All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 27, 2020 - Rubin Report - Dave Rubin
31:53
Dems Now Demand Court-Packing + the Craziest Anti-Trump Ad Ever | DIRECT MESSAGE | Rubin Report
Participants
Main voices
d
dave rubin
28:16
| Copy link to current segment

Speaker Time Text
unidentified
[MUSIC PLAYING]
dave rubin ▲ ● ▼
Hello, all you capitalists, you socialists, you anarchists, you communists, and other assorted people.
This is the Rubin Report Direct Message for October 27th, 2020.
One week from today, the fate of all our lives will be decided.
The fate of the economy, the fate, the fate of the environment, the fate of whether you will ever be laid again will all be answered Depending on whether Joe Biden or Donald Trump become or remain the President of the United States.
It's gonna be a wacky week and we've got a lot to get to, so we're gonna be mixing it up today.
Some funny stuff, some silly stuff, some election stuff, and some serious stuff.
I should tell you before I do anything else though, that starting today, if you guys wanna jump over to the Blaze TV, they got a crazy deal.
It's 30 bucks off an annual subscription so that you can get it for the cool, cheap discounted price of $5.75 a month.
The discount ends on Election Day, November 3rd.
So check that out.
Okay, so let's get to a whole bunch of stuff because there's a lot to talk about.
Oh, and I just did interview Alan Dershowitz, the Harvard Law professor, legal scholar, one of the last remaining 10 sane liberals on the planet.
I did interview him this morning all about the Amy Coney Barrett confirmation, which I'm gonna talk about in a few minutes myself.
But we went into some of the legal specifics, the sort of hysteria, the media reaction and all that.
It's a mini interview.
It's about 20 minutes.
We're gonna be posting that this afternoon.
And then I'm gonna do an extended interview with Alan Dershowitz after the election.
So that will be up on the YouTube channel a little bit later.
All right, we got a couple stories for you.
I wanna start with one.
I'm gonna make it very, very quick.
Because it's fairly obvious and self-explanatory.
Some of you may have seen this already, this clip that was going viral over the last couple of days.
This is Chelsea Handler, who I guess is a comedian, was a comedian, is basically just sort of like a hysteric, nutty, lefty, whatever she is.
But she was explaining to Jimmy Fallon why 50 Cent, 50 Cent, I'm a big fan of the 50, You heard about my ex-boyfriend, right?
unidentified
50 Cent and his support of Donald Trump.
Yeah, what's going on between you?
I saw your tweets and I go, wait, what's happening?
Because you said he was your favorite ex-boyfriend and then he... What is he doing?
Supporting Trump?
He says he doesn't want to pay 62% of taxes, which, by the way, isn't a plan of Joe Biden's.
That's a lie.
So he doesn't want to pay 62% of taxes because he doesn't want to go from being $0.50 to $0.20.
And I had to remind him that he was a black person.
So he can't vote for Donald Trump and that he shouldn't be influencing an entire swath of people who may listen to him because he's worried about his own personal pocketbook.
So I haven't heard back from him yet, but I am willing to, you know, seal the deal in more ways than one.
If he changes his mind and publicly denounces Donald Trump, I might be willing to go for another spin.
dave rubin ▲ ● ▼
Well, as I said, I want to make this one kind of quick.
And to that point, Chelsea Handler, if you're watching, you're a racist.
Yeah.
That's what we call old-fashioned racism.
You see a black person who doesn't think the way you want them to think, and you get to, although I get it, you're being kind of glib and jokey, but in effect you get to take away their blackness.
I had to remind him that he was a black person, so he can't vote for Donald Trump.
This is the same Donald Trump who at his State of the Union back in January was talking about all-time low black unemployment and the Congressional Black Caucus and all the Dems sat there like this and didn't applaud.
I'm old school.
I thought that low black unemployment, I thought that would be something we could all get on board.
It's sort of like Middle East peace.
I thought that was one of the things that we always wanted, but apparently not.
