Joe Biden Actually Just Told Coal Miners "Learn To Code" Proving Democrats Learned NOTHING From 2016
Joe Biden Actually Just Told Coal Miners "Learn To Code" Proving Democrats Learned NOTHING From 2016. Biden has said before that he would sacrifice hundreds of thousands of energy sector jobs over the "climate crisis" and so has Bernie Sanders.This shows the untenable position of Democrats. Trying to be ideologically drive to attract the activist base while sacrificing the working class.You can't do both. Trump's advantage is that he isn't concerned about climate change issues so he has cut back regulations to bring back coal jobs ensuring certain places in the US vote for him as he had their back.While many progressives have called this claim callous and ignorant it still leaves progressives and far left Democrats holding the bag. Bernie Sanders has Biden have been upfront about people losing their jobs, you can't support the energy sector unions while simultaneously calling for an end to it.Hillary Clinton said her biggest regret was saying she would end the coal industry and coal jobs. Even with this warning Democrats still carry on down the path of cutting jobs instead of creating them.Meanwhile "learn to code" was seen as so offensive Twitter actually banned people for saying it.If the Democrats won;t even take Hillary Clinton's advice then I'm willing to bet there will be a Trump Landslide in 2020.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Proving once again that Democrats have learned absolutely nothing from 2016, Joe Biden at a rally the other day told coal miners to learn to code.
I think he actually said learn to program.
This is widely seen as ignorant and callous.
And you're literally telling people their jobs are going away and to move into a sector in which they don't understand.
It is, to say, lacking empathy.
It's one of the biggest mistakes Hillary Clinton made in 2016, which she said was one of her biggest regrets.
Yet here we are with Joe Biden himself.
This is Gizmodo, by the way.
Biden to coal miners.
Learn to code.
It's such an absurd gaffe that even progressives are calling out Joe Biden for his shortsightedness and the callousness of these comments.
Naturally, the conservatives are.
There's two different perspectives on how to solve the problem, I guess.
But do you know what this also shows?
It shows that people don't quite, on the left for the most part, don't understand what it means to have a job.
Do you think that people have a job simply because they want to pay their rent?
That's not the case.
And this is what I think is the biggest divider between the socialists and basically everybody else.
This may be shocking to none of you, because I realize socialists for the most part don't watch my channel, but if you find yourself as a socialist, let me just tell you, People like working.
You know, there was that viral tweet I covered the other day from Carlos Maza, formerly of Vox, where he said, you know, a developed nation is supposed to make it so you don't have to work, but you can still enjoy the benefits.
And the reward for doing something that fulfills that purpose is access to resources.
I'll tell you this.
Not every job is a job you will like, and that's unfortunate.
But you need to focus on doing something you do enjoy.
The problem is we have so many young people being raised to do some nebulous, you know, non-existent, high-tech, you know, education-based job.
They're told to go to college and get a liberal arts degree, and then they're shocked because they have to actually work.
How about You raise your kids to like doing work with their hands, to like building things, and then sure enough you'll have somebody who's maybe just a tradesman, maybe a plumber, maybe a carpenter, maybe they're an architect, maybe it's something that people don't consider to be a fancy ivory tower job, but they're happy building.
You know, I've met some of the happiest people in the world doing some of the lowest skill level jobs.
I've met people who mow my lawn, who are really excited and telling me about the problems I have and how they're going to solve it for me.
And I'm like, wow, I never knew anything about that.
Like these certain weeds and like the hedges, like, dude, wow.
And these guys are happy.
They're like, I'm really good at what I do.
I'm passionate about my job.
I'm glad I'm working.
So when Biden says to coal miners, learn to code, he's basically saying what you've known your whole life, What your passion is, your purpose, who cares?
This is such an ignorant and naive view of what work should be.
But let's read and see exactly what Joe Biden had to say.
And I'll tell you this right now.
This is Gizmodo.
This is a lefty publication.
And the left and the right are in agreement on this one.
Biden, what are you thinking?
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com if you'd like to support my work.
There's several ways you can give, but the best thing you can do is share this video, and I'll tell you why.
Normally, it's hard to break echo chambers, I suppose.
But here we have the left and the right hand-in-hand like that beautiful meme saying, Joe Biden, you're crazy.
If there's one thing that can unite the progressives and the conservatives, it's their disdain for people like Joe Biden, who have no idea what's really going on, whose kids are working overseas for absurd amounts of money with seemingly no experience.
We get how the game is played.
I can have a disagreement with you about your policy ideas, like, say, the Green New Deal, which I'll bring up, but I think we can all agree people like Biden and the crony Democrats are corrupt and we should probably get rid of them because they have no idea what life is like for the working class.
That being said, Gizmodo reports!
Democratic presidential contender and Joe Biden.
And Joe Biden has some advice for the recently disrupted.
Learn to program.
At a rally in Derry, New Hampshire on Monday, per The Washington Post's Dave Weigel, Biden talked about how unemployed miners and coal workers who have lost their jobs in recent years can find jobs of the future if they learn to program.
Referencing his role in Barack Obama's—the Barack Obama-era Programming Skills Initiative in schools, Biden commented that, quote, Anybody who can go down 3,000 feet in a mine can sure as... I can't say that word, is it?
Sure as heck learn to program as well.
Anybody who can throw coal into a furnace can learn to program, for God's sake.
No!
That's such an insane comment.
He's literally saying learn to code to these people, which sparked the whole wave of people telling journalists to learn to code.
But I think, you know, what I find particularly funny here is The lefty journalists agree with the conservatives on this one.
It's an insane comment to make.
They have a bunch of comments from people who are progressive left saying, you can't just do this.
This is amazing.
I love this.
I love seeing the populist left and right, with all of their disagreements, look at Joe Biden like he's a lunatic.
Let's read.
What exactly these blue-collar workers in the mining and coal shoveling sectors should learn to code is unclear.
A December jobs report by Challenger, Gray, and Christmas found that the mining and tech sectors are both shedding thousands of jobs nationwide.
So, too, is everything coal-related.
It's fair to say that the long-term prospects for IT workers are better, with the Bureau of Labor Statistics projecting that computer and information technology jobs will grow 12 percent from 2018 to 2028, much faster than the average for all occupations.
Meanwhile, dirty energy jobs are dying left and right, despite Donald Trump's best efforts to slash regulations.
This is one of my disagreements with Trump.
I completely understand the people who are losing their jobs due to regulation and obsolescence.
I think Trump is looking backwards.
Not completely, but somewhat, because you have to recognize that these jobs are going away for a variety of reasons.
I also want to point out something a bit more important.
Telling someone to learn to code?
You realize that this 50-year-old man who's probably the best coal miner the world has ever seen, you're telling him to go learn how to use a machine and compete with an 18-year-old, okay?
There is a wave of people who grew up with these machines, who know how they work, and a 50-year-old man who is one of the best in their industry, be it coal mining or other energy-related fields, are not going to just turn around and become a master or expert craftsman in terms of software.
It's just completely unlikely.
It is a cold, callous, and ignorant thing to say to somebody.
You can't just take someone's passion away from them.
But I will say this.
I don't know what the solution is.
I think it's important to point out that it's no fault of their own, their jobs are becoming obsolete.
Certainly, we can bring some of these jobs back because regulation needlessly got rid of them.
We can see, you know, the climate change groups, people like Hillary Clinton made that mistake in 2016, and Hillary Clinton regretted saying it.
I'll show you that in a second.
But the fact is, jobs in general, many will become obsolete.
I don't know what the solution is, but I'll tell you this right now, especially if you're a conservative.
We need to figure out a way.
You know, not everybody in this country has a savings account.
Not everybody has a retirement account.
You know, the economy is doing better than ever.
People are starting to save now.
These are good things, but what do you tell someone who's 50 years old, who is laid off through no fault of their own, and then Joe Biden says, well, go learn the code?
That is not the answer.
I'm not saying socialism is the answer, but I think Andrew Yang is at least trying to think of something.
The solution could be to bring the jobs back.
I don't know.
They try work training programs, but the reality is it is not fair to cast someone out into the wilds with no resources.
Your job's gone.
I'm sorry.
You may have been a loyal employee of this company for 30 years.
You may be the best in the business, but nobody needs it anymore.
Therefore, you don't deserve money.
Some people might argue, well, they should have saved.
Yeah, I know, but some people have medical expenses, man.
A lot of people have high medical costs.
And as you get older, those costs pile up, and it makes it hard for some people to save.
So let's just say there's someone who did everything right, someone in their family got sick, it ate through their savings, they don't have enough, and now what are they supposed to do?
Let's read a little bit more.
Gizmodo says, the issue has less to do with whether programming is a desirable skill set.
It is in the same sense that speaking Arabic or having a master's degree in mechanical
engineering are desirable skill sets. To Biden's point, there are plenty of
success stories, including with laid off minors. This instead has more to do with whether everyone
has the desire or aptitude to learn programming to plunge into an ultra competitive job market
for developers, whether job retraining programs are actually effective or will be adequately funded,
or whether advising someone to just get a much more lucrative job in a high tech sector
actually comes across as helpful.
Here's what's funny.
Breonna Woo, for instance, is no friend of conservatives or the right.
But even Breonna Woo says Biden telling coal miners just move to high-tech is so tone-deaf and unhelpful.
Completely right!
Basically, they're going to show a bunch of people, kind of on the left, saying, like, this is nuts.
But let's move on from this, because I want to show you some things, right?
The downfall of the Democrats, because they don't seem to understand what's really going on.
This is a story from 2017.
Hillary Clinton's coal gaffe is a microcosm of her twisted treatment by the media.
Sure.
But let's read.
Back in March 2016 at a Democratic town hall in Ohio, Hillary Clinton made what was probably the best-known gaffe of her campaign.
As part of her answer on energy policy, she said, quote, We're going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business.
This was immediately taken as a sign of her hostility to the working class and a confirmation of Democrats' war on coal.
She now calls it the comment she regrets most, devoting an entire chapter to it in her new book, What Happened?
The point I had wanted to make, she writes, was the exact opposite of how it came out.
She felt absolutely sick about the whole thing.
One of the best-known gaffes of the 2016 campaign was a Democrat saying, we gonna take your jobs away.
And guess what?
This is the first time Joe Biden said it.
I believe it was on the debate stage when he said he's willing to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of energy sector jobs if it meant bettering the environment.
Now, listen, man.
I appreciate the desire to help the environment, but not at the cost of the economy when it causes individuals to suffer, become destitute, drug addicted, see their homes lost.
There's a lot of problems here.
The bigger question is that we've come to a point where we're at a really serious Fork in the road.
It's a big challenge.
What's the point of being alive if we have to sacrifice the well-being of certain people in our economy because we want to make sure the environment is better?
At the same time, if the environment goes to crap, we all die, okay?
And that's not good either.
So we have a serious challenge.
There are many people who are doomsayers and think the world's gonna end in 12 years, and that's nuts.
It's just not true.
If you look at the actual science, if you actually ask the actual scientists, they say no!
The world is not ending in 12 years or 8 years or otherwise.
But we do have a challenge.
Okay, there are a lot of people, these are their jobs.
I do think it makes sense to slowly start phasing things out, but like through grandfathering, maybe saying like, Honestly, you know what, man?
I really don't know.
I'm looking at this and I see a rock and a hard place.
I will just put it this way.
Democrats, if you tell union workers in the energy sector we're coming for your jobs, don't be surprised when many, many more people than just those workers decide to vote for the other guy who says, I'm actually going to bring your jobs back.
Because that's what they want.
And it's not their fault they don't have those jobs.
The last thing you want to do is say, we're going to sacrifice your jobs.
