The Young Turks - Price Isn't Right - November 7, 2025

Episode Date: November 8, 2025

Visit https://prizepicks.onelink.me/LME0/TYT and use code TYT and get $50 in lineups when you play your first $5 lineup! Donald Trump angrily insists there is no affordability issue. Steve Bannon says young Americans got screwed by corporatism. Judge orders Trump administration to fund SNAP benefits in full. Poll shows that Democrats have no idea who the leader of their party is. Joe Rogan slams corrupt political parties. Hosts: Cenk Uygur & Michael Shure SUBSCRIBE on⁠ YOUTUBE⁠ ☞ ⁠ https://www.youtube.com/@TheYoungTurks⁠ FOLLOW US ON: ⁠FACEBOOK⁠  ☞  ⁠ ⁠⁠https://www.facebook.com/theyoungturks⁠ ⁠TWITTER⁠  ☞      ⁠ https://twitter.com/TheYoungTurks⁠ ⁠INSTAGRAM⁠  ☞ ⁠ ⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/theyoungturks⁠ ⁠TIKTOK⁠  ☞ ⁠         https://www.tiktok.com/@theyoungturks⁠ 👕⁠MERCH⁠  ☞⁠      https:/www.shoptyt.com⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/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. Now streaming on Paramount Plus. It's the epic return of mayor of Kingstown. Warden? You know who I am. Starring Academy Award nominee Jeremy Runner. I swear in these walls.

Emmy award winner Edie Falco. You're an ex-con who ran this place for years. And now, now you can't do that. and BAFTA award winner Lenny James. You're about to have a plague of outsiders descend on your town. Let me tell you this. It's got to be consequences. Mayor of Kingstown, new season now streaming on Paramount Plus.

You're smoking some of the best dope God ever put breath in. Hey, God, it's Friday. Be my feet. 3x3 000 3x3 3x3 3x000

3x000 3x3 319 319 319 3rd and All right, well, young Turks, Jane Cougar, Michael, with you guys, we're going to have an amazing show. So first off, we've got a lot of news on the government shutout.

Of course, Donald Trump says, hey, don't worry about affordability. What's the big deal? It's not like I won the election on it. Okay, so we'll get to that in a little bit. Lots of turmoil on the Republican side. And speaking of which, look, the things I'm excited about, the Great Awakening, it's here. So Joe Rogan defying Trump and others and basically starting to talk about corporate rule. Yes, yes, we've been saying it for 20 years.

And now at once, it feels like the whole country's beginning to wake up. And then Tucker Carlson versus Ben Shapiro in the second hour, MAGA Civil War continues, and I'm here for it. So don't miss any of it. Michael. Yeah, let's not miss MAGA Civil War. But first, let's start with, you know, this and MAGA. I don't want to hear about the affordability, because right now we're much less. The affordability is much better with the Republicans. The only problem is the Republicans don't talk about it.

And Republicans should start talking about it and use their heads because we have great numbers. We have greatest. And they're going to only get better. When all these jobs open up, all these factories open up that are being built all over our country. But all these jobs open up. I love when he says those things because he took away the person who gives the jobs report. So we're not even going to know when those jobs open up. So how would these Republicans be able to message, but the president is also actually play acting.

He's pretending that the economy is working really, really great for the average American. And the polling, if it is in fact accurate, Jank, Trump's not going to be able to walk away from this issue. Yeah, so we'll break down the lies that he had there in other clips that we're about to show you. But I think two of the most interesting parts of this story are the polling that we're talking about. about, like how badly is Trump and the Republicans hurt by this issue? And let me say that it's pretty bad, okay, but you're gonna see the depth of it in a second. And then- Pretty bad also might be you on the US penny there. I'm in favor of it. The people are talking about it.

Well, now they're gonna really talk about getting rid of the penny. All right, so let's tell you about the kind of trouble the Republicans are. Yeah, they are. Since election night on this, just this past Tuesday, the president has insisted that Republicans are doing a great job in their handling of the economy, including saying this on his truth social. Here's President Trump. 2025 Thanksgiving dinner under Trump is 25% lower than 2024. Thanksgiving dinner under Biden, according to Walmart. My cost are, my cost are lower than the Democrats on everything, especially oil and gas. So the Democrats' affordability issue is dead. Stop lying.

That got hit with a community note on X. And that community note only happens when things are specious. Missing context, the 2025 Walmart Thanksgiving meal contains 15 items, while the 2024 meal contained 21 items. Additionally, most of the brand named items in the the 2020 formula were replaced with great value items, which I just, I think it's, I think it's so funny when they break that stuff down. So Mike, I'm gonna jump back in for a second on that because look guys, he says affordability is better with Republicans. Generally not true, I'm not gonna break down decades of data for you guys, but if you don't, if you believe Trump on that, no problem, okay?

But the real problem isn't really Republicans or Democrats on that one, it's the corporate rule, in my opinion. For 40 to 50 years now, wages have stagnated while prices have gone up. And corporate media doesn't really talk about it. The corporate politicians don't really talk about it. So that's a bigger issue there. But when he said the Republicans don't talk about our success, and that's really the issue here. No, it's the exact opposite. The Democrats actually did pretty well on unemployment, for example, under Biden, and they never ever talked about it, right? Whereas if Trump does anything slightly good, he can't stop talking about it. And he and he did, demands that everybody else go on TV and talk about, by the way, which is not bad political strategy.

