oratory that he uses in Martin Luther King's pulpit out on the, out in the United States Senate. Protests outside of Chuck Schumer's office or something. Then I would give Michael 200.

Right, I wouldn't make the bet. Okay, we'll keep an eye on Raphael Warnick. Is he going to be better in two years, is he going to be worse? Is he in two years going to run again just out of habit? Yeah, look, I want to get Al Franken on the show. We've been trying and I don't know if there's bad blood because we mildly criticized him when he was in the Senate. And once you become part of the elites, you can't stand any criticism, right?

And so God knows what he thinks. Unless you're Rocana. Yeah, that's why I love Rocotta, because that guy could take 20 punches and come right back, okay? And because he's fighting for things that he believes in, even if we agree or we disagree, right? That's why I respect them, okay? By the way, it's not just for progressives, and there's a lot of progressives who don't do that. But you know, there's Tim Ryan during the presidential campaign.

Forget the Ohio campaign, or I thought he would in a very tough campaign, but he sat in the seat. We went back and forth. Every time he says yes to the interview, and we go back and forth, I respect that, okay? And that's how somebody who's representing you should be. This is how, why I did it, this is what I believe, right? And he's very rare in politics, unfortunately. So anyway, the reason I want to talk to Franken is because look, when he went to the Senate, the guy who wrote the book about how the Republicans were lying liars,

went in and just shut the F up and didn't do a goddamn thing until they created a BS controversy and wrote him out of it. My guess is now if I ask him, he'll probably deeply regret that he did nothing while in the Senate. But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe in his mind he wants to justify it or he thinks he conquered the world, even though I literally can't remember a single thing he did, right? So this is the democratic way. Unfortunately, if they were a Mandalorian, they would say, this is the way.

Okay, the way is shut up, don't do anything, just sit there like a lump on a log. I mean, the reason Fetterman stood out so much is because we're like, whoa, not just us. The whole country, and certainly Pasadena, was that? He's also 6'8. Yeah, but that's certainly not why he won. It's a lot of 6-8 losers. But that's why he stood out. Yeah, but the reason he stood out politically is because he actually fought.

He fought Republicans. Yeah. We haven't seen that in 20 years, maybe 40 years. I mean, okay, so Michael. Maybe it's one reason that some people liked Beto. Beto could get aggressive and he'd get in their face in some cases. There's a lot of other issues, but I'm saying he's not, you know, he's not like many of the centrist Democrats that have run a variety of failed campaigns.

No, no, good point. And so you're partly answering what I was going to ask Michael, which is, yeah, look, Beto on occasions, so when he said, yeah, take away the AR-15s, et cetera, and he said a couple of things in his entire career where he were like, oh, Beto's fighting, and we loved it, right? And what would he do? He would immediately backtrack, right? And then he said, even about that famous comment about the guns, he backtracked from it. It's unbearable, it's unbearable.

So, Michael, do you, am I, okay, so you and I consistently have different perspectives on the Democratic Party. I'm asking this super genuinely, like the last 2040 years, fighters to the Democrats where you go. See, that's our- Well, 2040 is different. I mean, also, everything is within context. It's like who, context, who is the best running back? Well, in the 70s, a running back did something differently than one does in 2022. Same thing with the senator.

It also matters when you're in the minority and when you're the majority. It matters, you know, a lot matters. Who the leader is and who is telling you what you should and, you know, what our strategy is going to be. who the, you know, so a lot of that. And I would say the Senate is not, is a place that very few people in the history of this country have made their marks as a senator you remember. Lyndon Johnson, right, Sam Irvin. There are senators, and I'm not naming them all, RFK, but he made his mark in different ways. JFK clearly and Bob Dole. But I don't think that when you look at the entirety of 20 to 40 years, you can you can say the Democrats have certainly

taken attack, which is different, which is more, which is, I would say, more vanilla than you would have liked it to be, and maybe that it should have been. But I do think the Democrats play better defense and they play terrible offense. And I think that's where the problem is with how we see it. Yeah. Well, really fast. So much so that we can probably remember the times when they seem to be doing a little bit better on offense, like when they make a midterm cycle about corruption or, you know, in 2018, I thought there was some good stuff where they made the entire thing about Trump that was okay. They obviously failed in 2016 on that, but there have not been a lot of times where they've really taken it to someone. Fetterman, I think maybe

could be a good model for that. They're also not collaborated well, Democrats on offense. I mean, that's when it when it works best is when they're all in one bunch going. I mean, And look at, I mean, the most recent example is, is Mansion and Cinema on Bill Back Better, right? I mean, and or on, you know, build back better. When they're looking at breaking up the Democratic push, right? And everybody's staking their ground and they work at odds with each other. When you look at recent Republicans, they collaborate well. They work together well, even if it's abhorrent to so many people.

