Ricky Gervais NUKED Hollywood Liberal Elites From Orbit And They Are NOT Happy About It
Ricky Gervais NUKED Hollywood Liberal Elites From Orbit And They Are NOT Happy About It. Several weeks ago Ricky Gervais made some jokes on twitter.This led to a leftist outrage campaign and an attempt to "cancel" Ricky Gervais. They wanted him fired from hosting the Golden Globes. However it did not work and Ricky said he would double down the more they got angry.Last night Ricky tore into the hollywood liberal elites, mocking them for their faux woke outrage and fake politics. He grilled them for having no real idea how the real world works.Many woke journalists and celebrities were angry, some scowled, but many laughed and accepted it.The light at the end of the tunnel is that although this was Ricky's last year hosting the Golden Globes he has show Hollywood and the media that pushing back on woke outrage can be lucrative. Your business will survive, your ratings will go up, and the controversy only has power if you give it power.Good news for all of us freedom loving individuals.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Last night at the Golden Globes, Ricky Gervais, ever-offensive comedian, tore into the Hollywood liberal elite—Disney, Amazon, and Apple—because Ricky Gervais is the hero that we need.
One of the most poignant things he said is that if you're going to take your award, Come up here, don't grandstand, don't talk politics, because you have no idea how the real world works.
Most of these people have been rich all their lives.
They have no idea how the economy functions, how international relations function, yet they grandstand because it generates press for them.
Now, I'll say a few things before we read these stories.
While Ricky Gervais opened the Golden Globes by slamming this faux-woke liberal elitism, The Golden Globes were still dominated by faux-woke liberal elitism, though there were many celebrities who were quite unhappy with Mr. Ricky Gervais.
And there are several articles coming out today, furious, saying, Ricky Gervais was tone-deaf and he needs to be removed.
Good riddance to Ricky Gervais!
Let me tell you something.
Yesterday morning, my opening segment talked about how I kind of feel like the liberty side of the culture war is winning.
While the Golden Globes was fairly dominated by politics, Ricky Gervais opened it up by saying, hey, yo, this is kind of BS.
Granted, he's not coming back.
Maybe things could get worse.
But it's not just about this.
Joaquin Phoenix won an award for Joker.
The media tried everything in their power to make Joker this, like, far-right incel movie.
And it wasn't.
It didn't work.
There was a cancel campaign against Ricky Gervais before he started the Golden Globes.
Did you know this?
Because he made offensive jokes on Twitter.
In fact, one of the people, Patricia Arquette, who won an award, was heavily criticizing Gervais.
But guess what?
They failed.
They could not get Ricky Gervais removed.
And he even brings this up in his opening monologue about Kevin Hart.
He goes on to make a bunch of jokes that went right over the heads of some of the Hollywood liberal elites.
Some of these articles that are written, one of the jokes he made was about how the foreign press was too white, lacked diversity, but he was mocking them for constantly pushing a narrative that they don't even fit.
And it went over their heads.
This is an article from Slate where they're like, this one was on the mark.
He criticized the foreign press.
Like, no, no, no, no, no.
You don't understand how he was criticizing them.
So here's what I want to do.
I want to read some of these stories, but I want to show you the good, the bad, and I want to talk about what's going on in the cultural conflict or whatever you want to call it.
It seems like the Liberty side might be winning.
Now look, I know a lot of people have said it's easy to say, Tim, when a multi-millionaire comedian with, you know, tens of millions of followers or whatever gets up on stage and can say whatever he wants because he's got F.U.
money, and they mention other people who haven't been so fortunate.
And here's the truth.
While it's true, Ricky Gervais is extremely wealthy, he can do whatever he wants and get away with it, and he's not coming back to the Golden Globes anyway, he's saying something regular Americans agree with.
He actually got conservative Americans to watch the Golden Globes.
Can you believe this?
The ratings probably went up.
And now, the business is going to recognize that.
So while I will fully admit, the little guy, you're still at risk of being cancelled by woke outrage and cancel culture, Ricky Gervais, along with Dave Chappelle, and Joe Rogan, and many other comedians, Louis C.K.
to an extent, Aziz Ansari, they're not taking it anymore and they're pushing back.
This says to me that while we're still in the thick of things in terms of cancel culture and woke outrage, we're on the back end of that bell curve, we went up that hill, things got really bad and now we're starting to come back down.
Because when these businesses start to see they make money, from stuff like this.
Their ratings go up.
This is all the rage right now.
Fox News is talking about it.
It's on the front page of Reddit, across the board.
So many different forums posting the monologue of Ricky Gervais.
You know why?
We are all sick and tired of being told what we can or can't say.
We are sick and tired of walking on eggshells.
And Ricky Gervais, unfortunately it's not going to be the little guy, but Ricky Gervais and many others, like I said, Dave Chappelle, Joe Rogan, etc.
Or are leading that charge and acting as a shield to say what everyone is thinking?
I am sick and tired of these Hollywood multi-millionaires pretending like they care.
They fly on private jets while they complain about climate change.
Spare me!
So let's actually get into the story and read about what's going on before we get started.
Check out TimCast.com if you'd like to support my work.
But more importantly, I have a new YouTube channel that many of you may have already subscribed to, but check it out.
It is YouTube.com slash TimCastIRL.
Initially, I wanted to do, you know, like van life, like travel and do on-the-ground reporting.
For a lot of reasons I've explained many, many times, it's very, very difficult, not impossible.
So what's going to happen now?
I'm launching a new show, TimCast In Real Life.
It's going to be a talk show.
It's going to be general interest science culture.
Basically, I'm just going to be ramping up the amount of segments I produce.
Subscribe to this channel because I already did a two-and-a-half-hour show last night Where I played a fighting game that stars Andrew Yang and Donald Trump and Joe Rogan, and it is hilarious.
So check it out.
YouTube.com slash Timcast IRL.
Subscribe for more segments in a variety of different topics.
But let's get back to the news.
Fox News reports Golden Globe Awards host Ricky Gervais tears into the Hollywood elite.
Disney, Amazon and Apple.
That's right.
I know I laid into these faux woke leftists.
But he went after Disney, Amazon, and Apple, and he went hard!
Let's read a little bit, but I want to walk you through some of this.
It's not all positive, okay?
Politics was still there, but I think we have a good picture of the future.
I think there's a net positive.
Fox News reports, the biggest stars in TV and film gathered in Beverly Hills in the hopes of kicking off the 2020 awards season with a highly coveted Golden Globe Award and notoriously controversial host Ricky Gervais wasted no time laying into the Hollywood elite vying for a big win.
Stars from films like Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, Rocketman, The Irishman, as well as shows like Big Little Lies, The Crown, and Barry were in attendance, but the comedian and host was undeterred by the many famous faces staring back at him.
He called out the many stars in the room for their relationship to large corporations like Apple, Amazon, and Disney.
Apple roared into the TV game with The Morning Show, a superb drama about the importance of dignity and doing the right thing, made by a company that runs sweatshops in China.
And Tim Cook, they show his face, it's brilliant.
He mocked the stars in attendance, and I gotta be careful how I frame this, but he literally made an Epstein meme joke and then said, shut up, I know he's your friend and I don't care, after the audience groaned.
Seriously.
He goes after the reported abuse.
There was, I think he made a joke about, there was something where he said like, you have to be, something about being blind, you have to pretend like you don't know what's going on, kind of like Harvey Weinstein and everything in Hollywood.
He said he targeted Felicity Huffman saying that he drove in a limo and the license plate was made by Felicity Huffman.
Now that was just a roast.
I can respect that.
That wasn't political.
But everyone groaned and again he goes, I don't care.
Every time the audience would groan at him, and they did, I don't care.
So, but let's move on from this, because if you want to see his jokes, you can check out his jokes.
I want to show you the reaction.
Many of you have probably already seen it.
Check this out!
Oh man, I love it.
During the monologue, look at Tom Hanks' face.
Slate.com reports, Tom Hanks did not seem to be enjoying Ricky Gervais' Golden Globes monologue.
Ricky Gervais is the hero we need, and I'm going to say it, we deserve him.
We absolutely do.
For many of us, we have sat back while these multi-millionaires pretend to care, tell us that they're there for us, but they're lying because they want to sell soap or other brand products.
They get up on stage and they say this emotional diatribe to try and convince you that they're actually empathetic people, when in reality, they live in isolated communities with massive gates, and they don't actually care.
They just want to make money.
And that's the reality.
Now, I got no personal beef against Tom Hanks.
He's probably a good dude.
And the face says to me more like, I can't believe Ricky Gervais is saying this.
But sure enough, what do you expect?
Well, the woke Twitterati types are quite upset with Mr. Gervais.
Not everybody.
Not everybody.
You know, Vox and BuzzFeed, for instance.
Gave it more of a neutral stance, right?
So for those that aren't familiar, Vox and BuzzFeed are more left-leaning outlets.
And I knew it was going to be... I knew exactly how they'd frame this.
It was not that bad, right?
You know, they have their bias.
They do these really awful op-eds.
BuzzFeed has written some really bad stuff.