The lying is the annoying part. So a gas low under me. Now it's down to $2. No, it's not. They did a fact check. It's at over $3. So he just has no attachment to the facts. But later in this story, we're also going to show you Anna and Steve Bannon kind of agreeing, not on the solutions, but on the problem. And the Anna part's not surprising. The Steve Bannon part's super surprising. So some in the right are beginning to wake up. Oh, this is a massive issue. Right. And what Trump's saying when he's talking about, just to continue this for a second, when he's talking about this messaging, is I'm willing to sit here and lie, were the other Republicans sitting here and lying with me, right? And messaging has not always been the problem

of the Republicans, been the problem of the Democrats. And I think even now with this with this shutdown, I don't think enough Americans know that the Democrats are holding out for health care. I don't think it's well known. If this were Republicans, they would call it the health care showdown. Democrats are not calling at that, and they're allowing the Republicans called the Schumer shutdown. But let's continue on with our great president. He was confronted about the dismal state of the economy today, but this time by a three-time Trump voter. Take a look at this.

Regina Foley messaged me, and she says she is. retired in Greensboro, North Carolina. She is a registered Republican all her life. She voted for you three different times, but she is not happy about how her prices have not come down that she sees. And she said this, quote, I want the Republicans to keep control of Congress in 2026, but something has to be done fast. I don't see the best economy right now. Wall Street numbers do not reflect my main street money. Please do something, President Trump. So I guess What do you say to Regina and people like her? Well, I do say this.

Beef, we have to get down. I think of groceries. You know, it's an old-fashioned word, but it's a beautiful word. Beef, we have to get down, but we've got prices way down. And think of this energy. She drives a car, probably, and her energy prices are way down. And energy is so all-encompassing. It's so big that when energy goes down, everything comes down.

You think prices are coming down from this? We believe that, yeah, I think they're coming down, but I think they're down already. I think the biggest problem is Republicans don't talk about. about it. They don't talk about the word affordability, and the Democrats lie about it. I also love these voters. He says, I'm a three-time Trump voter. I am outraged about the cost of things. I want the Republicans to keep the Congress in 2026. It always baffles me. Let's just have a little more of Trump, and then we'll talk about it. He was continuing to talk about it yesterday. CNBC, look at this, down now minus 13 points on the net approval rating on the economy.

You come to this side of the screen, it's minus 19 points among Quinnipiac. And keep in mind, we're talking about hitting record lows for Donald Trump in either his first term, which of course ended back in 2021, or his second term. Worst economic net approval ratings at this point among presidents since 1977. In the presidency, right, this is a new Donald Trump presidency. Look at this. He's the worst for any presidency at this point. How about the second term? Come to this side of the screen.

Of course, Trump's in his second term. He's the worst for any president at their second term at this point. So Donald Trump isn't just beating himself with record lows. This is the lowest for any president ever at this point in either a presidency or for a second term. Yeah, there's Harry Enton from CNN talking about exactly how upset Americans are with all of this. You heard the president talking about beef prices as well. And today there was a little bit of news saying that his Department of Justice will investigate if meat packing companies are illegally inflating beef prices through illicit collusion price fixing. and manipulation. And that's why, you know, you're seeing a lot of these big prices. So you saw

Harry Enton from CNN, Jank, there, talking about how this is, in fact, resonating with American voters, no surprise. Because if there's any, I mean, this is the old, you know, pocketbook issue, pocketbook, it's a great word. It's an old word, but it's a great, it's a beautiful word. People talk about pocketbook issues. That's what the, that's what this is. Yeah, minus 19 on the economy ain't no joke. That means you're in a world of trouble. Economy is almost always the number one issue. And this is something he cannot lie his way out of. I know that he thinks he can lie his way out of almost anything, right? But at the end of the day, what's the price of eggs? What's the price of bread? What's the price of milk? Period. And even for the MAGA guys,

that's why that three-time MAGA voter was like, yeah, okay, I hear you. Yeah, Democrats, bad. I voted for you like a million times. I'm going to vote for you guys again. But for God's sake, are you going to do anything? And the answer is, no, no, don't talk to me about affordability. Right? So like what he says, it's already down when we already see that it's up. Like it's inflation is up 2.7% since February, I believe, right? So, and to be fair, it's gone up and down. And since he took office, it's up 1.4%. So, okay, not like 8% or something, but he did not stop inflation and it continues to rise. And people are feeling that. That's the you cannot avoid. Democrats made the same mistake. Oh, you know, that they still, look,

in my opinion, I think that a lot of them thought they didn't even notice the price of milk being a problem, right? Because it's in elitist circles. And what's, and that. It was also that they kept using the supply chain COVID argument that things are inflated that are going to come down. So that was. Yeah. So what, but Biden and Trump share the same mistake with at the end. There's plenty of mistakes all around, right? But yes, but what are you going to do about it, right? So Biden didn't have an effective plan. He could say, yeah, supply chain, that's a problem.

And you're right, he's right. There was a supply chain problem. It did cause some degree of inflation. But what did you do about it? Nothing. Or certainly not enough. Trump has the same exact issue. He's like, no, I'm just going to lie my way out of it and say the prices are down.

And hence, I don't need to do anything. No, you need to do something. And he's just not doing it. And so it's not gonna fly, he's gonna run into that same old beautiful problem. Problems like an old fashion word, and it can be beautiful, it could be ugly, but it could be beautiful. Yeah, minus 19% is a disaster. And he got away with these lies as a candidate twice and nearly three times. And he's now the president and he's a president who cannot run legally for office again.