And that pushes them over on offense. They back each other that way. And it's a bigger conversation, but I think that's what the difference is and how we look at it. All right, let me ask you it one other way, and then we'll move on. And we still have these amazing videos to get to. And by the way, right now the Warnock's- Senate race tonight. Yeah, Warnock's lead is 0.26, 92% of the vote in.

Apparently that last 8% is like almost all Democrats. Yeah. Because, I mean, we just keep running out of real estate. extrapolate. I mean, you look at Muskogee County, right? Muskogee County, where Columbia is, it's, Columbus, it's got right now 54,000 votes, 65, 35. Warnock in the general election was at 62. Herschel Walker was at 38. And so you see that even in some of these counties, the percentages are changing, that fewer Republicans are in the booth voting in a place like that, which is, you know, a Georgia population center right now. I'm afraid that tomorrow I'm going to be reporting 100% reporting. Walker's got a half a point lead, but we think Warnock's going to win by three points. Yeah, the map of the remaining votes is like there's.

I feel Warnock is going to be reelected. You guys, yeah, I hear you guys. It's all blue from here on now. Okay, I don't disagree with you guys. But having said that, and I'm not calling it at all, I would never call it based on these numbers. But you guys have been saying that for the last 20 points, right? And it hasn't moved at all. No, but that's part of it hasn't moved.

The rest has been coming in. Neither have the percentages coming out of the Atlanta metropolitan area. I mean, so that's what we've been basing this on. Yeah, and it's guys, it's not just Michael and John. There's many experts who agree with them who say, yeah, the remaining, it was 24% we're supposed to be Democrats. He's up by 0.8. Jake is posturing for tomorrow morning, Walker wins.

I knew it when John is. Michael were saying that I didn't want to say they won and that's what you're doing right now no no I look it's a no loose situation no no I believe in numbers no but I'm usually the first to call it race well that's true that is right but in this case I just I don't see it yet I I see what you guys are saying I just don't see it in the numbers yet and I am is what one of our members wrote in you there's definitely some PTSD from 2016 right or where everybody's like no don't worry don't worry don't worry He'll just go, oh, the numbers, yeah, she's going to win by, you know, she's going to win by age, she's going to be my fight, this is easy, right, until you saw the, no, it just, no, they never came in. But this is different, this is different. Okay, so last question in regards to how to run, right? Are we agreed that, that LBJ is the better model? Can I, is that clear or is that not clear? When I say, in this case, I'm not talking about running as much as the entire way of, of operating in politics. LBJ was super aggressive and he used plenty of carrots. People actually underestimate how many carrots he used, right? Yeah. But he also used some serious sticks, right?

And the Democrats, other than against progressives, haven't found a stick in 40 years. So, and that's, I try to find these comments because there's a mountain of them here. But again, to the credit of our members, somebody wrote in earlier about how, you know, They same thing, they haven't run hard and imagine if they had, right, et cetera. But that's what I'm asking here.

If the Democratic Party was filled with LBJs, Michael, do you think they do better or for some magical reason they do worse? No, I think, look, but fine, if they're full of LBJs, they're going to do better. But it's never going to be full of LBJs, right? I mean, LBJ we're talking about because he was one person who was an extraordinary senator and was able to move mountains in the U.S. Senate. And he was legend for it, right? I mean, he's the one senator we talk about in modern times who was able to do that. And so that's why it's sort of a futile conversation to have because it's a hypothetical that would never be realized.

Yeah, what we would love to have is people who are as good as the Democrats can sometimes be in pointing on and attacking how truly awful the Republicans are because they are. It's not a difficult thing to do. It doesn't offend your donors, and it's objectively true. At the same time, we would want them to actually ground their campaigns in real policy that addresses actual crises, get a bit of the Federman thing in there, or Bernie Sanders. And then also layer on top of it, a sort of aspirational tone like an Obama that can sell the policy and get people excited about it.

If you could combine those three things, then you'd become president. It's just clearly hard, or there's a lot of obstacles that derail you from that path. Okay, ask them answered. I want to go to the next video. This is Herschel's fans on the hypocrisy in regards to Warnock. Let's watch. In this case, we have a gentleman who's given his life to Christ for 25, 30 years and Raphael Warnock running against someone who is the best runner ever in Georgia.

