Bernie Sanders Cancels Events Following Medical Emergency, This Will End His Candidacy
Bernie Sanders Cancels Events Following Medical Emergency, This Will End His Candidacy. Following chest discomfort Bernie Sanders was treated at a hospital in Las Vegas for an arterial blockage and received two stents to help the flow of blood to his heart.Following this the Sanders campaign announced they would be canceling all future events until further notice. Strangely however they also canceled a major TV ad buy in Iowa sparking rumors that this may have been a much more serious issue and is being downplayed.Many have claimed this was an actual heart attack while others say it was just angina. Regardless though as long as Bernie is canceling events and ads it seems to be relatively serious.Democrats have long been targeted over health issues with Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and Bernie Sanders being called too old. All have had some sign of age related issues. Trump has been criticized for his health as well but most reports simply point to his weight issues and not much more.It doesn't matter what happened in the end however, this medical episode with Bernie Sanders may have just ended his political campaign.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Senator Bernie Sanders has been hospitalized for a heart procedure and is canceling his future events until further notice.
Now, I want to be very delicate here.
I wish Senator Sanders a quick and speedy recovery.
I hope he is okay, and I hope it's not as severe.
But we do have to talk about the political nature of these things, and this issue with Bernie is sparking several debates.
Whether or not his campaign is downplaying the severity of the issue, whether or not it was simple angina or a serious heart attack, that's what we'll talk about.
But we're also hearing now people speculate Bernie, he may be winding down his campaign.
This may be the end run for him due to these health concerns.
I need to stress, throughout 2016 and even to today, the mental health, the physical health of candidates has been a huge point of scrutiny for every candidate.
In 2016, Hillary Clinton was, you know, attacked heavily by her opponents for her apparent medical episodes.
I believe it's fair to say that this is going to have a massive negative impact on the senator, and I think it's a shame, too.
I think Bernie deserves to be run out of the race due to the merit of his ideas.
What I mean to say is, if Bernie Sanders is run out of the race, it should be on the merit of his ideas, not because something with his heart.
His ideas deserve to be heard and deserve to be challenged, and if they are good ideas, the people have a right to support him.
However, as many of you know, that's not how politics works.
And one big factor in a presidential candidate is going to be their health.
So this is a big issue.
So let's read this story from the New York Times about Bernie Sanders' heart procedure.
But I want to stress, Bernie Sanders is canceling his Iowa TV ad runs, which sends signals to many people, sparking rumors it may be the end for his campaign.
But let's read.
They say, Senator Bernie Sanders was hospitalized and treated for an artery blockage and is canceling his events for the coming days, a campaign official said on Wednesday.
During a campaign event yesterday evening, Senator Sanders experienced some chest discomfort.
Jeff Weaver, a longtime advisor to Mr. Sanders, said in a statement, Following medical evaluation and testing, he was found to have a blockage in one artery and two stents were successfully inserted.
Senator Sanders is conversing and in good spirits.
He'll be resting up over the next few days.
We are canceling his events and appearances until further notice, and we will continue to provide appropriate updates.
Now, what's strange to me is why they would cancel TV ads in this instance, unless it was more serious and they're letting on.
The main debate going on right now is whether this is the campaign downplaying what's happening.
But let's read.
They say, Mr. Sanders, 78, was traveling for a gun forum in Las Vegas that other candidates were also scheduled to attend.
He was to travel to California later this week.
He is currently recovering in a Las Vegas hospital, the campaign said.
Mr. Weaver read the statement to staffers on a quickly assembled conference call at 10.30 a.m.
Eastern time, according to an aide on the call.
No one on the staff asked questions following a statement, which the aide said Mr. Weaver read in measured tones.
One campaign ad referring to Mr. Sanders told the New York Times on Wednesday morning, he feels better than ever because that's how people feel after they get a stent and there's more blood flow.
Mr. Sanders has kept up a brutal schedule on the campaign trail, typically holding multiple events in several cities a day.
Over the weekend, he held several events at colleges in New Hampshire.
Following his trips this week to Nevada and California, he had been expected to travel to Iowa this weekend, according to a campaign ad.
This is where things get weird.
The Sanders campaign had planned to go on air with his first television ads of the campaign this week in Iowa, announcing a two-week, $1.3 million buy on Tuesday.
An ad-tracking service, Medium Buying, said on Wednesday that Mr. Sanders began canceling those ads.
The reason for the cancellation was not immediately known, even as late as Tuesday night.
Faiz Shakir, Mr. Sanders' campaign manager, was talking excitedly about the ad buy on a call with supporters.
It has to be, in my opinion, related to the medical episode.
And I have to stress, I don't think the simple solution here is that they just decided to cancel the ads.
Senator Sanders had a serious medical incident, and now they're canceling campaign ads.
That leads me personally to believe this medical incident may be more severe than they're letting on.
One of the arguments being presented is that of course the campaign needs to downplay the severity of what happened.
Many people on the left are calling this a heart attack, and I'll get into the difference between angina and a heart attack so we can talk about the medical difference, but colloquially, When someone refers to a heart attack, it does sound like this.
That's not medically accurate.
Bernie Sanders may be okay, but I can't understand why they would cancel a massive two-week ad buy.
If Bernie Sanders is only resting for a few days, they don't need to cancel a two-week ad buy unless this is very, very serious.
That's just my opinion, okay?
I want to stress I wish him the best and a speedy recovery, but we know how politics works.
It is very, very bad in terms of a public relations sense for Bernie to come out and
talk about a massive heart attack.
Let's read on.
They say, on the trail, Mr. Sanders' events are usually high-energy affairs, where he
regales enthusiastic crowds with his calls for Medicare for all and tuition-free public
college and rails against the corporate and Washington elite.
In recent weeks, he has struggled with a hoarse voice that emerged during a swing through
Iowa and Colorado and then worsened heading into the last debate in mid-September.
He subsequently canceled several events last month to rest his voice, but has since returned
to the campaign trail.
They say in March, he hit his head on the edge of a glass shower door requiring seven stitches.
Now look, Sanders camp is angry and they're gonna push back on all this, but this is serious, okay?
There have been multiple instances where Bernie Sanders' health has been made an issue.
He is 78 years old.
The Sanders, the pro-Sanders side are saying it's not a heart attack, calm down, they're smears.
But listen, Sanders has bumped his head before.
His voice was very hoarse in that last debate.
And now we have this medical episode.
This will, regardless of what you think politically, this is a nuclear bomb dropped on the Sanders campaign.
It doesn't matter if Sanders is healthy and these were anomalies.
It matters that this will be weaponized by every Republican and every Democrat.
The Democrats who are going up against him will use this and say, you're just too old.
They're doing the same thing for Joe Biden.
Joe Biden has had gaffe after gaffe.
They have said that his teeth may be slipping.
You know, it's strange to me why so many of our presidential candidates are so old today.
And this goes for Donald Trump as well, who I believe is 72.
Now, some people have pointed out that he was in his late 60s when he ran.
That's why he succeeded.
But he is going to be running again.
Now, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Bernie, they're all relatively old.
But we will talk about Trump's health, because as far as the multiple stories I have show, Trump is in good health, though they do say he's obese.
But let's read on about Bernie Sanders before we continue.
The one-time captain of his high school track team, Mr. Sanders, has tried to project an image of fitness as a candidate.
He pitched in the softball game his campaign stage over the summer on Iowa's Field of Dreams.
And his aides have released other images of him playing catch or shooting basketball.
When he's on the road, Mr. Sanders often heads to an open gymnasium to shoot baskets.
They say that Sanders has not yet released his medical records, though he has vowed to do so.
During his first presidential run, he released a letter from his doctor declaring that he was in very good health.
The letter stated that Mr. Sanders had suffered several ailments during his life, including gout, diverticulitis, superficial skin cancers, and laryngitis from acid reflux.
The letter also said Mr. Sanders had normal readings for blood pressure, pulse, and blood count, and that he had no history of cardiovascular disease.
Okay.
Well, we got some statements.
I guess we will wrap it up.
Not long after news of Sanders' hospitalization emerged, several of his rivals for the Democratic nomination sent good wishes his way with posts on Twitter.
Bruce, Team Warren, and I are sending you the best wishes.
We see Cory Booker said, glad to hear Senator Sanders is doing well.
And we can see from Klobuchar, Bernie's fighting spirit will get him through this.
So of course, for now, everyone, everyone in their right mind is going to wish him the best.
And that is sincerely what we should all be doing.
As I stated earlier, and I could probably state it better, Bernie Sanders is a presidential candidate with a massive following.
If he is forced to leave this race, it should be because the merit of his ideas are challenged, not because of heart issues.
And that goes for Donald Trump, that goes for Hillary Clinton, that goes for everyone.
Unfortunately, that's not how politics work, as I've stated.
Many people are concerned that a leader needs to be in good health to lead this country, of good mental health and good physical health.
So we do have a couple things I want to show you here.
This is Medium Buying saying the Sanders campaign is canceling their ad spend in Iowa.
But we have this statement here from Siraj Hashmi from the Washington Examiner, I guess.
He says, according to Fayez Hashmi, aka Baba, who is a cardiothoracic surgeon, the recovery time for a coronary stent is one week.
While this problem won't go away, Bernie Sanders will likely be back to campaigning in about two weeks, the longest, save for any added complications.
Now if Sanders had coronary artery bypass surgery or a heart valve replacement, which are obviously more invasive than a stent, the recovery time is three months.
Having witnessed this particular procedure, angioplasty, the cardiologist will insert a
flexible tube into an artery, usually a femoral artery in the anterior portion of your hip,
then a wire mesh stent is placed in the coronary artery. It's pretty quick.
Now I've asked some people what they think.
People who would know better than I when it comes to angina versus a heart attack.
And I believe we may be getting a bit esoteric for the average person because again, colloquially, they would view this very much the same.
But my understanding is it's much more likely this was simple angina, which is blockage in some capacities, limited blood flow to the heart, and the stent prevents a heart attack.
A myocardial infarction, which it's actually called, let me just show you here.
This is angina.
It's just chest pain.
And when they put a stent in, it's to prevent a heart attack.
A heart attack is actually known as a myocardial infarction.
And this refers directly to tissue death.
So it may just be that they are preventing a heart attack.
This wasn't a heart attack.
But in the end, it doesn't matter.
It doesn't matter because press campaigns aren't going to be completely honest.
Because if it was tissue death, we wouldn't know.
We wouldn't know.
We wouldn't know what happened.
And yes, of course, this campaign is going to try and downplay this.
Interestingly, however, the impact to the 2020 presidential nomination is already visible.
Elizabeth Warren is now the favorite on the predicted betting market with 51 cents towards yes.
And Joe Biden now in second with 25.
Bernie Sanders has dropped down.
Check this out.
We can see that this morning Warren has jumped up 5 cents in the betting pool and Bernie Sanders is down 2 cents.
Let's give this one a quick refresh to see if anything has changed as of the filming of this video.
So I want to do in the past 24 hours between Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders and we can see that yes, her upward trend continues.
