The Culture War - Tim Pool - Democrats IN TROUBLE As Polls Show GOP LEADING Favorability For Midterms In SHOCK TWIST
Aired: 2026-04-06
Duration: 33:26


=== Senate Lead and Redistricting Fears (13:40) ===

[00:00:00]  This November, we face the most important election of our lives because literally every election is the most important election of our lives because it's the one that's addressing the current problems.
[00:00:14]  But the issue is will Donald Trump be able to hold on to the House and the Senate, or will Democrats take back power and then shut down his second term agenda?
[00:00:26]  Well, the prediction is though things were pretty good about seven to eight months ago, Republicans were trending towards Keeping the House and the Senate, which would buck the historical trends.
[00:00:36]  Notably, every time a president gets in and there's a midterm, the other party takes the House because, well, what Trump does is motivating to Democrats and less so to conservatives and Republicans.
[00:00:48]  If you're a Republican largely happy with what Trump is doing, you're not motivated.
[00:00:52]  And if you're a Democrat being told the end is nine, we have to get out and do something, well, now you're motivated to do it.
[00:00:59]  Well, since last year, things have gotten precipitously worse, and it's looking like Republicans are going to lose the House.
[00:01:06]  However, there's some pretty dang good news for the Republicans.
[00:01:11]  We've got CNN's data guru saying that the GOP may actually keep the Senate thanks to the Democrats' historically low midterm lead.
[00:01:20]  Wait, wait, wait, hold on.
[00:01:22]  How?
[00:01:22]  What's going on?
[00:01:23]  I kid you not.
[00:01:25]  Yes, it's looking good for Democrats in the midterm to take the House.
[00:01:29]  And this is going to mean subpoenas, it's going to mean depositions.
[00:01:33]  People are going to go to jail like they did last time with contempt of Congress claims and filings.
[00:01:39]  They're gonna obstruct Trump, they're gonna impeach him, but hold on.
[00:01:43]  They're struggling to actually get there, which is kind of weird.
[00:01:47]  Democrats should have no problem steamrolling Trump.
[00:01:50]  I mean, his approval rating is down, but actually, his approval rating is still higher than where Obama's was and George W. Bush's was at the same time in their second terms.
[00:02:02]  Trump actually is trending moderately the same, I guess.
[00:02:07]  And when you factor that in and then realize that Democrats' lead is historically low, I gotta say, There's a little bit of optimism to be had for Republicans that you're gonna do better than people are actually predicting.
[00:02:21]  These prediction markets are saying it's gonna be particularly brutal.
[00:02:24]  Now, with all that being said, I don't wanna be just some guy blasting off copium and hopium, although those memes for that are familiar basically mean like we wanna be optimistic, right?
[00:02:35]  But I wanna be realistic too.
[00:02:37]  The data trends that we have seen from the previous polls and special elections indicate a 10 point surge for Democrats in the House.
[00:02:45]  And other statewide elections indicating they could theoretically pull off a major supermajority or just strong majority in the House.
[00:02:56]  They could get 10 seats.
[00:02:58]  Now, I don't know that that will really happen because that seems pretty dang extreme.
[00:03:02]  But I got to tell you, we got Candace Owens coming out saying Trump is satanic and needs to be impeached and removed.
[00:03:09]  And when you see former Trump supporters breaking and calling him the mad king, saying he must be ousted.
[00:03:15]  I got to tell you, Trump's going to lose a lot of support for this midterm, and he's the principal motivator for people.
[00:03:21]  You know, in his first term in 2018, when Democrats took the House, it was, well, the reason for it is that Trump supporters did not come out for non Trump candidates.
[00:03:31]  Trump is the true motivating factor for the Republicans right now.
[00:03:34]  That's why his endorsements are so important.
[00:03:37]  But there is something else here outside of the polls, and that is the death of the corporate media and how social media will play a role.
[00:03:45]  Recently, everyone's favorite Nate Silver put out bunk data.
[00:03:49]  Where he's basically, he says social media is a freak show.
[00:03:53]  Why?
[00:03:53]  Because everyone is right wing on social media.
[00:03:56]  Aside from the fact that the data is largely fake, just wrong, and he won't retract it because he wants to make a point, his real complaint is that the New York Times is not getting engagement and pictures of puppies, well, they are.
[00:04:11]  Seriously?
[00:04:12]  Okay, well, let's take them at face value.
[00:04:14]  If Nate Silver's data is correct, it means that no one cares about the corporate press narrative anymore, and they're largely motivated by, yes.
[00:04:23]  Cat turd.
[00:04:25]  If you don't know what that means, it's a guy on X who has got massive engagement, is massively pro Trump, and he does way better than the New York Times.
[00:04:35]  Now, I think the reality is.
[00:04:37]  Nate Silver's data is just largely wrong.
[00:04:41]  However, it is true that the internet, X particularly, does have a right wing bias.