You should learn to code.
And we're here to shut down the coal industry.
Sorry.
Anyone advocating for ending jobs, that's a path to defeat.
Let me give a shout out to Sagar Anjeti, who tweeted this.
You can see I retweeted it.
He said, Biden 2020.
Well, hyperbolic.
Yes, I agree with the sentiment.
your jobs overseas, sending your sons to die in war, and devastating your community.
I would do it all to the nth degree if you let me back in the White House.
Now learn to code.
And I think, well, hyperbolic.
Yes, I agree with the sentiment.
Joe Biden does not have the best records.
He's like Hillary Clinton, but with less mental acuity.
Actually, no, it's like, if you combined Joe Biden with Hillary Clinton, you'd at least get somebody who could stand up straight and think properly.
The problem with both of them is that, you know, Hillary Clinton kept falling down, Joe Biden doesn't know where he is half the time.
So you might get a whole candidate if you put them both together.
Sorry, though.
I'm gonna have to say it, man.
Joe Biden's track record is not good.
It's not.
Just because he's a moderate doesn't mean he deserves to win.
And I think the only reason people want to vote for him is because, you know, he's the only guy they know.
When you actually look at the donations, guess who is in the lead?
It's Bernie Sanders.
And for all of his gaffes and problems, I'll say this, man.
You might think he's bad policy-wise.
I will absolutely call him out for his pandering.
In 2016, one of the biggest gaffes he ever made was saying white people didn't know what it was like to be poor.
Please.
There are more white people in poverty than any other race in the country.
And I think it's just because they're mostly white people, but it's a fact.
There's tons of poor people.
And I've been to these, like, super rural areas in, like, the Oklahoma panhandle, or is it Oklahoma?
Yeah, like, I've driven through there.
I've driven off the beaten path.
On my way through L.A.
back to New York, I was trying to go to areas people didn't see before, and I've seen poverty in these areas when their towns are falling apart, when their industry is drying up.
You can't just say that.
Major, major gaffe.
And Sanders has repeatedly pandered.
But take a look at this.
You gotta give it to the guy.
The guy's at least willing to be straight to your face about what his plans are.
There's a story from The Hill.
On September 19th, only got 31 shares.
Sanders defends job losses from ending use of fossil fuels.
Boy, if I could tell you this, the Democrats have learned nothing from 2016, I could go back to September.
Listen, man.
Senator Bernie Sanders on Thursday defended his plan to shut down the fossil fuel industry, despite potential downsides for the industry's employees.
Sanders' $16 trillion Green New Deal climate plan calls for eliminating fossil fuel use by 2050.
The 2020 presidential candidate spoke more fully about a just transition.
This is not the answer.
It is not the answer to legislate away people's jobs.
We need new technology.
That's the only path forward.
The Green New Deal plan should be heavily investing away from blown up kids and stuff, and maybe towards new energy technology.
I know Trump has ragged on wind in weird ways because of the manufacturing process of it.
He's always taken out of context when he criticized this.
They tried making it seem like Trump was saying fumes come from wind turbines when Trump was talking about the manufacturing process.
Listen, you don't need to lie about what Trump was saying.
And that's what they did.
They were like, you know, Trump said, when you look at the manufacturing, you know, oh man, the fumes, the fumes are crazy.
And they try cutting the quote to make it seem like Trump was implying fumes come out of wind turbines.
No, no, no, no, no.
Trump's point about the manufacturing process is Somewhat fair.
There's always going to be a carbon footprint in the manufacturing process and fumes and stuff from everything.
It's not an excuse to not build wind turbines.
I think it's a great idea.
So Trump is wrong on that one, but I'm not going to pretend that Trump was implying that wind turbines generate smog.
That's so stupid.
That's why we can't have nice things.
Because you can't actually have an argument about what Trump was actually saying because they purposefully take him out of context to hurt him.
But anyway, anyway.
Back to Bernie Sanders.
I can appreciate that Bernie is saying, look, we're going to take your jobs away.
Joe Biden said the same thing.
Congratulations.
All of the unions, okay, don't want to lose all of those union members.
Put it this way.
If the unions have 10,000 employees who work in the energy sector, and they lose their jobs, guess what?
No more union dues!
Yeah, they're not going to like that.
More importantly, the unions are supposed to be fighting for the people who are members, so you're going to see a lot of other sectors joining together with the unions saying, no, you are not going to take our jobs away.
In fact, there was a letter drafted, I believe it was by the AFL-CIO when AOC published the Green New Deal, that was a lot of letters, where they said something like, no one is doing more towards finding renewable energy than we are.
Well, I got a couple more for you.
This is from February of, well, I guess not technically last year.
It's going to be a new decade soon.
Labor unions fear Democrats' Green New Deal poses job threat.
You don't say.
They shouldn't fear that it does.
It literally does.
Bernie is telling you to your face, we will take your jobs.
Joe Biden said to your face, we will take away your jobs.
And Joe Biden's response was, just learn to code.
One of the most offensive and callous things you can say.
In fact, it was so offensive, people on Twitter were getting banned for telling journalists to do it.
That's how offensive it apparently is.
And this is the world we're in right now.
I can respect Bernie and Joe being honest about their desire to shut down an industry and take jobs away.
But if you don't look at, like, they're not even listening to what Hillary Clinton said when she said she regretted talking about shutting down the coal industry.
Well, they just upped the ante, man.
You know what's funny?
I covered this the other day on my second channel.
Did you know that according to a Gallup survey, Donald Trump and Barack Obama are both tied for first place in America's Most Admired Men?
Trump's approval rating keeps going up.
It does.
The economy is better than ever and it will probably keep going up because of it.
People have finally gotten past his bad behavior because they're like, at least my life is better.
And what's the alternative?
Trump is saying, I'm going to bring jobs back to your community.
I'm going to end these awful trade agreements and shift the tides of favor towards America.
And Bernie Sanders is saying, I'm going to shut down an entire industry.
Do you know what that would do to the economy?
Listen, the economy is this big network, okay?
If the people in the energy sector can't afford goods, well then that has a ripple effect.
Small towns that are based in the energy sector will start drying up.
Towns, you know, there are some towns that exist because there's one big factory.
And then all the bars and all the restaurants and hotels provide service to the people who work through that factory.
The factory is paid for through, you know, electric bills, through government subsidy and things like that.
You come in and shut those factories down, it's not just the people who work for the energy sector who will lose their jobs.
And Americans know this.
So when you say we want to shut down the fossil fuel industry, there's right now some little old lady who sells, I don't know, she sells little dolls on the side of the street.
That's her business.
But she's in an energy town, she's in a coal town, and she's thinking to herself, I make a living selling my art.
If all these people lose their jobs, If no one has to come here anymore to do inspections, to do business meetings on the power plant, then I can't sell my art to anybody because there won't be any money here.
There are some people who serve pancakes, and they're like, my biggest customer base are the people who are coming in for breakfast just before going off to the power plant.
And I make them breakfast.
And guess what?
If they lose their job, I lose my customers.
This will end more small towns, and they don't care.
What they don't understand, because whatever's wrong with them, they can't seem to learn.
Trump won because he got the majority of counties.
Yes, not people, but he did get the majority of counties.
And that makes sense because, you know, L.A.
County and, like, you know, I don't know what Manhattan County is, Kings County or whatever, they're very dense.
But there's a lot of small counties, and Trump got the overwhelming majority.
And many of these people are seeing their towns dry up, their jobs dry up, and they're worried about it.
What do you think is going to happen?
Man, I'll tell you this.
There's some guy right now who's 45 years old, and he's a plumber.
And he's got a couple kids, and he's trying to figure out how to give his kids a better life, and he knows the only thing driving his town is coal mining, fossil fuels, fracking, or otherwise.
I'm no fan of this industry, by no means.
But I certainly understand, whether you like it or not, if you tell these people you're coming for their jobs and you will destroy their town, they will do everything in their power to stop you.
So you know what, man?
It extends beyond this.
I'll wrap this up with this last segment because I covered this yesterday.
Bernie Sanders says Medicare for All will cost jobs.
I got to say right now, okay?
I have respect for Bernie Sanders saying it to your face.
I really, really do.
It takes a bold politician to look you in the eyes and say, we're going to implement Medicare for All.
It's going to cost you two million jobs.
All these jobs gone.
We're going to shut down the fossil fuel industry.
All your jobs gone.
I'm like, wow!
That's bold, man.
That's a bold thing to say.
Now I know there are people who would say, he's saying he's being honest with you because he wants to do the right thing and he believes it will be the best path forward.
That's fine if you believe that.
Just know that there are people who are going to lose their jobs who don't care.
They don't care because you're going to destroy their lives.
Do we need to reform the medical industry?
You better believe it, man.
It's a disaster.
And people need better access.
We need to lower prices.
We need to figure this out.
We really, really do.
Bernie Sanders' solution would cost 2 million jobs.
And that's been one of the biggest hurdles.
Because how do you convince 2 million people?
2 million people to sacrifice their livelihood.
What they're an expert at.
The only thing they've ever been, you know, it's their career.
People like working.
They like doing things.
It's hard.
It's really hard.
But it's also going to be the fossil fuel industry.
And it's mind-blowing to me that they think this is the path forward.
I'll tell you this.
Final thought, to reiterate.
You might think it's the right thing to do.
It might be the right thing to do.
You will never win an election by campaigning on destroying the livelihoods of people, even if you think it's the right thing to do.
I don't have solutions for you, man.
I really, really don't.
I think the environment is in trouble if humans keep polluting it.
But I do believe the solution will be technological advancement.
And I believe necessity is the mother of invention.
So my fingers are crossed that we can find a way to move people into other industries.
I don't know exactly what we do.
I don't know if it's possible.
And I certainly think looking in the eyes saying, learn to code is not the solution to it.
I think it's unfair that someone who is a coal miner should lose access to their resources or a lucrative position simply because of obsolescence.
Well, what's the solution?
I honestly have no idea.
I don't think it's socialism, but I also think it's not fair to just say, sorry, you went through hardship and you can't afford it, too bad, out in the street.
Some might say they should have saved, fine, I don't know.
It's a serious conundrum.
But I will just say one more time, telling them you will take their job away ensures your defeat.
Stick around.
Next segment will be at 1 p.m.
YouTube.com slash Timcast News.
It is a different channel, and I will see you all there.
Donald Trump is declaring war on the Democratic debates.
It was a couple weeks ago that it was reported Trump was considering not debating the Democratic nominee because he's concerned about potential bias from the commission.
There's good reason to suspect there's a bias, and I want to go through that story with you from a couple weeks ago, but now we're seeing the actual tactical plan from Donald Trump.
Trump to counter Iowa Democratic debate with Wisconsin rallying.
That's right.
While the Democrats are on stage debating various policy ideas, Trump is going to be on stage expressing his ideas, creating a competing media narrative.
And I gotta tell you this, ratings for the Democratic debates have been declining Rapidly, the last debate, I believe, was the lowest.
Before that, it was the lowest, and it just keeps going down.
Not only that, a lot of people are being excluded because the ever-expanding, or I should say, the more difficult criteria with every Democratic debate removes some popular candidates.
Notably, Tulsi Gabbard wasn't able to qualify for the last debate, though she said she wouldn't do it in the first place.
We saw Andrew Yang recently ask for more polls so we can see more diversity on this Democratic debate.
Notably, again, Cory Booker didn't make it either.
As semi-popular candidates, though they poll low, are getting removed, less people care to watch these things.
I'm willing to bet Donald Trump's campaign rally, should it be covered by, say, Fox News, will get more ratings than the actual Democratic debate, and Trump knows it.