Now Bernie's downward trend is only a little bit down from 10 cents 4 hours ago to now 7 cents.
They're technically like a percentage basis.
This just means that, wow, there you go, I just told you it was at 9, now it's at 7.
That Andrew Yang, surprisingly, I didn't realize, was in third place in the betting market.
But here we can see that Bernie Sanders is now tied with Hillary Clinton in terms of who people think would get the nomination, with Elizabeth Warren set to take first place.
So I'll just show you a couple more tweets.
We have the statement, Crystal Ball, she's a personality reporter, co-host of The Hill.
I try to be careful how I title people.
Well, I wouldn't be fair if I didn't bring up Donald Trump's health as well in this argument, and I also want to talk about Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton and how this will impact 2020.
patients back out on the golf course the same day.
Prayers for a speedy recovery.
Well, I wouldn't be a fair if I didn't bring up Donald Trump's
health as well in this, in this argument.
And I also want to talk about Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton and
how this will impact 2020.
As I've shown you in the prediction markets, it seems this is, uh, is
bad news for Bernie's campaign.
Let me, let me read you now a bit about Trump's health and.
And boy, is the last sentence in this paragraph one of the funniest things I have ever read.
And I just can't believe it.
But hey, Trump's exuberant.
So in terms of Donald Trump's health, as we're talking about 2020, they say it.
This is from Wikipedia.
That's very little sleep.
That's very little sleep.
Wow.
I also get a decent amount of sleep.
In December 2015, Harold Bornstein, who had been Trump's personal physician since 1980, released a letter stating that he would be the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency.
Bornstein noted that Trump had an appendectomy at age 10, but did not mention the bone spurs that Trump said caused his medical deferment from the military age at 22.
A follow-up letter by Bornstein In September 2016 showed Trump's blood pressure, liver and thyroid functions to be in normal ranges and that he has a statin, that he takes a statin to control cholesterol.
In May 2018, Bornstein said Trump himself had dictated the contents of the December 2015 letter, and that three Trump representatives, including longtime bodyguard Keith Schiller, had taken away his medical records in February 2017.
In January of 2018, Trump was examined by White House physician Ronny Jackson, who said he was in excellent health, and that his cardiac assessment revealed no medical issues, although his weight and cholesterol level were higher than recommended.
Several outside cardiologists commented that Trump's weight, lifestyle, and LDL cholesterol level ought to have raised serious concerns about his cardiac health.
In February 2019, after a new examination, White House physician Sean Conley said Trump was in very good health overall, although he was clinically obese.
His 2019 coronary CT calcium scan score indicates he suffers from coronary artery disease, which is common for white males at his age.
He has called golfing his quote primary force of form of exercise, although he usually does not walk the course.
Here's the best part.
He considers exercise a waste of energy because he believes the body is, quote, like a battery with a finite amount of energy, which is depleted by exercise.
You can see this colored link here because I did not believe that was a real quote.
of energy which is depleted by exercise.
You can see this colored link here because I did not believe that was a real quote.
Seriously?
Well, according to the Washington Post, who I am no fan of, that's what they claim.
So I think it's a silly thing to believe if Trump really believes it, but I can't say I believe the press when it comes to this absurd notion.
You know, they recently said Trump wanted a moat across the Rio Grande or whatever, the border between the US and Mexico, that he wanted a moat full of alligators.
I'm sorry, I just can't believe that.
You've jumped the shark.
Maybe Trump did a long time ago.
I can't say I'd be too surprised if it was true, but the media jumped the shark with Russiagate, so sorry, I can't take your word for it.
But this is a story from 2017, titled, Trump Thinks That Exercising Too Much Uses Up The Body's Finite Energy.
President Trump reportedly eschews exercise because he believes it drains the body's finite energy resources, but experts say this argument is flawed because the human body actually becomes stronger with exercise.
Yes, the argument is flawed, assuming Trump even made the argument in the first place.
They say, Trump's views on exercise were mentioned in a New Yorker article this month, and in quote, Trump revealed the Washington Post's 2016 biography of the president, which noted that Trump mostly gave up athletics after college because he believed the human body was like a battery with a finite amount of energy, which exercise only depleted.
Where does that quote come from?
I have no idea.
They go on to just say the idea is stupid.
So here's why I can't take this seriously.
It's an absurd thing to say, but I will stress, I actually lean a little bit towards believing Trump would say something like that.
The problem is, just saying it's a quote from Trump Revealed, the Washington Post story, and not telling me whose quote it is, I think what you're really doing is trying to make it seem like Trump is quoted directly as saying that, when that's probably someone paraphrasing something that may have been an offhand comment or a joke that Trump made.
As we know, People in this media sphere don't understand what jokes are.
Or they don't understand them when they don't want to.
They take everything Trump says literally.
Listen, I want to make sure I make this clear.
I am not going to defend this quote or deny it.
I'm just pointing out I wish they would have said where the quote came from.
Because we have seen the media play this game before.
When Trump said that Hillary Clinton acid-washed her server, they claimed in a fact check from NBC that Hillary Clinton literally—they're like, fact check, false.
Hillary Clinton did not literally ash it using a corrosive chemical on our server.
So do I really believe Trump thinks this?
I think that's kind of weird.
I will admit, I think Trump's kind of a weird guy, so maybe that's the case.
But here's what I want to do.
Whether or not Trump is healthy or not, I just read you the reports.
We had this issue with Bernie Sanders.
Let's take a look now at Joe Biden.
The Washington Examiner writes, 11 years after he last released medical records, Biden's health at issue as campaign stonewalls.
Democratic frontrunner Joe Biden was speaking at a televised town hall Wednesday when the corner of his left eye appeared to fill with blood, bringing attention away from the issue of climate change at a time when his campaign is already batting back scrutiny about his age and health.
The eye issue likely isn't serious and will go away on its own after a few days, but it came after reporters have been asking Biden about whether his age will get in the way of his pursuit of the White House and followed a string of verbal miscues.
They're going to say that Biden is 76, but I highlight this because health has been a big factor.
Going back to 2016 with Hillary Clinton, when she collapsed, Uh, outside of a memorial event.
In 2016, Hillary Clinton was seen being carried.
There were numerous videos about Hillary Clinton being carried or brought upstairs or helped of her spitting up things.
I think health is going to play a big issue.
So I want to end with this very, very important point.
Stressing for the millionth time, I wish Bernie Sanders the best.
He's had a long and storied career.
He has many, many great arguments and many bad arguments.
And that should be the basis for why we challenge him.
But I understand, when it comes to being president, the American people want someone who's strong and capable.
And that means even if your ideas are good, they're looking for someone who can stand up for them, they're looking for someone who will be able to do this job for the time required, and won't end up leaving due to health issues.
If Bernie Sanders is sick, we've seen him bash his head, we've seen him, you know, his voice is hurt, we've seen him now hospitalized for heart issues, then I think this is a serious thing that will be considered by many people.
But I will end just lastly by saying this, regardless of what is or should be, regardless of whether or not it was a heart attack or angina, This was a nuclear bomb for his campaign.
This is it.
It's going to be weaponized across the board by everybody.
The Democrats are going to politely say, Bernie, please, you know, for your health, sit down by the fire, calm down.
But Trump is going to say, Bernie is too old.
And we're going to hear that from everyone who opposes Bernie.
But more importantly, Well, the Democratic candidates may not play this game so harshly.
People who don't like Bernie and do like Elizabeth Warren or Yang or Biden are absolutely going to use fire and fury and say Bernie is too old and needs to stop.
And I assure you, it is already happening on Twitter.
Okay, that's what we're seeing.
That's what this debate is emerging.
So, I'll wrap it up there.
Again, for the millionth time, I wish him nothing but the best.
I'd like to see his ideas challenged on that stage, and this should not be the way people, you know, drop out of a race, but that's just, that's politics, too.
Stick around.
Next segment will be at 6 p.m.
YouTube.com slash TimCastNews.
Thanks for hanging out.
I'll see you all there.
Donald Trump and the RNC have smashed a record, raising $125 million in the third quarter, currently with around $150 million cash on hand.
That's insane.
Obama, for the same time period, raised $71 million.
So that's good.
But Trump?
Nearly double.
Now here's the thing.
There's a lot to talk through.
We'll read through this in the statement from the RNC about how much they've raised, comparing it to Obama.
Bernie Sanders brought in $25.3 million in the third quarter.
And they say, but Trump swamps all.
The other Democratic candidates haven't released their numbers, but here's the thing.
Don't get all flustered or excited yet, whichever side you end up on, Bernie or Trump.
The issue here is the Democrats have a wide base, so donations for the Democrats are split up.
Now, it is a fact, however, that the amount of money Trump raised is more than every Democrat combined.
At least, that was the last bit of data I read.
The current numbers for the third quarter haven't been released by all Democrats, so we'll see how it goes.
And that's something you should pay attention to.
It's a big disadvantage Democrats have, right?
Their base is spread out.
All the nations are spread out.
So, technically, they have the advantage of obfuscating the total amount of Democratic support they really have, in a sense.
The other problem is that they're all fighting each other with that money, which means not only does there's no individual candidate who can come nearly as close as Trump can in terms of marketing and expenses, but they're using their money on each other and not the president.
So let's read from the Associated Press.
President Donald Trump's re-election campaign in the Republican National Committee raised $125 million in the third quarter of the year, a presidential fundraising record.
The pro-Trump effort said Tuesday that it has raised more than $308 million in 2019 and has more than $156 million in the bank.
Republicans aim to use the fundraising haul to fight off Democrats' impeachment effort.
Former President Barack Obama and the DNC raised just over $70 million in the third quarter of 2011.
President Trump has built a juggernaut of a campaign, raising record amounts of money at a record pace, said Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale.
RNC chairwoman Ronna McDaniel credited Democratic attacks on Trump for motivating supporters to donate in record numbers.
Gonna have to say, absolutely.
In the first, what was it, six hours of the impeachment inquiry, Trump raised a million bucks.
Within the next couple days, 15 million bucks.
It's the Kavanaugh effect.
The more they try and highlight these nebulous scandal claims, the more people are rallied by the news and feel like they are under attack.
I'm gonna stress something here, okay?
In the campaign, when Trump was running, he went to a restaurant and he ordered some, like, fancy, like, dry-aged steak, filet mignon or something, and he said, well done with ketchup.
And the media, man, did they mock this guy.
What kind of person has a fancy filet mignon with ketchup and well done?
What a monster.
What a buffoon, they say.
They belittle them.
Okay, maybe I'm being a bit hyperbolic.
But here's the thing.
I make this point a lot.
The average person, the average person in this country who was broke and eating garbage steaks from Walmart, yeah, they fry it well done and schlop ketchup on it.
That was Trump being relatable.
And the media didn't get that.
So that's the point.
When they target Trump over, like, the Ukraine scandal, well, let me tell you something, man, about this Ukrainegate and Bill Barr and all the stuff that's going on.
They're trying to claim it's a scandal.
They're trying to say that they're all compromised, they're all corrupt.
I don't know.