[00:04:46]  And I think that's because reality has a right wing bias.
[00:04:50]  And thus, we may be doomsayers worried about what's going to happen this November.
[00:04:56]  The truth is, I don't think it's going to be as bad for Republicans as many people are letting on.
[00:05:00]  And I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing.
[00:05:03]  Some say it's a good thing to threaten that the Democrats will take over because that will be a big motivator for Republicans to get out.
[00:05:10]  While others argue if you keep saying Democrats are going to win, Republicans will say then what's the point of turning out at all?
[00:05:16]  Well, let's take a look at the data, my friends, and we'll break it all down.
[00:05:19]  Before we do, head over to timcast.com and click join now.
[00:05:24]  Why?
[00:05:24]  It's not what you know, it's who you know.
[00:05:27]  That means if you want to accomplish things in life, the most important thing is to have that great network and other people to work with.
[00:05:35]  A single man struggles to survive, but together in a village, they can change the world.
[00:05:41]  And that is our Discord community at timcast.com.
[00:05:44]  Maybe you've got a project you want to start and you don't know where to begin.
[00:05:47]  Maybe you wrote a tremendous, beautiful poem, but you want it to be with music, but you don't make music.
[00:05:52]  You join a community at timcast.com, our Discord community, and you're going to find like minded individuals who are going to help get those projects off the ground, or maybe you can help them.
[00:06:01]  Most importantly, you make this possible as a member.
[00:06:04]  If you like my show and you think it's important, being a member makes it happen.
[00:06:08]  So share this video with everyone you know if you really want to help out and join us at timcast.com.
[00:06:14]  Here's the report from Mediaite CNN data guru reveals GOP may keep the Senate thanks to Democrats historically low.
[00:06:22]  Midterm lead.
[00:06:23]  Well, let's roll tape, my friends.
[00:06:25]  Great discussion there.
[00:06:26]  So, in the latest CNN poll, it showed that Democrats have a six point lead in the race for Congress.
[00:06:32]  Now, there are two ways to look at that a six point lead.
[00:06:35]  One, and say, hey, the Democrats are ahead there.
[00:06:38]  Democrats should feel good about that.
[00:06:40]  The other way to look at it is to say, for Democrats, is six points really enough?
[00:06:44]  CNN chief data analyst Harry Etton is here.
[00:06:48]  And that's the way that I think a lot of people are beginning to question this.
[00:06:52]  Given the Political wins and whatnot.
[00:06:53]  Is six points really a big enough lead for Democrats?
[00:06:56]  Well, I would say this, Mr. Berman, and that is that this lead is historically low for Democrats at this point with a Republican president.
[00:07:03]  Because take a look here, and I'm taking a look at the average of all the polls Dem generic congressional ballot lead at this point in the cycle with a Republican president.
[00:07:11]  On average, their lead's actually slightly less.
[00:07:13]  It's five points.
[00:07:14]  That's less than it was back in 2018 when it was eight points, and way less than it was during the 2006 cycle when it was 11 points.
[00:07:22]  So, yeah, Democrats are ahead.
[00:07:25]  But they're only ahead by five with a president whose net approval rating is bordering on minus 20 to minus 30, depending on what polls you look at.
[00:07:32]  You'd make the argument Democrats should be way ahead.
[00:07:35]  And they're just only sort of slightly ahead.
[00:07:38]  Now, to be clear, five points might be enough for them to retake the House, which is really a narrow margin.
[00:07:43]  Would not take much at all if Democrats think of this.
[00:07:46]  Would blow it.
[00:07:46]  The Senate is a different matter.
[00:07:48]  Yeah, the Senate is a different matter.
[00:07:50]  I think five points is enough to take back the House.
[00:07:52]  But in the Senate, five points is almost certainly not enough if you apply it to the Senate map.
[00:07:57]  Why do I say that?
[00:07:58]  Because let's just take a look.
[00:07:59]  GOP would win the Senate with this map.
[00:08:01]  Let's say Republicans only hold on to the states that Trump won by greater than 10 points.
[00:08:06]  That would, in fact, give them the Senate 51 to 49.
[00:08:10]  Why?
[00:08:10]  Because what you would see is you would see that the Democrats would flip North Carolina, they would flip Maine, but Republicans would hold on to Ohio, they'd hold on to Texas, and they'd hold on to Alaska because Donald Trump won all of those states by greater than 10 points.
[00:08:27]  And I will note, John and I were talking, you had the NCAA tournament going on.
[00:08:31]  This is sort of the chalk scenario going on where the most obvious events actually do occur.
[00:08:36]  Because take a look, during the Trump era, look at this flip the Senate seat, midterm and presidential years.
[00:08:41]  States the other party won by 10 plus points in the last presidential election.
[00:08:45]  Zero, zero, zero times did a party flip those states.
[00:08:48]  So we're talking about places like Texas, Alaska, Ohio, where Trump won by double digits.
