Fake News About Trump Is Getting Insane And It's Tearing America Apart
Fake News About Trump Is Escalating And Tearing America Apart. The New York Times recently changed a headline on its front page because it presented Trump in a neutral light. This was in response to far left activists and democrats expressing shock and outrage and demanding everyone cancel their subscriptions to NYT over it.New York Times capitulation to the outrage shows how media is biased either because of politics or out of fear of losing money. Today though, CNBC added "without evidence" to a headline about Trumps tweets that were actually fake news as Trump had cited evidence.Trump was tweeting about bias from Google and cited a former engineer Kevin Cernekee who said on the record Google was biased. CNBC claimed, without evidence, that trump claimed without evidence that google was biased.This seems to me to be more of an emotional dig at Trump and his supporters as it wasn't even supported by the evidence itself, in fact adding "without evidence" contradicted the body of the story in which Trump DID cite evidence.The fake news about Trump just keeps getting worse and I have never seen it as bad as it was today.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Earlier today, I saw this opinion piece posted on townhall.com.
It's written by Dennis Prager.
America is drowning in the left's lies about Trump.
Now, I wasn't necessarily going to open by showing this story, and to be honest, I'm not going to read through the opinion piece.
I just want to show you that headline because that's exactly how I feel today.
In the past few days, there's been some pretty tragic events, and following this, Every single lead story, and I'm not saying every single, I'm being hyperbolic, but just the front page of every single news site is the same thing over and over and over again.
Trump's rhetoric, Trump's speech, Trump's to blame.
They're putting their opinions in stories.
They're publishing non-stop incessant analysis and just overt lies.
And I gotta tell you, because I have to read all of these stories to try and figure out what's going on, at a certain point I just start exiting them out, I don't even bother clicking them, and I tune them out, and boy is it frustrating.
The reason I highlight this piece from Dennis Prager is because he's right.
America is drowning in lies from the left, but also the media.
And I have some examples for you.
And I want to talk about a more egregious instance where we can just plainly see maybe it's fair to say the left and the media are just mostly the same thing.
Now, I get it.
The media can refer to literally everything, including Town Hall, which is certified by NewsGuard as being, for the most part, factually accurate.
The media does include conservative commentary and news websites.
But for the most part, when it comes to, like, you know, the New York Times, CNN, the Washington Post, it's very clearly the left.
And these are the big, prominent papers.
Now, there's a lot of reasons why it may be.
They're based in urban centers for the most part.
Local journalism is dying off.
Or it could just be people who want to work there, share the opinions of the stories they see.
They think they're right.
They think they're being honest.
And they're liars.
Let me show you some stories that are probably going to, well, I would say shock you, but you're going to be like, yep, what else is new?
What if I told you the New York Times published a neutral headline referencing Trump's speech, and because of outrage from the far left and mainstream left, they changed the headline.
I kid you not.
Let's go through some stories, and I'm going to show you just how ridiculous and insane things are getting.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com slash donate if you'd like to support my work.
There's a PayPal option, a crypto option, a physical address.
And of course, the best thing you can do, just share this video.
Let me just stress, YouTube is deranking my channel, other channels like mine.
They're propping up CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, etc.
Now you may think, hey, at least there's a little balance there, right?
Yes, but most media is leaning left.
That's the point.
Look, I don't care for the political opinions of these outlets.
For the most part, I care about factual information.
They're all allowed to have their opinions, but man, if you like the idea of me calling out fake news, then please consider sharing this video because I'm competing with this, what you see right here on the screen.
And what you see, or for those listening that don't see it, Nate Silver.
He tweeted, tomorrow's NYT, uh, New York Times print edition, not sure quote, Trump urges unity versus racism, is how I would have framed the story.
He didn't like that, huh?
Well as it turns out, neither did many of the presidential candidates who pressured the New York Times into changing their headline.
Now actually, let me see if I can pull this back up.
One of the, one of the trends as of right now, I don't have it pulled up, is cancel NYT.
I kid you not.
This is what they do.
The left threatens to cancel their subscription because the headline about Trump was just telling you the facts.
Trump said this.
And the left gets outraged and the New York Times capitulates.
The media is catering to the left and this should show you, this is evidence.
Look at this story from the Washington Examiner.
And yes, the Examiner is a more conservative source.
New York Times changes headline on Trump's shooting response after presidential candidates slammed them.
And here we can see Beto O'Rourke saying, unbelievable, in response to Nate Silver.
Cory Booker, lives literally depend on you doing better, New York Times, please do.
Bill de Blasio, New York Times, what happened?
And Julie K. Brown says, one headline writer's mistake is not cause enough to close the door on an army of truly great journalists who don't write the headlines, as you know.
Well, eventually, we can see that they changed the headline, which now reads, assailing hate, but not guns.
The New York Times, like any other business, wants money.
And when their overly liberal base starts getting outraged, or more importantly, I don't think their base is going to be overly liberal, but let me just stress this.
Something is amiss.
Something is plainly visible when you have Democratic presidential candidates outraged, insulting Trump, and they cave to the Democrats.
Isn't that bad?
Trump is a person in politics.
He's going to be running for re-election.
Why should the New York Times take sides?
We can see how this was coming from the left.
Here's a story from Splinter, of which, before it was Splinter, it was Fusion.
I worked there.
What was the New York Times thinking?
I don't know.
They were probably thinking they created a headline that paraphrased what Trump actually said.
Heaven forbid the news actually reflect what Trump said.
Now, you may be saying, well, they changed the headline to assailing hate but not guns.
That's not necessarily anti-Trump.
Maybe this isn't an example of the media trying to favor the left, just not trying to enrage them.
Well, let me show you another story here.
This one is from CNBC.
Trump, without evidence, accuses Google of illegally swinging election against him in 2020.
Can I ask a question?
Why did this writer, Jesse Pound, add the phrase, without evidence, to this story?
Why do they all do the same thing?
Why is it a common occurrence?
You know what I see?
I saw this when I worked there.
I see it now.
These people don't have original thoughts.
I'm not exaggerating, and I'm not trying to be mean.
I've sat at bar tables with these people.
I've been in their offices.
They're regurgitating what they heard from someone else.
There's literally no reason a journalist should ever put without evidence in a phrase criticizing or highlighting something someone else said.
Can you please give me examples of how, in common, colloquial English, people say things like, I went to the store yesterday.
Here's a receipt to prove it.
I went to the store to buy milk.
Here's my receipt for the milk.
Who does that?
If somebody wants to make a political point, they'll just make it.
They don't stop to present evidence that makes literally no sense.
Why would someone at CNBC inject that into the headline?
Which I might add is fake news, and we'll get to that.
Well, here's my opinion.
The reason they add without evidence is not because they're doing their due diligence because they're journalists.
It's because they want to be emotionally satisfied taking a swing at someone they don't like or to signal to the left that they're on your side calling Trump a liar.
Perhaps it's because this person saw the outrage that was generated by the left over a New York Times headline.
And think about where that puts us.
I don't care about what your politics are.
I care about the fact that scientific articles have been pulled down due to activist outrage.
Not an exaggeration.
I care about the fact that headlines are forced to be changed because of left-wing activist outrage.
And I'm angry that I'm looking at CNBC adding fake news without evidence is completely fake news.
I am angry because they are putting fake news in their headlines.
Because Jesse Pound is either an activist who is trying to emotionally satisfy himself instead of actually helping you understand what's happening, or he's just trying to make sure everybody thinks he's on the right side.
Let's take a look at what he actually wrote.
In a series of tweets on Tuesday, Trump listed evidence-free accusations by several people, including Fox News host Lou Dobbs and former Google employee Kevin Cernichie.
Wait, wait, hold on.
I'm sorry.
Without evidence?
But Trump cited a Google employee?
Explain to me your definition of the word evidence.
First of all, whether he includes evidence in his statement or not is immaterial.
It is irrelevant to the point he is making.
If you don't like what he's saying, you can fact-check him.
But adding without evidence does literally nothing.
In fact, it's the opposite of what Trump did.
Because Trump directly referenced Kevin Cernanke.
Kevin Cernecki, a Google engineer, says I watched Kevin Cernecki, a Google engineer, say terrible things about what they did in 2016 and that they want to make sure that Trump loses.
Let me tell you something.
In a court of law, did you know that witness testimony is evidence?
It's not definitive proof.
And you can say that, and I'd be okay with that.
If they said, Trump tweets without definitive proof, I'd say, sure, I don't know why you needed to add that, but at least that one's kind of acceptable.
In this instance, we can just clearly see it.
The New York Times bending over backwards to activist outrage, CNBC publishing literal fake news.
What reasonable person would consider citing a Google employee saying they are doing this to be without evidence?
More importantly, they keep saying things like this.
Let me read what he says in the story.
There's no evidence that Google manipulates information to stifle conservative voices.
Okay, let's break down how he's phrasing this.
There's no evidence that Google manipulates information.
Stop.
There is.
But he said to stifle conservative voices.
Actually, a leaked email published by Project Veritas shows Yes, there is evidence.
Can I just, look, I'm really frustrated today because I've probably read like seriously 60 to 70 articles and it's just all fake news.
And at a certain point, I'm like, I don't know how to sift through this.
I don't know how you actually deal with this problem, but I am drowning in a sea of fake news about Donald Trump.
There's no evidence that Google manipulates information to stifle conservative voices.
How about the email from a Google employee saying they should restrict the YouTube channels of several prominent conservatives, including Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro, and PragerU, because of the perceived political leanings of these groups?
How about you do your jobs for once?
These companies have no fact-checkers, they don't care to fact-check, and they are more satisfied by putting emotional digs at somebody in their story instead of doing the job they're paid to do.
But you know what?
But there won't be.
Journalism died a long time ago, and it's getting worse and worse every day.
I've got more stories to go through.
This is a story from a couple weeks ago.
ago.
Trump's latest racist comments, including calling a majority-black area a disgusting
rat and rodent-infested mess, the president's own housing secretary Ben Carson lives in
the district.
By Ryan C. Brooks of Buzzfeed.
The title.
Okay, you want to call Trump racist?
I don't care.
But this is an op-ed.
This is an opinion piece.
I'm sorry, it's not listed as an opinion piece.