But they just gave it a blanket fair shake.
Although BuzzFeed, I think, had a little bit that was kind of like eye-roll-y.
But the LA Times, for instance, Forbes, and The Ringer, none too happy with Mr. Gervais.
But guess what?
Nobody cares.
Sorry.
Ricky Gervais made a series of jokes in the weeks coming up, in the months coming up to the Golden Globes.
Jokes about transgender people.
Or transgender issues.
And a lot of people got angry.
And they started attacking him.
Here's the thing.
You may remember Kevin Hart got fired from the Oscars for jokes he made in 2011.
At this point, many of us saw how powerful cancel culture really was.
The jokes were nearly a decade ago.
And this dude's getting fired?
Ricky Gervais made these jokes last week!
And when people started yelling at him, even Patricia Arquette, he said, I don't care.
I'll double down.
The more you get offended, the more I laugh.
Vox writes an article the other day that said, Ricky Gervais, how to do a Ricky Gervais joke, offend, get, you know, rinse, repeat.
That's his shtick.
Yeah?
I'm warning you now.
And this goes double for conservatives.
If you get offended, Ricky Gervais will come for you.
Because he is the hero we need and deserve.
I say deserve because we have sat through this for so long.
It has been six or seven years.
It has been nearly a decade.
of walking on eggshells with an ever-increasing outrage mob patrolling the streets, I'm doing air quotes, of Twitter, targeting anyone, even their own.
And finally now, at the Golden Globes, at a high-profile event, they couldn't get him fired and he just rags on all of them.
I can't tell you how good that makes me feel.
Check out this story from The Ringer.
Sorry, I'm losing my voice again.
It's part of the job.
Good riddance to Ricky Gervais, the sneering, purposefully intolerable Golden Globes host.
He's still got it, however much it thrills or disgusts you.
So, you get the general idea.
They're going to repeat a bunch of the same jokes.
None too happy.
Check this one out.
Golden Globes.
Ricky Gervais makes a great case for hostless awards show.
Does he?
I disagree.
I think Ricky Gervais convinced a bunch of conservatives and people who are tired of being bullied to finally watch mainstream television.
You know, most conservatives feel that mainstream media is biased against them.
And when you look at who's the Golden Globes, the Beverly Hills liberal elites, you know, Tim Cook, CEO of Apple, he's this guy who said, we're going to ban, you know, political speech, certain speech we don't like from our platform, and went on this big diatribe, same as YouTube, same as all these others.
And these people are all sitting in the audience.
So how do you think a regular working American, particularly a conservative feels, when they turn on that show and that's all they see?
No one speaks to them.
No one talks about how they feel.
No one defends them.
Instead, you get fake woke celebrities who complain about Trump building a wall, but who build walls around their multi-million dollar mansions in the Beverly Hills that you can't even get to anyway.
Private estates, Teslas, fancy cars, and they're the ones flying in private jets while complaining.
That the little guy is using too much water or leaving the lights on for too long.
Thank you, Leonardo DiCaprio.
So I'll throw some props to Greta Thunberg.
At least she used the boat.
Now, let's be real.
When she traveled across the Atlantic in that boat, that boat took a ton of energy to produce.
They got it donated.
They really did try.
I can respect that.
I really can.
But I can't respect these uber-woke celebrities who are like, yes, climate change is the greatest threat of our generation.
Now watch me buy nine beachfront properties and fly across the world in a private jet!
Yeah, sorry, I don't take it seriously.
And that's why I don't care for these shows.
You know, what's interesting to me is that I grew up in a democratic city.
I grew up in a liberal place.
I grew up in Chicago.
And I could always see this.
I felt like I was always struggling as someone in the lower-income bracket, as a low-income, you know, family, somebody poor, to fight for what made our lives better.
To truly believe in certain left-wing policy positions.
But the leaders, the people being propped up, the people being funded, they're full of it.
They're liars.
They're hypocrites.
And we all know it.
But wait, there's more.
Check this out.
From the Los Angeles Times Review.
Politics reigned at the Golden Globes.
Too bad Ricky Gervais didn't notice.
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry you're wrong.
It's too bad you didn't notice.
Politics reigned at the Golden Globes, but Ricky Gervais opened the Golden Globes making a point about politics.
He noticed.
He noticed last year, he noticed the year before, and he knew it now when he opened the show and said, take your little award, thank your agent and thank God, and F off.
Because you know nothing about how the real world works.
So the LA Times, you can take your little award and you can F off too.
Because you're trying to flip it on Ricky.
Ricky knows exactly what your game is.
But I also want to be honest, man.
Let's be real.
Ricky's joking!
He's not really, you know, to a certain degree, he doesn't mean to be the most brutal.
He's just poking fun at hypocrisy.
Notably, his own.
Ricky Gervais is still a wealthy liberal elite.
And that's why I respect him so much.
The willingness to be a part of this machine, to be a Netflix actor, to be a multi-million dollar Hollywood celebrity.
He's great.
He's a genuine individual with real integrity who's going to call it out.
I got a couple more things I want to highlight, and I want to end with Joker.
I'm so, so happy to hear this.
No surprise, Patricia Arquette got political and mentions Iran at the Golden Globes.
That's right.
It wasn't just her.
It was also, I think, who is this?
Michelle Williams talks about the difference between choice in life and the choices she had to make and how it helped her.
We get it.
Politics still reigns supreme.
Even if Ricky Gervais is going to poke fun, mock these individuals, they're still going to get political.
But there's one last thing I really want to highlight from IndieWire.
Joaquin Phoenix wins Best Actor Golden Globe over Adam Driver as Oscar battle heats up.
You see, Joaquin Phoenix, he's widely considered a lock to earn an Oscar nomination this month for his performance in the film Joker.
Before Joker came out, it received an award.
A standing ovation.
Joker is one of the greatest films I've ever seen, and I really do mean that.
I seriously do mean that.
It is not an action film.
It is not some hokey hero's journey.
It is a character-driven story.
It feels a little slow, but not bad.
And in the end, it's about an angry guy who lashes out.
And people prop him up as a symbol because they're angry.
It's got a lot of political messages.
But they hit the nail on the head with the hammer.
And the people in, I believe it was Italy, who saw it, cheered for it.
But something happened when it came to North America.
The woke Twitterati, the faux-woke journalists, started complaining that it was a tribute to the far-right and incels and was going to inspire terrible, terrible things.
Every single, like all of the worst things you could imagine, was said about Joker.
But Joker won.
And when the film came out, joke, when people started actually seeing the film, they started calling out this press, this fake news.
This has been a long time coming.
There have been a couple videos I've made in the past where I said, I believe the woke outrage, social justice, cancel culture stuff is dying, it's losing.
And there have been many people who have pushed back saying, no Tim, it's not true.
But I made a video yesterday morning, thumbnail, Ricky Gervais, that says it's finally ending, it's finally losing.
And what happened that night?
Golden Globes comes on.
I was streaming, all right?
I wasn't watching it.
I watched it after I finished my live stream.
You can tell my voice is kind of hurt because I talked for like four hours yesterday.
And I watched the opening monologue.
Bravo, good sir.
Bravo.
I made that video saying, here's what's going to happen.
They could not stop Ricky Gervais.
And Ricky Gervais got up in front of America and said what so many of us were thinking.
And then when it came to the actual awards, they also came and gave Joaquin Phoenix the award.
Because this politics stuff is not working anymore.
There's going to be a backlash.
Now, I'll tell you a few things.
I mentioned this the other day.
We'll elaborate a bit.
Big tech media movies, they lag.
Politics is downstream from culture.
And the cultural, I guess, zeitgeist and conversations we have on social media take a while to permeate big business.
But Ricky Gervais did something more powerful than just call out the Hollywood liberal elite yesterday.
What Ricky Gervais did was prove it is lucrative to call out the insanity.
I'm sure their ratings are going to be up.
The Golden Globes is all the rave, story after story, tons of press.
They could not be happier.
They could not be happier, because they're going to make a ton of money from this.
The ratings for next year will, depending on who they get, if they continue this trend, I know Ricky Gervais is out, but they generated so much press and attention from people who normally don't watch their show, here's what'll happen.
There are going to be other network shows, and they're going to see what Ricky did.
They're going to see the positive attention.
They're going to see that the woke outrage did not work, and they're going to say, their ratings were up.
We want money.
We want the green.
They don't care about politics.
You think any of these people care about politics?
They do not.
The actors will see it.
The ones that went up on stage after Ricky Gervais called them out, they already had their speeches prepared.
So of course they're gonna do it.
But as time goes on, less and less people will tolerate the insanity.
More and more businesses will recognize how much the general public is sick and tired of this.
They will support it.
They will ask for more.
And I will tell you this right now to the industry.
If you do more of that, Ricky Gervais himself, a limousine liberal, you will actually get conservatives watching your shows.
You will actually increase your ratings.
You will generate buzz.
You will make money.
Because this is what the American people want.
The fringe zealots of woke Twitter do not speak for the rest of us.
So let me wrap up with one final thought that I mentioned yesterday.