[00:08:54]  Which is why the Democrats might need a bigger lead than they have now if the Senate is really in play.
[00:09:00]  What else is going on now for the Democrats that maybe should cause them concern?
[00:09:04]  Cause them concern.
[00:09:05]  Why is that generic congressional ballot lead so low?
[00:09:08]  Because just take a look at this net favorability, party ahead at this point, midterm of years with the GOP president.
[00:09:13]  In 2018, Dems were up by 12.
[00:09:15]  In 2006, on net favorability, which party you like more, Dems were ahead by 18.
[00:09:19]  Republicans are actually ahead on net favorability at this point by five points.
[00:09:24]  So Democrats are just simply put running behind their previous benchmarks, and they need to be running well ahead of them if they want to take back the United States Senate, given that map.
[00:09:32]  To be clear, both parties are wildly unfavorable right now.
[00:09:36]  However, Democrats are even more unpopular.
[00:09:39]  Indeed, my friends.
[00:09:41]  Isn't that a wild way to put it?
[00:09:43]  And so I look at what's going on on social media and I am flabbergasted, is the only way I can say it.
[00:09:48]  When I see these personalities say, like, Trump is satanic and a demon and all this, and they're getting massive engagement, I'm sitting here being like, what reality is this?
[00:09:55]  Guys, I understand that both parties are deeply unfavorable.
[00:09:59]  I comment on politics.
[00:10:01]  I talk to people all the time.
[00:10:04]  I do my own kind of polling when I'm talking to strangers.
[00:10:07]  I'm kidding.
[00:10:07]  Like, we all talk to people we know and random people.
[00:10:11]  People we might bump into or meet.
[00:10:13]  And the narrative seems to be pretty static.
[00:10:15]  I mean, the Republicans are the less crazy political party.
[00:10:19]  We're upset with the war, but Trump is the better choice.
[00:10:23]  Right now in Kalshi, they are predicting at 86% the Democrats will take the House.
[00:10:29]  But I'm going to push back a little bit and say, I think that's overvalued.
[00:10:33]  I really do.
[00:10:34]  When you take a look at the 270 to win map for the House, Democrats are certainly favored, but there are 18 seats that are considered.
[00:10:42]  Toss ups.
[00:10:43]  We don't know for sure.
[00:10:44]  Theoretically, Republicans could end up with 224 seats.
[00:10:49]  Republicans theoretically could expand their control in the House.
[00:10:53]  I say theoretically because I want to point out Trump's going to need a Hail Mary if he's going to make this one work.
[00:10:59]  I mean, he's going to need a miracle.
[00:11:02]  Maybe miracles are the right way to describe it, but even with Democrats' lead, it is historically low.
[00:11:09]  And perhaps the polling data may be wrong.
[00:11:12]  Now, the one big factor in all of this, which freaks me out the most, of course, is how these Democrat states are trying to redistrict just in time for the midterms.
[00:11:22]  And one of the most shockingly insane things I have ever seen, because we are very close to Virginia, we see these commercials running on TV.
[00:11:33]  They run on ads on our social media.
[00:11:35]  I am watching, well, I was watching baseball yesterday, as one does on a beautiful Sunday, Easter, and a commercial runs in Virginia where they said, vote yes.
[00:11:46]  To protect our elections.
[00:11:49]  What was it really about?
[00:11:50]  Well, it's funny because my wife says it before I even said anything.
[00:11:53]  She goes, they're lying.
[00:11:54]  They're trying to redistrict the state to eliminate the Republicans.
[00:11:57]  And I was like, correct.
[00:11:59]  And the crazy thing about it is, there are five districts that they all have with tiny little strips converge near Arlington, which is weird.
[00:12:09]  I think it was Arlington.
[00:12:10]  Maybe Fairfax?
[00:12:12]  Is it the county?
[00:12:13]  But they all converge in this DC ish.
[00:12:17]  Hyper urban concentration of liberals.
[00:12:21]  If the state redistricts that way, they're turning one district into five and cutting out the Republicans.
[00:12:27]  So it may not matter if Democrats are actually unfavorable if they cheat.
[00:12:33]  Now, I got to be fair and say, is it really cheating?
[00:12:35]  Well, I would argue in the spirit of elections, of course it is.
[00:12:39]  The way our elections are supposed to work is a popular vote, not a procedural one.
[00:12:43]  But this is how everything's been going.
[00:12:46]  It is a procedural vote.
[00:12:48]  That is, They simply just need to manufacture as many numbers as possible to win.
[00:12:54]  No, they don't come to you and say, Listen, here's my argument for a better country.
[00:12:59]  Please vote for me.
[00:13:00]  They come to you and say, Rig the game on my behalf so I get more points than that guy.
[00:13:05]  Yeah, that's not real, right?
[00:13:08]  It's like soccer, you know?
