Democrats Civil War Just Went From Bad To Worse, AOC And Bernie Paved A Path For A Republican DECADE
Democrats Civil War Just Went From Bad To Worse, AOC And Bernie Paved A Path For A Republican DECADE. Right now there are two stories about the Democrats chances in the November 2020 election.One says that if Joe Biden is the nominee Trump is guaranteed to win because the activist far left will become deflated and jaded. The other says that if Bernie Sanders wins the nomination Trump will win because most americans will not support a socialist.Both stories are correct.At this point the Democratic party fracture is so bad that neither side will commit to supporting the candidate and it seems that "vote blue no matter who" has failed.The media machine, like CNN, are pumping out insane smears of Bernie Sanders and the progressives news outlets return in kind against the moderate condidates.In the end the Republicans are being given a clear path to 2020 victory. Combine this with Trump's successes and it seems like a Trump landslide is inevitable.The economy is soaring, approval for Trump is up, and the Democrats are tearing each other apart.It seems likely that the Democrats internal civil war will not end after this cycle and will continue for at least the next decade
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Right now, the progressive Democrats are warning that if Joe Biden wins the nomination, the Democrats will lose to Trump in 2020.
But at the exact same time, the moderate corporate Democrats are warning if Bernie Sanders wins the nomination, the Democrats will lose in 2020.
The undeniable truth is finally upon us as we are about to enter the first primary of the primary season or the Iowa caucus.
And it's that the progressive Democrats will not vote for a moderate and the moderate Democrats will not vote for a socialist.
And you know what that means?
It means the party is split so horribly.
Donald Trump is going to win.
Dare I say, I don't think a Democrat could win the presidency for maybe the next 10 years.
And that's not my opinion.
Frank Luntz, famous pollster, is bringing this up.
We're seeing the Democrat civil war go from bad to worse as we are about to enter the start of primary season.
First, we had the story from the New York Times.
A major fear for Democrats.
Will the party come together by November?
Now we have two conflicting stories, both accusing each side of causing the imminent doom for the Democratic Party.
But everyone seems to be slinging mud.
And while you may say It's normal, Tim.
It's primary season.
Of course they do this.
I agree.
But.
In 2016, Bernie Sanders started a Democratic Party revolution.
He went from this fringe candidate announcing his candidacy to a small handful of people to one of the most popular politicians in the country.
Today, he's actually leading in many of these early primary states, meaning Bernie Sanders could really win.
But as we know from Gallup, Americans won't vote for a socialist.
And that says to me, with a booming economy, and as I've stated a million and one times, Donald Trump's gonna win.
The Republicans are gonna sweep.
I think Bernie Sanders will probably take the nomination.
We'll see at this point.
We'll see.
And then ultimately what happens is moderate Democrats decide Trump is better.
And guess what?
Even Megyn Kelly and Bill Maher agree on at least one point.
Political correctness.
Let's do this.
Let's take a look at how the Democratic Civil War is tearing the party apart and clearing the path for a Republican decade.
And then I'll show you how even people on the left are sitting there shaking their heads saying, yep.
Let's get started.
This is the first story from the New York Times, which I just mentioned.
They say, even the goal of defeating President Trump isn't enough for some voters to commit to backing the eventual Democratic nominee, expressing a clear aversion to a candidate who is too liberal or too centrist for their tastes.
Now, I do want to stop and say this, because I did mention this when I read this last time.
They mean leftist or liberal.
People like Joe Biden and Klobuchar and Buttigieg, well, they're liberals.
Bernie Sanders is a leftist.
He's a socialist.
There's a big difference.
I think it's important to point out.
But, let's dive in to some of the more recent news.
Before we do, head over to timcast.com slash donate if you'd like to support my work.
There's several different ways you can give, but the best thing you can do, share this video.
Now, I know a lot of Republicans are probably going to be thinking, Tim, why would I share your video if it's going to help the Democrats figure out how to defeat Republicans?
Yeah, good point.
But still, please consider sharing it.
Now, if you're a Democrat, that's exactly the reason you should probably share this video.
Look, man, there are a lot of people on the left who don't want to hear things that hurt their feelings or present them a negative opinion about their plan moving forward.
Bernie Sanders voters don't want to concede that they're going to lose because Americans won't vote for socialists.
These far-lefty types like the Young Turks are adamant that the only way to beat Trump is with a more progressive candidate, because America is a progressive nation.
But they're wrong.
Americans won't vote for socialists, and as Gallup has shown us, this country is actually kind of center-right.
Which is funny, because it was Ocasio-Cortez herself who recently said there is no left-wing party in this country.
The Democrats are conservative or centrist.
If that were the case, what you've just admitted is that the overwhelming majority of this country is either conservative or centrist.
What makes you think Bernie Sanders will beat Trump?
You are wrong.
And this is your warning.
So by all means, ignore this warning.
Fine.
I guess you'd have no choice.
If you want Bernie to be the nominee and be the president, the only thing you can say is, Bernie will win, Bernie will win, and you can plug your ears.
But check out this story.
Let's talk about the Civil War in the Democrats.
This was January 10th.
AOC riles Dems by refusing to pay party dues, bankrolling colleagues' opponents.
Now, I know.
I've talked about it in great length.
It's something we've seen often with Ocasio-Cortez, but it's a good entry point into the Democrat Civil War.
Now, we know it started with Bernie Sanders, but here we've come to a point where Ocasio-Cortez has flat out said, I'm not going to help Democrats get reelected.
I'm going to help new progressives replace you.
There is no real Democratic Party at this point.
You've got the woke Left Democratic Party.
You've got the dirtbag Socialist Democrat Party.
You've got the moderates, the corporates, the populists.
There are a bunch of different factions.
But over on the right, you have Trump.
Seriously.
You have the party of Trump and a tiny fraction of never-Trumpers who consider themselves conservative and want a more proper, you know, candidate.
But for the most part, 90% of Republicans are happy with Trump.
They're unified.
They're happy with where they're going.
Democrats are not.
You know, 20% of Bernie Sanders supporters did not vote for Hillary Clinton, with around 12% actually voting for Donald Trump.
That's how bad it is.
The blank or bust vote.
So I will get to that because I'm going to show you how basically every candidate's supporters are saying it's either Yang, it's either Biden, it's either Bernie, and they won't choose anyone else.
I wouldn't be surprised if Trump gets 70% or 40 states or some ridiculous number.
Now, I think it's fair to point out I was absolutely wrong in 2018.
I always say this.
I thought Republicans would do way better in the House.
They didn't.
So we will see what happens.
But let me show you some more stories.
This is a news story from BuzzFeed.
Quote, things are gonna get crazy.
Bernie Sanders camp is warning supporters about a backlash.
The Sanders campaign is pleading with supporters to stay positive no matter what might be coming their way.
And there is the warning sound.
The horn being blared by Ocasio-Cortez.
She said things are gonna get crazy.
In these last eight days, things are going to get crazy, Ocasio-Cortez said on Sunday.
I don't even know what's going to happen, and that's why we've got to stay focused and committed as possible.
Well, that's right.
AOC and Bernie know, with the smears they've already faced from Democrats, not from conservatives, it's gonna get real bad.
And I'll tell you the worst thing for people like Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders, is that not only are they being targeted by Biden, somewhat, and other Democrats, because it's primary season, but conservatives as well.
So all of these Democrats, they're facing a fight on two fronts, the left and the right.
They say, Some rivals are already trying to capitalize on establishment anxiety.
Pete Buttigieg asked supporters twice on Saturday to fend off Sanders by contributing to the mayor's campaign.
If things stay steady until the Iowa caucuses in just nine days, Bernie Sanders could be the nominee of our party, one fundraising email read.
They're actually sending out emails acting like their greatest threat will be Bernie Sanders.
Well, I gotta tell ya.
It's actually true.
Less than half in the U.S.
would vote for a socialist for president.
If Bernie Sanders is the nominee, I hate to say it, but all current data, and I mean anecdotal evidence, whether it's worth anything or not, suggests Bernie can't win.
Americans don't like socialism.
There's a lot who do.
That number's going up, but not today.
But this is where it gets interesting.
Politico reports, quote, they let him get away with murder.
Democrats tormented over how to stop Bernie.
The party establishment is caught in a catch-22.
This story, it's, I believe the story is actually from, what is this from?
It's from today.
And it's fascinating.
They basically say, the Democrats have been trying to fend off the rise of the far left for some time, but they can't stop it.
When they go after Bernie with smears, they embolden his base and make them more adamant and angry.
And that activist base of the Democratic Party are a large portion of primary voters.
I mean, all these activists are going to come out and vote.
Now, I think it's fair to say, too, a lot of Bernie people who are far left don't believe in voting and probably won't, but there's nothing they can do about it.
Let's read a little bit they say.
With Bernie Sanders gaining steam a week before the Iowa caucuses, tormented Democrats are second-guessing what they say was a hands-off strategy against the Vermont senator in the 2020 primary.
They fear a repeat of 2016 is in the making.
When mainstream Republicans scoffed at the idea that Donald Trump could ever win the nomination until he became unstoppable.
Only this time from the left.
Well, there's going to be a repeat of 2016.
A media that lies, smears, and underestimates Donald Trump.
