Ep. 1470 - Kamala's Desperate Final Plea: "Vote for Me or You're Sexist"
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, Kamala's support among black men is cratering. but the campaign has a plan to win those voters back. It's just that the plan is terrible. Also, the media runs with an outlandish and obviously fake story about Donald Trump. Eminem hits the campaign trail and threatens to make literally no impact on the final result at all. And Liz Cheney claims that we should be looking for a president who would make a good babysitter. There are so many things wrong with that idea.
Click here to join the member-exclusive portion of my show: https://bit.ly/4bEQDy6
Ep.1470
- - -
DailyWire+:
My hit documentary “Am I Racist?” is coming to DailyWire+ on October 28th! Head to https://amiracist.com to become a member today.
Make The Daily Wire your hub for election coverage and tune in November 5th for live, real-time poll results and analysis! Join now at https://dailywire.com/subscribe
Get your Matt Walsh flannel here: https://bit.ly/3EbNwyj
- - -
Today's Sponsors:
American Financing - Call American Financing Today at (800) 906-2440 OR visit https://AmericanFinancing.net/Walsh Disclaimer: NMLS182334, https://nmlsconsumeraccess.org
Coign - Learn more about America's first credit card for conservatives at https://coign.com today!
PrizePicks - Download the app today and use code "WALSH" to get $50 instantly when you play $5: https://prizepicks.onelink.me/LME0/WALSH
- - -
Socials:
Follow on Twitter: https://bit.ly/3Rv1VeF
Follow on Instagram: https://bit.ly/3KZC3oA
Follow on Facebook: https://bit.ly/3eBKjiA
Subscribe on YouTube: https://bit.ly/3RQp4rs
Today on the Matt Wall Show, Kamala's support among black men is cratering, but the campaign has a plan to win those voters back.
It's just that the plan is terrible.
Also, the media runs with an outlandish and obviously fake story about Donald Trump.
Eminem hits the campaign trail and threatens to make literally no impact on the final result at all.
And Liz Cheney claims that we should be looking for a president who would make a good babysitter.
There are so many things wrong with that idea.
We'll talk about that and so much more today on The Matt Walsh Show.
In five days, my new movie, Am I Racist?
The decade's number one documentary streams exclusively on Daily Wire Plus October 28th.
But you need a Daily Wire Plus membership to watch, so join now at dailywire.com slash subscribe and use code DEI for 35% off your new membership.
Don't miss out.
Let's talk about the economy.
It's still a dumpster fire for many of us, thanks to the incompetence of our leaders.
But here's a rare bit of good news.
The Fed has finally dropped interest rates.
So if you want to put your family in a better financial position, now is the time to act.
Listen up, homeowners.
If you've been forced to put everyday expenses on credit cards just to get by, American financing has a solution.
They're helping thousands of families just like yours get out from under that crushing debt by tapping into their home's equity.
It's not a handout.
It's your money, and you should be able to use it.
American Financing is saving their borrowers over $800 a month on average.
It's like getting a $10,000 raise at work without having to learn any corporate news speak.
And it costs absolutely nothing to find out how much you can save.
They're moving fast, too.
They're closing some loans in as little as 10 days.
If you start today, you might not even have to make next month's mortgage payment.
Imagine that.
Keeping your hard-earned money away from the banks for a change.
There's no better time than now to turn your financial situation around.
Don't wait for the government to fix things.
We all know how that goes.
So take control of yourself.
Call American Financing Today at 800-906-2440.
It's 800-906-2440.
Or if you're more digitally inclined, visit AmericanFinancing.net slash Walsh.
NMLS 182334.
MLSConsumerAccess.org.
Do it now before the next economic crisis hits.
NMLS 182334.
MLSConsumerAccess.org.
We all, of course, remember that election night four years ago actually lasted a lot longer than one night.
It stretched on for several days.
And with each hour that passed, especially in the overnight hours, Donald Trump's lead slowly trickled away until finally the media declared that Joe Biden had emerged victorious.
What followed was widespread suspicion of election fraud, January 6th, a lot of lawsuits and so on.
And whatever you think of the results themselves, this is a clear failure of our government.
Their job is to ensure that elections are beyond reproach.
the appearance of fairness is almost as important as actual fairness.
And that clearly didn't happen four years ago.
Now, to quell the outrage that unfolded after the race, the race was called for Joe Biden.
Democrats came up with an explanation for what had occurred.
They stated that it was completely foreseeable that Trump's lead would dissipate, then vanish over several days.
And the reason they said that it made sense is that in key states like Pennsylvania, all of the votes weren't counted on Election Day.
They told us that as counties east of the Appalachian Mountains reported their results, it was only natural for Joe Biden's lead to continue to grow.
Democrats said that there was no cause for alarm here because when you look at the demographics of the late reporting counties, it all makes sense.
Those counties included cities like Philadelphia and Atlanta, which have very large black populations, and black voters in every presidential election in memory have always turned out in very large numbers for the Democrat.
Therefore, they said...
There's nothing to see here.
There's no fraud.
This is the expected result.
Just move on.
Don't think about it.
That's the excuse they went with, and a lot of Republicans bought it.
As we head into the final days of the 2024 presidential election, it's becoming clear that this excuse probably won't work this time around.
They won't be able to say with a straight face that late reporting counties and majority black areas all broke for Kamala Harris by 90% at the last minute.
And that's because Kamala Harris' support among black voters, according to every major poll, is collapsing.
Everyone admits this, admits that it's happening.
Even CNN admits it.
Watch.
And sometimes there's a trend line that I never noticed before and make me go, whoa, this is one of them.
All right, this is the Democratic margin among black men under the age of 45 in presidential elections.
You go back to November of 2012, what do you see?
You see Obama by 81.