This is what I deal with every single day when trying to understand what's actually happening.
The only reason they would put that in there is because they are angry and they want to be emotionally satisfied.
They have the maturity of children.
And see, saying that emotionally satisfies me.
But it's true.
Look, I can read a story.
I can try to remove my emotions from what is actually happening.
I try to tell you, like, here's what happened, and here's how I feel about it.
In many of the stories I cover, I want to make sure the facts are clear.
I use a third-party news rating agency, NewsGuard, to check my own bias, because I disagree with them on many instances.
Like, they give the Daily Beast a green checkmark, even though the Daily Beast publishes, look, they give BuzzFeed a green checkmark.
However, They do say, oh, no, yeah, they give them green check marks across the board.
And here we are looking at a BuzzFeed story, which is an overt op-ed that clearly doesn't like the president.
And this is news today.
You have a bunch of immature children who work for these companies, who are so angry, they don't care about what is factually true.
And then they'll say things like this.
But as journalists, maybe we should point out the president is a racist.
No, that's an opinion.
In fact, when the Covington student sued the Washington Post over, you know, the lies they published, The Washington Post got the case dismissed why the judge said the language used by the Washington Post was opinion and hyperbole and rhetorical devices that weren't definitive facts.
Welcome to news today.
And it's particularly bad.
You know, it's frustrating to see a circumstance like the Covington incident, but here we go again.
And what do we get for it?
We get dramatic calls to violence from things like- So let's move on, right?
So I've shown you a few bits of the fake news.
First, they get you angry by saying Trump's lying, he's got no evidence.
Sure, I think Trump lies.
I think he lies a lot.
Fine.
It doesn't give you the right to lie back.
It doesn't... I don't understand what these people are thinking.
Take a look at this tweet I highlighted the other day.
We're gonna do it again.
252,000 retweets.
Shooter.
I was inspired by Trump.
Wrong.
The Shooter's Manifesto, which according to the New York Times now was confirmed, says he wasn't inspired by Trump.
But moving on.
Media.
What could have caused this?
Shooter.
Look at this cool photo of the word Trump spelled in firearms.
Fact check.
Wrong.
The photo did not come from the guy in El Paso.
Media.
He probably played too much Fortnite.
Shooter.
It's like Trump said.
Hispanics are invading us.
Technically true.
Trump did refer to the migrant caravan as an invasion.
So, the way it's framed, I'll give it a technically, but Trump did say that.
But let's take a look at the premise of this tweet.
He was not inspired by Trump.
He didn't make that photo.
252,000 retweets.
Where's the fact check?
It's not here.
So, what ends up happening then is people see the fake news about Trump.
They're already angry because they think he's a liar.
Somebody tweets this, which is not journalism.
It is fake news, even though this person is a legal analyst for Rewire.
It's fake news.
This tweet, fake news.
And it goes viral.
And nothing can stop it.
When these companies realize that fake news is profitable, they will go for it full stop.
Full steam ahead, I should say.
Just full steam.
Just shoveling that coal into the steam engine.
Steam engines are pretty cool, though, aren't they?
And where does it leave us?
Reza Aslan calling for the eradication of Trump supporters.
Now, of course, perhaps that's my opinion, but here's what Reza Aslan said.
The president is a white nationalist terror leader.
His supporters, all of them, are by definition white nationalist supporters.
The MAGA hat is a Klan hood.
And this evil racist scourge must be eradicated from society.
If the subject of that tweet is Trump and his supporters, I'd have to imagine he's calling for them to be eradicated.
And what else can you expect, other than just escalation?
This is what's frustrating to me.
You know, seeing these fake news stories, seeing the incessant lies, it just never seems to stop.
Here's another story from BuzzFeed, which is not necessarily fake news, but let me explain to you how it is.
BuzzFeed writes, So many people were shot in Chicago this weekend.
A hospital had to briefly stop taking patients.
Chicago had two mass shootings within hours of each other on Sunday.
In total, 46 people were injured by gun violence in the city over the weekend.
So this story writes about something I believe is called bypass.
Bypass, as my understanding, is when... I want to see if they actually bring it up.
Let me do a quick search to make sure I can... So they don't mention the phrase bypass.
But I just want to stress, This is not out of the ordinary.
There is a system in place for hospitals to turn away ambulances and patients because,
yes, space is finite. They're trying to make it seem like this is a common occurrence,
like it's a rare occurrence, but it's actually decently common.
When hospitals will say, hey, we can't accommodate you, you have to go somewhere else.
But of course, they're chasing the narrative.
This is somebody who said, oh my god, a hospital, instead of doing the research, instead of providing you with context, like, hospitals have a procedure for turning away patients.
It happens kind of frequently.
That's why they have a procedure for this.
They say, can you believe this happened?
Yes, I can.
It happens all the time.
Especially, like, I'm from Chicago.
Well, we can then see how things just, I mean, kind of escalate from here.
CNN contributor deletes tweet referring to McConnell as Massacre Moscow Mitch.
Now, some people have said this was him calling for physical violence against Mitch McConnell.
Some people on the left have said it's actually insulting him calling him Massacre Mitch because of things he's done, not saying you should massacre him.
But regardless, it was good of him to delete, I guess, but he shouldn't have tweeted it.
He said something to the effect of seeing this hashtag trend makes him hopeful for America.
And where do you think this kind of rhetoric leads?
Far-left protesters at McConnell's home saying, quote, just stab the mother effer in the heart.
The rhetoric is getting insane because we're drowning in a sea of fake news.
We really are.
And there's no better example than the New York Times changing their headline because of pressure from activists.
There's no better example than today, this fake story that added the phrase, without evidence, they do this all the time, why?
It's just, it makes no sense.
And then you can see activists saying, Stabbed in the heart.
Now, I'm going to make sure I criticize McConnell and his campaign for sure, though I'm not going to necessarily say that Mitch McConnell himself called for this.
The buck stops with the people on top, right?
Team Mitch on Twitter said, the grim reaper of socialism, and they posted a photo of a tombstone with a woman's name on it, Amy McGrath.
And this got a ton of flack.
And you know what?
You can see the photo here.
There's a fake little tombstone on a spike.
It says, Amy McGrath, R.I.P.
Not appropriate.
Look, you can claim it was a silly joke.
You can say it's not his fault because his team did it.
When you have deranged leftists, you know, calling for violence, when you have actual fringe extremists engaging in violence, we should be doing everything we can to make sure we're not alluding to acts of violence.
And that includes Mitch McConnell.
Who I admit, like I've never been a fan of the guy.
I don't like this man.
Okay, I'll criticize him and whoever else, but you know what?
Mitch McConnell being a Silly turtle man as you know, they insult him to be or having bad politics Fine.
I don't like it.
Whatever But I I can't tell you what it's like to swim in a sea of fake news all day every day and then you know today I'm hoping they'll be done with it.
It's been several days now of just incessant fake news over and over and over again.
And it's like, it's like having someone drill into your temple.
I've got some more stories pulled up.
Um, this one's irrelevant.
I don't, I don't, this one shouldn't be here.
This was actually, uh, you can see this.
Like, I was working on other stories.
This one says, focus group of swing voters side with Trump on immigration.
I was actually, there was conflicting stories here.
And I just couldn't get to it because it's all just so much fake news.
I'm just swimming in a sea of fake news.
But I want to highlight this story.
Ocasio-Cortez.
Trump's immigration rhetoric directly responsible for El Paso.
Now, I bring this up for a reason.
The front page of The Atlantic, six stories, said the exact same thing.
The front page, six stories out of like, you know, 15 or 20.
The same narrative, all day, non-stop.
Great.
Can we please get a story in The Hill, in BuzzFeed, in the Daily Mail, in Vox, saying Ocasio-Cortez's rhetoric about concentration camps has caused a violent escalation too?
Or can we just stop the rhetorical trash and move on?
Apparently we can't.
Because let me just go back to the beginning.
America is drowning in the left's lies about Trump.
Well, Dennis Prager is a conservative, so of course he's going to point the finger at the left.
And I think it's fair to point to many elements of the left that are pushing lies.
Notably, this tweet with 252,000 retweets, which is 66% fake news.
Because she made three points, two of which are completely fake.
And then people don't do any research.
They don't.
They see this tweet and that's their news.
There was a report done by, um, it was Newswhip, I believe, tracking the most engaged with sources for the right in 2018, Fox News.
Biased, they get some things wrong, I disagree with them, but for the most part, factual, you know, real news agency, they're rated positive by NewsGuard.
The left is Occupy Democrats.
Look, I don't care what your policies are, but when you have a large section of people, when you have a large faction of people who don't actually read news and get their information on Facebook from memes, Yes, we are swimming in the left's lies about Trump.
And let me just stress how infuriating this story is from CNBC.
Jesse Pound, for whatever reason, wrote this story where he adds this ridiculous, nonsensical phrase without evidence for no reason, as if to imply whenever people talk, they pause to inject evidence to explain how they did something.
In fact, Trump literally did.
Trump cited a Google employee who said they were biased.
Did you know that a professor, I believe it was a professor, testified recently to Ted Cruz that Google did swing millions of votes?
Not like that matters.
Not like this people will do his job and actually investigate any of this information.
And so then it's funny, because the activists get mad and they say, Tim Poole's not a journalist.
Quite literally, I do journalism all day.
Now you're watching my political commentary channels, but it's just, you know, it's an information war.
And we are literally swimming In lies about Trump.
All day, every day.
Now, it's not like there's not lies about other people.
The right sometimes puts out misinformation and lies, too.
And I've called them out for it.
Recently, there were a few stories that were misframing a narrative about a Somali journalist who went back to Somalia, saying they titled it something like, uh, a journalist goes to Ilhan Omar's homeland to show the beauty and then gets killed by terrorists.
And the real story was a Somali refugee returned home to try and highlight the good of her country and was killed.
You don't have to frame it as if like putting Ilhan Omar's name made no sense and not including the fact that it was a literal Somali citizen doing it.
It's like...
Look, it happens.
But when CNBC does it, we've got serious problems.
When the New York Times changes a headline to bend to left-wing Democratic politicians, man, we're in trouble.
And it is tiring.
It is tiring.
I'll leave it there.
Stick around!