But that brings me to the bigger point.
Moving forward, why Trump is going to refuse to debate the Democratic nominee, period.
And I'm going to show you why.
Because there is favoritism, and there is actual statistical evidence that Trump will be hurt by it.
Now they're trying to play up that Trump is scared.
I kid you not, there's an article saying Trump admits he's not scared to debate.
No.
It's not so much about being scared, it's about why should Trump cede any ground.
Personally, he should debate.
If the Democratic opponent gains in the polls, it means Trump did a bad job and good.
But Trump is going to play it safe, presumably, and do things like this.
So let's get started and read about exactly what's going on.
With Trump's Wisconsin rally counter to the Democratic debate.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com slash Dunnit if you'd like to support my work.
There's a PayPal option, a crypto option, a physical address.
But of course, the best thing you can do, share this video.
Let's break some echo chambers for our New Year's resolution.
I know it's not perfect.
I know I have my biases.
But more importantly, I believe the end is nigh for YouTube commentary channels, you know, political commentators and journalist types like me, because YouTube is effectively quarantining our channels, they're removing us from recommendations, and they're pushing our viewers towards mainstream media, which means In over a long enough period of time, my channel will stop appearing on your channel and you'll have to seek people out.
That means the best way to survive this tumultuous time is for y'all, if you like what I do, to share the video.
That would be greatly appreciated and it would counteract anything an algorithm would do.
Let's read the news from the Associated Press.
They say, President Donald Trump will hold a campaign rally in Wisconsin next month, countering a Democratic presidential debate set for the same night in Iowa.
Trump's campaign says the rally is set for January 14th at the UW-Milwaukee Panther Arena.
It's the same night that CNN and the Des Moines Register are sponsoring the first Democratic presidential debate of 2020 at Drake University in Des Moines.
The Milwaukee rally will be Trump's second in less than a week.
The Republican president's campaign has said he'll hold his first 2020 rally in Toledo, Ohio on January 9th.
All three events could unfold against the backdrop of Trump's impeachment trial in the Senate.
The Democratic-controlled House voted earlier this month to impeach Trump on charges of abuse of power and obstructing Congress over his dealings with Ukraine.
The Senate trial is the next step in the process, but it has been delayed while lawmakers figure out whether to call new witnesses.
Alright, let's stop there for a second.
I want to show you this story from the Washington Post that says Donald Trump clearly won the Democratic debate.
It's an opinion piece from September and one of the older debates.
But I want to point something out.
I've tried to figure out what the point of impeachment was.
You may have heard me say this, so I'll just make it quick because they brought it up.
But think about what'll happen with the Democrat debates and the campaign trail just before Super Tuesday in March.
If the Democrats push for a Senate trial, it's not going to hurt Trump.
Trump's going to get more press.
He's going to keep doing his thing.
He's already made tons of money.
His polls are already up.
People are already overwhelmingly opposing impeachment.
Who's it going to hurt?
It's not going to hurt Joe Biden.
It might if bad press comes out, maybe some witnesses.
It's going to hurt Bernie.
It's going to hurt some of these other senators who are running for the Democratic ticket who might miss a debate or are going to get pulled off the campaign trail to participate in a Senate trial where they're not allowed to speak and must sit quietly as impartial jurors.
And then Pete Buttigieg and Joe Biden will be free to campaign just before Super Tuesday.
And maybe that's the real reason they're doing it.
This idea is not mine.
It was actually floated by a lot of progressives.
We'll see what happens.
Either way, seems like the Democrats are nuts for pushing it because it's only propping up Trump.
But let's go back in time.
I got a bunch of stuff I want to show you about the Democratic debates.
And I want to tell you why Trump's probably strategically correct To avoid debating Democrats.
Although, in my opinion, ethically wrong to do so, but it's his choice.
In this op-ed from the Washington Post in September, Kathleen Parker writes, Wait, wait, wait.
You might be saying, how could he have won?
He wasn't on the stage!
night left one clear impression. Donald Trump won. Wait, wait, wait. You might be saying,
how could he have won? He wasn't on the stage. That's exactly why he won. She says,
please don't shoot the messenger.
My left index finger recoiled a bit as it reached for the T on the keyboard.
But it's true for this reason.
Democrats are too earnest.
They care too much.
They're too smart.
They know too much.
Oh, oh, just wait for me to refute this.
You're gonna love it.
There's, hold on, let me say this.
But wait, there's more.
I got a whole list of sources rejecting the premise.
But let's read on.
Whoever says, as Senator Kamala Harris did, the American people are so much better than this, needs to get out more.
This isn't to recommend that primary candidates should be more like President Trump, not that they could, but as a panel of candidates, they're missing a key element essential to voter interest.
Not brilliant policies or the rote delivery of statistics, but a clear and firm message, as well as the other thing that Trump had in 2016, quote, It isn't necessarily good.
She uses saying, it girl, but boys have it too.
And she's putting it in quotes.
It isn't necessarily good.
In fact, in men, it's probably just a little bit bad.
Bad enough to attract attention, to convey toughness, to seduce with dazzle, or at least
bedevil those around him.
Love him or hate him, or just wish him away, Trump has the X Factor in spades and jokers.
She's right.
So, she goes on to talk about a variety of things, but she's right about this.
Donald Trump has the X Factor.
Why should Donald Trump bother sharing a stage with someone who doesn't have it, if it's only going to result in a bump?
But the reality is, she's overwhelmingly wrong.
See, she says, they're too earnest.
They care too much.
They're too smart.
They know too much.
I seem to recall Tulsi Gabbard taking Kamala Harris to task.
And it became this major news cycle.
Tulsi was the most searched for candidate.
She utterly destroyed Kamala Harris, pointing out her horrible record on law enforcement.
So, no, they're not too earnest.
They're all liars, for the most part.
And a couple of them, I think, are honest.
I happen to like Andrew Yang and Tulsi Gabbard.
Take it for what it is.
We'll see if they make the next debate.
But let's move on to some of the main issues of the debate that helped Donald Trump win, even though he wasn't on the stage.
You want to talk about them being too earnest?
How about this?
This is the famous story many of you are probably familiar with.
And I'll tell you this right now.
It's the end of the year.
It's New Year's.
So let's consider this a kind of like flashback episode of all the most popular cuts of the Democratic debates.
Show of hands on immigrant health care belies a thorny issue.
Why, yes, we all remember when the Democratic candidates were asked, how many of your plans for government health care would include non-citizens?
And they all raised their hands, some of them seemingly begrudgingly.
This was a very, very bad moment.
In fact, this moment was so bad, they made a rule for the next debate, I think this is true, fact check me, that you couldn't ask a show of hands question anymore because it made them all look insane.
And they did!
Because I'll tell you this, man.
America is not the woke Twitterati.
Regular Americans were shocked to discover that they were offering up government healthcare, their taxpayer dollars, to people who weren't citizens of the country.
But wait!
There's more!
How about this story?
The National Review.
This is just from a week or so ago.
Biden says yes to sacrificing oil and gas jobs for clean energy.
I brought this up in my earlier segment on this channel, that Joe Biden is making the same mistake Hillary Clinton did.
And Hillary Clinton said it was one of her biggest regrets when she said that one of her tasks was to end the coal industry or something to that effect.
Joe Biden gets up on the debate stage and says yes to sacrificing oil and gas jobs for clean energy.
And also when it comes to health care, I also highlighted this earlier, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren saying two million jobs to be cut.
Now there's a reason why I'm highlighting this.
It's not just because the Washington Post wants to claim they care too much and they're too earnest.
I think what I've shown you here, first and foremost, they're not too earnest.
They have no idea what they're talking about when they raise their hand and giving away health care.
And they don't care too much when they say they're going to sacrifice your job for their ideology.
That's the opposite.
What we're really seeing is exactly why Donald Trump has no reason to debate the Democrats.
They have thrown themselves under the bus with ridiculous, insane policy.
Donald Trump need only sit back and laugh as they continually push lies, deception, and ridiculous policy platforms that Americans don't agree with.
Why would Trump give them the opportunity to correct the record?
He won't.
He doesn't need to.
I think he won't.
Here's another story.
Elizabeth Warren dodges questions on middle-class tax hikes under Medicare for All.
Democratic presidential candidates tore into Elizabeth Warren after she dodged questions on whether middle-class Americans would have to pay more in taxes under her Medicare for All proposal.
This one's a twofer.
You see, In this debate story, Warren refused to answer the question and got mocked for it, and then Bernie Sanders did the right thing and admitted, your taxes will go up.
They're going to take away your private health care if you want it, and your taxes will go up, but overall costs are expected to go down.
It's a fair point.
Bernie's basically saying, yes, just say it.
We will tax you.
You will pay more, but you'll pay less in health care costs.
That's his pitch.
And I appreciate him being honest.
But once again, we can see this is a twofer.
You see, the Democrats heard Elizabeth Warren refusing to be honest.
That was bad for the Democrats.
That was bad for Warren.
Then they heard they're going to raise your taxes, take away your private health care.
That was also bad for Democrats.
Why would Trump actually need to debate them?
It would give them an opportunity to correct the record, which is why we're hearing Trump might not.
But let's move on, because I want to get more to Trump's reasoning.
There's a story from the New York Times explaining why he doesn't want to do it.
Here's a story I've highlighted several times, and I know I've been rehashing this.
If you've watched all of my videos, you've seen it several times.
But I have to do it for contextual reasons.
I have to show the sources.
It's a certified source.
It's Vox.
And there's a lot of people who don't watch every video.
Democrats' 2020 economy dilemma explained.
They say, at Thursday's debate, there seemed to be a firm consensus among the candidates that the right path is simply to deny that the economy really is performing all that strongly.
See, even the left-wing Vox has admitted The economy is doing great.
They say President Donald Trump with his typical flair is saying we have the greatest economy in history.
It isn't.
But something can in fact be quite good even without being the best ever.
This is from Vox.
They're progressives.
They are straight up telling us the economy is good.
We all know it.
We have a poll from USA Today where 80% of people said their life is getting better next year because the economy is doing really really well and they say it's because of Trump.
The Democrats' only option is to deny, as Vox has pointed out.
So here's what I'm laying out before you.
Take a look at this story from the New York Times.
Will Trump debate a Democrat in 2020?
He's not so sure.
The President's concern is not so much whom he will be debating, but the commission that runs the debates.
I think Trump should debate.
I think he really, really should.
I think it is the moral thing to do.
However, I can't blame him for not doing it.
It's not just about the strategic advantage.
See, all of that stuff I just showed you are huge net negatives for the Democrats.
Right now, consultants are scrambling, papers are flying, scripts are being written, and they're telling the Democrats how to correct their message.
Given the next opportunity, here's what you need to say.
And we noticed this.
As the debates went on, people sort of walked things back.
Kamala Harris at first said, I'll abolish your private healthcare, and then was like, no, no, no, I didn't mean it.
A fact check, man, I don't have that source pulled up.
I just want to make sure I make that clear.
But we can see they started to walk back the more extreme policy when they realized it was unpopular.
On the debate stage, they're trying to win, and so they're constantly one-upping each other to be more left.
This is a huge advantage for Trump.
They have spun a web for which they cannot escape.
And Donald Trump debating them would give them the advantage in correcting the record.
But Trump has a real reason not to do it.
Proof is in the pudding that the moderators are biased.
Check this out.
CNN's Anderson Cooper faces scrutiny for invoking Hunter Biden in Democratic debate.
This is back from October 15th.
CNN's Anderson Cooper was accused Tuesday night of giving Joe Biden a pass on his son's business dealings in Ukraine and also for elevating the president's lies and bringing them up at all.
