All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 12, 2019 - The Ben Shapiro Show
54:43
The Real Fight Night: Preview | Ep. 859
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Tonight is fight night!
Elizabeth Warren prepares to take on Joe Biden, Democrats try somewhat unconstitutional methods to push gun control, and President Trump's asylum policy receives a reprieve from the Supreme Court.
This is The Ben Shapiro Show.
Are you pumped, brother?
Because tonight is the real fight night.
Get ready for it.
Elizabeth Warren, Joe Biden on the same stage.
Two old people going at each other with tennis balls on the bottom of their walkers.
It's going to be unbelievable.
You're going to love every moment of Elizabeth Warren yelling at you like she's an annoying member of your HOA and Joe Biden walking into things.
It's going to be incredible.
We'll go through all of the preview for that.
Plus, Democrats are now pushing this new method of gun control.
It's called, let's violate the First Amendment repeatedly by not passing any laws, but pressuring private companies not to do legal things.
We'll get into all of that in just one second.
First, let's talk about the economic volatility that we've been seeing.
So we've been seeing enormous economic volatility of late.
A lot of expectations about where the economy is going to go over the next couple of years has people rushing.
To what they consider safer commodities, things like bonds, as well as to gold.
Well, can you afford another hit to your retirement like the last downturn when the S&P dropped 50%?
You should be diversified into some of those safer assets.
And you know what one of those safer assets would be?
Precious metals.
You know how I use for precious metals investment?
That would be Birch Gold Group.
Hedge against inflation, hedge against uncertainty and instability with precious metals.
My savings plan is diversified and yours should be as well.
The company I trust with precious metal purchases is Birch Gold Group.
Look back historically.
When the bottom falls out of everything else, gold does tend to safeguard savings.
Birch Gold Group has thousands of satisfied customers, countless five-star reviews, an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau.
Contact Birch Gold Group right now.
Get a free information kit on physical precious metals.
See if diversifying into gold and silver makes some sense for you.
This comprehensive 16-page kit shows How gold and silver can protect your savings and how you can legally move that IRA or 401k out of stocks and bonds and into a precious metals IRA if that's something you choose to do.
I'm not saying take all your money and stuff it into gold and then bury it in your backyard.
I'm saying you should be diversified into precious metals at least a little bit to protect yourself.
To get your no-cost, no-obligation kit, text Ben to 474747.
Again, text Ben, my name, to 474747.
All right, so tonight, tonight, the debate that we've all been waiting for with bated breath, Because it's Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren on the same stage.
Now, remember, we've had two other debates, and randomly, Elizabeth Warren ended up in the debate with all of the people who don't matter, and Joe Biden ended up in the other debate, right, with Kamala Harris, who was attacking him, and he ended up on a debate stage with Bernie Sanders at one point.
But Elizabeth Warren has basically been shielded from any serious criticism of her on any of the debate stages so far.
Well, tonight, she's the one who enters with a lot of the momentum.
So there are two separate polls that show Elizabeth Warren gaining ground.
There's one poll from The Economist YouGov that shows Joe Biden with 26% support among registered voters.
The same poll shows Elizabeth Warren at 26%.
So they are tied at 26% in this Economist YouGov poll.
Now, that Economist YouGov poll has had Elizabeth Warren polling a lot stronger than the other polls have been in the last several months.
They've shown Elizabeth Warren within three to four points in a solid second place over Bernie Sanders for a very long time.
That poll is a bit of an outlier.
But there's another poll from CNN that seems to confirm some of this.
There's a new CNN SSRS poll, and it shows that Joe Biden continues to lead the Democratic primaries with 24 percent.
But that is down five points from mid-August.
So in about a month, he's down five points in that CNN poll.
Meanwhile, Elizabeth Warren is now edging out Bernie Sanders for second.
She's at 18 percent from 14 percent.
Bernie Sanders is at 17 percent.
That's slightly up from 15 percent last month.
So in other words, Biden looks to be bleeding.
In a lot of these polls, while Elizabeth Warren looks to be gaining, and Bernie Sanders actually looks to be gaining just a little bit.
In the RealClearPolitics poll average, Biden is still up fairly substantially.
He's got about a 10-point lead on the rest of the field.
He's got about 27% in the RealClearPolitics poll average, with Sanders at 17 and Warren at 17 as well.
There's a Reuters-Ipsos poll that came out today, which is a little bit more typical of sort of polling data of late, but it has Biden all the way down at 22%.
It has Biden at 22, Sanders at 16, Warren at 11, meaning that Biden isn't riding in the 30% range he needs to be riding if he wishes to walk away with this nomination.
Now, the Hill-Harris poll also has Biden at about 27%, with Sanders at 15 and Warren at 12.
So there's significant differences in these polls as to whether Warren is in second or whether Sanders is in second.
But Biden appears to be receding back to the field, just like his hairline once did before he fixed that.
The fact is that Joe Biden seems to be on the downturn here, and that is because he's sort of gaffing along.
Nobody's super enthused about him.
Everybody sort of assumed that he was going to waltz to the nomination, at least in the conventional media.
Some of us suggested that his best day would be his first day and maintain that for months at a time.
Now, Joe Biden still has solid support in the black community, but if he starts to lose, if the aura of inevitability is gone, he's basically toast.
Remember when Jeb Bush jumped into the 2016 race, he was leading in the polls.
He had an established name.
He was popular.
And then he began receding to the field quite quickly.
And then he didn't win a single primary.
So you could see that happening with Joe Biden as time goes on right here.
Now, there's another problem for Joe Biden, and that's not and that he is not nearly as moderate as he makes himself out to be.
Now, he could run as a solid moderate in the Democratic Party, but what we have seen from Joe Biden is Biden vacillating on his positions.
Now, maybe that's because he forgot his positions.
Quite possible.
I mean, he literally doesn't know which town he is in half the time.
But Joe Biden is not nearly as moderate as he makes himself out to be.
McClatchy has a long article about this today, talking about how Joe Biden's platform is actually a lot more to the left than Hillary Clinton's was in 2016.
According to McClatchy, the 2020 Democratic frontrunner's emerging policy agenda is anything but moderate, at least compared to the party's last presidential nominee.
From health care to climate change to criminal justice, Biden has proposed ideas more ambitious and liberal than policies supported by Hillary Clinton in the 2016 campaign.
Now, that's not a shock.
The entire party has moved to the left, but Biden's supposed to be the moderate.
Taken as a whole, Biden's policy platform represents a significant shift from Clinton's.
According to McClatchy, on nearly every major issue, Biden has either exponentially increased the scope of what Clinton proposed or advocated for new ideas that most Democrats would have, up until now, recently considered fringe.