I get to do three more segments later today, and the entire news cycle is dominated by the same story over and over.
You know, I'll tell you what.
I see fake news all the time, and fine, I get it.
It's fake news all day, every day.
I'm being a bit hyperbolic here.
But today, it's not so much the fake news, it's that literally the front page of every website has the same story written seven times.
The internet has done something to the political left and right in this country.
For the longest time, for me growing up, we had this moral right wing that was, you know, critical of, I don't know, I guess things that were damaging the sanctity of family and things like that.
You know, there was like, you know, putting censorship stuff.
I guess it wasn't necessarily, it wasn't entirely a right wing, but we had this moral mentality in politics.
That is now almost exclusively on the left.
Almost exclusively.
The right still retains a lot of their, you know, moral sentiment.
But something happened.
It's really weird.
And now we're seeing the rise of this identitarian left.
It's not necessarily entirely identitarian, but it's this weird moralistic dogma where things are based on morality instead of principle.
But morality is ever-shifting among these people.
Part of what we see, then, is a fun-loving right-wing that's making jokes.
The Daily Wire, they do an amazing job at making memes and making fun of people who take things way too seriously.
I have this tweet here from Reza Aslan.
Twitter is allowing calls for, I guess, genocide?
And then Reza himself is shocked that someone would say the same thing to him to prove a point.
Showing, as the tweet on the screen shows, either Reza Aslan is dangerously stupid and inciting violence, or he is intentionally lying and misleading people using bad faith tactics to promote violence.
Either way, how does Twitter allow this?
But you can't tweet about voter ID or learning to code.
I've said it before, I'll say it again.
I believe the left is going insane.
Now the first thing we need to address, and I've got some tweets I want to go through, is that Twitter is biased.
Facebook is biased.
They're biased against the right, for the most part.
They're also biased against anti-war left, for sure.
But because they ban the crazies on the right, you only see the clean and proper individuals on the right.
Because they don't ban the crazies on the left, like Reza Aslan, you see truly insane psychotic calls for violence that go, I don't know, unanswered.
Sean King called for terrorism.
It happened.
He praised the terrorist, and then later deleted one of the tweets, the ones where he praised the terrorist.
But the call remained, and The Intercept published it.
So, what I think happens is, first and foremost, we have a perspective skewed because the right is being cleaned up and the left isn't.
But, this results in high-profile individuals seeing left-wing insanity as acceptable and embracing it.
Maybe because they're stupid, or because they're liars, or because they want attention.
And I've got some examples for you to back up this hypothesis.
The first thing I want to do is take a look at this tweet from Ezra Aslan.
I believe what we're seeing is an overt call for the genocide of people who hold a... I don't know if genocide is the right word, but he wants the mass execution.
He wants to... You know what?
I don't want to interpret what he's saying.
I'll remove my opinion and I'll use his own language.
He wants Trump supporters, all of them, the MAGA hat, the evil racist scourge eradicated from society.
What does he mean by that?
I mean, to me, saying that all of these people and, you know, and then referencing
this evil racist scourge must be eradicated. He refers to the president as a racist. He
refers to all of them, his supporters, and then says the racist scourge. He didn't, I,
He didn't mention ideology, necessarily.
The subject of that tweet is individuals.
So maybe he's talking about terror, but he doesn't talk about terrorists.
He talks about terror supporters.
To me, it sounds like he wants all of the Trump supporters dead.
He then has another tweet.
These are not necessarily in chronological order.
I just made this image.
Reza Aslan tweeted to Kellyanne Conway that you are the depraved evil we need to eradicate.
He said, you, to Kellyanne Conway, we need to eradicate.
Sounds like he's saying to kill her.
I don't know how else you interpret that.
He said, you, subject of the sentence, you, we need eradicate.
That's how, you know, basic grammar and syntax works.
He then has this other tweet.
Okay, hold on.
Kellyanne Pohl's own word eradicate back at her means I'm threatening her life
then her using the word means she was threatening the El Paso shooter we are
tired of this constant bad faith BS from the right and we're not going to put up
with it anymore okay hold on Kellyanne Conway referred to the shooter as a bad
guy who should be eradicated like whose ideology or something should be
eradicated well I I look I get it There are people calling for the death penalty.
Most people in this country support it.
I don't.
I can understand why someone might have that reaction and say, hey, the perpetrator, these people need to be eradicated.
While I disagree with the death penalty, that is still within the confines of what we can understand and empathize with, right?
Like, I get it, man.
You know, even though I oppose the death penalty, when I see somebody demanding it because a friend or family member was killed, I totally get it.
I totally get it.
I understand the emotion.
I can empathize.
I can feel what they feel.
I just, you know, don't think the death penalty is the right thing.
I don't.
But, I can understand that emotion.
Pointing the finger at Trump supporters, who are mostly, like, middle Americans, you know, like, working class people, who are just hootin' and hollerin', that is insane.
And that makes no sense.
But here's the best part.
Reza goes on to say, another death threat.
Why?
Because someone said, quote, tell your client I will eradicate him.
And then Reza Aslan published the guy's email.
So hold on.
Reza Aslan, 11 hours ago, said it was bad faith to claim that eradicate was a threat, but 22 hours ago said that someone saying he would eradicate him is a threat.
This says to me that, like my tweet says, either Reza Aslan is dangerously stupid, or he knows he's lying, and he doesn't have any principles, he's just saying, I am right, and I will kill you, and if anyone says anything to me, it's wrong.
But this is a common thread we see among what the left is becoming.
I think there are a lot of people who are, like, former liberals, former Barack Obama supporters, who are now Trump supporters, who are now independent.
Personal friends of mine are now straight-up independents.
And, you know, it's really funny, because when I bring this up, you get these far-left wackos like Reza, not him specifically, but people being like, Tim Poole's lying, like, I have friends on the— I'm not exaggerating.
Like, who do you think I hang out with?
I live in a big city.
There's not like a secret cabal of Trump supporters I'm hanging out with in the New York, in the tri-state metro.
Okay?
I mean, maybe in the Philly area, but not really.
The people I hang out with, skateboarders, yeah, they used to be left-wing.
Used to be key word.
The weirdest thing to me was when pro skateboarders hit me up like, hey dude, you're doing a great job, I appreciate it.
I'm like, what has happened?
I'm one of those skateboarders!
We, we, dude, skateboarders are anarchic, they reject society.
Many of these people refuse to get jobs.
Like, skateboarders are very, very close to being anarchists.
In fact, there's an overlap between the two.
And now, all of a sudden, my skateboard friends are straight up, nope, not voting Democrat, I'm out.
Where do people think I grew up, right?
What's happening with the mainstream left, I think, is partly due to people like Reza being attracted to nonsensical outrage.
And let me give you more examples of this outrage culture.
So in this tweet, I reference what I say is a garbled generic talking point to generate attention.
There is nothing specific said.
There is no explanation.
There is no solution.
This tweet is an excellent example of keyword stuffing used by media to generate traffic and get attention.
And this is in reference to a tweet by a verified Twitter user who works with Indivisible Team, Lee Greenberg, who said, Let's all be really clear on this.
The shooting in El Paso was a terrorist attack targeting Latinx people.
It was spurred by the same white nationalist ideology that is promoted by the President of the United States and mainstreamed by Fox News.
22,000 retweets.
Congratulations!
This tweet is a perfect example of, like, drone-like ignorant behavior.
You know what, man?
I think we have a serious problem with snowplow parenting with the snowflake generation.
And there are snowflakes on the right, of course there are, but it tends to be the left, for whatever reason.
I think it's not, for the most part, like, the left or the right isn't what's relevant in determining who has more snowflakes.
It's which one will be more attractive.
So what I end up seeing is when you have the left, which tends to be collectivist, constantly outraged, it's going to attract those who are sensitive and weak.
When someone says, don't clap, it triggers people, then somebody who's overly sensitive and arrogant and spoiled is going to be like, ooh, I want to tell people what to do too!
And so you see that viral video, I don't know if you guys saw it from the DSA meeting, the socialist meeting, where a guy's like, when you chatter, I can't focus.
You need to stop chattering.
And I'm like, dude, you don't own the world.
But you know what?
These people are trying.
Bless their hearts.
Take a look at this tweet from this Lee Greenberg person.
And let me break down what I mean.
First, we have El Paso.
Keyword.
Big event happened.
She chooses the big subject matter.
She said it was a terrorist attack targeting Latinx people.
So, she's calling it a terrorist attack, which most people did.
Fine.
Latinx.
Keyword.
I don't think most Latino people know or care for what Latinx means, and my understanding is that it's predominantly a white progressive thing.
Noting that Lee Greenberg is presumably white.
I don't know, maybe she's Jewish, but depending on what you're... Well, I'll say this.
The progressive left has no rules.
Sometimes Jewish is a minority group and sometimes it isn't.
I don't know.
It was spurred by white nationalist ideology promoted by the president and mainstreamed by Fox News.
Did she tell us anything?
No, she didn't.
This tweet says nothing, explains nothing, presents no solutions.
It's literally just keywords stuffed into a tweet.
And guess what?
It works.
Check this out.
22,000 retweets, 93,000 likes.
It does exactly what it's intended to do.
Does she understand any of this?
No.
She doesn't explain what the white nationalist ideology is that the president or Fox News is promoting.
Admittedly, Twitter is not a great medium for this, but it's one of the big problems.
With Twitter and social media.
And I'll throw some shade towards Trump as well.
At this point, everybody should get the hell off Twitter.
Twitter is an awful, ridiculous nightmare.
And it's bad for everybody.
I can appreciate the president, you know, speaking his mind and bypassing the press.
But I'll just say, man, Twitter is bad for everybody.
People weren't supposed to communicate this way.
And what we end up seeing are When I look at this tweet from this woman, boy do I see the perfect example of people who have no idea what they're talking about, who can't back it up, who are regurgitating something else they heard.
Now take this, and write an article about it, and you can see why intersectionality, left-wing editarianism, has become prominent.
On Facebook, on YouTube, etc.
Keywords work.
It's how algorithms source material.
It's how algorithms decide what should or shouldn't be shared.
Do you like this subject or not?
So here you can see a tweet that targets several keywords without doing anything.
