All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 7, 2022 - Doug Collins Podcast
31:37
What ever happened to the days of real political debates
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey everybody, I don't know about you, but as you've watched out over the world, the war in Russia and Ukraine is not just isolated to Eastern Europe.
It's spread all over the world and you can see it in market instabilities.
You can see it here.
People who do not think that that war is affecting you, all you gotta do is look at gas prices.
You look at your food prices.
You see the global change that has happened.
But you know something that's also affected investments as well, and I've said all along, Legacy Precious Metals is your navigator.
They're the ones that see you through to get to the next level.
The good news about this is, even with market volatility, market instability, you've got options.
Gold prices are rising as investors turn to gold, and gold presents a hedge against this inflation and protects you against the weakening dollar, which we are seeing.
Legacy Precious Metals is the only company I trust to deal with gold and silver and the other precious metals.
You need this investment.
You need this as part of your portfolio to keep you buffered from what we're seeing in the world.
War and volatility in the market.
This is where you need to be.
Call Legacy Precious Metals today.
Be proactive about this.
Get on board with it.
Call them at 866-528-1903. 866-528-1903.
Or you can download their free investor's guide at LegacyPMInvestments.com. LegacyPMInvestments.com.
Your navigator in a volatile world of investments.
You want to listen to a podcast?
By who?
Georgia GOP Congressman Doug Collins.
How is it?
The greatest thing I have ever heard in my whole life.
I could not believe my ears.
This house, wherever the rules are disregarded, chaos and mob rule.
It has been said today, where is bravery?
I'll tell you where bravery is found and courage is found.
It's found in this minority who has lived through the last year of nothing but rules being broken, people being put down, questions not being answered, and this majority say, be damned with anything else.
We're going to impeach and do whatever we want to do.
Why?
Because we won an election.
I guarantee you, one day you'll be back in the minority and it ain't gonna be that fun.
Hey everybody, it's Doug Collins.
Welcome back to the Doug Collins Podcast.
Before we get started today, I mean, it's finally almost over.
The election season, the 2022 election cycle that seems like it has been going on for the last 40 years is coming to a close tomorrow.
And, you know, look, We spent a lot of time last week on the podcast diving deep into these races.
I mean, there's still some things that, you know, as always, changes over the final weekend.
But before I get into today's, and I want to talk about something that is, and I wanted to wait until the end.
I wanted to wait till the end to really discuss this because it's something that we're going to probably expand on as the podcast is in the month maybe of November, maybe into December, on what I call is just political discourse.
How do we get to where we need to go?
There's a lot of issues out there that need discussing.
We've tended to move away from the way we do that.
Before I get started on that, though, I want to remind you, go to the DougCollinsPodcast.com, the DougCollinsPodcast.com forward slash DC.
We've got a big trip coming up in April.
I want you to be a part of it.
The information is out there.
It's going to be a tour of Washington, D.C., four days with myself, Eric, the travel guy, Lisa, my bride.
We're going to go to the Monument.
We're going to go to the Capitol.
Got some special stuff lined up for you there.
Museum of the Bible.
A lot of different things.
Talking about faith, talking about our country's founding, talking about where we come from.
Just as simple as I call it a walk in history.
No place you go in Washington, D.C., even if you set aside the current political environment, wherever you go in D.C., you can literally just almost feel the history.
And that's what we're going to be focusing on, where we come from, our faith, our strength, that it comes from that commonality.
And I think that is an interesting perspective.
Love to have you be aboard of this in April, but go to the DougCollinsPodcast.com forward slash D.C.
You'll get before the end of November, we've got some special deals going, so I want you to be a part of that as we go forward.
So a lot of things out there for us to dig into before then, but I wanted you to be aware of it.
There's also the Collins Collective, our email newsletter.
Also, you can get all the back episodes of the Doug Collins Podcast.
We're a year in now.
Can you believe it?
You guys are the best in the world.