So these things are gonna matter more, these lies and this obfuscation about what is true about the economy. Americans aren't buying it. That 19% number is unbelievable. Jenk, you talked about something that Anna said on Wednesday about the affordable affordability crisis in America being so profound, not to mention that she also sounds a little bit like, you know, Steve Bannon. And let's take a listen to this. Again, they're not saying the same things. They're far different, but listen. Calling him a socialist didn't hurt him in this election, because if you look at Democratic voters, many of whom live here in New York City, they are super skeptical of capitalism.

Sure. Because of the crony capitalism they've been dealing with. They don't see a future for themselves in this country in terms of being able to afford a house, be able to get married and have children. So young Democrats who were very much galvanized by Mom Donnie's message were not put off by his message of socialism. They liked it. This episode is brought to you by prize picks. You and I make decisions every day, but on prize picks,

being right can get you paid, which is kind of awesome. Don't miss any of the excitement of this sports season. On prize picks, whether you're a football fan, a basketball fan, or a fan of both like me,

it always feels good to be right. And let me tell you, With the NBA season starting off and NFL season in mid-form, there's no better time to play. I'd be using it all-season. What I love is how fun and simple the experience is. You just pick more or less on player projections for guys like Patrick Holmes or Step Curry. I've been right about Puka and Bijan all season, so I feel good about that. And when you cash in, of course it feels great.

What I really like is the new stacks feature. You can pick the same player up to three times in one lineup. So if you love Kevin Durant, for example, you can pick more on his points, rebounds, and assist all at once. It's the best way to put your sports knowledge to the test. If you want the biggest payouts, go for the power play, it's that simple. Download the Price Fix app today. Use Code TYT to get $50 in lineups after you play your first $5 lineup.

That's code TYT to get $50 in lineups after you play your first $5 lineup. Prize Pix. It's good to be right. My mornings are chaos. I need coffee that works as hard as I do. That's why I drink everyday dose, coffee with benefits. It's rich, delicious coffee boosted with mushrooms, collagen, and eutropics. Everything I need for focus and balance ready in 30 seconds.

The Black Friday sale is on. Get 61% off your first coffee plus starter kit, a free A2 probiotic creamer, and over $100 in free gifts. Plus, enter for a chance to win $100 cash or get your entire order refunded. Visit Everydaydose.com backslash podcast or use code podcast at checkout. So, so, and there you have what, what Anna was saying, and now take a listen to what Steve Bannon said, striking a similar chord. We're not communist. We're actually capitalist. The problem with our system is we don't have any capitalists. They got all these, they got all these interviews with kids and polls with kids that come back. These kids hate capitalism, they're all socialists. Well, hey, they never had a shot of capitalism.

They're at the receiving and the corporateism. The Russian serfs, did the Russian serfs sit there and did they love capitalism? No, they'd never seen it. And what they saw of it wasn't good. We need more people on our side of the football. We need more capitalist. One way to give them capital, not just better wages, that's income. Let's get them a little buy-in to the financial.

Let's get them bought into the financial structure of the country. You can do that by reallocation. It's simple. The government should have stakes in this. These guys are grifting off you. They've socialized the risk. You're the sucker that's going to guarantee the loans. You're the sucker that's paying for all the, everything that underpins it.

While they put these little companies together and they make it a trillion dollars, it's all for them. Now, it doesn't work like that. And in talking about government guarantees, which is an interesting turn. Let's go to this one graph before we get to some other people who agreed about the American dream. To what Anna said and to what I think Steve Ban was saying, nearly 70% of people, this is number five, said they believe the American dream that if you work hard, you will get ahead, no longer holds true or never did. That's the highest level in nearly 15 years of these types of surveys. So these people are definitely onto something, and Republicans are scared because it was,

It's Republicans who believe in that dream and espouse that dream, just like Democrats do. Eric Erickson, the conservative radio host, said grocery prices are going up and now Republicans are perversely doing the same thing Democrats did when they were in office with Joe Biden saying, quote, no, actually don't believe your eyes at the grocery store. Prices are coming down. That's just what we heard the president say. That's not helpful to Americans who are feeling higher grocery costs right now, which is actually. happening. The Republicans have got to figure this out. So, Jenk, I think that's all pretty compelling stuff about what the panic, the real panic and the real politic panic at the, at the grassroots level in Republican politics is onto. Yeah, totally. This goes beyond

just Republican and Democratic politics. This goes to an awakening that's happening in the country. First, Anna's appearances on CNN are hilarious in one way. She'll say things that are super popular with younger people, people that are online, etc. Like a couple of nights ago, she said, well, yeah, Mom Donnie says we should arrest that in Yahoo. And of course we should. He's committed war crimes and he's been, you know, there's an arrest warrant for him. And the conservative on the panel was like, that's it, we win. She's someone wants to arrest Nanyahu. Like, as if that's a super unpopular position when in reality that's actually a super popular position. Same thing kind of happened

here where she's like, you know a lot of young people are don't mind Mumnana being socialist because they're socialist. And Shapiro for a second there had a look of like, ha ha, we win. No, you don't win. That's the whole point that people are beginning to give up on your ideology and your market model. Now there's an irony here because I'm a capitalist and so there's some portions of abandon that I agree with. But and but there's, we're identifying the same problem. Before, in my opinion, the problem was hidden by mainstream media. No, don't worry, like your wages are not a huge issue. They haven't gone up in 45 years, adjusted for inflation, but it was like it almost never made the news, right? And it never made the news because the