All I know is you said the same thing about Russia and you were wrong.
And I know this.
I'd sure like to know what was going on that started this whole Russia nonsense when it was fake news and they were marching around with some document claiming Trump peed on... had some... There's a pee tape or something, okay?
The point is...
Why is it that for three years they can smack us around with this Russia get crap, and then finally we realize it's not true, and now you see that Trump is saying, okay, let's investigate it, and they're saying it's a scandal.
Enough!
You're telling these people they are the enemy for asking what happened.
That's what they do when they come up with these scandals, and you know what they say?
They say, fine, and they're doing it to Trump.
We are investing millions on the airwaves and on the ground to hold House Democrats accountable, highlight their obstruction, and take back the House and re-elect Trump in 2020.
The fundraising announcement comes as the pro-Trump efforts launched their first major advertising campaign of the cycle.
Trump's team aims to devote $1 billion to his re-election.
Last week, as the House Democrats launched their impeachment effort, the Trump campaign announced it would spend $8 million to air an ad attacking Democrats for trying to, quote, steal the 2020 campaign.
The RNC said it would spend $2 million attacking Democrats for their support of impeachment.
So here was my response on Twitter.
And I'm doing this so I could do a direct response to David Pakman.
I said, I don't understand.
The media keeps telling everyone the orange man is bad, but somehow he keeps raising record amounts.
Maybe they should say it more often so people get the message.
Let me just tell you what the point of that tweet was.
I suppose people can interpret it however they want.
The point is, In 2016, we knew the media was giving Trump free press.
It has been said over and over at least a dozen times by me.
We know it.
Every time a story comes out about the Orange Man, it is press.
Now let me explain something very simply.
So here's what David Pakman responded with.
Terrible music and TV shows often make a ton of money.
Not really an argument one way or another.
Actually, it is.
A terrible TV show and terrible music makes money because of marketing, okay?
You put out a bad song, and then have it... Look at Flappy Bird, right?
No, no, no, Flappy Bird's a bad example, because that went naturally viral.
But a lot of cultural, a lot of music, a lot of shows, bad TV shows, they make money because it used to be that there were only so many channels.
And so there's a lot of songs, and I won't call out any musicians personally, but a lot of really, really bad music.
But it made money because it was put on the air through marketing.
When a radio station or network said, we're gonna play this song in our lineup, people heard it.
Even if most people hated it, enough people liked it and they made money.
You get it?
So that's the point.
They keep giving him free press, good or bad.
CNN could say, Trump just deported this family, and some would hate it and some would like it.
CNN's framing is irrelevant.
I don't care what the media network is.
I don't care if it's my channel or otherwise.
I get it.
If I come out here and I make a video where I'm like, That, that evil orange man, did you hear that he's, you know, he went to North Korea and crossed the DMZ?
Why is, why is that person, uh, why is Trump going and meeting with Kim Jong-un?
And then another person will say, I think Tim's wrong.
I actually liked that Trump did that.
You see the point?
CNN can air every single Orange Man Bad segment they want.
For the most part, Trump supporters aren't watching.
But when they end up seeing that story, and it says like, breaking news, you know, ICE just raided a bunch of, you know, families and deported a bunch of people, the left goes, Oh no, Trump's a monster!
And they go and they donate to Democrats.
And Trump supporters and some moderates or just the people who might, you know, let's actually go with moderates.
They see this story and some moderates go like, I don't know about that.
Maybe Trump should be a little more, you know, not so aggressive.
And the other person looks at it and goes, well, you know, maybe we do need to start enforcing our immigration laws.
CNN could say Trump is an evil orange monster man doing evil monster things.
And someone will hear that and be like, That doesn't sound evil to me.
It sounds like he's enforcing the law.
So, no matter what the media is, the fact that... I did a video a few weeks ago showing that the media volume for Trump is more than double where I think Obama's peak was.
So, like, the media didn't talk about Obama a lot.
Like, they did a lot, but relatively, compared to Trump, no way.
It is the Trump bump all the way.
How many videos have I made talking about this guy?
It's like it never ends.
You know, so we're all stuck in this whirlpool that is Donald Trump's universe.
But the media knows it.
The media knows they make money off of it.
And whether it's intentional or not, it's the big story it tends to be, right?
Trump just broke a record.
I'm sitting here, I'm looking at these stories and I'm like, well, is it big news?
I mean, it is.
Amid all this bad press, Trump just raised a record amount for a presidential campaign.
Well, it's kind of crazy.
So let's do this.
I'll spend only a little bit more time on this.
To clarify, Pac-Man, I assume he was saying that I was implying... I don't know what he thought I was implying.
The point was that they're giving him free press.
I'm being sarcastic.
Maybe they should just keep saying it.
Because the point is, whatever they're saying isn't working.
It's helping the president.
So yeah, call Trump a bad TV show, fine.
But if you keep putting a bad TV show on the air, it's gonna sell ads.
Because people will watch it.
So that's what I'm trying to say.
And to be fair, someone mentioned that Trump has raised a ton of money from these networks.
GH Palmer, Las Vegas Sands, Adelson Clinic for Drug Abuse.
And, you know, I don't know what you want me to say to that, that presidential candidates through affiliate networks raise like a ton of- affiliates and subsidiaries end up making a ton of money.
Yeah, I don't like that.
That's stupid.
And you've got Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are not doing big, high-class fundraisers like Trump has done.
Okay, yeah, I actually really like that.
I don't like the fact that Trump is holding super, you know, wealthy dinners and all that stuff, but am I supposed to now just be like, oh, this one time I'm gonna be angry about it?
Hillary Clinton was doing it!
I mean, it's like something everybody does.
I don't like it.
I'm not going to praise Trump for raising all of this money from, you know, various affiliate networks and companies.
But people don't understand how this works.
You can't just donate six million dollars.
That's what they think.
It's through, like, their staff, their employees, and it's through various... It's, uh... It's complicated.
Super PACs, etc., because there's a limit on how much you can donate to a campaign, and to, you know, other campaigns, etc., etc.
The point is, By all means, bring it up.
What do you want me to say?
That presidential candidates, you know, get tons of money from big corporations?
Wow, what else is new?
I never said I liked the guy.
It's the funniest thing.
It's like, how about I point out to you how your incessant, you know, screeching is giving press to President Trump and helping rally his base, and then you turn back on me, yeah, but look at all the money he raised.
I'm like, yeah, that's a great point.
Congratulations.
Like, I agree.
I don't like that either.
Okay.
My point still stands!
So, you know, I will take the time to say this to Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders for not... I'm pretty sure they're still gonna receive money from corporations like this because it's like, what do you do?
What people don't understand is that when they say, like, this company donated, yeah, what it usually means is, like, a bunch of their employees Or they donate to a super PAC or to various organizations.
It's complicated.
You can't just give a $6 million check to a campaign.
The limit's like $2,500.
But I will give respect to Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders for not doing these big, super wealthy dinner fundraisers.
Although I kind of think that's more about press relations than anything else.
I get it.
They stand on the left populist kind of message.
So I can respect that.
Trump raising money from a bunch of millionaires in California is, you know, eh.
But let's do this.
This is the last thing.
Sanders raised $25.3 million in the third quarter.
So we'll see what the total Democrat haul is.
I believe in second quarter, Trump raised more than all Democrats combined.
It may be the case.
But maybe not.
Because think about this.
If Bernie raised $25.3 million, Kamala Harris raised, I think, $11 million.
I mean, we'll see.
We'll see.
Bernie is one of the favorites.
I wonder if Joe Biden raised anything.
Joe Biden probably raised money.
He probably came through a bunch of, you know, crony speeches or something.
Again, it doesn't work that way.
I'm making the point that he's an establishment Democrat.
He's got connections.
He can probably raise a bunch of big money through big business and big dinners.
But the numbers aren't out yet.
But the main point is this.
Well, Trump has 156 million dollars cash on hand between him and the RNC, and Bernie has 25.
Bernie has to spend that 25 fighting Elizabeth Warren and Joe Biden.
Trump has to spend that just pointing the finger at the Democrats.
So that means by the time we reach full-on 2020 election season, I mean we're in it, but I mean like when the Democratic nominee is chosen, They're going to have already spent a ton of their money fighting each other, and Trump can weaponize that back against them.
So every criticism Bernie said, every attack ad, every ad they've spent targeting each other, is fuel for Trump increasing the amount of reach he will have in terms of going after the Democrats.
And this is probably why there's an incumbent advantage.
Trump has all this money, and no Republicans, you know, I mean sure there's some Republicans that are running, but for the most part, no.
He's going to spend it and just talk about the Democrats, the Democrats, the Democrats.
Bernie's going to talk about Biden, Kamala, Warren, etc.
So that's the challenge, I guess.
That's the challenge going up against an incumbent.
But outside of all that, let's not make any excuses for the Democratic field.
They're weak.
Bernie Sanders was strong in 2016.
Well, you know what?
I don't know what happened to Bernie.
He's lost the plot.
And I mean it.
He was fairly moderate.
Nationalistic, even.
Bernie and Trump shared a lot of positions.
They still kind of do.
But now it seems like Bernie is playing this game just so that he can...
So he can win, I guess.
Like, you know, I always use this example, but in 2016, when Bernie got up on the stage and said, white people don't know what it's like to be poor, I was like, why would you sacrifice your campaign that way?
Because what we learned is that Donald Trump ignited areas of the country where there are many white people who are in extreme poverty and addicted to opioids.
And that, that message of Trump saying, we'll bring back your jobs, that was the opposite of what Bernie said when he said, white people don't know what it's like to be poor.
God, imagine living in a small dying town, your industry is shut down, whatever it may be, and you're scared, and your family, you're worried about feeding your family, and then Bernie gets on that stage, looks you in the eye and says, white people don't know what it's like to be poor.
And you're sitting there with your dry spaghetti noodles with ketchup on top saying, just eat it, we couldn't afford the gas bill this month.
And that's what Bernie said.
Yeah, don't know what it's like to be poor.
Try going to any rural town that has seen the collapse of the manufacturing industry.
Andrew Yang points this out, and good for him.
He mentions, I don't know, Bernie lost it.
It's so crazy to me that he would say that.
I was shocked.
I'm like, you realize the majority of the poor people in this country are white.
The people who are sitting in houses that are about to be foreclosed on because their power plant shut down.
That's what's happening.
There was an AP story I covered.
There are union workers saying our power plant is being shut down.
What do we do?
And now they're freaking out about what the Democrats are saying and they're voting for Trump.
It is mind-blowing to me that Bernie and the other Democrats would play this game and literally tell half the country who are suffering, we don't care about you.
And that's it.
This message of white privilege is poison.
Is poison.
You know, I get the concept.
I seriously do.
The majority of this country is white.
There's an in-group bias for the most part.
But that's changing.
The left now has an out-group bias.
White liberals have an out-group bias.
All other groups have an in-group bias.
An in-group bias means that the majority Well, we'll be biased towards the in-group, which is a bias towards the majority, which is white people.
Congratulations.
That's the concept of privilege.