And, well, also Bernie Sanders.
And ultimately, I think what's going to happen is they're going to claim Trump can never win.
They're going to try and smear him every which way.
It's not going to work.
It's going to be 2016 all over again.
Let me tell you something.
There was a segment on Saturday Night Live that went viral.
It was called White Male Rage.
And they talked about the movie Joker.
And she's describing the movie and then starts laughing and singing about how it's white male rage.
Now I thought the segment was kind of funny in that they did kind of poke fun at the woke left.
But it also exemplified, regardless of the intention of the skit, it exemplified perfectly 2016.
Let's do this.
Do you know what the movie Joker is about?
Well, there's a lot of interpretations, but I'll tell you how I saw it, how many people saw it.
You have a man named Arthur Fleck.
He is mentally ill, he is being treated through government programs, he's struggling to get by, he's beaten in the streets, he's mocked and belittled, and he feels like he doesn't exist.
More importantly though, He relies on therapy and government programs, help.
When he doesn't get it, he starts going, he gets crazier and crazier.
On the TV, the ultra-rich, you know, Dr. Wayne, is criticizing the poor.
So here you have the white male, mentally ill, without a job, impoverished, struggling, belittled, and they take away his services.
It's truly, in my opinion, a story about class issues.
And what do they say on Saturday Night Live?
It's just white male rage.
Laughing about it.
Whether it was their intention or they're trying to be woke, it doesn't matter.
Whether they're trying to mock white male rage, they exemplified exactly the problem.
And I try to explain this to people, man.
Imagine.
These are your options.
It's 2016.
You're sitting in your living room.
You have no job.
Your savings have dried up.
Maybe you're on drugs.
It's a big opiate problem.
And you're questioning your own existence.
And what do you see?
You see Donald Trump who comes and he says to you he's going to help you.
And then you see there's Bernie Sanders who for a while said the same thing.
And then it changed when he went on the debate stage and he said white people don't know what it's like to be poor.
He really said it.
That's your choice.
As somebody who grew up in this country who may be suffering, your choice is between Donald Trump or the lady on TV laughing and singing about how you're just expressing your white male rage, totally ignoring the real problems you face.
Well, I know it's a bit of a sidestep from what we're seeing with the fight within the Democrats, but that's what people are really looking at.
That's the woke left.
That's what Bernie Sanders represents.
So, I think it's just fair to say, I bring this up, I thought it was interesting, but it's also a sign of how Bernie Sanders really can't win.
And the Democrats, the moderate ones, that, well, the moderates tend to be more corporate, fine, whatever, but at least they're pushing back to a certain extent.
Unfortunately, even Bloomberg and the moderates are still embracing the woke ideology, which will bring us a repeat of 2016.
But here's the story, right?
So I was on this story about Politico, and they're talking about how the Democrats are terrified of Bernie Sanders.
Look, they know a socialist can't win.
Meanwhile, the progressives are saying the exact opposite.
Progressives warn of a great deflation.
The left is more energized than ever.
So what happens if Joe Biden is the nominee?
This from about a week ago, they say.
Quote, please don't make me vote for Joe Biden, a flock of teenagers pleaded in a series of videos posted to social media at TikTok earlier this month.
But as the Iowa caucus draws closer, a Biden nomination is looking more likely by the day.
Lefty groups are worried and warning that a Biden win could crush the activist enthusiasm they're counting on to win in November.
Thousands of Americans who wait for hours in line to snap a photo with Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, or who filled arenas for Bernie Sanders of Vermont, simply will not be as enthusiastic about the former vice president.
But that's not the issue here.
Actually, I should say, well, I should say that's not the issue.
The issue is that regular Americans who don't pay attention to stadiums, what they're really concerned about are policies.
They don't need to go out and shake hands and meet their celebrity activist, you know, nominee.
They want to hear that you have the right idea.
And they're probably just hanging out minding their own business for the most part.
That means the people who won't vote socialist are being split.
The activists are screeching, we want an activist, but the regular people are saying nothing and probably won't come out if you give them the activist.
The activists won't come out if you give them Joe Biden.
In the end, I think Trump wins, but let me show you a really good example.
So we have, first, this is just another story in the Civil War.
Progressive groups have gone hard against Joe Biden.
They're trying to tear him down.
But I want to get to the bust moment.
Check out this Google search.
It's Yang or bust.
This right here is a series of posts about how people, these people are saying, if Yang doesn't get the nomination, they're not going to vote.
I'll tell you this.
I completely agree.
I feel the exact same way.
I'll probably go out in the primary and vote for Andrew Yang, and then when he invariably doesn't get the nomination, then I'm probably just going to stay home on election night, because I don't know, I don't care.
I don't really care for any of these other candidates, and I think Trump's gonna win, so I just don't see the point.
I really would not vote for Bernie, because Bernie can't defend himself.
Warren is a liar.
Buttigieg actually seems alright, but he seems kind of like grey putty.
I don't really know what He's about.
Really, it's kind of nothing.
I mean, him and Klobuchar.
And Joe Biden should not be running.
That dude doesn't even know where he is.
And there's a bunch of other things wrong with that guy.
I like Andrew Yang.
Probably going to vote for him, and that's it.
But it's not just Yang or Bust.
It's also Bernie or Bust.
Well, at least 47% of Bernie supporters are not committed to supporting the eventual nominee.
So if you're sitting here saying, we've got to get these activists ready, and they're saying Bernie or Bust, nah, sorry.
That's a bad investment.
If the Democrats were willing to go after Bernie Sanders, they are risking everything And then what happens if it's not Bernie?
Well, now they're in trouble.
They absolutely need to try and court moderates and convince them to already support other people.
This feels like a hostage situation for Democrats.
The activists are saying, if you don't give us Bernie, you will lose because we refuse to support you.
And, well, that's the case.
But, surprisingly, there's still the inverse!
For Democratic establishment, it's Biden or Bust from September of 2019.
I kid you not.
Biden or Bust.
Now, what I do find funny is there's not really a very big Bust movement for other candidates.
For Elizabeth Warren, she's kind of the second choice for the activists.
When it comes to her, they just say, Bernie, Warren, or Bust.
So Warren's always kind of a second thought.
But you get the point.
We know the Democrats have been fighting against each other, taking swings at each other.
They're warning themselves.
Democrats are pleading to themselves.
The far-left Democrats are saying, Democrats, listen, Biden will make us lose to Trump, while at the exact same time, the moderates are saying to the Democratic voters, Bernie will make us lose to Trump.
How are you supposed to actually win this one?
In the end, you know what's going to make Trump win?
First of all, Trump's successful economy.
But somewhere in there, at the top, is the fact that Democrats can't form a coalition.
Don't take my word for it.
I turned it over to Frank Luntz, the famous pollster who said, If AOC successfully splits the Democratic electorate between a center-left and further-left party, it would be a godsend to the GOP for the next decade.
If AOC splits, I'm sorry.
She already did.
I think I've made that clear.
How can you have two articles coming out at the same time?
Saying, if it's Biden, we lose.
If it's Bernie, we lose.
I think it's fair to say neither side will support either, and Trump will win because they're going to sit this one out.
So in the end, who wins?
Donald Trump.
The Democrats can't, they can't form a coalition, but it's not just that.
The next decade seems to be lining up for a Republican decade because it's true.
Progressives and moderates in the Democratic Party or to say that the liberals and the and the progressives in the
Democratic Party are split nearly 50-50 so there's not going to be a coalition anytime soon
at the exact same time We are hearing from people like Bill Maher and Megyn Kelly
when they explain exactly why liberals will vote for Trump Check out this quote from Megyn Kelly and Bill Maher on his
show Bill Maher said in reference to her getting fired from NBC
when that happened to you I was angry for you Maher said
Because this cancel culture when they do polls they find like 80 to 90 percent of people in this country hate this
this s Yes.
Even liberals hate this S. This is one reason why Trump got elected.
Because people hate political correctness so much that they'll even take it in the mouth of a werewolf when he's not politically correct.
Megyn Kelly said, because he's a fighter, and that's the package it comes in.
He says, I mean, you even apologized for something I didn't think was that awful.
It's like, why couldn't you just say, okay, I was a little inartful at how I expressed it.
My bad.
Let's move on with our lives.
No.
Instead, you have to go away for all time.
Who are these perfect people who have never made a mistake?
Let me bring it back to the Democrat Civil War.
When Megyn Kelly and Bill Maher, okay, are sitting down together in agreement that 80 to 90 percent of people in this country, including liberals, would rather have a Donald Trump president if it meant no To political correctness, I think it's fair to say we all recognize why Donald Trump will win.
80-90% of this country.
Now I know he's just spitballing here.
He pulled that number off the top of his head, sure.
But he's mostly right.
Most Americans don't want the woke far-left nonsense.
The real threat to the Democratic Party, the real thing that allows Trump to succeed, is the fact that the Democrats have awful candidates.
I'm sorry, Hillary Clinton was terrible.
And then they bring in, you know, Bernie Sanders, who was okay, but then completely fell off that horse.
Now what's left?
I mean, honestly, like, in terms of what the Democratic Party wanted to be, Buttigieg might be the best they have, but, I mean, who is he really?
The far left is storming the gates of the Democratic Party to try and take it over.