The former VP's embrace of an unabashedly liberal agenda cuts against some perceptions of him, both from progressives who criticize Biden as insufficiently bold and center-left allies who argue he can appeal to voters in the middle in an election against Donald Trump.
Now, this is an important point.
If it appears that Biden is moving substantially to the left, he loses his reason for being in this race.
If he is too moderate, he doesn't excite the base enough to actually win the primaries.
So he's stuck between a rock and a hard place.
Exactly the same thing that would allow him to win a general election kills him in the primaries.
And if he moves left during the primaries, it undercuts his case that he would be super electable in a general election.
So he is now trapped between the progressive woke base of the Democratic Party and the bulk of Americans who are looking for some sort of return to normalcy, something that is relatively inoffensive.
Now, Biden's been able to sort of bridge that gap so far by just being old.
I really mean that.
It actually cuts in his favor.
See, if Biden wants to appear the safe pick, what could be safer than Grandpa Joe wandering around, bumping into the furniture?
He's not threatening in any way.
He's not going to take your savings account.
He doesn't even know what a savings account is anymore.
He's half senile.
Joe Biden, the age thing cuts in his favor in a general election, but in a primary, it ain't exciting anybody.
And now he's moving to the left, as McClatchy points out.
Biden's current set of policy prescriptions would likely be considered radical if they had been proposed in any previous Democratic presidential primary.
On healthcare, Hillary Clinton proposed offering a public insurance plan for Americans enrolled in healthcare exchanges.
She wanted to let adults older than 55 buy into Medicare.
But Biden goes much further.
He wants to allow all Americans to buy into a public-based plan, a government-backed insurance plan, a shift some progressives have said would represent an enormous change to Obamacare.
Clinton proposed spending $60 billion on a clean energy fund.
Biden wants to spend $1.7 trillion in federal money to make the country emit a net of zero-carbon emissions by 2050.
Biden is also pushing to triple Title I funding for schools that educate low-income students and to abolish the federal death penalty while encouraging states to do the same.
Clinton wanted to maintain capital punishment in certain situations.
Biden is pushing a $20 billion initiative that encourages states to reduce their prison population, which of course cuts directly against his old policy.
So where is Joe Biden?
That remains the question of the day.
But Biden is going to be attacking Elizabeth Warren on the same grounds, and that will be the interesting part of tonight's debate, is that both Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren have shifted substantially in their positions over time.
Warren is going to suggest that Biden is ideologically muddled, that Biden is not coherent in his ideology.
But the fact is that Hillary Clinton, that Elizabeth Warren, forgive me, Hillary 2.0, is not Particularly non-modeled in her past political positions, as we've talked about on this program.
She used to be in favor of school vouchers.
She used to be against taxpayer subsidized tuition.
She used to be kind of lukewarm on taxpayer funded daycare.
Now she's in favor of all of those things.
And every day she comes out with a new proposal to spend your money and raise taxes every single day.
So which Elizabeth Warren is the real Elizabeth Warren?
That is going to be up for debate tonight.
And that apparently is the angle that Joe Biden is going to take.
Now, it is true that the Bernie Sanders-esque Elizabeth Warren will do better in primaries, but she is less likely to do well in a general election, of course.
Now, all the stuff that sounds great to primary voters doesn't sound great to the vast bulk of Americans.
So yesterday, there was a big headline about Elizabeth Warren and Jim Cramer.
So Jim Cramer, of course, the commentator on CNBC, he does mad money, and Jim Cramer suggested that Wall Street executives are panicked about Elizabeth Warren, which is a narrative that cuts very much in her favor in a primary.
But when it comes to a general election, do Americans really want somebody as president who is panicking all the CEOs on Wall Street who are responsible for your 401k?
Like, it sounds great until your 401k takes a massive stock market dump.
Here's Jim Cramer talking about Elizabeth Warren.
How is it possible that this company cannot find a CEO?
I mean, are they worried about Elizabeth Warren attacking them?
She or he would be.
Of course they are.
And of course that person is.
Why wouldn't they be?
I don't know.
If she becomes president, what do you think is going to happen to the banks?
I don't know what's going to happen.
Look, I've got to tell you, when you get off the desk and you talk to executives, they're more fearful of her winning.
I mean, I've never heard anybody say, look, she's got to be stopped.
OK, well, the point that Kramer is making here, again, this is a point supposedly in Warren's favor.
Oh, she's anti-corporate.
Oh, she's going to hold the CEOs to the fire.
There's only one problem.
You know who runs the companies that hire everybody?
You know who's actually responsible for your market investments and your retirement fund?
It would be exactly the people who are scared bleepless of Elizabeth Warren.
Now, that's not going to be an attack on her in the primaries.
That's an attack on her in the general election.
In the primaries, the attack on her is going to be that she's a hypocrite.
And there are legs to this attack, because she is a hypocrite.
Elizabeth Warren used to be a rational, reasonable liberal.
Now, she's gone off the path in dramatic and insane ways.
And she's being ripped, I think rightfully so, by a lot of folks in the Joe Biden crowd who are saying, you know, this new sort of, I am the truest, bluest Elizabeth Warren is not real.
Ed Rendell.
He's the former governor of Pennsylvania.
He's in the Biden camp.
He has an editorial in the Washington Post today going after Elizabeth Warren.
And here's what he says.
He says, I like Elizabeth Warren.
I like her a lot.
Too bad she's a hypocrite.
He says, I think Warren has been a great senator and her work in setting up the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was terrific.
Okay, fact check, false.
The CFPB is the best protection ordinary Americans have from financial institutions that prey on them.
Fact check, false.
In fact, I like her so much, when she ran for Senate in 2018, I co-chaired a couple of fundraisers for her and donated a combined $4,500 to her campaign.
Shortly after announcing her candidacy for the Democratic presidential nomination in February, says Ed Rendell, Warren said she would shun high dollar fundraising events.
That means no fancy receptions or big money fundraisers, only with people who can write the big checks, Warren wrote in an email to supporters.
Now, Warren has every right to make that pledge, even if she had obtained significant contributions from donors in the past.
Doing that doesn't make her a hypocrite.
But there are two other reasons why the description applies.
First, because she transferred $10.4 million from her Senate re-election campaign to her presidential campaign fund.
More than $6 million came in contributions of $1,000 and up, as the New York Times recently noted.
The senator appears to be trying to have it both ways, get the political upside from eschewing donations from higher-level donors and running a grassroots campaign, while at the same time using money obtained from those donors in 2018.
That $10.4 million gave Warren a substantial head start in building a presidential campaign staff and doing other things for which money is essential.
If she wasn't being hypocritical, she would have taken only the dollars raised in smaller increments from her Senate race and transferred those into her presidential account.