But it doesn't negate the experiences of the individual.
So if you want to bring it up, I'm fine with it.
But when you get your candidates going up there and preaching that no white person, you know, could be poor and knows what it's like to live in a ghetto...
Man, you've lost the plot.
I cannot stand the racial stuff.
I really, really can't.
And Bernie just went... I don't even know what he was doing.
He lost me.
He lost me completely.
And that's why I am grateful there's at least Tulsi Gabbard, who denounced, to an extent, identity politics as divisive and in some ways bad for the country.
I don't want to overstate what her opinion was, but in an interview with Michael Tracy, she stated as much.
But you know what, they're smearing her as a Republican and telling her to switch parties, so I think the Democrats are done.
I don't see how the Democrats could win an election ever again if they're gonna tell half the country that they're privileged when they're sitting there, you know, having spaghetti with ketchup on it because, you know, they can't afford to go grocery shopping.
Let me give you one last example when I sign off.
I saw this video that went viral, and it was rather terrifying.
Maybe terrifying isn't the right word.
No, maybe it is.
It was heartfelt, heart-wrenching, but also kind of scary.
It was a middle-aged man who was in tears, saying that Trump saved him, that for two years after he had lost his job, his savings had dwindled, he was struggling to put food on the table for his family, he didn't know if his kids would be able to go to college.
And then Trump promised to bring back industry, and then he did.
I don't know, uh, you know, I could be misremembering, so you definitely fact check me on this, but I remember watching this video, and it was like this guy, like, basically in tears, saying that, you know, Trump came through for him, and now he's putting, now he's got a job, and he's saving again, and he thinks things are gonna be a lot better.
That message, for these people, It's real.
And that's why when CNN went to a Democratic stronghold in Minnesota, they found a town of Union Democrats locally voting Democrat, nationally voting Trump.
I just don't understand why the Democrats want to lose this.
You know, you've got someone like Tulsi Gabbard, who is absolutely willing to talk about freedom
of speech, the right of individuals and Americans, and the working class, and health care, and
a lot of issues that are more progressive, but while, you know, like pushing back on
this insanity they have.
But the media will not give her a fair shake.
And you see it on Twitter.
It's like, I think it's simple, man.
The Democrats are in a civil war.
And the Twitterati identitarians who work in media will do everything in their power to prevent a fairly moderate or moderate left-wing type from actually winning.
I don't know why they hate Tulsi so much, but boy, do they.
Maybe it's because she pushed back on the DNC.
I have no idea.
She supported Bernie in the last election.
It's mind-blowing, but all I can really say is, whatever the messages the Democrats are pushing, they're going to tear each other apart.
I'll leave it there, otherwise I'll ramble forever, but you get the point.
Trump's raising money for a reason.
He really is.
Because when you see these interviews with people saying that they're scared, and they're going to lose their jobs, they're going to lose their families, their houses, and they don't know what to do, and then Trump comes to that area, and he says, I'll bring your job back, And he does.
Does he do it all the time?
I can't tell you if he does.
All I know is I've seen a couple instances where people said he did.
Well, there you go.
Or, it's not even about that, but people scared of losing their jobs are gonna vote for him anyway.
I'll leave it there.
Stick around, next segment on this channel at 1pm, and I will see you all then.
So I made a couple videos in the past two days that have sparked a strange pseudo-controversy, and admittedly there have been controversies in politics that have gotten me kind of, you know, like, on alert and concerned, a little bit of worry sometimes, depending on what the controversy might be, but this one has been nothing but fun, and it's funny, and I actually love talking about this stuff.
For those who aren't familiar with the past videos I've done on this issue, I basically made a video where I went over a New York Post story that said, women are struggling to find men who make as much money as them to date.
It's not the first time I've talked about this either.
But for some reason, this one video sparked a big outrage, and I have no idea why, but particularly the outrage was among, you know, feminist bloggers.
You know, women who are nearing or are above 30 years old and work for these woke outlets, and they're verified, and they're tweeting screenshots and all this stuff, and yeah, yeah, yeah, I get it.
Now, it's obvious why they're offended.
You know, the video is me talking about why I'm not interested in them.
But I'll tell you this, look, just because I am not interested, don't take the rejection personally.
I'm one dude giving one opinion.
However, I then went on to cite Jezebel, which states, in this report, Jezebel the Feminist Outlet, they wrote about how every male of every age, you know, I'm sorry, let me rephrase this better, they found that men of all ages find a woman at 20 years old to be the most attractive.
So the point I made was, let's talk about this, who do you want to date?
You have these women in these stories who say they can't find men who make as much money as they do.
They're finding guys with no ambition, guys who, you know, don't make a lot of money, and they're upset by it.
They're not finding good men.
Okay.
Let's flip the script.
Let's take a guy who is physically attractive, charismatic, and economically attractive.
That's a word they use.
And everyone's all mad like I brought up.
I'm like, dude, I read an article, man.
Come on, give me a break.
So you have a guy who makes good money, he's a physically attractive guy, and he's confident and charismatic.
Who do you think he's going to try and woo?
He's not going to try and woo a 30-year-old woman with a career, for several reasons.
Now, based on the title of this video, which you've probably seen, we have a study here, how Americans really see success, and we're going to branch off again.
We're going to extend this story.
Why do I think my assessment is correct?
The number one factor for individuals in terms of what they view as being successful is having children.
I am not exaggerating.
This is a new report that has just come out.
Parenthood was the most common achievement for individuals' views of success, but ranked
33 out of 76 when people were asked about things society considers important for success.
So let me show you some very interesting things.
Why is it that these career 30-year-old women are really, really mad at me and it's a controversy
for some reason?
Well, it's because, for one, according to the study, let me see if I have it pulled
They say that, uh, where did it just go?
Oh, come on, I just had it.
Females assign 20% more importance to the attribute of being famous and 30% more importance
to quote, has a large social media following as a perceived factor of societal success.
So I want to stress something important.
Societal success and individual success are differentiated in this.
When individuals are asked, what do you think would make you successful?
They say being a parent.
It's incredible.
So then when you take a guy who's attractive in every possible way, what's he going to
He's going to pick a mate that will have children with him.
It doesn't mean she has to be a traditional housewife cooking dinners.
Because that's definitely not what I said, but of course that's what they're trying to claim!
No, I just said I want a woman whose goal isn't going to be that she will become the CEO of a Fortune 500 company.
Of course she can work and have expertise and life experience and all that stuff.
And then, for me, I'm looking for somebody who's now ready to have a family and wants to raise a family.
So it's, like, kind of traditional in the sense that progressives have gone really far off the deep end and want this family where it's both parents working full-time and a housekeeper takes care of their kids.
I'm not about that.
So, here's the thing.
When asked, what do you think society views as success, the number one is fame.
And I mean, it makes sense.
You're successful.
Everyone knows who you are.
That's what they think.
But here's the thing.
That's what people think others want.
So it's really incredible.
You're someone, they ask you, how do you define success?
And they say, I just want to be a parent.
Okay.
But everybody else, everybody else wants to be famous.
That's what they think.
And I learned that, I learned something really interesting when I was younger, because I genuinely thought that too, and I learned it wasn't the case.
People don't want to be famous.
And anybody who says they, very few people actually want to, and that's why very few people actually are.
Most people want to live a quiet life, and I kid you not, have kids.
Have kids.
So now let's factor in all this data.
Okay, because I got more data I want to show you.
Take a guy, he's succeeded, he's built a career, he is, you know, early 30s, and he's gonna say, now, what do I want to be successful?
Is it success to have a large following and to be famous?
No, it's not.
It means nothing.
And I talk about this all the time.
If they banned all my channels outright, I would say, finally, a burden has been lifted off my shoulders, and I'll go kick back by a lake, man, and just chill out and just, you know, look at the stars and have a good time.
But, you know, in the end, I'm passionate, and I like doing the things that I like doing, so I do them.
Given no alternative, then I would be free to just go and chill and mind my own business, live a quiet life.
So it's a double-edged sword, essentially.
Of course I like doing what I'm doing, that's why I do it.
But if they forced it away from me, hey, what's the worst that could happen?
I can be successful.
By having a family.
And I consider that to be accurate.
I don't know if I would consider having a family to be the number one, but it's definitely in the top three, probably.
I think you want to be successful in terms of career and individual development, and a family is a part of that, so it's hard for me to define.
But I will stress, First, to these feminist career women who are shocked that a man would say this, like, is anyone really surprised by this?
I can't believe it's controversial that successful, attractive dudes want younger women.
I mean, that's just kind of obvious.
Everyone knows that.
Now, if you want to argue it shouldn't be that way, hey, yeah, by all means.
Like, you know, I laid some criticism the other day saying, guys, come on, grow up.
Find a more mature woman to be with.
But look, in the end, guys are the way they are, and what they find attractive is what they find attractive.
There is a weird blip on the data from Jezebel showing that younger guys like cougars.
That's true too.
But I think the issue is what we see here from these studies.
from the study is that women, they believe more than men that being famous and having
a large social following is more important to society.
So if you take an individual who wants to appear successful, like what do they think
other people would view as success, you end up with women who assign more importance to
being famous and having a social media following.
Well that makes sense.
These feminists who are angry at me are likely to view their careers as woke bloggers, as woke feminist writers, as more important than having a family if they want to appear successful.
I think it may be that some of these people have a chip on their shoulder.
They've grown up being told they're not as good as guys, or they have to fight to be harder, or whatever.
I've talked to some women who have said that all their life they were told you have to work twice as hard to be better or more successful than guys.
Maybe it's not that women assign more importance to being famous and having a social media following, but it's that men assign less.
They're much less likely to think anyone cares about being famous, regardless.
It's not surprising, then, to see that people were... these particular feminists were angry that I made a video.
But I just want to stress, man, it's so weird to me that I can literally pull up, like, some articles and talk about my personal feelings on the internet about relationships, and they get offended.
It reminds me of that Ricky Gervais bit.
I love this bit.
He says Twitter is... he basically... I'm gonna kill it.
I'm not a comedian, okay?
But he talks about how...
People on Twitter, you know, they'll see a tweet from you and they'll take it personally.
And he's like, it wasn't meant for you.
It's just like a thought, right?
That's like going to a town center and seeing a posting for guitar lessons and taking it and going, but I don't want guitar lessons!
And then he's like, then they call you up and say, are you the one offering guitar lessons?
But I don't want any!
And it's like, it's for people who wanted it, you know?
I'm not surprised these feminist women aren't attracted to me.
I have no problem with that.
Most women in this world are... I'm sorry, I shouldn't say women.
Most people in this world are very picky about their type.
Types exist.
We get it.
Maybe I'm not your type.
I've got more than enough women that I've gone on dates with and have had relationships with.
Just because you are not interested, That's fine.
If you can disagree with my opinion, that's fine, but dude, like, who I choose is not gonna change.
It's not an opinion you can even argue against.
It's the weirdest thing in the world to me, that they're like, can you believe Tim actually said this?
It's like, well, yeah, I mean, some people have really weird fetishes and do strange things with cucumbers.