Meanwhile, Ocasio-Cortez is attacking them from the inside, trying to oust actual incumbent candidates and calling the Democrats not a left-wing party.
If the Democrats aren't a left-wing party, then what is she doing in there?
Why is she running as a centrist conservative in her own opinion?
Well, it's because they've declared war.
Now see, with Donald Trump, it was populism, and he won.
They didn't cheat him.
But in the end, the Democrats, well, I think the far left doesn't care.
I think they're absolutely willing to allow Trump to succeed because their bigger concern is the corporate establishment machine.
And to an extent, I can respect that.
You know what I mean?
I like the idea of actual, you know, humans who want to see real change and work on policy.
Then these keys to the castle do nothing Democrats.
What I mean by that is they just want the keys to the ivory tower.
They don't do anything once they get there.
However, I think Bernie is really, really bad for the job at this point.
He won't defend himself.
And in the end, you know, Donald Trump is the one who's going to take it.
Because like Bill Maher said, they'll take it from the mouth of the werewolf.
He's a fighter.
You know, Megyn Kelly says he's a fighter, and that's the package it comes in.
But let me show you some other stuff.
This tweet from Inez Stepman said, If you can't understand why Trump's voters seem to stick
with him no matter what, consider that every single U.S. institution save one, the
military, has well under 50% approval from Americans.
Voters think the whole thing is rotten, so they care less about Trump's faults.
The way I see it is, oh, they know about Trump's faults.
They do.
I talk to Trump voters all the time who tell me they think he's an arrogant narcissist and they laugh about it.
You know what?
I think there's a really, there is a sentiment behind many Trump voters that's kind of like, you know what?
He's not perfect.
He's far from it.
But I'll tell you this, he is a bull.
And he put out the horns, stormed through the doors of that ivory tower, and he's rampaging around.
All of these establishment people and corporate cronies are freaking out while they screech, well, I never!
And Donald Trump is just thrashing through, knocking things over.
And it feels good to a lot of people.
Now the reality is the U.S.
economy is doing really, really well.
People are very satisfied.
New polls are coming out showing that Americans are happier than they've been in a long time.
They have hope for the future.
Many of them, even Democrats, admitting it's Donald Trump.
So what happens in the end is you have the Democrats, who insist on denying the strength of the economy, fight with each other, point the finger at each other, and that spells their demise.
Seriously.
What I find truly fascinating about all of this I saw two articles come out nearly at the same time.
One arguing if it's Biden we lose and one arguing if it's Bernie we lose and now we know neither side will support the other.
I used to believe for a long time that the moderates would be willing to support anyone so long as it wasn't Donald Trump.
But now with Bernie, I think that's not the case.
He has shown such a weak will and a lack of a spine.
I think people are gonna pick Donald Trump.
I think liberals, moderate liberals, will absolutely support Trump.
But I'll leave it there, so stick around.
Next segment's coming up at youtube.com slash timcastnews starting at 6 p.m.
Thanks for hanging out, and I will see you all then.
Yesterday, we all got some extremely tragic news.
I had seen this story about a helicopter crash, and I didn't think too much of it.
Later on, it was revealed Kobe Bryant was on that helicopter.
Now, I'm not a big sports fan, but it's still sad to hear about the death of a legend like Kobe Bryant.
And for all the guy's faults, he really was a source of inspiration for a lot of people.
A lot of people looked up to him, and I know it might seem silly, okay?
But people like Kobe Bryant do give many others hope.
They give them something to look forward to, to be excited about, to be passionate about.
Here's a guy who was one of the best of the best, and I completely understand why people look up to athletes.
And people of great stature.
So it is really, really sad to see that, you know, Kobe lost his life.
So, you know, my condolences to all of his family and to his kids, to all of his fans.
It's a big bummer, you know?
I think there are a lot of people who are really nasty and there are a lot of people who are just, you know, kind of regular people who are sort of leading the charge, inspiring people.
Kobe was a good dude, as far as I'm concerned.
Now I'll tell you something else.
Everybody has bad things in their past.
Some things are worse than others.
But there's a reason why, when someone passes away, we are typically just positive about them, and we don't want to play stupid games of bringing up the worst things about their lives.
The fact is, Kobe Bryant's life was an overwhelming net positive for everyone.
But he does have some bad stories.
Upon his death, and we're all sad, and it's not even been a day yet, so I apologize if this news is too soon, but I think it needs to be addressed, we are seeing these left-wing journalists try and bring up the worst things about Kobe Bryant's life at one of the worst possible moments, and I don't know why, but I can speculate.
We now have news that a Washington Post journalist was suspended after tweeting link to a 2016 story about Kobe Bryant's rape case just hours after he died in a helicopter crash.
The Daily Mail reports Felicia Sanmez is a national political reporter for the Washington Post.
She was suspended by the newspaper on Sunday after controversial tweets.
Sonmez was roasted for a post hours after Kobe Bryant died in a helicopter crash.
She tweeted a link to the story.
This is a story.
It's a 2016 story.
This story is 17 years old, okay?
Kobe Bryant's the accusations against him.
17 years ago.
And she thought it would be appropriate to say, oh, the guy just lost his life.
We're all really sad about this.
The loss of a legend.
I'm gonna be what?
A wet blanket?
Why?
Now I'll talk about these journalists and what they do and why they do it, but let me just start by saying, she's not the only one.
In response to this and the backlash, a Buzzfeed reporter did the same thing.
You know why?
I think these people are professional sticks in the mud, professional wet blankets.
They just want to cause misery to people.
This is why they lie about you.
There's something wrong with them.
While most of us are trying to be optimists, while most of us are sad when anyone loses their life, we want to remember the best in people so we can have hope for the future.
We want to think about all of the times we've watched Kobe, we've been excited and inspired, when you've watched him play a game and you were laughing with your friends and high-fiving your buddies when he got that shot, when he won the game.
You want to feel good.
We want to know that tomorrow things will get better.
We want to know that a week from now things will be better and we can dream for a better future for ourselves, for our kids, for our families, for our neighbors.
Yet these people, for some reason, want to sit there with a scowl on their face and just throw mud.
At our lowest point, they just want to cause pain.
Let me read the news, and then I'll keep ragging on these journalists.
And guess what?
BuzzFeed, a BuzzFeed reporter, did the same thing.
Surprise, surprise, BuzzFeed.
Why is it journalists?
You know what I mean?
They do this stuff all the time.
It's like we talk about with Trump, right?
What I said the other day is, the common joke is like, you know, Trump could run into a burning building to save a bag of puppies, like, you know, a sack of newborn puppies.
And the media would write a story about how, you know, Trump's actions, he didn't crawl, and so the puppies inhaled too much smoke.
And like, they would blame him for something.
They just want to be awful.
They want you to feel bad.
I don't know why, but I think it's some kind of mental disorder.
Let's read the story.
They say, A Washington Post journalist has been suspended by the newspaper after she tweeted a link on Sunday to a years-old story about the Kobe Bryant rape case just hours after the basketball player legend and his daughter were killed in a helicopter crash.
They say she covers national politics for the Post, took to Twitter shortly after the world learned of Bryant's death, along with eight others aboard his private helicopter, which crashed outside of L.A.
She posted the link to the story.
We understand.
The tweet generated hundreds of shares and thousands of likes, as well as many comments.
Sanmez says she has received death threats after posting the tweets.
In follow-up tweets, Sanmez wrote, well, that was eye-opening.
Okay, hold on.
Never acceptable to send someone death threats.
I actually don't even think she should be suspended, okay?
But I understand why she was.
I don't think she was suspended.
Because there was some, like, moral moment at the Washington Post.
I think they saw their bottom line was hurting, because guess what?
Kobe Bryant is a legend.
Everybody loves and is sad about his passing.
I'm seeing everybody on Instagram.
You name it.
Musicians, pro skateboarders.
Those are the people I follow, so.
But yeah, everybody's like, man, that's a bummer, you know?
Listen, you don't gotta like anybody.
You don't gotta like Trump.
You don't gotta like Hillary.
You don't gotta like Kobe Bryant.
We can still recognize that Kobe was not this overt political actor.
He wasn't somebody who was sticking his head in between fights.
He was just a dude who was good at what he did and he inspired others to be better for all his faults.
We want to remember the best in people.
So, look, I don't think people should lose their jobs over stupid mistakes, right?
I don't know why she thought it was appropriate to do.
These people are weirdos.
She should be told.
She was told, okay?
People emailed her.
They sent her awful things.
I think she got the point.
I don't think she needed to be suspended, but... Well, here we are.
Not my call.
I don't work for the Post.
But I will add, not cool.
Not cool sending threats to anybody.
I don't care if she's tasteless and doing something.
That's nuts.
I will also add, I kind of, you know...
I don't really believe she got nearly as many threats as she's probably making it out to be.
I don't think that's the case.
I think people were just being really mean to her, but let's read.
So she tweeted this.
She said, well, that was eye-opening.
To the 10,000 people literally who have commented and emailed me with abuse and death threats, please take a moment and read the story, which was written three plus years ago and not by me.
Any public figure is worth remembering in their totality.
That's a cop-out excuse for a nasty person trying to kick us when we're down.
That's sick.
