James Smith critiques the Democratic primary's "shit show" debate, grading candidates from Sanders' B to Steyer's irrelevance while attacking Gail King's moderation. He highlights Sanders' dangerous nostalgia for Castro's Cuba and Putin's interference without evidence, contrasting it with Trump's 1950s nostalgia. Smith exposes Biden's absurd claim of 150 million gun deaths versus the actual 300,000 and Warren's baseless allegation against Bloomberg. Ultimately, the episode argues that Democratic tactics mirror those used against Trump in 2016, prioritizing donors over voters and relying on falsehoods rather than policy expertise. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
South Carolina Debate Fallout00:04:17
Fill her up!
You are listening to the Gash Digital Network.
We need to roll back the state.
We spy on all of our own citizens.
Our prisons are flooded with nonviolent drug offenders.
If you want to know who America's next enemy is, look at who we're funding right now.
Every single one of these problems are a result of government being way too big.
You're listening to part of the problem on the Gas Digital Network.
Here's your host, James Smith.
What's going on, everybody?
What's up?
Welcome to a brand new episode of Part of the Problem.
Thank you for listening or watching or however consuming.
I appreciate it.
I am flying solo for this episode.
No guest, no Robbie the Fire Bernstein.
His coronavirus took a turn for the worse.
All this time, we thought the AIDS was protecting him against the coronavirus.
And, you know, we had it on word from top scientists that they would cancel each other out.
But, you know, what do the scientists know?
And now I'm starting to question everything.
Maybe climate change isn't the threat that everyone says it is.
I don't know.
The scientists were wrong on this one.
But anyway, get better soon, Rob Bernstein.
I have a feeling he'll be better by Friday, but fingers crossed.
Fingers crossed that that comes true.
So obviously there was a debate last night.
We'll do some recap of that for today's episode.
But man, it is really, it's crunch time in the Democratic primaries.
At this point, we're just a couple days away from the South Carolina primary, and then we are less than a week away from Super Tuesday.
Super Tuesday is very close, super close to the South Carolina primary at this point.
So now you kind of have this weird thing where they're almost kind of lumped together.
And what I mean by that is just that winning South Carolina isn't going to give you some bump going into Super Tuesday because there's barely enough time to really get press about it, to fundraise off of it, to really see any jump in the polls or anything like that.
So that's one more thing that seems to be working against Joe Biden.
But this is it.
We're going to, as of next week, we're going to have a much clearer picture of what this process is going to look like.
And at this point, there really only seems to be two possibilities.
And one is that a week from now, Bernie Sanders has just run away with this thing.
Or two, that a week from now, Bernie Sanders is the frontrunner, but he hasn't run away from it with it.
And that's a, if you're Bernie Sanders, you got to be pretty pleased with where you sit right now.
Going into South Carolina, man, it's a real chance for, I think, not only a knockout blow of Joe Biden, but a devastating turn for Bernie Sanders just take this whole thing over.
I mean, if he takes South Carolina and then does very well on Super Tuesday, I think it's going to be damn near impossible for anybody to catch him.
And just to understand what's going on here, Joe Biden still sits, I think as the latest polls, he was like up four or five points in South Carolina.
But to keep perspective on that, Joe Biden was up by 50 points at one point in the South Carolina polls.
He was up by 50, 40 points.
You know, he had huge, huge lead there.
And it's now Bernie Sanders is within striking distance, as they say.
So this is, you know, it certainly could go either way at this point.
I think there's a strong chance that Joe Biden ends up underperforming and Bernie Sanders takes it.
And then things get interesting.
Things get real, real interesting when you got, it really at that point, I think, is going to be Bernie Sanders versus Donald Trump.
It's one of those things where no matter how many times you say it out loud, it still seems pretty remarkable that that would be the presidential election in 2020.
DNC Tactics and Trump Comparisons00:10:06
If you had told someone that in 1980, they would have shit their pants or just not believed you.
That's probably more likely.
If they shit their pants, there was already something wrong with that guy.
I'll say that.
So, debate, woof, it was another shit show.
It was really another shit show.
Even the mainstream corporate press is, they seem to not be happy.
Everybody is acknowledging that this was bad.
I actually think this one was even worse than the previous one.
The previous debate was nasty and there were a lot of attacks and a lot of fighting, but this one was like even nastier attacks.
And there was a lot of like talking over each other.
The moderators were terrible.
It was a CBS debate.
They had a, what's her name?
Oprah Winfrey's friend, Gail King, is moderating, which is just ridiculous.
I mean, I don't know.
This woman seems to be more suited for like a, you know, like a lighthearted morning show or interviewing celebrities.
But you would think that a serious news network like CBS would be like, yeah, you kind of have to be like a policy expert to do one of these debates.
This is kind of a big deal for us.
But they just had her and she was very awkward and strange.
And there are just these weird moments at one moment where she like called Joe Biden a gentleman and was just being kind of lighthearted and complimentary, which again is fine when you're interviewing celebrities or doing some morning show, but is really weird and inappropriate when you're a debate moderator and the job is president of the United States.
You're supposed to like be neutral and not do things like that.
Anyway, there was talking over each other between the candidates, like to the point that it's, as many podcast listeners probably know, it's like, oh my God, it feels like something's crawling under your skin when you just listen to people talking over each other.
It's brutal.
It won't happen on this episode.
But that's, you know, it's like a horrible thing in any type of broadcast.
And the moderators were doing nothing.
I mean, there was like points where there were minute, two minute long stretches of people just talking over each other.
At one point, Mayor Pete and Bernie Sanders were just both answering a question.
I mean, they just both kept going and no moderator stepped in to do anything.
A lot of shouting out of turn and things like that.
It just looked bad.
It looked like an amateur production.
And there were a bunch of people who were kind of complaining about it.
Then that comes off looking bad too.
Like if you're running to be president of the United States and you're up there just kind of complaining about the moderators and the debate rules, that doesn't come off looking great, even though I kind of am sympathetic because it was terrible.
But anyway, a lot of just things were hurled back and forth at one another.
And ultimately, at least for me, I mean, it was almost a tough debate to really analyze, but I felt like kind of the same way I did with the last one where, you know, Bernie Sanders may not have won the debate, but he won the night because you basically come out of it like, well, nothing changed.
Nobody had their moment.
And so the guy who was the frontrunner before, he didn't really hurt himself any.
So he moves on in the same position.
And nobody was like, you know, if like, I suppose you could say in some ways the previous debate was good for Biden because Bloomberg got hurt so much.
This one, you know, you could maybe make the same argument.
If I was going through, oh, the other thing, the other thing I wanted to mention that I did think was really interesting, and I've seen a lot of people on Twitter mentioning this.
So I was, you know, I was thinking this as I was watching it, and I wondered if anybody else was noticing this dynamic as well.
And then it turns out I went on Twitter, a whole lot of people were noticing this.
So I was a little relieved by that.
Like, I'm not going crazy here.
But, you know, the last episode was all about the similarities between Donald Trump in 2016 and Bernie Sanders in 2020.
And weirdly enough, the day after I record that episode, I'm watching this debate.
And there's one more tactic that was used against Donald Trump that's very clearly being used against Bernie Sanders.
And it was the audience.
It was a packed audience against Bernie Sanders.
They used to do, if you remember, back in 2016, Trump would be at these debates and he'd be insulting people and delivering these lines and saying all these things about his policies and whatever Donald Trump does.