Can you believe they did it?
I honestly can because I've seen some of these websites.
It's not shocking.
We get it.
People like really weird, really specific things when it comes to dating.
And so I made a point.
The data shows there is a trend in this regard.
Does it mean it's morally right?
No, I'm not going to argue morality.
I'm just saying guys like 20-year-old women.
Surprise!
So here's the thing.
I think one of the problems we have, and we can see it here from this data, is that something has happened in our society that has led females to assign more importance to being famous and having a large social media following, or at least believing that's what is important.
And guys take it less seriously.
But everyone at the end of the day wants to be a parent.
They view that as successful.
At a certain point, I think if an individual doesn't view parenthood as being that important, they're now an outlier compared to the rest of society.
You end up with these women who dedicate all their time and energy to having a career because they think that is what makes them successful, whereas the average person just wants to have a family.
So let me put it this way.
The women, the feminists on Twitter who are outraged and angry over this and who are spamming and tweeting and all that stuff.
All their, like, it has more to do with them not being in line with the average person in this country and being upset about it.
The point I'm trying to make is, I believe at some point they were misled.
And I think, you know, not all of them, I gotta be very careful on how I phrase this, because what I'm trying to say is, don't be angry about the way things are because you've made a different choice.
I respect your choice.
I think it's fantastic.
I think more women should choose to live the life they want to choose and be free from any constraints and societal pressures and all that stuff.
And for those women that form powerful followings and become very famous and successful, hey man, nothing but respect.
Hard work is much respected.
Absolutely.
Anybody who's willing to push ahead and strive and do what they have to do to succeed in the way they view success, more power to you.
The point I'm trying to make, though, is that society views parenthood as the single most important factor in individual success, and that means the women who don't are the outliers.
I'm not saying it's a good or bad thing.
I'm not condemning anybody.
I'm just saying the average person prefers to have a family as a sign of success.
That means If a guy finally gets that big promotion and he nails the Bergensen account and gets a high five from his boss and a big fat bonus check, that's not the definition of success to him at the end of the day, on average.
The definition of success is him coming home to his family and saying, guess who's going to college?
I secured the deal, we've just, you know, now I'm going to get the promotion and be able to put away for my kids to go to college.
I'm making a point.
I don't know if college is the right thing.
The point is, what defines the success for the average person is to come home and to be a parent.
And so here's what I think.
To these women, the point I was making in that video, which they got so outraged by, was maybe you need a house husband.
You know, a relationship isn't built upon both people being at work all day and then hiring a housekeeper to raise your kids.
If, on average, people view parenthood as the biggest factor in individual success, and that's what the study says, Well, then you're gonna find, you know, if you're a woman who's working, then you're gonna find a lot of guys, even guys who don't make a lot of money, are also likely to view having kids as being successful.
This presents an inherent conundrum for feminists due to biology.
And again, let me just state facts and point these things out, and I know it's going to generate controversy anyway, but I will say it.
I've said it before and I will say it again.
So for all the, you know, outrage that comes my way following this next statement, I ask you, where were you two years ago when I said the exact same thing?
There will never There will never be complete equality between males and females when it comes to career for one simple reason.
And when I say never, I mean generally, but we can break this down.
Women carry children.
Men do not.
That means the physical toll of carrying the child, it matters.
End of story.
So we can knock down every societal barrier.
We can institute every law possible.
But biologically, men have the advantage when it comes to career of not having to use their body for having kids.
I'm not saying it's right, I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm just saying that is a fact.
Now, there are societal things that can be changed, like a mandated parental leave when both parents are expecting a child and the guy can't be working, but I've heard all of these stories.
And listen, I know there's gonna be a lot of feminists who are angry and outraged that I've said something like this, but let's be real, man.
I know many feminists myself who had kids and they said their career was held back when they had to take even a little bit of time off to have the child.
The ultimate disadvantage in this space could come down to a fraction of a fraction and become statistically negligible.
If the woman works through her pregnancy and then only takes off a short amount of time, you know, after having the kid, a very short amount of time, it's possible that it's no different than any other paid leave or paid vacation.
But in the end, there are physical differences between men and women.
That's controversial.
It absolutely is.
Don't ask me why.
I think it's fairly obvious, and that's why we have maternity leave and not paternity leave.
I, for one, think we should have parental leave as a whole, and fathers should take time off to raise their kids.
Absolutely.
And this can do a lot to change a disadvantage.
But I bring this up because I've read numerous stories about women who... So there's one particular story.
I know a man and a woman who worked in the same industry, and I'll avoid getting too specific because I don't want them to get called out for this.
But they both did the same thing.
At one point, they both, around the same age, they both had kids.
Not together, with different families.
The woman decided to take some time off to raise her new child, and the man took off only a little bit of time to raise his child, but for the most part, kept working.
Ten years later, the guy is extremely successful with a huge portfolio and tons of money, and the woman is not.
She's making only a little bit more than she was a decade before.
And she told me she decided to be there for her child and raise her child, and that held her back from her career.
I mean, this is a common problem.
I find it a common issue faced by women who are trying to have successful careers and also have a family.
That's why the trope that we see in media and often mentioned by the feminists is called having it all, where they argue whether you can or you can't.
I'm not going to say whether you can or you can't.
I'm just pointing this out.
In the end, I don't want to ramble too much on this.
Let me just stress there is a reality, at least today.
It may change.
It may be due to societal factors.
Men may like 20-year-old women for social norm reasons or whatever.
I have no idea.
You know, there have been arguments presented.
I'm not saying it can or can't change.
I'm just saying today, the data shows us the number one factor in success for an individual unasked, on average, the most common, Not for everybody, but the most common is parenthood.
So when you take an economically attractive guy, charismatic, confident, and physically attractive, his choice will be to have a family on average.
And that means for women in their 30s who are working, on average, will be less likely to find a high-ranking male.
You need to watch these documentaries.
There's one called, like, The Science of Sex.
And they do these really interesting things.
One of the things they did was they had 100 men and 100 women.
And then they had all of the men look at photos of the women
and rank them on a scale of 1 to 10.
And the inverse, all the women looked at the photos of the men,
scale of 1 to 10, rank them.
They then went out into the street.
And they showed these photographs to random people and said, how would you rate this person on a scale of 1 to
10?
Interestingly, the public average, like the random person on the street
would look at it and assign basically the same value that was the aggregate.
So, you know, you had one guy, and out of the 100 women, they rated him between 6 and 8, so he's a 7 on average.
The public gave the same average.
It's exactly what you'd expect to find for men and women.
Then they did something really interesting.
They added career stats to the cards.
All of a sudden, a guy who was rated a 10, tall, chiseled, you know, 5 o'clock shadow, you know, ripped kind of, they said on the career chart that he was a theater manager making like $30,000 a year.
He became a 7.
They took a guy who was ranked a 5 short, pudgy, scraggly hair and glasses, and they said he was a software engineer making $500,000, and he became a 7 as well.
What we've seen over and over again, whether it's true or not, I'm just saying it's been presented in media and these studies, is that men and women view attractiveness very differently.
Women are looking, as they say, for many different factors, economic attractiveness being one of them.
That's why women are complaining about economic attractiveness and men aren't.
Men don't look to women and say, I hope they make enough money.
In fact, the trope is inverted.
Many of these stories say that men are intimidated by women who make too much money.
And it could be for a lot of reasons.
Maybe they're scared the woman will leave them because she doesn't need him.
That's a very feminist thing to say, right?
Maybe it's because they feel inadequate, like they can't provide.
I'm not saying what the reason is, that's just what they present.
Okay?
Take those into account, and then realize a guy who has a ton of money is likely going to be looking for a young woman who doesn't have money, who he can provide for, and who can have a family with him.
All of these things line up.
I can't believe it's controversial to even say, and it's warranted three now 20-minute videos.
But hey, bring it on!
I really don't care.
You know, it's funny because people claim that I do these things as a grift or whatever and I'm just trying to pander.
It's like, oh please dude, I will court the controversy if I think what I'm saying is true.
So all the woke feminists that want to get mad at me and drag me and insult me on Twitter, I don't care.
I'm just a dude talking about his feelings on the internet.
Okay, if you're mad about that, I don't know what to tell you, man.
I'm just sitting in this nice little studio room that I have, and I'm looking at a camera, and I'm talking about how I feel based on something I read.
You want to get mad and salty about my personal feelings?
I'm gonna be confused, because I never asked you out on a date anyway.
And honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if you said no and didn't find me attractive.
That's cool!
Everybody has different tastes and different wants.
So don't get mad at me for talking about what I want and talking about why I think this is the case on average.
If you want to disagree with me, I'm more than welcome to hear any argument in the contrary, for sure.
There was some other data I really wanted to get into, and I'll just mention it lightly.
This data from Jonathan Haidt, Corey Clark posted it, that conservatives tend to be more concerned with their immediate social group, and liberals are more concerned with broader social groups like humanity as a whole.
And that makes sense.
Individualism versus collectivism.
It's exactly what we see.
So then I'm not surprised that these woke Twitter feminists are outraged that I'm saying these things because it's an affront to women, you know, based on what they need and the group as a whole.
And I'm not surprised conservatives agree because it's about what the individual wants.
Again, let me just push this point straight through.
Women, according to the study, are more likely to view being famous and having a large social media following as being a sign of success.
That means the larger social group is accepting of you in some capacity.
Individuals ultimately say that parenthood is the sign of success.
So don't be surprised, then, when liberals tend to view being famous as a big factor because they're more concerned with society, and it tends to be these woke feminist women.
That's just what we can expect.
So look, man, here's what I'll say.
At the end of the day, I am not assigning values.
I am not trying to generalize literally everybody.
I am a staunch individualist, and I believe the individual is the smallest minority, and we must respect and protect individuals.
That means if you're a woman who chooses to have a career, and you're in your early 30s, you have every right to do what you do and to live your life as happy and be fulfilled, but don't get mad at me for pointing out data, okay?
I can't do anything about that.
Now, I also want to make sure I stress, you will absolutely find your special someone, and I'm sure to all these woke feminists who are angry at me and think my paintings are stupid, there is absolutely a guy out there for you who also thinks I'm offensive and stupid.
And I think you guys would go great together.
And so by all means, enjoy it, rag on me, insult the beanie, whatever you want to do, I'm glad you found someone that fulfills you.
That's all it's really about, okay?
I'm glad you have a career, and you make good money, and you're free and independent.
Those are all respectable things.
I have tremendous respect for anybody who wants to work hard to achieve what they want.
And that includes somebody who just wants to be a mother.
That includes a guy who wants to be a house husband.
That includes both men and women who want to be the CEOs of Fortune 500 countries.
I'm sorry, companies.
And to all of these women, Who are running the military-industrial complex, which is true.
I believe every CEO of these companies now is female.
Congratulations!
You know, it says a lot that those that manufacture weapons of war and bomb kids can be female, too.
You can tell where my priorities lie, right?
Stick around.
Next video's coming up at 4 p.m.
YouTube.com slash TimCast.