[00:13:09]  Soccer's not real.
[00:13:11]  Did I offend soccer fans?
[00:13:12]  Maybe.
[00:13:13]  But when you have people falling down and acting like they broke their legs to get some kind of benefit in the game, that's not real.
[00:13:23]  We all know they're faking it.
[00:13:24]  Soccer falls.
[00:13:26]  I'm kidding.
[00:13:26]  I'm not trying to be mean to all the soccer fans out there, for which there are many, but come on, you get it.
[00:13:31]  When some Democrat wins because they changed the game, am I supposed to be like, wow, we're really happy with our popular governance?
[00:13:38]  We've got a few factors to consider here, however.

=== Voter Fraud and Bot Narratives (16:15) ===

[00:13:40]  We've got Politico, how the GOP's fraud crackdown could impact the midterms.
[00:13:45]  While many Republicans approve of tackling fraud, the Trump admin's recent efforts may not be enough to overcome concerns about higher costs.
[00:13:53]  They say JD Vance and the Center for Medicare and Medicaid.
[00:13:56]  Administrator Mehmet Oz are taking high profile roles in the fight.
[00:14:00]  Vance kicked off a new fraud task force this spring.
[00:14:04]  In Congress, several House committees have launched their own investigations.
[00:14:07]  The looming question will the all hands Republican fraud crackdown translate to votes at a time when Americans are laser focused on the high cost of living, including hiked Obamacare premiums?
[00:14:18]  Republicans argue it will help shift the spotlight off complaints about health care and affordability during Trump's first year in office, as well as counter Democratic attacks over the more than $1 trillion in Medicaid cuts in last year's one big, beautiful bill.
[00:14:32]  The Medicaid reforms, which include expanded work requirements, were focused on trying to address fraud, such as integrity checks, said Energy and Commerce Chairman Brett Guthrie.
[00:14:46]  We are seeing the fraud that we are trying to solve.
[00:14:49]  Guthrie said voters want to see it addressed.
[00:14:51]  I always say good governance is good politics, and addressing fraud is good politics.
[00:14:57]  Indeed, cracking down on fraud can help Republicans reinforce a message of accountability and stewardship.
[00:15:02]  But it's not a substitute for addressing what voters care about cutting health costs, says Joel White, a GOP health strategist.
[00:15:08]  Well, my friends, what I'd like to point out for the most part is that Democrats have been complaining about being unable to fund these medical programs and said, you know, if we just tax the rich, we can fund everything, which is just not true.
[00:15:22]  It's always been a lie.
[00:15:24]  And I'll explain why.
[00:15:26]  First, we have a lot of fraud.
[00:15:27]  We know there's a lot of fraud, and that's the Republican angle.
[00:15:29]  The Republican angle is if we cut the billions in fraud, which you find in Minnesota, Ohio, and California, we will have more money for these programs.
[00:15:36]  That's true.
[00:15:37]  Will it be enough to fund all of them?
[00:15:38]  I don't know, but it's a good PR swing, right?
[00:15:40]  Hey, we got a billion dollars in fraud.
[00:15:42]  Let's get that money back.
[00:15:43]  I don't know that's going to put a dent in the budget in terms of funding a lot of programs, but hey, a billion dollars is a billion dollars.
[00:15:49]  Now, if you were to tax Bezos on his wealth, he'd have to liquidate assets, destroying the value of those assets.
[00:15:53]  And we're talking largely about Amazon stock.
[00:15:55]  The same thing is true for Elon with SpaceX, Tesla, or otherwise.
[00:15:59]  Tesla stock would crumble if Elon was forced by law to liquidate those assets to turn over to the government once every year.
[00:16:06]  It would destroy the value of these companies.
[00:16:08]  In turn, Elon would be worth less money and not be able to actually, or actually more importantly, not be eligible for those wealth tax schemes anyway.
[00:16:16]  Over the long period, you gut and eviscerate the wealth that you claim to be taxing, and then there's nothing to tax.
[00:16:21]  So wealth tax just literally don't make sense.
[00:16:24]  It's an excuse by Democrats to try and come up with a reason why it's someone else's fault we're not paying your programs.
[00:16:31]  Well, listen.
[00:16:32]  If you can't fund the programs without stripping the assets of somebody else, then you can't fund the programs.
[00:16:38]  It would be a time bomb.
[00:16:40]  If you are fraudulently giving money away, well, then you can at least get that money back.
[00:16:45]  Neither of these are solutions, at least one is practical.
[00:16:49]  Well, Newsweek says Democrats get record-breaking boost heading into the midterms.
[00:16:54]  Democrats say candidate recruitment is reaching historic levels ahead of the midterms.
[00:16:59]  Indeed.
[00:17:01]  They're reporting record-setting candidate recruitment across state legislative races as well as the party ramps up preparations for the midterm elections, according to a new release from the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee.