Could you imagine being at a funeral and someone gets up and says, but don't you all remember when this person did this horrible thing?
You'd be like, dude, dude, dude, okay?
You want to wait a week?
To talk about what it means to truly respect someone's full life story.
The totality of their existence.
You want to give us a moment to be sad?
Dude, people are crying over this, man.
And I get it.
I know there's going to be a lot of people who say it's so silly to get so worked up over an athlete.
Listen, man.
Every day we wake up.
Every day people wake up.
And you don't know what's going on in their lives.
And people find symbols that can make them feel good and try to strive for things.
There are kids growing up in poverty, okay?
They're in inner city communities, they're in rural communities, and they don't know what's in front of them.
They're poor.
They're hungry.
And they look to people like Kobe, whether you think it's silly or not, and they think, I can be that one day.
That's what I respect about people like Kobe Bryant.
For all of their faults.
Not perfect.
I'm not stupid.
I'm not gonna play silly games and be like, the guy never did- No, come on, man.
There were other things that were in his life, and I'm not gonna bring them up.
Because the dude just passed, and people are sad about this.
But I- You know what?
This is why I rag on the media as often as I do.
Okay?
Because whatever it is about these people, man, I just- I just don't get it.
I just- I just don't.
They're just- For some reason, they're just like, They're just weird negative drains on society.
We're all trying to be optimistic.
You know, we know that hurricanes happen.
We know storms happen.
We know fires happen.
And we're just trying to hope for the best, keep a smile on our face, so we can fight every day for something better.
And that's what we look up to.
We turn people into kind of symbols.
It doesn't always make sense.
You know?
Kobe's just a guy.
People do this for everybody.
But it's sad, man.
You know what I find particularly sad about this?
Is he's not... He's not someone, you know... I mean, look.
I think it was LeBron who came out about China and did all that stuff.
For whatever reason, even if it was LeBron, I'm just saying these are people, they're not politicians.
They're not involved in some hardcore fight.
They literally just try and make us feel good.
They're athletes.
It's a form of entertainment.
Their job is to make us feel a little better every day.
And that's really it.
He does his best.
He's one of the best.
I can respect that.
She said, even if that public figure is beloved and totally unsettling, Even if that public figure is beloved and that totality unsettling, that folks are responding with rage and threats towards me, someone who didn't even write the piece but found it well-reported, speaks volumes about the pressure people come under to stay silent in these cases.
Nah.
No.
Cop out.
We're not talking about... We're talking about you.
We're talking about you tweeting this literally hours after the man just passed.
That is sick.
That is some kind of sickness.
You know, that's sociopathy.
Let me tell you something about journalists, man.
News organizations have started drifting towards hiring people with followers, okay?
Most journalists would say something like, I don't want to be the story, right?
I know a lot of journalists, and they'll say, no, no, no, no, don't put me in the story.
These people are the opposite.
They want followers.
They want to be famous.
You know why?
News organizations have started incentivizing this behavior by saying, I'll hire you, how many followers do you have?
They don't do it overtly, but in my experience, it's kind of like this.
If you hire a reporter with 100,000 followers, and they tweet out the story, you're gonna get clicks.
Those clicks mean money.
So you want people with reach.
What kind of person desperately wants to build followers and gain reach?
People who are narcissistic sociopaths?
Okay, not every single person, but many of them.
And I fully recognize, I'm one of these people who tweets my feelings and gets a ton of followers and plays this game too.
I'm not gonna pretend it's not true.
There is a certain thing.
about people like this, where they want everyone to know what they think, so they can build up followers, they tweet these things for shock value, so they can get more access, more reach, and then make more money.
For me, I left these news organizations because of behavior like this.
Now, I certainly love my own opinions, like, come on, I'm pretty arrogant too, I get that.
I joke about it all the time.
There's a certain kind of character that you have to have to put yourself out there on videos like this or in tweets like this.
The difference is, these people are... It's like they lack real original thought and ability, so they use shock factor, like, to try and gain following?
I don't even know.
But let's do this, okay?
She was suspended.
We get it.
There's a bunch of people calling her trash and a dumpster.
Let's get to the suspension part.
They had a spokesperson, so I'll just... Let me see if... No, okay.
They're claiming that she violated policy. So they say, Tracy Grant, managing editor of the Washington Post, told
the DailyMail.com on Sunday, national political reporter Felicia Sanchez was placed on
administrative leave while the Post reviews whether tweets about the death of Kobe Bryant
violated the Post newsroom's social media policy. The tweets displayed poor judgment that undermined
the work of her colleagues. Fact.
On Twitter, reaction to Sanchez's tweet was scathing.
What a disgusting post from Washington Post reporter Felicia Sonmez immediately after Kobe Bryant and his daughter's death, tweeted one user.
Oh, and it's worse.
There is a lot in here.
So I'll tell you this.
I don't know if she should be suspended, but let's be real, it's administrative leave, so she's probably still getting paid.
And now she just doesn't work, so I don't know if that's punishment.
Okay, here's a vacation.
Congratulations, you've earned it.
But her tweets, whether, you know, you know what, I'll do this, okay?
You get the point.
They're claiming she violated some policy or may have.
I don't think that's the case.
But let me show you this.
Welcome to BuzzFeed.
Addie Baird tweeted the exact same thing about Kobe Bryant.
I'm actually sickened that I'm even showing the tweet.
I think it's gross.
But she tweeted it.
It's got 196 retweets.
A lot of people thought it was appropriate to share the story just after the man passed.
What is wrong with these people?
I just can't figure it out.
They just want to rain on our parade.
They want everyone to feel as bad as they do, I guess.
Hey, it's like they say, misery loves company, right?
You must be a truly miserable person to sit there as people are crying and mourning the loss of a legend And then look people in the eye and say, oh yeah, and scowl and throw this mud right in their face.
Like, how utterly disgusting, man.
So, of course, this, uh, I cover Democrats in Congress for BuzzFeed News, proud union gal, is doing the same thing.
And I don't know if this was before or after.
I'm assuming it was after, and I'm assuming it was in response to the backlash this Felicia Washington Post reporter got.
But how hard is it?
How hard is it to let people mourn?
How hard is it to try and be positive?
I'll say it again.
Could you imagine being at a funeral, and then people like this show up, and they're like smugly sitting there like, yeah, but you know he was accused of this, that, and this.
It's like, dude, please.
Okay?
You know, we're supposed to be trying to make the world a better place, and they often talk about how millennials are doing worse than the previous generation.
You know, there's an article about this from CNN about two weeks ago.
And I was thinking about it like, why is it that millennials are doing worse than the previous generation?
I actually don't blame the boomers to a certain degree.
Like, I'm not gonna pretend like they destroyed the world and now millennials can't succeed.
I'll blame them for their parenting.
Okay?
Because they raised people like this.
I'll tell you what.
If your whole thing is to be a wet blanket, a net negative, a crab in a barrel, don't be surprised if you just make your life and everyone else's lives miserable.
Like, these people are literally sitting there saying, I hate my life and I hate myself, so let me make sure you suffer too.
I don't dig it.
You know what I like to do?
I like to do the inverse.
There's a story I tell maybe once every seven months, because I love this story.
I was riding in a cab from Manhattan to Brooklyn.
Now here's a little secret most people don't know.
Cab drivers in Manhattan can't pick up fares in Brooklyn, or at least they couldn't several years ago.
I don't know if they've changed it by now.
So if you hail a cab in Manhattan, sometimes they crack the window and say, where are you going?
We say, Brooklyn.
They speed off.
They're not allowed to do that.
It's illegal.
But so I get in this, I hail a cab, I get in, and the guy says, where are you going?
And I say, Brooklyn.
And immediately he's like, oh, he's all angry.
He's all pissed off.
And he drove like, A jerk.
And I was really not enjoying that ride.
I'm like, dude, this is so uncomfortable.
The dude was complaining the whole time.
So you know what I did to show him what for?
When we finally got to my apartment, I gave him a 100% tip.
25 bucks on top of 25.
And the dude was shocked.
And he was, he literally was like, oh, thank you, thank you!
He's like, he said blessings to my family.
And I said, hey man, I appreciate you were willing to drive me to Brooklyn and, you know, hopefully this will get you back and you won't gotta pick up another, because you can't pick up a fare.
And he was like, yeah, yeah, of course.
Well, he was angry.
He had a bad day.
And he was probably thinking, now I'm gonna go to Brooklyn.
And I gotta drive back from Brooklyn.
I can't pick up a fare.
I'm gonna lose money.
So I said, okay.
I know not everybody could tip like that.
But I threw in the next 25 bucks.
Because here's what I was thinking.
If that dude leaves my apartment feeling angry, he's gonna pick up another fare, and that guy's gonna sit in there, and he's gonna be angry, and it's gonna make the passenger angry, and it's gonna create this big rippling effect of anger.
So you know what I thought?
I was angry at the guy.
I did not- I was not happy with him treating me that way.
But I was like, you know what?
Here's what I'm hoping, and maybe he was just a bad dude, I don't know.
But by giving him that good tip, now he's all happy, all of a sudden his day is going really, really well, and he probably felt a little guilty for being so mean to me when I took care of him.
But the next time someone gets in that car, you might have a guy in a suit, businessman or woman, they sit down, they're all grumpy, and then they get in this cab, this cab driver is all smiling and having a great day.