How do you tow that line of who the more religious, the more Christian candidate is? Well, I see Warnock is more of a charlatan than a man of God personally. Just by the way he's, he conducts himself and the money he takes from George Soros and people like that. So I've got no problem supporting Herschel. This is a big difference. You just look at the lives. Ralph Warnock, what he supports stands for, abortions, all the bad stuff. And Herschel Walker stands for life.

that's a biggie. That's a biggie right there. It's such a double standard and that's what Democrats do. They're complaining about him forcing someone to get an abortion, but they're pro-choice. Hey, we know you probably hit play to escape your business banking, not think about it. But what if we told you there was a way to skip over the pressures of banking? By matching with a TD small business account manager, you can get the proactive business banking advice and support your business needs. Ready to press play? Get up to $2,700 when you open select. small business banking products. Yep, that's $2,700 to turn up your business. Visit td.com slash small business match to learn more. Conditions apply. So it makes no sense. And that's what

Democrats do. They like to spin things just to make it look evil or this. I don't know if he did it or not. You know, the bottom line is he's the right choice. I mean, I've heard numerous things about Warnock, him dumping his kids in a parking lot trying to run over his wife. And the bottom line, when I watch him speak, I think he's a snake oil salesman. I just, I don't trust. anything he says. Okay, that's coming up. Hold on, hold on. Not yet. Not yet. No, no, and not on me. Not on me. Not yet. You might later. Okay, when Michael wins the bet two years from now. Oh, wait. But the reason you saw that elbow from the sky is because it has been called.

So go ahead and drop it on Herschel. Now. Down goes Herschel Walker, down goes Herschel Walker. Oh, thank God, down goes Herschel Walker. Raphael Warnock has won re-election to the Senate. The Senate is 5149. It is now Democrats will control committees, not just in an even committee. They will have an imbalance of members of each committee in the Senate. They will dictate the agenda of the Senate.

It will be more difficult for the Republican House to push things onto a Senate, not impossible. And we know the tenor of these Democrats. And as Jenk has talked about, the spine and backbone is sometimes flimsy. But this is a great place for them to start the next Congress. And it's certainly, I would say, unexpected going into last year. Okay, so now let's talk about what's actually going to happen. Now that we know the compensation of the Senate, 5149. So number one, nothing is the correct answer.

And it would be nothing almost under any circumstance to be honest with you. So I'm not trying to, this is not me trying to pick on Democrats, because the Republicans have the House. So it is what it is, whenever there's a split legislature, you're gonna get usually approximately zero done, okay? The presidential election begins tonight. Yeah, that's right. Now having said that, usually what happens in these kind of situations is somehow, they

They find a way to pass tax cuts for the rich. So that's not on the agenda and Biden has never said anything like that, but that's usually what happens. So we'll see, we'll see, but is there, I'll ask both you guys, is there any conceivable way that the Democratic Party could pass any of the remaining Biden agenda? I mean, I'm not even 100% sure they'd be able to do that if they'd held the house, I don't know. I guess you could come up with some way in which the chaos in the House over choosing

the speaker results in some moderate Republicans being willing to go along in some bipartisan legislation. I'm not sure. I mean, we have the lame duck session. It's possible something could be done during then and the fact that they held the Senate is obviously crucially important for the next two years when it comes to actually being able to fill the many vacant judicial spots as well as have a snowball's chance in hell of actually putting someone in the Supreme Court if that happens in the next two years.

So in terms of legislation, I don't have much expectations, but there are still consequential things that can be done. I think non-Trump Republicans in the House would be what the tell is, right? How toxic Trump becomes over the next several months will dictate whether or not they want to position themselves against those freedom caucuses and those real MAGA Republicans in the House, in which case you could maybe see some things getting done, but not not at the top of what we know to be Biden's agenda right now. So I think that it's going to be, it'll be careful.

The other thing is how quickly if Biden decides not to run when he announces that, if it's next summer, then you have a real lame duck president, and you're going to have people positioning themselves for a presidential election that would look very different if the president were to run again. So there are lots of things from outside that will come into play as well. And the House, you know, I think John makes a good point. Whatever happens in that leadership fight, it's going to be a tenuous hold on the speakership. presumably, as we've seen before from Republicans with John Boehner and then moving in Paul Ryan

after they went through two or three people who they thought would would be there, one of them at that time, also McCarthy. So I think that there's a real chance that Republican infighting will may benefit some legislation. We're not going to be talking about this Congress for years to come. Okay, I'll channel John McLaughlin here. Correct answer. Democrats get nothing done and they're ecstatic about it. So there's more nuance.

Let me say the rest of my actual voice. So number one, it's too bad because that was such a good imitation. Agreed. Agreed. Okay. So look, I don't think Democrats wanted to pass anything going forward anyway. So, and I don't say that in like some just blanket cynical way. So Biden announced what his agenda was.

And number one, I don't think he bled. believed 85% of that agenda. So here's my proof to that effect. You know, the $15 minimum wage was supposed to be one of the first things done. Very easy, I was told 100 times. Yep. And then not only did they, the Republicans voted down, but eight Democrats voted against it, including Biden's top two allies, the two senators from Delaware. So there's, it's inconceivable that they voted on that without asking the White House. So the White House obviously told them, no, we were lying. Just go ahead and vote against the $15 minimum wage. We don't want any part of that, okay? So now the mansion side deal is back in the lame duck session.