And also, if you want to send me a note, just hit the little email link there and it gets right to me.
So, let's get started, though.
And what probably, it's been degrading over time.
We have gained more and more of a sense of elections and electioneering that has come down to what consultants and the media consultants, the general consultants, the handlers, however you want to put it, have determined more and more.
And we've talked about it a lot on this podcast, having those folks come in, that the effectiveness of digital, the effectiveness of TV ads, broadcast TV ads, mail, these are all things that are a part of a campaign.
What we have seen a lack of, in my opinion, and it's happened not just in the last two or three years.
It's happened over the last 30 or 40 years.
We've moved beyond the idea of having a longer, what I'll call, Debate about issues and a debate about, you know, where we come from.
It going back to the old classic whatever debates.
It's funny to me today while I hear there'll be all these times when, you know, certain candidates who may be fudging on having a debate or not want to say, well, I want to go and just have a Lincoln-Douglas style debate.
Nah, I don't think they did.
You know, because if you go back and you look at Lincoln-Douglas debates, those were all-day affairs.
And it was not just that, you know, one person would speak for hours, hours about what they believed.
I mean, Lincoln would speak for long periods of time.
Stephen Douglas would speak for long periods of time.
It's a great read.
In fact, I encourage you to find, you know, some books on Lincoln and Douglas or read about the Lincoln-Douglas debates.
They were fantastic.
If you're really geeky and wanted to know about all of these issues, but that we had some of the most foundational debates that came when one spoke for an extended period of time, then the other spoke and responded.
And then we go back and forth at this.
It would give the people who show up, and by the way, you know, we have attention span of, you know, most of the digital vendors, most of your video, your TV vendors, your broadcast TV, all your political people, put this out there.
Look, I got to get them for 30 seconds.
They got no more attention span in 30 seconds.
It's got to be boom, boom.
They're bad.
You're good.
This is it.
Look, that is effective.
I've been in politics.
I will not criticize what is happening because it is effective.
For all of you people out there who want to say, you know, you don't like negative ads.
We've talked about this a little bit before.
Yeah, you do.
Yeah, you do.
Because if you didn't, They wouldn't move numbers.
And there was a great, about a week or so ago, there was a discussion by the head of one of the PACs that was helping Republicans.
There's both Republican PACs, Democrat PACs.
But this gentleman was very honest about that one of the things that you do with television, as you do with broadcast TV ads, is you try to bring the favorables of a candidate down if they're higher.
To where they're negative.
So like, for instance, in this, he pointed out, he said there were several races they picked out that they were starting out to say they had a plus 14 favorable rating.
And after they run their ad series, that person was demon or negative upside down in favorability.
Why is that important?
Hire your favorables.
The more likely people to vote for you, the harder it is to gain traction for your side.
What you try to do, as has always been said, is you try to raise the unfavorables of your opponent while raising the favorables of your own.
That's the perfect nexus here of what you're trying to do.
And that is accomplished through mail, is accomplished through digital, is accomplished through broadcast ads and cable TV ads and the ads that you see on YouTube and Hulu and all the rest.
And that's really where you go.
What my comments today, and I want to talk for just a little bit though, is moving beyond that.
At a certain point in time, that is just who we are as candidates, who we are as people.
And it's going to be more and more so because we've become a disconnected side of society when it comes to these elections.
Think about this.
More and more, and we're here, you're getting this podcast on the day before the national election, and people are tired.
There's no early voting today for the most part in any part of the country.
This is that day in which campaigns are trying to get their people out to vote and motivated for the election day vote, that turnout that they feel like will help them solidify their win.
So as we just take a pause here for a minute, the question comes is, what do we really know many times about these candidates?
Because the idea that these Lincoln-Douglas-style debates, these grand oratories of what people believe, are where we find this out.
We're just not seeing it anymore.
You're having more limited discussion with candidates, even with the media.