And he's like, hey, cheer up, man.
Things will turn around.
I hope you're having a good day, too.
And then the people in that new passenger might say, yeah, you know what?
And that might create a wave of positivity.
See, these people are the opposite of that.
I recognize that there is a cycle of anger and hate that can persist.
And we want to do our best to shut that down.
And so I think sometimes the solution is counterintuitive.
Hey, this guy's being mean to me.
I know how to show him up.
I'll be doubly nice to him.
Because also, you gotta understand, there's even a bit of comeuppance.
Like, oh man, that dude must feel so guilty that I was just like, a smile, a handshake, and a big tip.
He probably felt bad.
But then he probably felt good, because now his day is going great.
So I'm like, I satisfied all of my emotions.
I'm like, I'll show you, dude.
I'll do something you don't expect.
I'll be nice to you.
And I don't care about me.
I'm a mature adult.
I've got good mental fortitude.
I knew that when I got out of that cab, I'm gonna go play video games, have a burrito.
I'm gonna be happy.
Okay?
I'm totally- I'm fine.
This dude's not gonna drag me down.
But how do I make sure he doesn't drag other people down?
You gotta be a good person.
You gotta be nice.
And so I look at this, and these people are literally the opposite.
These are the people who would find a happy cab driver and sit there with a scowl and say, I wanna make sure you suffer by the time I get out of your cab.
So you persist that cycle of anger and rage.
You know what the problem is?
These people who work in media, who are being attracted to it, these blue-checky, big-following-count, narcissistic sociopaths, who work in complete misery, who hate themselves, and they want everyone else to hate each other, they're getting the jobs.
They're creating these narratives, and this kind of lunacy is persisting.
It's why I couldn't stand working for these companies.
Their whole existence is just scowling misery.
They love being bullies.
Not all of them, okay?
Real journalists still exist.
But I gotta say, if you consider me to be a real journalist, I mostly am doing commentary, let's be real, but if you consider me to be at least a real journalist in the sense that I'll actually search and source for facts before commenting on them or presenting them, I quit.
I didn't want to work there anymore.
Like, man, do you have any idea what it's like to show up to an office every day and the people are just like, literally everything is awful?
I remember when that movie Ghost in the Shell came out.
Remember that?
With Scarlett Johansson?
I'm actually a fan of the anime, to a certain extent.
I didn't, you know, I don't know everything about it, but I watched the anime just a bit.
I've seen the movie.
So when it came out, I'm like, oh, really cool.
Everyone in the office was immediately like, okay, how can we make this bad?
But they didn't say it like that, but they were literally like, what's wrong with this movie?
Ooh, I know, let's say this.
And I'm like, whoa, whoa, whoa, man.
Like, you don't realize that a lot of fans of this show are really excited to get a live adaptation.
They're excited for this.
Why are you gonna just write all this nasty stuff about it?
Why are you gonna try and hurt people?
But they do, it's what they do.
It's so gross, you know what I mean?
Look, man, I'm not perfect.
You know, I rag on people too.
I contribute negativity.
I totally get it, I totally get it.
But this is a whole other level.
I recognize sometimes you can be negative, you can talk about negative things, and you might spread negativity, and that's what the news tends to do.
Even me, totally get it.
You might talk about stories, I'm angry a lot, and things like that.
But dude, this is a step over the line.
I'm willing to accept a certain degree of negativity and anger when it comes to big news and world policy, and I'm fully willing to recognize I'm not perfect, and I'm very much in a similar camp to a lot of these people.
But dude, Kobe?
Come on, man.
That is- that is- that is- that is- that is below the belt.
You know what I mean?
I'll leave it there.
Uh, I'll say it one more time, dude.
Kobe was a legend.
For whatever his faults may have been, I'm gonna get off this- this horrifying image because I'm just- I just find it so horrible.
There are a lot of kids out there, man.
And they're trying to figure out what they're gonna do with their lives.
And I'll tell you what, you know, having grown up on the south side of Chicago, not knowing what the future had for me, there were people I looked up to.
Skateboarders.
And it seems silly.
Especially now that I'm older and I'm like, I know a lot of these skateboarders and they're just like, regular people.
What you want to believe when you're living in, you know, the gutter, figuratively or literally, that there is a light at the end of that tunnel.
And you want to believe the best in people because you want to strive for a better world.
So people like Kobe really do provide that.
When I was younger, I probably would have thought this idea was silly, like, you know, who cares about athletes?
We want to focus on scientists and things like that.
But I really do understand the value brought, and I understand why people truly love someone like Kobe Bryant.
Because they wake up every day, and maybe they got a really crappy job, but they're looking forward to watching that exciting game.
And the game may be silly to many of you, but to some people, it's the light at the end of the tunnel.
Let me tell you one more story and we'll wrap this up.
I'm going to totally ruin the story.
You may have heard it before, but it's basically like during the Great Depression, a man works every day and he makes very little money.
He makes only a few dollars or a relative few dollars.
I don't know what the exchange rate would have been based on inflation, but let's just say the equivalent of a few dollars a day.
And every day after work, he spends about 20 to 30 percent of his daily income on a beautiful rose.
And he brings it home and he puts it on the table where he has, you know, what little dinner with his wife as he can.
One day, the guy selling the roses asks him, saying like, I know you don't make a lot of money, why would you buy a rose every single day when you could be saving that money and making yourself better?
And the guy said, the rose is what keeps me going every single day.
And the point was, even though it may seem like a bad idea, I personally wouldn't do it, I'd save my money.
But this guy was of humble means, and he knew that his mission every day was to get that rose so he and his wife could have that beautiful thing on their table while they ate what they had.
And that's kind of what entertainers and celebrities can be.
That every day you're like, I know I'm gonna get to sit down, hang out with my buddies, and we're gonna share a passion.
So that's why this kind of, you know, that's why people like Kobe are valuable.
I'll leave it there.
Stick around, next segment's coming up at 1pm on this channel, and I will see you all then.
Yesterday, while reporting on the tragedy of Kobe Bryant's passing, a reporter for MSNBC, for some reason, said the N-word.
Now, she claims it was an accident and said that she was mixing the team names Knicks and Lakers and it turned into...
Whatever, I'm not even gonna say the word she claims she accidentally said because it sounded like there was a G in there.
I'll tell you what, I can't play you the clip on YouTube because despite what she claims about it being an accident and her just, you know, accidentally slipping two words together, it's definitely the N word.
On MSNBC, this host said this.
Now here's the thing.
It was obviously an accident.
I don't think she was seriously trying to call anybody the n-word.
Come on, man.
Calm down.
But lo and behold, it is not conservatives and it is not moderates calling for her to be fired, for the most part.
There are certainly some conservatives who are saying, listen man, MSNBC, you start this cancel culture game, you reap what you sow.
Most people are just kind of scoffing at her and rolling their eyes.
But I gotta be honest, I don't see a whole lot of conservatives actually saying we demand her job.
But there is now a petition from leftists because she said it, that she must be fired!
Heaven forbid she accidentally put these two words together or whatever.
Listen, we'll read this story, but let me tell you something.
If she was on her show, And she looked at a person of color and said, you, and then spouted the slur.
I'd be like, dude, not okay.
In this instance, I think her excuse kind of makes sense, but whatever, it doesn't matter.
I don't think an MSNBC host would intentionally be like, just shout out the N-word, especially in this context, it doesn't make sense.
Because she mentions he's like on the team of, you know, N-word or whatever, and it's like, So, her excuse kind of does make sense, though she does really- it really sounds like a G to me.
Whatever.
The point is, look, I get it.
Some people make mistakes.
Whatever the mistake may be.
Pencils have erasers.
Even to an extent that someone actually did say something offensive, I'd be like, make it a teaching moment, explain why you shouldn't say it, and let's all move on, because we're sane, rational adults.
I'll tell you this, man.
I respect everybody's right to free speech.
You want to say all the nastiest things in the world?
You go do it!
This is a private cable network.
It's very different from a public platform like Twitter or Facebook.
And if a company doesn't want her around because you said something offensive, even by accident, well, you know, that's the company's issue.
But I think as a society, we need to be willing to forgive people and let people move on and learn and grow.
Otherwise, we just create pockets of, like, I don't know, Festering mold and you take somebody said something nasty and throw them in the corner with the other festering mold and it gets bigger and worse Let it let people apologize, right?
So here's the story Heavy.com says, Reporter says she did not use racial slur during Kobe Bryant report.
They say while reporting on Kobe Bryant's death Sunday afternoon, MSNBC reporter Allison Morris says she stuttered on air and said, I'm not even going to say the word she claims to have said, because it seriously sounds like the N-word, rather than Lakers during the broadcast.
Morris offered that explanation in a tweet after receiving social media backlash from people who thought she said the N-word during her report.
Now here's where it gets important, okay?
I don't care what you think.
The point is, the woke far left is straight up saying, I don't care.
She said the word.
Fire her, right?
Check this out.
Here's a petition.
Get Allison Morris fired.
And the craziest thing about it, it's got 20,584 signatures.
The craziest thing about it is, they're like, we know she said it.
She used to work for Fox.
She did not work for Fox News.
She worked for a local Fox affiliate.