I will see you all there.
I almost don't believe this story.
The story is that Todd Phillips, I believe he's the director of Joker, he says that woke culture ruined comedy and led him to make the Joker, and I don't believe it.
I don't believe it.
My personal opinion, we'll read the story, but my personal opinion is he has been getting slammed by the media and dragged as being like making this, as somebody who's made this incel movie.
And I think he's fed up.
One of the first things he said was that the far left sounds an awful lot like the far right.
Yeah, well, a lot of us have been saying that for a long time, and I don't think he went far enough at all to make anybody care.
But the media has been slamming Joker to the point, there was a story recently, that they are not going to be allowing press to the red carpet event.
I believe it may have already happened, I'm not sure.
The opening, Thursday previews tomorrow.
I'm excited for the movie.
But here's a guy who's being blasted in the media, his film, and they're claiming that, you know, there's going to be incels showing up with guns and all this other crazy nonsense.
You know, he's had a letter sent to him about how he's got to denounce gun violence and I'm sure he's pissed.
So here he comes and he says, basically, that because comedians are scared, they don't want to do these movies anymore, he's having trouble making movies like he used to.
You may be familiar with movies like Old School and The Hangover.
What a strange jump to do The Hangover and then all of a sudden be doing Joker.
Maybe he's being honest.
Maybe now, because of all the attacks, he's like, you know what?
I'm just gonna say it.
This is your fault.
And now here we go.
So I have to wonder, if what he's saying is true, what will the themes of Joker be?
Apparently, one of the themes is that the guy fails to be funny and then gets really, really angry or something.
But we'll see.
Here's what I want to do.
I have a tweet pulled up talking about it, and there's a bunch of whiny people being like, okay, calm down.
They're complaining about him saying this.
So let's read the story and then see what the naysayers had to add.
They say, Todd Phillips explains how woke culture ruined comedy and led to The Joker.
This is from CBR.
Joker director Todd Phillips has explained how woke culture directly led to the upcoming take on The Clown Prince of Crime.
Prior to working on Joker, Phillips was primarily known for such comedies as Old School and The Hangover.
In a profile on star Joaquin Phoenix in Vanity Fair, Phillips revealed how he began to find making comedies difficult due to woke culture, and that directly led to Joker.
Go try to be funny nowadays with this woke culture, he said.
There are articles written about why comedies don't work anymore.
I'll tell you why.
Because all of the effing funny guys are like, F this S. Because I don't want to offend you.
It's hard to argue with 30 million people on Twitter.
You just can't do it, right?
So you just go, I'm out.
I'm out.
And you know what?
With all my comedies, I think that what comedies in general all have in common is they're irreverent.
So I go, how do I do something irreverent but F comedy?
Oh, I know.
Let's take the comic book movie universe and turn it on its head with this.
So that's really where that came from.
So, here's the thing.
There's this particular subreddit full of self-described SJWs who are saying, oh please, The Hangover was hilarious, nobody's having a hard time doing movies.
First of all, let me back up his point.
It's not about whether or not they're having a hard time, it's about whether or not the individual actors want to be associated with something potentially offensive.
The answer is no, and they're not going to do it.
The other issue is that many of the jokes in these movies that weren't offensive back then may be offensive today.
And how about the point of the Asian actor in Hangover who breaks out of the trunk in his underwear or whatever happened, I don't know, and have him recur as a character for the next several movies?
Yes.
I'm sure if you did that today, you'd be attacked for it.
So why would he bother?
It's not just about that either.
It's about him with a script saying, hey, let's do this, and then someone being like, ooh, mm, that's a bit insensitive, mm.
Or other people who are scared being like, I'm not going to say that, man.
I'm not going to say that in a movie.
I'm sorry.
You know what?
You're a comedian.
You're an actor.
You're Bradley Cooper.
You were in The Hangover, Bradley Cooper.
And now your option is to do this potentially offensive bit with the Asian guy jumping on you and hitting you on the head.
Or do Marvel and your raccoon, okay?
You know what I mean?
Like, yeah, I'm gonna avoid the joke that's gonna make people angry and just do the superhero movies.
And you see what happens now.
Here's a guy who made The Hangover, and the lead is voicing Rocket Raccoon in several superhero movies and Avengers films.
So he's probably thinking, let's go superhero.
So he goes DC, and he says, let's make something crazy.
They say, despite initially positive reviews following the movie's premiere at the Venice Film Festival, Joker has proven controversial, with many wondering about the potential real-world impact of the movie and its portrayal of violence.
In September, a question about whether Joker might inspire violence led to Phoenix walking out of an interview.
Still, despite the controversy, Joker is tracking to be a major box office success.
I already got my tickets.
I wonder if you already got your tickets.
Look, I went to see Batman vs. Superman, and I was not excited by the end of the film, but it was kinda eh, whatever.
Joker is apparently getting rave reviews, despite all the controversy, so I'm excited for it.
Apparently, it's not a superhero.
It's, like, based in reality, so it's just about a crazy guy doing crazy things.
I personally don't think it's going to be about the Joker.
I really don't.
I watched a film theory video where they talked about it.
I do not.
Let's save the speculation on Joker because it's coming out tomorrow.
Let's finish this story and look at the criticism.
They say directed by Todd Phillips, Joker stars Joaquin Phoenix, Robert De Niro, Zazie Beetz.
Oh, she was in Deadpool, wasn't she?
She was cool, I think.
Was she in Deadpool?
Yeah.
Bill Kant, Francis Conroy, and a bunch of other people.
I'm not going to read the credits.
So here's what I see.
I see this tweet from Discussing Film, where they mention, Todd Phillips states, Go try to be funny nowadays with what culture.
We get it.
We read through that.
And there are some great tweets.
Here's one that's really funny.
In case anyone is having a hard time understanding this, and someone made this image.
Todd Phillips stated, go try to be funny nowadays, and they quote the tweet.
And here's this person's criticisms.
Todd Phillips stated, I'm lazy, not actually funny or insightful at all, and the only way I can get attention or provoke shallow laughs is by going for the cheap shots, the shock value, and offensive tropes.
He adds that lots of other unfunny people are quitting in a pout, too.
You will notice that most of them are white men.
Oh, and there it is.
Pour Delivres.
I don't know, Fleur?
Sounds French.
Yes, yes, of course.
Because the Shane Gillis guy who made the Asian joke and then lost his job is certainly nobody, you know?
That's never happened.
And they love playing up this game where they do it like... Check this out.
Like every week there's a new politically incorrect stand-up on Netflix.
You mean in the past couple weeks, much to the cheering and celebration of those who were demanding it.
Yeah.
But we still saw Shane Gillis fired for SNL.
Here's a comic, this is hilarious.
It's open season for us comedians.
Now we're being oppressed at every turn.
We can't say anything anymore.
Always censored.
Always silenced.
I'm like a second-class citizen as a person holding money.
Freedom of speech is dead.
How am I meant to make ends meet?
Web flicks.
Silence, censored, slurs I can't say versus the world.
See, the thing is, they don't understand that there was a backlash to their psychosis.
And the backlash was people like Dave Chappelle, Aziz Ansari, Louis C.K., Ricky Gervais, Joe Rogan, Bill Maher, need I go on, saying, stop!
Enough!
You never broke the mainstream, but you tried, and they finally recoiled back, and now you're going, they always claim to be censored, but they're getting Netflix specials!
They're getting Netflix specials because of you, dimwit!
And that's the first time I've direct- I'm hypothetically insulting somebody who didn't say anything, so fine.
I try to avoid directly insulting people, sure.
Listen, they do this all the time.
So, yes, Shane Gillis was fired for offensive stereotypes about Asian people.
Let me go back to the comment I made about Hangover, where you had a character who was an offensive Asian stereotype who was the butt of their jokes.
Now, I can't remember the comedian's name.
He's a really, really great comedian.
He's really great.
Timing is perfect.
His delivery is excellent.
But you can understand why people won't want to do this anymore.
They're worried about getting cancelled.
Oh, Dave Chappelle didn't get cancelled?
Oh, woe is me!
The guy who's already ridiculously famous and signed multiple deals a few years ago, Ricky Gervais, isn't getting cancelled?
Oh, heavens!
You mean the guy with like 14 million followers on Twitter?
The issue is, people trying to come up now are being beaten over the head by you lunatics.
Comedy is hurting, and it's fortunate and unfortunate at the same time that you have, you know, the Joe Rogans, the Ricky Gervaises, the Dave Chappelle's.
They're famous.
You guys, you guys, you're already famous.
And so you have money, and you can say, I don't care.
Dave Chappelle was asked in a Q&A session, what's he going to do if Trump gets re-elected?
And he laughs and goes, probably get a substantial tax cut.
And it was hilarious, because he's right.
But do you understand the point there in the deeper context?
I get he's making a joke, right?
It's not like it's his big concern about getting a tax break.
But the point that I'm going to bring up here is, these super famous and wealthy comedians I mean, they don't want to get cancelled.
You know, Louis C.K.
said he lost $35 million in a day, sure.
But man, when you're already rich, okay?
When you're already rich, I get it, you don't want to lose your career, but these people are acting like the risk-takers.
Who are already grandfathered and wealthy and famous are somehow not being targeted.
Aziz Ansari, I'm sorry.
He had to lay low for a while because of those smears.
And we've seen comedians have their careers destroyed.
Oh, but Dave Chappelle was offensive?
Oh, please.
You notice that he's not a white man like you claim?
We want to point out Bill Maher, Joe Rogan, and Ricky Gervais?
Enough, man.
It's clear that whatever it is they're doing, it's causing problems.
So I'd be thrilled if this is true about Joker.
If it really turns out that this inspired the movie, then there may be some digs at these people.
But surprise, surprise, they're turning on Joker and claiming it's an incel fantasy, it's gonna inspire violence, and I think Todd Phillips has probably had enough.
And I get it, man.
I don't blame you.
I'm even more excited to see this movie now based on this review.
And I think he gets it.
I'd be willing to... You know what?
I'll say this, too.
Let's make this accusation.
I'm being somewhat hyperbolic here.
Maybe he just realized, you know what?
People really hate woke culture.
I bet if I say this is a rebuke of that, they'll come see my movie.
Oh, you better believe it!
When that Dave Chappelle special dropped and everybody was tweeting about it, I checked it out and I laughed the entire hour.
It was fantastic.
And I will say this too.
There were two extremely, extremely funny things.
Some of the funniest things I've ever seen.
A Joe Rogan show.
I saw it in Philly.
That was incredible.
It was sometimes irreverent.
He had a bit about cats.
It was sometimes about Hillary and Trump.
Equally offensive.
Nailing people and just poking fun at reality.
It was fantastic.
It wasn't always political.
Jonathan Pai.
If you're not familiar with him, he's the news reporter on YouTube in the UK who's always like ending a segment and then ranting about something and that was probably one of the funniest things I've ever seen and he absolutely rags on Twitter and outrage and all that stuff because they get it.
They get it.
So anyway, my respect to the comedians who have stood up and said, bug off.