You're having a media that is much more hostile and much more biased.
We see Carrie Lake is frankly fueling an entire campaign on the fact that she's fighting with what she, following up on what Donald Trump has said and President Trump said, fake news.
Because they will constantly ask her about things that she will clarify, and then they go back at it from a different angle, basically because they want to paint her as a fringe candidate.
And the media has taken that feeling that that is their role.
So she's now turned it, as many candidates have turned it, and said, look, I'm just not even going to deal with you.
You're not going to give an interview.
I'm not going to...
You know, sit down with you because you're not going to give us a fair shake.
I've experienced that before.
I've turned down radio interviews.
I've turned down some other interviews because I just was tired of dealing with a biased opinion.
I can handle an honest question.
What I don't like, and many candidates don't like, both Republicans and Democrats, is when they feel like that they're being attacked and that the interviewer is pressing their own political agenda.
If it's another candidate, I'm in a debate, I expect the other candidate to push their political agenda.
I do not expect a journalist to push a political agenda or take what I have said, and then even though it is truthful, it is factual, and what I have said, then try to tear that down with their own opinion or their own version of the story.
This is why I think people are getting more and more frustrated.
Look, the ads will work.
We're not talking about ads.
I'm talking about how do we actually get a message out for what you want to do?
Because come tomorrow, there's going to be a new Congress.
I believe it's going to be tomorrow.
It's going to be the Republicans taking back over the House.
I believe the Senate is going to flip.
And there's going to be a new governing agenda in Washington, D.C. The question is, what is it going to be?
Now, Kevin McCarthy has put out their proposal, commitment to America, that they're trying to say, here's the broad generalizations of the four headings that we're going to work on.
From economy and safety and the investigation, those kind of things that give you a general idea of what the Republicans want to do.
But once you get further into it, it makes it even harder.
I remember this was one that was a problem for us in the majority when President Trump became president in 2017. We had the majority in both House and Senate.
Now we had the president.
And, you know, the battle cry for years had been talking about health care, Obamacare, get rid of it, get rid of it.
President Trump at that point had talked about it.
And as someone, you know, so, you know, realistically pointed out to me just the other day, it was like, okay, now you have, you had this opportunity.
And when President Trump said, okay, where's the plan?
It was sort of a crickets on the other end.
And I can go into a long podcast at one day and talk about why we picked healthcare before taxes during that 2017 period.
And it was mainly for money to pay for the taxes because there was a way to restructure a healthcare bill that not only would provide more coverage, be better benefits, and do the things that need to be done, but we had to restructure it.
And that's when it really fell apart.
That's when John McCain, and I've said this many times before, John McCain did not stop Really a bill in and of itself.
What John McCain stopped was more discussion.
That was what just frustrated many of us on the Republican side to understand why John McCain would be opposed to even discussing things further.
And that's all he did in the Senate.
There was a very skinny bill that was put forward that would have led to a conference committee in which we could have fleshed this out.
Instead, he made his famous You know, thumbs down.
I think it was more of a political thumbs down to personal preference against Donald Trump, not about the healthcare bill, but guess what?
The country suffered because we didn't have a healthcare bill anymore to deal with.
All of that said, with this new governing agenda that I believe is coming in starting tomorrow, People have went through a campaign cycle in which we have been devoid many times because of, I believe, media bias.
I believe media polarization.
And we see this from the left and the right.
It's become now where it's very rare, except sometime in print media, to actually see candidates from either party crossing over to liberal media and conservative media.
You just don't see that all the time.
And so it makes it much more difficult to get into the in-depth plans.
And again, I want to go back to, and what I want to spend just a few more minutes on today is, is this idea that we all, we had a debate, we ought to debate.
What we're seeing is two things.
We're seeing candidates who don't want to debate, who refuse to debate, And refuse to give any insight into what their, you know, more positions are.