And it would just be getting like booze, booze from the entire crowd at the debate.
But then you look at the polls and you're like, oh, Donald Trump is in first place by a large margin.
Like he's dominating.
Way more people support him.
Yet in this audience, way, way, way less people support him.
It's a little bit strange, you know, like that.
And to see Bloomberg have this enthusiastic support from the crowd, which was different from the previous debate.
The Bloomberg people, they figured this out.
But so Bloomberg all of a sudden has all this enthusiasm and it's just so disconnected from the poll numbers or just like the rallies that Bernie Sanders goes to.
I mean, Bernie Sanders goes to these rallies.
There's 20,000 people show up to listen to him speak.
They're losing their minds.
They're like hardcore Bernie fans.
And then all of a sudden at the debates, he's getting booed and he's getting, you know, Bloomberg is like, has these enthusiastic cheerleaders and it's just, you know, it all seemed pretty, pretty obviously set up.
And then, of course, it was because a lot of these internet journalists, the real journalists in our society, were like, you know, badgering people about it.
They unearthed some of the info where basically it costs thousands and thousands of dollars to get a seat at these things.
And you have to like become what they call a co-sponsor.
So you have to kind of be like in with the party.
And so basically they can filter who comes in to these debates and who doesn't.
And it just, it's hilarious.
Obviously, it's a tactic against Bernie Sanders, but it also just shows how full of shit the DNC is, you know, with all of their talking points about income inequality and, you know, being the party of the workers and all this shit, representing, you know, being pro-democracy and representing everyday Americans.
Yet when it comes to the debates, they won't just be like, oh, well, these are free tickets or, you know, $20 tickets or something for the general public to come to.
No, no, no.
That's when you want to have these big campaign donors and politically connected people there.
And it also, you know, it made me think about some of the differences between Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump.
And this is an interesting dynamic.
And I'll see how this, you know, we'll all see how this plays out over the next few months.
But, you know, as I talked about the last episode and even just now, like there are these similarities between the effect that Donald Trump's campaign had on the establishment and the effect that Bernie Sanders campaign is having on the establishment and the tactics that are used against them.
There's a lot of them that are like almost identical.
But the two people are really different.
And not just their policies that are different and things like that, which there's plenty.
But, you know, Donald Trump, and I've said this from the beginning of this campaign, Donald Trump, a big part of the reason why he is the president today is that he had this thing, this killer instinct that really works in politics.
And Bernie Sanders just doesn't have that.
He doesn't have it in him.
I've covered this a lot on the show in many different ways.
And this is a thing where we're going to actually see whether Bernie Sanders has the personality type to deal with everything that's being thrown at him.
And if you remember what Donald Trump did, which was a really powerful moment in the 2016 primary debates, is he would call that out in the middle of the debate.
Like he would say something and it would get booze and he would go, you know who's booing right now?
It's Jeb Bush's campaign contributors.
These are the special interest donors and they boo me because they know I'm not, you know, I'm not taking money from them and I don't owe them any favors and I'm going to work for the American people and not for these special interests.
And he'd like point them out.
And that was like a really effective way of neutralizing that.
And Bernie Sanders, it seems, just doesn't have that in him.
He has been more combative with Michael Bloomberg than he has been with anybody else.
And I think it's because I think Bernie Sanders has a real hatred of billionaires.
I mean, I really think that's what it is, is that, you know, he's not a very confrontational guy, but he really, really hates Michael Bloomberg.
And, you know, that seems to come out of him.
Bernie Sanders also has this.
It's a weird thing he's got.
He's kind of like he's a little bit passive aggressive and he's kind of nasty when he's pushed.
When tough questions are asked of him, you see this come out, this kind of like, you know, like I remember we talked about this a while back when he was doing that Fox News town hall and they asked him about not, you know, paying a lot of taxes or giving a lot of money to charity.
And he gets very snippy and nasty.
You remember like the woman, what's her name?
Fucking Martha something, the Fox News reporter.
And she asks him, she goes, you know, well, how come you don't pay more money in taxes or give more money to charity when you're calling for a 60% tax rate on your, you know, like I forget the exact numbers, but it's like you're calling for like a 60% tax rate and you're paying like 13% in tax.
The Heshy Socks Obsession00:02:02
Why don't you give the rest of your money away and lead by example?
And he goes, well, you, why don't you give all that money away?
You make a lot more money than me.
And it was like kind of this snappy thing.
And she's like, because I'm not a socialist who's running for president.
Like I'm not advocating that other people pay these high rates.
So it was, you know, he always has that kind of thing, but he's not, he doesn't have the fighter thing that Donald Trump has.
And that's, that is, to me, still, I've been saying this from the beginning, but really now that we're down to crunch time and that Bernie's really got a shot at this thing, that's going to be, I think, quite possibly his Achilles heel.
And they're going to test that and see how much they can exploit it.
All right, let's take a quick second and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is Heshy Socks.
As you guys probably know by now, the brand new collection has been released.
They're incredible.
The amazing styles, the same great feel.
For those of you who are new to the podcast, you might be wondering, why is Dave always going on and on about Heshy Socks?
And I'll tell you straight up, they're the best socks I've ever owned.
If you're tired of your feet hurting after a day in dress shoes, go to Heshisocks.com.
They will solve this problem for you.
Most fashion socks and dress socks are expensive.
They're poorly constructed and they provide zero protection, but not Heshy Socks.
Heshy socks are cushioned in the heel, foot, and toe.
They have arch support in the center so your feet don't slosh around in your shoes.
And it just leaves your feet feeling good after a day of walking around in uncomfortable shoes.
They are made with high-end, breathable Pima cotton, and they're antimicrobial, so they kill the stink.
Best of all, they're designed to stay up, so you don't have to tug at your socks all day long to keep them up, which is very annoying.
Anyway, go to Heshisocks.com.
That's H-E-S-H-I-Sox.com.
And if you enter the promo code problem30, you're going to get 30% off your entire order of fashion, basic, or ankle socks.
That's Heshisox.com, promo code problem30 for 30% off.
All right, let's get back into the show.
Sanders' Flubs and Performance00:11:06
So, okay, going through, let's just go through the list of people real quick.
Maybe I'll grade them.
That's usually what I do with these debate recaps.
So there were six people on the stage.
I would say, okay, let's start with Bernie Sanders.
You know, I'd give him like a B for the debate.
He did fine.
He didn't hurt himself.
He didn't do particularly great.
Bernie Sanders at this point, you know, he repeats his thing over and over again.
You know, he didn't do anything to change the dynamics, but he didn't need to.
He's the frontrunner, and he did reasonably well at making sure that there were no, like, you know, no serious wounds, you know, like nobody landed anything big on him.
So that's it.
And, you know, like, if you think of like a fighting analogy or something like that, it's like if you're up four rounds to nothing and you're going into the fifth and final round for like a championship UFC fight or something, and you know, you just make sure you don't take any big shots.
Okay, well, then you did what you needed to do.
So he did what he needed to do in this debate.
Joe Biden, I will say I thought Joe Biden had his best debate performance yet.
Now, I did not say, please make sure you hear me correctly.
I didn't say Joe Biden had a good debate performance.
I said he had his best one yet.
He's been atrocious, but this was a different Joe Biden, which was kind of interesting to see.
I didn't know he had it in him.
And he was clearly, I mean, this is it.