Man, this poor woman, you know what I mean?
I feel so bad for her.
I get it, man.
It's kind of a shocking moment because she said this.
She said it!
Okay?
Whatever your interpretation may be, she said it.
But I recognize, man, it's probably, it was probably, like, you know, she knew.
I bet she knew right after she said it.
She was probably sweating bullets, freaking out.
But let's go back to the story.
Let's read.
read they say in her Twitter statement Morris apologized for what she said
writing writing earlier today while reporting on this tragic news of cubby
Bryant's passing I unfortunately stuttered on air combining the names of
the Knicks and the Lakers please know I did not and would never use a racist
term I apologize for the confusion this caused I don't agree
Like, it makes sense, right?
But why would she think Kobe Bryant was on the Knicks?
Maybe she did, I don't know, whatever.
But aren't the Knicks in New York?
So I don't know why she would, but maybe she just didn't know what team he was on and she did stutter.
Regardless, I don't think she was intentionally trying to spit it out.
But I will also point out, as much as MSNBC isn't necessarily, like, the woke far left, I don't know, man.
You know, part of me wants to say I've seen these Antifa types shout racial slurs, okay?
I've seen far-left socialist types shouting racial slurs.
I don't think that applies to this woman.
But, you know, a tiny, tiny part of me is like, maybe she really is a racist.
Maybe she really is.
And maybe it wasn't intentional.
She knew she'd get fired, but maybe it just slipped out because she was thinking nasty things.
I really don't think that's the case.
And regardless of whatever her intention or whatever she holds in her heart, I think it would be fair for us to be like, okay, okay, okay, come on, everybody calm down.
She didn't call anybody the name.
She's apologetic.
We can move on, right?
Apparently we can't!
A petition to get Morris fired has started to circulate the internet.
On Sunday, a petition titled, Get Allison Morris Fired, began making the rounds on the internet.
A section of the petition read, On January 26, 2020, the world lost basketball legend and icon Kobe Bryant.
Allison Morris of MSNBC News thinks it's okay to use a racial slur at this period of time.
No, she doesn't.
That is not fair.
What she said was not an accident, but on purpose.
Whoa, whoa, calm down.
Because she paused before she said Los Angeles N-word.
Now I gotta admit, I did question that too.
If you've listened to the audio, she actually does pause before saying it.
I'm kind of like, did she stop to think about saying that?
Stop, you know, I don't know.
They say we need to join together to get her fired because enough is enough and we will not tolerate this racist BS anymore.
Within an hour, it had 250 signatures.
250?
So what?
Oh.
20,586.
Let's refresh the page and see what happens.
It is now at... Alright, it's not loading.
Don't blame me.
Okay, we are waiting.
It's not loading.
Okay, there we go.
It's going up.
It's got 21,230.
And it just went up again.
So from the moment when I just read it to you, I had just opened the page, it is already up basically like a thousand more signatures.
I certainly hope they don't fire this lady.
That's nuts.
Now here's what they say.
She moved from Fox to NBC News now last year.
They say Variety announced that NBC had hired Morse from Fox's NYC station as a full-time anchor.
Fox New York is not Fox News, okay?
That's a very important distinction.
Fox News is biased.
That's, you know, they do their thing.
But Fox local outlets are not necessarily biased.
I don't really care.
It mentions her degree and stuff like this.
They talk about the crash or whatever.
They say MSNBC declined to comment.
Probably the wise move, but now.
What do you think?
Do you think that conservatives are gonna come out and demand her job?
Well, I think some are somewhat facetiously or sarcastically.
You know, a lot of people are angry that it's the left.
It's MSNBC that often play this game of trying to get people fired and highlighting slurs.
You look at the left-wing activists who go after, you know, Tucker Carlson.
Tucker Carlson's never accidentally done this.
At least as far as I know.
Maybe he did.
I don't know.
So they say, Tucker Carlson's opinions are so offensive, we must strip him of all advertisers.
And Tucker's lost a ton of advertisers over his opinions.
Fine.
This lady literally said the word.
I get it could be a mistake, but I can understand why people on the right are saying that's a double standard.
Why should this MSNBC reporter get to say this, accident or otherwise, why should we assume the intent she had when they assume the intent of Tucker Carlson and his advertisers literally pull out?
However, You know, one big thing about conservatives is that they don't often mobilize.
They don't.
And I think it has to do with what divides the left and the right.
I think Republicans tend to be individualist.
Tend to be.
And Democrats tend to be collectivist.
But in weird ways, right?
Republicans will be collectivist about, like, core ideals.
But on issues like this, they're not going to form a mass protest.
They're not going to organize a petition to get someone fired.
And I think one of the main reasons is, while the left will say it's because Republicans are racist and they like it, no, it's because they don't mobilize.
And it's because they're not whiny children.
They recognize she made a mistake and they ultimately don't care.
I think one big dividing factor right now at least, maybe not for all of history, but Democrats tend to be immature.
I know, I know, the Democrats and Lefts are going to get really, really angry at me, but I really do think one thing that separates Democrat from Republican is maturity.
You look at the, you know, Bernie Sanders far-Left types who don't seem to understand basic economics.
Don't get me wrong, You got a bunch of Republicans and Trump supporters who are as dumb as a box of rocks.
But in general, there is an individual responsibility factor of people who are like, listen, I'm going to take care of myself, worry about my business, and do my thing, and I'm not going to worry about the stupid stones people trip over over there.
But the left being super collectivist, for tribal reasons, Really want to wield this power against other people?
Don't- I don't know, but there's a lack of maturity and understanding, so, whereas you'll end up with some Republican being like, I don't care what words someone use, sticks and stones will break my bones, blah blah blah.
But the children, the angry whiny kids who want to exert authority, the bullies, are freaking out, going, uh, how dare, how rumpf I say?
And now that I've explained it to you, I'd like to show you some examples.
So I often browse... I have a tendency now to try and grab my glasses when I'm not wearing them.
It's a bad habit.
I read all these subreddits, okay?
Believe it or not.
It's really funny, I see a lot of people who claim that I only focus on one thing.
In response to me talking about impeachment, when I said, who cares about Bolton?
I'm not gonna get into it.
Somebody was like, why don't you actually see what Adam Schiff has to say?
You won't even read his argument.
I'm like, dude, I have heard Schiff's argument 800,000 times.
I'm good.
But no, I read the left-wing and right-wing subreddits.
And over at GamerGazi, This is a self-described SJWs.
They facetiously call themselves social justice warriors.
Or literally, I don't know.
About 26,000 people here, but they often post stories from the context of pro-social justice.
I don't think the subreddit is actually the worst of the worst.
I've seen some really crazy stuff.
No, I think these people are actually true believers.
So, I've seen the people here, while I disagree with a lot of their views and perspectives, I've seen them actually defend general principle, and I can respect that, but I disagree with a lot of their opinion, like this.
They linked this story.
MSNBC anchor Alison Morris denies using N-word during Kobe Bryant report.
Online petition calls for it to be fired, now with 7,000 signatures 11 hours ago.
So now we know it's up to 21,000.
Someone said this.
Expected result of MSNBC hiring a bunch of Wall Street Journal's rejects and other assorted neocons.
So right away.
We see the comment, fully believing this woman actually intended to use the word.
It's not.
The next one says, I totally think she said it as some kind of awful slip, but to be honest, you might need a new job if that's a thing that happens with you.
Actually, that might be a fair point.
Like, listen man, I think it's fair to say, if your job is to be a live anchor, And you accidentally said the N-word?
Maybe that's not a job you should have.
I'll put it this way.
If your job is to drive railroad spikes with a sledgehammer, and you accidentally sledge someone's foot, even one time, maybe it's not a job for you.
Maybe, you know what I mean?
Like, look, your job is to be on TV saying things in real time, and if you have slip-ups like this, this is a really, really bad slip-up.
Maybe you shouldn't be on TV.
I'm not saying she should be fired because she committed a slight against public opinion.
I'm saying she slipped up in one of the worst ways possible in a job that requires her not to slip up.
But ultimately, I don't think she should be fired.
I just think that actually is a fair point.
Here we go.
This is the best.
This is my favorite.
It says, it honestly sounds like a near-even split of the N-word and what she claimed happened.
She used to work for Fox, so I'm sure it was the N-word.
These people don't even know that Fox News is completely different from local Fox affiliates.
And as such, now they assume these local journalists, who don't really talk about national-level politics for the most part, are absolutely the same as Fox News.
To me, that's just so absurd.
You could watch the video for yourself.
The one in the link?
Just a thought.
They responded, Oh, so they said the same thing, I guess.
The Republicans aren't abandoning their principles right now because they see an opportunity to destroy someone's life.
I mean, some may be, but for the most part, no.
High-profile conservative personalities are just saying, you do it to us, why can't we do it to you?
But they're saying it, not actually calling for her job.
Meanwhile, the woke left is literally accusing this lady of doing this on purpose and trying to get her fired.
Cancel culture.
Is stupid and gross.
But you know what?
MSNBC, this is the game you play, it's the faction you picked, it's the ideology you follow, for the most part.
And so why should it be that MSNBC can have things like this happen, and then no comment?
No repercussions?
You helped create the culture.
You reap what you sow.