But this is what we call the soft bigotry of low expectations.
And if you think that black people aren't allowed to think for themselves.
If you think that people like the brilliant Thomas Sowell, or Larry Elder, or David Webb, or Candace Owens, or Tim Scott, or the litany of other black people who aren't just default Democrats by the basis of their skin color, if you think they're wrong, or they're somehow less black, or they're sellouts, or Uncle Tom's, or the rest of it, you in fact are the racist.
This is a more pernicious racism than say, oh, I don't want those people using those water fountains, which obviously is racist, and everyone is against that.
That type of racism, in essence, doesn't exist anymore.
It's gone.
There's nobody remotely close to anything mainstream that wants different laws for black people or Latino people or gay people, even, or anything else.
We've obliterated that sort of bigotry, and what we've been left with is lefties.
Bigotry, that they think they own you as a person.
So if you're a black person and you're watching this, guess what?
Dave, old Dave here, he thinks you're allowed to think whatever you want.
And if you're a white person, you can think whatever you want.
And a gay person and a straight person and a Christian and a Jew and a Muslim, you are entitled to think whatever you want.
And hopefully you've thought about it for yourself and come to a conclusion.
And the things that make you, you, whether it is your skin color or your gender, your sexuality, They do not define you, except without that, the left pretty much has nothing, and I think they're in for a rude awakening next week.
I predicted about a year ago that Trump was gonna get about 30% of the black vote, and I got a ton of hate from tolerant lefties on Twitter saying I was crazy and blah, blah, blah.
I don't know that it's gonna be 30%, but I think it is going to be shockingly a lot.
We know that the Blexit movement that Candace is doing, Black Voices for Trump and a whole bunch of stuff.
And just, there's a tectonic shift.
And if you're thinking that the polls are telling you what's going on, I think you got another thing coming.
All right, that's all I got on Chelsea.
You're an old-fashioned racist, Chelsea.
Sorry, hate to tell ya.
Let's talk about Mack Weldon for a sec.
Michael, help me out here.
I wanna talk about Mack Weldon.
They are the sponsor of this week's show.
And I seriously love Mack Weldon.
I wear, I've got sweatpants, I got hoodies, I got knit tops and T-shirts and the whole thing.
There are premium men's essential brand that believes in smart designs and high quality fabrics.
Mack Weldon offers a one-stop shop for men's basics.
They got socks, shirts, hoodies, underwear, polos, and active shorts, whatever you need.
Mack Weldon has you covered.
Unlike the assortment of department store brands that make up your top drawer, all of Mack Weldon's basics have a consistent fit that you can count on.
Mack Weldon offers a wide Range of customized fabrics that can keep up with you no matter what your day looks like, such as the 18-hour jersey, silver, air-knit, X, dry-knit, warm-knit, even cashmere.
And I'm telling you guys, I love the sweatpants.
It finally cooled off in LA the last couple of days and I'm wearing sweatpants at night and who doesn't love a good pair of sweatpants.
Mack Weldon has created a totally free loyalty program.
Level one gets you free shipping for life.
Once you reach level two by spending 200 bucks, Mack Weldon gives you 20% off every order for the next year.
Mack Weldon wants you to be comfortable, so if you don't like your first pair of underwear,
you can keep 'em and they'll still refund you, no questions asked.
And for 20% off your first order, visit MackWeldon.com/Rubin and enter promo code Rubin.
That's 20% off your first order.
When you visit mackweldon.com slash Reuben and enter promo code Reuben, I think you got the point.
Again, for 20% off your first order, visit mackweldon.com slash Reuben and enter promo code Reuben.
And now back to the show.
Hello, I'm Dave.
Okay, let's move on.
So I wanted to talk a little bit about the Amy Coney Barrett hearings.
As I mentioned, I did this interview with Alan Dershowitz Harvard Law professor and legal scholar who's been in this fight forever and, you know, he's on that shortlist to St.
unidentified
Lib's.
dave rubin ▲ ● ▼
He's still, you know, planting that flag and he doesn't get invited to dinners anymore.