Well, they're trying to make it seem like, well, Anderson Cooper played both and it was wrong because he helped Trump but he also, you know, gave Biden a pass.
No, the reality is Americans have real questions about why Joe Biden's son was getting paid so much for doing so little.
That's legitimate.
You call it Trump's lie?
That's ridiculous.
We know for a fact Hunter Biden had this job and we want to know why.
I don't care what the reason is.
I want to know why.
Was it because he got a job over his daddy's name?
Well, I'm upset by that.
And Joe Biden should not be president if he sits around while his kids use his name to peddle influence.
Sorry, not happy.
But what happened then?
Anderson Cooper said, we know it's debunked and not true.
Care to answer?
Well, thanks for answering for him.
You didn't answer any of the questions.
You just asserted something that wasn't true to defend Joe Biden when the questions were never answered.
And that's the real reason Donald Trump shouldn't be debating.
I mean, in terms of whether or not it's going to be fair and strategic, Donald Trump is looking at two things.
They've already been biased in favor of the establishment.
They've already cut certain people out.
The DNC is rejecting Andrew Yang's calls for more polls.
Look at this, from the other day.
DNC rejects Yang's request for new polls ahead of the next debate.
These candidates have repeatedly been saying, you need to accept these polls, you need to push this.
And the establishment had said, buzz off.
So Trump knows the whole thing is rigged.
It's even rigged against the lesser-known Democrats.
So why would Trump bother participating in a rigged debate?
Especially when the Democrats have already laid their bed for themselves with ridiculous statements and ridiculous policy.
But let me show you this story.
The New York Times brings up a really interesting point about what Trump learned from 2016.
President Trump is discussing with his advisors the possibility of sitting out the general election debates in 2020 because of his misgivings about the commission that oversees them, according to two people familiar with the discussions.
Mr. Trump has told advisors that he does not trust the commission on presidential debates, the nonprofit entity that sponsors the debates, the two people said.
Less of a concern for Mr. Trump than who will emerge as the Democratic nominee is which media personality will be chosen as debate monitor according to people in contact with him.
And that brings me back to the story I showed you about Anderson Cooper.
They're going to have a biased left-wing journalist and Trump's going to say, not interested.
He doesn't need to be.
He's going to hold a campaign rally at the same time and espouse his message to a willing rap, to a willing base, and it's going to be aired on TV.
Why bother with debating?
Again, I think he should debate.
I'd like to hear his ideas challenged.
But it's bad from across the board, and I'll blame the media for this one.
The media who is biased and has already shown they will defend Joe Biden when no answers were given to any of us over what his son was doing.
Think about it.
If Joe Biden's the nominee and he's on stage with Trump, Anderson Cooper's gonna go up and be like, Trump, you lied.
Explain your lie.
Joe Biden, I'm so sorry he lied about you.
Why would anyone participate in that?
Check this out, though.
At a State of the Race campaign briefing in Arlington, the president's advisors declined to comment on what their plan was for the debates.
One senior advisor to the president seemed to wince at the question and said it was not something advisors were prepared to discuss until next year.
In the 2016 general election debates, Mr. Trump repeatedly complained about being at a disadvantage to Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee.
And the post-debate polls showed Mr. Trump had a good reason to be concerned.
Mr. Trump and Ms.
Clinton were essentially tied in the polls going into the first debate.
But she received a bump after each of the three face-to-face matchups.
A Gallup poll conducted after the third debate, for instance, found that 60% of viewers thought Ms.
Clinton did a better job, while 31% chose Trump.
After his performance in one of the debates was panned, Mr. Trump blamed a defective mic and questioned whether it was done on purpose to put him at a disadvantage.
It turned out that a technical malfunction had indeed affected the volume of his voice during the debate.
A malfunction, you say?
Just like it was a glitch that Twitter removed his tweets?
Sorry.
We all saw that debate where Andrew Yang's mic was off.
You could see him talking and no sound was coming out.
And you know what?
He didn't do enough about it.
But Trump, on the other hand, would be like, excuse me, excuse me.
Anderson Cooper's response is basically that Trump is a liar.
Great.
So I'm loving Vanity Fair's Bok Bok Magok method.
We'll see if it plays out well for them.
I kind of think it won't, because Trump is—he plays strategically.
He knows how to run the press.
He knows how the game is played.
And he plays it better than the Democrats.
Thus, he is holding a rally during the Democratic debates.
And I'm willing to bet the ratings for his rally will probably be better.
Okay, maybe that's not true.
Maybe that's a bit unfair.
I bet the Democratic debates ratings are going to be like 5 million.
Trump's rally might be only a couple million.
But Trump's going to get a lot of views online.
And Trump's going to steal the limelight.
He's going to make sure a lot of people I'll put it this way.
While the Democrats are spitting and yelling and talking about their crazy policies, as I've already shown you, the weird gaffes and stuff they've had, Trump's going to draw attention away from them.
It's entirely possible.
That while we saw the Democratic debates getting around 6 million viewers in the last debate, Trump's ratings might pull several million away from that debate towards his rally, in which case the ratings may be even lower.
Listen, I watch Democratic debates.
I also watch the Trump rallies.
I watch the news.
I want to see what's being said.
I'm going to have to choose now between Trump and the debates.
A lot of people will feel that way.
But I'm going to wrap this up with one final story.
I never like using singular polls, okay?
I always like using the aggregate.
And right now, in the aggregate, Trump's job approval rating is at a high point.
Its aggregate is around 45%, which is pretty much a campaign high.
As I showed you, 80% of people are optimistic.
The Democrats are lying on the debate stage saying the economy is bad.
But Zogby released this poll showing that Trump's approval rating is now over 50%.
Whether you trust Zogby or not, some people don't.
There are now a couple polls, notably Rasmussen teeters around 50%.
Zogby does, again, not a fan of using individual polls.
But I want to show this, I want to wrap it up with this for one reason.
The Democrats have made numerous gaffes.
If more than one poll now is showing Trump's approval rating going up, if then the aggregate is going up, if among the African American voter is at 36% according to three different polls including Emerson, Trump has absolutely no reason to veer off course.
His entire strategy, whatever it is, is working.
He should stay the course, and he will keep gaining, and there's no reason to risk that by giving his platform to a Democrat.
As we can see, bringing it all back to the original story, Trump is going to hold a counter-event, his own rally during the debate.
Why bother being on stage and telling all of his fans to look to the Democrat?
He doesn't need to.
I think he should.
I think the debates are important for us to figure out who has the good ideas.
The problem is, the media has been biased, so Trump has a real excuse to say, not playing your game.
Now, the left will say Trump is scared, they'll say bawk, bawk, ba-gawk, but it's not good enough.
I'm sorry.
Trump's got the upper hand on this one.
And the New York Times even shows you why.
But I'll leave it there.
Stick around.
Next segment's coming up at YouTube.com slash TimCastNews at 6 p.m.
And, well, if this is the last video you watch because you're going to get prepared for your festivities because the decade is ending in but a few hours, then Happy New Year, everybody, and I will see you all tomorrow.
But I will have three more shorter segments up.
YouTube.com slash TimCastNews.
It is a different channel.
Thanks for hanging out.
The ratings are in, and Brian Stelter's Reliable Sources on CNN hits rock bottom in key demo.
I mean, I'm not trying to be disrespectful for the guy, but I think he's basically become the, we're smarter than you and the orange man is bad show.
He has one segment I'm very, very critical of where he says, don't listen to Fox News.
Or I'll be fair, he shows Fox News and says, tune out the spin and tune into us.
He's certainly not as bad as Chuck Todd is.
And I want to give some defense to Brian Stelter because he highlighted some quotes from, it's the dude from Washington Post, Marty Baron, who said, maybe it wasn't him, but they were, it was Chuck Todd and this guy from the press saying that Donald Trump supporters Or they were reading a quote from somebody about Trump supporters believe in fairy tales like Noah's Ark, and a bunch of people got really mad at Brian Stelter saying he shouldn't have shared the information.
That's not true.
Stelter absolutely should have shared the information, and you should be grateful that he pointed out that these people on MSNBC were insulting your religion, so I can respect that.
I certainly don't think Brian Stelter is the worst.
I just think he's a biased actor, same as me, but doesn't admit it.
So here's the thing.
You watch Brian's show on CNN, and I'll tell you all this stuff as though he's right and he's smarter than everyone else.
It's the opposite of what I kind of do.
I say, I think I do a good job, but you better watch what Brian Stelter and David Pakman and other people have to say because it's probably things I miss.
It's kind of an inverted message.
So while I can certainly respect what he does, I'm very critical of it because he's giving you a false sense of security.
It's the most dangerous thing in media.
But anyway, anyway, we'll read the story, and I want to be fair.
I want to be honest about analytics.
And in doing so, I must point out, Fox News boasts best primetime ratings ever!
Finishes on top of Basic Cable for fourth straight year.
Did you know the Hallmark Channel beats CNN in ratings?
Let me explain to you the key demo, how it works, what's up with Brian Stelter's ratings, I'll tell you why I think this is, and I also want to tell you about some changes I'm going to be working through in the next year to actually try and solve for this problem, even though it may actually be bad for me.
First, CNN and almost all cable TV ratings are on the decline in general, except apparently Fox News with their best primetime ratings ever.
Daytime ratings, my understanding is, have been going down.
I've covered this in the past.
But see, what happens is, as the ratings collapse, these channels become more and more desperate to cling to a particular narrative.
Now, I'll tell you this.
It's one thing for, in my opinion, for me, to have a personal opinion and, you know, particular disdain for a certain class of elite politicians.
I'm very, very critical of the Democrats.
My framing is often, you know, very critical of them.
But there are socialists who have a similar framing, too.
It's nothing to do with politics.
I think the way I explain it to people is that, you know, I grew up in a basically completely Democrat-controlled city, and Republicans didn't play a role in any of the things I faced.
So now I see the Democratic Party, you know, Joe Biden saying, learn to code and all this stuff, and it's like anti-working class, anti-union.
I feel like they're duplicitous.
So it's nothing to do with my personal politics, but yeah.
The problem for CNN, however, for Brian Stelter is that his channel has devolved into the Orange Man Bad Show, but it's mostly about how, like, he's the reliable authoritative source when CNN peddled fake news and FBI talking points for three years and were disproven.
So if you want to ask why the ratings are down for CNMI, Brian Stelter's ratings are rock bottom, and Fox News' primetime are at record highs, I mean, look no further than the Mueller report and the Horowitz report.
You may get a bombastic, sensational view from Hannity, and I am very critical, and I've been very critical of Hannity, but you're still getting correct information, just a bit, I don't know, bombastic, right?
And it's kind of like, I think you need to balance your diet outside of Fox News, but at least they're not telling you fake nonsense.
There have been some bad stories from Fox News that have been retracted, but there's a consensus among left and right outside of the Democratic establishment that Rachel Maddow and MSNBC is cranking out trash.
You guys gotta turn on the Hill TV's Rising with Crystal Ball and Cigar and Jetty because you've got a bouncy, you've got a progressive, you've got a conservative, and they're fair to people when they have them on and try to understand them.
Not like what CNN is doing.
And to an extent, not what Fox News is doing, but hey, at least Fox News is telling you what was really happening, right?
So let's read this.
Let me explain how these ratings work.
They say CNN's beleaguered media show Reliable Sources with Brian Stelter hit an embarrassing new low on Dec.
22, when it averaged only 85,000 viewers among a key age group.
Stelter regularly touts the significance of the news demographic of adults age 25 to 54, but the dismal performance marked his lowest viewership of 2019.