He knows, and I'm sure his campaign has made this clear to him, that South Carolina is it.
This is his last stand.
I mean, he has, it's still very unlikely that he could get back in this thing for real, but the only way he can is first place in South Carolina.
There's nothing else is a victory.
Everything else is a fatal loss for Joe Biden.
I mean, you can't come in second in a state where you were up by 50 points and spin that into some type of like successful night.
And of course, if you're Joe Biden and you've been running on, you know, I'm the one who can win, well, then you have to win something at some point.
So he needs a win.
And this is the state where he was up 50 points.
This is like, he's, this is the one.
He has to win this one.
So, and he came out in this debate and he was much more angry and aggressive than he's been in these other debates where he's been very passive.
And it worked better.
It worked better for him than the previous debates had.
He had a couple, you know, flubs.
I mean, he can't help himself from like the stuttering and flubbing things up.
He does that all the time.
I mean, he can't, the guy can't speak in paragraphs without something, you know, going wrong.
And he had a couple embarrassing moments.
I think we're going to play some clips.
We'll probably get to the major one.
But he did better.
He did better.
It wasn't as bad.
Bloomberg.
Oh, so Biden, I guess, grading on a Biden curve or something like that, you might give him a B, but overall, like a C, something like that.
Bloomberg came off.
Bloomberg came off of an F.
That was his last debate.
It was an app.
Like, I mean, I'm not being harsh on the guy.
That was the previous debate, it was the worst debate performance I had ever seen.
I've never seen anybody, and I mean, I've seen really bad debate performances.
Like, I remember Rick Perry when he said there's three departments I'm going to eliminate, and then couldn't remember what the departments were, and then just said, oops.
And I actually thought Bloomberg had a worse performance the last debate than that debate.
It was terrible, just terrible.
He did better in this one, but it was still bad.
It maybe went from like an F to a D plus or something like that.
He's just not good at these.
He doesn't have any like he just doesn't have that it factor.
He doesn't have any charisma.
He doesn't put forth like a, this is why you should vote for me.
His whole thing is basically that Bernie Sanders won't win.
So me.
And that's just, that's a tough message to sell.
You know, Bernie Sanders is out there selling, I think healthcare should be a right.
We need a revolution in this country, free college, wipe away college debt, you know, whatever.
All, you know, raise the minimum wage, all of these things.
And you're selling, well, I don't think he can win with that.
How are you going to get people as enthusiastic, your donors in this debate audience aside?
Who's going to be enthusiastic about that stuff?
Elizabeth Warren, I thought, had like a B. Like she did good.
She was on the attack again and kind of getting in there.
But it's just Elizabeth Warren, unfortunately, suffers from being Elizabeth Warren.
She's just a very unappealing human being.
Very unappealing.
Mayor Pete, I thought, did bad.
I think he's, he, this was one of his poorer debate performances, if you ask me.
He, he, like, I'd give him like a C, maybe a C minus.
He usually is fairly, you know, okay at these things.
I mean, he comes off robotic and kind of empty and just speaks in platitudes.
But that's him.
But he doesn't embarrass himself, you know?
Like he's, he's got all of his answers memorized and he's quick on his feet and he's he's a high IQ person, you can tell.
Just nothing authentic and no real issues that he's like cares about.
But this one, he tried to get more aggressive and I just thought it didn't work for him.
I also thought the interrupting stuff was really like he overplayed it to the point where it was like, this is, I felt like it was backfiring on him.
I don't know.
You know, who knows what the average person watching thought, but that was how it came off to me.
So not a great night for him.
Amy Klobuchar, eh, just like another, another C minus or something like that.
I mean, she just, you know, she's starting to fall into this like, why are you there category?
Like, why are you still in the race?
She's got these like kind of canned pre-written one-liners that are like these like mom jokes.
They're always horrible.
And she's, you know, laughs and then laughs really hard at her own jokes.
She had the shaking under control a little bit better in this debate.
She wasn't spazzing out like she has been in previous debates.
So I'll give her, I'll give her some credit for that.
And then there was Tom Steyer who I could only describe his debate performance as he was there.
Like he was technically there.
And that's about as much as I could say.
He really is falling into the category of like, what are you doing here?
Like, what are you doing here?
What's the point?
You know, like, don't get me wrong.
There are people there.
Like, if Andrew Yang, you know, was still in the debate or Tulsi Gabbard was still in the debate or like there are these other people who, even if they were polling very low, you could understand where, like, why they're still there because they've got kind of like a signature issue that nobody else is really talking about, at least not seriously, the way they are.
So like if Andrew Yang believes we need a universal basic income, like this is the reason and nobody else is endorsing this.
And that's why I'm here to like push this belief that I have because I believe in this and I think it's the like it's necessary for the country.
Or obviously Tulsi Gabbard there, who I'm much more sympathetic to, being there because like no, nobody is truly an anti-war candidate.
I'm the only one who's leading with the war issue and who's telling you we have to stop fighting these wars.
You know, you can understand why they would stay there.
But someone like Tom Steyer, you're like, what are you doing here?
What's his thing?
That I, I, his issues are like, I want it, I want to impeach Donald Trump.
I've been leading the effort to impeach Donald Trump from the very beginning.
It's like, okay, well, Donald Trump was already impeached and he was acquitted.
So that's over, right?
What are you running on?
You want to impeach him again?
Like, okay.
So there's really nothing there.
And then he's like, I'm for, you know, I'm a climate change activist, which is, I mean, okay, but the problem is so is everybody.
So is everybody on the stage.
Every, there is nobody on that stage who's not going to say climate change is an existential threat and we need to take bold action and yada yada.
You know, that's everybody.
And then it's like, oh, so I'm, I'm, you know, I'm a climate change activist, but I don't like Medicare for all.
And it's like, okay, so you don't like Medicare for all, but neither does Bloomberg.
Neither does Joe Biden.
Neither does Amy Klobuchar.
So now where are we again?
Like, what reason is there for you being here?
It's a weird thing if you don't have an issue that differentiates yourself and you're fading in the polls and not fading.
I mean, you're irrelevant in the polls.
You have no possible path to the nomination.
So why be there?
It's just because you want to be president?
Like, okay, you want to be president.
Guess who doesn't want you to be president?
The voters.
So beat it.
Like, it's, it's very strange.
But anyway, so that was more or less my takeaway from the performances of the night.
So let's play these clips.
We got a little video with some packages.
We'll play some clips, pause it, and discuss some of the things that were said.
I really am surprised that all of these, my fellow contestants up here, I guess would be the right word for it, given nobody pays attention to the clock.
I'm surprised they show up because I would have thought after I did such a good job in beating them last week that they'd be a little bit afraid to do that.
But I think Donald Trump.
So Bloomberg, I give him like I'll give him a little bit of credit that he tried to make a joking reference to his terrible performance.
And it didn't really land.
It wasn't delivered in a very funny way.
But I will, here's what I will give to Michael Bloomberg.
After a debate performance like his previous one, again, the worst debate performance I've ever seen.
And I've been watching these for quite a while.
That's about all you can do.
Like basically all you can do in the next debate is be like, oh man, I'm surprised anyone even wants to debate me anymore given how awesome I am at this.
I mean, you got, you know, because like, so like there was a good, it was a good idea, I have to say.
Unfortunately, this effeminate New York Jewish billionaire isn't the funniest guy I've ever seen in my life.
And he just didn't land it.