[00:17:13]  State Democrats are shattering recruitment records across the country, President Heather Williams said, pointing to a surge in candidates filing to run in battleground, traditionally red and reliably blue states.
[00:17:23]  Party officials attribute the trend to earlier investment in organizing infrastructure, staffing, and support for legislative causes.
[00:17:31]  I'm going to go ahead and counter this, my friends, and say propaganda.
[00:17:36]  This is actually really bad news for Democrats.
[00:17:38]  It means there's massive infighting.
[00:17:40]  You see, when a party is unified, they have a single candidate they typically are okay with, and they don't get primaried.
[00:17:47]  What we are seeing now is that Democrats are seeing record candidate recruitment.
[00:17:51]  What does that mean?
[00:17:52]  It means tons of people are upset with each other and they're fighting each other for control of the party.
[00:17:57]  I know, maybe a bit extreme of me to explain it that way.
[00:18:00]  The truth is, there are a lot of highly motivated Democrats, and the good news for them is this motivation is going to translate into activity at the ballot box in November.
[00:18:08]  The problem, however, is that if progressives and the moderate Dems are fighting each other, they're not voting for each other.
[00:18:14]  So when they claim that there is massive recruitment at the state level for people to run for office, yeah, they're implying that there are people challenging the infrastructure of the Democratic Party.
[00:18:24]  These people are not likely going to vote for the corporate Democrat.
[00:18:29]  A progressive that says, point of privilege, she, her, they, them, is not going to vote for a Tallarico type.
[00:18:36]  Even though James Tallarico is still liberal coded, he is a white Christian man.
[00:18:42]  And they're going to say, white privilege, and they're going to reject him.
[00:18:45]  This is a big problem for the Democrats.
[00:18:47]  So they want to frame it as something tremendous and great that so many people want to run for the Democratic Party.
[00:18:53]  I'd argue it shows chaos in the party and a breaking of ranks.
[00:18:56]  Truth be told, the Republican Party exists in a permanent state of infighting.
[00:19:00]  So, I guess, welcome to the club.
[00:19:04]  The Republican Party is a spattering.
[00:19:07]  I would say the right coalition, we call it, of a variety of ideologies that at least largely agree the left has gone crazy.
[00:19:13]  And that's why you get many moderates, individuals like myself, who have voted for Trump and the Republicans for the first time, right?
[00:19:19]  Starting in 2020.
[00:19:21]  And we lost in 2024, and we won handily.
[00:19:25]  But we are seeing a bunch of people who are, I don't know how you describe them.
[00:19:29]  Brett Weinstein's a great example.
[00:19:31]  I mean, he's a liberal guy.
[00:19:32]  He voted for Trump, and now he's saying Trump is the mad king and must be stopped.
[00:19:35]  And Candace Owens is saying he's a satanic Zionist who needs to be removed by Congress.
[00:19:40]  Yikes.
[00:19:41]  Well, what I would argue is that these individuals are going to break a ton of support away from the Republicans.
[00:19:46]  Or theoretically, they could pressure a bunch of more middle of the road neocon type Republicans into winning.
[00:19:53]  Seems kind of counterintuitive, I would argue it.
[00:19:58]  But no, the argument is this Who are the kind of people on the right that want Trump removed?
[00:20:03]  The never Trumpers, the neocons, the people who went to the Democratic Party.
[00:20:07]  You may say, yeah, but Candace Owens is anti Zionist and critical of these very same people.
[00:20:11]  It doesn't matter.
[00:20:13]  If Republicans run on the platform of Trump is bad and needs to go, you're going to unify the anti Zionist right with the neocon right who doesn't like what Trump is doing and have never liked Donald Trump.
[00:20:23]  That being said, maybe not, considering a lot of the neocons are now cheering Donald Trump on because they love the war with Iran.
[00:20:29]  I can't predict exactly how this will play out, other than suburban women are one of Candace Owens' biggest demographics.
[00:20:36]  That's why she has the Stanley mug.
[00:20:38]  Right in frame on her show.
[00:20:40]  It's very female coded, big and trendy, and they love this stuff.
[00:20:43]  They love the true crime murder mysteries, but now they're being told to abandon the right, who they supported largely for RFK Jr., in which case Democrats take control.
[00:20:52]  And I will quote Candace Owens We don't care about your midterms.
[00:20:57]  She explicitly stated that responding to me when I said that what she was doing was demoralizing and was going to empower the Democrats.
[00:21:05]  She said, We don't care about your midterms.
[00:21:07]  Okay, I didn't say you had to, but that proves my point.
[00:21:12]  These individuals would have the Democrats win.
[00:21:16]  I guess the question is why?
[00:21:17]  Is there an alternative?
[00:21:19]  I'm a realist, not an idealist, unfortunately.
[00:21:22]  There are things I wish that were, but I also know that the system is as the system is, and we can only move it so much.