And today it's reported, why is it back? When again, I was told the same exact thing, including for people inside Congress. Oh, Jake, you're worrying about nothing. We're definitely gonna get a $15 minimum wage. Sorry, that's a done deal I heard. And then now I had heard up until today, oh, the Manchester side deal is killed. That's a done deal. There's no way they're doing.

We talked about that on Friday. Yeah, that's right. And guess what? It's not a done deal. And why? Today's reporting is Joe Biden wanted it back in. Joe Biden is Joe Manchin. He never wanted to do 85% of his agenda. He did exactly what he wanted to do. About 15% of his agenda, good enough to do okay in these midterm

elections and coast the rest of the way without hassling any of his donors and not taking too much flag from his voters because now he could do the most reliable Democratic tagline of my lifetime. There's nothing I could do. Oh, they love it when there's nothing they can do. So they're not even going to try, of course. Now, I say of course, but in reality, if you want to do, you could try a thousand things. And by the way, you could win on 500 of those. So you're not going to win on defund the police or anything like that. And there isn't a single Democrat, maybe exception of two people that are in favor of that in Congress, right?

Certainly not Joe Biden. So when you're talking about real policies, real policies that Democrats are actually in favor of, They could put a ton of pressure on a couple of Republicans in swing districts in the House, and maybe they could win a vote in the House, right? And then they have the Senate and they have the presidency. So how do you put pressure on people? Well, you say, all right, I'm going to put up paid family leave. Polls at 80%.

Go ahead, vote against it. Just paid family leave. I'm not confusing it with all these other BS stuff. No, 80%. Go ahead. Go ahead, vote against it. Okay? Will they do that?

That's the easiest, most obvious thing. in politics. Approximately 0% chance they do it. Instead, they're gonna say for two years, I did nothing we could do. And then they're gonna go high five with their donors. CNBC's already celebrating. They wrote an article, actually before the midterms, saying the markets were looking forward to a split Congress

because that means gridlock and the markets love gridlock. Why do the markets love gridlock? Because it protects the status quo. And who's on top in the status quo? The people running the markets. So that's why they love it. That's why they love it. So nothing will get done at all, except in the lame duck session, they will pass every kind

of dirty deal that corporate Democrats and corporate Republicans actually still want to do. And they'll do it in the middle of the night and go, ah, this is a lame duck. Who could tell? Who we didn't even know if it was Democrats or Republicans? And bipartisan, moderate censures, et cetera. And they'll pass crap legislation that the whole country hates. That there's actually bipartisan agreement that we don't want it when we don't like it. And that's why they'll pass it in the lame duck session.

There I saw it for you. I want to respond to that in sort of a tangential way. I just want to briefly note along the way because I want to say something that's going to make the audience probably not like me. I want to say a different thing that'll make them like me less. Now that this race is done, you remember we did a sheet of our predictions of all the races. I just want to be clear, literally the only one I got wrong was that I thought it would result, that we would have a 50-50 Senate, which the math didn't even work out on that based on my predictions,

Every other one of the predictions is right. So now that I've been unbearable, I think your read of what will happen is totally right. I think more importantly for people to understand, and I wish the media would acknowledge us, but they have a financial reason not to, the lack of interest in having a situation where anything can get done. Like I don't think regular people, I don't know, would get why so many people would have a vested interest in nothing being able to be done. Whether it's through a split Congress or whether it's through the existence of the filibuster,

that make it hard to get things done are great for people who are already benefiting. That said, now that we are officially done with the midterms, I do want to say that while we have been incredibly critical of Biden, rightfully so, all along the way up to and including some of his recent moves like on the rail strike that have been so terrible, and he is going to earn a lot of our continued criticism going forward, there were a few things that if you would talk to us the day of his election when he won or the day of his inauguration, I think I think our read for what would get done was I think critical for a reason. It was pessimistic for a reason, but I think there was more done than we would have predicted.

No. And you don't think that there were more bills passed than we would have given him pre-credit for on Election Day 2020? No, and I'm gonna fault myself. And what about judicial nominees? No, no, no, no. But also the midterms went much better than I think we would have predicted a weak centrist president like Biden would preside over. I think we would have assumed he would deliver very little. And yeah, exactly.

I'm not speaking for everybody. I'm mostly speaking about myself. He would deliver very little. And then he would be punished massively in the midterms, which are already predisposed to hurt the party in power. And yet they did better. Now, there are lots of contextual reasons why. I mean, Trump put up a lot of terrible candidates and all that.

But anyway, I just, we keep it real at the audience. So this is my read of, I think maybe there were some bright spots that I would not have predicted on election night 2020. Yeah, so John, my sense of it is in different directions on all that stuff. So number one on things he would have gotten done, I'm gonna fault myself because I would have naively thought that they would have done half the voting rights bill. Because it was so important to them, to their own political careers. So I thought for sure he was gonna do that. It turns out he didn't even do that.