Imagine if, like, I made a tweet where I was like, man, Fortnite, Call of Duty, and Minecraft talk about gaming, right?
This is something that needs to be talked about.
The greatness that is.
Division 2 and Fortnite.
Just like stuffing those keywords in an article and then hoping, you know, the algorithm picks it up and puts it in front of people.
Look at, here's the thing.
I don't know if Minecraft is still popular on YouTube, I have no idea.
But Fortnite and Minecraft, I'm just throwing those out there because at some point they were popular on YouTube.
You can make a video where you use the word Fortnite and it will promote that video.
So, she might as well have said, let me be really clear Fortnite on this.
You see what the point I'm trying to make is?
When you break down this tweet, she told you nothing.
All she did was take surface-level sentiment without explanation and regurgitate it into a gigantic disgusting ball of vomit and she got 22,000 retweets.
Young people can see this happening.
Look at all the kids who are spitting an ice cream or licking it or whatever, trying to get attention.
That's what we're seeing, but it's infecting politics, and that is a nightmare.
It is dangerous.
Take that kid who licked that ice cream for attention, the people who kept repeating it, even after she got arrested, people kept doing this.
Because they don't care about the repercussions.
Now take people like Li, who know they can get followers and retweets.
And it feels good to get those internet points.
These people are losing their minds.
And they put out garbled nonsense, which she just basically took keywords that mean nothing and stuffed them up.
But I got more for you.
So this woman, Caroline Rothstein, was... This one's not the same example.
This is an example more of a virtue signal.
So let me show the tweet first here, and then I'll show you my response.
This woman said, It's got 28,000 responses and 555 replies.
got it to the middle-aged white man on the airplane who offered and began to take my
suitcase out of the overhead compartment for me was a quickly calculated act of resistance."
It's got 28,000 responses and 555 replies.
This is an example of a failed virtue signal.
She tried coming up with anything that could be deemed resisting middle-aged white men
who were overstepping bounds, and all she did was tell the story of a guy who was helping
her with her bag?
What insane reality do these people live in?
This is a clear example of someone whose brain is infected with some kind of permanent, like, persistent delusional state.
That's what I call it.
The fact that she saw this circumstance of a guy being like, let me grab your bag for you.
People do that for me all the time and I'm a guy!
I'll be on an airplane and I'll be trying to get my bag out and someone will grab it for me, I'm like, thank you, appreciate it.
Or someone will grab the door for me, man or woman, thank you, I appreciate it.
What is going on with these people?
That they are losing their minds and it's going to result in an absolute chaos.
So, with a story like this, I think about how, in a desperate bid to get attention, everything must be oppression.
And again, I'll stress, you want to know why intersectional feminism is becoming the dominant left-wing ideology?
It's because if you write an article about police brutality, you have that one keyword.
Police brutality.
Well, two keywords.
One key phrase.
So it gets, you know, the algorithm pumps it up saying some people are clicking on things like this.
Then you have another story called, like, you know, feminists rise up or something.
And the feminists, you know, will click it.
But guess what happens when you combine these things?
Now you have feminism is the response to police brutality against trans people of color.
All those keywords.
And then Facebook goes...
Shoves it in your face.
Now about all of a sudden the dominant media that is going to be intersectionality because they can take one story and turn it into a story with 50 keywords which will absolutely shut down stories without those keywords.
You end up with people who live in this delusional state who are then desperate for attention because that's what people really want.
They just want to be noticed.
And so she's like, how dare this white man take my bag out of a compartment?
Who cares?
Who cares?
Go watch that video about the Democratic Socialists and you will see the repercussions of this kind of psychotic mentality.
You will see people saying things like, don't use gendered language when addressing the crowd.
So what?
Who cares?
Chill.
You can't control the world.
You can walk outside and I can say whatever the hell I want.
So I get it.
You've made yourself a safe space.
Fine.
You're in your safe space.
Do whatever you want.
But this DSA meeting gives us an example of how insane people are getting.
How they're like, Don't clap, don't cheer.
And then the guy says something, I can't remember what he said, and then everyone starts clapping and cheering, he goes, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, stop, we're almost there, please, just do jazz hands, we don't wanna, we don't wanna hurt our invisible disabled friends.
I kid you not, that's what he's talking, he said something to that effect.
There are people with disabilities you can't see.
People are becoming increasingly weak.
Very, very weak.
Everything is scary, everything is violence.
And you know what?
I don't know what the solution is.
But I want to end by highlighting this old story about Reza Aslan, who ate brain.
Now I know a lot of people are going to say it's a cheap shot, but hear me out, it's not a cheap shot.
I really have a point to bring this up.
Reza Aslan has tweeted about eradicating, in a sentence he said, we have to eradicate this scourge where the subject matter was Trump and his supporters.
I don't know what he meant by that other than, to me it looks like he wants to kill people.
Sure.
Now a lot of people have pointed out that on a CNN show, Reza Aslan ate human brain.
He ate a small piece of charred human brain with Hindu cannibals.
A lot of people use this as a low blow to point out, you know, he's nuts, but there's actually a better point here.
Well, by all means, criticize the guy for eating human.
The bigger issue is why Reza Aslan ate human brain.
He did it because he was desperate for attention, in my opinion.
At the time, you know, when this story happened, Reza Aslan ate brain, CNN was trying to do a show, and a lot of companies were trying to be like Vice.
Vice is edgy, breaking the rules.
I remember they did one where Ryan Duffy was wearing bulletproof clothing and they actually shoot him and the bullet falls off the clothing.
It's actually rather impressive.
I believe the reason Reza Aslan ate brain is the same reason he fervently tweets about punching children, which he's done, and about eradicating the scourge in reference to Trump supporters, I guess.
So why is Reza Aslan doing any of this, in my opinion?
For the same reason he ate brain.
In the CNN show, he sits down with them, and trying to be edgy and push the envelope, he ate brain.
Well, guess what?
You stepped over the line, pissed everybody off, offended Hindus because these are a fringe sect of weirdos who are eating brain.
Look, Shane Smith of Vice met with an actual cannibal.
And they did a video called, like, The Cannibal General of Liberia, which got, like, millions of views.
It was interesting.
The guy talks, and there's the trailer for it.
He's like, you must drink the blood of the baby or something crazy like that.
So what I see here is somebody who's desperately trying to be cool and thinking they're going to cross that line and so they eat brain.
Now some people have said he was forced into doing it.
He didn't want to.
I don't care.
Why would you sit down with these people and then take the brain and eat it?
And there was like, I guess, like I've heard some stories where the producers were like, do it, do it.
And other stories where he felt like they might actually kill him if he didn't.
Doesn't matter.
He sat down with cannibals, he ate brain, and my opinion is that, just like the tweets he's putting out, he's doing it on purpose because he's desperate for attention.
Well, this was crossing the line.
Reza doesn't seem to understand.
All he does is cross the line.
I gotta admit, I have no idea how this guy is famous at all.
His tweets are nothing but ratio.
He calls for violence.
And I gotta stress, the main point of this video, how does Twitter allow him to be on their platform?
Twitter literally allows a guy to call for violence, say he wants to punch teenagers, like a 14-year-old in the face, or insinuate he does.
It's a guy who ate human brains, who is sitting on Twitter saying, Trump and his supporters are, you know, all of them are evil, racist, this scourge must be eradicated, I can't figure out what else he's trying to say.
How do they allow this kind of thing to exist?
So let me stress this point.
When you ban the crazy right-wingers, when you ban the weird QAnon people, you make the right look good.
When you leave up the brain-eating guy who's calling for the eradication of a scourge and reference Trump supporters, you make the left look absolutely insane.
But you know what?
Maybe the answer is the left is becoming insane because they don't deal with their crazies.
They struggle to call out Antifa if they ever do.
They run defense for it.
They defend their extremists.
Reza Aslan is, like, beyond extreme.
And, you know, I know people who know him, and I've said, you know, the guy ate human brain.
And they're like, oh, come on.
And I'm like, no, no, not oh, come on.
The guy literally ate human brain.
Like, I'm sorry.
If you handed me human brain and then said eat it or I'll effing kill you, I'd be like...
I'm not eating the brain, dude!
It's just not gonna happen.
And I've been to conflict zones, and I've been threatened, and I've been shot at.
No, I'm not going to do something like eat brain.
It's just not gonna happen.
You can bash my hand with a hammer.
You're gonna have to tie me down, rip my jaw open, and shove that in my face before I ever do anything like what this guy has done.
The point I'm trying to say, to me, he's doing it for attention.
All of it.
He did this show.
He did crazy, crazy things.
Eating brain.
He's tweeting insane things.
And I think there's an obvious reason he's doing it.
Just wants attention.
Just like Lee Greenberg, who tweeted a nonsense keyword stuff tweet that doesn't actually say anything.
It's not a unique idea.
This is a regurgitated talking point we've heard 50 million times, and all she did was take the regurgitated talking point, put Fox News in it, and El Paso, and Latinx.
It's not an original opinion.
These people don't have original thoughts.
My word, go spend some time in the forest and count stars.
Like, expose yourself to the wilderness.
Now, I will end with one thing.
President Trump's approval rating has taken a sharp hit in the past couple weeks.
Now look, I've made videos where I've said Trump's approval rating reaches an all-time high and talked about the significance of that.
And I'll explain.
When Trump goes on a tweet tirade and people say things like, oh, orange man bad, over and over again, and his approval rating goes up, well, in my opinion, it's significant that his approval rating reaches an all-time high.
I don't think it's significant that his approval rating has gone down because it's in line with things we've seen before.
It goes up, it goes down, it goes up, it goes down, but it's trending upwards.
Even though it's gone down now, it's not even the biggest drop we've seen in the past couple of weeks.
So I will stress a warning to Trump supporters and to Trump himself.
You risk losing moderates when you tweet out things that are overly offensive or look childish.
I think Trump would do great to tweet less.
And that's not just me, a lot of people think so.
I can appreciate him speaking his mind, but everybody should tweet less and the president can set an example.
So I give this warning to Trump and his supporters that you do run the risk of losing the moderates.
However, polls show, there's another poll out now, showing Trump actually is more appealing to a certain degree to moderates than the Democrats are.