Democrats never pounced on it. The Republicans never pounced on it. No one in power ever talked about it. But meanwhile, the problem was accumulating, accumulating corporate rule, accumulating the donors controlling everything, accumulating. So now we're, we're going to, we've gotten to a point where, you know, right wing sometimes we'll call it crony capitalism. There's nothing wrong with that phrase. That's absolutely true. Some on the left, including me, call it corporatism. But I've now seen Steve Bannon call it corporatism, right? And so we're, and that's the same thing. That's basically corporations through their campaign donations, buying off our politicians, and redirecting everything towards them and away from you. So that,

sorry that I keep pounding this to death, but because it's so outrageous. So an excellent example of that is the oil companies getting 35 billion dollars a year in subsidies. That is just, that's 10 times what Israel gets. And they're the most profitable companies in the world and they have no excuse. The industry is perfectly mature. They're just, it's a robbery, it's a robbery. So Bannon realizes the problem, we realize the problem. Some on the right that are more populous are realizing the problem and a lot of their

voters, tons of their voters are starting to realize the problem. Then the question becomes, yes, but what's the solution, right? So Steve Bannon had a curious one that you kind of noticed, Michael, which is he was kind of saying we should do wealth redistribution to protect capitalism, which was deeply ironic. Let's go socialist to protect capitalist. I mean, he's like, no, they're going socialist, we got to stop it by going socialists before before them. Right.

Okay. Fascinating. Fascinating. The funny thing is since I'm a capitalist, I think that's a little too left wing for me. Okay? So you don't need to punish the rich. Andrew Yangonomics. Yeah, yeah.

You don't need to do it. But what you need is for your representatives to actually represent you. And what that means is the, guys, corporatism is opposed to capitalism because it doesn't want competition. competition. The minute a corporation is born, one of the things that it tries to do is eliminate all of its competition. So corporations by their nature are going to be against free markets. Yes, that's deeply ironic, but very true. And so now then the question is how do you protect free markets from the corporations that want to kill it? And so I don't think the idea

is necessarily redistribution in a kind of ham-handed way. The idea is for the government to protect us from the corporations instead of serving the corporations. And you do that through a thousand ways. You break up monopolies that can set prices unilaterally and oligopolis. There's regulations to protect consumers, for example, with the banks. They take wild out of control risk and that winds up collapsing the economy and costing us so much money. And a lot of times the banks just literally rob us, right?

And the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, for example, was doing a fantastic job of catching them and returning billions of dollars to the American people. One of the first things that Trump did was, let's get rid of the consumer financial protection bureau. And then he went around, we were almost the only show that talked about it, getting rid of almost every white collar fraud department within like the SEC, the IRS, all these different agencies. He's like, don't overlook the corporations at all. Let him go nuts. Let him steal all they want, let them no regulations, right? And also getting rid of their legal departments too, not just the, but taking away.

any kind of illegal muscle that they would have to protect themselves in that way. Yeah, so now we're in this dark place where over 70% of Americans think that their American dream is dead. So the old school guys, the corporate Democrats and Republicans and Trump don't get it. They're like, oh, we'll just lie our way out of this. We'll just pretend the problem doesn't exist. We've been pretending for 40, 50 years and the media covers our ass. But now mainstream media is dying and online media is going, no, I don't think so. later in the show, we're going to show you Joe Rogan saying the same thing.

If Joe Rogan, Steve Bannon and us are agreeing on the problem, that's pretty compelling. Of course, again, back to the solution for one last second. One of the other angles that, so when Bannon talks about economic populism, again, he's half right, right? But then when you get to the solution and you get to Bannon, so I would put it this way, Fuentes at the extreme, then Bannon, then Tucker and others. on like some version of white or Christian nationalism, right? And I used to think that Tucker used to dog whistle to that a lot more.

I think he's actually gotten better on it, whereas Fuentes has gotten as bad as you can be. And Bannon has gotten worse. So the idea is to go backwards, have white people or Christian people or whatever subset that they think they're in have all the power. How does that help everybody? That doesn't help people at all. That's just you saying, yeah, times are tough, so that's why I should be in charge. That's not a solution. Our solution is actual populism, serve the voters.

You got to end the money in politics. If you don't end the bribery, this is going to go on forever and ever and ever. Who do you think they're going to serve? You or the guy who gave him a million dollars, or $10 million or $100 million. Everyone knows the answer. So the number one cancer is money in politics. That's where we got to start to get out of this corporate rule nightmare we're in. Yeah, there's no question.

All right, agree with you, Jane. Well, look at that even Michael agrees. All right, so now that we got Michael to agree with Steve Bannon, we can move on. Yeah. Okay, so the truth behind the staff payments, because there's a couple of things that is not being made clear in the media, and they're really important. So we'll do that when we return. Get no frills delivered. Shop the same in-store prices online

and enjoy unlimited delivery with PC Express Pass. Get your first year for $2.50 a month. Learn more at pceexpress.ca. All right, back on TYT, Jank and Michael with you guys. But also, Aynes Seesaw, thank you for joining. We, you know, there's a join button, it's a beautiful, it's old-fashioned, but it's beautiful, it's right below the video, okay, and that's what she pressed. CDN, Norse Dog Dad, Gifted a membership on YouTube, we appreciate you guys.

There's also a website, it's also beautiful, little old-fashioned, which is actually true, it's way too old-fashioned. My button is bigger than yours and my button works at t-yt.com slash join. Okay, now let me tell you real quick about chapter Medicare enrollment is now and it goes through December 7th. You guys know this. Come on, like if you're on Medicare or your parents are, there's no reason not to save it. On average, $1,100 is free. It's a 20 minute call. We did the research for you. These guys actually are the best in the business. They're the ones that are most trusted. And it's because of how they set up the payment system. So long story, I did an interview about it, but they get paid, not from you guys, but by commission, but the other guys are cheesy.