I know a little something about that.
But we'll be posting that a little later this afternoon.
But I wanted to show a clip of ACB, as we're calling her.
We went from RGB to ACB.
I want to show a clip of her and then I want to show a couple tweets by some of the mainstream Democrats on how they're reacting to this thing.
Now, before I even set up the clip, I just wanna say the thing that was the obvious piece that the media really was struggling to deal with the entire time as they were making hay out of this whole thing, which is that she was going to be confirmed without question.
I did videos saying that weeks ago.
The second Trump nominated her, everyone knew That she wasn't gonna be Cavanaugh, right?
They weren't gonna be like, oh, we found 20 guys who say you sexually harassed them 30 years ago, and everything else.
She's got seven kids, several adopted kids.
By every measure, this is a good, decent woman.
Some people aren't happy about her faith, which actually is bigotry.
And people were upset that she's adopted two kids from Haiti, as if that's what somehow white supremacy is, when you take kids and you treat them as your own.
I mean, these people are just completely bananas.
But the simple truth, of the situation is that she was going to be confirmed no matter what.
Sadly, the way our system works now is everything is done on partisan lines, and the Republicans had the numbers.
Not only did they have the numbers, but even if one or two people defected, they still had the Vice President Mike Pence as the tiebreaker.
So we all knew it was gonna happen, and it was all theater, and remained and continued to be theater into yesterday.
So let's throw to this clip.
This is ACB.
After she was confirmed, and then we'll throw to some of these Democratic tweets, these genius tweets.
Let's go to the clip.
unidentified
One of the fundamental differences between the federal judiciary and the United States Senate, and perhaps the most acute, is the role of policy preferences.
It is the job of a senator to pursue her policy preferences.
In fact, it would be a dereliction of duty for her to put policy goals aside.
By contrast, it is the job of a judge to resist her policy preferences.
It would be a dereliction of duty for her to give in to them.
Federal judges don't stand for election.
Thus, they have no basis for claiming that their preferences reflect those of the people.
This separation of duty from political preference is what makes the judiciary distinct among the three branches of government.
All right.
dave rubin ▲ ● ▼
So it's obvious to anyone watching that that this woman is well qualified for the position and is going to judge as fairly as possible.
We understand her judicial philosophy.
You may not like her philosophy.
But that in and of itself doesn't exclude her just because you don't like her judicial philosophy.
You may remember a couple weeks ago, even John King on CNN said that in normal times, a woman with her track record, or a nominee, I don't even think he said woman, a nominee with her track record would have gotten 70 votes.
I actually asked Dershowitz about that this morning.
I said, if we didn't live in such crazy partisan times, is there anything about her record that would have left this in a weird situation, you know, this sort of completely partisan 51-49 situation.
And basically he said, in normal times, she would have got 98 votes, meaning that virtually everyone would have voted on her because you don't vote for people that you think will make judicial decisions exactly as you wish them to be.
You're voting on whether you think they're qualified to do the job.
And by the way, I see a lot of people that are sort of hysterical around,
oh, now the court is gonna swing more conservative.
There are times when it swings more liberal, but it certainly will be more conservative.
It will look at the world through a more conservative judicial lens.
There's simply no doubt about that.
And I see a lot of people worried about that.
But you also have to remember that the judges, once they're in there, they don't always rule on things
exactly as you think they are going to.
There are many, many instances of this.
So, I mean, just John Roberts and Obamacare, right?
They didn't think he was appointed by a Republican.
People didn't think that he was gonna be for Obamacare.
In essence, he was.
There's a lot of evidence of that.
But I do want to address two specific things that a lot of people, my more liberal friends and family and viewers are asking me about before I get to the Democratic tweets on this.
The two issues that seem to be Coming up, and I have a lot of genderless anime trolls on Twitter saying, now the court's gonna take away your marriage, Dave.