And then the simple fact that debates today are not like, as I said earlier, when you had this idea of a Lincoln-Douglas debate, when you had this idea of, you know, a question being thrown out to candidates, you know, two candidates and said, okay, here is, we have, you know, rising crime in our country.
How do we deal with it?
Open-ended questions.
And you let one person speak for a couple of three minutes, give them two or three minutes, four minutes, whatever it is, then the other side have a chance, and then they say, you know, hey, let's respond to each other.
And then you say, okay, well, you said this.
How does that actually work?
That's when you actually get into a debate that people could actually learn from.
We don't do that anymore.
And this is the part that is, I guess, when you get to the situation of looking at debates and looking at public discourse, folks, I believe we entirely need more discourse, not less.
We need more time in which people are able to, and members of legislative bodies, executive bodies, are able to spend time You know, talking about what they actually believe, you know, being asked questions, fair but honest questions, and sometimes those will be difficult, like, how are you gonna pay for it?
How is this gonna work?
They need to be able to answer those questions.
And we're not getting it anymore.
Even if they showed up for what we classify as debates, we're not getting it anymore.
Debates have become...
The modern debate has dissolved from the Lincoln-Douglas-style debates and then the debates of old, in which, like I said, you had candidates who would give their answers, then they would compare their answers, they would ask each other questions, and the debate became more of a discussion between two candidates fighting for an office.
Today, debates have simply become Here's a question.
You've got 60 seconds.
And at the end of the time, we're going to give the other person a rebuttal, which typically is not a rebuttal to what you said, except they've already prepared a zinger because they know what your answer is because they've heard it many times on the stump speech.
And so they're going to try and say, you know, a zinger that they prepared.
Then there'll be a rebuttal from you.
And at the end of the day, you've had two and a half minutes of nothing.
And I think this is what is frustrating for many of us.
Now look, I participate in those debates.
If I ever run again, I'll have to participate into what they call a debate.
Those are not questions and answers.
Those are questions and statements and rebuttals.
And then preparing to see what line works best to get picked up after the debate.
Not the substantive policy, because frankly, let's just be honest.
There's no way you can give a substantive answer Beyond, if you consider, and again, I think we're talking two different things if this is where we're at with this.
If you believe don't raise my taxes is a substantive answer, then we have a problem with, okay, I agree with not raising taxes.
What else are you going to do with the budget?
How else are you going to fund the government?
What are you going to cut?
What are you going to take out?
Those are all valid questions that need to be answered.
Most of the time, candidates are never asked those questions.
Or they're allowed to say, you know, we're going to just do away with five departments of the federal government without saying, what do you do to replace those?
What do you do to deal, especially if there's an issue that federal money is just being funneled through there?
How do you get that money?
Do you cut that off completely?
You know, how is this handled by the states if that's what you're wanting to do?
Again, this is where discourse is so important.
This is where civil discourse, debating, argumenting, Arguing is such an important part.
And folks, we've gotten the idea that arguing is just a general yelling at each other, which people, I hear this all the time, I don't like lawyers, I don't like politicians, all you do is argue all the time.
Well folks, This argument, and going back to its base, root, and form, is taking an idea and discussing it.
It's not arguing we've now tied to the arguments that we have with our spouses, or the arguments we have with co-workers, in which it divulges into this is my way, this is your way, Our voice is raised, especially depending on how important or not important it is to us and to what we want to believe.
And we don't end up sharing why.
We end up sharing what we think should happen.
And in doing so, that leads us to something nobody likes to be a part of.
Nobody likes to be around just argumentative people who are not looking for solutions.
What we've seen, however, in this campaign cycle frustrates me even more than what I've just described.
And that is that you've had candidates who have just intentionally not debated.
And there's been Republicans, there's been Democrats.
Look, and I'm not talking about the races that are basically uncontested.
I mean, you can have a contested race in which you know the Republicans are going to win by 40 points and you know the Democrats are going to win by 40 points.