I would have given $15 minimum wage 50-50 because they kept saying that's the first thing up. That's so easy. We're definitely going to do it. And guys, it's not hyperbole. I was on the phone. You're quoting the president. You're criticizing by saying it's not hyperbole. Folks, this is.

I know, yeah. Listen, guys, this is real. No, seriously, I talk to members of Congress. So it's not like it was theoretical. No, they were positive that $15 minimum wage was going to be easy, not worth discussing. So they didn't do a lot of the bare minimum. And what pass, freaking semiconductor industry gets $50 billion? I guess I marginally care that we're independent in that regard.

But you know who really cares? The corporations that paid Biden and a lot of Republicans to pass a $50 billion gift to the semiconductor industry. By the way, that's our goddamn money. They're plenty of rich. And by the, what did Intel do? Intel said, oh, we're going to create so many jobs if you're passing that bill. And what did they do right after the bill?

they outsourced 8,000 jobs, I believe it was. But whatever the number was, it was a giant number. Because this is all a joke. They're just funneling money to all their donors. That's almost entirely what they got done. So they get some environmental things passed in Inflation Reduction Act that's positive? Yes. Okay. Was it close to 50% of the things that we wanted to pass for climate change?

No. A lot of things got past that helps the fossil fuel industry. Okay, so no. He was, it was, and but at the same time, I told you guys, and I still think that, he passed 15% of his agenda. That's my rough, rough sense of it. And I thought Obama passed 5% of his agenda. So, hey, I guess he tripled Obama in by my estimation.

Those are rough estimates too. And I mean, you can go through and figure out what the percentage is and why they weren't passed. It's not up to Joe Biden to pass those things. So it's a Congress that does it. It's a president who puts it forward. So you can't just put it all on Biden. I can. But that's, well, you can.

But you'd be wrong to do that. No, I would break every ankle there was until I got the goddamn bill best. Well, which is why you'd probably have a tough time winning. But that's empirically true. Well, yeah, but I'm in a very last house. No, but hold on, I want to say something about that. Because Michael's very right about that. I think the Democratic Party should be 100 times more aggressive, right?

And I'm positive because of history that that would work. LBJ did it and he was the most effective but a Roosevelt FDR did it and and he was the most effective the ones who don't do it are the least effective and we could show a hundred things of this but in this day and age if you're an aggressive Democrat your chance of winning an election is very low because you'll never make it out of the primary the press and the money and everything else will bury you in a primary you have almost no chance the money and the establishment of the parties more than than anything but but the practical matter Is there a couple of good things here, whether it's about specific legislation or not.

You don't need bipartisanship now to get a subpoena power. You can issue subpoenas without having to rely on someone from the other power. I think that's terribly important. I also think that when you have 5149, you're not reliant upon two senators who have been a thorn in the side. So if Chuck Schumer proposes legislation that is to the liking of Democrats, it will be, you know, I'm not here to cast anything on any of the people involved here. If the leader of the Democrats puts forward legislation, it's easier for that legislation to pass whatever it is.

That's very important in governance. And I think that the practicality of this win, that's why the Republicans were fighting so hard to get this seat one, because they know exactly what that means, aside from just one seat. This is very important. And a bad day for Vice President Harris, who has less to do. Yeah.

Or a good day. Also, just real quick, I just have to say in regards to what Michael said, I massively agree and disagree on two things. One is keeping the Senate is really important because it allows you to pass judicial nominees forward. And so winning the Senate is more important than winning the House. The fact that they kept the Senate on the third branch of government alone is very, very important. Okay, that is a real thing. And so that you should celebrate that tonight. If you're a Democrat, makes a big difference.

The part I wholeheartedly disagree is, okay, now you know, you got mansion in cinema, they've lost leverage. No, they haven't. There's plenty Democrats, even if they, right now, right now, by number they have. It doesn't mean that there aren't other people that are going. It's just more difficult for one senator to hold things up. Yes, that's all I'm saying. But you know they will have a rotating series of senators.

There may be, but Jenk, all I'm saying, it's more difficult for that to happen. Yeah. And that's not even incorrect or correct. It is just by math alone, more difficult for that to happen. Except since I think that 80% of the Democratic senators at least are total frauds. I don't think it moves to math at all. Okay, so by the math is moved by the election. It's 51-49 instead of 50-50.