I believe the Republicans are going to sweep heavily across the board in 2020.
I think Trump is going to win.
I think the Republicans are going to retake the House.
They're going to dominate the Senate.
I could be wrong.
I could be absolutely wrong.
When we look at 2018, we saw the efforts of the blue wave.
People for two years were tired of Trump on the Democrat side.
So they went out in droves, in force, to stop him.
And they got 31 House seats, but they lost the Senate, and that's about it.
What's going to happen when Trump's base returns in 2020?
We saw them try to muster their forces, and they failed.
So here's what I think is going to happen.
The Republicans are going to dominate.
And I know if you're on the left, you might be upset about it.
I know the far left's probably upset about it.
But what's going to happen after that is there's going to be a reckoning.
The Democrats are going to ask themselves hard questions.
Why do we keep losing?
How did we lose this?
And I'll tell you, for one, impeachment is not anything Americans actually care about.
Some do.
I get it.
Some do.
But Americans want to know that they're going to have food on the table.
Americans are sick and tired of walking on eggshells.
So long as the Democrats keep pushing this stuff, they will lose, and they will have a reckoning in 2020 where they will reflect, or not, but if they don't, they will cease to exist.
If they do, they will come to liberal people like me, to people like Dave Rubin, like Joe Rogan, for all the negative opinions you might have about us, and they will say, what can we do to bring these people back?
They will turn to Tulsi Gabbard and they will say, what can we do?
Because she's certainly been trying and she's a progressive, but she said, if we don't respect Trump voters, we will lose time and time again.
Ricky Gervais is not the first to come out and call this out.
Dave Chappelle did it and there were others before him, but he is.
The next in line to set the stage, to tell the world we've had enough.
It's not about being conservative.
It's not about being liberal.
It's about American values of free speech, free expression, liberty, humor, jokes.
It's about the ability to be free from anxiety that someone will come and take your job away because you accidentally said something offensive.
And comedians, of course, are going to be the first in line because they're always trying to be offensive.
Hence, Ricky Gervais and Dave Chappelle.
I have tremendous respect for all of them, all of these comedians.
You know, like Aziz Ansari, Louis C.K., Ricky Gervais, Joe Rogan, etc.
Because they're the ones refusing to back down.
They're the ones who make us laugh.
And with their positions and their followings and their wealth, they have finally turned and acted as the artillery to protect the individuals who want to express themselves without fear.
Now it's true.
If you're a little guy, if you're a medium-sized, you know, public figure kind of like me, we're still at risk.
YouTube still censors my content.
It's a fact.
But I think the tides are turning and freedom is going to win.
Because as much as the left likes to argue, the progressives and the far left, they say the left always wins, the future always goes to the left.
Wrong!
The future always goes to individualism and liberty.
Everything you've seen throughout the past, from civil rights to today, it's not about the left.
It's about fighting for liberty.
And the left today is not.
They're fighting for authority.
That will lose.
And with it, you will cede ground to conservatives.
So be it.
Come 2020, you better reflect.
I should say the 2020 election.
It's 2020 now.
But I will end with this.
It's not over.
It's not over.
You got to remain vigilant.
And it's possible Republicans do lose in 2020.
I don't know.
I was wrong about 2018.
I think I'm right now, but I could be wrong.
So we'll see.
But for now, the tides are turning and things look good.
And maybe the freedom of expression will return thanks to people like Ricky Gervais.
Stick around, next segment's coming up at 1pm, youtube.com slash TimCastNews, and don't forget to subscribe to my new channel, TimCastIRL.
It's going to be a new podcast show, general interest, cultural issues similar to this, but I'm gonna bring on guests, scientists, talk about academia, studies, it's gonna be higher level, you know, but I think it's gonna be general gaming podcast kind of stuff, so I will have a political show, cultural political show, and a general interest show.
And there you go.
Subscribe.
I will see you all at 1 PM, assuming I can still talk.
It's a major trending subject.
The video's going viral.
However, my assumption was that ratings would be better.
The ratings would do really, really well.
People would hear this message, and that would trigger Hollywood and the media into recognizing what Ricky Gervais was saying is profitable, and they should continue with it.
I'm losing my voice, sorry.
And that other people in Hollywood would start to essentially turn around from the woke, far-left nonsense and start saying, hey, I can be edgy and crazy too.
Well, the Washington Post writes this story.
At the Golden Globes, Gervais' sharpest barb poked Hollywood's piety.
Nobody cared.
Technically, this is true.
I say technically.
Because nobody cared as a hyperbolic statement.
When Ricky Gervais opened up saying, don't be political, blah blah blah, a lot of people just shrugged and then got political anyway.
But it certainly mattered to a lot of people who feel disenfranchised by Hollywood and by the media.
Moderate individuals like myself, conservatives obviously, feel like they're not represented by Hollywood.
In fact, they're shamed and shunned by them and insulted by them.
So Ricky Gervais certainly said things that people care about.
When the Washington Post says nobody cared, it's because they're talking about the Hollywood liberal elites.
You know, this story's from last night.
But what he's basically saying is that they view everyone as their elite clique of lefty, you know, politicos, right?
They don't care about what conservatives think, even though conservatives loved it.
They don't care about what freedom-minded individuals and the politically homeless think because we're not part of their clique.
So when he says nobody cared, he's saying, yes, among Hollywood's elite, they didn't care.
They're gonna do whatever they want.
Now here's the bad news.
I thought things would look good for the Golden Globes after this, but I jumped the gun.
According to the New York Post, the Golden Globes tank 15% in early ratings on track for 8-year low.
But just wait.
Ricky Gervais still did the right thing.
Let's read this and I'll explain.
New York Post reports.
Not even the spectacle.
Of witnessing Hollywood's elite take a tongue-lashing from host Ricky Gervais was enough to save the Golden Globes telecast.
The 77th annual ceremony's ratings were down about 15% from 2019, according to very early numbers from Nielsen, The Wrap reports.
However, the outlet emphasized that it's very important to stress that this preliminary data is subject to significant upward adjustment.
A full Nielsen report is expected in a few hours.
The telecast attracted an average of 14.76 million viewers.
And a 3.8 share among adults 18-49 in what are referred to as fast nationals ratings.
Those early figures skewed down 6% in viewers and about 16 in the demo from early figures this time last year.
The 2019 Golden Globes broadcast ended up at 18.61 million viewers and a 5.2 rating in the 18-49 demographic.
Sure, fast national ratings are unreliable for live broadcasts, The Hollywood Reporter reports,
but Sunday's numbers appear to be on track to deliver the smallest Golden Globes television audience since 2012.
So I was wrong!
I thought the ratings would be up.
And perhaps that was naive of me.
Because the ratings for the Golden Globes are dependent upon last year's ratings and the marketing.
If last year's show was bad, the ratings will go down.
You also need to consider cord cutting and people watching on YouTube or other live platforms that are hosting it.
I'm not sure if they were.
I think it was on TV.
But people don't consume this stuff anymore.
Even Ricky Gervais' monologue said, Netflix won everything.
But!
I say but.
The issue is that nobody knew what Ricky Gervais was going to say, so they didn't tune in to hear what he had to say.
We just knew that he was going to make jokes.
Now that people are hearing what Ricky Gervais said, more people might tune in next year.
But I still think the ratings will go down next year.
Here's why.
Like I mentioned, Hulu, Netflix, cord cutting.
This stuff's archaic, man.
Nobody cares about these people anymore.
And this is also technically a good sign for the culture war.
It means these people's influence is waning.
They can go up on stage and say whatever they want and preach to whoever they want.
Nobody cares anymore.
So while Ricky Gervais came on stage and he said what he had to say, the Washington Post said nobody cared.
Yeah, because Patricia Arquette and Michelle Williams still gave their political pandering speech.
But guess what?
The ratings were down.
Your influence is waning.
Nobody cared.
You know what, though?
So I think it's fair to say nobody cared.
I also think it's fair to point this out.
This is the current Ricky Gervais monologue video on YouTube.
2.2 million views in like, what is this?
10 hours?
12 hours?
Okay?
Maybe a little bit longer.
When did this air?
Like 9?
So now it's like 16, 17 hours.
Not even a full day.
Over 2 million.
2.2 million views on average.
About.
I'm estimating.
I'm rounding up.
And it's the number one video on trending.
It's got 110,000 likes, 1,400 dislikes.
I think it's fair to point out a lot of people do care what Ricky Gervais had to say.
It's just not your liberal elites who are preaching to the unwashed masses.
Like I mentioned in my main segment, a lot of Democrats are passive.
A lot of people just watch the TV and say, sure, whatever.
So these people get up and grandstand because it's just a default generic thing to say.
I'm no fan.
Apparently, in the world of people who are seeking out information, in the world of the people who actually care and pay attention to the news, this mattered a great deal.
And it's going viral because we are sick and tired of walking on eggshells.
Now, many might say, well, of course, conservatives on YouTube are giving it a thumbs up.
We know that YouTube comments are all right-wing, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
It's not true.
I leave you with this.
The Way of the Bern.
The Bernie Sanders subreddit.