And when you go call the brokers, they just go for whatever pays them the highest commission. But chapter is blind to how much they're getting paid. So that's why they're honest and they just try to find you the best plan. So, and by the way, if you have the best plan, they tell you, so you stay on it, okay? So 707, TYT help, 707 TYT help, call now and save a lot of money. That's through what date? That's through December 7th. Okay.

And I mean, come on, $1,100 per year is not a small number. All right, Michael. Yeah, well, we will, you know, we're talking about Medicare with chapter. We will talk about different kinds of benefits. So look at this. 38 days into the government shutdown this morning, a federal judge accusing the White House of withholding federal food assistance for political reasons and ordering the administration to fully distribute SNAP benefits by today. Judge John McConnell saying,

quote, people have gone without for too long, not making payments to them for even another day is simply unacceptable and causing irreparable harm, saying, quote, the evidence shows that people will go hungry, food pantries will be overburdened and needless suffering will occur. So, There you have it, 42 million Americans rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly known as SNAP, and those benefits were due, and a massive portion of them have not, a massive portion of the number of the 42 million Americans have not received those benefits this month, despite the fact that SNAP has never before lapse during a government shutdown.

With delayed November payments, millions of American families and children are now going hungry. It's serious. But after a court fight, it seems that the Trump administration is going to cave grudgingly and start sending out full payments. What's say you, Jake? So they have one interesting point that Trump lawyers did in these cases. But outside of that, there are three facts here that prove definitively whose fault this is. So we're going to show you that and break it down for you. So yesterday, as we heard just a moment ago, Judge John J. McConnell Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the for Rhode Island ordered the Trump administration to fund food stamps in full for all Americans receiving them, meaning that the Trump administration would need to fully pay for November SNAP benefits. Although the Trump administration said partial funds would be distributed this month, a response to a lawsuit challenging its plan to suspend SNAP payments during the shutdown, recipients who were due to receive their benefits this week have empty balances.

Now, this is the second time that Judge McConnell has made this order. The Trump administration didn't listen the first time and after the latest order, the Trump administration immediately requested an appeal. The administration has asked the first U.S. court of appeals to issue an emergency stay of judges ruling Thursday, ordering the administration to fully fund the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program by today. But the Trump administration told states earlier today that while the appeal, is in progress, it will follow the judge's orders and immediately begin funding the SNAP benefits in full. We had a listener, I think, tell us that that's happened. I don't know that that's the case.

But what is this case actually about? An issue is whether a federal judge can compel the government to use $4 billion from Section 32 of the Agriculture Adjustment Act Amendment of 1935 to fund November SNAP benefits. The Trump administration argues that these funds are needed to support WIC programs, that's women, infants, and children programs, and that using that money to pay for SNAP would essentially starve Peter to pay Paul. Recipients have yet, as of this report, to see anything in their accounts, and it's late Friday. So, Jank, what do you make of all this? Yeah, so the one good point they have there is, they say to the judge, look, you say we have enough money in the agriculture department, we don't need to cut off SNAP. That's true.

But you know, some of it is in the WIC program and we don't want to take from WIC to give to SNAP. And now you got the courts telling the executive branch how to handle their budget within the department and that's overreaching, right? Okay, that's not that bad a point. But so now you break down the rest of it to see who's right. So, okay, here are the critical facts. Do does SNAP normally get cut off in a government shutdown? Because If it does, I mean, look, there's a government shutdown, what can we do, right? But as Michael pointed out to you earlier, it's true, no, Snap normally is not affected by a government shutdown. Second fact, Trump then comes in and says, yeah, I'm stopping Snap, he said this earlier, so that, you know, the Democrats stop the government shutdown.

So he's saying, yeah, I'm doing it for a political reason. I don't have to do it. The Agriculture Department does have plenty of money, and it normally doesn't get taken out. But I'm doing it to punish the Democrats for the shutdown. Well, then that's pretty clear. And then the third thing is, yeah, that culture department actually does have enough money. Like if they didn't have enough money, you could say, well, you're complaining, but what can you do? There's just because of the shutdown, the more money didn't get allocated into their coffers and they don't have it and they can't legally go into debt.

No, nothing like that exists. Even without WIC, they have enough money. Exactly. That's the point. Yeah. I mean, sorry to interrupt there, but that's you just. made the point. And the point is that the money exists. It is it's why I say it's a terrible argument. You said it's a good argument. I understand why their lawyers may say it's something they could do. But I think it's a terrible argument because the money is there. Look, I mean,

they're not, they're not stopping payments to ICE. They're not stopping payments to protective services, the secret service. There are ways of taking money, and that's discretionary money that's going to pay for this ice explosion that's happening across the country right now. That money, as Judge McConnell has said, there are people going hungry. That is not what we do in this country. So there are ways to, it's not just robbing Peter to pay Paul, because the money exists in other places and you don't need the Congress to allocate those monies.

There is some executive, this is a White House that loves using executive orders. They could do an executive order and get these funds paid. Yeah, and there's an issue of legal, there are legal issues and factual issues in any court case. So a legal issue is how much should the courts interfere in executive branch decision, budgetary decisions, right? So that's the part where I say, oh, that's a fair issue, right? And I'm not judging it either way, but yeah, that's not outrageous. It's a fair philosophical issue.