But once again, this is the game I see all the time.
The left will be like, this thing Republicans are doing is really, really bad.
And I'll be like, you know, that's actually a good point.
And then they'll do it and be like, please, everyone, calm down.
You have to understand it was an accident.
They'll go after someone on the right for a slip up.
They got one dude fired from a local job in New York.
And then when it happens on their network, it's oh, no, no, no, not us.
We really gotta get over this cancel culture, guys.
Yes, when it affects them.
But when they can wield power against someone not in their tribe, it's fine.
I think for this woman, the problem she faces is that she's not particularly well-known.
She's not like Rachel Maddow.
If Rachel Maddow did it, people would be like, oh, calm down, it was an accident.
But because she came from the Wall Street Journal and a Fox affiliate, they pounce.
She's not one of them, even if she is reporting for MSNBC.
Now, I guess apparently she works for NBC News.
I don't know.
Whatever.
You get the point.
I'll leave it there.
Stick around.
Next segment is coming up at 4 p.m.
on youtube.com slash timcast.
And here's the thing.
We are going to come back to this.
Because the next segment that I'm presumably going to be working on is...
The Democrats of all types, far left, moderate, whatever, they're all freaking out because they all hate each other.
And this is why.
Stick around, I will see you at 4 PM.
But I actually think this shows Greta Thunberg as a hypocrite as well.
And it's not just about her meeting with Prince Charles.
It's about the fact that she constantly rags on Europe and the U.S.
when China and India Are producing substantially more.
Now, I know it's kind of like beating a dead horse, but because of this photo with Prince Charles, I thought it'd be interesting to go into why Greta Thunberg is being hypocritical, because I think the big thing here is, I don't blame Greta for being a hypocrite.
I blame her parents, and the people around her clearly don't want her to actually focus on the real problem with climate change.
Listen, if you actually cared, about global warming and climate change and carbon emissions, you would be politely and peacefully asking, Greta, please talk about China, okay?
Because you've already convinced more than half of the people in Europe and the United States to enact these policies.
Oh, but she's not stopping there.
So here's what I don't understand.
Let me tell you this.
Why is it that the US already, for the most part, agrees we are going to curb carbon emissions?
In the UK, they're trying to build high-speed rail to offset carbon emissions.
We mostly agree with you.
Why won't you stop screaming at us?
But you know who you're not talking to?
China.
China's supposed to be abiding by the same rules as everybody else.
They're not.
They're building new coal power plants.
And they produce around twice as much CO2 as the U.S.
So we're actively trying.
They're actively defying.
And what does she do?
She poses with Prince Charles pure hypocrisy.
But again, I don't blame her for being young, naive, and ignorant.
You know, that's teenagers, right?
We were all dumb.
Some of us are still dumb.
Many of us are still dumb.
Most of us are dumb in different ways, too.
Like, let's be real.
Humans are kind of dumb.
But, um, I think there's common sense involved.
And the common sense is, we'll call it triage, right?
What I find really funny about the whole climate change thing and Greta Thunberg and China... Take a look at Black Lives Matter.
I love this comic they share.
Where, you know, it's two burning buildings.
It's two houses.
They're both on fire.
But one is really on fire.
One's got a little fire.
And there's a black person looking kind of upset.
To the left is a white person saying, but all lives matter, and taking the fire hose to put out the little fire.
The argument they're making is like, yes, we understand that all lives can face problems, but they're trying to deal with a real fire here.
Okay, I actually respect that argument.
If that's true, then we should apply the same logic to Greta Thunberg.
Why are you trying to put out the tiny fire in the U.S.
while ignoring the massive fire that is China and India?
I don't know, Greta, why?
I think it's because it's really about changing policy, like Greta Thunberg wrote in her op-ed when she said we gotta end colonialism and patriarchy and whatever.
I don't think they actually care about climate change, and that's why I constantly rag on these people, okay?
I actually do care about the environment, and I agree.
Hey, look at China.
Now, there's a lot of conservatives who don't believe humans are contributing to climate change, and they point out China to show the hypocrisy or the double standard.
I'm actually doing it legitimately.
I'm saying right now to all of you, hey, if you care about climate change, we really need to figure out what's going on with China.
I mean, let's be real, China's doing a ton of really awful, horrifying things.
You know, I'm gonna save, like, you know what, man?
China is gonna go down in history.
This generation for China is really, really bad.
They got the camps, the Uyghur camps.
They got the coronavirus going nuts right now, and boy, that's looking scary.
And they got CO2 emissions.
But let's actually read this story from the Daily Mail.
They say, Prince Charles flew 16,000 miles in just 11 days using three private jets and one helicopter.
Before proudly posing with Greta Thunberg in Davos.
Can we throw a little shade at Greta?
Like, why would you pose with this guy?
What are you doing?
Check this out.
They actually show this map of, like, all the ridiculous travel he did.
They say, on a trip to the World Economic Forum in Davos last week, the prince met activist Greta Thunberg and used an electric Jaguar car to travel to the Swiss resort.
Ah, the multiple private jets you took and the 11,000, was it?
16,000 miles.
But I did use an electric car to meet the activist, so that's worth something, right?
But the MOS can reveal that in the 11 days before his high-profile appearance, Charles took three flights on private jets for official government business, and one on a helicopter.
You know why he took the electric Jaguar?
It was just a... He was putting on a show.
Look at me in the electric car!
Yeah, we get it.
You don't care.
After his speech last Wednesday, during which he urged world leaders to take bold and imaginative action on the environment, he took a fourth jet to Israel for an official trip.
There is nothing stopping him from flying first-class commercial.
It's substantially cheaper.
So why fly private?
Don't ask me.
If he flew commercial first class, he'd be very comfortable.
I mean, I mean like legit first class, where you get a little pod.
And if you flew on, like, Emirates, man, they got rooms.
You can, like, close the door.
I heard some of these places, like, actually have showers.
And you might as well do that.
What's your private jet gonna have, huh?
Just waste fuel?
So we can see here he posed with Greta.
They say, Prince Charles meeting climate activist Greta Thunberg after he gave a speech to the World Economic Forum in Davos.
Now, I will stop right here and say this.
Listen.
I don't know to what extent she's in this photo with this guy, because the left loves to take photos of people and claim they're best friends.
For all I know, she was talking to him, and she probably criticized him, you know?
I bet she really did criticize him a lot.
She's criticized all these people, so I think that's fair to point out.
Someone took a photo, and now making it seem like, you know, they're in support of each other.
But I will say, it doesn't build confidence when you're posing in photos with world leaders while scowling at Donald Trump and ignoring the real threat.
That is, well, China, okay?
So, you know, they got a video of it and they're all happy together and everything.
Sure, fine, whatever.
I want to show you something.
Check this out.
This is on the Donald right now.
The Donald is the pro-Donald Trump subreddit.
And it says, please don't show this map to Greta.
It will ruin her childhood.
And it's from rslashmapporn, world's CO2 emissions.
Now, as you can see, there's a gigantic splotch over China.
And I don't know exactly what these are supposed to represent, but I can tell you it is wholly inaccurate.
It is.
I mean, it is accurate to say that these areas produce a lot of carbon, but it seems like they're really not highlighting the U.S.' 's total output.
Let me show you a real CO2 map.
Well, I say real, but a different CO2 map.
Now, here's the big challenge.
All of the maps on CO2 emissions come from activists, so it's really hard to trust.
But we can see here something funny.
You see the U.S.
right here, and China right here, and the big dots are the same size?
That's absolutely unfair.
The U.S.
produces 5,416 MTCO, number two producer, and China is nearly is about double that.
So it's fair to say that the US...
does produce a ton of carbon emissions.
And it is fair to criticize the U.S.
and say we got to do better.
But guess what?
Most of the people here already agree we have to do better, even if around half of them don't even think Climate change is a serious, or man-made climate change is a serious problem.
You actually have a ton of conservatives and moderates who might actually say they don't think man-made climate change is real, but still agree we can do better in certain ways.
And I'll tell you what, that is a huge step forward.
So why focus on what we're doing?
Now I do think they should be putting Europe in one big, you know, bubble to see what they're actually producing, because it's a lot as well.
I think it's fair to point out, you know, Russia, India, they're producing a ton.
But why is it always about us?
Look at the plastic straw ban.
Do you know that the US doesn't even produce most of the plastic waste in the world?
Like, we produce very, very little actually.
Most of it's coming from...
China!
Yeah, they're not- they don't care.
They're gonna do whatever they want.
They're not playing by any international rules, but for some reason we're all yelling at ourselves, so I'll tell you what.
We will make sure our bedroom is clean, but across the street there is a disaster of sewage leaking into the street, and for some reason, Greta's pointing at us.
Could you- isn't that- isn't that weird?
I don't- I don't- I don't really trust why they're actually arguing for these things.
Because again, you look at what AOC called for with the Green New Deal, and what was it?
Guaranteed jobs, free college, free healthcare, and I implore you to tell me what any of that has to do with the environment.
Nothing.
So what do you think I think when I then see Greta posing all smiley with Prince Charles who's flying around on private jets but scowling, how dare you, at Donald Trump?
Hypocrisy.
I don't think Greta Thunberg has any original thoughts in her brain.