The implication being that this conservative court is now gonna take away gay marriage, which as you know, a couple years back, the Supreme Court decided under the Equal Protection Clause, that's what Justice Stevens wrote about, that gay marriage was the law of the land, that we should have equality for all people.
Now this is what the court has always done.
It has always expanded equality for more people, right?
It doesn't give people special rights, it gives people equality.
That's what that, Judgment did and I think it's a sound judgment and and most people from what I understand think that it's a pretty sound judgment There are there are people that lean on the more conservative side of it That still would have preferred it had been left to the states But I think Justice Stevens reasoning is sound and you can read the the you can read it for yourself Does anyone read the the justices decisions?
I'm not so sure but anyway, you can but so a lot of people are saying to me Well Dave there now now you see what's gonna happen You right-wing maniac.
You right-wing lunatic.
It's always lunatic or maniac.
That they're gonna take away gay marriage.
Now, not only, as I just said, does the court always expand rights.
I don't know that the court has ever taken away rights.
Taken away equal rights from a group of people.
That's just one thing.
But also, it isn't that the court just picks things.
Like, oh, we're a conservative court.
We're just gonna pick things to talk about.
We're gonna pick things.
that we're gonna make judicial decisions on.
What happens is court cases move up from local courts and appellate courts and district courts and all of those things.
They move all the way up and this process takes years and years and years to get up to the Supreme Court.
So the idea that A, that this is gonna somehow happen tomorrow or something like that, like that's just crazy.
But I know that's not in and of itself a good enough argument.
I think the idea that they won't take away rights is.
But also the court moves at some level the way the populace moves.
And they also know that by reversing gay marriage, the endless litany of things, the Pandora's box that they would open up, are you gonna force all these people to get divorced?
What are you gonna do with the kids?
The zillions of legal questions and financial questions, not to put aside the human right element of it and all of those things.
So I just simply don't think it will happen.
Maybe years from now I'll have egg on my face, but I would be absolutely shocked and I don't think it's something that you should worry about.
The other one, is the abortion one.
And here, and as you guys know, and my more conservative viewers don't love my opinion on this, although most of you have emailed me or many of you have emailed me to say that you'll agree to disagree.
In my book, I lay out the first trimester case for abortion.
I don't deny that it's life, but in a pluralistic society, I think you want the most amount of people to have choice.
And let's not get into all of the existential and philosophical and religious issues.
For this very moment, but if you wanna hear some of my thoughts on that, well, you can either read the book or listen to the audio book or watch my debates with Shapiro or Prager or Michael Shermer or a bunch of other people, okay.
Now, that's not exactly what Roe v. Wade is, right?
Roe v. Wade made abortion the law of the land, meaning it was federally legal everywhere.
Now, personally, you know I'm a states' rights guy, right?
I want as much to be done by the states and as little to be done as the federal government.
So even though I am begrudgingly pro-choice, if a case was to whittle its way and get through the courts, and I don't even know that there's one in the court system right now, but if a case was to get all the way there to the Supreme Court, I don't know that personally I could back Roe v. Wade.
That isn't because I want abortion to be illegal.
If they reversed Roe v. Wade, what that would do would kick it back to the states.
What I think you could do, if you were a progressive, if you were a lefty, if you were a good liberal and you were upset by that, well then the local state legislators would have to make it illegal.
So let's say Alabama then made abortion illegal.
What you could do, and this is how you take control of your life, is if you really were an abortion advocate and you wanted to make sure that people had access to abortions and everything else, you could start non-profits, you could start all sorts of fundraising so that people in whatever few states might reverse The abortion ruling might make abortion illegal, that they could get to the other states and all expenses paid and they could have the procedure and go home and you could even give them bonus money.
And all of the celebrities that are constantly telling us how wonderful abortion is, like Bette Midler and Barbara Streisand and Rosie O'Donnell and the rest of them, put your money where your mouth is.