I mean, look, if you don't have a debate in those, is it good?
Probably not.
But that's the way these districts are shaped.
You have to depend on, you know, Maybe more town halls or more interviews to get what the person actually believes or ask them, you know, if they have a campaign event, you get to ask a question that they'll answer.
Those are just the realities of life.
But what we're seeing more and more, and we're seeing it in two governor's races in particular, one is Josh Shapiro in Pennsylvania and then Katie Hobbs down in Arizona.
And the interesting part about this is they're not saying we're not going to debate because we don't have good ideas.
They're saying we're not going to debate because we don't like our opponent's ideas.
We don't like what our opponent has said.
Katie Hobbs and Josh are being cowardly in this.
And Katie Hobbs more than most.
She's basically saying, you know, I'm not going to debate Carrie Lake because what she asked about the elections or what she said about Donald Trump.
Again, what Katie Hobbs is saying to the American people, and if I was a Democrat in Arizona, I would be furious that my candidate for governor, who wants to lead the state, is refusing to get on a debate stage even one time with Carrie Lake.
Look, you may not think that you can compete with Carrie Lake oratorically.
You may not think that you get run over.
Well, practice.
Look, if you're wanting to be governor of the state of Arizona, you daggum well better know how to stand up for what you believe and how to get it done, and that would be by debating ideas, thinking about ideas, or it tells me that simply you're going to follow orders from somebody else, not yourself.
Now, if Hobbs' campaign wants to do this and continue to do that, fine.
I think it's going to cost them.
I don't think they're going to have to worry about being governor because I think this cowardness of not debating Carrie Lake is rubbing off people in Arizona, not just badly with Republicans, but independents who say, look, if Carrie Lake is so bad, Katie Hobbs, why don't you get on a debate stage and put that out?
Ignoring, trying to ignore her and get up is not working.
And what makes it so more frustrating for me is when you have the public broadcasting service in Arizona who have provided the statewide governor's debates for years, agreeing with Katie Hobbs saying, okay, we're not going to do a debate, but if you're not going to do a debate, let's sit down for an hour and I'll just ask you questions.
That is not what, you know, frankly needs to happen.
That is not a challenging, in many ways, it should have been more, you know, again, moving from traditionally more toward a campaign assistance from public broadcasting of Arizona.
Why does this matter?
Why am I so frustrated with this?
Because at the end of the day, people need to know how a candidate can handle themselves under what is limited amount of pressure.
For one hour, you should be able to stand up and answer questions about your campaign.
Fetterman In Pennsylvania, does not need to be a senator.
Hopefully tomorrow, Dr. Oz will win that race.
The debate, you know, I've made a social media post that said, you know, I disagree with John Fetterman, but at least he had the guts enough to show up to a debate, although he did horribly at this debate.
His campaign team should be banned from running elections.
His family needs.
There's a question here on why they would allow this to happen.
Media vendors, the Democratic Party of Pennsylvania.
There's so many down the line here.
Again, what they're basically now asking the people of Pennsylvania to do is to elect a senator who is in more need of rehab than he is.
Getting better from his stroke, which I hope he does.
I hope he gets the help that he needs.
He gets the speech therapy he needs.
He gets the processing therapy that he needs.
Whatever else may need that he gets that.
I want him and his family to grow old together and I want him to be as healthy as he can coming off of a major stroke.
Yeah.
There's not going to be a closed captioning device around all the time.
And then expecting him to make these cognitive decisions in as a role is one of 100 in the United States Senate is just not good for anybody.
He stood on the debate stage, though, and revealed that to the voters of Pennsylvania.
It is amazing to me that they let him do that.
You know, they've been lying to the press and to the public in Pennsylvania for months now that, oh, he just has problems with the word here or there.
We saw some of his early speeches where he finally got back out of speech.
It took almost until September before he actually got back out and did public speeches.
And you could see that they were very stilted.
They were very hard to follow.