Warren attacked former VP Joe Biden for holding a kickoff fundraiser in Philadelphia in April, which she criticized as, quote, a swanky private fundraiser for wealthy donors, in an email to supporters the next day.
Well, says Ed Rendell, I helped organize that affair, and I thought her attack was extremely hypocritical because nearly 20 of us who attended the Biden fundraiser had also given her $2,000 or more in 2018 at closed door fundraisers in swanky locations.
Warren didn't seem to have any trouble taking our money in 2018, but suddenly we were power brokers and influence peddlers in 2019.
The year before, we were wonderful.
I co-chaired one of the events for the senator and received a glowing handwritten thank you letter from her for my hard work.
It seemed odd to some of us who gave her money that Warren was experiencing an epiphany less than 12 months later.
It's one thing to fashion a campaign that relies on grassroots fundraising, says Ed Rendell, but it's another to go out of your way to characterize as power brokers and influence peddlers the very people whose support you have previously courted.
He says Warren isn't the only person to have been hypocritical about fundraising.
Barack Obama did the same thing, he says.
He vowed not to take any money from the political action committees of Wall Street firms in his 2008 campaign, but his campaign took in millions of dollars from individuals who worked for Wall Street firms.
But the news media basically gave Obama a free ride and didn't point out the blatant hypocrisy of trying to win credit for shunning contributions from Wall Street firms while taking tons of money from people who worked for the same Wall Street firms.
Politics can make people do peculiar things.
Funny that Ed Randall had nothing to say about this in 2008, so far as I recall.
He says I also take issue with the notion, raised by Warren in her criticism of the Biden fundraiser in April, that people who give the maximum allowable individual donation of $2,800 to a presidential candidate are doing so because they believe it will get them a federal job, win their business a federal contract, or even gain special access.
Hey, by the way, Ed Rendell, welcome to the anti-campaign finance reform side of this argument.
I'm making this argument for years.
If you really believe that rich donors are given $3,000 to buy special access to a politician, as opposed to because they want to see the politician win, I'm not sure which donors you're talking to.
Most of the donors I know who can afford to give $2,800 don't consider that to be a massive donation in any way, shape, or form.
Randell says donors who give $2,800, for the most part, are doing so because they believe strongly that the candidate would make a great leader, or maybe they believe in the candidate's values or policies on the important issues challenging the country.
He says that are there some people who give or raise money in presidential campaigns with ulterior motives?
Sure, but I'm confident the crowd at the Biden fundraiser gave money to him for the same reason that I did.
So despite my feelings, Elizabeth, if you're reading this and you win the Democratic nomination, I'll be happy to support you.
We'll campaign for you with all my heart.
And by the way, Philadelphia has a lot more swanky restaurants you haven't seen yet.
Pretty harsh words from Ed Rondell.
And this will be the line of attack by Joe Biden on Elizabeth Warren tonight, is that she has refashioned herself in Bernie Sanders' mold, but she has only done that for the sake of convenience after running for Senate in 2018.
And then she took that and she has now flipped to, I'm the most progressive senator in the world.
By the way, all of these are lines of attack that Donald Trump is going to use against her and will use to good effect because Donald Trump is a brawler.
Donald Trump is somebody who will fight you and fight you hard.
So we'll get to that in just one second.
First, let's talk about neighborhood safety.
So the fact of the matter is that I am deeply concerned about safety.
The reason that I am deeply concerned about safety is because there are lots of death threats against me.
People have tried to come to my house.
People have tried to target my family.
I'm really worried about safety.
And when I'm not home, I want to make sure I know who is at the front door all the time.
Well, the way to make that happen for me has been Ring.
Ring's mission is to make neighborhoods safer.
You might already know about their smart video doorbells and cameras that protect millions of people everywhere.
Ring helps you stay connected to your home anywhere in the world, so if there's a package, delivery, or a surprise visitor, you'll get an alert and be able to see, hear, and speak to them all from your phone.
As a subscriber, you have a special offer on a Ring Welcome Kit available right this very instant at ring.com slash Ben.
Again, that's ring.com slash Ben.
The kit includes the Ring Video Doorbell 2 and a Chime Pro, which is just what you need to start building a ring of security around your home today.
Go to ring.com slash Ben.
That is ring.com slash Ben.
Again, I have Ring devices because I want to keep my home safe.
I want to know who's at my front door ringing the doorbell, and then I can pick it up from anywhere so I know exactly who is there and whether they are safe or not.
Go to ring.com slash ben.
That is ring.com slash ben.
And you have a special offer available on that ring welcome kit.
Additional terms may apply.
Again, ring.com slash ben.
People I trust with my home security, you should trust them too, because I care a lot about security.
And so should you.
Okay, so.
Bloomberg is reporting that Joe Biden plans to argue at this week's debate that all presidential candidates, including the incumbent, must be transparent about their finances and any business dealings in their past.
That, of course, is directed at Elizabeth Warren.
Why?
Well, because Elizabeth Warren has done a fair bit of corporate consulting over the years.
The lady who likes to rip on CEOs and corporations.
She's gotten paid by CEOs and corporations to consult with their firms before.
The Biden adviser said voters deserve visibility into candidates' finances, especially from those who are facing questions about their activities before taking office.
The adviser declined to confirm whether Warren would be Biden's explicit target.
With her polling in second place in many state and national polls, the former VP's team is paying close attention to her.
While Warren has posted tax returns dating back to 2008 on her campaign website, the Biden camp appears to be calling for greater scrutiny of the years before 2008.
That was the year that she was appointed to the Congressional Oversight Panel that examined government response to the financial crisis.
Warren, whose presidential effort is styled around fighting corporate America, has taken on corporate clients as an advisor or expert witness on bankruptcy in the last 20 years.
In May, her campaign posted brief descriptions of her roles in those cases, and some of that work has been questioned during her two Senate campaigns in Massachusetts.
Biden may be an imperfect messenger for the argument because obviously Biden has some corporate concerns of his own.
People raising questions about his associations with his son Hunter and business dealings between Hunter and foreign countries while Biden was vice president.
But The real key here is undermining Warren's image as a candidate of progressive integrity.
Because all Biden really has to do is knock Warren down one peg.
He doesn't have to knock her out of the race.
He has to knock her down one peg behind Sanders and he wins the nomination.
That is his goal.
And you know who knows this?
It's Bernie Sanders.
Bernie Sanders is very well aware that his best angle here is to let Biden and Warren fight it out, hope that Biden knocks Warren down, and then he gets to pick up that progressive vote.
Because there's one thing that you can say about Sanders you can't say about Warren, and that is he has been entirely consistent in his communistic agenda since day one, since he was mayor of Burlington, Vermont.
So Sanders is the real true believer here, and he's been avoiding attacking Warren because he doesn't want to look mean.