Now, it's not viral on the Bernie Sanders subreddit.
It's just posted.
It's got 21 upvotes.
It was posted 12 hours ago.
It's not, you know, front page number one for Bernie.
And I think it's fair because, you know, the Bernie Sanders subreddit is mostly people who care about Bernie and politics.
But this is Ricky Gervais' monologue.
And he pointed out things that even the left cares about.
And tearing down the elites is something Bernie fans care about, too.
I think what we're seeing Is the ivory towers collapse?
Bernie Sanders supporters do, whether anyone wants to believe it or not, overlap just a bit with Trump supporters in the populist area.
Bernie Sanders and Trump said a lot of similar, a lot of similar things in 2016.
And now we can see that the Bernie Sanders fans who engage this are fans.
So one person saying, Thanks for calling out Apple sweatshops.
He says I also like the if ISIS started a streaming service, you'd call your agent.
All those prepared speeches and they got pre-roasted.
They actually let him do it.
Brilliant.
Terrific monologue.
Love the audience shots of boomer Tom Hanks looking appalled.
Seriously.
Amazing.
Somebody on Apparently, they cut a lot out between what they posted online and what was shown live, according to some people on Twitter.
There was a lot of nervous laughter.
The waning days of the glorious empire, fiddling while the world burns.
I'm stoked to see that left, right, whatever, we're all coming together to poke at the Hollywood liberal elites.
I'll tell you this, man.
The Republican Party is very different today.
A lot of never-Trumpers are people who want their old-school Republican Party back.
Donald Trump woke up places and people in this country that normally don't vote.
He brought them into the Republican Party and this shocked the delicate sensibilities of old-school Republicans.
He changed it.
Bernie Sanders was doing something similar for the Democrats.
The Democrats cheated and pushed him out.
Right now we can see the populists, be it left or right, ain't having it with the elitists.
And Ricky Gervais, though he is a Hollywood liberal elite, took a swipe.
And a lot of people who are sitting at the bottom loved it.
So while the Washington Post, inside the ivory tower, along with these uber limousine liberal elites, can say, nobody cared, look down.
Look outside your ivory tower and look to the ground, and what will you see?
Left to right.
The people on the ground, the peasant revolt, is watching.
And they're happy that it's happening.
It's finally time for these people who pretend to care to get knocked down a peg or two.
So thank you, Ricky Gervais, the hero we need.
So perhaps the ratings weren't what we wanted them to be.
Perhaps he couldn't stoke the flames and get people to watch, but I think it's important to point out my mistake.
It's not so much about Ricky's show tonight.
It's about the fact that after the show, his monologue goes viral.
Two million views in less than a day.
Number one trending on YouTube.
Because who cares about the Golden Globes and the political grandstanding of these Hollywood liberal elites?
We care about what Ricky had to say.
And we want to watch him deliver this scathing tongue lashing to their faces.
And that's what matters.
And that's what goes viral.
So perhaps, People might market off this.
I don't want to say I was completely wrong in my first segment.
While I was wrong about the numbers, I think people will still see this and say, I can be edgy too.
There's money to be made here.
Let's do this.
So they're looking at Ricky Gervais, and they're seeing, man, I'd love to get 2 million views on a video in less than a day.
I don't.
I get 100,000.
I'm happy.
I'm glad you guys watch.
But I'm no Ricky Gervais.
But I'd sure love to be.
And I'm sure that's what many, many people are thinking.
How can I get the spotlight like that?
How can I build up a massive following and be respected by so many people?
How can I have the people cheering me on to empower my brand?
Now they do it for the wrong reasons, so what?
They'll do it for the money.
But all that matters is that they do.
So, I'm gonna lose my voice.
Again, I'll wrap up here.
Stick around, I got a couple more segments coming up for you in a few minutes, and I'll see you all shortly.
In a recent interview, Ocasio-Cortez lamented the fact that her and Joe Biden share the Democratic Party, that the tent is too big, and she said in any other country they wouldn't be in the same party.
But I think we're seeing something different.
I don't think they're in the same party.
I don't think there technically is a Democratic party anymore.
And I have a bit of data that backs up my assumption.
There's also a ton of anecdotes.
There's a lot of stories in the press talking about the Democrats splitting or falling apart.
Here's one from December.
Pelosi has lost control of the Democratic Party to AOC and the lunatic left, Scalise says.
But that's technically true.
They still have some control, but the reality is there's been an ongoing civil war on the Democrats' side.
Meanwhile, Republicans are unified.
I believe if Bernie Sanders had won the nomination in 2016, they'd be equally unified.
The Republicans didn't like Trump, but Trump was able to win.
He brought on many new voters, people who never voted before, into the Republican Party, creating a different kind of Republican Party.
And now they've all essentially centralized around Trump and what he believes in.
On the Democrat side, they're in a state of civil war.
But there's one fact that makes me believe it's just not even a Democratic Party anymore, and that's fundraising totals.
While Donald Trump and the RNC together have raised nearly, I think, half a billion dollars or something like that, The Democratic National Committee is in debt and raised less than half.
But the Democrats as individuals raised tons of money.
Now, no one raised more than Trump.
But together, they did raise way more than Donald Trump.
But when Trump is combined with the GOP, they beat all the other Democrats.
Here's the point I'm trying to make.
People are donating to the Republican Party.
People are donating to the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee, or whatever it's called.
It's got a different name.
They're donating to congressional campaigns, the committee that funds them.
They're donating to the Republican National Committee in general, and they're donating to Trump.
All of these things, together, supporting the same ideas.
However, the Democrats aren't.
They're fighting each other, and donations are going to individual candidates and not the DNC.
Which says to me, the Democrats as a whole are... Well, maybe it's unfair to say they don't exist anymore, but I certainly think they're on their deathbed.
People are supporting Andrew Yang, who says, not left, not right, but forward.
People are supporting Tulsi Gabbard, though not the most popular.
She is being smeared and slammed by the Democrats.
And we can see how MSNBC, the establishment progressive or liberal outlet, omits Bernie Sanders Yang and Tulsi, or outright smears Tulsi.
There is no unity on the Democratic side.
And so what we're seeing is the support for each individual candidate, not for the Democratic Party.
There may as well be no Democratic Party if they're not going to get behind anybody and they're split down the middle.
Maybe not even down the middle.
Bernie Sanders outraised Joe Biden by, I think, like two to one.
So who is really supporting what?
Bernie Sanders is an independent.
He's always been an independent.
He's running on the Democratic ticket because you kind of have to.
The Democratic Party at this point stands for nothing, is fractured, and is undergoing a massive civil war where people don't even bother to vote for the Democratic Party.
In 2016 we saw Bernie or bust.
I believe it's worse today.
With AOC saying Biden shouldn't, they wouldn't even be in the same party?
Then how can you expect people to, quote, vote blue no matter who in 2020?
I'll make a bet.
First, Andrew Yang is awesome.
I really like this guy.
Tulsi Gabbard as well.
These are the people I would prefer to vote for.
They're likely not going to get the nomination.
I'm not insane.
I'll be real with you guys.
I don't expect it.
But I'm going to do what I can, I suppose.
Because I do like them.
But if they don't get the nomination, I'm not going to vote for any of these other people.
I believe Bernie has pandered too hard, and I think he's pushed some policies I can no longer be aligned with.
Biden?
Never going to happen.
I'm going to vote for my candidate because I believe in them, and not for Blue, no matter who.
I think other people feel similar to me, and I believe other people are upset that Democrats are refusing to stand up against this woke ideological outrage that is slowly taking over the party.
Where are the moderate sane Democrats?
I don't know.
I feel like they've given up.
And that's too bad.
My early morning segment was Ricky Gervais slamming his Hollywood liberal elites.
That video is currently trending.
Ricky Gervais' opening monologue is trending on YouTube.
I think, number one, overwhelmingly liked.
Last I checked, it was like 90,000 thumbs up, 1,000 thumbs down.
Because regular people are tired of the woke, cultural, far left, whatever.
It's probably why Joe Biden polls number one.
But there is a large enough faction of these progressives who are going to support it, which says to me, if you look at the Democratic base right now, or I'm sorry, the candidacy, what do these people even agree on?
They're continually one-upping each other and they don't stand, they barely stand for the same things.
Many of them are talking about abolishing private health care.
Many are saying, no, we need a public option.
They're so far spread out.
It seems like the battle for the soul of the Democratic Party is completely meaningless when you factor in the axe-or-bust voters.
It doesn't matter to me if, you know, Bernie Sanders wins.
A lot of people will say, I'm only gonna support Bernie, and if he wins, I'll vote for him, otherwise I won't.
Okay, well, I would only support Yang or Tulsi.
That says to me, There is no Democratic Party.
But allow me to stop ranting and let's read some of these stories.
I'm not going to read this Newsweek one.
I just wanted to highlight this.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com slash donate if you'd like to support my work.
There are several ways you can give.
However, what you need to do is subscribe to my new YouTube channel, YouTube.com slash TimCastIRL.
I know many of you were expecting a more on-the-road van channel.
Unfortunately, it has proved nearly impossible.