[00:21:27]  You may not like that two ton granite slab sitting on your lawn, but you're not going to just one day lift it up and throw it.
[00:21:34]  You're going to have to move it slowly, and it's very difficult.
[00:21:36]  Maybe with a lot of help, you might be able to move a two ton slab of granite.
[00:21:41]  But, my friends, I suppose the question is what is the strategy that Democrats have moving forward?
[00:21:46]  And it's going to be to lie.
[00:21:49]  To lie.
[00:21:49]  Snopes coming in with the fact check.
[00:21:52]  Fact check.
[00:21:53]  Mike Johnson allegedly said on hot mic, it'd be huge for the GOP if Save America Act lowered voter turnout.
[00:21:58]  Here's the real story.
[00:21:59]  I would humbly request that Snopes just put fact check false.
[00:22:03]  Mike Johnson never said this.
[00:22:05]  Let me show you the video.
[00:22:07]  One of the videos has been going massively viral.
[00:22:09]  Breaking news.
[00:22:10]  Mike Johnson just got caught on a hot mic.
[00:22:12]  saying how huge it would be for republicans if the safe act actually went through because they would lose 18 of voter turnout Yeah, you heard that right.
[00:22:31]  Literally saying how huge it would be for the Republican Party if the Save Act actually happened because it would result in 18% less voter turnout.
[00:22:43]  18% less.
[00:22:45]  Yeah, that's literally fake.
[00:22:47]  Thanks, Snopes.
[00:22:48]  They were talking about an election in Louisiana with high voter turnout.
[00:22:51]  And he said, we might get 12% to 18% voter turnout in Louisiana.
[00:22:55]  And Johnson was like, wow, that'd be great for us.
[00:22:57]  And they took it into context and said, They're talking about lowering voter turnout by 18% with the SAVE Act, which, to be fair, literally would be good for Republicans because Democrats tend to vote on their feelings.
[00:23:08]  That's true, though.
[00:23:09]  But that's just not what was said.
[00:23:11]  So I can appreciate the.
[00:23:13]  What color is that?
[00:23:14]  You know those cars that paint where it's like when you look, it's kind of green and then you move, it's purple?
[00:23:19]  That's whatever her hair is.
[00:23:20]  I don't know what it's called.
[00:23:22]  Origin of the video.
[00:23:22]  And I love how Snopes won't just fact check it because Snopes is heavily biased.
[00:23:26]  But thanks for at least writing the article.
[00:23:28]  March 29th, just a few days after the news briefing, Louisiana held elections that were largely local except for a few statewide.
[00:23:33]  Constitutional amendments.
[00:23:34]  Landry encouraged voters to support the amendments.
[00:23:36]  He noted in the conversation they did not think opponents had spent so much money against an amendment in a long time.
[00:23:42]  Then at the 11 minute 39 mark of the recording, Johnson asked Landry about turnout for the March 29th election.
[00:23:47]  John said, What's the anticipated turnout?
[00:23:49]  He says, Well, we thought it would be 12, but it looks like it may be 18%.
[00:23:51]  John said, That'd be huge for an election, I mean, for an amendment vote.
[00:23:55]  For a Louisiana election date without major races, 18% is reasonably high, not alone.
[00:24:00]  For example, the most recent amendment vote got 13%.
[00:24:03]  So what do they do?
[00:24:04]  The Democrats lie.
[00:24:05]  Congratulations.
[00:24:06]  Well, this has resulted in something really, really funny.
[00:24:10]  We've got this from the Democrats, rslash Democrats on Reddit.
[00:24:14]  Speaker Mike Johnson caught on hot, Mike, wanting to lower voter turnout in part by Save Act voter suppression, saying they'd be huge with turnout at 12 to 18%.
[00:24:22]  That is a lie.
[00:24:24]  But here's where it gets real fun Nate Silver lamenting the fact that the New York Times is just not getting popular anymore.
[00:24:33]  Social media has become a freak show.
[00:24:35]  The ecosystem is unhealthy, especially on Twitter, and that's producing some strange beasts among the most influential accounts.
[00:24:41]  The funny thing here, first and foremost, is that his story is fake news, and I knew it was fake news right away because.
[00:24:48]  As I read this story of the prominence of the New York Times, not the New York Times, and of right wing personalities, I said, Oh boy, Tim Poole is a famous guy.
[00:24:59]  I bet he's on this list.
[00:25:00]  And then my ego was smacked in the face because I am not on this list.
[00:25:04]  I'm only half kidding, by the way.
[00:25:05]  Obviously, I saw this list and I was like, Oh, I wonder where I'm at on there.
[00:25:09]  And I'm not, despite having doubled the engagement of many of these individuals.
[00:25:13]  They have omitted me.
[00:25:14]  Well, I think the reason they probably omitted me because they're not going to put me in gray.
[00:25:19]  And they don't want to put me in red.
[00:25:21]  So, what is Tim Pool?