He wants to look as though Warren is an ally, that he's sort of her ideological forebear, which is really weird, because again, Elizabeth Warren as a human, I mean, I know Elizabeth Warren a little bit, much smarter than Bernie Sanders, just as a human being, much smarter, much more nuanced, much more interesting, and I think her deep down views, she's abandoned all of that to run as sort of Bernie Light, who is more articulate and has more plans.
And that's why every day she comes out with a new plan.
She has a new plan today to give social security beneficiaries a raise.
Social security is already bankrupt.
Social security is not paying for itself.
It is already running in the red.
The government is taking in less money for social security year on year than it is handing out.
Elizabeth Warren wants to spend more money on social security.
Where's that money going to come from?
She's going to raise your taxes, of course.
She wants to raise taxes on people who make more than $250,000 a year.
Now, I'm not sure if that's household or people.
That makes a fairly large difference.
Because if you have two members of your household, one making $150,000, one making $100,000, that does not necessarily mean that you are just raking in the dough.
I mean, if you're living in a major city like Los Angeles or New York, that puts you in, like, the low end of rich.
That does not put you in the midst of wealth.
Okay, but regardless, Elizabeth Warren seems to think that people who are wealthy are the cash cow in the United States and can be milked and milked and milked, despite the fact that the United States has taken in about the same percentage of GDP for government revenue For the last 60 or 70 years.
I mean, even in the cases where the top tax bracket was like 91%, it applied to very few people.
It applied to people at the very, very, very top, and most of those people avoided those tax brackets because the effective tax rate ended up being significantly lower.
Elizabeth Warren wants to correct all that and grab an enormous amount of revenue from people at the top, supposedly, assuming that they won't avoid all of that.
So once again, she's just making more promises to people that she can't keep.
Well, Bernie Sanders, all he has to do is sort of lay off Warren.
And he's basically pledged to do this.
So last week he was on The View and he was asked about Elizabeth Warren.
And people have been wondering, why isn't Sanders going at Warren?
Because he knows that Biden's going to go at Warren.
He knows that Biden has no interest in going after Bernie Sanders because Biden looks at Bernie Sanders and realizes that Sanders isn't a direct threat to him.
Warren is a direct threat.
So Sanders' hope tonight is that he can stand off to the side and shout at the clouds like, like Grandpa Simpson.
And that Warren and Biden will go at it and he'll just stand over here going, I'm the true.
You wanted a true socialist?
I have never taken money from corporate interests, unlike my good friend, Elizabeth Warren.
Right.
That's what he wants.
But he doesn't want to have to say Warren's name.
He made that pretty clear on The View last week.
Let's talk about, then, Senator Elizabeth Warren, because not only is she a friend of yours, she shares a lot of the same ideas that you came out with first.
She's saying Medicare for all, free public college, the Green New Deal.
Is there enough room in the party for both of you?
Because are you now in danger of splitting the vote and giving Joe Biden a clear path to the nomination?
Well, Sonny, Elizabeth is a friend of mine.
She and I have known each other for well over 20 years.
And she's going to run her campaign, and I will run my campaign.
Okay, so Sanders is going to avoid her like the plague, the same way he avoided Hillary Clinton until it became inevitable he had to attack Hillary Clinton.
He's going to try the same strategy with Elizabeth Warren and hope that Biden really does damage to Elizabeth Warren.
So that's the dynamic on the stage tonight.
Then you're going to have all of the sort of peons on the stage, the Beto O'Rourkes, who's going to be shouting about gun control endlessly, and Cory Booker, who's going to be desperately seeking attention with his angry voice.
Mr. Potato Head with his angry eyes.
You can have Kamala Harris who will switch her positions repeatedly on stage while trying to arrest everybody.
That'll be exciting.
Pete Buttigieg will give you a little bit of biblical exegesis based on the idea that Jesus was super into abortion.
So that should be exciting.
But everybody knows that the main fight, right?
All this stuff is undercard stuff.
The main fight tonight is going to be between Biden and Warren.
And Biden does have to take Warren down a peg because she is picking up a lot of support and the media love her.
Because as I've said before, when it comes to support in the media, people tend to support the candidate that makes them feel better about themselves.
And all the people in the media want to view themselves as intelligent.
They think that Warren is intelligent and thus they support Elizabeth Warren.
They don't want to view themselves as back to normalcy, non-visionary, Regular old Joe voters and so they don't support Joe Biden in any real way now in just one second I want to get to the the Attempt by the media to paint this race as the female race They have to distinguish Elizabeth Warren from Bernie Sanders on one hand and Joe Biden on the other and so naturally the media are going exactly where you would think they are going which is to Elizabeth Warren is a female and the reason people don't like her is because she's a woman because she's a
Absolute crap.
We'll get to that in just one second.
First, let's talk about looking good in a suit.
So, I know what you think.
You think you can just go down to your local department store and pick a suit up off the rack and it's gonna fit you like... Wrong.
It's gonna hang off of you like drapes.
Okay, what you really need is a tailored suit.
You wanna look like James Bond?
Well, you gotta shop like James Bond.
That means a personalized suit.
And that is where Indochino comes in.
They make suits and shirts to your exact measurements.
Your Indochino suit is made for you.
They've got attention to detail that beats any department store.
If you're in the middle of planning a wedding, They have tons of options for people looking to outfit their wedding party.
So here's how it works.
You can visit one of their showrooms.
I've done this before.
It's a lot of fun.
Indochino has over 40 showrooms in North America, and a stylist will take your measurements personally.
Or you can measure at home and shop online at indochino.com.
You choose your fabric.
Inside and out, you can choose lapel, lining, buttons.
You can even write your own monogram.
Indochino will then professionally tailor your suit and mail it to you in just a couple of weeks.
A suit that is made for you is going to fit you like a suit made for you, right?
Everything in life is becoming more personalized.
Why not the clothing that you wear?
This week, my listeners can get any premium Indochino suit for just $369 at Indochino.com when entering promo code SHAPIRO at checkout.
Plus, shipping is free.
That's Indochino.com, promo code SHAPIRO for any premium suit for just $369 and free shipping.
It's a fantastic deal for a premium made to measure suit.
Once you go custom, you're not going to want to go back.
Go check them out at Indochino.com and use that promo code Shapiro for the special discount.
OK, so the media, of course, are trying to paint this race as stop being mean to the females.
Stop being mean to the women.
And this is where we get a wonderful, this is where we get the picture of the day, the best picture of the day.
Because they tried this with another candidate in 2016, you'll recall.
Americans were sexist if they didn't vote for Hillary Clinton.
Well, Americans did vote for Hillary Clinton by popular vote, but they didn't by electoral vote.
And now Hillary Clinton wanders the earth.
Sadly, looking for relevance.