So the reason I bring this up, I bring up the dip in approval rating because this is not
necessarily having to do with the recent events for the most part because polls go back a few
days and it can actually go back a couple weeks. But to show that like don't don't think Trump
and his supporters are invincible in Don't think Trump is guaranteed to win.
You are absolutely not.
Trump's approval rating is still below 50% and you are going to see record voter turnout.
However, I'm not going to make a dedicated video talking about Trump's approval rating on this instance because it's not significant that his approval rating dipped by a point and a half or two points.
It's actually a point and a half.
Um, simply because it's still higher than it's been in a long time.
It's still trending upwards.
It is what it is.
So I'll leave it there.
This turned out to be a long one because boy, I got a lot on my mind.
Stick around.
Next segment will be at 1 p.m.
on this channel, and I will see you then.
Right now, basically every single news outlet is leading with the exact same stories written over and over and over again.
And let me explain something to you guys.
I read the news All day, every day.
I probably have a hundred plus tabs open at any given time.
I'm reading every major news website.
The Atlantic, CNN, New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal.
I read digital sites and things like that on the left and the right.
I go to different forums.
I'm constantly reading.
And right now, possibly one of the most draining and annoying things ever, is the exact same thing being written by every single person.
This slight variance.
And I'm sitting here and you know I gotta say like after reading the 60th, and I'm not being hyperbolic, maybe like the 60th story that says the same thing.
Trump's rhetoric, conspiracy theories, ignoring, it's just so mind-numbing.
So I want to talk about this story.
Fox & Friends pushes incendiary invasion conspiracy theory even after El Paso shooting, while Trump Live Tweeted host Brian Kilmeade defended the conspiracy theory at the core of the Shooter's Manifesto.
I'm just completely annoyed by everything.
These people that Vox, CNN, you know, The Atlantic, whatever, They don't actually care what other people think.
They don't care what is true, what can factually be proven, and they don't care to actually explain the news to you.
This story stood out to me.
The Invasion Conspiracy Theory.
Could they perhaps explain to you so you understand what Fox & Friends is trying to say?
They could do that.
But they're not going to.
They're going to just say it's an incendiary invasion conspiracy theory instead of saying something like, Fox and Friends is talking about what they call an invasion.
Let's explain to you what they're trying to convey.
You can still determine if you think it's incorrect and why, but the framing is always one side bad, you bad, we good.
Let's read a little bit of the story.
Before we get started, however, go to TimCast.com slash donate.
If you'd like to support my work, there's a PayPal option, a crypto option, a physical address, but of course, the best thing you can do, just share this video if you like it, or don't, because man, I gotta say, this news cycle is one of the most mind-numbing and annoying cycles, because...
You know what, man?
There's no originality left.
I just keep saying the same talking points were gurgitated back and forth.
Now they're bringing video games into it.
It's like, dude, you're tired.
I get it.
Journalists.
There's nothing left to be outraged about.
So let's just rewrite the same story we wrote two days ago that we wrote again yesterday and we'll write again today saying the exact same thing.
This time we'll get someone else to write it.
We'll publish the same thing.
It's a phenomenon we see in the media all the time.
Let's read.
They say, rather than distance themselves from the immigrant invasion conspiracy theory that's allegedly motivated the shooter in El Paso, On Saturday, Tuesday's edition of Fox & Friends indicated the hosts of President Donald Trump's favorite show will continue to defend and reinforce it.
On Tuesday, host Brian Kilmeade, echoing the manifesto written by the El Paso shooter, who in turn drew inspiration from Trump.
It's just so, so mind-numbing.
I'll give some credit to the New York Times, who said, this predates Trump, but they feel like Trump is certainly emboldening it.
Here's my opinion.
All of this predates Trump.
It absolutely predates Trump.
It's one of the reasons Trump got elected.
Trump is not the cause of.
He's a symptom of.
And perhaps there are Trump supporters who view he may be a potential solution, too.
I've talked to some people who have said, oh, you know, they're saying they're not racist.
It's just the problem is immigration and things like this.
I don't care what your opinion is of what you think of yourself or otherwise.
I care about trying to understand people and what they see is happening.
I would like to create media to explain to everybody the point of view and the circumstances and the perspectives, etc.
Instead, we get this.
We get the media we deserve.
You can tell I'm just so tired because, I kid you not, Normally, on any given day, I'll have a bunch of news pulled up, and I'll try and figure out what's the most pressing issue.
Today, what do we have?
Like, literally, 99% of media is the same thing.
Same thing.
And here we go.
So let's read about what the conspiracy theory is.
They said they used the term invasion to describe migrants and asylum seekers crossing the southern border, saying if you use the term invasion, it's not anti-Hispanic, it's a fact.
Right?
And half the country agrees with that.
When you have hundreds of thousands of people coming to the southern border from various countries, then sure, they'll call it an invasion.
It's a bit hyperbolic in my opinion.
I would look at it like this.
The only time I've ever actually, at least I believe this, the only time I've ever actually alluded to the idea of an invasion, was when we saw a photo of a few thousand, I believe it was like 14,000 people, and they were flying the banner of their countries.
And at that point, I'm like, come on, man.
Like, dude, I don't know how else you describe that.
If a bunch of people from a different country march towards yours, waving their flags, at a certain point, you can call it an invasion, right?
However, the rhetoric has been pretty strong on the right, referring to all of the migrants coming here as an invasion.
It's hyperbole.
It's not technically wrong.
It's an opinion.
They're calling it conspiracy theory.
It's so mind-numbing and tiring to see all this.
Like, I kid you not.
Nothing, like, I feel like the media is just complete trash.
At least today, at least in this cycle, I can't make sense of half the stuff because it's just...
Outraged, angry people who want to post media to emotionally satisfy themselves.
That's what they're doing.
They'll write something like, Adding conspiracy does NOTHING to explain what's going on to anybody.
Vox is such a trash outlet.
I believe.
I'm pretty sure it's the guy who took a clip of Donald Trump saying that he doesn't consider himself a first responder, but added the caption, Trump alleges he was a first responder.
This is Vox.
This is the media today.
All of this, in my opinion, precipitates the greater conflict.
So this is a really good example.
I can't tell you exactly why they're writing this garbage.
Let's read a little bit about... I'll give you... I need to give you some context.
Let's read a little bit more and I'll come back to this.
They say, the invasion conspiracy theories about immigrants that appeared to motivate the El Paso shooter and that Trump has spent the better part of a year pushing have gotten heavy play on Fox News.
They're not explaining anything about it.
They're just literally saying conspiracy theory over and over and over again.
They say, just a day after Trump condemned mass shootings by reading a speech from a teleprompter, so what?
In which he said, In one voice, our nation must condemn racism, bigotry, and white supremacy.
The president, drawing inspiration from Fox and Friends hosts, tried to shift the blame.
In tweets quoting Fox and Friends commentary, Trump suggested that former President Barack Obama, who released a statement on Monday responding to the mass shootings that took place over the- Dude.
Vox is such garbage.
I just can't- I just can't even read this.
How does this get past an editor?
How did they publish this?
What is wrong with these people?
And, you know, our culture is sick in a lot of different ways.
I'm done with this article.
I'm completely done.
I'm just so sick and tired of all of this garbled nonsense, keyword-stuffing trash that explains nothing and is just an insult.
You want to make conservatives feel bad?
Just write an article saying conservatives are stupid instead of writing this trash.
You're not explaining anything.
You're not telling anyone anything.
And this is what the media has been doing nonstop.
So why are we here?
Well, they're desperate.
They're absolutely desperate to do something.
And so, I'm sitting here thinking, like... How- Am I gonna comment on this?
Am I gonna try and explain to you what invasion- No.
Listen, I've said several times now there's going to be some kind of civil conflict, and this is a good example of why.
Our culture is sick.
These people don't care to explain to you what's really happening.
They just want to be angry.
You know, there's that really funny comic where a guy's like, I'm mad.
The other guy goes, here's a solution.
And the guy lights it on fire saying, I don't want a solution, I want to be mad.
And that's what we get.
So, I believe in solutions.
What are we doing over here in this office?
We're creating a newsroom with the intent of breaking this garbage cycle in producing real news and not making hyperbolic insanity just for the sake of insulting people we don't like.
Which, of course, happens across the aisle.
I mean, left and right alike do these things.
In fact, a lot of the conservative websites are pretty much commentary sites and not too much actual journalism.
And the left has journalism, but they always frame it, you know, in a very left-leaning way, which is... I'm gonna do a bigger segment on the fake news.
It's just... It's gonna make everything a lot worse.
The violence is gonna escalate.
But I'll say in response to this, it's just... You know, we get the media we deserve.
We get the leaders we deserve.
And so long as people are not interested in better understanding, they're just interested in being consistently angry at each other, I just see this going in one direction.
I pulled up Vox.
Maybe that's a little unfair.
I could easily pull up any other website like CNN or The Atlantic.
Here we go.
Here's a story.
A 7-year-old had 547 teeth.
Hey, that's not about this, but let's look at this.
Okay.
Reformed white nationalist.
Conservatives have a white nationalism problem.
Trump's invasion rhetoric.
How to survive a mass shooting.
Gun control.
A leader for white nationalists.
Here we go.
The left needs to counter Trump's language.
Trump's words are poison.
Like, how many articles do you need to write about Trump's speech?
Let's look at the front page of The Atlantic.
Trump obscures mass shootings at doublespeak, one.
We need language about Trump, two.
Trump's words, three.
Conservatives have a white national problem, four.
Trump's invasion rhetoric, five.
Are you kidding me?
Five?
Is there more?
Did I miss one?
Then there's Trump's leader, six.
Just the front page alone.
That's what we get.
CNN isn't the worst because they actually break things up by different subjects.
So you've got the finance stuff, you've got a millionaire.
And then just like politics is literally just nonstop the same rhetoric over and over and
over again.
Instead of actually helping people to understand things, it's just Twitter.
I'll say this.
Twitter is the worst thing imaginable.
It's just so terrible.
And it's most- I don't know what the solution is, man.
I don't even- This video is basically me venting my frustration at being sick and tired of the media.
Just pumping out fake news, garbled nonsense, stuffing keywords, and not making any damn sense.
I pulled up this one story simply because they used the phrase conspiracy theory instead of explaining to you what the Fox hosts were actually saying.