[00:25:22]  Well, I've supported Trump and the Republicans, don't get me wrong.
[00:25:25]  But of course, every single person on here is definitively left and right.
[00:25:30]  So, it's just not real.
[00:25:33]  Hassan Piker is not even on here as well, despite having massive engagement.
[00:25:37]  Hassan should be the second or he should be the biggest blue sphere or the second biggest blue sphere.
[00:25:44]  And he's not on here.
[00:25:45]  Why?
[00:25:46]  Because they're trying to create a narrative.
[00:25:48]  Now, Nate Silver, Knows the data is fake and is not retracted as a fake story.
[00:25:53]  This is narrative crafting.
[00:25:55]  They want you to believe that Eric Doherty and Gunther Eagleman are the most prominent right wing personalities.
[00:26:00]  They are propping up these voices because they want to create a media narrative.
[00:26:04]  Now, I'm not saying I know that Nate Silver genuinely believes this, but he does know that the data is fake.
[00:26:10]  Nikita Beer, who works at X, says the data is not accurate.
[00:26:14]  It's missing half the network, including his own engagements at 12 million, to which Nate Silver responds, It's not my data.
[00:26:21]  The source is Cluvia, which is linked in the article.
[00:26:23]  I'd link to it in this tweet, but ironically, that would kill engagement.
[00:26:27]  And I know that traffic is hard to count, especially for a private company, but if you have more accurate data, then publish it.
[00:26:33]  What?
[00:26:34]  Nate, no.
[00:26:35]  You published bad data, and they've proven it.
[00:26:37]  I've proven it.
[00:26:38]  I posted my numbers.
[00:26:39]  I have about 11.6 million engagements this year.
[00:26:42]  I'm not saying I'm the biggest personality in the world, but of the, I think this would put me at, actually, do we have the data set pulled up?
[00:26:48]  I don't think I do.
[00:26:49]  It would put me in a decent, uh, I don't know, 50th or something, 11 million, somewhere around there.
[00:26:55]  Yeah, I tweet all the time and I trend and people threaten to kill me.
[00:26:58]  It happens.
[00:26:59]  And here I am being omitted from your story.
[00:27:02]  Now, again, to be fair, a lot of people are saying, Tim, shut up.
[00:27:05]  It's not about you.
[00:27:05]  No, no, no.
[00:27:06]  Fair point.
[00:27:07]  My point was, I immediately noticed it was fake because I wasn't on there.
[00:27:10]  And metrics matter for our sales team and things of this nature.
[00:27:15]  The bigger picture is, what does this ultimately mean and why is Nate Silver upset?
[00:27:20]  Well, he says this.
[00:27:22]  Excuse me.
[00:27:23]  Do you think that X is facilitating high quality information?
[00:27:26]  If you suppress external links and there's no real quality signal other than engagement, and people aren't even getting to the accounts they follow so much as the algo, it seems like this is about where you'd end up.
[00:27:38]  The New York Times published a link to critical original reporting on Iran 45 minutes ago.
[00:27:43]  A good story, fair.
[00:27:45]  They have 53 million followers.
[00:27:47]  The engagement metrics you display say they got 94 likes and 33 retweets out of that.
[00:27:52]  Is that accurate?
[00:27:53]  And if so, shouldn't you work on a better algorithm?
[00:27:57]  That's interesting.
[00:27:58]  One person pointed out that you didn't check the data was good, but you slapped your logo on it.
[00:28:02]  That's a pretty funny point.
[00:28:03]  Now, see, here's the real thing that Nate Silver is mad about.
[00:28:07]  He is mad because the New York Times is not getting more engagement than political commentary.
[00:28:13]  That's reality.
[00:28:16]  Here's one it's paywalled.
[00:28:18]  What good does that do us?
[00:28:20]  So, if you can't get it, what are you going to do?
[00:28:22]  Now, I love this from Alex's.
[00:28:24]  Did you know that Nikita Beer and Elon Musk are so powerful that they made the New York Times suck at social media on Blue Sky and Threads, too?
[00:28:32]  Here's the reason I bring this up Nate Silver is lamenting the fact that no one reads the New York Times and they would rather engage with individuals and the individuals' opinions and the information they present.
[00:28:45]  What he fails to acknowledge is that on Blue Sky and Threads, liberal bastions, no one watches or reads that stuff either.
[00:28:55]  So, Case in point, Nate Silver is plumb wrong about what's going on.
[00:29:00]  And I'll just say this the funny thing about this grid is that even if it were accurate data, it's X. Liberals have all left.
[00:29:08]  Now, something funny did come out of this.
[00:29:10]  Hassan Piker says, I couldn't find myself on the list, but here are my numbers.
[00:29:13]  And we can see that he's got 487 million impressions, 30.6 million engagements.
[00:29:19]  I believe those numbers are true.