Yeah, but when you, but then you have to also analyze the factual matters in the case. And when you do, then you go to what Michael is saying, and the judge is like, but you have enough money, even without WIC, so I'm not reallocating anything, you just got to go. You buy law, this was allocated. You're supposed to pay it. A government shutdown does not affect it by law. You're saying you're doing it for a political reason. That's okay, I mean, you could do any politics you like, but you can't mess around with the law.

And the law is you're supposed to pay these people. So that's, they're, like Michael said, they're appealing, but they've started giving out full payments now. Because yeah, they're wrong. They're wrong on the law and the facts. Yeah, and that's it, 42 million people and they're going hungry, many of them. And that's why it's not a question necessarily of whether we're telling you how to spend the money. There's a taxpayer money that's going back to people who need that money. We just, as I said, 42 million people rely on SNAP.

Let's take a look at this right here. This is SNAP recipients by county. Roughly 12.6% of households receive SNAP benefits in the previous 12 months. In this chart, areas that are darker blue have a higher percentage of households receiving SNAP benefits. benefits. You look at some of the poorest states in the country. You look at South Texas, New Mexico, and you see so much of that that's there. Households receiving supplemental nutrition. You see a huge majority of SNAP households have both either children or both an elderly individual or a non-elderly individual with a disability. Those families, as we've come to know, are relying on food banks now and the kindness of others in order to to stay fed. Some like Gia Haley must now make difficult decisions in order to survive. Gia Haley is trying to survive on water and coffee. Haley 41 said she's been out of groceries since October 29th. That's nine days with no groceries and the monthly $298 she receives

in food assistance did not arrive as it ordinarily would have this past Wednesday. The black coffee kind of kills my appetite. Is that where we are in a Is that where we have a president and his administration fighting the mandate to send these benefits? Because because politicians can't agree on whether to open the government up. In fact, it is where we are, Jank. And that all you need to know is that this person has coffee and water and she's drinking coffee because it suppresses her appetite. Yeah, so part of the reason that while they're appealing, they're fully complying, in my opinion, is because they're beginning to see the political damage.

Because they, Trump said just the other day, oh snap, it was expanded too much by Biden. Way too much, people shouldn't be getting it. Or that many people shouldn't be getting it, right? Well, everybody who's on snap is like, what did you say? Like, are you calling me a bum? Is that what you're, like, you know that most people on snap either have children are older themselves or are disabled, right?

And so, and 12% of the country is a giant number. Giant number, 12.6 actually, right? So that's one eighth of the country that's on this program. And he's spitting in their face saying like, I don't think you should be getting it. And so now as people literally are starting to go hungry, there's, you're like, are you saying I'm the problem? I voted for you, mother. Right? Yeah.

And so not all of them voted for him, but a ton of them voted for them. This is a political disaster. By the way, it's a moral disaster. I want to read one comment from one of our members on t.yt.com. Koffefe said, let's turn that golden ballroom into a food pantry for hardworking Americans. I bet that money would go a long way to feeding some local people in need. So look, he's saying that literally, and by the way, if Trump was smart, that would be genius move to do like some sort of food from the White House or something, right? And he might do a symbolic, I got a couple of big Macs for a couple of people around here, right?

But overall, the much larger point, as he's alluding to, is, wait, we're going to spend $300 million on a golden ballroom, and you just had this great Gaspi party as you're cutting food from 42 million Americans? I mean, look. That's a great point, though. I mean, that's it in a nutshell right there. I mean, my thing about ICE, you know, it's not as accurate as what that is, because that his discretionary spending the president just decided he wanted to do.

Yeah, and he didn't ask anybody, he didn't get any permission, he wanted to do it because he wanted to have nicer soirees at the White House with his fricking donors. Let's be honest, are you going to those, are you going to be in that ballroom? You're not going to be in that ballroom. Ninety-eight percent of the people that are going to be in that ballroom are donors. So the donors are like, oh great, a golden ballroom for us and no money for you and no food for you. Nah, no, they're poking the bear.

And this is a terrible idea politically and morally. And that's why they're turning around because they Trump tests things all the time. He thought he could just spit in the face of people who are in need. And he's beginning to find out politically, no, you can't. And your party's now in a lot of trouble. And part of the reason, by the way, the threat of taking away snap and all these cuts from the average person and giving more and more to the wealthy elites is why. they got their asses handed to them in these 2025 elections.

And wait till you start hearing over the weekend, as I'm sure you will, conservatives saying that, oh, it's going to illegals. The stamp money is going to illegals. There are people that shouldn't be getting it in the first place, not true. And even if there's, you know, like any entitlement program, even if there are some leaks in the boat, you don't sink the ship just because of some leaks in the boat. But people are already going to be saying that, I'm sure.

Yep, all right, we're gonna take a quick break. When we come back, who is the current Democratic leader? Who should it be? Should it be anyone? I have a, well, I'd like to think an interesting point about that, but we'll find out when we come back. Back on TYT, Jank and Michael with you guys. Galfer 75 is a good longstanding member, he's on Twitch, and he wrote in, now we have like four cell phone providers, four railroads, soon to be three, like four gas companies, and a crap load of other monopolies. That's totally right, except for one thing.

All of a sudden we have another cell phone provider, and it's called Noble Mobile Mobile. Okay, so guys, I did the switch. When I was doing the switch from Verizon and Noble, I was worried about a couple of things. Am I going to get to keep my phone, my phone number, all my contacts, and am I going to have the same cell service I had before? Boom, boom, boom, boom, all of them. You don't have to worry about it. You definitely keep your phone number, keep your contacts. Nothing changes.