Clinton only won him by 63.
Then we're all the way down to Biden last time around by 53.
A tremendous drop already.
And then you take a look at the average of the most recent polls and Kamala Harris is up by only 41 points.
That is about half the margin that Obama won them by back in November of 2012.
And this, I think, is, you know, when Barack Obama goes in last week when he was in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, essentially talking to young black men, he made it seem like it was a Kamala Harris specific problem.
Uh-uh.
This is part of a long-standing trend of young black men moving away from the Democratic Party.
And Kamala Harris is just the latest to face that magnitude of younger black men going towards the Republicans.
Now, to be fair as possible to Kamala Harris, her support is dropping among a lot of demographic groups.
It's not just black voters.
New York Times just reported that, quote, Vice President Kamala Harris' support among Hispanic voters is in dangerously low territory for Democrats.
More than one-third of Hispanic voters say they support both building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border and deporting immigrants who are living in the United States illegally.
But interestingly enough, you'll notice that the Harris campaign isn't going on the offensive against Hispanics.
They're not lecturing Hispanics about how they're racist and misogynist.
Maybe they'll get around to that, but they haven't done that really yet.
CNN isn't freaking out either.
Instead, the Kamala Harris campaign and their surrogates and their allies in the media have all united to go after black voters and black men specifically.
This has been going on for some time now.
A few weeks ago I talked about Barack Obama's literal finger wag at black men.
He showed up at Kamala Harris' campaign headquarters and told black voters that if they're hesitating about supporting Kamala, then it's because they hate women.
So here's part of what he said one more time.
Barack Obama is back on the campaign trail and he's making the case against Donald Trump.
But before his guest feature in Pennsylvania, Obama made a surprise visit to Kamala Harris' campaign headquarters in Pittsburgh.
It was there that he got candid, maybe a little too candid if you are in the vice president's inner circle tonight.
He warned that Harris is underperforming him with black voters.
And he had a message specifically for black men.
Part of it makes me think that, well, you just aren't feeling the idea of having a woman as president.
And you're coming up with other alternatives and other reasons for them.
So now you're thinking about sitting out or even supporting somebody who has a history of denigrating you?
Because you think that's a sign of strength.
Because that's what being a man is?
Putting women down?
That's not acceptable.
I just love that clip with the actual finger wag.
You need to support a woman because she's a woman.
Or you're a sexist.
Don't ask me what a woman is.
Obviously I can't answer that.
This is the kind of outburst that, if you're being charitable, you might chalk up to a bad day.
Maybe the kite surfing wasn't great on Martha's Vineyard that day, and so Barack Obama decided to go off script and take out his frustrations on insolent black voters who won't do what he commands them to do.
Certainly, if you're a Kamala Harris supporter, that's the best case scenario.
The worst case scenario is that Obama was delivering the campaign's well-rehearsed, scripted closing argument, which is that if you're a black guy and you don't vote for Kamala, then you're a horrible person who hates women.
If that's the campaign's closing argument, then they're obviously in a lot of trouble.
And unfortunately for anyone who's pulling for Kamala, it does appear that indeed that is the message they're going with.
You can tell because Obama isn't the only surrogate for Kamala who's talking like this.
Here, for example, is a Georgia pastor, we'll put pastor in quotes here, named Jamal Bryant.
Kamala Harris visited his church this weekend.
Watch.
He said something is wrong with brothers who don't know how to support a sister.
Yeah.
Full stop.
Mordecai was man enough to know that in order for me to be a man, I gotta know how to support a woman.
Something is wrong with brothers who don't know how to support a sister.
It was a sister that raised you.
It was a sister that taught you how to read.
It was a sister that taught you how to bathe yourself.
In the context of the vice president, were you trying to send a message?
Yeah, that we've got to be able to vote.
That misogyny is still real in our community.
We've got to address it head on and not act like it doesn't exist.
The reality is if black men had voted, Stacey Abrams would be a governor.
And so I think that we've got to do some real redress that after racism, the biggest ill in America is sexism.
And I think it's part of the responsibility of this generation to deal with it head on.
That is funny that he says it was a sister that raised you.
So he's just assuming, like assuming that the black men in the congregation are fatherless.
Which, you know, statistically is a safe assumption, but maybe that's something that this pastor might want to, like, maybe you might want to stop and think about that one.
And maybe that's an issue that deserves some of your attention, rather than just taking it for granted and using it as a means to lecture people for not voting for Kamala Harris.
But he's saying that black men were misogynists also because they didn't support Stacey Abrams.
And now they're misogynists because they won't support Kamala Harris.
This is the pastor that Kamala is trying to court.
And just to be clear about who this pastor is and what he stands for, here's the vision for his church that he laid out in a podcast last year.
Listen.
For me to tell 16-year-olds to be celibate is one thing.
A 37-year-old who's used to getting some, I need a different kind of gospel.
Yeah.
So the church ain't telling me nothing about sex toys.
Ain't saying nothing about the church telling me to be celibate, but my gynecologist is saying something got to happen down there because your stuff's shutting down.
Yeah.
So we got to have real gospel for grown-ups.
I'm about to go to Newburgh.
I'm going to Newburgh on Sunday!
Yeah!
No, no, no.
The church is not relatable to our generation and down.
I'm looking for people that smell like weed.
I'm at their place, Rashawn.
No, no, no, really.
New Birth is the largest land-owning black church in America.
And so my position to my deacons is why aren't we not...
Raising cannabis.
I'll be able to bring in black males.
They're able to do it legally.
I'm teaching them farming.
I'm helping them to enhance the ecosystem.
This is the kind of conversation.
So if the guy, black boy in Bankhead said, they growing weed at the church?
Where do I join?
I don't need no pamphlet for him.
He coming in.