Instead of trying to help you understand what's actually going on and why conservatives are concerned, orange man bad conspiracy theory.
I had a friend once, a year and a half ago, said to me, Is there any reason to support Trump?
And I responded with, I guess if you're concerned about terrorism, you know, there's a lot of people who think he's gonna be stronger on borders and security, and with a lot of the high-profile, like, you know, Islamic terror, then, you know, sure that makes sense.
And the response I got was, no, Trump and his supporters just don't like brown people.
And I said, do you really think that's the core issue that's motivating people, the color of someone's skin?
Like, you really think the only reason someone would vote is because there's a brown person?
And I was told by this person, yes, that's it.
And I'm like, that's such surface-level nonsense.
It's just you haven't actually explored the issues.
Skin color has very little, like, very little to do with anything.
Like, if you want to actually make an argument about some Trump supporters and white nationalists, sure.
It's a race-based argument, a little bit more than skin color.
But if you want to talk to actual people who voted for Trump and support him, you've got so many different issues.
Do you care about jobs?
Do you care about free trade agreements?
Do you care about border security?
Do you care about, you know, just job competition?
Do you care about political correctness?
And the narrative, like the response, is always just like a garbled talking point without specifics.
And that's what we're getting here.
That's, you know, whatever.
I'm leaving this segment because I have no idea what I'm even going to be.
Whatever, I'm done.
I'm doing a bigger segment coming up about how the lies in the media are just making everything worse.
Just worse and worse and worse.
Which is kind of an expansion on this, but stick around.
YouTube.com slash TimCast at 4 p.m.
I'll see you then.
Another day, another story about how a spike in the minimum wage is hurting businesses.
This one from The Daily Caller, titled, Cutting staff, spiking prices, the plight of NYC restaurants under a $15 minimum wage.
Now, here's the thing.
Increasing the minimum wage can be a good thing.
The problem is, as I've explained in many videos, and many of you probably get, a one-size-fits-all policy for the entire country makes no sense, and we'll have a one-size-fits-all policy for industry For varying industries also makes no sense.
It's hard to know how to actually deal with this problem.
My opinion is that increasing the wage minimum to $15 is a band-aid on a bullet wound.
The bigger issue we're dealing with?
Automation.
Low-skill jobs are being replaced by robots and kiosks, and forcing businesses to pay more won't change that fact.
The core issue I've highlighted in many of these videos, and we'll get to the news in a second, Is that what we're really trying to change is the value of an hour of labor.
And so long as technology exists, the value of that hour will be low.
Forcing the businesses to pay more won't change that fact.
So we can maybe talk about how to change the value of an hour through policy, but this is not the way you do it.
This is knee-jerk reactions, and it's hurting people.
So let's read the story.
But before we get started, Make sure you check out irl.minds.com.
If you didn't know, at the end of this month, I am going to be hosting an event in the Philadelphia suburbs.
It's in New Jersey side.
We have a ton of excellent speakers.
There's gonna be a ton of issues we're gonna be talking about.
We've got people on the left, the right, we've got progressives, we've got feminists, we've got anti-feminists, we've got conservatives, and we've got people in the middle.
It has been a journey putting this thing together, but I want to do one big push as we're nearing the event August 31st.
IRL.minds.com.
Check it out.
You can see it on the screen.
It's MINDS.com.
Let's get to the news.
The Daily Caller reports, New York City's $15 minimum wage, which began to take effect December 31, 2018, was meant to bolster earnings and quality of life.
But for a lot of residents, it's doing the opposite.
I will also stress there was a cafe, a famous restaurant where Ocasio-Cortez actually worked, that shut down because of this.
They say, Democratic New York Gov.
Andrew Cuomo signed legislation in 2016 to increase the New York state's minimum wage to $15 an hour.
The lowest minimum wage in New York at the time was $9.60.
NYC's big employers, 11 or more employees, were the first to be forced to increase minimum wage pay toward the end of 2018.
The rest of NYC's smaller-scale businesses won't have to pay up until December 2019, according to data on Cuomo's website.
Cuomo claims to have created the bill with the needs of workers and businesses alike in mind, but a lot of business owners in the boroughs beg to differ.
They say the extra money comes with an unforeseen cost.
Higher good prices, fewer working hours and layoffs.
Many people working in the restaurant industry wanted to work overtime hours.
But due to the increase, many restaurants have cut back or totally eliminated any overtime work.
Andrew Riggi, executive director of New York City Hospitality Alliance, told Fox News,
There's only so much consumers are willing to pay for a burger or a bowl of pasta.
Why is that? Why won't someone spend $10 on a cheeseburger?
Okay, I'm pulling a number out of a hat.
But no, no, no.
Why is there a limit?
The reality is, the limit to what someone is willing to spend is based on how much time they have to work to earn a certain amount of money.
If I value myself and my labor, because maybe I went to school, maybe I'm trained, if I say I deserve more than one cheeseburger per hour, because I'm smart, skilled, and worked really hard and deserve it, I'm not going to spend two hours of labor on one cheeseburger.
Let's remove the money from the equation, because when we're dealing with inflation and the cost of goods and the increase, none of that matters.
What matters is, if you hire someone with no skills whatsoever to mop your floor, What are they entitled to?
I certainly think it'd be great if they were entitled to, no matter what work you did, you had a certain standard of living.
Unfortunately, producing a product like a cell phone, which most people have, requires skilled labor, imports, technology, development, etc.
And that means, if the value of the labor you do is disproportionate to the value of the labor to produce a
good, you will have to work x many hours to get that good.
So to put it simply, if making an iPhone requires 10 hours of skilled labor,
which that skilled labor comes with, you know, 100 hours of investment,
the person who produces that is not going to trade one phone for one cheeseburger.
It's like, I don't understand why I have to explain the value of objects and time.
But the issue is, when it comes to dollar amounts, Many people on the left don't seem to understand this
concept, okay?
Your value as someone mopping a floor, in terms of how much you get per hour, is low compared to someone who can build a castle.
So, we're not gonna pay, we're not gonna give one cheeseburger for a guy for an hour towards building a castle because that's skilled labor, took investment and learning, and they wouldn't accept it.
They'd demand more.
And that's how the market works.
Let's read on.
They say.
Roughly 77% of NYC restaurants have slashed employee hours, 36% said they had to lay off employees, and 90% had to increase prices following the wage hike, according to a NYC Hospitality Alliance survey taken just one month after the bill took effect.
Check this out.
This is a graphic it says, on December 31st, 2017, the minimum wage, tip wage,
and minimum salary requirements increased for full-service restaurants in New York City.
In response to those increases, respondents adjusted their restaurant business operations
in the following ways in 2018. Menu prices went up 90.20%.
I believe that means 90% of restaurants increased their prices.
Reduced employee hours, 76%.
Eliminated jobs, 36%.
Eliminated tipping, only 2.9%.
Reworked food and beverage menu offerings to reduce cost, 55%.
And then we can say, these increases were a significant factor in me closing a restaurant.
Only 2.9%.
I did not make any of the above changes to my restaurant business operations, 3.9 and other 6.
So only a few who have closed attribute it to the increase in wages.
Let's be real.
I'm not gonna shut my business down if I gotta pay my employees more.
I'm just gonna charge more money.
Now here's the problem.
There's going to be a ripple effect, dominoes falling over.
I've explained this before, so if you've watched any of my videos on this, I just want to make sure I make this point for anybody who's new to the argument against a minimum wage.
Andrew Yang is opposed to it for similar reasons.
Automation being one of them, but also increasing the minimum wage doesn't change anything about the unseen labor and the costs of running a family.
And let me just put it this way.
I'll use the cheeseburger reference.
If you can get one cheeseburger per hour, and the person who makes the cheeseburger can produce one cheeseburger per hour, that's like low-skilled wage.
Making a cheeseburger is not that difficult, so anyone can really do it.
And we're talking about fast food burgers.
If then, all of a sudden, you say everyone should get two burgers per hour, but the guy who makes the burger can still only make one, this is probably a really bad analogy, because what I've done in the past is like talking about somebody who trains to be a baker now only being able to get one cheeseburger instead of two, which they were used to.
Like, people go to school for a reason.
We'll go back to the story, because I'm getting hung up on this analogy and doing a bad job of it.
They say only about 4% of survey respondents indicated that none of the above changes took
place in their restaurants.
What it really forced you to do is make sure that nobody works more than 40 hours, Susan
Coteen, owner of Lido Restaurant in Harlem, told Fox News.
You can only cut back so many people before the service starts to suffer.
NYC restaurants are taking hits from Cuomo's push, but Washington doesn't seem to have
received the memo.
The House passed the Raise the Wage Act in July, which mandated a nationwide $15 minimum wage.
The bill was later blocked by the Senate because it makes no sense to To pay someone in rural Iowa what somebody in New York City makes.
The cost of living in New York is way higher.
It's like nobody really thinks about the ramifications of their decisions.
And I gotta say, this is usually a problem on the left.
It exists on the right too.
But for the most part, I have all these, I see all these feel-good notions like, we should do this because it will work.
Listen, let me explain why increasing the minimum wage can be a good thing.
Because I want to make sure this is understood.
You know, there's nuance in these debates.
If you're importing a product where the wage stays the same, right?
10 bucks for, you know, 100 bucks for a low-tier phone.
Paying someone in New Jersey more means they will have access to that imported good.
The problem with a federal increase is that it means the guy in rural Iowa who's harvesting, you know, or I'll say Idaho, harvesting potatoes is now getting $15 an hour, which means the cost per potato is going to increase.
If you can harvest 10 potatoes per hour, and you got to pay someone $10 an hour, then it's a dollar
per potato plus you got to cover tax, transport, etc., growth, and then you're going to be
spending like two bucks per potato.
Increase the guy's wage. Now you have to... the cost of pulling... I don't understand why people
don't seem to get this. If you can make one widget per hour and you have to pay $10 per hour, it's
$10 per widget, and then you've got to sell the widget for more to make a profit for your business
so you can cover everything else.
Overhead, physical location, transport to and from, employee benefits.
So it's beyond just that wage.
And they don't seem to get it.
They don't seem to think about that.
If you're going to raise wages for rural America, you will see a dramatic and rapid inflation in major cities.