But I will, I give him some points for the attempt.
Propaganda, Putin, and Evidence00:13:15
All right, let's let's play.
But Donald Trump thinks it would be better if he's president.
I do not think so.
Vladimir Putin thinks that Donald Trump should be president of the United States, and that's why Russia is helping you get elected so you'll lose to him.
Hey, Mr. Putin.
Hold on, before we get to Bernie Sanders, hey, Mr. Putin.
So, but anyway, I just thought, you know, that's something worth noticing there is that now you have this is, you know, this is the game.
This is the line of attack on Bernie Sanders.
That, well, look, Russia's cheating to get you this nomination.
And now, again, as I think was, you know, mentioned in the debate, I don't think it's in this montage of clips that we're playing here, but I forget, I think it was Biden who said in the debate, which it was really great.
I love every time we get this on record.
But they go, because of course, you can just say that now, now that it's been reported by the Washington Post, because intelligence officials, you know, anonymous intelligence officials told the Washington Post that Russia's interfering to help Bernie.
And so now you see it's a fact and it can just be mentioned at the debate.
And at no point will anybody, including these fucking idiot moderators, but nobody will ever go like ask this wild radical follow-up question, which would be, what evidence do you have that Russia is interfering to help Bernie Sanders?
Of course, by the way, there's more follow-up questions that any like person with an IQ over 100 who follows this shit at all might want to ask.
Like, well, what specifically are they doing to interfere?
How significant is this really?
You know, there's lots of other questions you could ask.
But before we even get to any of that, what evidence do you have?
And at one point during the debate, Joe Biden said, well, we know that Russia interfered in the 2016 election.
He goes, there's no question about that.
And then, of course, you'd almost be waiting for, oh, well, there's no question.
So then what evidence do we have?
And Joe Biden tells you right there, he goes, oh, well, the intelligence community, they all agree.
So that's it.
That's what it, I mean, he'll say the thing, 17 different intelligence agencies or something like that.
But really, if you look into any of that shit, first of all, it's the intelligence community.
I don't care if fucking a thousand spies all tell you that something happened.
That doesn't mean that it happened.
And the other thing is that they do this thing where like, you know, the CIA will come out with a report and then the FBI is like, we agree with the CIA report.
And then some other organs that we agree with the CIA's assessment.
We agree.
And then you'll be like, well, look, 17 intelligence agencies.
But really, it's all just the one fucking report.
And as we've seen with like the Steele dossier and the Mueller investigation, like just faking one report can get you all of these other different fucking things.
And this is much like the same thing that happened with the Steele dossier, where the Steele dossier will be, so they'll like put together this dossier.
Then it'll be reported.
You know, someone will report on the Steele dossier.
And then they'll be like, well, now there's numerous reports that Donald Trump is doing this.
And you're like, wait, wait, wait.
No, there's still just the one report.
The other report was just reporting on that one report.
There's not numerous reports on this.
There's nothing.
There's actually just one guy making things up.
And that's the way this clown show works.
So anyway, now here's Bernie Sanders' response.
Hey, Mr. Putin, if I'm president of the United States, trust me, you're not going to interfere in any more American elections.
I'm hearing my name mentioned a little bit tonight.
So let's pause it there before Bernie says, I'm hearing my name mentioned a little tonight, which is a nice little, hey, you know, him reminding everyone he's the frontrunner.
Thought it was pretty funny actually when he looks into the camera and says, Hey, Mr. Putin, if I'm president, you won't be interfering around here anymore.
So, this is Bernie Sanders.
This is Bernie Sanders being tough, you know, the tough fighter that is Bernie Sanders.
Now, of course, this is what I was getting at before when I was saying Bernie Sanders doesn't have this killer instinct in him.
He's got, he's kind of a pussy, and it's a bit of a problem.
That is a bit of an issue if you want to lead a revolution.
They're usually not led by pussies.
And so, this is what weak men tend to do.
Non-confrontational men tend to do.
I'm sure everybody listening has some experience in life with this.
And there's nothing wrong with being weak or non-confrontational.
I mean, weak isn't great, but there's nothing wrong with being non-confrontational.
And there's nothing wrong with being a guy who's a little bit timid.
But they'll do this thing where they fake the tough, the tough guy.
So, well, oh, you think I'm that?
Well, let me call out Vladimir Putin right now.
But of course, that's not like, as we all know, right?
That's not what a fighter would do.
What a fighter would do is say, What evidence do you have?
See, that would actually be a fighter.
You go, oh, you're just going on what the intelligence community tells you.
Well, I'd like to see some evidence.
If you're going to just throw it out here, I'd like to see some evidence.
That intelligence community told me that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.
They were wrong about that.
Maybe they're wrong about this too.
Like, that would actually take some courage and some balls, and he's not going to do that.
So instead, he turns to Vladimir Putin and goes, Let me show you exactly how tough I am.
I'll go right along with your narrative and call out Vladimir Putin.
I mean, there's no risk or there's nothing courageous about that.
But it is pretty funny to say that the interference stops when I'm president.
Well, how or why?
Why?
Just because you say so?
I mean, if they're interfering in our election on this grand scale, why would it stop when you're president?
I mean, you're saying that, like, the whole premise of all of this is that they interfered in the 2016 election.
Well, just to recap, Donald Trump wasn't president in the election he was running in, right?
Barack Obama was president.
So Barack Obama clearly didn't want them to interfere on behalf of Donald Trump.
So he couldn't stop it.
What are you proposing we're going to do to stop this election interference?
It's just kind of like, well, it won't happen anymore because I'll be president and I'm not taking any more of your crap.
But he's just trying to have the anti instead of Donald Trump, who basically, which actually took a lot more courage, however you feel about it, it took a lot more courage for Donald Trump to go like, yeah, yeah, Russia, you get the rest of those emails, you send them right over here.
Sure, I'd like all the information on Hillary Clinton that Russia has.
You know, anyway, but so that was that was Bernie Sanders' tough guy moment.
American elections.
I'm hearing my name mentioned a little bit tonight.
I wonder why.
I have opposed authoritarianism all over the world.
What I said is what Barack Obama said in terms of Cuba, that Cuba made progress on education.
Yes, I think really, really?
Literally, there's no comparable bad to what Barack Obama said is they made great progress on education and healthcare.
That was Barack Obama.
I am not looking forward to a scenario.
So that, and by the way, you got a little taste of what Pete was doing to Bernie Sanders all night long.
Like he just speaks over him to a point where you're like, Pete, shut up.
It makes you want to smack him.
Like, shut up, dude.
Let him give his bullshit socialist apologist answer.
So let me, just a few points on this, because what's not, what wasn't in that clip is that then Joe Biden goes on to say, like, well, Obama never said the same thing.
Obama would never compliment the Cubans.
It's actually, you know, they're both wrong.
Joe Biden is wrong.
Barack Obama did say several nice things about Cuba, including praising their literacy program and their education in general.
Now, let me say, I have, as you guys have noticed on the show, I've been somewhat sympathetic to Bernie Sanders over the last few weeks.
As I'm sure all of you regular listeners know, it's not out of any affection for Bernie Sanders or his policies or anything like that.
And as I've said all along, you know, if Bernie Sanders gets this nomination, I'm pretty certain we'll do quite a few episodes that will be somewhat critical of Bernie Sanders.
But it's, you know, much like the Trump situation, it's like his enemies make me almost root for him.