That's the group that I'm going after.
So this is the person that Kamala is relying on to scold black men, a pastor who wants to turn his churches into literal marijuana farms where they talk about sex toys.
This is the quality of surrogate that she now has.
And it gets even worse.
CNN asked Stacey Abrams about Jamal Bryant's comments because you see Stacey Abrams, unlike Donald Trump, is allowed to claim that all of her election losses are illegitimate.
So CNN still pretends to take her seriously.
And in this interview, Abrams basically agreed with what the pastor said.
Well, they didn't bring up the sex toys and weed farms, although Stacey Abrams is an erotic fiction author, so we can fill in the blanks there anyway.
But watch.
Do you agree that black men who are not voting for Harris and who didn't vote for you, as the pastor sees it, are misogynists?
As he said, misogyny is still real in our community.
I would say, number one, I know it's a shock to everyone, but sexism remains real and a very pertinent issue.
But I want us to be really clear that Kamala Harris is doing very well with black men.
Black men are the second strongest cohort of Democratic voters.
What we're seeing, though, is that she is showing them due respect by actually speaking to their issues.
And those issues differ from other cohorts.
I'm not quite certain why there is this panic about Black men voting.
They vote.
In fact, they vote more than their counterparts in any other community for Democrats.
However, we do have to acknowledge that there is sexism.
There is racism.
There are challenges in our electorate.
And that's why it's so important that Kamala Harris is going everywhere and talking to everyone.
She respects voters.
She meets them where they are.
And she refuses to be told that she has lost a cohort, lost a community, simply because she's different.
The best candidates recognize that you win by meeting people where they are.
And Kamala Harris is doing that every single day.
And we'll keep doing it for the next 14 days until we get to Election Day.
So this is a refrain we're hearing again and again from Kamala's defenders.
They are lashing out at black men and only black men for failing to support Kamala, not really going after Hispanics or even white guys.
I think because they've chalked white guys up to a, you know, they've just given up.
Like, that's not going to happen and they know it.
So this is maybe the first time in the history of the modern Democrat Party that they're leaving all these other demographic groups alone in terms of the scolding for now so that they can harangue black men.
It doesn't happen very often, but that's what they're going with.
And it's hard to imagine a more counterproductive strategy with under two weeks until the election.
That everything they're saying is true and that there's an unusually large number of black men out there who are skeptical of electing a female president solely on the basis of the fact that she's a woman.
I don't buy that, but let's just say that it's true.
Well, the way to convince those people that a woman can lead this country is not to badger them.
It's not to nag them.
If they're skeptical of women leaders and your response is to be like a nagging wife, all you're doing is reinforcing every stereotype and negative perception in their minds.
But what you should do if you really think there's a critical mass of black men who are hesitant to vote for a woman is to actually respond to their concerns, explain to them why Kamala is deserving of their respect, even though it's true that various authoritarians and foreign adversaries probably won't treat her with any kind of respect.
still explain all the ways that Kamala has demonstrated leadership and projected toughness so that these voters can rest assured that they're leaving the country in capable hands.
And if you're not able to explain that, which of course you aren't, then that probably tells you the problem.
None of Kamala's surrogates can do that because they know that Kamala Harris isn't capable of projecting toughness.
She's not capable of projecting a coherent thought, other than the idea that she grew up in a middle-class family and worked at a McDonald's somewhere, even though there's no record of either of those things occurring.
So we're left with this.
Here's just one more example.
This is Jen Psaki, the former Biden spokeswoman, and here's her thoughts on all this.
Kamala Harris, the vice president, I'm going to call her vice president now because I keep calling her.
She is like, in my view, an undervalued talent.
She's like, She's a very fierce communicator.
She's very strong, especially on one of the core issues that made the election maybe won or lost on, which is abortion rights.
You know, and this is why I think when she did a couple of interviews after the debate, I was sitting on the set with a bunch of other MSNBC anchors and we were like, everybody was like, that was great.
It's like, yeah, that's what she's doing out in the country, and nobody is really tracking it.
It's just, that's who she is.
But there is a character out there.
It's almost like public opinion hasn't caught up with what she is doing out there.
And also, we live in a country that is sexist and racist.
So there is that.
Not everybody at all, but there is a level of it that does impact elections.
Now, if you do what none of these surrogates want to do and you actually talk to black voters, you'll find that they happen to have the same concerns that other demographic groups have.
They're worried that Kamala is unqualified.
They think she'd be bad for the economy.
And which are the main concerns of every other group of people that are hesitant to vote for her.
Here are just a couple of examples.
The first is a clip from a voter in Pennsylvania.
The second is a focus group conducted by the Daily Mail.
The third is a group interview conducted by Anton Daniels.
Watch this.
There was a couple of men we spoke to who felt like she was too tough on the black community when she was the DA in California and that that really turned them off.
Take a listen.
She did too much out of LA for me.
She did too much damage to the black community out there.
I ain't even got the trust in her.
I actually would be scared if she weren't.
As a black man, I wouldn't be scared.
Hand up if you think the economy is better under Trump.
And hands up if you think the economy is better under Biden than Harris.
Okay, 7-1.
That's pretty, pretty clear.
The truth.
I'm not saying he's like, of course, yeah, like I do say, he has best.
He still has a business mindset.
I think that lended somewhat.
And I think, yes, the trickle down of whatever previous stuff.
And I think he just handles certain things a little better.
Who does?
Trump.
Trump.
Liz?
He provided more jobs, more opportunities, stimulus.
Absolutely.
No, she's not presidential.
And it will definitely come back to bite people.
Does anybody disagree with that?
I agree 1000%.
Why do you agree?
I mean, I've listened to a bunch of interviews that she's done.
And well, I think she's done maybe like three outside of the presidential debate.