I tried, I made some videos, and in the end, there were a lot of obstacles that made it difficult.
What I'm going to be doing now is a higher-level interview show and general news, interest, gaming, etc.
just to create a new podcast that explores I don't want to necessarily say higher-level ideas, kind of, like academic, cultural, science, and mainstream news.
Subscribe to this channel.
I will be dramatically increasing my output, doing maybe 10 more segments, a new live show every night, Monday through Friday, at 8 p.m.
So stick around for this.
It should be coming in the next couple weeks.
Subscribe to youtube.com slash TimCastIRL if you have not done so already.
And let's get to the news!
This is the first story I want to show you.
Pelosi has lost control of the Democratic Party to AOC and the lunatic left, Scalise says.
You may be familiar with Steve Scalise.
He's a Republican.
He faced some serious adversity.
He's recovered.
And now he's slamming the Democrats because they're being led by this far left.
People like Ocasio-Cortez with millions of subscribers have tremendous influence over what the Democrats can do.
Now, for the longest time, the Democrats had passive support.
And I really do mean passive.
People would just vote for them because they didn't like Republicans.
This opened the door to the far left and progressives to come in and lead the activists to start gaining ground.
Because the original Democratic base is passive, they're not fighting back.
Meaning AOC, the Young Turks, etc., other progressives and far leftists are easily able to take over.
But let me show you the story from the New York mag Intelligencer.
Let me read you this paragraph right here.
They say, Ocasio-Cortez isn't the first politician to become a cultural sensation,
but she may be the first to do so at the very beginning of her career,
when she's occupying the lowest rung of political power.
Her main project going forward may be this, harnessing her immense star power and the legion of young
lefties who see her as their avatar, not just to push the Democratic Party away from an
obsession with its most moderate members, but also to make the stuff of government, like
congressional committee hearings and neighborhood town halls, into must-see TV.
She said the Congressional Progressive Caucus should start kicking people out if they stray too far from the party line.
Other caucuses within the Democratic Party in Congress require applications.
Ocasio-Cortez pointed out.
But they let anybody who the cat dragged in call themselves a progressive.
There's no standard, she said.
The same goes for the party as a whole.
Democrats can be too big of a tent.
That's a quote.
It is comments like that that kept Ocasio-Cortez and the rest of the Democratic Party from reaching any kind of meaningful detente.
I asked her what she thought her role would be as a member of Congress during, for instance, a Joe Biden presidency, and here's her quote.
Oh, God, she said with a groan.
In any other country, Joe Biden and I would not be in the same party, but in America, we are.
Right now, can you point to a Republican Who does not, for the most part, align with the Republican Party.
There's a few, maybe some senators, that straggle.
But for the most part, they tend to vote for Trump, with Trump.
They tend to support similar policy positions and ideas.
Some of them may be wishy-washy, but they're aligned.
Now look at the Democrats.
Joe Biden in no way has anything in common with Ocasio-Cortez.
Nothing.
You can say Democrat in name only, but which one's the real Democrat?
The progressives are taking over.
Perhaps in the future the Democratic Party name will remain, but it will not be the Democratic Party anyone could recognize.
As of now, you look to the Republican Party and... Look, you've got people like Jeff Van Drew switching to the Republican side, and that dude's been a Democrat forever.
But here we are.
The Republicans are a big enough tent.
Trump has endorsed former Democrat Jeff Van Drew.
And most people just side with the Republican plan, not the Democrats.
They scratch at each other.
They spit at each other.
And that says to me, it's just a name.
There's no party here.
They're fighting each other.
They disagree with each other.
She's dragging Joe Biden.
There is no party unity.
I believe it's pointless now to even say Democrat because I don't even know who we're talking about.
Let's read a little bit more.
Four days before Ocasio-Cortez won her primary in one of the biggest congressional upsets in at least a generation, I stood with her on a street corner in Queens across from a bodega underneath the 7 train and not far from the housing project where she had been canvassing.
Longshot candidates for Congress tend to sound the same.
They have a compelling bio, can lay out a theory of why they should win and how the entrenched incumbent has been absent or ignored community voices, or kowtow to the powers of Washington.
But they often crumple under sustained questioning and have fantastic views of how politics work.
Well, they try to argue against this, but that's true of AOC.
She really doesn't understand high-level economics, political situations.
You know, she got Amazon completely wrong.
The point is, I highlight this next paragraph to show you, she didn't actually win.
Let's be real.
They used the primarying technique.
For those that aren't familiar, Ocasio-Cortez won her seat by getting activists to vote in a primary.
Now, let's be real, that's the process.
And Joseph Crowley failed to rally primary voters.
That's his own fault.
That's how the system works.
But I do find it absurd that because the passive voters of this district would simply vote Democrat, as Nancy Pelosi says, even if you took a glass of water and slapped a D on it, people would vote for it.
She ends up winning, even though she got something like 16,000 votes in a district of 750,000 people.
She did not actually win over the Democrats.
They just didn't care.
She won over the progressive activists.
She pushed out one of the highest, the most powerful Democrats.
Joe Crowley was ranked the fourth ranked Democrat in the party.
And here she is.
This says to me that most Democrats in this country are not paying attention and do not care.
Think about it.
If their attitude is vote blue no matter who, they don't care who the Democrat is.
They don't care about the Democratic Party.
They just want to vote against Donald Trump.
Think about the people who would vote for Crowley who didn't vote at all and didn't care.
They did not care for the Democrat and what he stood for.
The activists came out for Ocasio-Cortez, she won the primary, and then regular people said, I don't know, I'll just vote Democrat.
They didn't care.
Ocasio-Cortez won simply because of activist votes in the primary.
First, NBC News reports Democrats' 2020 split risks handing Trump a big advantage.
Even without a consensus standard-bearer, Democrats could make the case for their party if they could agree on a direction other than away from the president.
Here's the big problem.
There is no Democratic Party.
I'm going to show you the data next.
There isn't one.
They can't agree on anything because they don't like each other.
Ocasio-Cortez says she doesn't even want to be—essentially, she shouldn't even be in the same party as Joe Biden.
How will any of them agree on a direction if they don't believe they should be in the same party?
Pelosi doesn't like the far left.
The far left doesn't like Pelosi.
And donations are not going to the Democrats.
They're going to individuals.
Take a look at this story from Vox.
Just the other day, Trump and Republicans won.
The 2019 fundraising battle.
Together, these Democratic candidates raised about $142 million in the fourth quarter.
On the other side of the race, President Donald Trump, the Republican National Committee, and two joint fundraising committees for the GOP pulled in a record $154 million in the last quarter of 2019.
The president will head into 2020 with nearly $200 million on hand after raising close to half a billion dollars in 2019, according to the Washington Post.
Let me break this down for you.
The Democrats together, all of them together, get $142 million.
But look at this.
The Democratic National Committee reported just $83 million, $83.6 million, and $6.5 million in debt.
$83.6 million and $6.5 million in debt.
That's for this year.
The Democratic National Committee raised a decent amount.
They raised about half of what the total Trump and GOP raised.
But think about Trump compared to the Democrats.
The GOP, Donald Trump, and all of them together beat all of the separate Democrats.
Now, I don't know if they're combining the DNC's money of 83 with the Democrats because that would be greater than the total GOP numbers.
And that's something Republicans should seriously be afraid of.
I'm not exaggerating either.
If people really do push this vote balloon no matter who, because voting against Trump really is this winning strategy, well then they're raising more money than Trump.
But I don't see that.
I donated money to Yang and Tulsi.
I donated a little bit to Marianne Williamson because I did want to see her on the debate stage.
A lot of people disrespect her, but I appreciated her positive message.
So there's a lot to criticize her for, but I think the media's been very, very unfair to her, Yang, Tulsi, and Bernie.
And a few others, for sure.
But what we're seeing here is, The GOP, Trump, and his other committees, they all want the same thing.
They all want Trump to win.
All of this money is going to be for Trump to win.
The Democrats, no.
The money that goes to Yang goes to Yang.
The money that goes to Bernie goes to Bernie.
The money that Bloomberg is dumping into the race goes to Bloomberg and hurts other Democrats.
The money being pooled by these Democrats is for them as individuals.
The Democratic National Committee did not raise that much money.
Trump raised half a billion last year.
They raised 83 million.
You add the Democrats just in the fourth quarter.
I know it's complicated because the monies aren't like one for one.
The amount of money that they're showing here, it doesn't actually equate to each other.
The point I'm trying to make Is that I believe the X or bust donations show that the Democrats are way too fractured.
Bernie supporters do not support Biden, which means if Bernie wins the nomination, Biden supporters may or may not support Bernie.
I'm pretty sure Bernie supporters will not support Biden.
I seriously mean that.
Because you look at what AOC said, and that says to me that her faction will not support, will not support Biden.
And in an extreme long shot, Tulsi Gabbard wins the nomination.
I really don't think it.
Who's going to support her on the Democratic side?
This says to me that while you have all of this $154 million and Trump's half a billion unified, the Democrats have nothing.
Fox News two days ago.