Right now, I am doing some changes to my channel.
There's going to be a new show.
I think I'm going to do it.
I've been saying I'm going to do things, but we'll do it.
But I average about just around 900,000 to a million viewers for my hour and a half content every single day.
Those people are all in the key demo.
All of them.
So it's shocking to me to see Brian Seltzer's show only getting 85,000 when I'm getting like 10 times that.
Granted, I do have 18 to 24 as well, but they're a smaller percentage.
So it's around 75%, 70 or so percent of my viewers are 25 to 54.
And that's, you know, and so there is some overlap.
So I think it's fair to say Because some people watch multiple videos per day, it's not most, actually.
It's absolutely not most.
Most people watch, like, 1.2 or so videos per day, so it seems fair to say that, like, 600 or so thousand of the people who watch my content every day are unique, key demographic viewers.
That's almost ten times what CNN's Brian Stelter gets.
So, you know, for whatever reason, you know, the media likes to pretend, like, cable TV news matters.
But I'm going to be fair, so you need to stick around.
I'm going to be fair and I'm going to show how it's actually not all candy canes and rainbows on my end.
Brian Stelter isn't doing as bad as they might want to make it seem.
They say the dismal performance from Stelter came as Fox News' Media Buzz, a direct time slot competitor, thumped CNN's reliable sources across the board in 2019.
Stelter's show averaged only 748,000 total viewers for the year prior to its 2019 finale on December 29, while Media Buzz got 1.3 million over the same period.
In addition, CNN's Sunday morning media show lost 12% of its viewers compared to 2018, while Media Buzz kept its audience with nearly identical year-to-year averages.
I'll tell you this.
It's because Stelter's show is lightly Orange Man bad.
Look, I want to be fair, man.
Stelter's show is not like the fervent, end-of-the-world Rachel Maddow's is.
Stelter, at least, sometimes has fair segments.
It's just a bit biased, and he needs to recognize that he isn't the authority on these things just because he's on CNN.
He acts like he's smarter than everybody.
It's not the right— It's not a smart thing to do, okay?
There's fake news across the board.
Our media establishment is riddled with fake news.
We know this because of Russiagate.
We know this because of Spygate.
The facts come out, okay?
They try to act like everything Trump says is literal.
Calm down.
But he's not the worst.
He's not the worst.
There's been a few— There's been several times, you know, maybe about two or three times per month, I will actually Praise Brian Stelter and use him as a source when he gets things right.
I want to make sure that's clear.
And now I want to show you what is fair.
What's fair is Fox News is getting the best primetime ratings.
Pointing out first, primetime is very different from Sunday morning, although Fox News likes to boast that their Sunday morning show does better than Stelter.
But come on, let's be real.
This is CNN's social blade.
CNN got 165 million views in the last 30 days and their ratings are up 13%.
Now I'll tell you this.
YouTube changed the algorithm to hurt my channel and my ratings went down by a few percentage points.
CNN dramatically helped Fox News more than anyone else because they're directing most independent commentary to Fox News, even progressive Jimmy Dore.
I kid you not.
You look at this data.
Actually, let me just pull it up.
I got this graph right here.
The Jimmy Dore Show.
This is tracking.
When you watch a Jimmy Dore video, which is this white line right here, you are then sent to Fox News, which is this line right here.
I guess you can't really see because it's cut off, but you can see it highlights Fox News.
Most of the people who watch Jimmy Dore, or I'm sorry, if you watch a Jimmy Dore video, he's a progressive, he's a Bernie supporter, you are more likely to be sent to Fox News.
Okay, so Fox News is reaping the rewards of the media outrage.
But I want to make sure this is clear.
While CNN isn't reaping the biggest rewards, and we can make fun of them because their ratings are down and brag about how us on YouTube are doing so well, the reality is CNN is doing really well on YouTube.
And it's because YouTube is propping them up, let's be honest.
But it doesn't matter.
It doesn't matter if YouTube is propping them up.
I mean, it's a serious problem.
It's hurting independent commentary.
But while we sit here and go, like, haha, look at their ratings.
They're down.
And look, I get 800,000 views per day.
What is CNN getting per day as a whole?
2 million.
They're averaging 5.5 million views per day.
Now, I think it's fair to point out CNN floods YouTube with, like, a stream of, like, 50 videos per day.
And I do six.
So that plays a role in it, and they're also getting propped up by YouTube.
But the fact is, they are going to get views, they are going to retain influence.
Don't act like, you know, everyone wants to gloat, like, ah, Brian Seltzer's show is doing bad.
Brian Seltzer's show is probably doing better than mine on YouTube.
I'd be willing to bet it is.
Actually, maybe not.
Maybe that's not true.
But CNN as a whole, because they flood the channel with clips, and then YouTube promotes it, and I've complained to YouTube about this, but they do not care.
Here's what YouTube has done.
They've quarantined political content.
So you don't appear on the front page anymore.
You barely appear in search.
There was even a period where they removed most political content from search, and it was Steven Crowder who complained.
It's all removed.
And now, if you watch my content, I'd be willing to bet if you look at the sidebar right now, Fox News across the board.
Which means they have created an entropic system.
Where it's hard for us to gain subscribers, and we slowly bleed our subscribers to CNN and Fox News.
So I'll tell you this.
I know we're 10 minutes in.
Subscribe, hit the notifications, and share this video.
You may have noticed a lot of the videos I say, I'm always like, make sure you share this video, and there's a reason why.
YouTube can try and shut down the algorithm.
And you know what?
To an extent I get it.
There have been many instances where the algorithm fed a certain kind of content and YouTube changed it.
It's not unique to politics.
But they're doing it now and it's going to hurt creators you know and like.
If you share my videos and others, you overpower the algorithm because there's nothing more powerful than an individual sharing and recommending on their own.
YouTube can say, we're going to show your video to 1,000 people, but if 1,000 people show it to their average of 300 friends on Facebook, you got 300,000 impressions.
That's the power of sharing content you know and like.
Now, I said I was going to be fair, so I'm not done.
I think it's fair to point out CNN's getting them views over on their YouTube.
For the longest time, most of these news outlets are based in liberal cities.
You know, they're based in cities.
Cities tend to be liberal.
So they hire liberals, they have a liberal perspective, and they push a liberal message.
Things are starting to change.
People are leaving big cities.
I got a story.
Maybe a story for the next few days.
But things are changing.
Changing a lot.
And as, you know, the Daily Wire, for instance, gains traction on Facebook, now one of the most prominent outlets.
And they're mostly commentary.
Fox News, also one of those prominent outlets.
Fox News, substantially, you know, more views than CNN.
As the world shifts into a digital landscape where you have an endless supply, an endless field of choices for what you can consume, Things change.
You know, people watch CNN because CNN's kind of a default.
But when you go on YouTube, you're more likely to get Fox News these days.
And that means we're going to see a dramatic change in how, for one, Fox News produces content, but also in how people perceive the world.
You may have noticed Fox News and even the Drudge Report have started becoming a bit more moderate, much to the chagrin of many conservatives and Donald Trump himself tweeting, what's happening to Fox News?
Why are they hiring Democrats?
Why are they doing town halls with Bernie Sanders?
It's because Fox News won.
They know they won.
It's because CNN is dying.
What's really fascinating to me is that I grew up in a world where Fox News was hyper-partisan.
Bill O'Reilly said insane things like, sun goes up, sun goes down.
You can't explain that.
I kid you not, Bill O'Reilly said that.
And I'm sitting here like, what was the famous quote?
We explained that 500 years ago.
He's like, tide goes in, tide goes out.
You can't explain that.
No, no, no, no, no.
We did.
Okay.
Whether you like Bill O'Reilly or not is besides the point.
Forgive me if I'm criticizing a guy you like watching, but I just think the guy's, he's a relic of an archaic age.
And he didn't understand how, you know, like the moon worked.
Fine.
I was one of those people laughing.
Fox News for being absurd and nonsensical.
Today, Fox News is the only channel that's actually been correct.
They're bombastic, they're partisan, but man, you look at CNN and you're drowning in insane trash.
They're telling you things that aren't true.
MSNBC is substantially worse.
Everything's inverted.
How is Fox News more likely to be correct these days?
And it's a fact.
I love how people are like, take the red pill.
No, no, you don't get it.
It's not about anyone taking a red pill.
I'm exactly where I've always been.
But Fox News did a town hall with Bernie Sanders.
Okay, and the ratings were through the roof.
They hired Donna Brazile, a Democrat.
Fox News is becoming the actual news platform.
It's crazy.
And there are still so many people who refuse to accept it.
They're like, Fox News is fake.
Have you watched it?
Have you fact-checked it?
Well, they certainly have their problems, and they've certainly said crazy things, even as of recent.
CNN has become mind-numbing trash, and MSNBC is substantially worse.
What's the worst we got from Fox News?
Sean Hannity talking about Seth Rich, saying it needs to be investigated?
What's the worst we got from Rachel Maddow?
Russia could shut off the power in Fargo in winter and people will freeze to death!
Whoa!
And then bring in on that guy Jonathan Chait who's like, Trump may be a Russian asset going back to 1987!
That's nuts!
It's nuts.
I'm sorry.
It's possible.
Conspiracies might happen sometimes.
But I love how, like, NBC tried smearing me as a conspiracy theorist for me saying they're nuts.
That's the game that's being played.
So now we can see what's going to happen.
I'll tell you this.
YouTube has absolutely been propping up Fox News.
I don't know why, but man, they are.
That's going to be good news for the president.
Even if he's critical of Fox News, even if he thinks, you know, they're becoming too lefty or too moderate, it doesn't matter.
Fox News is substantially more pro-Trump than any of these other news outlets.
These other news outlets will stop at nothing to create the Orange Man bad narrative and push it as hard as possible.
So think about what happens in the coming years.
YouTube, in response to the outrage from these woke journalists from companies that are laying people off and collapsing, creates an algorithm which starts pushing you, you guys who watch my content, to Fox News.
Even Jimmy Dore!
Like, dude, Jimmy's awesome, by the way, but he's such a, like, far lefty.
And more power to him, he's a good dude.
I have no problem if you're a socialist, if you're a communist, as long as you're an honest person, you talk about what you believe and why you believe it, I think you're wrong.
I think you're allowed to be wrong, though, and I think if you're a good person, having good conversation, and calling out the BS where it is, I think we're in good company.
So I can disagree with Jimmy doing a lot of political issues, but he's fair, he's honest, and he calls out the BS.
So what is the response?
Send all of his Bernie-loving progressives over to Fox News.
So think about what that means.
There was a meme that went around where some guy was pretending like he said, my dad asked me to fix his Facebook.
So I unfollow all the Trump pages and follow the Bernie pages.
You know, two weeks later, he's like, I'm going to give Bernie Sanders a chance.
Yeah, and then everyone clapped.
No, it didn't really happen.
What is happening is, in response to woke outrage, for whatever reason, maybe it's because YouTube wanted a solution, and YouTube also wants the safer bet.
They don't want Warren in.
If Warren gets in, she's gonna break up all these tech companies.
So YouTube's like, just promote Fox News.
And there it is.
Anyway, this bell keeps ringing.
It's just outside the street.
You've probably heard it several times in the past couple weeks, but I'll leave it there.
Stick around.
Next segment will be at youtube.com slash timcast at 4 p.m.
I've got a new schedule coming.
Big changes next year.
You know what?
We'll fight through the bell and I'll tell you what's going on.
Due to algorithmic changes, I did mention this before, but now you're going to hear it because we're talking about media.
Due to algorithmic changes, particularly about what's going on with Fox News, it doesn't make sense for me to run, you know, one segment on my main channel and multiple segments on my second channel.