And you can tell like she doesn't know what to say.
And it's like, she's reading from a teleprompter.
You can see her eyes.
But that one was, she wasn't reading from a teleprompter.
That's how you know she didn't know what to say.
And that's how she had to get out of there, get out of there on time.
So yeah, she's, it's a bunch, she doesn't, she says a whole bunch of nothing, man.
So I definitely agree with what Spaces said.
Anybody else?
Yeah, I agree as well.
She never answers questions.
Well, imagine that.
All of these black voters that you see in these clips share some very fundamental concerns that millions of other people have for good reason.
All of these concerns reflect very real problems with Kamala.
This is why Democrats probably shouldn't have installed her in a coup.
You know, it's one of the benefits of actually holding a primary is that you can try to find someone who voters, at least your own voters, are actually interested in.
Nowhere in any of these clips do these voters say that they hate women or that they don't think a woman's capable of being president.
They obviously aren't faking their answers either.
They're clearly expressing their actual beliefs.
And this is why black voters, particularly black men, aren't supporting Kamala Harris to the extent that they supported other Democrats.
Now, you can draw your own conclusions about why the Kamala campaign is so irate about this.
Maybe they're realizing that the late night vote counts for majority black counties in eastern Pennsylvania aren't going to swing their way this time around, or if they do swing their way, it'll look even more suspicious.
Maybe that's why they're so upset about what black voters are doing as opposed to other demographic groups.
Maybe Democrats have so little respect for black people that they take their vote as a given every single election cycle, regardless of the candidate they put forward.
They think that it's owed to them.
Maybe it's all the above.
Regardless of what exactly is going on here, the Kamala campaign is making its desperation as transparent as possible.
This is their closing argument of the 2024 election.
Vote for Kamala or you hate women.
It's like a parody of how to finish a campaign when you're trying to elect the first woman president.
And the reason the Kamala Harris campaign is losing its mind is that contrary to all of their expectations, voters can see right through it.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
Question I get a lot from my audience, especially after they've seen one of my movies, is how can I get into the conservative fight?
Well, for starters, you need to be strategic about where your money is going.
Most credit cards are funneling millions to left-wing causes and candidates, hoping you're too distracted by cat videos to notice.
But now, you can align yourself...
And your values and fight back against the woke mob.
And the way to do it is COIN. COIN is America's first conservative credit card.
That's C-O-I-G-N dot com.
A portion of every transaction is donated to conservative causes and charities at no cost to you.
Coin empowers us to get woke out of our wallet.
And the bonus?
It's a good-looking card, too.
Bright red with a We the People on the front.
I mean, it practically screeches in Bald Eagle.
Coin works everywhere.
Visa's accepted and comes with 100% U.S.-based customer service and consumer protections.
So start earning cash back while fighting the liberal agenda.
Apply today at coin.com.
That's C-O-I-G-N.com.
Be sure to select Daily Wire in the How Did You Hear About Us section.
Terms apply.
Go to coin.com slash disclosures for full details.
Well, out of all the fake anti-Trump stories, this one just might be the fakest.
Here's the story based on testimony from unnamed sources that the corporate media is currently having a field day with.
You've probably heard about it.
Reading from Mediaite, it says, In 2020, then-President Donald Trump went into a rage over the price tag for the funeral of a dead soldier he had pledged to pay for, according to a report published by The Atlantic.
Private Vanessa Gulen, a soldier at Fort Hood, was beaten to death by a fellow soldier and his girlfriend in April 2020.
The girlfriend burned Gulen's body, which was discovered buried near the base two months later.
Trump invited her family to the White House and pledged to personally help them with the costs.
So that's the first part of the story.
That's the part that no one really disputes.
All of that happened.
But then we get to this.
Less than a month after losing the presidential election, Trump asked how much the funeral would cost.
In an Oval Office meeting on December 4th, officials gathered to discuss a separate national security issue.
Toward the end of the discussion, Trump asked for an update on the McCarthy investigation.
Christopher Miller, the active secretary of defense, was in attendance along with Miller's chief of staff, Kash Patel.
And Trump asked, did they bill us for the funeral?
What did it cost?
According to attendees and to contemporaneous notes of the meeting taken by participant, an aide answered, yes, we received the bill.
The funeral cost $60,000.
Trump became angry.
It doesn't cost $60,000 to bury an effing Mexican.
Quote, unquote.
He turned to his chief of staff, Mark Meadows, and issued an order.
Don't pay it.
Later that day, he was still agitated.
Can you believe it?
He said, according to witnesses, effing people trying to rip me off.
Some of the alleged witnesses of these alleged comments have come out publicly now and denied that Trump ever said it.
And we'll get to that in a minute.
Ever said this thing about, you know, burying an effing Mexican.
But even without those denials, any intelligent person knows this is BS. Okay?
Nobody would say what Trump has claimed to have said here.
Once again, Trump's enemies hate him so much that they can't even make up plausible lies about him.
Like, if you wanted to make up a more plausible lie, maybe you would claim that Trump offered to pay for the funeral expenses, but then later expressed dismay about how expensive it was, and, you know, made some kind of comment about how the funeral industry rips people off.
Now, I don't think that he would say that or did say that, but, you know, it's slightly more, it doesn't go the extra mile to make it outlandish.
And it wouldn't be any kind of scandal if he did say that.
But they go much further than that, and instead they claim that he said that it doesn't cost that much to bury an effing Mexican.
Which is the kind of comment that a bad fiction writer would have their villain say.
And these corporate media journalists are bad fiction writers, and Trump is their villain, and so this is the kind of dialogue you get from these people.
And it doesn't even make any sense.
Like, what does her being Hispanic have to do with the funeral cost?
Are we supposed to believe that Trump thought that funeral costs are staggered depending on the ethnicity of the people involved?