And if this is the case of this story, bravo, Todd Phillips.
I really look forward to seeing Joker, so stick around.
I've got a couple more segments coming up in a few minutes, and I will see you all shortly.
I decided to start this segment with a tweet from myself to give you the proper context of the story.
See, Donald Trump has a phone conversation with somebody in Ukraine that he doesn't prompt, and he mentions, hey, some weird stuff happened in 2016, why don't you look into it?
Okay, you know what, man?
I wasn't feeling Russiagate.
I'm not feeling Ukrainegate.
I want it to all be done.
But it would be a tad hypocritical of me to not at least entertain the Ukraine investigation on Trump's side because I entertained Russiagate.
I said over and over again, you know, let's see what the Russiagate investigation finds and then we'll make our determination.
Okay, well, I don't care for the Ukraine stuff or CrowdStrike.
I want to move on, but you know what?
Hey, fair is fair, right?
So let's see what Trump has to say in regards to what happened with CrowdStrike 2016 and all that stuff.
And maybe it's nothing.
Fine.
Let it happen.
Whatever.
Show me what you find.
We did it for Russia.
We can do it for Ukraine.
But here's the thing.
They call it a scandal.
It's a scandal that Donald Trump spoke in this way.
Oh, okay.
You know what's not a scandal?
Presidential candidate pressures tech CEO to shut down the legal and protected speech of her political rival.
Can you believe the world we're living in right now?
These Democrats, they're trying to get their political opponents' speech shut down.
You want to complain about Trump, I say, I hear your point.
And then Kamala Harris comes out and tells Jack, hey, do something about this.
We need to ban this guy.
Seriously?
Well, could you imagine?
If Kamala Harris went to like the CEO of NBC and said, do not allow Trump to appear on your network or run ads because Biden was sending letters about blocking Giuliani.
It's getting nuts.
So here we have the tweets from Kamala.
First she said, Hey Jack, time to do something about this.
What does that mean?
It's also interesting that Jack Dorsey donated the maximum possible amount to Tulsi Gabbard.
Now I also like Tulsi Gabbard, but that's not the point.
The issue is, Jack is actively partisan if he took action against Trump.
That would be outrageous and terrifying, okay? I wouldn't call for censorship. And then she says,
let's look, let's be honest, real Donald Trump's Twitter account should be suspended.
Oh, okay. Jack, do something about this, his account should be suspended. Right, we get it.
Kamala Harris calls on Twitter to suspend Trump for threatening the quote whistleblower. No.
But you know what? Kamala Harris.
Her predicted rating?
Like, we can go by polls, right?
But predicted is where people put money down.
Her predicted is down.
People don't think she's gonna win.
So you know what?
Fine.
First of all, I love how everyone's saying Kamala Harris is a cop.
Uh, yeah, she locked up innocent people.
That's a whole other thing.
Tulsi Gabbard's takedown of Kamala Harris, I gotta stress this because, boy, was it absolutely glorious.
Perhaps the most glorious thing I have ever seen in the history of politics in my life was when Kamala Harris got smacked down for imprisoning innocent people and holding them beyond their sentences.
Okay, I'll stop and say, people are ragging on her for being a cop because they're the left and they hate cops, and I don't think all cops are bad.
I think that's silly.
I think there's corruption everywhere and we have to do our best to weed it out.
But I just thought it was funny that the left does that to her, you know what I mean?
So let's read.
They say, United States Senator and 2020 presidential contender Kamala Harris is now calling on Twitter to suspend a sitting president because she doesn't like what he says on the platform.
Speaking with CNN's Anderson Cooper on Monday, Kamala Harris claimed President Trump is now using his Twitter account to bully people, citing his recent tweets about the whistleblower in the Ukraine scandal as evidence.
Now, I want to stop and say, one of the funniest things I've seen Trump tweeted something about war, and then someone claimed it was inciting violence.
It's like, dude, if you think that Twitter should suspend the president for threatening retaliation and conflict, you're assigning the commander-in-chief role, or an aspect of it, To an unelected tech CEO.
The president of the United States is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces.
It is not the legal incitement of violence to say we will go to war.
That's like war affairs.
It's much, much different if you're targeting individuals with a legal precedent.
If you're threatening war, it is different.
Do I like Trump for doing it?
No!
But that's besides the point.
You can't ban the president You know what?
That's the main issue, right?
They want to ban the president for saying things in the course of his presidency.
They want to hurt him politically.
They say, speaking with CNN's Anderson Cooper on Monday, Kamala Harris claimed President Trump is now using his Twitter account.
Oh, I read that.
I'm sorry.
The president's tweets and his behaviors about this are just further evidence of the fact that he uses his power in a way that is designed to beat people down instead of lift people up.
Look who's talking!
Are you nuts?
On Monday, President Trump referred to the whistleblower as a fraud for pushing the narrative that he pressured Ukraine to dig up dirt on Vice President Joe Biden and Biden's son Hunter.
The fake whistleblower complaint is not holding up.
It is mostly about the call to the Ukrainian president, which, in the name of transparency, I immediately released to Congress and the public.
The whistleblower knew almost nothing, and its second-hand description of the call is fraud, Trump tweeted.
So, you know, maybe we'll come back to this.
We get it.
But I really want to do something fun.
You want to see something fun?
Check this out.
Julia Jester tweets, asked if she agrees with Kamala Harris that President Donald Trump's Twitter account should be suspended.
Tulsi Gabbard says, no, I think freedom of speech is something that is an important foundational right in our democracy.
And she goes on to say we can't just cancel people.
And I agree!
Good on you, Tulsi!
You know, there have been a lot of people who've supported Tulsi for exactly this kind of thing.
I noticed, like, you know, Jimmy Dore, for instance.
Jimmy Dore is amazing.
He's a progressive.
He very much does not like Trump, but I find that there's a big crossover between our audiences, which is really interesting, because we talk about wildly different things.
I think he's generally supportive of AOC.
I'm generally not.
But there's a lot of people who kind of, you know, watch both of our channels.
Because Jimmy, see, defends free speech.
And one of the best things Jimmy has ever said, in my opinion, was when he was talking about the Carlos Maza-Steven Crowder thing.
He's on stage at this, like, comedy event, and he's like, this guy's trying to get this conservative dude banned.
So what?
Don't effin' watch him!
And I'm like, thank you!
What happened to, like, the Bill Maher-type people who are liberal, but are gonna say, I don't care if Steven Crowder wants to say mean words on the internet.
I won't watch it, and I'll tell other people not to.
Now, for me, I actually prefer to watch people... I don't get offended, right?
I'll watch Stephen Carter, see what he has to say.
I think we aground some things, it's aground some things, that's fine.
I'm fairly moderate.
But Jimmy's a progressive, and his response is on point.
Just don't watch it!
And Tulsi Gabbard—and he's also spoken very highly of Tulsi Gabbard.
And so, you know, here we now are.
Tulsi taking the principled position.
We can't ban the president.
We can't have this cancel culture.
But here's the best part.
What do you think the response was?
Here's the first one.
This was the exact talking point Fox News personalities were promulgating on air all day yesterday.
Thank you, Ian Sams, for letting us know National Press Secretary for Kamala Harris calling Tulsi Gabbard essentially right-wing.
Here's what Will Chamberlain said.
Who knew that fighting for free speech was a right-wing talking point?
I'm gonna break some sad news to y'all.
AllSides.com.
It's a great website.
It is a news aggregator that gives ratings based on language.
It's very amazing.
Go to AllSides.com.
I've talked about them before.
And they will show you whether something is left, center, right based on the message they push, the editorials, but also the words they use and things like that.
The bad news.
Free speech is now a right-wing talking point.
I'm not kidding.
Based on what right-wing outlets have said versus left-wing, the left is anti-free speech.
And I'm not exaggerating.
And you'll always see this deflection from the left when they try to defend this, saying, we're for free speech.
There was one really paradoxical article, it was hilarious, that said, you can't have free speech without censoring people, or something like that.
Because the argument was, you know, marginalized people are scared to speak up because of hate speech, and it's like, dude, I've had people threaten me.
I still speak up.
I'm sorry, if you're scared, that's on you, not on me or anyone else.
But here they go!
Tulsi Gabbard is right-wing!
Of course!
Because she said Kamala Harris was wrong.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Now you got these people on the left defending the person they just called a cop.
Someone said, this person, did you ask Tulsi Gabbard about the free speech rights of the children that her family electrocuted when they ran a conversion therapy practice?
If you're not, you're not a very good reporter.
Well, I'm not going to, I can't fact check that in the immediate, but hey, I'll at least read your claim.
Although I don't, I'm not bothered by it because that's not a reflection of Tulsi and who she is.
But how is Twitter harming, how is taking away his Twitter harming his free speech?
He's the president.
He has his own platform.
I'm going to, I'm going to stop now and say something very, very important.
Listen.
I've thought about it.
I've thought about it a great deal.
I firmly believe the best thing for this country right now will be Twitter to completely ban Donald Trump from Twitter.
No, no, hear me out!
Hear me out!
I'm not doing a bit.
I'm being completely serious.
Twitter must, must right now for the good of this country ban Donald Trump.
Because then Trump would move to an alternative social media platform, keep posting the same thing, driving a media narrative, but using an alternative platform that would grow a user base outside of the social monopoly that is Twitter.
Okay, now I was actually kind of doing a bit.
The point is, go ahead, ban the president.
I would love to see Trump get on Minds.com and start making posts, and then all of a sudden, the media saying Donald Trump posted to Minds saying X.
And then, guess what?
Twitter is no longer relevant.
Yeah, I'd love it.
Please, please ban him.
And then make him use something else.
There are a bunch of social media platforms Trump could be using, and for whatever reason uses Twitter.
At the White House Summit, someone asked him if he would use a different platform, and he said, which one?
Well, there's a bunch, dude!
So, what's the name of his press guy?
I can't remember the name of the press guy, so forgive me, but Trump's press guy?
Can you get Trump on a different platform?
Not because, listen, no matter what Trump tweets or posts or Facebooks or Mines or whatever, no matter what it is, the media is going to chase after it.
And they're going to put screenshots and prop it up.
Stop letting, stop, Trump is empowering Twitter and Twitter is biased.
And Twitter mob culture is insane.
So if Trump went on a different platform, it'd be amazing.
And you'd get a lot of new people on that platform, and you'd create a new culture with better leadership.
Trump has that power.
Why doesn't he do it?
So, let's be real.
No, Trump shouldn't be banned.
Social media platforms shouldn't be banning people.
But I do think it's true.
It would be a massive net positive if Trump was banned and moved to a different platform.
I think that's fair to say.
Stick around.
I've got one more segment coming up in a few minutes.
I will see you all shortly.
I promise this will be the last video on this subject, at least for the foreseeable future, about women as housewives.
See, here's the thing.
I did a video the other day, or like two days ago, about women who were shocked that they're in their early 30s, they have careers, and they couldn't find men to date who are ambitious and made good money.
And I made a simple point, and I back it up with data from Jezebel, a feminist website, showing that men are mostly attracted to 20-year-olds.