I'm going to probably move all of my segments to my main channel starting next year and do a new show on this channel, which will likely be like an 8 p.m.
livestream podcast.
More fan interaction, more comment interaction, and I'm going to probably hire someone to do guest bookings.
And I want it to be more of a semi-political general interest show, which means we're going to be talking about a wide range of topics.
It might have to do with... I'm thinking of having it be structured in two ways.
Like, we talk about news, but conclusive stories and unconclusive stories.
So the known and the unknown.
The known being like, hey, here's what I can tell you is actually happening.
And the unknown can be stuff like, this is a really weird story.
There's a story out of Oregon that I never covered because I'm saving it.
about animals, bulls, being exsanguinated, all their blood removed, and they were dropped from a great height.
It was presumed, and this is part of the Chupacabra legend.
So this is a legitimate news story.
It happened!
And that would be a really interesting segment to talk about the unknown, things we can't prove, we don't know what's happening, and we speculate.
So I've been planning this for a while.
The studio is going to be done in the next couple weeks or so, and I think I'm going to do an entirely new show on this channel.
And what I'll do is, it'll probably be an hour or two long, Probably with a co-host, probably regularly scheduled guests, where we'll talk about some of their expertise and some mainstream news topics, then break it up into segments so there will be like three hours of content from me every day starting in the new year.
We'll see what happens, but that's the plan for now.
Thanks for hanging out, and I will see you all at 4 p.m.
at youtube.com slash timcast.
You know, for a period I had a playlist about things backfiring on activist groups and, you know, basically activist groups and political activists, because they would implement policies that would then, you know, turn around and bite them, like hate speech laws.
There was one story where some anarchists had to remove the anarchist symbol because it was deemed hate speech, and it's kind of funny.
But I think now I need to come up with a new show called Californian Wasteland.
Man, California is a strange dystopian nightmare that doesn't quite make sense at all.
Yesterday I ran a segment that said San Francisco is a technocratic leftist fascist dystopia or something.
Because I can't wait to tell you what it is.
Let me tell you something right now.
Progressives, leftists, they're battling the government over this bill called Assembly Bill 5, which basically banned freelance journalism, nuking a ton of writing jobs.
Basically now, if you're a freelance writer, companies won't hire you if you're based in California because this law says you can only write 35 times per year.
So they're basically saying instead of dealing with that, we'll just hire somewhere else.
Naturally, all these progressives are outraged because they're being fired.
And it's not all progressives.
There's a lot of people who do writing jobs and transcription jobs who are also angry.
Here's what's really confusing and twisted about this.
First, let me tell you the news.
Uber Postmates Sue California Over Gig Laws, Escalating Fight.
Suit Claims New Laws Violates Constitutional Guarantees of Equal Protection and Due Process.
The progressive left has found an ally in gigantic multinational tech corporations that are worth billions of dollars.
Who would have thought?
Well, for the longest time with the censorship debate going on, we've heard many activists say, but I'm a private company, so here we are.
California is not left in any sense of the word, but they pretend to be.
Many people in California who say they're leftists are not.
They're in fact in favor of massive, unaccountable corporations suing the government over a law that was intended to help the unions.
Granted, I think the law was still ill-planned and bad.
We are— I can't even explain what's happening.
Basically, let's start from the beginning.
Unions wanted a law.
Democrats enforced that law.
Progressive writers and other lefties got really angry that their jobs were being taken away and have now inadvertently aligned themselves with massive multinational corporations.
My, what a strange decade 2010 has been.
And as we wrap things up, I thought it would be fun to just talk about the Californian wasteland.
When progressives who are supposed to be battling against the 1% are walking hand-in-hand to reject a law that unions actually wanted, my brain explodes.
Let's read this story from the Wall Street Journal.
Uber Technologies and Postmates sued California to challenge legislation that could force the companies to treat their drivers as employees, the latest escalation in a battle over the new law set to take effect in the new year.
The companies, competitors in the food delivery market, joined two drivers in the lawsuit filed in federal court Monday against the state and its Attorney General Xavier Becerra.
The suit claims that the new law, known as Assembly Bill 5 or AB 5, violates constitutional guarantees of equal protection and due process because of how it targets some workers and companies.
The lawsuit is the first by major on-demand companies against AB5, which was passed in September and takes effect Wednesday by so-called gig economy companies that rely on drivers and others to provide on-demand services.
It follows similar legal challenges in November by the California Trucking Association and in December by groups that represent journalists, which fear its effects on freelancers.
No, no, no, no, no, let me stop you right now.
Check this out.
There's a company called Patch, and they do hyper-local news.
I'm not super familiar with it.
They've been around for a while.
The general idea is, you know, if you live in a certain... There used to be local papers.
They don't exist anymore.
I remember when I was a kid, I grew up on the south side of Chicago.
We had a paper that was just for the south side, and people stopped caring, and then, you know, somebody would throw the paper on your porch, and then it would just rain, and then get soggy, and nobody cared anymore.
Well, Patch is trying to basically fill that gap.
Local news is extremely important.
Without local journalism... You know, let me tell you this.
There was a story about this guy.
He claimed he was a Trump voter, said he regretted his decision and wouldn't vote for Trump in 2016.
Local journalists uncovered, dude never actually voted.
That's local journalism.
The New York Times ran two stories uncritically parroting this guy's narrative and he made the whole thing up.
It was local journalists that figured it out.
Because local journalists are concerned with their communities and actually do good work.
So Patch is trying to somehow reinvigorate that.
I'm not saying the company's good.
I don't know a lot about them.
I'm just saying that's their goal, right?
They recently published something.
This was being pushed out by journalist Matthew Keyes in California, where they said Californians need not apply.
Wow.
Think about that.
Listen, man.
Hyperlocal news is hard to fund, okay?
Because you've got, you're basically trying to get local businesses to, you know, this is how the media used to work, right?
You make a small newspaper, you'd go to the local restaurants and say, like, would you want to advertise my paper?
They'd say yes.
Now people just Google restaurants.
They see the ads when they go on the internet.
Nobody needs a local paper anymore.
Google and Facebook have essentially destroyed this.
But you still need local journalism to deal with corruption.
What if it turns out your alderman, your mayor, your congressman is doing something bad and it's not being covered by national press?
Because it doesn't generate enough national interest.
It's what local journalists are supposed to do.
So now, as Patch tries to hire people freelance because it's the best they can do, California gets completely cut out of the picture.
How insane.
Well, unsurprisingly, they're being joined hand-in-hand by many corporations.
Let's be real.
I think it's funny to say that these progressives are now inadvertently allied with, you know, major corporations.
But the fact is, when you can see the left and the corporations pointing out this law is unconstitutional, It probably is.
It absolutely is.
You know what blows my mind about this law?
It's because the unions wanted it.
The idea was that these companies exploit workers by not giving them full wages or benefits, leaving them as contractors.
Okay.
Well, if somebody wants to freely sell their labor at a certain rate, it's their choice, right?
I think it's crazy to me.
Imagine if, like, You had an object and it was like, I understand there are certain regulations, I'm for certain regulations, but like, regulations for safety issues, like you can't just sell food on the street because what if your food is bad and you make people sick?
But it, you know, for the most part, you usually don't need peddler's licenses in a lot of places unless you're occupying a specific space and trying to say like, this is my space.
You can basically be like, here's a painting.
Who wants to buy it?
You can go on Craigslist.
Who wants to buy it?
Imagine if the law changed that you can't freely trade your labor.
Well, I think it's funny because that was what the unions wanted.
The unions wanted restrictions on who could be hired so they could get more members.
What an interesting paradox.
Let's read.
They say, AB5 establishes a test that employers must pass to classify their workers as independent contractors, as is done with drivers by Uber, Postmates, and other gig economy companies, including Lyft and DoorDash.
Employers who don't meet the test must treat their workers as employees entitled to benefits, including minimum wage and paid sick days.
The law, which is intended to give workers more protection, has also forced some companies to re-examine their operations, which some companies in industries such as healthcare, saying they could be forced to cut workers.
Uber has said it doesn't think the law requirements apply to its business, but also has warned that if it had to classify drivers as employees, it could be forced to hire far few drivers and reduce the areas where it operates.
And the thing about Uber is with all its faults, it operates in a very supply and demand system.
They have this thing where, like, if there's not enough cars, they offer more money to encourage more people to come out, which means if there's 10 cars on the road and 10 people want those cars, there ain't no cars on the road anymore.
So if a new person pops up saying, I need a car and nobody wants to drive, they notify drivers, we're going to pay you a premium because there's no one driving.
It's a supply and demand system.
It's a really interesting world we're entering, I've got to be honest, where Uber isn't hiring people.
They're just offering up a network where you can connect with people looking for a ride.
People argue that because Uber gets a cut, a percentage, therefore Uber is hiring these people.
But man, I really don't see it that way.
I personally don't see it that way.
I think Uber's terrible.
I don't think it's a good job.
I mean, but people who need the money are going to do it anyway.
But think about the alternative.
You could easily launch an app that doesn't take a cut, and just connects people who are looking for rides.
The problem, I guess, is maintaining the Uber infrastructure of, like, vetting people.
They charge for it, and they are looking to turn a profit.
In reality, Uber—actually, I think Uber is losing money.
It's running on investment.
So I don't know if it'll survive in the long run.
But here's the conundrum, basically.
I mean, look, here's the main takeaway.
You get the main point, that this law is basically backfiring across the board.
It was this progressive union law that was supposed to help people, and now everyone's freaking out.
Even the woke journalists in the Twitterati are outraged by it.
And they don't intend on changing it.
Let me leave you with this.
How do you feel about Uber?
I don't think it's a job.
Uber is providing you a service.
They connect you as a driver with someone looking for a ride.
But I'll ask you, how do you feel about Uber? I don't think it's a job. I really, really don't.
Uber is providing you a service. They connect you as a driver with someone looking for a ride.
They take a cut based on providing that service.
It's, you know, I just don't see how you could say Uber is hiring these people
if they can work whenever they want, do whatever they want, drive whenever they want,
and all Uber does is say a person over there is looking for a ride.
What if someone made an app that just, you could press a button saying I need a ride, and someone saying I'm offering a ride, and they determine how much money they made?
That's why I think the whole thing is quite silly.
But whatever.
The Democrat who passed the law is being dragged relentlessly.
Apparently, she has a statement here.
They say, Lorenza Gonzalez, the author of the statute, has urged city attorneys across California to seek court orders on January 1st requiring companies to implement changes in response to the law.
Amazing!
She's getting dragged from everybody and she's doubling down.
Lo and behold, not surprised, California is a wasteland.
We will see what comes up.
I do have another big story I'm working on talking about California that I might save it for when I have to fly again.
So that might be in a couple days, but stick around.
I have another segment coming up in just a few minutes.
We are wrapping up the decade.
The 2010s are officially over.
As of tonight, I hope you're all having a good time.
And I got two top stories.
The top worst things Donald Trump has ever done.
And the top 24 PC moments of the decade.
Stick around, you'll probably enjoy them, and I will see you in a few minutes.
Donald Trump is certainly no saint.
Anybody who claims the man is perfect, you know, you need to read or watch more.
Look, I'm of the camp of the orange man is not that bad.
I think there's a lot of things that are bad about him, the way he's changed, the candor of our presidency.
It's not the most important thing.
And I think it's kind of absurd that people are like, the character of the presidency and like the status of it has been besmirched by the orange man.
I'm like, yeah, it's fair, but is it really the worst thing in the world?
I'll tell you this.
Trump has done some bad things.
The Washington Post has compiled a list.