And again, these people hate Trump so much that they can't think clearly enough to make the lie more plausible.
They could have claimed that he said, oh, it doesn't cost that much to effing bury someone.
Again, I wouldn't buy that either, but that's more plausible than bury an effing Mexican.
Why would he say that?
It doesn't even make any sense.
It's just, it's totally asinine.
And Mark Meadows, Trump's former chief of staff, who's the guy that was supposedly there and that Trump talked to and said, you know, I'm not going to pay it.
He's come out on the record and said that never happened.
Jack Posobiec also reports this.
Defense officials who were, defense official who was present at the meeting discussing the soldier's funeral said Trump said nothing of the sort and only asked about making sure the funeral was paid for and that Milley had aides there who may have planted the Atlantic story.
Meanwhile, also the sister of Vanessa, the sister of the victim, has come out and condemned the Atlantic story and the journalists who are playing politics with her sister's death.
And she said that Trump was nothing but supportive and kind to her.
So once again, we have the outlandish story about Trump saying or doing something awful with no on-the-record sources.
And then you have on-the-record sources who are coming out with their name attached to it and saying, I was there, that didn't happen.
In this case, you also have the family of the victim saying, like, stop it, cut this out.
And this is the way it always goes.
As a general, even leaving aside how outlandish the claim is, I'm always going to believe that When you have one side with no on-the-record sources, when you have one side making a claim,
and we don't know who the claim is coming from because no one's putting their name to it, and then you've got another side saying the opposite, but they have their name attached, and they're saying, I was there, this is me, this is my name, I was there, here's what actually happened.
In that case, of course, you're always going to The logical and rational thing in a situation like that is always to believe the side that is willing to put their name on it.
Especially in this case when it's something like this and it's like, okay, if that actually happened and he really said that, then why are you being anonymous?
Why don't you just come out?
What kind of coward would you be?
That you were there for this, and you heard it said, and you don't want to come out?
And what are you even worried about?
What's there to be worried about?
If it actually happened, and everybody in the room knows that it happened, then why wouldn't you proudly come out as the one person who's willing to speak out against this horrible thing that was said?
All right, Conal Harris sat down for an interview with NBC News, and I thought this part was pretty astounding.
Listen to this.
On the question of your beliefs, which you believe in, let me ask you this question very broadly speaking here.
Do you believe that transgender Americans should have access to gender-affirming care in this country?
I believe we should follow the law.
I mean, I think you're probably pointing to the fact that Donald Trump's campaign has spent tens of millions of dollars.
They're trying to define you on this.
I'm asking you to define yourself, though.
Just broadly speaking, what is your value?
Do you believe they should have that access?
I believe that people, as the law states, even on this issue about federal law, That that is a decision that doctors will make in terms of what is medically necessary.
I'm not going to put myself in the position of a doctor, but let's also understand that Donald Trump is running tens of millions of dollars in ads to talk about two cases.
To distract from the fact that his policy and plan is also to take away the Affordable Care Act, which provides health care for tens of millions of people in our country.
That his plan is to undo the $35 a month cap on insulin that impacts millions of seniors in our country.
That his plan is to do away with the $2,000 cap on prescription medication, the annual cap.
That his plan is to get rid of the Department of Education, which would mean getting rid of Head Start.
That his plan is to give tax cuts to billionaires and big corporations and on the backs of middle-class working people.
So let's not get distracted by the issues that, to your point from the introductory point you raised, People want to know that their president has a plan to make their life better.
And that includes addressing, bringing down the cost of living.
It includes dealing with prescription medication costs.
It includes addressing the housing.
So you get the, and then she goes into the whole ramble.
This is, and I've made this point already, but here it is illustrated in striking detail.
Kamala Harris refuses to even say that she supports gender-affirming care, quote-unquote.
And notice something.
She wasn't even asked about gender surgeries for minors.
She was asked about gender surgeries, period, for anyone.
And even that, she doesn't want to explicitly support.
She was very obviously trying to avoid supporting it.
Because the question was, do you support gender-affirming care for transgender Americans?
That was the support.
That was the question.
And she could have said, yes, I support that.
And then gone into her whole spiel about Donald Trump and how Donald Trump is terrible.
But she didn't want to say that.
And it's incredible.
Now, it's not incredible that Kamala is flip-flopping on something or running away from her past positions.
We're used to that.
She's done that on every issue, as we know.
But to see her do it on this issue is amazing.
I mean, it would have been unthinkable.
Four years ago.
Just four years ago, it's unthinkable.
Four years ago, that question is a layup.
She'd go into a whole speech about the importance of gender-affirming care and how crucial it is that we protect the wonderful trans community and so on and so on and so on.
That would be a question that she wants to answer.
It would be a subject that she wants to talk about four years ago.
But here we are less than half a decade later and the most liberal presidential candidate in history Is too nervous and too embarrassed to explicitly or even implicitly articulate the pro-trans argument.
Instead, she says she'll follow the law.
But that is a total surrender.
Okay, you have to understand.
That is what you just saw in that clip.
And we've seen it heading in this direction.
There's been signs of it.
But I think what we see in that clip is that is the white flag.
That is a total surrender.
It's not just a backpedal.
That is a white flag, an absolute surrender.
Because as she knows, as she knows, okay, follow the law.
Well, the laws in many states now say that so-called gender-affirming care for minors is illegal.
So she's effectively supported those laws by saying she'll follow the law, that we should follow the law.
She has supported whatever the law is.
So what does that mean?
Well, as I've said, it means that we have won on this issue.
The trans movement is in a state of full-on collapse.
It is collapsed.
Not even collapsing.
It has collapsed.
It is rubble on the ground.
Now, does that mean the fight is over?