Now, I know you don't like that idea.
You want it to be federal.
But, you know, we happen to live in a country with 350 million people, and you don't always get what you want.
So I know that would be a little bit messy, but the power would go back to you.
I think a lot of people think that Roe v. Wade, suddenly, if it was ever flipped, and by the way, I'm not even saying it would be flipped, and ACB isn't even saying it would be flipped, but if it got flipped, it kicks it back to the states.
It doesn't make it illegal.
I think it's important for people to have some understanding of that, but okay.
Let's move over to some of the reaction by the Democrats.
And I've been warning, if you've been listening, I've been warning you guys that one of the things that the left does is always out-banana itself.
It always out-lefties itself and there's nothing that's too crazy for them.
And I think if you see some of the tweets by the Democratic leadership in response to ACB, who again is supremely qualified to do this job, if you see some of these tweets, as I'm going to show them to you in just a second, You'll see that they have much bigger plans around this.
This isn't about whether ACB was confirmed or not.
This is now how do we change the system.
Change or, well, change in the short term, but burn it down in the long term.
So let's go to ACB, the Jar Jar Binks of politics.
I'm gonna read her tweet first.
AOC says, Republicans do this because they don't believe Dems have the stones to play hardball like they do.
And for a long time, they've been correct.
But do not let them bully the public into thinking their bulldozing is a normal response.
Oh wait, sorry.
Their bulldozing is normal, but a response isn't.
There is a legal process for expansion.
So what she's saying, in essence, is we did not get our way.
By the way, when they're telling you that the Republicans stole this or did something illegal or something like that, no.
The president is a four-year president.
There's quotes from Ruth Bader Ginsburg, RBG, saying the exact same thing, saying that the president, he's voted for four years.
If there's an opening, he's gotta nominate somebody, and that's exactly what he did.
Now, are the Republicans hypocrites because they stopped Obama from doing it last time, knowing that he wasn't gonna get the vote with Merrick Garland?
Yes, they're hypocrites.
You're not gonna believe it.
Politicians are hypocrites.
I cannot believe it.
And that goes across the board.
Isn't that crazy, folks?
Politicians are hypocrites.
No doubt about it.
But they did not do anything illegal.
They used power in the last case to stop something when they had it, in this case to do something when they had it.
That's what power is, and that's what politics is.
So Harry Reid in 2013, when he did the nuclear option, instead of a super majority to confirm a judge, he said it has to be a simple majority.
Well, that was a very short-sighted term.
So you can pin all of this, this 51-vote situation, you can pin this back on the Democrats.
Harry Reid, this is all you, man.
And there's a tweet that you can find where he's bragging about it.
And it's all you.
And I said it last week, but you can find a video of me on The Young Turks as a lefty, as a progressive at the time.
And I said, this is gonna bite you guys in the ass.
The second you lose power, they're gonna use it in ways that you don't want.
And that is the dangerous thing about power.
That's exactly what Mitch McConnell said back then.
And that's exactly what the Republicans did right now.
So there is a legal process for expansion.
Now that's changing the rules.
Now we're gonna add judges.
And if we have the power, we're gonna add judges.
And by the way, then the Republicans can get power again and then they can add judges and remove judges.
And it's just an endless nonsensical game.
So AOC doesn't want, she doesn't like the system, right?
She doesn't like capitalism.
She doesn't really like democracy.
She doesn't like separation of powers or any of those things.
She wants it her way or the highway.
If I don't get what I want with the processes that are in place that we've always been governed by, we're gonna just change them.
That's what AOC is saying.
Let's go to Kamala Harris, who is the presumptive Democratic nominee, because it ain't old-bag Biden.
She said, Okay, that's just not true.
It was a legitimate process.
We won't forget this.
said, "Today Republicans denied the will of the American people by confirming a
Supreme Court justice through an illegitimate process."