I'm actually going to refute some of these things.
I also want to make sure I point out as a disclaimer, we're wrapping up the 2010s and I thought it would be fun to do two segments.
This segment is highlighting the negative view of Trump from the Washington Post.
I want to stress, I'm not going to independently go through all of the nuances and context of each claim, so it's very likely, as the media does, they take Trump out of context to try and smear him.
But I have looked through some of these things, and I can already see that, yes, they're kind of smearing him for stupid things.
But rest assured, the next segment I will do is about the crazy PC left, and I thought it would be fair to do these two segments as sort of a critical-uncritical view as we end this decade.
And we're gonna get started with The Orange Man Is Bad.
Now, listen.
Come on, man.
It's so insane.
You know, let me say this as we wrap up this decade.
Trump has got his faults.
He needs to be criticized for doing a lot of things.
If you don't criticize him, he goes off on, you know, if you don't criticize people, they'll falter.
They'll go onto a bad track.
Criticism can be constructive even if it's sometimes meant to just be negative.
However, the way the media talks about this guy, you'd think he was a vampire or some kind of Frankenstein monster with claws who was going around crushing the skulls of babies.
Calm down.
He's just like, he's just boorish.
I love that word too because people have started commenting on it saying they wish he was more boorish.
Trump is just a bad attitude.
That's like the worst thing they could ever say about him.
But they do have a list, and we should read it.
Mark A. Thiessen writes, Okay, I'll be fair.
I'll pull that up too.
Although I wasn't trying to do that, I think it's fair to do.
Here are the 10 worst things.
Let's read these.
He ridiculously claimed our country is full.
Ooh, I love this one.
I love this one.
We are not full by a long shot, thanks to Trump's economic success.
We have well over a million more job openings than unemployed workers to fill them.
If Trump wants to keep this strong economy going, he needs more workers, and that means he needs more immigrants.
No, it doesn't!
Supply and demand.
The economy does well when the demand for jobs is higher than the supply of workers.
When the supply of workers is growing and the demand is shrinking, then you have market competition.
Salaries go down.
People can buy less.
So long as there are more job openings, yes, we do need to fill those.
Otherwise, there will be some stagnation.
Salaries will go up.
Let me explain it to you.
Is this one of the worst things Trump has said?
No.
If there's a million job openings and no workers, that means poaching will begin occurring.
And people will go to someone and say, I need you to work this job.
And they'll say, I already have a job.
Can I give you a 10% bump in pay?
And they say, yes.
Then their boss will say, no, no, don't leave.
I can't have you leave.
And they'll offer more.
This means the advantage is on the worker.
So long as the demand for jobs is higher, poaching and wage competition occurs, that's a good, excuse me, a good, good thing.
So, no, we don't want to get to a point where we fill every job and then are just stagnant.
That doesn't make sense.
We do want to fill these jobs to allow companies to grow, but it also means as long as there are, I'll say it again, more demand for jobs than there are people who can work them, it's good for everybody.
Number nine.
Okay, that was ten.
He used anti-Semitic tropes to attack his enemies.
Trump was absolutely right to call out Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib for their anti-Semitism.
Bravo, good sir.
He was right.
Including the charge that Israel's supporters in Congress are disloyal to the U.S.
But then Trump declared that, quote, any Jewish people that vote for a Democrat show great disloyalty, using the very same anti-Semitic trope that got Omar and Tlaib in trouble in the first place.
That is not the same trope by any stretch of the imagination.
Trump was talking about, like, support for Israel, and he was criticizing those who are disloyal or voting for Democrat because they're not particularly pro-Israel.
It's not the same by any stretch of the imagination, but I am still critical of it.
It is not the same, because what Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib are doing are much more ridiculous.
What Trump is doing is also bad.
If somebody wants to vote Democrat and don't want to support what Israel is doing, they're allowed to do so.
That's not disloyalty.
And I think Trump should be criticized for saying that, but to act like it's on par, listen.
What the left wing has is this weird anti-semitic conspiracy nonsense.
What Trump is doing is trying to support Israel.
You shouldn't blame someone as a soil because they're critical of Israel.
You can be critical of Israel.
That's the difference.
Criticizing Trump here is because you're allowed to be critical of Israel.
Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar have said things that were not about Israel, like it's all about the Benjamins and stuff like that.
Okay, so come on.
Let's not act like it's the same.
But yes, Trump should be criticized in my opinion.
He said the Soviet Union was right to invade Afghanistan and congratulated China on the 70th anniversary of the Communist takeover.
I'm going to stop right here.
Trump is playing a game, okay?
He's playing diplomacy.
This is ridiculous.
Do I agree with Trump?
Do I like that he said it?
No, of course not.
But you also got to understand, Trump doesn't want to start a war, so he's got to give a little to get a little, which brings me to the next point.
He lost a needless government shutdown fight.
They go on to say that he wanted, you know, he shut down the government over $5.7 billion and ended up getting $1.38 billion.
He would have had if he had just gone along with the bipartisan deal.
Trump went for a big ask.
I don't care.
I really don't care.
I mean, I guess there are people who lost pay.
No, pretty much everyone gets paid for their work.
The shutdown is dumb.
I think it was dumb.
And he ended up losing out.
But what Trump tried to pull off was a big ask, saying, I want this much, and they walk it back.
Would he have gotten it?
Well, he says he would have gotten it anyway.
I think Trump ended up getting more than he expected.
He ended up pulling funds from other areas anyway, so it's not like he lost the fight.
Trump does this.
The big ask is a common sales technique.
You say, I want $100.
And they go, oh my god, that's too much money.
OK, fine.
Give me $20.
$20 is cheap.
That's what Trump was aiming for.
Seems like it didn't work out.
I wouldn't call it needless.
He was fighting for a reason.
But by all means, we can criticize any politicians for doing things like this.
He uses emergency authority to circumvent Congress on the border wall.
After losing the shutdown fight, Trump uses National Emergency Act powers, which I'm pretty sure was deemed legal, so I don't know why you're criticizing him for that.
Like, the money exists to be used for national security reasons.
Trump wanted to use it.
It's within his power.
I could be wrong.
Look, man, I'll tell you this.
If you don't like that he did it, it's your opinion.
That's fine.
But I think it's like, you know, there's very specific things.
That Trump has done to be called out for, like firing missiles in Assyria, okay?
Like, that's fairly obvious.
Or when he said something like, even though this journalist got killed by, you know, actors in Saudi Arabia, we got a big money deal coming in.
Those are obvious, right?
Whether or not Trump was gonna, you know, pull funds like he was allowed to, it's his deal.
But I am short for time because these segments are supposed to be short, so let's just jump through these.
They say he continued to spread the canard that the United States is fighting endless wars.
Nah, I'm gonna stop you right there.
He's right about that.
We are fighting endless wars.
How long have we been in Afghanistan and Iraq?
Right now in Iraq, the embassy is under siege.
I'm not playing that game, okay?
Trump is right about that, although I'm gonna criticize Trump for not following through as much as he probably should because he's supplying weapons to Saudi Arabia because the money is so good.
They said it themselves.
He's supposed to pull the troops out of Syria.
Well, now they're guarding, you know, oil refineries and stuff.
Listen, man.
Trump is right when he says endless wars, but Trump isn't acting enough on them.
Don't play this game with me, okay?
You know, what we're doing in the Middle East is insane, and some people right now were born after.
I kid you not.
Some people were born after we engage in this war, and now they're preparing to go and fight in that war.
It is absolutely insane.
He continued to attack dead people.
Yeah, listen, I think it's fair to point out Trump is What did I call him, boorish?
Trump's a bad character.
He's absolutely a bad character.
You're not gonna be able to argue this one with me, okay?
Trump speaks poorly of people.
He said that this guy, you know, John Dingell, could be looking up, referencing that he could be in hell, okay?
Yeah, sorry, man.
There's a level of respect that Trump doesn't have for a lot of people.
Some people like it, they laugh about it, but I tell you this, man, if you're one of these Trump supporters who likes that Trump mocks people this way, let me just tell you, I traveled the country.
I've met with people.
Most of the Trump people I've met.
I was in an Uber in Dallas when I was going on the Glenn Beck show.
The Uber driver said he liked Trump for his policies, but wished he wasn't such, you know, a jerk.
That's a fact.
Trump would be doing so much better if he didn't say things like this.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think so.
Look at this one.
He asked the President of Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden.
No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.
I'm glad he did.
I'm glad he did.
I think it's inappropriate.
I'm saying I'm glad he did, not in the sense that I agree that it was right for him to do, but I'm pushing back on what he's saying here.
Listen, man.
Trump should have left it up to the Attorney General to make contact.
He should have left it up to the ambassadors and whoever to make contact.
He shouldn't have made it himself because it exposed too much risk.
And now we can't get a legitimate investigation into what Hunter Biden was doing, taking up all that money.
I don't care about what your reason is.
And if you come to me and say Hunter Biden did nothing wrong, I will show you the door.
Americans, the children of vice presidents, should not be going and getting fat cash from foreign governments because their daddy is the vice president.
Sorry, no argument.
I'd like to see an investigation.
I like that Trump wants to investigate it, but Trump should have done a better job about it.
He shouldn't have made that phone call.
There are ways to deal with this, but Trump is such, he's so arrogant.
You can call him overconfident, but he just has to do it himself.
He can't just let his lieutenants, he can't let the system take care of it.
I get it, there's a lot of corrupt actors.
We've learned this from these reports, but he should not have done this.
So I guess I'm technically in agreement, but you know what?
I want to see the investigation.
He invited the Taliban to Camp David.
I'm sorry, man.
Yeah, I'm gonna have to criticize this one.
It's rough because we're really looking for a way to end this war in Afghanistan, but nah, I don't know about this.
I don't know about this one.
Camp David, man, of all places, it's a tough call.
It really is.
I want to be reasonable and say that Trump doing everything in his power to end the war in Afghanistan is a good thing.
But you also gotta think about the sanctity of the United States, and what happened on 9-11, and what it means to invite these people here.
So, I'm gonna have to be a milquetoast fence-sitter on this one.
What's the biggest?
What's the worst?
He gave Turkey a green light to invade Syria?
Get outta here, dude!
Get outta here!
You know what, man?
I'm glad I got to read this list.
I'm not gonna read the best things Trump has done.
Sorry, you're all gonna get mad at me now.
Okay, I'll go through it really quickly.
But Trump wanting to pull troops out of Syria is in no way giving Turkey the green light.
Don't play these games.
Our soldiers should not be in Syria.
Period.
I don't care about your stupid gas pipeline or Ukraine or whatever.
But Mark was fair.
He has a list of the 10 best things.
He says he continued to deliver for forgotten Americans.
Bravo, I agree.
He implemented tighter work requirements for food stamps.
Okay, yeah, right.
He has got NATO allies to cough up more money for our collective security.
That's a good thing.
He's still with the people of Hong Kong and that's serious because he's trying to negotiate this trade deal.
His withdrawal from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty is delivering China and North Korea a strategic setback.
Okay, I don't know a lot about that.
His maximum pressure campaign is crippling Iran.
His tariffs threats force Mexico to crack down on illegal immigration.
He delivered the biggest blow to Planned Parenthood in three decades.
That's not a guy... I'm sorry.
I'm pro-choice, guys.
I don't see that as a good thing.
I'm surprised the Washington Post actually said that.
Why is that?
What?
Surprising from the Washington Post, but sure, I don't agree with that.
I think there's a lot to hold, you know, there's a lot to criticize Planned Parenthood for, but it's a political opinion whether it was good or bad.
I know there's a lot of conservatives watching who might think it's a good thing.