That means a guy with a successful career who makes a lot of money, he's probably going to want a younger woman.
That's what men are after.
But more importantly, the number one factor in success?
Parenthood.
That was from a video I just did.
Well, here we have another story.
Woman quits job to spoil husband like a 1950s housewife.
It just so happened this story emerged around the same time.
from September 30th, just a couple days ago. And it's basically about, it's almost like a cosplay,
I guess? I mean, I don't know, because it's one thing to just be a housewife, you know? It's
another thing to like wear the 1950s clothes and watch vintage TV shows and like sit on your vintage
furniture, I guess?
So anyway, I'm doing this story as kind of some levity to the situation.
Apparently, my videos sparked a controversy and feminists were outraged, and they tended to be, you know, 30-year-old feminists who worked careers and didn't have families, and I can understand why that was offensive to them, because I was saying, you're not going to find, you know, it's going to be harder for you, for the most part, to find attractive and successful men.
Take a look at, you know, like, I don't know, look at Trump!
How much younger is his wife?
But anyway... Guys with money and power go for younger women.
That's a fact.
But now let's read this... I gotta admit, this story's a bit silly.
It's a bit silly a little over the top, but hey, to each their own.
If she wants to be a 50s housewife and dress like that, well then good for her.
Let's read it from the New York Post.
Katrina Holt is not a modern woman.
After three years of happy marriage and getting stressed out by her job in a busy payroll department, she decided in 2018 to turn back time and live like a 1950s housewife.
That's when Holt, 30, transformed her Hillsboro, Oregon home into a suburban shrine to the pre-era era, busying herself cleaning, making dresses using vintage patterns, and getting dinner on the table by the time her husband Lars, 28, gets home from his job as an engineering manager.
I feel like I'm living how I always wanted to.
It's my dream life, and my husband shares my vision, she says as a vinyl Doris Day soundtrack plays in the background.
It is a lot of work.
I do tons of dishes, laundry, and ironing, but I love it, and it's helping to take care of my husband, and that makes me really happy.
Now, I think one reason that the story gets a lot of play among conservatives Is that they'll prop it up as evidence of a greater cultural truth that women would be happier doing this.
I don't think that's necessarily true.
I think women are happy choosing what they want to do.
And that means if there's a woman who's in her 30s and she wants to work in an apparel department and not be a 50s housewife, she made that choice based on what she thought would make her happier, just like literally any human being, regardless if you're male or female, if you're Mexican, Latino, black, white, whatever.
People make decisions.
Sometimes their decisions are wrong and they end up less happy than they were before.
But for the most part, a person's choice is their own choice.
So I don't think this is indicative of any greater truth.
You know, we've seen people like Gavin McInnes say women would be happier at home.
Well, I disagree.
I disagree on the grounds that they aren't doing it.
If they really wanted to do it, they would, just like she did.
In fact, I think this is proof that it's kind of okay the way it is.
It may be true that there are a lot of women who would be happier and are scared to do it or don't want to, but the reality is, here's a woman who just went and did it.
And she's happier for it.
And I am absolutely positive there are many, most women I know would absolutely not be happy doing this.
But let's read.
She says, they go on to say, yes, her closet is full of flattering frocks she sewed herself, and the home's decor is retro as all get-out, but it's not like it's a museum, Holt tells PA Real Life.
When I look at everything that is happening in the world now, I feel like I belong in a nicer, more old-fashioned time, she says.
I agree with old-fashioned values, like being a housewife, taking care of your family, nurturing the people in it, and keeping your house in excellent condition so everyone feels relaxed.
But of course, the part-time seamstress of 10 years, who sells her handmade garments online, asked for Lars' permission before leaving the workforce.
I spoke to my husband and told him that I want to be a housewife and he said that was fine with him.
It was a fantastic feeling when I quit.
I can do what I want to now and run my house as I want to run it.
Now I'm a full-time homemaker.
Man, I mentioned in the last video that if all of my social media was banned, I'd be like, woo, and I'd just go off to the woods, go fishing, sit up, look at the stars, have a nice campfire, and just, man, get away from everything.
I gotta admit, every so often, you know, it just, man, it would be really nice to just lounge around all day playing video games and reading a book.
For me, though, I'm driven to do other things, and that's why I won't.
There's no obligation for me to sit here and make videos like this.
But I can fully understand her feeling when she quit her job and started focusing on exactly what she wanted to do, because it's actually what I did.
I worked for big companies.
I remember I used to work for American Eagle Airlines, a regional airline.
I remember when I quit.
And all of a sudden, I was just staring at the open world, and I said, wow, that's amazing.
I didn't have any money, and that was kind of scary.
But it seriously is like sometimes you're in a bad position, and you just want to get out.
I can totally respect that.
And I am where I am today because I learned that lesson early on.
I went to work for Vice.
I worked for Fusion.
And after Fusion, I said, I'm not going to do it anymore.
I'm going to wake up when I want to wake up.
I'm going to talk about what I want to talk about.
I will call no man mister.
No man master, but you get the joke.
And so, uh, here she is saying, uh, she's doing the same thing.
She's doing what makes her happy and she's relaxing and living the life that, you know, she wants to.
And I think that's the most important takeaway.
It's your choice, man.
It's your life.
She's got a great partner who respects her decision to do it, makes him happy, she's happy.
That's what I'm talking about.
Just do what makes you happy so long as you're not infringing on the rights of others.
If you're mad that someone rejects you because you don't want to do this, well then just find someone else.
There's more fish in the sea, you know?
They say Holt's typical day starts at 6.30 a.m.
when she wakes up and lays out Lars's clothes before preparing his breakfast and packing his lunch.
After feeding herself, she does 50 minutes of gentler exercises from yesteryear.
I'm not super concerned about her routine.
Let's read about when the man of the house returns.
When Lars gets home, he actually likes to hang up his own coat, but Holt doesn't mind.
I read in a 1950s book that if a man wants to hang his own coat up, you should not feel like it makes you a bad housewife.
Instead, she serves him a refreshing glass of water and a plate of snacks—cheese, dried fruits, or nuts—before putting the finishing touches on her entree.
After dinner we play board games like Scrabble or watch our vintage shows like I Love Lucy or the Donna Reed Show.
Sometimes we read.
I like reading 1950s cookbooks and vintage beauty and sewing magazines.
Now I'd like to pause and address the weird criticisms from the feminists and even the anti-feminists, acting that because I said what I said I was looking for a traditional wife.
I'm sorry, you're wrong.
This to me sounds unenjoyable.
I don't want to get home and have some doting housewife prepare a meal for me And have like a glass of water and take my coat or anything like that.
I'm just talking about having someone manage my social circumstances.
You know, that was my point.
Like, I don't expect to come home and you'll be like, hello dear, and take my jacket and there's fresh cookies in the oven and we're having roast for dinner.
No, just once I'm done working I can be like, you know, what's going on?
What are you up to?
And the bigger issue is just about being there for the kids while I'm working.
I understand that may be her prospect as well.
But the point is, this is a bit over the top.
I don't want to watch I Love Lucy or the Donna Reed Show, and no, I don't want to be served food once I'm finished working.
I can make my own food or order, it's no big deal.
I'm just looking for someone who wants to manage social aspects of life.
And this is the really, really funny thing about all the criticism from all the outraged feminists.
It's like, dude.
I made a simple point.
In my life, the person I need will be like, hey, there's a movie playing later.
I bought us tickets to go see Joker tomorrow.
We're gonna do 6 p.m.
That works for you, right?
I'll be like, yeah, that's perfect.
Cool.
And I'll be like, awesome!
I don't gotta worry about that stuff.
That would be great.
I don't care for a woman wearing frilly dresses and preparing my meals or anything.
I'm just saying, I'd prefer not to have someone who's working all the time because I would never see them.
It's just so mind-blowing.
People are like, Tim's asking for a traditional wife.
No, no, I'm not!
Not at all.
I'm just asking for someone who isn't at work all the time.
Hey, better yet, if you make YouTube videos and you work all the time, that actually works too, because then you're not outside.
The main point was, how do you have a relationship with somebody who's at work as much as you are and you never see each other?
And then who takes care of the family?
Nobody.
That's not traditional.
That's, well, I mean, it's technically traditional, but come on.
This, this is something different.
But hey, I'll say this too.
I mean no disrespect.
I mean, I think it's very nice to see people doing what makes them feel good.
And if that's this, then hey, more power to you.
You know, the way I always explain it, if you want to just be a clown and walk around the streets juggling bananas, I got no beef.
In fact, I got respect for you.
It takes guts.
Just don't, you know, once you start throwing those bananas at people is when you cross the line and you're infringing on other people's rights.
So hey, do you, you know?
So they say yes when they aren't spinning Sinatra or Day on the record player.
The couple does watch TV.
No cable or streaming channels, thank you.
But when it's not in use, they keep it hidden away so as not to disrupt the mid-century modern vibe.
But make no mistake, Holt says, Lars is not a controlling hubby.
He grew up in a house where he helped his mom with the cooking and did the cleaning.
So he is not domineering in any way, she says.
If I did, heaven forbid, have dinner late, he would not make a fuss, but I can tell it means a lot to him that it's normally on time.
Bottom line is, a man needs his wife to make him feel spoiled every once in a while.
Besides, that's the payoff.
Because he makes a lot more money than I do, he works very long hours, and makes my dreams come true, so I try to make his dreams come true, too.
It's an equal partnership.
Yes.
Isn't that what it always was?
I think the problem with the actual traditional world was that women didn't really have a choice.
I mean, truth be told, neither did men.
Men couldn't stay at home to raise the kids.
Now, I think there is a bigger problem in that, based on the data I've looked at, these women, you know, these stories, they're working women who are looking for men who make more than they do, or as much.
And that's an interesting predicament, that You could have a situation where it's socially acceptable to be a housewife, but women complain when men don't make enough money.
Well, therein lies a big problem.
The problem back in the day was that there was no choice.
Today there is.
And I think all that really matters is if a woman wants to work, nothing should stand in her way.
If she wants to be a career CEO, nothing should stand in her way.
And if she wants to be a housewife, nothing should stand in her way either.
And the same is true for men.
If a guy wants to stay at home and be a house husband with the kids, nothing should stand in his way.
And if he wants to be a CEO, same thing.
The only thing that stands in your way are your own obstacles.
It's all about equality.
But I found this story, I actually really like it.
Live by the Golden Rule.
She says, I think we as women should support each other.
If a woman says she wants to be a homemaker, we should not say that's not right.
What's right for me might not be right for someone else.
We all have to do what's right for ourselves.
Absolutely.
The golden rule, do to others what you want them to do to you.
Actually, I don't think that's actually a good rule because some people are masochists and others aren't, so, you know, you get the point.
But anyway, that's the message, you know?
Live how you want to live as long as you don't infringe on others' rights and stop getting bent out of shape because I talked about my personal preferences or you don't like the way men behave.
I mean, look, In terms of breaking the law and social norms, we can talk about the bad things men do.