You're talking about the tendencies. But you're assuming that 51 actually are Democrats and believe in the democratic agenda. It is definitively easier to get something through than it was before. It is. It still might be impossible to do that. And there still may be senators, but on paper it is easier to do it. It's 5149. And last thing I'll say about that is that, look, today as we've discussed the lame duck

session, there was a clear democratic leaning toward against Saudi Arabia helping them militarily against Yemen. Okay, Bernie Sanders has been leading the chart saying, hey, let's get out of Yemen. Let's not help Saudi Arabia there anymore. Saudi Arabia slapped across the face. They slapped Biden across the face by not lowering gas prices before the midterm elections, et cetera, right? And so now Biden is leaning towards, hey, yeah.

go ahead and basically pull the funding from Saudi Arabia about the war in Yemen. So that's a great development, right? And all the Democrats were already on the record, or not all, but most of them were. Now, all of a sudden, today I read, there's a couple of Democrats who might switch their mind. Of course! Because if they think they're going to actually win a vote, all of a sudden, a couple of Democrats reconsider. And look, for foreign countries like Saudi Arabia, it has to go through at least one extra

layer before it gets to them, but yeah, they're funneling millions and millions of dollars to those corrupt senators. So do you think that might have something to do with it? Of course it does, of course it does. All of a sudden, you change your mind on Saudi Arabia, all of a sudden, please spare me, they're crooks. And also just, I believe that Michael, you mentioned this much early in the program, but to be clear, like, it's very easy to get caught up in this election, especially when it's this election with this potential senator in it. But we need to take, especially as progressives, we need to take sort of the long view. We are trying to, like Littlefinger, we have to fight every battle constantly in all times.

Because the 2024 Senate map, everyone seems to agree, looks really bad for the Democrats. So this makes that, you know, the numbers check out one better in terms of how difficult that is going to be to maintain control of the Senate. And if we want to work over the next two years to have a primary where you have multiple progressives running and we choose one of them, they become a president, but they don't have the Senate then, then that sucks. So we not only need to fight that battle, but these little incremental wins along the way. And whatever special elections pop up between now in 2024, we have to win those two. We have to be planning ahead and setting the ground for progressives to finally accomplish things when they finally get in the White House.

Yeah, I'll end this segment on this. If the Democrats think that there were God's gift to politics, which they definitely do, and think, oh, no, it wasn't just Trump, it was us. We were so good at this. We should keep doing what we're doing. And it's not Trump as a Republican candidate. That's a couple of ifs, right? Well, one's a guarantee.

The Democrats are clearly overconfident right now. If Trump's not the Republican candidate, 2024 is going to be a slaughterhouse. the Republicans are going to wipe out the Democrats because Democrats are going to do two more years without doing a goddamn thing and people aren't going to not, most people don't watch the actors. I mean, I hate to say it, I wish they did, right? We have a lot of viewers, but the overwhelming majority of people watch a billion other kinds of media, right? And so they won't hear the same thing you guys are hearing. And so most of them won't even understand the concept of a split legislature. They'll just think the Democrats were in charge. I see Biden right there. And they

didn't do anything, right? And the Republicans, meanwhile, will use the House to have all sorts of nonsense hearings where they pound the Democrats politically. And remember, without Trump, the Republican candidates like Brian Kemp, DeSantis, and Greg Abbott killed, not only killed the Democrats, of course, politically again, these are crazy times. I have to clarify that, right? Okay, but but they beat so-called stars in the Democratic Party, battle O'Rourke, Stacey Abrams, et cetera, and they dismissed them. So the Republicans are doing really well minus Trump, and the results of this midterm election has buried that and made it unclear and given the Democrats overconfidence. So I think we're in a world of trouble in 2024. And John is right, the Senate map looks much worse for the Democrats in 24, which is an additional gigantic burden.

I don't know that it looks, or it looks just as challenging as this one did, I think. I mean, I think you're, you're, you have John Tester in Montana. I mean, when you look at red states, you have Jackie Rosen in Nevada, which was very competitive this time for Cortez Mastow. But Jackie Rosen, maybe, you know, she doesn't have the Harry Reid machine behind her in Nevada in the same way, but she's a, as, as Matt, Cortez Masto did. But nonetheless, I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that this is a, I think that this gives, could give Democratic candidates momentum going into 2024 and also realizing that picking good candidates is much better

than picking ones that you think might be good is what the Republicans did with the celebrity candidates this time around. And so I don't, I don't think it's as bleak. I mean, if you look around that map, Angus King and Maine, maybe Maine independent, I mean, there's an independent, I mean, is an independent in Maine. That's an attractive seat perhaps. And then of course, Ted Cruz, the Democrats are going to mount a campaign against him, which obviously won't do well, but we'll see. And Rick Scott may not run. Glenn Yonkin may run against Tim Kane and Virginia if Tim Kane runs again. There's so many different factors at play here that I don't think that I don't think it looks so terrible for the Democrats objectively, as you might think in 2024.