Trump campaign and the GOP raised nearly half a billion in 2019.
People on the Republican side know what they want.
They want Donald Trump.
People on the Democrat side are Democrats in name only.
They want a mixed bag of things that are conflicting and fighting with each other.
This is a battle for the soul of the Democratic Party, sort of.
But like I said, what does Biden have?
He doesn't know where he is half the time.
What does he really represent?
I guess technically he's a remnant of a bygone era of Obama and Hillary Clinton.
So maybe he'll still maintain that lead and win.
There's a new faction coming in.
Several.
Bernie Sanders isn't independent.
He's not a Democrat.
Andrew Yang's not even a politician.
Andrew Yang says not left, right, but forward.
These groups are raising lots of money, these individuals, and it's for them, not anyone else.
Let me show you a couple more things, and I'll probably keep things short, because my voice is kind of going.
This is a story from a couple of days ago, Real Clear Politics.
Is it even right to call Biden a frontrunner if he's being eclipsed by Buttigieg and Sanders?
This is what I was talking about with passive Democrats.
They're not donating to Biden.
When asked, they say Biden, simply because they're not paying attention and they don't care.
How could someone like Biden, who can't remember where he is at the time, with his bloodshot eye and his gaffe after gaffe, how could someone like him be the frontrunner?
Most Democrats do not care.
They're not paying attention.
They don't care about what the Democratic Party is.
They're barely members of the Democratic Party as it is.
So when it comes to the polls, yeah, it's Biden.
But when it comes to actual enthusiasm, it's Buttigieg and Sanders.
So Joe Biden is the frontrunner, and that proves my point.
That the Democratic Party isn't really anything.
Nobody cares.
Nobody knows what Biden stands for.
They're fractured between these two other candidates.
So all of these different groups are fighting for the name Democrat.
To me, it just shows the name Democrat is meaningless.
What's going to happen is probably the Democratic Party will exist in that form with the name.
But what does the Democratic Party stand for?
Can you tell me?
I honestly have no idea.
And this brings me to 2020.
Check out this story from the week.
They ask, will the Democratic-Party split give Trump his victory?
And the answer is yes.
This is from April.
The Week says, With President Trump's approval rating consistently maxing out around 42 percent, it can see that there is just one way for Republicans to retain control of the House.
They must thoroughly demonize Democrats, relentlessly labeling them America-hating, baby-killing, economy-wrecking, Israel-loathing, freedom-shredding socialists.
Add 6 or 7 percentage points of demophobic swing to Trump's solid base of support, and he will prevail.
Even if a solid majority of Americans consider the president personally loathsome.
But there is another way.
Trump could win if the Democratic Party splits.
The chance of that happening is probably greater in this election cycle than in any since George McGovern's faction of anti-war progressives seized control of the party in 1972, leaving Cold War liberals out of power for the first time since the Truman administration.
This time around, tensions in the party may be greater and the risk of outright fracture even higher than they were nearly half a century ago.
Yes, today's Democrats are united in their hatred of the president, but that is where party unity ends.
They go on.
Spend time on Twitter following Democratic activists and pundits, and you'll be tempted to conclude that the party is divided between different factions of left and progressives.
Some are enthusiasts for Bernie Sanders, Well, this is an old article.
Harris is gone.
self-described social who believe the self-described socialist is the only
option. Others pine for a woman or person of color to be the standard-bearer and
will settle for nothing less. Many of these Democrats are flocking to Elizabeth
Warren. Others gravitate to Kamala Harris. Well, this is an old article. Harris is
gone. Well, let me make my prediction. In 2020, which is this year, in the election
I should say, what I mean is 2020, the election, Republicans know what they want.
They want Trump.
They're throwing money at Trump.
Trump has raised more than any individual candidate.
All of these candidates are raising a lot of money.
But together with the GOP and other, you know, Republican groups, Trump has outraised all of the Democratic candidates, which means when it comes time to donate to the frontrunner who wins the primary, who enters the presidential race against Trump, This support for Yang, for Tulsi, for Buttigieg, for Biden will not go to the other candidates.
They will not donate to each other.
Some will.
Vote blue no matter who.
Many won't.
Because they hate each other.
Ocasio-Cortez slams Pelosi.
She slams Biden.
She's not saying, when asked, will you support Biden?
What did she say?
We shouldn't even be in the same party.
Well, then why are you a Democrat?
Biden's been a Democrat longer than you.
What gives you the right to claim to be a Democrat, then?
Why don't you run as Green Party or as the Progressive Party?
Bernie Sanders isn't independent.
How does it make sense that AOC comes in claiming to be a Democrat, but then criticizes the elders who have shaped the Democratic Party over 30 years?
Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of Biden or Pelosi.
The fact is, she's coming in saying no to Biden, rejecting him, refusing to support him.
What do you think happens when Biden wins the nomination?
There is no Democratic Party.
There are just people claiming they're Democrats because they need the name to actually get those passive votes in certain districts.
But when you realize that there are many active votes, too, who won't support the other Democrat, it means that Trump sweeps with 42% approval.
He's at 45.3 in the aggregate.
He's going up.
And there it is.
The Democrats aren't going to win because there are no Democrats.
It is ridiculous to claim AOC and Biden are in the same party and even Ocasio-Cortez says so.
So what?
What do we have?
A Republican party.
Not the majority of the country.
Not by popular vote.
Maybe it is today.
And a bunch of people who claim they're Democrats but believe wildly different things and don't support each other.
To me, that's basically a group of independent campaign, you know, not candidates.
Democrat is a title.
It's a name.
It's a brand.
And it represents nothing.
I'm losing my voice.
I'll wrap it up.
Stick around.
Next segment's coming up at youtube.com slash timcastnews, 6 p.m.
And don't forget to subscribe to Timcast IRL for a new show coming in the next couple weeks.
I will see you all at 6 p.m.
It's a story about a man who doesn't like Donald Trump, who was pranked by a friend when they put a Trump sign in his yard.
But when people threatened this man, he said, you know what?
I'm going to make the sign bigger.
And I feel like this speaks to a lot of Americans in many ways when the left forces people to become Trump supporters.
I'm not a supporter of Trump.
I make videos critical of Democrats, so they accuse me of being a Trump supporter.
Cenk Uygur of the Young Turks called me a Trump supporter.
Why?
I've said Trump is bad, just not as bad as they claim he is.
I think Trump is not that bad because that bad is a reference to the insane psychosis of the TV.
Trump is a Republican president.
I do not find him to be good.
I do not find him to be as bad as they claim.
I'm rather ambivalent.
I think he's done some things that are okay, but for the most part, he's not my choice.
I am not a supporter of his.
I'm just not insane.
This man, was targeted and threatened with vandalism. And so he, he
doubled down. And this to me is a physical manifestation of what we see for so many people.
How many people do you think are going to say, you know what? I hate Trump. Screw it. Checking off
the R come, come November because they're tired of being bullied. You can't tell me what to
do. Trump's going to get that vote.
Let me read you the story and we'll talk about it. 15 foot Trump sign sparks neighborhood debate
over Bremerton sign code. They say the Trump 2020 sign in Kevin chambers yard started out as a joke.
While Chambers was away on a work trip, a friend stopped by and installed the 4x8 sign, which reads, Trump Pence 2020, Make America Great Again.
In the front yard of his West Bremerton home.
Chambers says he's not a supporter of Donald Trump.
Planned to take the sign down after about a week.
It was a prank.
His buddy was messing around with him and he had a laugh about it.
You know why?
He's not crazy.
He's a regular American.
He's someone who says, I don't like Trump.
But when his friend puts a sign in the yard, he rolls his eyes and laughs at his buddy's joke and says, OK, OK, I'll get around to taking it down.
Then someone showed Chambers a screenshot from a Facebook group where commenters had discussed tearing the sign down and egging his house.
He said, I decided I don't really like Trump, but I don't like people telling me what I could do in my yard more than
I hate Trump.
I can't really laugh because I'm losing my voice, but I love it.
I don't like Trump either, but I'll tell you what.
If someone threatened me, I'd put ten signs in my yard.
I'd say, bring it on.
I can do whatever I want.
It's my house.
So the sign stayed up until someone tagged it with spray paint.
In response, Chambers and Robert Parker, a South Kitsap resident who owns the sign, used wood stilts to elevate it 15 feet above the ground.
The wall just got 15 feet higher.
You know the joke?
So many people who tacitly voted for Trump Have become staunch supporters because of the threats, because of Antifa, because of being insulted and berated and lied about.
And now they are staunch Trump supporters.
Now, this guy, I'm not saying he's a Trump supporter, but he quite literally just made the sign 15 feet taller.
You know the meme?
Back in the day, they'd say, uh, whenever something would go crazy on the left, it would be like Trump saying the wall just got 10 feet higher.
Like every time they react, he's like, okay, I'm gonna make the wall bigger.
I'm gonna make it bigger as like a punishment.
That's where the sign has stayed until two weeks ago.
When Chambers received a letter from the city telling him the sign was in violation of city code.
Under Bremerton's rules, non-commercial signs are limited to a maximum height of six feet.