Okay, that's just not true. It was a legitimate process. "All in their effort
to gut the Affordable Care Act and strip health care from millions with pre-existing
conditions." We won't forget this. So everything she said there is just
complete nonsense. First off, it wasn't an illegitimate process because if it was
illegitimate, meaning illegal, they wouldn't have been able to do it.
They did exactly what they are allowed to do within the Constitution of the United States.
Again, you may not like that, but then you can also pass an amendment, but that would take You'd have to be part of the system, and you'd have to pass things and do work, and that would be tough for these guys.
So, Harris is absolutely lying when she says this is an illegitimate process.
It is completely legitimate.
All in their effort to gut the Affordable Care Act.
Now, I don't know it's all in their effort.
Now, maybe they will gut some of the Affordable Care Act.
That is possible.
Trump, by the way, has repeatedly said, and he said in the debate the other night, and you don't have to believe him, I'm actually not totally sure what I believe on this, That in his plan, once they gut Obamacare enough, although Biden's now calling it Bidencare because you'll get the public option.
I don't think Obama's thrilled with that.
Oh, yeah, my signature achievement.
Not only Trump's going to gut the whole thing, I bet you're going to switch the name to Bidencare.
I mean, it's also silly.
But this idea that they're gonna do the pre-existing conditions situation
because Obamacare covered people with pre-existing conditions
and that the idea of what she's saying here is they're gonna try to screw over people
with pre-existing conditions.
Well, Trump is saying that his plan will cover pre-existing conditions.
I tend to think that if that plan really comes to fruition, that they will because there's almost nobody
that's against that except maybe a healthcare executive, somewhere crunching the numbers, right?
An actuary who works for a healthcare firm or something, maybe an insurance firm, maybe they're looking at it
and going, "We don't wanna cover it."
But the public, I'm pretty sure, someone get me the numbers on this, the public, regardless if you're a Republican or a Democrat, people want people to be covered with preexisting conditions.
And by the way, not only do I completely agree with that, regardless of whether that was put in place by a Democrat or a Republican, if the government's to have something to do with healthcare, I think there's an interesting argument there, But not only do I see that as something that will happen either way, but nobody's against it.
That's the thing.
There's really, you can't find anybody that really is against it.
So Harris's comment here is just patently disingenuous.
And then let's throw to Elizabeth Warren.
I'mma get me a beer.
Elizabeth Warren, she's such a human, isn't she?
Such a Native American human.
Here we go.
She says, hundreds of thousands of Americans are dead and millions are waiting for the federal government to fight this pandemic?
Republicans say, sorry, no time.
We have better things to do than pass a relief package like steal a Supreme Court seat.
Oh, Liz, Liz, Liz, Liz.
You left the range with that one.
They didn't steal the seat.
I think I explained why.
The seat was not stolen.
It was perfectly legal.
And if it was illegal, you'd be doing something about it, but you're not, because it wasn't illegal.
And also the idea that they're doing that instead of passing a relief bill.
The Republicans have a relief bill sitting in the Senate.
I recommend going to Dan Crenshaw's Twitter feed to see what's going on with that.
The Democrats refuse to pass it.
And at this point, I think there's probably no way around it.
They don't want it passed because they want the American people to feel like they're in pain right now, so hopefully they'll vote for Biden.
That's just pretty obvious.
Politics, again, it dirty.
It's dirty, people.
So that's all about that.
If you want more of just sort of the legal ins and outs and some of the sort of the blue sky stuff on that, as I said, my interview with Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law professor, will be up in a couple hours.
And, oh, we got two stories.
I'm gonna do them somewhat quick over here.
Man, I'm windy today.
I am long-winded.
First off, California, this clown state that I live in, Gavin Newsom, he was the former mayor of San Francisco, ruined that city, so now he's ruining the entire state.
I was in Beverly Hills yesterday.
There's a big sign when you enter Beverly Hills, no trick-or-treating, stay safe, stay home.
Bananas.
Well, now they've issued a bunch of Well, I can't say their edicts, their guidelines, things that they don't want you to do for Thanksgiving.