Because major cities are overpriced.
The cost of living is really high.
Now what do you think is going to happen when the cost of food goes up threefold, fourfold?
It's ridiculous.
Anyway, I'll leave it there.
The big takeaway from this was just like, I was really surprised to see that menu prices went up across the board for everybody.
That's to be expected.
That's the result.
Now you're gonna have people in Brooklyn being like, dude, it's 15 bucks for a cheeseburger?
I'm not gonna buy this.
And then you have a dangerous cycle.
Or, that person's gonna say, I need a raise.
And they're gonna go to their boss and say, you gotta pay me more.
And then everything just ticks up.
Anyway, stick around, I got a couple more segments coming up for you in a few moments, and I will see you shortly.
Ted Cruz says universities are quote, trying really hard to raise a generation of pansies.
I guess I kind of agree, but I don't think it's necessarily universities.
I think the bigger issue is just that our culture has become so, I just, so comfortable That we're overbearing on our children, we don't let them make mistakes, they're not allowed to fail, and now they're terrified of everything.
You know what I think helped me out in becoming a functioning adult and becoming successful?
It was that my family opened a business when I was young, and when I was like 11 years old, I was taking buses and trains by myself.
My family trusted that I would be safe.
The city was safe enough, even though it was actually kind of dangerous in Chicago.
But they thought I'd be okay.
And they were right.
I was.
I was like 11, and I was taking trains to go to my family's business.
And I was working with the family business.
I think working in the family business helped me understand the world and become a bit more resilient.
But now we have young people who are institutionalized their whole lives, from preschool up to college.
They never experience the real world, and thus everything is terrifying.
And what better example than the DSA, the Democratic Socialists?
I was going to say, Ted Cruz blames the universities.
And I think that they do deserve some fault.
I'm not saying Ted Cruz is missing this point.
I think he's focusing on universities.
I agree.
But let's now talk about just the cultural problem in general.
Take a look at this video.
I'm not gonna play the video.
I'll play some clips of it, but I'm not gonna play with the audio.
Basically, this video has been going viral among mostly moderates.
Among moderates, but mostly conservatives, showing the nightmarish reality that is snowflake culture.
In this video, there's a man in the bottom right corner who is saying,
please don't chatter because it's triggering to my anxiety and I have sensory overload.
And it's like, wow.
Look, man.
Within reason, I'm willing to accommodate people.
But this is nuts!
Nobody claps.
They do jazz hands.
And boy, I'll tell you what.
People who've never experienced the real world, this is what happens.
How do you think these people are gonna survive?
I honestly don't know.
Well, actually, I think they'll survive by demanding resources from those who do get their hands dirty and calloused.
You know, you can tell a lot by—you can typically tell a lot by shaking somebody's hand.
You'll meet someone, shake their hand, and you can feel that rough skin?
That means they do work with their hands.
That means they're—so it doesn't mean shaking someone's hand in itself doesn't mean they don't do work, of course.
There are people who have served in the Armed Forces who aren't heavily doing—well, for the most part, aren't necessarily getting their hands all roughed up, but are experiencing, you know, trauma and, you know, harsh realities.
But there are a lot of people who have never done a hard day's work in their life who claim to advocate for working class people.
Like these people, the Democratic Socialists of America.
The epitome of wealth and privilege.
Overwhelmingly white Americans, one of the wealthiest nations on the planet, if not the wealthiest nation, complaining about the whispering in the room, and then someone else complains that the guy said the word guys.
Don't use gendered language, and I kid you not, It sounds like a South Park sketch.
Like, it sounds like an episode of South Park, where you have, like, heavy, labored-breathing, like, that's what South Park does.
I'm not trying to be mean to any individual.
You can't actually see any individuals.
People are gonna get mad at me, but no, no, no, listen.
Growing up, I've experienced hardship, okay?
My positions on policy are not based on emotion.
They're based on cooperative solutions.
I think, you know, in my opinion, there are very few people who hold, who are in the political space that I am, who have a true understanding of the politics.
I can have a reasonable disagreement with conservatives, but I can talk about facts, ethics, reason, and I can empathize.
What we see here, and I'll read the story from Ted Cruz, is a generation of young people who are like... You ever see Wall-E?
Okay?
In the future, all the humans are floating around, they're overweight, their skeletons are crumbling, and they're just on chairs, and they're all just like massive and fat.
And that's where we really are heading.
These people are saying I'm getting triggered by whispering.
The original, like, triggering?
It's a real thing.
It was meant to, uh, it was typically used, at least as my understanding, refer to people who came back from war, and when a car backfired, they'd have a panic attack.
That's triggering.
Because the car backfiring sounds like a grenade or explosion of some sort, and it makes them like, ah!
I've had similar jumpy reactions to cars backfiring because I've been in conflict zones.
Not necessarily war zones, but urban conflict, police action with live gunfire.
I've been shot at live gunfire.
And so there have been a few times a car's backfired and it's like, woo, boom, adrenaline to 100.
But it doesn't put me in a debilitating state.
Some people experience panic attacks where they fall down, they can't breathe.
That's triggering.
People whispering?
Man.
So let's do this.
Let's see what Ted Cruz had to say about universities.
Before we do, I am going to be- Look, go to irl.minds.com.
IRL.minds.com.
We're putting on a live event at the end of this month.
Sign up now.
We're trying to do one big push before the event, August 31st.
It's in the Philadelphia area.
There's gonna be a ton of awesome speakers.
There are progressives.
There are conservatives.
There are feminists, anti-feminists.
There are people across the spectrum.
Count Dankula will be there!
And, um, Sargon will be there!
And Lauren Chen and Melissa Chen.
I don't- I- I'm- They're not related.
And, uh, Xiuwan Head.
So there's gonna be- There's gonna be people, uh, across political spectrum.
We have progressives.
We have Graham Elwood, Tara Dovlin.
Progressives and feminists.
It's gonna be great.
Come to the event.
There's gonna- There- Uh, I believe the after party already sold out.
So... Get your tickets now!
But, uh, let's see what Ted Cruz had to say.
Senator Ted Cruz rocked the room at the Young America Foundation National Conservative Student Conference last week, ripping universities and colleges for trying really hard to raise a generation of pansies.
Cruz's biting remarks were triggered by the first question after his speech when he conducted a Q&A.
A student from Binghamton University got the ball rolling, stated, Hi Senator Cruz, it's a pleasure to meet you.
I compete in parliamentary debates, however, in tournaments.
Well-intentioned but misguided policies about political correctness have been quashing freedom of speech and our free expression of ideas.
It is incredibly frustrating, but it seems to be a microcosm of what's going on in our national dialogue.
Do you have any prescription of how we can improve our level of discourse at the local and national level to restore the meaningful and important conversations that have been combining to make our democracy as great as it is?
What a well-spoken and thought-out question, young man.
Cruz replied, elaborate a little bit on how political correctness is impacting college debate.
The student answered, I'd love to.
So at the beginning of every round, for us to write our gender pronouns on the board, what?
It gets a little bit worse.
If our cases are a little bit edgy, we have to trigger warn before each round if we say anything.
At this point, Cruz bent over and put his head in his hands, eliciting laughter.
This is the crazy thing to me.
I think one of the big issues in today's politics is not necessarily left or right.
I've heard people say authoritarian versus libertarian.
It's nationalist versus globalist.
Man, it is overly sensitive pansy versus hardworking, calloused individual.
It is hardened adults.
It is maturity versus immaturity.
Why is it that these democratic socialists aren't working class?
They have liberal arts degrees.
They're not lifting bricks and shoveling, you know, dirt and farming.
And they're claiming they're representing the working class.
No!
You are a new pseudo-bourgeoisie of uber-wealthy Americans who have iPhones and live in urban districts for the most part.
You are wealthy.
You are rich.
Let me tell you a story.
I was in Brazil, okay?
I was in Brazil, and I went to a favela.
Favelas are like shantytowns, and there's like narrow corridors, they're just houses built on houses.
One of the houses I went to, they couldn't flush their toilet because they needed rainwater for water pressure.
It hadn't rained, there's a drought, so unfortunately, they all just did their business on top of their family's business, and there was a huge pile, and it was nightmarish.
More than that, When you flushed, it was the PVC pipe that shot into an open ditch.
I kid you not.
I did an interview with a Brazilian gang leader, and we were on a bridge above an exposed ditch with human waste just pouring all over the place.
That's being in a slum in Brazil.
And I tell you this story, I highlight how bad it was, because the mother said to me, Through a translator.
Why are the rich people protesting in America?
And I, confused, said, no, they're not.
She was referring to Occupy Wall Street because it was several years ago.
And I was like, no, no, it's like the poor younger people are complaining about wealth inequality.
And then the translator says it and she laughs and she goes, no, Americans are all rich.
And I started laughing, and I'm like, yup!
To her, America is the ivory tower.
These people, these DSA people, are the global elite, uber-wealthy, capital city crazies.
You ever watch Hunger Games?
How all of the people in the capital city dress like lunatics?
This is what it reminds me of.
They, like, eat food and then they drink Ipecac to vomit so they can keep eating.
It's like, I think they should do that in Rome or something.
Anyway, the point is, to these other parts of the world, most of the world, where people are poor, what do you think they're looking at?
They're looking at a bunch of people complaining about whispering, overly sensitive, pathetic, weak, but wealthy and privileged, sitting atop the massive skyscraper ivory tower that is, you know, the epitome of wealth in the world, and then complaining that everybody's mean.
Man, I strongly recommend these people never travel outside the country.
Heaven forbid you go to another country where, like, you break your leg and fall down, and when someone walks by you to ask for help, they take your backpack and leave.
Heaven forbid you go to an area of the United States, like Baltimore, where someone just doesn't care and says, no offense, you know, I'm gonna now rob you.
I grew up on the South Side.
of Chicago.
I was shot at once, literally no reason.
A car drove by, guy aimed at the window, and fired at me and my brother in his car.
And we were like, whoa.
It just happens.
It was random, for no reason.
And that is America.
America has bad areas, but for the most part, we're all pretty wealthy.
And these people are acting like they have it so bad.
It's just, it's so weird.
Let's wrap up.