The only thing that changes is your bill, whatever it is, $100, $140, $89, goes down to $50. And then on top of that, if you don't use all your data, they give you money back at the end of the month. But on the $50 alone, I mean, go check your bill. I did it myself a week ago, I'm positive. Nothing's going to change for you. If it turns out, by the way, you have bad service for whatever quirk of the cell towers and stuff like that, you could just switch back. And by the way, when you try to switch back, Verizon or AT&T is going to offer you a ton of cash to switch back. So there's no downside to this.

Go.t.com slash switch. Go.t.t.com slash switch, you pretty much, unless you're paying less than $50 a month, You're pretty much guaranteed to save money. And so I love it. It's a good partner for us, and it saves you guys a ton of money. On average, you save about 500 bucks a month. All right, Michael. All right, well, we've listened to the president.

We've listened to some of his surrogates. Now, let's listen to the people with this. Who do Democrat voters want as the future of their party? It would be pretty cool to see Kamala Harris kind of take that roll up again. Yeah, I think it's an easy answer to say Gavin Newsom, but there may be somebody else out there they're not aware of. Prisker, Governor Illinois, I don't think he's afraid of Trump. I do like the approach that people like Andy Bashir and Kentucky have taken, though. Hakeem Jeffries, I guess.

I just think that he needs to be a little more forceful in his actions. Michelle Obama. So, you know, Democrats had a marvelous victory on Tuesday, a big victory. But the party is still facing a big question right now. as to who their leader is. Some people think it's Kamala Harris or Gavin Newsom, but a damning new poll or a poll that we can discuss whether or not it's damning from Politico found that many Democratic voters have absolutely no idea who their leader is. We'll get to the results of that poll in a second, but first, Jank, your two cents on this. Yeah, so I like who came in number one, and it's not a person.

And I'm going to tell you why I like that so much after Michael gives you the facts about the rankings. Okay. Well, here are, in fact, those rankings. Jank teased number one. This political poll found a total lack of consensus among 2024 Kamala Harris voters when asked who they consider to be the leader of the Democratic Party. Don't know is in first place with 21% Kamala Harris, 16%. Nobody, I don't know if nobody and don't know are the same, but I think nobody is in first place because nobody has a majority here. Chuck Schumer 7.7, Hakeem Jeffrey, 7.4, former president Barack Obama, 7.4, and Gavin Newsom at 6.2.

The top response was, I don't know, made up of 21%. And, you know, the, when you look at the people who have the name leader after their names, that's a leader, minority leader, Chuck Schumer and minority leader, Hakeem Jeffries, neither of them were able to break 8%. Then we go to the poll continues. Former President Biden at 4.4. General answer is 2.9%. I don't know what that is. Ken Martin, who actually runs the DNC at 2.2. Other name or unclear name, 2.1. Bernie Sanders, who was actually not a Democrat at 1.9%, Hillary Clinton, 1.2%. And Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez at 1% or a little over 1%. Here were some of the verbal answers people gave when asked who the Democratic leader was. Ugh, no one was a 26-year-old white woman in Arizona who voted for Harris. Not sure who it is now, that is kind of the problem, says 50-year-old white woman in California who voted for Harris.

And I do not believe there is a leader right now, says 49-year-old white man in Maryland, who also voted for former Vice President Harris. It's not just the voters who feel like the party is in limbo. Even Democratic insiders aren't sure who their leaders are. Lauren Harper Pope, a Democratic strategist and co-founder of Welcome Pack, says this is where we are, guys. The party is divided factually and ideologically, she said, I couldn't tell you who the leader of the Democratic Party. party is either and I work in Democratic politics. So Jenk, I think we'll have a lot to discuss it. Yeah, no, I love the don't know is winning.

Why is that a problem? I don't know why that's a problem. In fact, I think the reverse is a problem. Whenever we've had a clear Democratic leader, not whenever, but certainly recently in the last 20 years, I would argue, it's been a disaster. The clear leader of the party is Joe Biden, so we all have to listen to Joe Biden. But the brother's got dementia and he's falling apart at the seams and he's intensely selfish and He says he doesn't want to go.

Doesn't matter, he's the leader, I've really listened to the leader. Well, he was president at that time, so he was in fact the leader. Yeah, I got you, but turn into a disaster. And but more importantly, guys, than Biden is the idea that we all have to listen to the leader. Okay, so the Democratic leadership generally has been more establishment figures my entire lifetime. And they have demanded complete obedience and they love to anoint candidates. And they like to announce like, oh, even before anybody's won anything, Hillary Clinton is going to be the new leader of the Democratic Party. But we didn't vote on it yet.

No, why is Bernie Sanders even running? He's ruining unity. Wait, wait, wait, wait, you guys are assuming Hillary Clinton's the leader. We haven't voted yet. I kept saying in 2015, 16, all the way back to 2013, right? So whenever they anoint a leader, epic disaster. And Hillary lost to Trump. Kamala Harris lost to Trump.

You can't get a bigger disaster than losing to Trump. The leaders tend to be very selfish, very corrupt. So I don't need some sort of democratic leader telling me what to think and what to do. And if that is their job, they're miserable at it. The last time the Republicans did not have a clear leader was in 2015. How did that turn out for them? Well, they had this mess of a primary. And in that 17 people ran, and in that giant, you know, scrum, a guy emerged.

And now we don't like that guy who emerged, but he's won the presidency twice. And he's given the Democrats huge losses. Why? Because they didn't know who their leader was and they looked around and decided to use their own judgment to pick the guy they thought that they liked best or the one that they thought was most likely to win. And again, no one believed the Republican voters. They're like, you idiots, you're picking Donald Trump. He's definitely not going to win. Stupid voters, how did that turn out? So I trust the voters way more than I trust anyone in politics or media. So I love that the Democrats don't know who their leader is.