The city has given Chambers until the 21st to either lower the sign or take it down.
Bummer, dude!
Total city buzzkill.
Come on.
Let the dude defy the vandals, the haters, and the terrorists.
What started as a joke between friends has now evolved into a debate over how the city regulates signs.
Chambers argues the six-foot height limit is too strict for a sign on his property that doesn't block sight lines for drivers and is a safety risk.
He also believes the city's response was motivated by the content of the sign.
And this is where we kick it into high gear.
It's on his property.
Who cares about what the sign says?
He could hang it from a tree.
They're saying, oh, it's too high, gotta take it down.
No, it sounds like they don't like Trump.
So here's a guy who doesn't like Trump now going to battle the city.
You can't tell me what to do.
But city planners say the code is written to regulate all non-commercial signs, not just ones with political messages.
And a six-foot sign limit is based on the specific zoning in the area where the sign is located.
Quote, we're not saying that based on the content of his sign, he has to take it down.
It's purely that, hey, your sign is too high, just bring it down a bit, that way we're in compliance.
That was from the city planner, Justin Rowland.
Almost Justin Roiland, huh?
Under Beaverton's code, non-commercial speech signs are signs with religious, political, social, or philosophical messages, and don't promote commercial products or services.
Signs can't be bigger than 32 square feet, and the maximum height is limited to six feet tall.
measured from the ground to the top of the sign.
The city doesn't proactively search for signs that are out of compliance, Rowland said.
Instead, complaints from citizens drive what signs the City Code Compliance Department investigates.
In this instance, a December 18th complaint from a resident alerted the city to Chambers' sign, which means the only reason it's being targeted is because it's a Trump sign.
Period.
Nobody's going to complain about a sign that says something like, you know, Bernie.
I really doubt a Trump supporter would.
So they say, City Planning Manager Allison Satter said she agreed with Chambers that the way the sign is displayed now doesn't pose any health or safety issues.
Because it's not a health or safety issue, it's not a priority for the city, but it is a violation.
You can say whatever you want on your property, you just have to be compliant with those two minimal codes.
The issue is more broad for Chambers, who said he wouldn't have had to raise the height of the sign if the city properly enforced its rules on graffiti.
He also called out overzealous neighbors who don't believe people can have their own opinion.
There's a lot of anger and vitriol when people don't agree, and that's why I let the sign stay up in the first place.
When City Code doesn't regulate specific content on non-commercial speech signs, Chambers said the fact the sign advertises President Trump's re-election played a part in City's decision to cite him for a violation.
He said, I think the complaint was politically motivated, and I don't think the city would
have responded this way if it wasn't Trump.
Personally, I don't live there, but I think so.
People complained because it was a Trump sign.
If it was anything else, they'd have said nothing, no one would care, and he'd get on with his life.
They're targeting the political message and telling him, essentially, your joke sign ain't gonna fly here because we don't like Trump.
And you can see there's a photo, it's got graffiti on it.
They say, So the city treats all non-commercial signs the same way regardless of messaging, Rowland said, and I'm going to say yes, that's true, but they only react to complaints and the complaint is due to the nature of the sign.
If there are complaints about any other potential candidates for the upcoming elections, if complaints are made about those signs and we look at it, we will follow through the same way.
And there it is.
Only if complaints are made.
You know what, man?
It was a joke.
That was it.
And now you've made this guy defend Donald Trump.
This is like the perfect physical manifestation of 2020.
Everybody who was like, I'm thinking about Trump, and then got smeared and insulted and berated said, fine.
You want to be lunatics?
Check the box.
Cities and counties across the country made changes to local sign rules following a Supreme Court ruling in the Reid v. Town of Gilbert.
Oh, this is tough.
I can't pronounce last names and that one is a doozy.
Bremerton altered its code in 2016, including a change that shifted political signs under
the larger heading of non-commercial.
Bremerton's code passes muster under the ruling according to Bob, oh this is tough, Gomulkiewicz,
I can't pronounce last names and that one is a doozy, sorry Bob, a professor of law
at University of Washington who teaches classes on property law and freedom of speech.
He said, when I read Bremerton's sign ordinance on its face, it looks like they have done
a nice job of regulating signs for constitutionally permissible reasons.
He added that the Supreme Court also held that cities can have different rules for commercial and non-commercial signs.
Right now, cities can more heavily regulate commercial speech.
I think Bremerton has done a nice job there in that they have less regulation of non-commercial speech.
So how is he not allowed to have a sign on his property?
What if he just put it on his house?
Chambers said he hasn't decided yet whether he'll take the sign down by the Jan 21st deadline.
If he doesn't, the city may forward the case onto code enforcement.
If the sign still isn't in compliance, Chambers could be fined.
Right now, I'm evaluating our options on how I want to proceed.
Look, I do have to keep this short because I'm struggling to talk.
Hopefully that can work tomorrow.
But I really wanted to go into greater detail, so I'll do the best I can for the next minute or so.
How many people do you know passively or tacitly voted for Trump because they hate the guy?
Who have now become staunch Trump supporters because of Antifa?
How many people didn't want to vote for Trump but witnessed Antifa bash someone over the head?
Witnessed fires and beatings and brutality and just hostility and rage and that's made them want to vote for Donald Trump?
I know a lot of people.
Who are sitting there questioning, like, why are you yelling at me?
I didn't vote for the guy.
Why are you screaming in my face?
Why are you calling me a fascist?
And now they're saying, you know what?
Fine.
You reap what you sow.
Is this what you want?
You want it so bad?
Fine.
How many people feel like the Democrats on the left have forced them out of the party, and so they say, fine.
If you don't want me in your tent because it's too big, like AOC says, are across the board.
I'm willing to bet this guy's gonna vote for Trump.
I think so.
He doesn't like the guy, but here he is having the city come after him, threatening him, and taking special exemption because his buddy put a joke sign in his yard.
There you go.
So, again, I'm gonna keep it short.
Sorry, guys.
One more segment coming up, and I will see you in a few minutes.
Aliens definitely exist, and they could be living among us on Earth, says Britain's first astronaut.
You know, when I read this headline, I got excited.
Something interesting is finally going to happen.
Let me tell you.
Life's kind of boring, isn't it?
People look for things to fulfill them, but life is very droll, routine.
You travel around the world.
I've been to so many countries.
And everything's kind of the same.
I mean, there's subtle differences.
There's language differences.
There's McDonald's.
There's Hard Rock Cafe.
It's all very much the same.
We want to believe in something better.
We want to see this headline and believe that aliens do exist and they do live on Earth, according to Britain's first astronaut.
And our fingers are crossed.
But then when you read the story, you get a little bummed.
He's not talking about, you know, like men in black.
He's just saying, on other planets somewhere, we can't see them, they probably exist.
And he's right.
I'd like to imagine that he was actually saying they exist because they're on Earth and he knows it, but he's not.
He's just saying the universe is so big, in all likelihood, they do.
But he does go on to say maybe they're on Earth.
And there's an idea I want to talk to you about, kind of like decoy ducks, right?
The ducks don't know they're not real ducks.
Let's expand on this later.
But let's read this for now.
From CNN, aliens definitely exist, Britain's first astronaut has said.
And it's possible they're living among us on Earth, but have gone undetected so far.
Helen Sharman, who visited the Soviet Mir space station in 91,
told the Observer newspaper on Sunday that aliens exist, there's no two ways about it.
There are so many billions of stars out there in the universe that there must be all sorts of different forms of life.
Will they be like you and me?
Made up of carbon and nitrogen?
Maybe not.
Then, in a tantalizing theory, that should probably make you very suspicious of your colleagues, Charmin added, it's possible they're here right now and we simply can't see them.
Charmin was the first of seven Britons to enter space.
The chemist spent eight days as a researcher on the space mission when she was 27, making her one of the youngest people to enter orbit.
NASA rovers are trawling Mars for evidence of past or present lifeforms, but humankind's endless fascination with extraterrestrial lifeforms has so far proved fruitless.
Charmin is not the only person to speculate that we've had brushes with aliens, though.
A former Pentagon official who led a secret government program to research potential UFOs... Excuse me, hiccups.
Revealed in 2017, told CNN at the time that he believes there is evidence of alien life reaching Earth.
Elsewhere in her interview, Sharman said there is no greater beauty than looking at Earth from up high.
I'll never forget the first time I saw it, she added.
Sharman also discussed her frustration with observers defining her by her sex.
People often describe me as the first British woman in space, but I was actually the first British person.
It's telling that we would otherwise assume it was a man.
When Tim Peake went into space, some people simply forgot about me.
A man going first would be the norm, so I'm thrilled that I got to upset that order.
CNN has reached out to Charmin for comment.
We had another story.
NASA could find alien planets that host life after new oxygen breakthrough.
This is the real news.
This is cool stuff.
I'll read it for you in a second.
But let's talk about aliens living on Earth.
We do different kinds of decoys.
We have decoy ducks.
We put them in the water.
The ducks can't tell the difference.
As far as they know, it's just a duck sitting there not saying anything.
There's a really sad photograph of a decoy puffin.