This is just... I don't know if this is the saddest picture I've ever seen, or the happiest picture I've ever seen.
I'm having a tough time deciding.
So, if you can't... This is why you should subscribe, folks, to Daily Wire, because then you can actually see this picture.
It is a picture of Hillary Clinton at some sort of book signing, sitting behind a fake Resolute desk.
Because she's not behind the real Resolute Desk because she was not elected president.
She's sitting behind the fake Resolute Desk grinning with a bunch of papers in front of her.
Hillary Clinton has literally become Miss Havisham from Charles Dickens.
Remember Miss Havisham?
The old spinster who was once engaged and jolted at the altar and now she's 60 and she runs around her decaying mansion wearing her wedding dress from 40 years beforehand.
That is Hillary Clinton now.
Hillary Clinton is like, you know what?
I don't know about you guys.
I need to get behind this desk and pretend just for a little while.
That I'm president of the United States.
I need to pretend.
I'm gonna get behind this Resolute Desk and I'm gonna pretend just for a little while that my best memory of this Resolute Desk is not Monica Lewinsky beneath it, but actually just me sitting behind it as though I were president of the United States.
I mean, wow.
That is a sad human being.
That is a very sad human being.
Like some people lose an election and they go on to have a life like Mitt Romney.
And he lost an election and then he went on and he had a life.
He got elected to Senate and he was doing some charity work.
Al Gore lost an election, won the popular vote, lost the election, spent the next couple of decades fibbing about the effects of climate change and making billions of dollars off of it and leading himself a life, winning an Oscar.
John Kerry went on to be Secretary of State.
Hillary Clinton loses an election and she is basically Stacey Abrams-ing this thing.
She's going to just claim that she won.
I have to say, I love this picture.
I almost want to have it framed and signed by Donald Trump.
I think I can make that happen for myself, really.
This now occurs to me, that I know enough people close to President Trump that I feel like I could probably get this picture signed by President Trump.
And it would be the ultimate in wall art.
Hillary Clinton sitting behind the fake Resolute desk, never having accepted that she lost the election.
In any case, you recall back to the 2016 election when America was informed that you were sexist if you didn't vote for Hillary Clinton.
Well, now we're going to do the same thing, but with Elizabeth Warren.
Veronica Rueckert has a piece.
She is a Peabody Award-winning former public radio host, voice coach, and communications expert.
She has a piece today in the Washington Post titled, That Grating Noise?
It's People Criticizing Female Voices on the Debate Stage.
She says, at the televised Democratic presidential debate primary on Thursday, three voices will issue from the Houston stage to convince voters that the next president of the United States can do something no one in the history of the office has ever done.
Sound like a woman.
Well, Bill Clinton sometimes sounded like a woman.
But in any case, she says, if this doesn't seem revolutionary, it should.
Remember the continuous spray of adjectives, metaphors, and punditry applied to the subject of Hillary Clinton's voice?
Glenn Beck likened it to an ice pick in the ear.
Glenn is technically correct.
Shrill was another popular choice, along with the implication.
Imagine listening to that for four years.
I believe I actually said that exact phrase.
Imagine listening to that for four years.
Meanwhile, the voices of Senator Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump battered and nasal, skated past unnoticed.
Now, I'm pretty sure that I make fun of Bernie Sanders on a regular basis.
Bernie Sanders?
Talking about pudding?
With his funny Brooklyn accent?
And it sounds like he swallowed some sort of hippopotamus?
Like, I make fun of his voice all the time, but I do love that we now have to paint this picture of Elizabeth Warren as victim.
You don't understand the glowing media coverage she has received heretofore.
The glowing media coverage.
The Washington Post theater critic wrote an entire piece, we went through it, an entire piece about how she was like Shakespearean level actor, how she drew you beyond yourself.
Oh!
Oh!
And the guy basically did a Meg Ryan in When Harry Met Sally.
And he basically orgasmed while he was writing the piece.
He brought himself all the way.
And yet we're supposed to believe that Elizabeth Warren is victimized by people pointing out that actually her voice is a little bit wobbly, and that she goes down into this register a lot, which is something I hate in all politicians, including politicians I like.
I always used to make fun of Ted Cruz's sincere voice.
When Ted would get real sincere, he'd go down here.
And that's when you knew he was being sincere.
And I hate when politicians of any stripe do that.
But according to Veronica Rueckert, it's all about the fact that Elizabeth Warren is a woman.
She's a woman.
And that is why we have to be nice to her and not make fun of her voice, as opposed to everybody else.
Veronica Rueckert says, Women have been given a famously narrow road to walk.
Step to one side, and they are strident, hysterical, and grating.
Step to the other, and they are uninvested, passionless robots.
Well, no, sometimes women are strident, hysterical, and grating.
And sometimes they're uninvested, passionless robots.
And sometimes they're actually fine.
Right?
Sometimes Nikki Haley is great.
Sometimes, on the Democratic side, I don't find Amy Klobuchar to be grating.
Maybe we judge each individual pretty harshly because they're in politics.
You know how many people make fun of my voice and my cadence?
There are literal TV episodes dedicated to my voice and cadence.
So, like, get over it, gang.
I don't think they're making fun of me because I'm a Jewish man.
I think they're making fun of me because I have a funny voice and a funny cadence.
Like, whatever.
Deal with it.
But this is the new narrative, is that if anyone attacks Elizabeth Warren's cadence or her performance, it's because you hate women.
It's cuz of that.
Yeah, good luck with that agenda.
If that's the best Elizabeth Warren can do when Donald Trump comes for her on the basis of the fact that she is a habitual liar in both her policy and with regard to her own past as a Native American princess wandering the prairies, If the best they can do is he's a sexist, then they better prepare a fake Resolute Desk for her, too.
Because it ain't going to go great.
In just a second, we're going to get to the Democratic agenda.
Now, here's the thing.
The entire debate right now is based on not Donald Trump, right?
That's really the Democratic pitch, is not Donald Trump.
And that's a fairly solid pitch.
And then they start coming forth with their policies, and you can see it on the state level, and it is ugly.
And it is, in many cases, unconstitutional, and it's a real problem.
We'll get to some of these bad policies in democratic states, which we'll filter up to the feds in just one second.
First, you have to go over to dailywire.com and subscribe if you want to see the rest of the show live, or if you want to see the show at all, right?
I mean, if you want to get it commercial-free, if you want two additional hours of me in the afternoon, we do three hours of show just for you.
We have access to the backstages, we have access to the mailbag, all sorts of goodies.
You have to be a subscriber over at Daily Wire, and for $99 a year, you get this.
The very greatest in beverage vessels.
I mean, this thing is life-giving.
How life-giving is the Leftist Tears Hot or Cold Tumbler?
I'll tell you how life-giving the Leftist Tears Hot or Cold Tumbler is.