And, you know, it's like they just the tactics that they use against him, the bullshit, the propaganda all around him, it makes you kind of root for him.
And I also just happen to hate the establishment and I like to see them suffer.
And Bernie Sanders is delivering some of that.
So I've enjoyed that.
And truthfully speaking, Bernie Sanders, even from my perspective, probably has more redeeming qualities than some of the other candidates up there.
That would be my honest feeling on it.
However, this stuff about praising Fidel Castro and his education, his education is, whew, it's just so outrageous.
I can't not.
I can't wait until he gets the nomination to criticize him for this stuff.
This is some insane, like batshit insane socialist, ideological, warped way of seeing humanity and society and education and evil.
It's insane.
And it does.
Now, I don't know, by the way, that the red baiting strategy is really going to be that effective against Bernie Sanders.
I mean, socialism, truthfully speaking, in many areas of contemporary American society is not a dirty word.
In fact, capitalism is much more of a dirty word.
This is true.
Now, I don't know if like if you took a nationwide opinion poll that socialism would beat capitalism, probably not yet, but it wouldn't lose by as much as you think it should.
And it's actually in lots of areas in life, you know, like in certainly in New York City, but on college campuses, in Hollywood, in most of the media, probably, just saying I'm an unapologetic socialist or I'm an unapologetic capitalist.
I mean, in all those areas I just listed, capitalist would get you much more, much more hated than being a socialist would get you.
And in many ways, that's something that free market types like myself and a lot of you guys who listen, we have to recognize, swallow that bitter pill and deal with that.
Like, you know, it represents a failure of a lot of different people.
Jeff Dice was saying this when he was on with Judge Napolitano on an episode of Kennedy I was on where the judge was guest hosting last week.
But he's like, you know what?
Libertarians got to kind of go like, well, look, we've failed then in a lot of ways.
I mean, libertarians have been around for a long time.
And if we haven't even convinced people, you know, that socialism isn't good or that capitalism is preferable to socialism, then we really haven't done a great job.
And much more so, it represents a failure of conservatism Inc. and the people who are supposedly fighting against socialism that they've gotten to this point where it's, you know, you haven't even won.
I mean, it really is like remarkable, just remarkable that after the 20th century, that it's not just like a no-brainer to everybody that capitalism is preferable to socialism.
And I mean, there's a lot of different reasons for that, but I think, you know, I would say that probably one of the major ones is that socialism is the legal order of the state, and the state runs the schools.
So, you know, it's not, you know, it makes a little bit more sense if you recognize that.
But I mean, it's really just, you know, I mean, I know this point has been made to death by lots of different people, some good, some not so good.
But it really is like, I mean, socialism was tried over and over again in the 20th century.
And, you know, you just look at any, you know, look at North Korea versus South Korea.
Look at East Berlin versus West Berlin.
Look at, you know, look at the Soviet Union and the United States of America.
The idea that anybody would prefer the system of socialism is really, it's sad and hard to actually believe.
And, you know, like if you want to live in like abject poverty or you want to be like ruled by some authoritarian, you can have that life.
Like you can have that within capitalism if you want it.
You can just allow some fucking predatory person to rule over you and you can give away all your stuff and, you know, like fill your refrigerator very sparsely.
Socialism vs Capitalist Reality00:02:59
I don't know.
You know what I mean?
Like you can have that, but it seems pretty clear by their human action that most people don't want that.
And if you just look at North Korea and South Korea, like South Korea doesn't have to work very hard on making sure that people don't defect into North Korea.
Like they're not trying.
They don't want to go.
North Korea has to work really hard, threaten to torture your family, and people still try to defect out of there.
So it's like, you know, and of course, East Berlin and West Berlin, right?
Like it's not like the wall wasn't built by the fucking people in the West trying to keep them out of the socialist paradise.
The wall was built because people were flooding out of East Berlin into West Berlin by, you know, the tens of thousands.
And they were like, oh shit, this is starting to look really bad for us.
And that's why they built the wall because everybody would get the fuck out if they had the option.
And anyway, it's just, you know, so it is, it's crazy.
However, I'm not sure the red baiting will work.
I actually think that today in 2020, that the woke shit is far more unpopular than the socialist shit.
And I get why the woke shit's unpopular, but it's just, it really shows people's like lack of understanding of economics that the socialist stuff isn't equally, or if not more, unpopular.
All right, let's take a second.
I want to tell you about our sponsor for today's show, which is Easy DNS, a web hosting platform and domain provider that will defend your right to exist.
We talk a lot about it on this show, cancel culture, being deplatformed, or even having your website taken down.
As a content creator, it's scary to think that your YouTube, Twitter, even your web hosting provider can take away your ability to put out the content that you want to, to interact with your own fans.
Tech companies can completely undermine your ability to make a living just because you have a different point of view.
And that's why I want to tell you about Mark Joftovic's new book, Unassailable.
Mark Joftovic is a lifelong libertarian, the CEO of Easy DNS, and has been writing about technological challenges to our freedom on his blog, Access of Easy.
Now, in his new book, Unassailable, Mark has put together the ultimate guide on how to protect yourself from de-platform attacks, cancel culture, and other online disasters.
This is an important read for everyone in my audience.
The book is easy and it's really interesting, covering topics like tech company censorship, how tech companies push collective thinking, how to defend yourself from de-platform attacks, how to recover your online assets if you are deplatformed.
If you have content online, Mark's guidance is invaluable for keeping your content safe.
If you don't have content online, it's still a fascinating read about the current culture wars and online censorship.
To purchase the book, go to unassailablebook.com.
That's unassailablebook.com.
And if you have a website, you should have it hosted by easydns.com, the web hosting platform that will defend your right to exist.
Make sure you use the coupon code problem.
You'll get 20% off your first order.
There's also a link in the episode description if you want to go click on that.
All right, let's get back into the show.
Democratic Language and Lived Experience00:16:02
Anyway, Bernie Sanders, I know I've said this before on the show, but it's just, I'm sorry, if you have, you have the frontrunner of the Democratic, you know, of the Democratic primaries saying this shit.
It just has to be, has to be repeated because it's so unbelievable.
And it really shows something about Bernie Sanders.
Like Bernie Sanders really did praise all of these brutal socialist leaders and he switched it.
You know, like he stopped doing that at a certain point and started just with the like, no, I'm not talking about Venezuela.
I'm not talking about Cuba.
I'm not talking about the Soviet Union.
I'm not talking about Nicaragua.
I'm talking about Denmark, you know?
And then like he went and, oh, we're just talking about Sweden and Denmark.
That's what we're talking about.
Social democracies, even though he still calls himself a socialist.
Like there is, and I know a lot of people, this kind of all sounds the same, but there is a real difference between a social democrat and a democratic socialist.
That's why like when you talk to real democratic socialists, like we had Ben Burgess on the show, they're not just talking about like Medicare for all or something like that.
They're talking about either government seizing entire industries or what they'll say is worker-owned industries, which in other words, making it illegal to have a fucking business, making it illegal for you to run a business or own a business or start a business.
This is like more real deal socialist stuff.
The social democrats are talking about Sweden and Denmark.
Like they're just like, hey, we should have high taxes and like a big safety net and then capitalism.
You know, oh, you want to own your own company, go ahead, but you're going to pay like 70% in taxes or whatever.
Now, that has its own problems and it's very flawed.
It's why Denmark and Sweden have rolled back a lot of those programs because it crushes the economy.