You could tell that he was struggling in this regard.
But yet, you know, the Democratic Party, the Democrats behind Fetterman had the opportunity to change their candidate.
They did not.
They decided that they would push forward a candidate who is, you know, from my perspective, liberalism is deeply flawed, but now his health is deeply flawed as well.
But I then go back to this.
He was on a debate stage.
For the non-50% of the Pennsylvanians who have not voted in this race, they have now the opportunity to say, you know, I may like John Fetterman, but I can't afford to put John Fetterman in the United States Senate.
It matters, folks, at the end of the day.
And this is why I've done this.
That's why I wanted to do this podcast, why I agreed, and we're here with each other three days a week, every week.
It's why I do media.
It's why I go on TV. It's why I do, you know, I've had a radio show.
I've, you know, wrote op-eds.
I do this because I believe that the public discourse in this country has got to rise.
I believe that we've got to get to a point where Republicans and Democrats can sit down in the same room, even if we disagree vehemently with each other, to find solutions where solutions can be had.
Now look, in the United States House, it's a majority rule.
You just get enough Republicans on board, you got that bill.
But what we've seen is big things, truly big things, all always typically done in a bipartisan fashion.
It doesn't mean that Democrats become Republicans or Republicans become Democrats or liberals become conservatives or conservatives become liberals.
What it means is to say, okay, here's the best ideas.
What can we do to actually put this forward to get the best idea for the American people?
As we've moved further and further away from debates, you have members of Congress who literally are scared to death to go to the floor and speak.
It's just true.
They'll do it only begrudgingly and then they'll read it when they get there.
I mean, they rarely speak or ask questions or they use their five minutes, you know, to read off questions and move forward.
We're not a good communicative body from government.
And I will say, you know, from a Republican perspective, frankly, and I've said this before, you've heard me say it, you know, Republicans have, I believe, the best policies, but we also have the worst presentation many times of those policies.
We forget that people are the end result of the policies, not the policies themselves.
Democrats have done a better job on relating to people, but they have, in my opinion, the worst policies.
So as we look at this the day before the election, I wanted just to give you a podcast today to just sort of share my heart that out of the almost billion dollars spent, probably over a billion dollars spent, in campaigns all across this country, several billion.
As you look at that, what did we learn?
We learn, you know, who did this when they were younger, who did that, and some of that we need to know.
I mean, again, you're not going to hear from me that we need to quit doing opposition research, that we need to quit doing, you know, negative ads, because, frankly, they do work.
I mean, it's wrong for me as a candidate not to point out, if I'm a Republican running against a Republican in a primary, that my opponent did, you know, is, say, pro-choice.
I mean, if I didn't bring that out, the other candidate's not going to bring it out unless they're wanting to.
It is something to differentiate yourself between candidates, and you're going to see that in the general elections, you're going to see it in primaries.
The problem is what we've seen in this election, and it's grown even further, is because of the bias that we see in the media, because we see the inherent...
And each of you can name.
Here's the liberal networks.
Here's the conservative networks.
Here's the reporters that present their own views and not the news.
Here's the ones that are fairly down the middle of the road.
I mean, all of this has become a point now to where the press is really mouthpieces for whoever their political persuasion is and not an objective journalist presenting facts from both sides.
And now, at the end of the day, we have folks like Shapiro and Hobbs who are just skipping debates because they don't like their opponent.
Or, frankly, also, they don't know how to actually speak in public.
I'm beginning to believe Katie Hobbs has no idea how to communicate.
I mean, you never hear from her.
You never even hear, you know, barely even giving her own, you know, press conferences.
And so, you know, the voters of Arizona are faced with a decision of someone who doesn't know how to articulate what they believe, seemingly, and Carrie Lake, who is out there articulating what she believes every single day.
I think that's what's going to carry the election for Carrie Lake tomorrow.
But as we look ahead, debates have not died.
They shouldn't have died.