We left it in here overnight one time, and I came back the next morning, and there was a fly swimming around.
In the leftist here, it had not died.
It had remained alive inside here.
Now, any normal fly would have died, but I promise you this thing is just... I don't promise because that would be false advertising, but...
I can only say from anecdotal evidence, the creatures that have fallen into the Leftist Tears Tumblr, it's been sort of like the regeneration pit from Batman.
Basically, it may grant eternal life.
I don't know.
I don't know.
No one I know has died while drinking from it.
We'll put it that way.
In any case, go check us out at dailywire.com.
You get the annual subscription for $99 a year.
Also, you're helping us out.
You're protecting us from a left that wishes to deplatform everybody.
You become part of the team.
Please check us out.
We are the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast and radio show in the nation.
All right, so let's get to some of the democratic policies on the federal and state level that Americans are going to run screaming from on a broad level.
Now, they may not understand the consequences of these things yet, but...
They should.
They should.
So let's talk about one policy that was undertaken by Governor Philip Murphy, Democrat of New Jersey, yesterday.
According to Nick Corrasiniti over at the New York Times, New Jersey will stop doing business with gun manufacturers and retailers that fail to adopt policies that go beyond federal laws, like conducting expanded background checks to stop guns from falling into the wrong hands, becoming the first state to take such stringent action against the firearms industry.
So you should understand what this means.
It is not illegal for any of these companies to do what they are doing.
There is no violation of federal law.
There's no accusation of discrimination.
There's no accusation that would make state cooperation with these entities or contracting with these entities violative of federal law.
There are federal statutes, for example, that prevent the federal government from contracting with discriminatory companies on the basis of race.
There's nothing like that with regard to, here's a company that sells guns, because that's not illegal, nor should it be illegal.
In fact, the Second Amendment protects precisely that sort of thing.
Yeah, the state of New Jersey is now saying they will not contract with a company like Walmart unless Walmart does what New Jersey wants to do, but cannot even legislate on guns.
So they're not saying you have to comply with New Jersey law.
They're saying you have to go beyond New Jersey law.
And if you don't go beyond New Jersey law, we're not going to contract with you.
Now, this seems to me a First Amendment violation.
There's something called viewpoint discrimination.
The federal and state governments, they are not allowed to discriminate against any contractor or any person on the basis simply of viewpoint.
I disagree with you.
I'm not discriminating in violation of anti-discrimination law or anything.
I just disagree with you about gun control.
And the state says, you know what?
I can't contract with that guy because he disagrees with me about gun control because he's a gun seller.
So I'm not doing business with him.
I've done nothing illegal.
You have no excuse to discriminate against my business.
And yet that's exactly what New Jersey is seeking to do because the left has discovered that it is far easier to pressure companies into doing their bidding With the government threatening them and with the government using the power of the gun to kind of subtly say, well, you know, it'd be a shame if something happened to your business there.
Sure, we can't legislate you out of existence, but we can certainly make your business a little tougher, can't we?
So we're just going to sit over here and we're going to play with our own gun.
Not aiming at you, per se.
We're just kind of waving it around the room.
If it happens to stop on you, that's something that might happen.
But, you know, if you comply with us, then I'll just put this thing right back in my pocket and then we can be friends again.
The left has found that it is much easier to pressure corporate in America into doing their bidding than it is to get people to vote for their policies.
Because the American system of checks and balances requires tremendous consensus on a particular issue before legislation gets done.
And this is true even at the state level for the most part, even in blue states like New Jersey.
So instead, governors, executive branches in the federal and the state governments, they are now attempting To usurp power by effectively pushing businesses to go beyond the letter of the law in ways that the governor of New Jersey likes.
And you're seeing this from the woke blue check marks on Twitter as well.
Pressuring Walmart, right?
There was not a grand upswell of anti-Walmart activity among the consuming public.
The media decided they were gonna make it an issue and Walmart felt, okay, do we really want to receive a billion dollars of damaging press at the hands of a nasty media or do we just ban the ammo?
I guess we'll ban the ammo.
Now, the truth is, what corporations should do is they should all collectively tell all of these actors, blue check marks, Governor Phil Murphy, to shove it.
That's what they should do.
But they won't.
Why?
Well, because you have a serious collective action problem, which is much easier to work hand-in-glove with the government than it is to stand up to the government.
And you saw the same thing sort of happen in the 1930s with regard to the car companies.
A bunch of the car companies became very dependent on the FDR administration.
Henry Ford refused to go along with that, and Ford was significantly damaged by the FDR administration.
In effect, it's funny.
There's a lot of talk about crony capitalism.
This right here is a form of crony capitalism.
It is a governor of a state explicitly benefiting certain types of companies that back his agenda politically without the force of law behind him.
But with the threat looming in the wings that he's going to do something to lead a crusade against a private business.
The same people who are ripping on Donald Trump for going after companies, and I said rightly so because Donald Trump should not be going after private companies, are doing the exact same thing so long as those companies don't agree with them on gun control.
Here's Governor Phil Murphy doing this ridiculous and I believe unconstitutional routine.
Couple of days ago, I signed an executive order which essentially puts our money where our mouth is.
It has three parts.
Number one, if you're a vendor and you're selling guns or ammunition or related equipment to New Jersey, you've got to abide by a set of principles as it relates to gun safety.
Secondly, if you're a financial institution and you are lending or investing in those vendors, manufacturers, retailers, you also will have to abide by a set of principles as it relates to gun safety.
And thirdly, we're going to review and ultimately, I think, ban certain types of insurance that leads to irresponsible gun behavior.
So they're going to ban insurance so you can't insure yourself against losses from guns going off or something.
Liability insurance.
I mean, this is full-scale insanity.
This is soft tyranny in action.
He doesn't even have legislative approval for this in New Jersey because he couldn't get this through the legislature.
He's just doing it from the executive branch.
And again, none of these companies are violating the law.
The second step of what he is talking about is particularly dangerous.
He's saying, we won't do business with a vendor that doesn't abide by a set of principles that is not established by law.
It's just what I want them to do.
Viewpoint discrimination overtly on its face.
Then you get to the second thing he is saying, which is that if a bank does business with those businesses, then we won't do business with them.
And this is the next step for the radical left.
What they would like to do is make it so that you cannot use your credit card to purchase things the left doesn't want you to purchase.
Right now, it's guns.
Soon it will be a subscription to the Daily Wire.
Soon it will be a subscription to anything that they don't like.
You're giving money to your church, and your church discriminates against same-sex couples by only performing traditional marriages?
Well, sorry, you can't use Visa for that, or MasterCard, or American Express.
That is where this is going.
Now, as I said, with regard to the original Walmart action on all of this, this will inevitably lead to the rise of other forms of credit, right?