Does it mean that Kamala won't get into office and flip again, potentially?
No, obviously it doesn't mean that.
So it's in a state of collapse, but that doesn't predict exactly what's going to happen in the future.
What I'm talking about is right now, the state of things right now, the state of play right now is just a total disaster.
It's an absolute disaster for the pro-trans movement, for the trans activists.
And what it shows is that our counter-strike against the trans agenda...
Our metaphorical counter-strike against the trans agenda has been devastatingly effective.
We have made it so that the most liberal presidential candidate in history does not want to go near the issue with a 10-foot pole.
That's how we've made it.
And every single trans activist, they know it.
They might want to deny it, but they know it.
It's like, we beat you guys.
We beat you.
And I think that there's value, first of all, in recognizing that.
I think as conservatives, we don't have very many wins, culturally, especially.
We don't get a lot of cultural wins.
And you have some conservatives that are so used to losing, they're almost addicted to it.
Whenever a win comes along, they don't want to acknowledge it.
And I said this on Twitter last night and got some responses from people.
Basically, like, kind of upset that I'm saying we won, because they don't want to acknowledge that we won on anything.
And I think for some of them, it's like, there's some conservatives who really had nothing to do with the win.
They weren't a part of it.
In fact, some of them were actively working against us and naysaying the whole time and all of that.
And so there's jealousy and envy that goes into it, I think, for some of them.
But I think more common, it's just the conservatives aren't used to winning, and so you get a little bit nervous.
You don't know what to do when we actually win on something.
But I think that, yeah, you know what?
Spiking the football and gloating a little bit, that's an important part of the process of winning, is to say, yeah, we beat you.
And again, that doesn't mean that you just...
Kick up your feet and say, this is over.
We don't need to focus on it anymore.
Because, yeah, she gets into office.
Does she try to ramp this up again?
What happens in the future?
We'll see.
The trans activists, they're not just going to go away.
But they've got to huddle up and figure out a drastically new strategy.
Yeah.
And so it is pretty incredible.
All right.
Let's, yeah, I guess we'll play this.
Eminem spoke at a Kamala rally in Michigan.
Actually, he introduced Barack Obama, who also spoke, of course, at this rally in Michigan.
I think this was last night.
And let's watch a little bit of his speech, I guess we could call it.
Detroit!
What up, though?
So look, I wrote down a few things I wanted to say.
I love you, too.
Thank you.
I'm here tonight for a couple of important reasons.
As most of you know, the city of Detroit and the whole state of Michigan mean a lot to me.
And going into this election, the spotlight is on us more than ever, and I think it's important to use your voice.
So I'm encouraging everybody to get out and vote, please.
I also think that people shouldn't be afraid to express their opinions.
And I don't think anyone wants an America where people are worried about retribution or what people will do if you make your opinion known.
I think Vice President Harris supports a future for this country where these freedoms and many others will be protected and upheld.
And here to tell you much more about that, President Barack Obama.
So, you know, I've repeatedly warned Republicans against trotting out washed up celebrities as if anyone cares what they think.
And it's nice to see Democrats making that mistake because, yes, Eminem is very famous.
He has sold a lot of a lot of records.
He's one of the best-selling artists of all time.
But he has no impact anymore.
Nobody cares what he thinks.
Just no impact.
Nobody cares about him in general.
If this was 2002, it'd be different.
But his cultural powers peaked about 20 years ago and have cratered since then, even though he still gets great numbers.
Every time he puts out a new album, I don't know, he's released like 10 albums since the last one that anyone cared about, which was the M&M show in 2002.
And all the stuff he puts out now, sells like crazy.
I assume he gets huge streaming numbers.
And yet it just has no impact.
It has no influence.
Which is sort of interesting.
Eminem has discovered a very unique brand of irrelevance.
It's a very financially profitable brand of irrelevance.
It's kind of like...
I'm not even sure what to compare it to in the music world because he's sort of I don't know if there's ever been an artist in the music industry who sells so much and is so famous and well-known and sort of successful by those metrics and yet just has no impact.
I don't think that's...
You'd almost have to go...
You know what it's like?
It's like Avatar.
Eminem is the Avatar of the music world.
Avatar, both films...
Made billions of dollars, two of the highest grossing films of all time.
Everyone has seen them.
Well, I saw the first one.
I didn't see the second one.
But everybody knows about them.
I mean, if you make a billion dollars at the box office, how many people went to see the movie?
Like, what, 100 million or something?
And yet, the movies have no impact.
Nobody would ever cite Avatar as one of their favorite films.
Nobody can even remember any specific details about them.
It's like they sell a lot, but nobody cares about them.
That's the thing.
People go watch it, but nobody cares about it.
It's like oatmeal.
I mean, oatmeal is one of the most widely consumed foods probably in the world, but nobody has strong feelings about oatmeal.
Nobody remembers that great oatmeal dish they had once.
It's oatmeal.
You don't hate it.
You don't love it.
It's just there.
And that's Avatar, and that's also M&M. So the analogies are getting increasingly obscure here.
but oatmeal is to Avatar is to Eminem.
Okay, that's the, so anyway, that's the point.
But here's the funny thing.
There are other middle-aged white rappers from Detroit that have also endorsed Kamala in the last week.
Apparently, according to what I just saw on Twitter, ICP, the Insane Clown Posse, have come out for Kamala.
As well.
And this happened recently, I think, in the last few days.
As you've probably heard.
I mean, it's earth-shattering news.
I think it was Violent J, specifically, one of the Insane Clown Posse guys, who endorsed Kamala.
So Kamala has the vote of a 52-year-old man who performs on stage in clown makeup.
That's the kind of vote that she's getting.
And by the way, just a little bit of music history, Eminem and ICP used to be rivals.