But they have, they can't do nothing and expect to do well. All right. So we talk. We talked so much that we blew up past the commercial break. So we're gonna keep going. I'll do one thing as a transition and then I've got another really important topic here. Weird Al Draganovich wrote in, David Wasserman, quote, I've seen enough. Jank Huger is the loudest member of the election I panel. That's funny, Weird L. Draganovich, you're a member, $100 dollar blue apron gift card. You make us laugh or you have insightful comments, love to give that to you guys.

rewards at tyt.com so they can verify that you are a member and you'll get it. All right, so I just thought of Sherrod Brown. He's also up in 24, I think. The senator from Ohio, that's going to be an ugly race for Democrats. I mean, for everybody, it's going to be an expensive race. Josh Mandel says he's not going to run there, so it's going to be, there'll be a real race. Yeah, okay, so one more topic. Joe Biden, is he going to run again?

and will he win or lose? Michael, go? I say he will not run again. Really? And he will neither win nor lose because he won't run. Okay, well, that second part is definitely, is logically consistent. Let's put it that way. All right, John, thoughts. I don't run.

I know Democrats on Twitter get so mad if you suggest that he shouldn't run. Well, they shouldn't get mad now. I mean, and he shouldn't announce until the middle to end of next summer. But that's when I think he'll announce that he's not running. Yeah, I hope that he doesn't run. If he does run, he'll be a slightly more tired version of the 2020 Sleepy Joe. Has John answered the question yet? I'm saying I don't think he's going to run because he's very old, but I also think here,

I'll be a contrarian. I've been doing the simulations in my head of what a Trump desantis contested primaries like. And sorry, I apologize, and I'm blowing people's minds. I think, I don't think it's impossible that he could win, but he would be cruising by in the same thing that got him through in 2020. I think that if it's a contested primary, and I'm starting to wonder if it will be, I think DeSantis should risk potentially sliding into irrelevance and just run in four more years or whatever.

But if he does run, and it's what each of them would have to do to beat the other, I think is going to either make Trump the same sort of toxic candidate he was in 2020, or DeSantis is going to have to pick off Trump's base by being just as terrible. So then how do you run as some sort of sane, moderate alternative to Trump? You won't be that anymore after a fight with Donald Trump for two years. And so I think the Republicans are beatable in 2024. I think they're most beatable if Trump is the candidate. But anyway, like maybe Trump goes to jail, DeSantis cruises by, it's not contested and easily

gets it and then he whoops Biden, I don't know. I'm hoping that Biden drops out very soon. We have like five good progressives run. That's what I'm hoping for. Yeah. So wrong. Biden will run. So let me first explain why Biden's going to run.

Gavin Newsom went and kissed the ring the other day. I mean that literally. I don't mean, well, not literally, but I don't mean kiss his ass, which is the euphemism we usually use. But I mean like he went and said, okay, I'm your copo and you're still the Don. Okay.

He basically went there to say, I'm not going to run if Biden runs, which is what you do. And which also means I will run if Biden doesn't run. Oh, for sure. But he said, go get him, Cap, and put me in the ballgame. So he is assuming that Biden is running. I think there's a reason why he's assuming that. I think that the word on the street is that Biden is going to run. And so word on the street for whatever that's worth.

But what's, but Gavin Newsom has stopped preparing. He was knee deep in preparing. He was running ads in Texas and Florida, et cetera. And now he's saying, okay, I guess I'm, you know, I'm on the bench. But there's another side to that story, Jane, which is that it's a bad look to be running ads when you have a sitting incumbent president, especially going into a midterm election. So making Biden more powerful right now is important to all Democrats. And that's why. And Newsom was getting criticism for that.

and it's pulling it out now doesn't mean that you can't start it up as soon as it's proper to start up. I'm, you're reading good tea leaves, though. I mean, your read is as good as mine. I just think that they're, that they're not going to, I think that there's no situation under which Biden will announce anything on this until he gets through a legislative year. And I just don't see it happening. So you think he's going to announce? Period. I think in the summer of 23, you'll say that he's not running. So, okay, so still hurt?

No, no. Like if he was to drop out. You wait, because then Democrats have, they're not obligated to support anything that the president is doing, that the infighting on Democrats begins immediately. The race begins immediately. Distancing yourself from the president begins immediately. If legislation comes from the White House, it's very easy to not support it because you are, you're carving out a position.

You have to, you cannot start the moment he announces, he's a lame duck, the Democrats are lame duck, Chuck Schumer's a lame duck, everybody is neutralized in his own party, and he would never do that. He respects sort of the way, I mean, to a fault is very devoted to the way Washington works. He would not, I don't believe, wait, he would not do it immediately. Yeah, okay, I mean, Michael's making really good points. Those things are all true, the things that he just said. But I would layer on top of it a couple of things. So first of all, I haven't seen any daggers out. Normally, if they think Biden's not going to run, respectful and all that, but they're still got daggers like Buttigieg and Kamala Harris and Gavin Newsom would be making some moves against one another, right? But normally. In preparation for eventually running when Biden doesn't.