And before I quickly read them here, let's not forget, remember back in March, it was 15 days to slow the spread.
We're gonna, you know, we're gonna flatten that curve.
That was 15 days, guys, and then everything will be back to normal.
We're now like eight months later, and he's already making plans for a month from now in Thanksgiving.
And these plans are just ridiculous.
Gatherings that occur outdoors are significantly safer than indoor gatherings.
All gatherings must be held outside.
Attendees may go inside to use restrooms as long as restrooms are frequently sanitized.
I want to be very clear about this.
I live in California.
We host Thanksgiving.
It's the one holiday we host.
I'm gonna do it however I want and I'm gonna have as many people over and you can send your stormtroopers to my house, Gavin Newsom, but it won't Go well, I still live in a free country, and you don't get to tell me whether my guests have to eat indoors or outdoors.
You're an awful human being.
Then a couple of the new rules, though, are really something here.
All gatherings must include no more than three households, because you wouldn't want four households getting together, because then they start talking, you know?
That would be a problem.
Masks must stay on after eating and drinking and singing and chanting and shouting are strongly discouraged.
What's Thanksgiving if you can't shout at your family?
Good God, you authoritarian loons.
Okay, final story.
Speaking of authoritarian loons, the Lincoln Project.
You know these people?
These are a bunch of sort of, I would say, impotent Republicans who got everything wrong forever and who back all the losing candidates and everything else.
They've become these never-Trump people who are all supporting Biden.
I don't know what makes them conservatives by any stretch of the imagination, If they're voting for a guy who, especially because of what he has coming behind him, is the complete antithesis of everything they purport to believe, but they're extremely well-funded and they really like being liked by the media, and there's no way to be liked by the media more than being an anti-Trump Republican or a principled conservative who always loses, right?
That'll get you a lot of TV time on MSNBC and the usual spots.
Well, they released a video this morning of, well, You just watch.
I don't want to color it for you.
Take a look.
unidentified
[MUSIC]
Hey, honey.
Hey, honey.
You asked me to wake you and tell you what happened in the election.
Who won?
Trump.
Trump won.
But I thought you could only be president two times.
Not anymore.
[crowd chanting "FRG"]
The Lincoln Project is responsible for the content of this ad.
dave rubin ▲ ● ▼
[BLANK_AUDIO]
Oh, Lord, it's too early to drink.
I mean, these people are just awful.
unidentified
Mommy, is Trump going to be president for a third term?
dave rubin ▲ ● ▼
What are we going to do?
And that white, privileged woman in her rich house with her white child.
It's all just so terrible.
Yes, it's not even about his second term.
It's about his third term.
Everything that's wrong with everything is so summed up.
In this overly priced, slick ad by a bunch of people who never get everything right and just keep sticking around.
It's like, yes, that's what you're gonna do to your child.
That's child abuse.
That's child abuse.
The night before the election, and it's gonna be his third term, I'll wake you up in the morning and tell you if the president won, and if not, we're gonna pack the bags and run.
Obviously, his whole second term went by and they didn't do anything.
You guys seem like you're doing pretty good.
This is just lunacy.
They are playing on your heartstrings in the most dangerous sort of, Gross.
It's actually gross what these people are doing.
They're gross people.
And don't let them trick you into doing something that you don't want to do.
Vote your conscience, whatever that is, even if it's completely against everything I've said to you here.
All right, people.
I am off to Santa Barbara.
I'm doing an event with Bishop Barron this evening.
And I don't think it's live, though.
I think we're gonna hold it and then they're gonna be posting it in a couple weeks.
Yes, I got a thumbs up on that one.
And we're gonna stop and get a little Chick-fil-A on the way.
That's the rumor around the Rubin Report studio.
So maybe there'll be a picture at rubinreport.com of me eating a hateful chicken sandwich.
You never know.
Anything's possible.
All right, one week left, guys.
Stay sane.
▲
Export Selection