But that's a very different thing than being a democratic socialist.
But what Bernie Sanders does is he goes, oh, you know, I know I call myself a democratic socialist and I used to praise all of these authoritarian socialists, but I'm really talking about the social democracies, but I'm still going to call myself a democratic socialist.
It's this kind of weird thing where you're like, well, so what exactly is it that you believe?
Like you're not really being clear on this for someone who always says, let me be clear.
You're not being that clear.
And so then when this comes up, it's interesting that, and the thing that's like interesting there is that there was never a point where Bernie Sanders went like, hey, I was wrong to praise all of those authoritarian socialists.
I mean, he'll say, I'm not for the authoritarian part.
You know, like he's like, no, I don't like that they did that, which more or less to me translates to like, you know, I think that the government should concentrate all of the power in a society, but I don't want them to be authoritarian about it.
It's like, you know, I want to create absolute power, but I don't want it to corrupt them.
Like, okay, that's a nice thought, but, you know, and then every time you give someone absolute power, they're like, oh, the problem there wasn't the power.
It was the corruption.
It's like, yeah, yeah, but there's one leads to the other, right?
Like it's like saying, like, okay, I'm going to give this group of people the power to murder whoever they want to with impunity.
Like, you could just murder whoever you want to, and you won't get in trouble for it at all.
And then they go on a murdering spree and you're like, well, the problem is that they went on the murdering spree.
And it's like, well, okay.
I mean, yes, in some sense, but the problem is also that you gave them the power to murder with impunity.
It's probably not a good idea to do that.
And that's why you see so many of these left-wing pieces where they're like, you know, the problem in Venezuela isn't the socialism.
It's the corruption.
Okay, right.
The problem isn't the socialism.
It's the misallocation of resources, like, right, but one leads to the other every single time, every single time.
So anyway, but so Bernie Sanders never really walks that back.
He just kind of moved on and then actually gets like annoyed if anyone brings it up.
It's like, what a stupid question.
I'm obviously not talking about authoritarianism, you know, even though I did praise all these authoritarians.
But so this, he's, this is the, the Cuba thing, and he's sticking to his guns on this.
He's sticking to his guns on, well, look, you know, there's a lot of things that I don't like about Cuba, but they did really great on education.
They did really great on their literacy rate.
And of course, this is the propaganda that the Cubans have put out there for decades and decades and decades.
The idea that they came in and literacy was very low and literacy was then increased.
Now, let me say this.
There probably is some truth to it.
Now, the literacy rate being increased.
When I say probably, I say because we don't really know for sure.
The thing about these closed societies is the information that's given to the world is not very easy to verify because they kind of let you into where they want to and close off other areas and don't show you that.
So you don't know exactly, but they brag that they have like basically 100% literacy rate.
I doubt that that's true, but that's what they say.
However, it does seem like there's some evidence that the literacy rate increased in Cuba.
But to praise their education, this is like this weird thing.
And it's part of this twisted socialist ideology where you just really believe in a state and in a state providing things for people.
And I guess it just all depends on what your definition of education is.
Like for me, right?
And I think for sane people everywhere, if you are not allowed to think certain thoughts, say certain things, read certain books, then you're not, there's nothing to say about your education.
That's not education.
That's indoctrination.
And that's exactly what it is in Cuba.
You fucking like, okay, so yes, they did have this big literacy program right before Fidel Castro had the revolution and right after he took over.
They had this big literacy program, but it was expressly, explicitly for political purposes.
It was to indoctrinate people into the state religion.
It was to make people fucking, you know, like the literacy program was all about you learning how to read what your duties to the state were.
So that's worthy of praising their education.
Like, I'm sorry if you can't criticize the government and you can't criticize or you can't read anything that criticizes the government, then that's indoctrination, not education.
And someone praising that is creepy as shit.
All right.
There's like an old Cuban saying that was something, or of the Cubans who fled, I guess, but they said something like literacy went up, but we weren't allowed to read.
Something like that, you know, because basically like, yeah, they taught people how to read, but you could only read the government propaganda.
So to say that in a country where it's an outright authoritarian country, there's no elections, there's no freedom to dissent, you know, nothing like that.
The state runs every single school.
The state runs every single newspaper, every radio show, all of these things.
Then to praise them for the way they've educated their people, it's something really sick about that.
Like really fucking sick.
You know, it's like, I don't know.
Like if you kidnapped someone and kept them in, you know, your basement and then taught them how to read, I deserve to be kept in this basement every day.
And they'd be like, well, listen, he shouldn't have kidnapped them, but he did teach them how to read.
It's like, yeah, but like just to fucking keep them prisoner.
And of course, he's kept them in grinding poverty for, you know, since he was, I mean, he's dead now, but his brother's, I guess, doing it.
But anyway.
So just really, really creepy stuff that Bernie Sanders is out there saying that.
You know, it's, I don't know how effective this attack is.
My guess is not that much, but it's still pretty wild.
And his defense that, well, Obama said nice stuff about them, it's like, yeah, it was despicable when Obama said it too.
So that's, you know, that's not doing much for me.
All right, let's play the next clip.
Where it comes down to Donald Trump with his nostalgia for the social order of the 1950s and Bernie Sanders with a nostalgia for the revolutionary politics of the 1960s.
My secretary of education will be someone who has taught in public school.
My secretary of education will be someone who believes in public education.
And my secretary of education will believe that public dollars should stay in public schools.
I come at this with a great deal of humility because we have had a lot of these two, just completely empty platitudes.
It's almost, at least Bernie Sanders thing is almost refreshing in contrast to that because even though it's batshit insane, at least he's actually saying something.
Just nothingness of Elizabeth Warren, but, you know, with a shot at charter schools at the end.
I don't know what to say about these, you know, just bullshit, empty rehearsed lines by Pete.
Just nothing there.
And yeah.
But Elizabeth Warren with a shot at charter schools after that.
And the context of that was that they were asking about Mike Bloomberg increasing charter schools, which greatly helped in New York.
So that was a little bit weird, but I don't have much to comment on that.
All right, let's keep going.
I come at this with a great deal of humility because we have had a lot of issues, especially when it comes to racial justice and policing in my own community.
And I come to this with some humility because I'm conscious of the fact that there's seven white people on this stage talking about racial justice.
And I know that if I were black, my success would have been a lot harder to achieve.
And I know a lot of black people that if they were white, it would have been a lot easier for them.
That's just a fact, and we've got to do something about it and rather just demagogue about it.
Let's just go on the record.
They talk about 40 Democrats.
21 of those were people that I spent $100 million to help elect.
All of the new Democrats that came in and put Nancy Pelosi in charge and gave the Congress the ability to control this president.
I got them.
The fact that.
Let's pause it there.
Oh, it was a great, a great Freudian slip by Mike Bloomberg.
You know, people misspeak all the time and they say a little thing and you hate to pounce on anyone for doing it.
I think we're about to do it again in a second.
But when he goes, oh, there's all these congressmen and I bought, I helped get them elected.
It's a real funny thing for a billionaire who funds politicians to almost say, I bought you a bunch of congressmen.
But that would have actually been a much more honest way to describe it.
Anyway, the whole other comments there, the race stuff just gets so cringy and whoa.
Whoa, my God.
I just goes, I know my life would have been harder if I was black and a black's life would have been harder if he was white.
And that's just a fact.
It's like, well, is it?