I mean, I'll start a credit card.
It'll be the Shapiro credit card.
We'll go out and we'll find people who are startup investors to back that, and then you'll just use our credit card for the conservative causes that you want to use it for.
So there is a way out, which is why this is not quite government compulsion.
But when you have the governor of New Jersey pushing it, it starts to look a lot more like government compulsion and targeting financial institutions for participating in fully legal activity.
The state doing that is a form of viewpoint discrimination, and it's disgusting.
And I hope that everyone sues.
I hope this thing ends up in court because it is absurd.
It's absurd.
Furthermore, you can see the game.
So, all the same people who whine about CEOs and corporations and crony capitalism, the Elizabeth Warren crowd, all CEOs are evil, they're bad.
They've got a Scrooge McDuck money bin back there, and they swim around in their gold, and then they screw their workers.
Those evil, evil CEOs, well they also, we need their help to pass gun control.
So we are going to simply threaten them, and then we're gonna give them additional pat you on the head points if they do what we want.
According to Amelia Lucas over at CNBC, Leaders of 145 companies wrote a letter to the Senate on Thursday urging the governmental body to take action on gun safety.
Now, let me just point out, if 145 companies wrote a letter to the Senate cutting against financial regulation by Elizabeth Warren and her fellow senators, the media would be talking about how evil these CEOs are.
The media would be talking about how dare they throw their corporate power around like this.
You think their workers are in favor of this?
You think their workers back this and their customers?
You got 145 CEOs to send a letter talking about why Forever 21 wants gun control, and suddenly it's, oh wow, look at them, social warriors right there.
And by the way, a lot of these companies are like Forever 21.
I don't think Forever 21 is on the list, but it's like Uber, Levi Strauss, Gap.
Like, who cares what the Gap has to say about gun control?
Do you buy a gun at the Gap?
Does the Gap make holsters I am unaware of?
Of course not.
These are just companies that are attempting to get in the good graces of the left by establishing their own capital account with the left.
Remember that time, guys, when we backed gun control and we were all best buddies?
Remember that?
Well, if you could just see your way clear to, like, not looking at foreign labor laws, that'd be awesome.
That'd be great.
It's so wildly hypocritical and ridiculous in every possible way.
But it is an easier way than actually passing public policy.
You can't pass a bill, so you just push corporations to do this stuff for you, because they're risk-averse, and they're looking for an anodyne corporate culture where everybody agrees.
And there was talk in the 1950s, and Marxists used to criticize the so-called corporate man, the idea that corporations were interested in churning out basically widget human beings, human beings that all look the same, the man in the gray flannel suit.
And it was exaggerated because it turned out that a lot of people were still individuals.
They just wore similar suits to the office.
Well, now corporations, more than ever because of social pressure, are trying to turn out good little liberals who abide by all of the various policy preferences of big city Democrats because they don't want the risk.
because they don't want the risk.
Well, eventually the right is going to wake up to this and the risk is going to be countered because every time a corporation does this sort of thing, there will be blowback from the right and competitors from the right who start up and take a portion of the business.
If you politicize everything, the right will have to politicize back.
Now that's not the world that I prefer.
The world that I prefer is a world where Gap can sell whatever it wants so long as it's legal and Dick's Sporting Goods and Walmart can sell whatever they want so long as they're legal and you don't have Rahm Emanuel threatening to ban Chick-fil-A just because he doesn't like the CEO.
All that stuff is gross and ugly.
But that's not the world that the left has allowed or created.
And so things are gonna get a lot worse before they get better.
Now, speaking of bad democratic policy, Yesterday, the Democrats were pushing again on immigration.
AOC, the illustrious, brilliant AOC, she was talking about deporting migrants with disabilities.
So the idea, I guess, is that if you have a disability and you come into the country and you falsely claim asylum, we can't deport you anymore.
She says this is a form of killing them.
She's a delight, AOC.
Folks and people like Mr. Sanchez and Ms.
Bueso are not collateral damage to this administration's policy.
They are the target, correct?
Correct.
Is targeting and changing policy to specifically target people with life-threatening diseases for deportation, essentially killing them through deportation, would you characterize that as cruel?
Killing them through deportation.
So in other words, if you show up on America's doorstep, not claiming asylum, but because you want us to pay your medical bills, and we say, well, we can't take in everybody in the world who has a bad disease.
And so we are not going to allow asylum simply based on we have better medical care here.
Is that killing people?
According to AOC, yes, of course, this is the same AOC who is attempting to destroy ICE and suggest that ICE is a horrible, horrible thing.
In fact, AOC apologized to migrants on behalf of the United States.
There's nothing more galling than when people apologize on behalf of other people.
It's really irritating.
AOC doesn't get to apologize on my behalf because I'm not apologizing on her behalf.
I don't apologize to the world on behalf of her stupidity.
She doesn't represent me.
Her views don't represent me.
But here's AOC apologizing on behalf of the Trump administration's dehumanizing policies, apologizing to the world and migrants at large.
I'd also like to apologize to you both for the behavior of some of the members of this committee, where they are speaking in profoundly dehumanizing terms to you, and you don't deserve that.
I'd like to apologize to you on behalf of the United States of America for the dehumanizing policies that they are pursuing.
Okay, so again, if this is the Democratic platform, good luck with this.
Good luck with this.
Thomas Homan, who is the head of ICE, he went after AOC pretty hard.
Basically, just the way that Ted Cruz owns Deadspin, Thomas Homan apparently owns AOC, just repeatedly he owns her.
So here he was yesterday going after AOC saying, listen, if you want to regulate, regulate.
But if you want to sit here and bitch about ICE doing its job, then that is not actually accomplishing anything.
ICE last year took a season of opioids off the streets of this country that could have killed every man, woman, and child in the United States twice.
They've arrested thousands of sexual predators that preyed on children.
They rescued thousands of children who were victims of predators.
They arrested hundreds of women who were victims of sex trafficking.
I am proud of the agency and ICE.
In my 34 years, I've never seen such hate toward a law enforcement agency in my life that you want to abolish them rather than doing your job and legislate.
If they don't like it, legislate!
Okay.
Homan, of course, is exactly correct.
And AOC can't legislate because even her own party doesn't back her radical agenda.
The Democratic Party would not abolish ICE, because then you just have to establish another enforcement agency called MICE.
Right?
I mean, it would just be something that would be exactly the same thing, but with a different name.
So Democratic policy again.
The Democratic primaries matter, but once we get to the general election, if Democrats insist on pushing radical policies, things are going to get really ugly.
And these radical policies are across the board, across the country.
There is a California bill that is now going to basically put Uber or Lyft out of business.
Why?
Because they are going to force these companies to treat independent contractors who work for Uber and Lyft as employees.