And the decoy puffin has one peg putting it in the ground on a rock.
The other puffin seeing it raises its leg trying to socialize.
And I saw that and it made me wonder.
What if aliens have sent decoy humans to entrap or to study humans?
It's possible we can't tell the difference.
It's possible you'll be walking down the street, and you'll see a person standing around, looking around, saying nothing, and you'll think nothing of it.
It's just a person.
But seriously, it could be a robot.
Listen, when the ducks look at the decoys, they don't go and touch it.
They can't tell the paint from the feathers.
They have no idea.
For us, we're a bit more discerning.
We're very visual.
So if we saw a human, you'd probably know if it was painted on a peg like a scarecrow.
We'd get it.
But what if it's animatronic and just a simple robot?
Sitting in a chair, throwing breadcrumbs to the birds, and we walk past the person and never say any words otherwise.
No one interacts, the animatronic gets up, walks away, gets picked up by the aliens, none's the wiser.
What if the aliens are even more advanced?
What if they make humans that are biologically human, but they're like replicants?
And so they're programmed, and they're mindless avatars controlled by the aliens, we can't tell the difference, because as far as we can tell, they live, breathe, bleed, etc.
That would be awesome.
But you know what?
I'll save that for the sci-fi.
Because it's just speculation and there's no evidence to believe aliens have actually come here.
But now we can maybe find aliens on other planets, because there's a new breakthrough.
A story from The Independent.
Scientists have found a new way of finding oxygen on distant planets that could help them discover alien life.
Now, it's also important to point out...
Life doesn't need oxygen.
It's possible that life exists in ways we can't even imagine, or that it's not based on water but some other liquid medium, not even carbon-based, maybe silicon-based, maybe something else.
Let's read.
The technique could be used by NASA's James Webb Space Telescope to sniff oxygen on planets in distant solar systems.
That, in turn, could help discover planets that are alive and could be home to extraterrestrial life.
One of the possible indicators of life on other planets is oxygen in its atmosphere.
On Earth, oxygen is created when living organisms convert sunlight into chemical energy, and scientists think the same might happen on Earth.
The assumption, though, is that all life follows the same chemical makeup.
I will say, it's true though, I'm not saying they're wrong.
I would defer to the scientists.
In terms of finding life like us, we absolutely should be looking for oxygen.
But it's also entirely possible that oxygen is naturally occurring, and I will point this out too, oxygen is actually hostile for life.
I could be wrong, but in my general research and reading of this stuff, we evolved to be able to survive oxygen-rich atmospheres.
Oxygenation destroys simple bacteria in life.
So, life evolves in water, this is my understanding, in certain undersea vents, volcanic vents, and slowly evolves the ability to withstand heavy oxygen environments.
It was the bacteria and stuff in the oceans creating oxygen as a byproduct, spitting it out, and it then, you know, put oxygen in the atmosphere.
It's entirely possible, as far as I know, that some planets may just be oxygen rich.
And if that's the case, we might assume we're seeing life when we're not.
Granted, I defer to the scientists.
I take their word for it.
If this means they can find life, it's a breakthrough.
Awesome stuff, they say.
Scientists hope the new technique could allow them to spot the same signal coming from other planets, and in so doing, perhaps spot planets that might be home to alien life.
But I would say more importantly, to help discern planets we could potentially colonize.
The breakthrough described in a new paper published in Nature Astronomy allows NASA's telescope to detect one of the signals that comes from oxygen molecules when they collide with each other.
As they do, they block out a specific part of the infrared spectrum, and the new telescope will be able to see that and give scientists a clue to the distant world's atmosphere.
Technology like the James Webb Space Telescope is the best hope for examining such distant planets, since they are too far away to ever visit or ever see in much detail.
But it requires incredible advanced technology because of the weakness of the signals.
Quote, Before our work, oxygen at similar levels as on Earth was thought to be undetectable.
This is from, with Webb, Thomas Fauches from NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center and lead author of the study said in a statement.
This oxygen signal is known since the early 1980s from Earth's atmospheric studies, but has never been studied for exoplanet research.
Spotting oxygen on a planet might not be a guarantee that something lives there, like I said.
Scientists have proposed alternative explanations that could create oxygen on exoplanets, and so it might not be a definitive indication that the world is alive.
Well, I'll tell you this.
I think the most important thing is not necessarily trying to find life, but maybe find a place where we could terraform and create life.
We need to find a planet in the Goldilocks zone.
That's the zone of temperature that would be hospitable for us and our form of life.
For a long time, they thought life was going to be like we were, carbon-based, of a certain temperature.
It's not true.
There's now some theories that life could use different chemicals at different temperatures.
But at the very least, tracking planets that could support human life colonization.
What if we loaded up a life bomb?
We created something full of bacteria, seeds, soil, and energy.
A very, very large system.
And I don't mean bomb as explosion.
I mean a vessel we send that is capable of sustaining life to a planet that can sustain life and we seed that planet with life.
Maybe there is no other life in the galaxy, in the universe, but maybe we can take something, a small bio... I say small, but maybe a really large ship, that we find a planet that has all the chemicals that could sustain life.
Maybe it's an experiment.
Maybe we send a rover to a planet, we have the ship expand, releases seeds, pollen, you know, and just slowly tries to evolve and grow, and we watch it.
Maybe we could terraform a planet, Maybe it would take tens of thousands of years or hundreds of thousands of years, but maybe we just do it anyway.
And then maybe in a few million years the planet will be just like Earth and they'll have no idea it was seeded by us and we will no longer exist.
But I like to hope we can colonize the stars.
I'll leave it there.
I hopefully can talk tomorrow.
I was playing the video game for three hours last night and I killed my voice.
Thanks for hanging out.
I'll see you tomorrow at 10 a.m.
YouTube.com slash Timcast.
The video game you're seeing is called Yang 2020, Path to the Presidency, and it is one of the funniest games I have ever played, so I decided for the 1pm segment, I am going to show you this game and explain it to you.
It should still be something you're able to listen to.
I'm not going to go through the whole story mode, but I am going to play some of the game and show you, so this will probably be a more visual video than what I've done in the past.
You know, typically when I do a video, you can just listen.
You're going to want to watch this one.
So what we have here is the main menu.
Andrew Yang, as most of you know, is running for the presidency.
And the media... Man, the media really plays him for a fool.
Like MSNBC, he boycotted for a while.
They used the wrong image, they cut him out from polls.
So the gist of the game...
is it's actually quite simple.
You're Andrew Yang, and you have to literally fight your way
to the presidency.
We've got here Fred the Felon, who is, my understanding, he's a truck driver, he's a real guy.
And he is now, he's like a Yang convert.
You have Joe Rogan, look at this, Joe Rogan, he looks like Tian Shenhan from Dragon Ball Z.
Cory Booker, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Pete Buttigieg, Joe Biden, and Donald Trump.
So again, I'm not gonna play the full story mode for you.
The game's available on Steam.
I tweeted it out.
Go to twitter.com slash TeamCast, because I put the link up, and you can pick up the game for like seven bucks.
This is not like a sponsored spot.
I just found this game so hilarious and amazing that I thought it would be funny to share with you.
Not only that, a lot of people have been asking me about it.
So, check out my channel, YouTube.com slash TimCastIRL.
And there's a two and a half hour stream of me playing through the whole story mode, and doing versus mode.
There's like... So, I think you have to actually unlock the other characters, but you start with... Okay, so it starts with Joe Rogan and Andrew Yang, I guess.
Sometimes it's Donald Trump, but you gotta unlock all the other characters.
Here's what I'm gonna do for you.
I'm gonna go back and I am gonna play story mode to unlock Donald Trump for you.
And I wanna show you, it's really funny, I just gotta do it.
This'll be a short segment, I'll do like 10 minutes.
But I really think this game is worthy of you guys checking out in a shorter segment.
So, I'll tell you one more time.
First, this game was made by Sam's Games.
That's about what I know about the dude.
He's on Twitter.
His name is Sam's Games.
And, uh, it's, it's, it's really, really funny.
He, uh, yeah.
So go to TimCast, go to YouTube.com slash TimCast IRL to watch the full stream of this game.
Marianne Williamson would be epic, because she'd have, like, psychic powers, and she would, like— Joe Biden in this, his eye is red, and he shoots— he shoots blood from his eye.
So, uh, yeah, this has been... Let me be real with you guys.
I was gonna do a segment on, like, Nancy Pelosi voting on war powers and stuff like that, but I did a stream of this.
It didn't get a ton of views, but a lot of people watched, and I felt like, in terms of doing a demo of this game, getting it to the widest audience possible, I should do a shorter segment for my second channel.
So this is what it is.
Again, link in the description below.
It's like seven bucks.
The dev has worked on this, like, by himself for the past several months.
It's a very pro-Andrew Yang game.
It explains his policies and stuff, and it's him winning the presidency.
But I think regardless of your political position, whether you're a Bernie fan, a Trump fan, or otherwise, you're gonna get a kick out of this game because it's just funny.
Although the Elizabeth Warren thing is really offensive.