I mean, all right.
I guess some black people have harder goes of it than some white people, but is it a fact that if you were black, you would have not been able to make money?
I mean, like, wouldn't we have to at least like run that experiment in order to know it as a fact, like as an undeniable truth?
But, you know, I don't know.
It's just like, it's like the thing about like when the Democrats talk about race and mostly when the Republicans talk about race too.
You're just not allowed to be, no one has the balls to be honest or speak with any nuance.
Like, and this is what pisses off a lot of people.
It pisses off a lot of black people because it's like just...
It's obvious that they're pandering to them.
And it pisses off a lot of white people because it like won't, it won't acknowledge the truths that a lot of us know.
Now, I'm certainly not going to say that there's no truth to the idea that some things are harder, you know, for black people.
I mean, look, whatever, whatever you think the reason is, which I think is somewhat debatable, but there's certainly a much higher violent crime rate amongst African-American men than there is amongst, say, white men or Asian men or something like that.
Now, what exactly causes that?
I think there's several there's several different things, but you know, okay.
Now, that might mean that some black guy who's not a violent criminal is looked upon more suspiciously because he belongs to a demographic where people, you know, that has a higher violent crime rate.
Now, that you can say also that that might just be racism, that people look at a black guy and assume he's going to be, you know, violent, or it could be that, like, you know, people are just see things in terms of patterns.
And if something's more likely to be true, they err on that side.
Whatever it is, that's, you know, it's, there's nothing wrong with recognizing that's bullshit for the black guy who's not a violent criminal, who like has to live with that, that like perception.
So, you know, and I could think of other areas and examples too, but the one they always go to is like being pulled over by the cops or something like that, even though I don't know exactly where the evidence is that they just get pulled over more.
But certainly, I'm sure there is some truth that if you have police who are dealing with someone who's of the demographic that's more likely to be a criminal, I think just basic human, you know, like the way human beings work would probably indicate that it's more likely that they're going to treat you like you belong in that group.
So, you know, and that sucks for the person who doesn't deserve it, who's not in there.
Yeah, that's bullshit.
Okay.
But then if you're just going to make this broad statement that like a black guy in a, you know, in this situation would have a harder time than a white guy in this situation.
The problem with that, of course, is that we have had affirmative action for decades now.
And we have all of these companies, all of these corporations who brag about their diversity and these rainbow coalitions and colleges and all these things.
So that actually, for the average person, in many situations, if a white guy with the same work experience or the same test scores or the same situation applies for something, they probably will get passed over for the black guy or for the, you know, whatever, whatever group it tends to be, Hispanic guy or something like that.
Usually doesn't work in the favor of Asians because they're already scoring so high that they fucking, they're already overrepresented, which is why they were like suing, what is it, in Harvard, I think, for fucking being discriminated against.
But so to just tell white people that like, oh, you know, you have it fucking so much easier.
Yeah, let's just say to speak the democratic language, it doesn't match a lot of people's lived experiences.
And they're not allowed to talk about this with any degree of honesty.
The truth is that there are some situations where it's harder being black and there's some situations where it's harder to be white.
And that's just not allowed to be said.
But I'm pretty comfortable saying it.
I also think it's just fucking gross and pandering to be like, you know, like basically apologize that there's six white people on stage.
Like, I'm so sorry.
I'm so sorry to the voters who chose us.
You know, it's like they had black people they could have voted for.
It's not like there was no conspiracy to keep Corey Booker from being the fucking nominee or Kamala Harris or fucking, you know, Tulsi Gabbard or there were people of color who were in it.
They didn't get the support.
I liked Tulsi Gabbard.
I liked my favorite of the group was a woman of color, but it had nothing to do with her being a fucking woman of color.
It was just because she was anti-war.
She could have been any color if I would have been happy to hear someone making the anti-war argument.
But the voters didn't choose them.
So who are you apologizing to?
Gun Manufacturers Accountability00:13:56
The fucking voters?
And it's not even like a situation where like, well, all the black voters were for Corey Booker, but there were just so many more white voters that their voices aren't being heard.
The black voters were for Joe Biden and Mike Bloomberg now.
You know, like it's not even like they didn't even want.
So clearly they didn't even value that in the same way that you seem to.
But Mayor Pete, the guy with zero percent black support, he'll be real just pandering.
It's just disgusting.
All right.
Let's keep playing.
I'm not out of time.
You spoke over time and I'm going to talk.
Here's the deal.
Here's the deal.
We've got to deal with the institutional racism.
Vice President.
Mr. Vice President.
I know how you cut me off all the time, but I'm not going to be quiet anymore, okay?
Mr. Steyer, prevent North Korea from launching missiles to take them down.
And if we don't...
Why am I stopping?
No one else stops.
Okay.
All right, so let's pause it there.
So that more or less was Joe Biden's night in a nutshell.
It was, like I said, more forceful and aggressive than he's been in the past, but just still Joe Biden.
You know, like he's just kind of like, no, you're not going to cut me off.
I'm not taking it anymore.
And then when they give him time, he just stops in the middle and it's like, I don't really have anything to say.
I guess I'll just stop there.
It's just a real wonder why that guy's not going to be president.
Okay, but I think coming up is Joe Biden's best moment of the debate.
Here's my Catholic school training.
150 million people have been killed since 2007 when Bernie voted to exempt the gun manufacturers from liability more than all the wars, including Vietnam, from that point on.
Carney John R. Street, and I want to tell you, if I'm elected on her, I'm coming for you.
And gun manufacturers, I'm going to take you on and I'm going to beat you.
We have to acknowledge that we should.
So yes, you did hear right, Joe Biden, evidently privy to some information that the rest of us were unaware of, that since 2007, 150 million Americans have been killed from gun violence.
I know.
I know what you're thinking.
That seems like a lot.
Take a look to the person on your left and the person on your right.
One of them has been killed due to gun violence since 2007.
Yeah, it's look, I know, just jumping on someone for getting a number wrong, but it's not like it's not the number, it's not like the number is 150,000 and he said 150 million.
That's not even the number.
The number's like 300,000, I think, or something in that ballpark, depending on how you measure it.
So the number's just pulled out of his ass.
And 150 million is a hell of a number to pull out of your ass.
Like, what?
150 million people died more than all the wars.
Like, yeah, that's a lot more than all the wars.
That is basically half the country.
So, yes, I don't.
Anyway, you know, like, I'd be a little bit more forgiving if it was like close to the number or something.
Like, he just missed it, but it seems like he just completely made this up.
And then I'd also be a little bit more forgiving if the point he was making wasn't such a fucking dumbass point to begin with.
His point was that we're not holding gun manufacturers responsible for when people get killed with guns.
And if I'm president, we'll hold the gun manufacturers responsible.
And he made a comparison to holding the tobacco companies accountable for people dying from cigarettes.
But the problem with that, right, is that what the tobacco companies did was that they basically suppressed information that cigarettes were that they were deadly and then came out and said that they weren't, that they in fact weren't.
Now, that's a little bit of a different thing where there is an argument to be made to hold them accountable for that, okay?
Like if you're selling sugar and there's actually some rat poison in it and you go and you test it and you find out there's rat poison and then you come out and you go, there's no rat poison in our sugar.
Okay.
Then you have an argument to hold somebody accountable for something.
But to say we're holding gun manufacturers accountable for someone purchasing a gun from them and then killing someone with it is a much, much different thing.