They didn't get along very much.
Eminem once said that Violent J is basically a closeted gay man and said that his name isn't Violent J, it should be Silent Gay, which is kind of funny.
I mean, it's not comedic brilliance, but it's kind of funny.
Not the kind of joke that Eminem would tell anymore.
This woke version of Eminem, he's very disappointed that he made that joke.
But here's my point.
And I'm not even trying to be funny when I say this.
I think that the ICP endorsement Of Kamala has a better chance of making an impact than Eminem's endorsement.
I don't think either one makes an impact.
I don't think either one swings the election.
But ICP has a better chance.
Like, that's more likely.
If she knew what she was doing, she'd have them up on stage.
And the reason is that ICP has a very, very dedicated...
Cult-like following.
It's small, but very dedicated.
That's lasted for decades, which is, I don't know, I mean, it's crazy.
But these guys are in their 50s now, and they still have this, you know, very dedicated cult of followers who are all disaffected, disinterested white people, mainly in the Rust Belt.
That's their whole audience.
And there's probably like 50,000 of them total.
But if ICP could mobilize even half of those people to vote, then that might actually...
Who knows?
I mean, that could actually make a difference.
That's the thing nobody expects.
In all the political analysis and prognostications that we've heard...
No one has talked about the ICP factor.
This is not something that doesn't make its way into any analysis.
Probably because it doesn't matter at all.
But I'm really just trying to make a point that Eminem's endorsement is even less.
He's not even the most relevant middle-aged white rapper in Detroit endorsing Kamala Harris right now.
That's what it is.
If you want the easiest, most straightforward way to put your sports knowledge to work, you need to download America's number one daily fantasy sports app, PrizePix.
Here's what makes it so great.
You just pick more or less on at least two players.
That's it.
And you can win up to 100 times your cash with as little as four correct picks.
Plus, they invented something called FlexPlay, which means you can still cash out if your lineup isn't perfect.
You can literally double your money even if one of your picks doesn't hit.
They've even got an injury insurance policy.
If your player leaves in the first half and doesn't return, your lineup stays alive.
And if you want to play alongside guys like Drewski, Joe Budden, and MMA champ Sean O'Malley, just check out Community Plays under the Promos tab.
But Price Picks doesn't just make winning easy.
They make getting paid a breeze, too.
All withdrawals are fast, safe, and secure.
I'm talking 15 minutes from win to cash in hand.
If only the DMV could operate with that kind of efficiency, we might actually get somewhere in this country.
Our show's camera assistant Mike has Price Picks and has had a lot of fun with the games.
He's excited to submit this week's lineup, including some favorite players like Sam Darnold, Saquon Barkley, and Kareem Hunt.
I think two of those might be good picks.
Download the prize picks app today and use code Walsh to get $50 instantly when you play $5.
That's code Walsh on prize picks to get $50 instantly when you play $5.
You don't even need to win to receive the $50 bonus.
It's guaranteed.
Prize picks.
Run your game.
Get ready, because in five days, the decade's number one grossing documentary is coming exclusively to Daily Wire Plus.
That's right, my new movie, Am I Racist, is arriving on Monday, October 28th, but you will need a Daily Wire Plus membership to watch it.
We've made it easier than ever by putting our memberships on sale.
You gotta head over right now to dailywire.com slash subscribe.
Use code DEI for 35% off your new Daily Wire Plus membership.
Am I Racist is our epic troll of the left, and it shocked the box office with its success, but...
Taking on the establishment, it's not cheap.
Making a movie and getting into theaters across the country, it's a monumental and costly endeavor.
We're doing the work, but we can't do it without your support.
So join us right now as we fight the left and build the future so we can keep standing up for you.
Go to dailywire.com slash subscribe today, become a member, and get ready for Am I Racist?
Streaming exclusively on Daily Wire Plus Monday, October 28th.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation. - Liz Cheney is out on the stump campaigning for Kamala Harris.
It's unclear what this is supposed to accomplish.
Who is Liz Cheney supposed to appeal to?
Which group of voters will be persuaded to vote for Kamala because Liz Cheney told them to?
Nobody knows for sure, probably because those voters don't exist.
Nonetheless, Cheney sat down with Kamala for a town hall discussion in Michigan this week.
At least they called it a town hall.
Usually a town hall, though, means that the audience can ask questions.
That's the point of a town hall.
That's what a town hall is.
It's why it's called a town hall.
It's supposed to be an opportunity for the town to speak.
But the host of the fake town hall, Maria Shriver, explained ahead of time that nobody in the audience will actually be allowed to ask Kamala any questions.
Listen.
You're not, unfortunately.
We have some predetermined questions, and hopefully I'll be able to ask some of the questions that might be in your head.
I hope so.
So, they have predetermined questions.
Hopefully, Maria Shriver explains, those predetermined questions will be the same ones you have in your head.
And if they aren't, too bad.
Just sit there and shut up.
The peasants will not be allowed to speak.
Instead, the three women on the stage, Kamala Harris, Maria Shriver, and Liz Cheney, did all the talking.
They didn't actually say anything.
No authentic human thoughts were expressed, but they did talk a lot.
And towards the end of the event, Liz Cheney gave her closing pitch for Kamala.
And the campaign liked this bit so much that they clipped it and they posted it to Twitter.
But I think there are some problems with the pitch.
Here it is.
I will just end this by saying, and I also know, because I have spent time with Vice President Harris, because I have come to understand what she believes about how she will govern, that she will be a president for all Americans, that she's committed to listening and committed to having viewpoints, some of which, you know, come from different ends of the political spectrum.
And if you think about how you conduct You know, your life outside of politics, how we all conduct our everyday lives, those are the kinds of people that you trust.
Those are the kinds of people you can work with.