[00:29:20]  And then everyone noticed among his verified followers, he has 22,000 out of 1.6 million.
[00:29:26]  Well, a lot of people are claiming he's botted.
[00:29:28]  I would make the argument that liberals don't buy verified accounts on X.
[00:29:33]  They go on Blue Sky and Threads.
[00:29:36]  I don't think Hassan Piker is botted.
[00:29:38]  I think Hassan Piker is very famous, has been propped up in the New York Times and other platforms.
[00:29:42]  It is interesting that when you compare him to many others on X, for me, I have 2.6 million followers and about 230,000 are verified followers, putting me just below, I guess, 10% or whatever.
[00:29:54]  Fairly bad, I guess.

=== Verified Members and War Funding (03:30) ===

[00:29:55]  I don't know.
[00:29:57]  It is what it is.
[00:29:58]  When we take a look at this chart of other individuals, we can see that no, email strong is about 10% verified.
[00:30:04]  I think the issue is that there's a small spattering of verified individuals and a lot of users.
[00:30:09]  The bigger your account is, there's still a concentrated core of people who will pay for X.
[00:30:14]  And then there's the bigger community that it makes sense that if you have a massive following, you're going to have a lower ratio.
[00:30:19]  And if you have a smaller following, you'll have a higher ratio because people who are in tune to what's going on are more likely to know who these individuals are.
[00:30:27]  To put it simply.
[00:30:28]  But I don't know.
[00:30:29]  I have around 10 or so percent, I think.
[00:30:33]  Most individuals floating around 100K followers see around 20%.
[00:30:37]  Ian with 1.2 has about 10%.
[00:30:39]  I think Hassan Piker just, I don't think he's spotted.
[00:30:43]  I really don't.
[00:30:44]  Maybe.
[00:30:44]  We did see some weird stuff going on when Elon was announcing that he was selling the platform.
[00:30:48]  So, fine, perhaps.
[00:30:49]  What I will say is this the reason why I bring up the Nate Silver stuff in this context the corporate press does not have the influence.
[00:30:56]  And a lot of this data is still largely correct.
[00:30:59]  Although it is omitting a lot of more recent data and certain voices that are not there should be, like Hassan and myself.
[00:31:04]  The fact is, I still do believe that engagement is largely right leaning.
[00:31:08]  And so while we talk about the potentialities this midterm, I will stress, my friends, the right is doing better than the polling predicts.
[00:31:16]  The politically engaged are leaning right.
[00:31:19]  Now, moderates may be upset with Trump right now.
[00:31:21]  It doesn't mean they're going to vote Democrat.
[00:31:23]  Moderates may say no Trump war bad, but the Republican Party still has net favorability.
[00:31:30]  The important thing to understand in this is that when we poll support or approval for Congress and see record lows around 13 to 20 percent, that doesn't mean an individual member of Congress.
[00:31:41]  In people's districts, they overwhelmingly approve of their member of Congress.
[00:31:46]  At the national level, they view Congress as wholly dysfunctional, but it makes sense.
[00:31:50]  A member of Congress is going to serve their constituents, not the country.
[00:31:54]  And that means you will find Republicans in support of war funding.
[00:31:58]  A bill will be signed giving $10 billion to making missiles.
[00:32:03]  And we asked this on the show years ago.
[00:32:05]  Why do they do it?
[00:32:06]  The Republican Party doesn't like this.
[00:32:08]  And the response is actually really simple from members of Congress who had on the show.
[00:32:11]  They say, you got to understand, in that district in Texas, all of the jobs are tied to weapons manufacturing.
[00:32:17]  So that member of Congress is massively popular in their district when they vote for war funding.
[00:32:23]  If they go to Congress and vote against it, they will get voted out in two seconds.
[00:32:27]  So the country may say, it's bad they voted to fund this war, but in that district, they are cheering for this guy.
[00:32:34]  So, understand the media narrative is cooked.
[00:32:38]  The left is not on X.
[00:32:40]  They are on other platforms.
[00:32:41]  We don't know exactly how it's going to play out, but the GOP is still considered more favorable than the Democratic Party, and that says a lot.
[00:32:51]  Polls may not mean much.
[00:32:53]  My prediction ultimately will still be that Republicans are on track to lose the House, but I don't want to just be, I don't want to ignore these data points simply because we expect Republicans to lose.
[00:33:05]  I think if people get it in gear, It's possible Republicans can do better than people realize.
[00:33:11]  Harry Anton thinks so.
[00:33:13]  I'm going to leave it there, my friends.
[00:33:14]  Thank you for hanging out.
[00:33:15]  Smash the like button, share the show.
[00:33:16]  Follow me on X and Instagram at Timcast.
[00:33:19]  More segments to come throughout the day.
[00:33:21]  And then, of course, Timcast IRL at 8 p.m.
[00:33:23]  Don't miss it.
[00:33:24]  Thanks for hanging out, and we will see you all then.