Okay.
And here's why.
Because number one, there's no mystery that guns can be used to shoot people.
Everybody knows that going in.
That's kind of the whole gun thing.
Okay.
But they're legal and they're selling something legal that can be used in a legal manner.
So you can go hunting with a gun.
You can shoot for sport with a gun.
You can defend yourself with a gun.
All of these things are legal and completely morally justified to do with a gun, right?
So it's not as if they're selling guns with the intent that people will go murder.
They're just selling you the gun.
If you then go and murder somebody with that, that is insane to go after the manufacturer for it.
That would be a more accurate comparison would be like if someone commits vehicular manslaughter or vehicular murder and then you go and sue Toyota for making a car.
Well, why would you sell them that car?
You're like, I don't know.
I sold them the car to drive in, not to go drive through a crowd of people, right?
Like, you know, there's been a bunch of in Charlottesville, some woman died after being hit by a car.
There's been a bunch of different like terrorist events in France and I think a couple in America where people drove cars into people.
But why wouldn't you go, oh, let's go sue the car companies?
Because how is the manufacturer possibly morally responsible for someone using an item or a vehicle in this sense that has legitimate functions in a way to murder people?
So that's the argument with the gun manufacturers.
It's so fucking stupid.
And it's just like it's pandering to this like, I don't know, this dumb, ill-informed group of anti-gun left-wingers.
But so anyway, and also just to put your mind at rest, I'm fairly certain 150 million people have not been killed by firearms since 2007.
All right, let's play the next one.
Should be renegotiating the New Start treaty and the other arms negotiations that must happen.
This president just likes to do tweets at 4 a.m. in his bathrobe, gets out there and doesn't achieve the results we need.
I would meet with him, but I would do it with our allies.
I would have clear deliverables, and I would achieve those deliverables.
At least I didn't have a boss who said to me, kill it.
The way that Mayor Bloomberg said that have said to one of his pregnant employees.
People want a chance to hear.
People want a chance to hear from the women who are.
I never said that.
Senator Warren, that is a very serious charge that you leveled at the mayor.
Yes.
You told a woman to get an abortion.
What evidence do you have of that?
Her own words.
Mayor Bloomberg, could you respond to this?
Never said it.
Period.
End of story.
If we spend the next.
Let's pause it there.
So that was one of the more shocking moments of the night where, because I've seen this reported on before, but that supposedly, allegedly, I should say, Mayor Bloomberg told a pregnant, a pregnant woman who was an employee of his that she should kill it, referring to the baby.
Now, the really outrageous thing about it is that, you know, Elizabeth Warren would just throw this out and then, you know, he denies it.
And she's like, what evidence do you have?
And she's like, well, she said it, her words.
Like, well, did you speak to this woman?
You just saw the same fucking reports that the rest of us did.
You don't know what the fuck's going on here.
That's like a crazy thing to just accuse someone of and have no evidence to back it up.
I got to say, Bloomberg did a very poor job.
I mean, they didn't really show the whole thing there, but Bloomberg did a really poor job of dealing with that question.
Like, if you're accused of something like that, you know, okay, he said, didn't say it, never happened.
And then he went on to say something along the lines of like, he goes, I didn't even know where that came from when this came out.
We were like, I don't even know who this person was or what they're, you know, what you want to have something a little bit more like, I would never say that to a person.
That is a horrific thing to accuse me of.
Like, I would never dream of saying something so vile to any pregnant woman, right?
Like, that's, that'd be more or less the story.
But, and then as a lot of other people have pointed out, there is something kind of entertaining or interesting about a bunch of Democrats who support abortion up until the very end of the third trimester being like, he told her to, you know, he told this woman to kill the baby.
And you're like, well, I thought it wasn't killing a baby.
I thought that was your whole thing, right?
Like, there's no moral issue with this.
It's just a clump of cells.
It's a woman's right to do that.
So really, from your perspective, what's so outrageous about this?
Like, he just, he told a woman to exercise her right, right?
He's a feminist hero.
He told her to kill a baby.
The offensive part should be that he suggested that it's killing, right?
But anyway, you know, of course, that would be a really horrific thing to say.
And if he did say that, it's horrible.
But I just don't, I don't know.
I don't like assuming somebody said something really horrible because it was once reported.
No one's like come forward and said that this happened.
So anyway, I thought it was a cheap shot by Elizabeth Warren, but maybe an effective one.
All right, let's keep playing.
Four months tearing our party apart.
We're going to watch Donald Trump spend the next four years tearing our country apart.
And there is Amy Klobuchar with one of her dumbass prescripted lines.
But I got to say, that was a good way to close off that video because she's got a point.
She's got a point.
And whether you think Trump's going to tear the country apart or whatever aside, the last debate in this one, too, were good nights for Donald Trump.
They're very good nights for Donald Trump.
One of the things that the Democrats or any opposition to Donald Trump would like to kind of run on is like, oh, well, Donald Trump is just so crass and he lowers the whole standard of discourse in this country.
And he doesn't like uphold the, you know, the, he's not presidential and, you know, all these things that they say about him, the dignity of the office and all that crap.
And, you know, you could maybe get some people sympathetic to that argument.
But when your debates are going forward, you said to kill, told a pregnant woman to kill her baby and you blah, blah, blah, and all this shit.
It's like, yeah, that is a good, that's good for Donald Trump because now you're all right down in the mud with him.
And that's where Donald Trump enjoys bringing people.
He brings, Donald Trump has always had this ability since being in politics to bring everybody down into the mud.
And Donald Trump is a creature of the mud.
So once you're down there, you're where he's comfortable, right?
Like we all remember when Marco Rubio started making little dick jokes about Donald Trump, Marco Rubio had lost.
You've lost.
Because now you've got no, I'm the serious senator and you're just the reality show.
You're not the serious senator.
You're the guy making little dick jokes.
And if you can make little dick jokes, then why can't Donald Trump make bleeding out of our eyes and bleeding out of everywhere?
You know, like, why, why is this any better than that?
And he's able to do it with almost with almost everybody.
Anyway, it was a good night for Bernie Sanders because it was just a shit show.
And so I don't think there's going to be any big rearranging of the status of these different candidates.
And it was a good night for Donald Trump.
The only thing that's that is bad for Donald Trump in this whole process is that I do believe, and I've said this from the beginning, but I really do believe that Bernie Sanders is the toughest matchup for Donald Trump.
I think anybody else that I'm looking at up on this stage, Donald Trump would just make mince meat out of.
I mean, I think he would just destroy them.
You know, it's like all of them have been saying like, you know, it's like even Mike Bloomberg's thing was he's tweeting insults back and forth with Donald Trump.
So his whole thing is like, I can take him on.
Joe Biden kept saying, I can't wait to get on a debate stage with Donald Trump.
The problem is we've already seen you guys on a debate stage, a much less challenging one.
And you guys aren't impressive in the slightest.
So you really think you're going to go debate this animal, this freak, you know, who's, it's not like, oh, he's a really good, like, you know, classically trained debater.
It's like he blitzes you and comes at you from all different angles and holds nothing back and he's vicious.
He's a tough guy for politicians to handle.
And yeah, there's, it seems to me more and more clear, the only one who has a chance of handling him is Bernie Sanders.
And that's where the Democrats are at.
Anyway, things are going to get real interesting, real interesting this week.
So we'll see what happens.
And I can't wait to talk to all you good people about it.