Fine, you're allowed to.
I know we're playing politics, but I'm just shocked to see Washington Post agree with it.
I happen to be on the other side of that argument.
He ordered the operation that killed Baghdadi.
Bravo, good sir.
I am not a war person, man, but Baghdadi was like, he's like a shadow of evil cast on this planet.
You gotta give him credit for that.
Sometimes, you know, I'm a very anti-death penalty person, but I believe in the safety of others, right?
I believe in, you know, you have the right to end someone if you're doing it to save other people, and this guy was bad, and he was leading bad people, and stopping this is a good thing.
He has continued to appoint conservative judges at a record pace.
I'm surprised this dude's saying that.
Like, look, I'll concede Republicans won that fight.
I guess technically if you're a Trump supporter, it's a good thing.
I'm gonna lean towards, I mean, for like what I want.
I would prefer moderate judges.
You know, Trump's appointed some pretty conservative judges, some with no experience.
But look, I concede the loss.
I absolutely do.
And I think if Democrats were willing to do that, they might see themselves winning.
When you're a sore loser, it just makes people not want to be around you.
I will concede.
I would prefer Planned Parenthood not be targeted, though I understand there's moral conundrums here.
It's tough.
It really, really is.
Some of the hardest ethical questions I've ever faced.
Not perfect.
Appointing conservative judges is...
It's good in a lot of ways, I can concede that.
And I can concede the Republicans, they earned this victory because they got Trump and Hillary Clinton was the bad actor.
But progressives will need to push back on this one.
I would not call that a good thing Trump has done.
I would call that a defeat for what I would be looking for.
But hey, there it is.
I will wrap it up.
I tried to go as quickly as possible.
The next segment is about political correctness, wrapping up the decade.
Stick around and I will see you very shortly.
From the National Review, the 24 most absurdly PC moments of the 2010s.
Now, I did not compile this list.
This list was brought to you by Katherine Timpf, if you're not familiar.
You should follow her on Twitter, and I'm doing that because I'm going to be reading her list, so, you know.
Credit where credit is due for compiling the list.
But as we are wrapping up this decade, we have seen an expansion of the intersectionality starting just around the beginning of this decade, and it has been a wild ride with Gamergate and Comicsgate and whatevergate, and all the gates in the world coming together because people were upset for one reason or another, and people on the internet are insane.
So now we have this list, and I bid you adieu.
This is the last segment I will do of this decade.
Of course, I will see you tomorrow.
Let's leave it with a bang.
The 24 most absurdly PC moments of the 2010.
Coming in at number one.
A college diversity training course taught that it was culturally insensitive to expect people to be on time.
I remember this story.
Oh, it takes me back.
Time is a tool of white supremacy.
I kid you not.
A Clemson University training course taught its attendees that it is offensive to expect people to be on time because time may be considered fluid in other cultures.
Welcome to the 2010s.
The phrase trigger warning was deemed a trigger.
Yes!
According to a piece in Everyday Feminism, trigger warning is actually in itself a trigger because it could be re-traumatizing for folks who have suffered military police and other forms of violence.
They recommended saying content warning instead.
Coming in at number three, a professor was accused of harassment for saying that effort is 10% of the grade.
Sexual harassment.
A Brooklyn College of City University of New York professor says he was forced to change his syllabus after he was accused of sexual harassment for stating that effort was 10% of the grade.
Ah, this was a great decade, wasn't it?
Watching our culture and society fall apart.
A campus survey included a trigger warning to caution college students that it may contain anatomical names of body parts.
The survey was distributed at several major universities because apparently college students just might not be able to handle the kinds of words that most kids hear in middle school biology classes.
Coming in at number five, university researchers demanded that we accept people who identify as real vampires.
It's been a great past 10 years, huh?
Apparently, it's the least we can do to prevent anti-vampire discrimination.
Number six, a Seattle area councilman was concerned about the city hosing poop off of its sidewalks because he thought that it might seem too racially insensitive.
Wow, I think thinking that itself is racist.
The area in question reportedly stank like urine and excrement, but one councilman was worried that hosing it down would be a microaggression.
What is he implying about brown people?
Is he saying they poop in the street?
Dude, chill.
Number seven, a bathing suit advertisement was criticized for being sexist because it depicted a woman in a bathing suit.
I thought it was a normal product advertisement to depict the product that you're selling, but apparently I was wrong.
She may be referring to what happened in the UK.
Yeah, it was like the beach, I think, was it the beach body ready thing?
If not, that's another thing that happened where it was like a woman in a bathing suit and then they ended up, someone else made like a version of a big fat woman wearing bathing suits because... Some feminists decided that pussy hats were both racist and transphobic.
Why?
Well, because not all women have vaginas and not all vaginas are pink, of course.
Oh, there you go.
So all the women in the women's march wearing those pink hats with the ears?
You're bigots.
Number 9.
A professor claimed that the small chairs in preschools are sexist, disempowering, and problematic.
Apparently it makes no difference that preschoolers are small people.
Coming in at number 10.
We got 14 more after this one.
College students decided against bringing a camel to school for a hump day event due to concerns about racism.
Students at the University of St.
Thomas in Minnesota were worried that the presence of a camel might offend Middle Eastern students.
It's an animal, dude!
Number 11.
A school in Seattle reportedly insisted that Easter eggs be called spring spheres.
No!
Maybe calling them simply eggs would have still been too religious.
Hard to say.
Number 12.
A group of Berkeley students insisted that they could not take their in-class exam due to their lack of privilege.
Apparently, test-taking was just too emotionally taxing for some University of Berkeley students to be able to handle.
The phrase, quote, long time no see was reportedly declared to be derogatory toward Asians.
Oh, that I did not know.
A student at Colorado State University said she was told that she shouldn't use the phrase, despite the fact that even NPR admits that it is so widespread as a greeting that there's nothing to indicate the term's origins, be they Native American or Mandarin Chinese.
Long time no see?
What does that mean?
Number 14.
A college newspaper changed its name from The Bullet because editors were concerned the name was too dangerous.
The University of Mary Washington changed its newspaper's name from The Bullet to The Blue and Gray Press because its editors were worried that the old name propagated violence.
Wonderful.
Coming in at number 15.
Lecturers were warned that capital letters might scare students and that they should avoid using them.
Journalism lecturers at Leeds Trinity University were instructed to avoid using all caps when communicating with students because it might make them too afraid to do the assignment.
If you're scared of reading words, I'm sorry.
You've got other problems.
Number 16, a campus-wide email told white students to stop wearing hooped earrings because doing so was cultural appropriation.
A resident assistant at Pitzer College sent an email to her entire school claiming that white girls wearing hooped earrings was offensive to the black and brown bodies who typically wear hooped earrings.
That's right, because we gotta keep them separated.
That's the idea, right?
To quote the offspring.
I don't know if that was their intent, but that's basically what people are saying today.
Number 17.
A campus Christian club was found guilty of discrimination for requiring its leaders to be Christians.
Apparently the Chico State University's club's rules violated a 2011 executive order.
Technically it does!
You can't have a club for Christians, because if you do, you can have people who aren't Christians leading that club.
That makes sense.
Coming in at number 18, Oxford University law students were told that they didn't have to learn about rape or violence law if they found it too triggering.
That's right!
Just plug your ears and say, I don't need to know about it.
Undergraduate law students were reportedly allowed to leave during any lessons about such material if they felt too uncomfortable.
Notably to one of the famous safe spaces which began to emerge in the 2010s.
These are spaces where they have like pastel colors on the walls and beanbags and like stuffed animals.
So if you can't handle real-world conversations, you can lock yourself in a room, plug your ears, and squeeze your teddy bear.
Coming in at number 19, the word to, that is T-O-O, was declared sexist.
According to a piece in the Huffington Post, the adverb was deprived, has deprived most women of self-satisfaction and appreciation.
Now that is gloriously insane, and I don't even know what the argument they're trying to make is.
At least in the other ones, I can be like, yes, some people will be triggered about certain subjects.
I think you're stupid if you run away from, like, real life.
But this one doesn't even make any sense.
Number 20.
A liberal author demanded that normal people avoid wearing any kind of red hat because all red hats can be too scary.
Sorry, Washington Nationals fans.
I'll tell you this, man.
Wasn't it... Remember that woman?
She was at Berkeley, and she was wearing a hat that said, Make Bitcoin Great Again, and someone pepper-sprayed her because of it.
I'm actually kind of shocked to see a lot of lefties that wear hats that look like MAGA hats.
But it'll say something like, you know, make America gay again or something.
I'm like, you realize someone might attack you because they don't care what the hat says, they just see it and they assume you're a Trump supporter?
So yeah, I'll tell you this.
A liberal author demanded that normal people avoid wearing any kind of red hat because they're too scary.
I would never say that.
I will say, though, if you are a Trump supporter or a red hat wearer, be careful.
It's not about being scary.
It's about how people will physically attack you for wearing these hats, as we've seen throughout the past several years under Donald Trump.
Number 21, we're coming to an end.
Skinny eyebrows were declared cultural appropriation.
Apparently it's offensive to tweeze your eyebrows a lot if you're not Latina.
Note, thick eyebrow styles were called cultural appropriation in the 2010s too.
That's a double!
You know, this is another example of how no matter what you do, it's going to be offensive to someone.
Thick eyebrows, thin eyebrows, they're both offensive.
Coming in at number 22, Evergreen State University told professors to take students' protesters' feelings into account when grading them.
All Fs!
No matter what you do, I'll take your feelings into account, and a count, an F. Apparently, their emotional commitment to protesting should be taken into account when evaluating their academic work.
And you wonder why people can't find jobs?
Well, now they can work at McDonald's because the economy is a-boomin'.
Number 23.
A lot of college kids were upset about the vagina monologues.
Several colleges and universities either cancelled or adapted the performances of the vagina monologues over concerns about excluding women without vaginas.
One school, Southwestern University in Texas, cancelled theirs for another reason.
Because a white lady wrote it.
Wow, impressive.
And coming in, last but not least, number 24.
Students.
Transgender student can't be diversity officer because they are a white man now.
What?
That's just how it ends.
I don't know if that's the best or the worst, but I've got a special mention.
As we come to an end and say goodbye to this decade.
Just the other day, the number one trend on Twitter was hashtag it's okay to be white.
A phrase that has been deemed offensive, racist, and white supremacist propaganda when it was literally designed to prove that point that no matter what you say, no matter how innocuous, they will take it and they will run with it and accuse you of being a bigot.
Proving the point of 4chan over and over again.
Let's not forget, while we have these most absurdly PC moments of the 2010s, again, follow Katherine Timm.
It's her list.
I don't take credit for it.
I want to mention, and actually, for those listening on the podcast, it's at Kat, K-A-T-T-I-M-P-F, her list.
I just read it.
Normally, I'm like commenting and stuff, but in this instance, I think it's fair to say.
But I must end with the biggest and best PC moment of the 2010s, the okay hand gesture.
Just that.
Because it has had such a tremendous impact.
People have been, like, suspended from school.
People have been investigated.
Police have been investigated.
There have been major press cycles dedicated to the OK hand symbol over and over and over again, and the whole thing is a hoax!
You wanna talk about insane PC?
How about the ultimate troll?
The greatest troll ever performed, turning the OK hand symbol into a symbol for white power.
Bravo 4chan!
Congratulations.
With that being said, it's time for me to say goodbye.
I won't see you until the next decade, haha.
I hope you appreciate the dad joke, but in all seriousness, go out, have drinks, be merry, and enjoy yourself.
Typically, I don't really do much.
I'm probably gonna just sit around here and stare up at the sky as people scream.