Good, let's go find, let's, that's our job to go out there, have them run an amazing primary in 2028, right? And let's see who the leader actually is after we vote. You guys decide who the leader is. Yeah, it's such a stupid poll in my, I mean, we're sitting here telling you about it. But I think it doesn't matter. Whenever somebody doesn't have the president, there's a question of who the standard bearer, the leader of the party is. It used to be that a former president would have that position. The most recent former president, President Biden is not that type of a person and likely not in the condition to do that at the moment anyway.

But it isn't, you know, the notion of a leader at the end of the 90s, the Republicans didn't have a leader. Dan Quail was thought of as someone who could run for president. President Bush's former vice president because they didn't have a leader. And then George H.W. George W. Bush showed up and that went that way. But this isn't something that happens. There's no leader because the leader is always the president. And this is a party that it doesn't mean they're in disarray because they don't have a leader in a poll. It just means that they don't know who the leader is because they shouldn't because there's no leader yet.

I agree with you, Jank. I agree that these sort of things are silly because it makes it sort of attaches an ineptitude to the party over not having leadership. They shouldn't have a leader yet. They don't know what what they're leading. They're in the minority in both houses of Congress and the presidential election hasn't happened. And are there leading voices? Yes, I would argue that the leading voice in the party right now in practical matters is probably Chuck Schumer. And in esoteric matters is probably Governor Newsom. But they're not the leaders of the party because they haven't been, they're not there yet. So I agree with you, Jank. I don't think these things matter. And I don't think you could have a leader now when you're out of party and out of power anyway.

Yeah, and so let me expand upon what you're saying. So Gavin Newsom is among the folks that you would consider in the category of potential leader, right? Yeah, a little leading voice certainly. Yeah, and so how did you get there? Partly because he's the governor of the largest state, that makes sense, right? And partly because he's trying hard in different ways to rise up, right? So first he went and talked to the right wing, and that didn't work out great, but it was at least I thought it was a decent effort, not executed perfectly, but made sense. to try to do something, right?

And now he's fighting Trump harder than anyone else, at least rhetorically, optically, et cetera. That's good. See, that's how you want people to prove themselves. So, you know, how we feel by Gavin Newsom overall might be a different question. But in terms of how he's handling this, that makes sense. Then you've got Rokana, who most people in media would say, oh, no, he's a, you know, congressman.

Yeah, he was the co-chair of Bernie Sanders campaign, but, And he's going to run for president. He's a legit, probably he's a legit guy, et cetera. But I don't know about leader, right? I mean, they're not even including him in some of the polls. But the reason why I introduce him in this conversation is because he's the one guy that is the most active in Congress, constantly introducing bills, going in media, making the case for democratic policies, progressive policies.

I mean, you see him fighting 24-7, finding allies on the right, like Tom Massey and Marjor Taylor Green on the Epstein files, finding three, four significant right wingers on lowering drug prices, like super active. To me, that's the best way to become a leader. And then, you know, of course, have the problem that the media almost always skews everything. Just any perspective will skew a conversation, including ours, right? But for mainstream media, they love the big names already. They're just obsessed with the powerful. So that's why Michael's example is right. They're like, okay, Dan Quayle is going to be the leader of the Republican Party. Meanwhile, the whole country's, or anyone that was paying attention, like, really?

Dan Quayle's an idiot. So like, I don't think he's going to survive that primary, but there was talk of like, no, it's Dan Quayle. Then of course you remember in 2016, Jeb Bush. If it's not Jeff Bush, it's Marco Rubio. I mean, how many times are they going to be wrong before we realize? That's the example that Jank just gave, right? I mean, it's easy to say Gavin Newsom now.

Nobody knows who Rokana is, right? But by the time it comes time to pick a leader, people are going to know who that's People are going to know who that was. Who was the leader for the mayor's race in New York? Was it Zoran Mamdani? No, it wasn't. But that's who became the leader because time happened. So if they took a poll two years ago,

Mamdani's name wouldn't have been on it. So that's why these things are silly. Do you think Barack Obama's name would have been on a poll in 2007 of who the leader of the party was? Cut to a year and a half later and he's the president and he's twice elected. So it's all name recognition. It's silly. And the fact that nobody thinks there's a leader is more. refreshing than if there was one there.

100% agreed last two fun facts. When you get all the way to the bottom of the poll, speaking of Mumdani, he's tied at, they just both have 0.3%, so de minimis, but he's tied with Pete Buttigieg. We were told that Pete Buttigieg was going to be our leader. And now he's at 0.3% with Mom Donnie who showed up yesterday. Right, right.

Worse news for Buttigieg than it is good news for Mum Donnie. That's definitely right. But last thing, guys, to Michael's point, when Mom When Donnie started the mayor's race, he was polling at 1%. When Donald Trump, people forget this, when Donald Trump came down the golden escalators, he was polling at 1%. So you don't know who's going to be the leader until you have a process to pick the leader. And if you don't go through that process, you're almost always going to get a worse candidate.

So nothing wrong with tough, strong primaries where we test people and find out who can lead. So all right, hopefully we'll do that right this time. All right, guys, we got to go to, I did do one misstep earlier. I wanted to correct real quick. I said Noble Mobile saves you $500 a month. That would be awesome, but no, $500 a year on average. Okay, nevertheless, go.t.com slash switch. Okay, we'll be right back.