How do you think that's going to work?
You think that Uber and Lyft are just going to continue business as normal now that they have to pay for the health insurance of all of their drivers?
Do you think they're going to employ people the same way?
Do you think maybe there will have to be a new screening process?
Do you think that maybe prices will rise on consumers, costing them more money out of their pockets?
And the answer to all of those questions is yes.
But California doesn't care because California can just throw them out on the streets where they can be homeless.
And then we can pretend that they have a right to live out on the streets like California does.
California, by the way, also in an attempt to curb the homeless problem, they've now approved statewide rent control, which of course is going to result in more homelessness because rent control is the stupidest economic policy ever devised by man.
Rent control is the idea that if I force you to rent at a lower price, you will continue to build new homes and new apartment buildings Just for the fun of it.
Without earning the same profit you would have been able to when you could upcharge people.
What they were willing to spend.
You're gonna end up with less housing because of your dumb rent control policies.
Look at New York, where when rent control was really at a tight, people were burning down their own apartment buildings for the insurance money because it was so unprofitable to run apartment buildings.
So yeah, it turns out democratic policy is a giant fail, and that is what Trump is gonna have to run on if Trump can avoid his own foibles.
Alrighty, time for a quick thing I like, and then a quick thing that I hate, and we will be out of here.
So, things that I like.
I don't know if you've ever seen Bill Burr's routine.
Bill Burr is extraordinarily funny.
He has a new routine called Paper Tiger on Netflix.
And it is astonishing.
Okay, whatever you thought of Dave Chappelle waking up to the woke left, Paper Tiger is about as politically incorrect as any comedy special I have ever seen.
He opens by going after Michelle Obama, which is, we can't do that.
I mean, she's actually been sainted.
She's in line to be canonized by the Pope.
So, he starts with that, and then it goes downhill from there, or uphill, depending on if this is your sort of thing.
Here's Bill Burr's Paper Tiger a little bit.
I'm a married man with a kid, but I'll tell you this right now.
If I've learned anything in five years of being married, it's we're always working on me.
I just think to myself, like, what could my wife complain about?
I crush everything.
I pick up after myself.
I like to think I'm a good dad.
I work my ass off to make a great living.
Crush all of that!
All she has on me is who I am as a person.
My daughter has yet to meet the real me.
She's seen glimpses of it.
Like, whoa!
Daddy almost snapped his phone in half!
Okay, so this particular preview does not give you the full spectrum of what the Bill Burr special is.
So it focuses on all the stuff that's apolitical.
Yeah, it gets kind of political.
And frankly, I can't believe this guy is still working.
And I don't think that the woke skulls will let him work for very much longer.
Because all fun things, all criticism of the left must be silenced.
Paper Tiger, Bill Burr, go check it out.
It's pretty astonishing.
Okay, time for a quick thing that I hate.
So I have this thing about people staying in their lanes.
If you're an expert on something, stay in that lane, right?
You're a climate change expert over at MIT, stay in that lane.
If you're a horror novelist, maybe you should stay in that lane and not try to play political pundit.
Stephen King, who used to be an excellent horror novelist, you read his early stuff, his early stuff is much better than his later stuff.
His later stuff is basically great premise, 800 pages of futzing around, everything explodes.
That's pretty, really, that's like literally every one of his books for the last 15 years.
He doesn't know how to end it.
This is my criticism of a lot of Alfred Hitchcock movies as well.
Great premise, develops okay, ending is terrible.
Well, in this particular case, this happens to be true of Stephen King, who hasn't written a truly great book for probably 15 or 20 years.
Again, I've read a lot of Stephen King, I really enjoy a lot of his work.
But that model that I talked about is basically it, right?
He ends Under the Dome the same way he ends The Stand, the same way that he ends most of his other books.
Great premise, really fascinating.
Everybody blows up at the end.
The end.
Maybe a couple people survive.
In any case, Stephen King went on The View.
Now again, I'm just gonna put this out there.
I have never lobbied.
I'm not gonna sit here and lobby to be on The View.
But you should put me on The View!
Okay, so, I've wanted to be on The View for years.
I have very few life aspirations that I have left to really accomplish, right?
I have a beautiful family, I have a nice house, I get to do what I want for a living, right?
All sorts of great things happen to me.
There's one thing on that bucket list that I would really like to check off before I go, and that is being on The View.
Now, I don't think this will ever happen, because I think the folks at The View know why this would never happen.
I think this is an unspoken assumption between me and the producers at The View, why this is a thing that is never going to happen.
That said, Stephen King was on The View, and of course we had to solicit his political opinions, because if there's someone whose political opinions you want, it's somebody who wrote graphic child gang sex scenes in it.
That's a- I desperately need his opinions on migration.
Go for it, Stephen King.
I try to keep my politics separate from the stuff that I write, the stories, because I think people like story.
People want story and, you know, if they want the news, they want, you know, the stuff they can go on and get on MSNBC or they can go on Fox or whatever, but sometimes life comes along and imitates art instead of the other way around.
And as I was rewriting this book all at once, I find out we're locking little kids up in cages on the border.
And I'm thinking to myself, this is like my book. - Okay, nope, nope.
I love that Stephen King really believes his books are apolitical.
Under the dome, basically all of his books have basically just turned into a riff on Footloose.
There's the small-minded sheriff who's secretly a sexual abuser but is going to church every day and he's a religious hypocrite.
It's all so rote and it's all so boring and I'm sorry, having Stephen King talk about politics is like having me write a horror novel.
Not in my lane.
I can criticize it as a reader.
But even there, you know, that's not my area of expertise.
I'd rather have Andrew Clavin stake on it.
He's an actual novelist.
Stephen King on politics.
It's like a three-year-old finger painting.
You know, we can pretend that it's good and, like, pretend that it's relevant and put it on the fridge, but it ain't good.
It ain't good.
All righty.
We'll be back here later today for two additional hours of content.
Plus, tonight, the big, knock-down, drag-out, democratic fight between the octogenarians and the septogenarians.
Very, very exciting.
All the baby boomers go at it tonight.
We'll be here tomorrow to cover all of that.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
This is The Ben Shapiro Show.
The Ben Shapiro Show is produced by Robert Sterling.
Directed by Mike Joyner.
Executive producer, Jeremy Boring.
Senior producer, Jonathan Hay.
Our supervising producer is Mathis Glover.
And our technical producer is Austin Stevens.
Assistant director, Pavel Wydowski.
Edited by Adam Siavitz.
Audio is mixed by Mike Coromina.
Hair and makeup is by Jesua Olvera.
Production assistant, Nick Sheehan.
The Ben Shapiro Show is a Daily Wire production.
Copyright Daily Wire 2019.
▲
Export Selection