I keep these short, but, you know, let's Cruz then provoked hilarity, shaking his head sadly and intoning, We're all gonna die after the laughter and applause subsided.
He continued, One of the saddest things we are seeing is our colleges and universities are trying really hard to raise a generation of pansies.
What is the sense that you have a right not to be offended?
You have a right not to hear ideas that are scary?
Look, the entire purpose of university is to hear ideas that are scary.
This prompted another ovation.
Crew said, I talked about being a happy warrior, not a daisy-wearing daffodil priest.
It really is not that frightening.
When I went to law school, I was surrounded by leftists.
I took classes from Marxists, and by the way, I don't find Marxism just sort of cute and chic.
A guy down the hall from me sophomore year in college had a poster of Che Guevara.
I remember going into his dorm and saying, hey man, that's really cool, that's so awesome.
Have you thought about maybe putting a Hitler next to it?
Maybe Mao, Stalin?
Listen, if you're gonna celebrate evil, torturing, murdering sons of...
Bitches.
Really.
Shea was an amateur.
There are much worse guys to pick from.
That brought the house down.
Here's the problem.
Let me tell you the problem of everything.
I'm gonna wrap it all up.
I completely agree with Ted Cruz's assessment, and I am not a conservative.
There used to be in this country, I mean there are, they're just, I don't know where they're at, liberals Who had strength, and courage, and maturity.
And now the left is being dominated by whiny babies who can't handle hearing dangerous ideas.
Well, it's a damn shame.
But you know what?
Unless these people grow up, they're not going to win any fight anytime soon.
Stick around, I got one more story coming up for you in a few moments, and I will see you then.
I guess I'm what you would call a cross-pressured voter on the issue of the economy and immigration, and this could decide the 2020 election.
In a story I did a few days ago, I showed a poll from Harris X, Harvard-Harris, I believe it was a Harvard poll, showing that 40% of moderates believe the Democrats have gone too far left, while only 33% of moderates believe the Republicans have gone too far right.
That perfectly explains kind of how I see things.
I think Trump has been a bit aggressive on some things, but not that much.
I do believe the left has gone too far left, and most moderates do.
Now, when it comes to moderates, it's not so much that they're either in the middle on all issues.
Like, a lot of people assume that if you're moderate or centrist, you're in the middle on all issues.
No, it means you agree with some left-wing positions, you agree with some right-wing positions, and that makes it very difficult to choose who to vote for, for the most part.
This story talks about that, and they go into detail about how moderates, cross-pressured voters feel about morality, immigration, and the economy.
So I want to read through this, but I also want to reference this story from a few weeks ago, because there have been several polls that say this.
This one says, And this references what I was saying about moderates.
That most, like 66%, don't think Trump is too far right, but 52% think Democrats aren't too far left.
Advantage Trump.
With that in mind, I'll point out there was a recent poll today Saying that for the most part, swing voters will not vote for somebody who is in favor of more immigration.
And my understanding is even legal immigration, which is kind of crazy.
But Bernie Sanders has said it and Trump has said it, so maybe that's where your line is.
So we'll start by reading this.
Before I get into it, I need you to do two things.
First, share this video if you want to support my work because my content gets deranked, CNN gets propped up.
More importantly, check out IRL.
We are putting on a live event August 31st.
You should come.
It's in the Philadelphia suburbs.
There's going to be a ton of awesome speakers.
We have progressives.
We have feminists, anti-feminists, conservatives, liberals.
Count Dankula is going to be there.
Blair White is going to be there.
Andy Ngo is going to be there.
I will be there.
Let's see.
Megan Murphy will be there.
Feminist Megan Murphy, as well as progressives like Graham Elwood and Tara Dovlin.
So we are really trying to have a legitimate conversation, bringing people together for real talk.
Check it out.
Buy your tickets now.
I believe The After Party already sold out.
So irl.minds.com.
Let's read the news.
Yahoo!
This is a report from Business Wire, reporting through Yahoo!
Coverage of swing voters in American elections tends to assume that such voters are moderate centrists.
But recent survey research finds that currently, undecided voters are cross-pressured, with conflicting preferences rather than consistently moderate views.
Indeed, on two central issues, the economy and immigration, about a quarter of Americans hold split views, torn between being closer to one party in immigration and another on economic policy.
These cross-pressured voters will be crucial in next year's election.
In the 2018 midterm, the GOP lost support among economically liberal anti-immigration Americans, 19% of voters.
That's weird.
While gaining support among economically conservative pro-immigration Americans, That's really weird.
Actually, this is all really weird.
Okay, both types of cross-pressured voters are more likely than other Americans to say they are undecided about who they will vote for in 2020 in the 2020 presidential election.
So check this out.
Let's ignore the first part.
The GOP Lost support among anti-immigration Americans.
How does that make sense?
And they gained support among pro-immigration Americans.
I'll tell you why that's crazy.
They lost support among economically liberal individuals.
The economy is more important.
The GOP attracted economically conservative individuals and lost economically liberal individuals because the economy trumps immigration.
That means all this immigration talk from the left is a waste of time.
You're not going to beat Trump if the economy is good and you need to figure out what your attack strategy is.
Now we've heard from Bernie, Elizabeth Warren, others saying, the economy may be great, but it's not working for regular Americans.
I disagree.
Wages are up.
Workforce participation is up.
And perhaps the truth is, the Democrats just don't have anything to say.
So then here we are.
It looks like based on this, the GOP, now they did lose more support than they gained, but it's interestingly that the anti-immigration Americans were less willing to support the GOP.
I wonder how this will play out going into 2020.
Let's read on.
In the new Democracy Fund Voter Study Group report, Opposing Forces Issues Dividing Voters Ahead of the Election 2020, Lee Drutman, Senior Fellow at New America, uses data from the 2018 and 2019 voter survey to offer new insights into how the electorate has shifted since the 2016 presidential election.
and how views of the economy and immigration could impact the 2020 election.
Among the report's key findings, about half of the electorate is consistently to the left on economic issues, including social welfare policies, inequality, taxation, and regulation.
and immigration issues, including whether immigrants contribute or detract from American society.
A quarter of the electorate are consistently to the right on the same economic and immigration
issues. That leaves about a quarter of voters who are cross-pressured on the economy and immigration.
On the economy, most Democrats are on the left, along with many independents and some Republicans.
On immigration, the overall distribution is similar, but Democrats, Independents, and Republicans are all further to the right.
And this is why Trump is playing the strategy he's playing.
Listen.
They say, Democrats, Independents, and Republicans are all farther to the right on immigration.
So what do you think happens when the 2020 Democrats go up on stage and say, free health care for undocumented citizens, decriminalize illegal immigration?
Most people are to the right on these issues.
They're going to be like, that's nuts.
Bill Maher did a segment, bless his soul, where he said, If all the Democrats have to do to beat Trump is be less crazy, and they're screwing that up.
And he goes on to say something like, the Democrats are going on the debate stage and telling you they're going to let Hondurans come in here, they're going to give all of your money to Hondurans so they can have free college courses in America Sucks.
That's what they're saying.
And if the data shows this, that swing voters are siding with Trump, that even the Democrats are farther to the right on issues of immigration, what are the Democrats doing?
You know, there's this obsession among the far left that they've got to go far left if they're going to win.
They've got to wake up those new voters.
Sure.
But you will lose the center, and Trump will gain the far right and the center.
The center is the real battleground, and they don't seem to get it.
Democrats, uh, they say, where the parties stand.
Democrats have a public opinion advantage on economic issues.
Voters are more evenly split on immigration, with independent voters right of center.
And there it is!
Independent voters are right of center on immigration.
And that's what I've been saying.
Voters who are cross-pressured on the economy and immigration represent a key hinge point for the upcoming election.
We often think of elections as competition for moderate centrist swing voters.
But this analysis reveals that many of these swing voters are not so much moderate as they are cross-pressured and may decide who to vote for based on what issues the candidates emphasize.
Now I'll stress this, as I said in the early point of the video, if the economy is more important than immigration, it's possible that these people are going to vote Democrat because they
care more about taxes and things like that. But immigration can become an economy issue. If
too many people are coming into this country and displacing low-skilled workers, that's going to
dramatically shift the supply of labor, advantaging major corporations, giving an advantage to
major corporations who can then, you know, pay what the market is willing to pay.
I had someone tell me recently, they knew a business that was paying illegal immigrants under the table and it really helped that business.
Sure!
And it depressed the local economy.
If there's a college student, 20 years old, needs a job, and they say, I need 15 bucks an hour.
The business is going to be like, if we have no choice to pay it, we have to pay it.
And yes, prices will go up, but that's how an economy works.
They have to pay competitive with the market.
What then happens when someone shows up and says, I'll work for 10, just don't write it down?
They'll say, take the guy for 10.
And that's why we have the laws in the first place.
I don't understand how you can simultaneously be for a minimum wage and for decriminalizing border crossings.
You can't have both.
It's mind-blowing to me.
Here's what I think is going to happen.
Immigration issues bleed out into economic issues, and economic issues is actually more than one thing.
We can talk about the economy in the sense of, am I making good money?
Are my wages going up?
Or in the sense of, should we provide social programs to other people?
They're not necessarily the same thing.
If you tell someone, we are going to help other people and in response you'll pay more taxes, I assure you most people will probably say no.
It's not that they're necessarily selfish, but that's just the way things are.
You've got to secure your own mask before securing the mask of those sitting next to you.
And most Americans are going to say, I love universal healthcare, I will not pay more taxes to get it.
I already pay too much.
Now the argument from Bernie and other people is, yes, but your overall cost of healthcare will go down.
So imagine this.
Your taxes go up by a few percent, but you have no health care costs anymore.
That's the idea.
And it's unfortunate that it's hard to convey the in-depth principle to people, but in the end, people are more concerned about the individual choice they have.
Many people like their private insurance.
They're not concerned about paying too much money.
Are you going to take that away from them?
I don't know.
But what happens then when the Democrats offer up free healthcare to undocumented citizens and say they're going to decriminalize border crossings?
Well, I assure you, you will push cross-pressured voters completely away from you.
Because whether it's the economy or immigration, you are negatively impacting both.
I'll leave it there.
Stick around.
Next segment will be tomorrow at 10 a.m., podcast at 6.30 p.m.