But I haven't seen any of that. But I haven't seen any of that. There's no normally. When was the last time that happened? When did the daggers come out for someone? I mean, Ted Kennedy coming after Jimmy Carter, that's not normally. That's that's 45 years. Yeah, no, but you, like in the beginning of the Biden term, Kamala Harris and Buttigieg's

camps were throwing pot shots at one another behind the scenes. With, to each other, to each other, not to the, I'm misreading, I thought toward the president. No, no, no, no, they mean, he means preparing for the war. Yeah, and I don't see anybody. Well, now they're part of the same administration, too, so they're, but they're politicians. No, I know they are, but he's the secretary of labor. They're going to be secretaries of the cabinet who leave their jobs very shortly at the

beginning of the year. There's going to be an influx of new cabinet members. And then the daggers can start coming out at that point. But if they don't, if they don't, then you're spot on about that. Yeah, so far they haven't come out at all. If they thought they were going to run against each other, it would be, they would be itching to get to those daggers. Right. And so that that's, that's part of it. And then I think that Biden is a cranky old man. And he genuinely thinks he nailed this election. And he genuinely thinks that he should run again. And why are these whippersnappers coming around and he said things to this effect like, well, why are we having this conversation? I'm the goddamn president, right? And he's not understanding the fact that

he is really old. And by the way, here's another thing that he's not realizing, Washington's not realizing, Democratic Party's not realizing, he's actually really unpopular. And so that like that hurts Democrats' feelings. Why do you think he's unpopular? His approval ratings? Okay, but why are you relying on approval ratings when you're not, when we know that the polling in so many of these races is wrong? Why do we believe that approval ratings are the only accurate poll in America? I'm curious. I'm- No, no, no, I think. I've given up believing any of those. I don't think any U.S. President will ever get over 46% approval rating again in our lifetime. I just think that that's how it is. I don't buy it. So- Michael, you know, people always say, oh, the polls are always

wrong. Are they? I've only seen a couple of instances where they're wrong. It's like the most over-hyped thing in the world that the polls are wrong. I don't think they're wrong. I've seen 98% In the cases, the polls come really close. Go through a lot of the cases, they were close, but a lot of them, they were way off, especially national polling. And the way we- Come on, you're doing wishful thinking. You think the polls were wrong that Trump is unpopular? I think that he's unpopular, but he's got a huge, he's got a huge center of popularity among the people that support it. Sure, everybody knows that.

Which is a shrinking population. I think he starts at 33% and builds off of that. I don't think that the Biden approval rating poll is wildly wrong, but I, but I, I don't think that I don't think he's consistent they've done a hundred polls I don't I don't think that he is as I just I think that the polling there are polling problems that pollsters will acknowledge right now and that one poll with and it's not consistent no no no but the the one poll no no no the one poll meeting president's approval rating the president's approval rating poll that's the one poll I'm talking oh I see in general and so I think that there is I think there's a reason to be dubious about polls and even pollsters are saying that now. I, it doesn't matter at all. If the president's at 40%, the president's at 40%. You can run for president at 40% as a sitting U.S. president and you can get, yeah, but I don't think he's going to run.

I think that's part of what. I don't think he wants to get killed. If he does run, are we agreed, do we not think that a contested? Okay, here's what's going to happen if he doesn't, if he does run, okay. Yeah. Like the mainstream media and mainstream Democrats will form the. most solid wall you've ever seen in his defense. Yeah, they will yell at the top of their lungs.

Like they did for Jimmy Carson. Right, and anyone who dares to oppose Biden, and leading that charge will be the New York Times, NPR, and CNN, they will be furious with rage. Well, but anyone runs against Biden. I agree, and that will frustrate me, but they will be able to point to the midterms where he largely bucked the historic trend of, I mean, that is a sign in it. I don't think that that means much for 2024. I'm just saying if he had been wiped out in the midterms,

I think it would be a lot harder to do that. Oh, yeah, I totally agree. And that's why they're going to, that's why they're going to be even louder. They're going to say, he won the midterms. He's an incumbent from everyone. Kennedy did to Jimmy Carter. And they're all going to scream at a decimal level that would make me embarrassed. Okay.

Now, they're not going to actually scream, but every article is going to be filled with complete, A billion percent innuendo that it's great treason to run against Biden. And if it's anyone but Trump, Biden will lose by like, maybe double digits. It'll be a, he'll be slaughtered. It's so early to say that you may be 100% right that he'll get slaughtered. He may win a close election. There's no way to know that.

I think there should be another bet. All right. I don't think he's going to run. Whether or not he's going to run. But he thinks he is going to run. All right, we got to go, guys. We'll do that bet in the member's only post game. Okay, so be sure you're checking that out.

We still have a couple of clips. They're amazing clips of Walker supporters. We'll get to go do a little na-na-n-nana, and then one other important topic. All of that, if you're a member, t-y-t.com slash join, or if you're on YouTube, hit that join button below.

We'll see you there in a minute. Thanks for listening to the full episode of the Young Turks. Support our work, listen ad-free, access members-only bonus content, and more by subscribing to Apple Podcasts at Apple. ho slash t yt i'm your host jank huger and i'll see you soon