Public discourse has to be raised, not lowered.
We have to have more discussions, not less.
We need more time with our representatives in Washington, D.C., in committee hearings, doing what we were paid to do while we were there.
What we've actually got is less.
And at the end of the day, it means that more and more members have to concentrate on Campaigns, fundraising, and other issues than they do with the actual job of governing.
At some point, we've got to reverse this trend.
It's not going to reverse overnight, and it's not going to reverse quickly, but we have got to be able to where we get to a point where we're honest with our constituents we're running with, we're able to tell them what we believe and why we believe it, And then use all the other campaign tools we have to win the elections that are before us.
If we don't do that, I think you're going to see, although we're seeing good turnout in many places, people are getting more and more cynical.
And as one of consultants told me just yesterday that, you know, what we're seeing now is Doug, it's hard for us to really decide on targeting.
He said because it's became more as the old, you know, from For guys when we were growing up, the old shirts and skins.
I mean, it's either I'm a Democrat or I'm a Republican.
You're not going to reach me no matter what you say.
And he said that brings the list of who we can actually try to target.
The list is even more narrow.
And so you're gonna see more simple messages without a lot of beef and a lot of context that are being directed to folks who have not affiliated, so to speak, with one of the parties.
And this is dragging us into discourse that is not helpful because when we get to the candidates and then the then Congress people get to Congress, Senators get there to the Senate.
You have state legislatures.
You have governors.
Then they've only discussed, heard, and processed what their tribe believes.
And if this is all that we're going to do, then there's no crossing over.
There's no discussion.
It's the, again, one of them.
I've said this before.
I say it again.
Politics has become one in which we only Subscribe to our side, and we're not even looking to discuss what the other side may believe.
Not that we would agree with it, but that we would sharpen even our own arguments.
We don't do that anymore.
So, folks, enjoy the day.
Have a great day.
I mean, we've got a big election tomorrow.
I'll be seeing you.
I'll be doing a lot of election coverage on the networks with Newsmax, with Fox, and others.
I look forward to seeing you there.
Hope you tune in.
Go to the DougCollinsPodcast.com.
Send me an email.
Let me know.
What you thought about this election cycle, and then let's get ready for some more after the cycle as we discuss what the new Congress looks like, where we're going from here, and what it actually means to you and me.
Also, some special things coming up hopefully in the month of November, December.
December, we're going to get back to some of our hunters, some of our favorite episodes and from bringing in some new friends from the songwriting industry, maybe even the movie industry.
A lot of neat things coming up.
Again, just want to thank you for a year of the podcast.
We're excited for this past year, what it brought.
We're excited for an election cycle and then the governance that comes.
That's what we do here on the Doug Collins Podcast.
Thank you for joining us.
Hey everybody, MyPillow, I just wanted to let you know MyPillow is having the biggest sheet sale of the year.
You all have helped build MyPillow into an amazing company that it is today.
And now Mike Lindell, the inventor and CEO, wants to give back exclusively to his listeners.
The Perkow bedsheet set is available in a variety of colors and sizes, and they're all on sale.
For example, the queen size is regularly priced at $89.98, but it is now only $39.98 with our listener promo code.
Order now because when they're gone, they're gone.
You're not going to be able to get it.
These FurCal sheets are breathable.
They have cool, crisp feel.
They come with a 10-year warranty, 60-day money-back guarantee.
Don't miss out on this incredible offer.
There's a limited supply, so be sure to order now.
Call 1-800- 800-986-3994.
Use the promo code Collins, C-O-L-L-I-N-S. Or you can go to MyPillow.com, click on the radio listener square, and use the promo code Collins, C-O-L-L-I-N-S. Lisa and I sleep on these sheets every night.
You will want to have them as well.
They're a wonderful product.
Go right now, either 800-986-3994, code word Collins, or go to MyPillow.com.
Also use the code word Collins to get this discount.
▲
Export Selection