Like, if you wouldn't hire somebody to babysit your kids, like, you shouldn't make that guy the President of the United States.
I mean, that's like...
So if you wouldn't hire someone to babysit your kids, you shouldn't make them President of the United States.
That's the big applause line at the end there.
And the implication is that you would hire Kamala and you wouldn't hire Trump.
But there are a lot of reasons why this argument doesn't work.
For one thing, this is a very awkward point to raise when Kamala Harris is sitting right there on the stage.
As everyone knows, the number one rule when hiring a babysitter is to make sure that you keep Kamala's husband as far from her as possible.
Doug, after all, has his own philosophy when it comes to babysitters.
As he always says, if you wouldn't want to get someone pregnant, you shouldn't hire them to babysit your kids.
In fact, as it happens, Maria Shriver's ex-husband had a very similar approach to house cleaners.
So this is a really weird thing happening here.
But putting all that to the side...
I actually wouldn't want Kamala to babysit my kids.
And not just because I'm afraid that her husband might come over and complicate matters.
Kamala has no children of her own.
There's nothing maternal about her.
And when I'm looking for a babysitter for my kids, I'm definitely not looking for a weird, cackling spinster like Kamala.
Especially not one that's rabidly pro-abortion, as Kamala is, because that tells me that she doesn't value human life and has a special disregard for the lives of children.
And yet here I am wanting her to take care of my children, so I wouldn't want that.
Now, Trump, on the other hand, is a grandfather with five kids of his own and ten grandchildren.
His children are all adults now and are still close with him and speak highly of him.
He can tell a lot about a man based on how his adult children treat him and talk about him.
In fact, that is a much better litmus test than the one that Liz Cheney is proposing.
All that said, would I hire Donald Trump to babysit my kids?
Well, the answer is no, because I wouldn't hire any man to babysit my kids.
More importantly, this has nothing to do with the presidency.
I am not looking for a president that has the same qualities as a babysitter.
And I'm not looking for a babysitter that has the same qualities as a president.
It's extremely revealing that Cheney conflates these two positions in her mind.
Never mind the fact that Kamala would make both a terrible babysitter and a terrible president.
The point is that presidents are not babysitters.
And the qualifications and character traits needed to perform either job hardly overlap at all.
So, I want a president who is Tough, practical, pragmatic when necessary.
One who can effectively delegate.
Someone who can handle multiple large-scale problems at the same time.
A president who can both negotiate and wield authority and who knows when to do either of those things and how.
Presidents should be resilient and resourceful, intelligent, not overly emotional.
Presidents should command respect.
And we're just speaking in sort of the broadest strokes here.
Of course, more specifically, I want a president who's willing and able to secure the border, protect our national sovereignty, restore law and order, keep us out of foreign wars, decimate the federal bureaucracy.
And so on.
Now, when it comes to a babysitter, I'm not really expecting them to do any of those things.
In fact, I don't much care what my babysitter thinks about the situation on the southern border.
And I don't need or even want her to possess most of the crucial personality traits that I want a president to have.
Instead, I want a babysitter to be kind, empathetic, caring, maternal.
I don't really want any of that necessarily, certainly not in the same way, in a president.
Now, yes, I want both the babysitter and the president to be competent, but that competence takes on very different forms.
I want them both to be intelligent, but it's a very different kind of intelligence.
I want them both to be responsible, but again, the responsibilities are very different.
A president is focused on large-scale problems.
A babysitter should be focused on problems in really the smallest and most personal scale.
How many of the great presidents and leaders of history, whether they were president or not, were former babysitters?
How many of them would have made good babysitters?
Teddy Roosevelt was a great leader, but I'd probably prefer some random 22 year old woman as a babysitter over him.
Likewise, I'm not sure I'd feel comfortable going out to dinner with my wife and leaving Winston Churchill or George Washington or Julius Caesar in charge of the kids for the evening.
Those men can lead armies and countries and empires.
Can they change diapers?
Probably not.
George Patton was a great leader.
How would he handle a nanny gig?
Not well, I imagine.
Who would I trust to feed my toddlers and put them to bed?
A 19-year-old girl referred to us by a family friend or Abraham Lincoln?
Probably the former.
Does that mean that the 19-year-old girl would make a great president?
Almost certainly not.
In fact, my 11-year-old daughter isn't old enough to babysit by herself at this age, but she is very good at taking care of her younger siblings.
Is she qualified to be president?
No.
At this point, I mean, more than Kamala Harris, yeah, I'd vote for her over Kamala Harris.
But, you know, that's a low bar.
So I probably spent more time debunking this point than was necessary.
But it is important because it shows that the Kamala campaign doesn't understand, even in theory, what sort of qualities are necessary to lead a country.
Of course, there's been an effort for decades now to turn our political leaders into glorified nannies, That's why they call it the nanny state.
And now they're taking it very literally.
Which is bad for the country, but it does make Doug Emhoff pretty excited.
And that is why Liz Cheney and I guess Doug Emhoff are today canceled.
That'll do it for the show today.
Thanks for watching.
Thanks for listening.
Have a great day.
Godspeed. - The question everyone in America is asking, Am I racist?
Get a Daily Wire Plus membership to see Am I Racist?
This is all I have.
Did you want to?
I can help you guys out.
Yeah.
Go to amiracist.com and sign up now.
I've been told because I'm a white male, kind of at the top of the pile, how do I get down from the top?
I don't think you necessarily can.
They're good past all the talk about racism.
We have to love each other.
It can't be that simple.
How do we get to a point of racial harmony?
It's good to talk to you.
We're still on a journey, all of us together.
I think you've got some journeying to do.
Just talk to me about the statistics.
We have an epidemic.
20 million crimes a year, 6,000, 7,000 hate crimes.