I'm not saying that to elicit an emotional reaction or to insult her.
I mean that literally.
I don't think she has any original thoughts.
I think she was told what to say and what to think, and she reacts accordingly.
She is the perfect, you know, mascot for the outraged, you know, climate change activists who really want to implement mass social reforms and don't actually care about the environment.
Now they claim to, and she very well may, but she is a climate doomsayer who's shrieking about how the end is nigh, but then seen posing happily and smiling with those who would do exactly what she says not to do, and then saying literally nothing about the giant smoldering fire pit coming out of China.
Welcome to Modern Day Activism.
This is one of the reasons I left the nonprofit industry, because I saw exactly what they were all about.
They don't actually care.
It's just a business.
How long until we start seeing Greta Thunberg brand mugs and stuffed animals or stuffed dolls or whatever?
How long until... I'll put it this way.
Look, obviously they're not gonna sell dolls and mugs, but they do use her likeness to fundraise, to generate outrage, and then here's my favorite part.
How dare you criticize a child!
Leave her alone!
She's just a child!
You know what, man?
If a child walked into the middle of your living room while you and your friends are like hanging out and started screeching and yelling at you and having a temper tantrum, wouldn't you like ground them or like tell them to stop crying or put them in their room?
Since when did we become a society that says when a crying child is shrieking we just give them whatever they want?
I'm thinking about how, like, you know, a kid would have no idea how something works.
There's funny videos like this, you know?
The kid doesn't understand basic, you know, life, or economics, or law, or anything, and they're asking for something that makes literally no sense, and you're like, that won't actually do anything.
I'll give you an example.
Here's how I envision Greta Thunberg.
She's got her fingers in a Chinese finger trap, she's pulling as hard as possible, and she's really angry, and she's yelling at you while crying to help her pull her arms.
And you're sitting there saying, stop.
That will make it worse.
That's not going to solve it.
And she goes, how dare you?
Stealing my childhood.
My fingers are trapped.
I'm pulling.
It's not coming out.
Yes, perhaps there is a different solution.
Perhaps you should be paying attention to something else.
China, India.
I'll be fair, okay?
Yes, the U.S.
produces carbon emissions.
Yes, I'd like them to reduce it.
Yes, I think we can do that.
And I think it's fair to point that out.
But this?
This is hypocrisy.
Stick around.
Next segment's coming up in a few minutes, and I will see you all shortly.
I now believe that the coronavirus problem is substantially worse than we actually believe.
And I believe we should start erring on the side of, it's going to get really, really bad.
And I could be wrong.
Here's the thing.
We have even Vox.com reporting this.
Did China downplay the coronavirus outbreak early on?
A new study shows the virus took off weeks earlier than Chinese officials suggested.
Check this out.
Incredible footage shows China's 1,000-bed coronavirus hospital starting to take shape after just four days of construction as the nation rushes to build three more.
Let me ask you a question.
If this was just a regular old coronavirus, granted it could be dangerous because it's a novel virus, we have no immunity to it, but if the mortality rate is around 2% and there's only about, you know, a couple thousand people who are infected, why would they need 4,000 beds?
Why would they quarantine over 40 million people?
Why would they lie about when the outbreak started?
And now apparently some people are reporting it didn't come from animals.
There's a biolab nearby.
I'm not gonna play any games into any, you know, speculation, conspiracy theories, or anything like that.
Some people believe there was a breach of the biolab, which for years people have been concerned about.
Maybe that's the case.
But I can at least say, based on Vox.com's reporting, and the rapid expansions of these emergency hospitals, I think the coronavirus is going to get really, really bad, because I'll tell you this.
A two-week incubation period, airborne virus, and it was weeks earlier when this outbreak started?
It's probably already substantially worse, and we don't even know yet.
What do you think it's going to look like in two weeks?
Now, as per usual, I think it's fair to say, never panic, always remain calm, take care of your family, get some supplies, be chill, don't worry about the world ending or anything like that.
But while I typically thought this would probably be more in line with like SARS or MERS or these like, you know, every few years of some other crazy epidemic or pandemic, it's coming to get us.
This one seems a little bit different.
I don't think we've ever seen a quarantine on this scale or a mass production of these emergency medical facilities.
Or these photos and videos of people collapsing in the street.
This one feels like it might actually get really bad.
So, I'm not saying it's the end of the world or anything.
I'll tell you this, though.
Chernobyl, they lied.
Fukushima, they lied.
Very likely they're lying now.
Let's read the story from the Daily Mail.
They say...
Incredible timelapse footage has captured Wuhan's first dedicated coronavirus hospital.
Wait, hold on.
They're also making dedicated coronavirus hospitals.
Does that not sound much, much worse than like the flu?
Now, on TV, they've said this.
The flu is way worse.
It's way more deadly.
And that may be the case.
But I'm curious as to why we don't have the mass production of hospitals for flu season.
Okay?
You know, flu season happens every year.
We don't mass produce hospitals to bed 4,000 people and quarantine 40 million people.
This one has me actually worried.
I don't know why the Chinese government would be doing this.
Maybe it's an overreaction.
Or maybe they know what's happening, they know what's going to get worse, and maybe the mortality rate is actually a lot higher.
There's this viral video, it's now appeared on Fox News, New York Post, where a nurse is saying there's over 90,000 infected.
That would make a lot more sense when we're looking at the mass production of these 1,000 bed facilities.
They say this.
The emergency facility, named the Huoshenshan, or Fire God Mountain Hospital, is situated in the western suburbs of Wuhan, the epicenter of an outbreak of the novel coronavirus which has killed at least 81, infected more than 2,800, and spread to 14 other countries and regions.
The authorities have instructed four construction companies to toil through the Chinese New Year holiday in order to complete the six-acre, 1,000-bed medical center in Kaidan District in a week.
is expected to receive its first patient on February 3rd, according to state media.
So let me ask you this.
2,800 people infected with the virus, with an estimated mortality rate of, well, at 81%.
Well, they put it around 2%.
And I'll leave it there, because we'll see what happens with the actual death rate.
But it seems to be a little bit higher, at least for now.
Some people are saying maybe even 3 or 4.
If the flu is worse, You have to answer me why they're building this rapidly.
I think we're in for a rude awakening come a couple weeks, but we'll see what happens.
I mean, now I will say it's kind of cool how humans can do this rapid response, you know, effort to big crises like this, and I think this actually shows us the quick abilities of the Chinese for all of their faults.
I think this shows, this gives me hope.
I'm not super concerned about a virus being bad if they can react this quickly and in this, you know, immense scale.
I'm also thinking about any other natural disaster which could affect the Earth.
Humans can mobilize very, very quickly, so.
Let's read a little bit more.
They say, China is building at least four hospitals in a desperate bid to curb the spread of a life-threatening disease.
Life-threatening disease, though, huh?
Two of the urgent projects are in Wuhan, one in nearby Huanggang City, and one in Zhengzhou, in central China's Henan Province.
Drone footage released by People's Daily today, People's Daily today, okay, shows trucks, diggers, and builders operating in full swing on the construction site of Huoshenshan Hospital while dozens of shipping containers were put, okay.
So we get it, we get it.
They've got footage of them building hospitals, great.
So here's the question I have.
Vox.com reporting that they may have lied about when the outbreak started.
If that's the case, why would they stop lying?
Okay, the only reason we would know about it now is because it's happening and we're seeing it, but wouldn't it make sense if they lied then, they're lying today about how bad it really is, and only answering questions about what they can't hide?
Vox reports.
In late December, when China first announced the outbreak of a mysterious pneumonia, officials in the country were quite clear on a few things.
Most of the patients had been exposed to a food market in Wuhan, the city that's still the epicenter of the outbreak.
According to local health authorities, the earliest case had symptoms just two weeks earlier.
On December 12th, there was also no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission, meaning the virus wasn't yet spreading from one person to another.
That suggested people might have been getting sick directly from animals in the market.
Together, the details, while concerning, were somewhat reassuring for global health experts.
They suggested that this outbreak of a deadly new coronavirus began very recently and might not spread very far, and that the general population was not at risk of serious illness.
Since last week, the case toll has exploded.
By Monday, there were more than 2,800 cases of COVID-19 as the virus is known across China, and a smattering of people with the illness in at least a dozen other countries, including five in the U.S.
and one in Canada.
There's already serious discussion about whether the new virus is at risk of becoming a pandemic, which all means the early indications of a rather low-key outbreak were wrong.
A new study published on January 24th in Lancet helps explain why.
The authors, Chinese researchers and doctors working in Wuhan, paint a very different portrait of the first days of the outbreak.
They suggest the virus and its spread among humans took off weeks earlier than Chinese officials said.
Let me just stop right now and tell you this.
They initially were saying it was direct contact with the animals, or consumption of.
That would make sense then with these certain cases coming from Wuhan.
If we're now learning it can spread patient to patient, person to person, and the incubation period is two weeks, it's possible that there was something weeks earlier that sparked or was spreading the virus, and many other people who we don't know about who may be sick, they say.
The researchers reviewed the clinical charts, nursing records, lab findings, and chest x-rays of the first 41 patients who had confirmed infections.
Among other things, they reported that the first case wasn't even linked to the Huanan Wholesale Seafood Market at the center of the outbreak.
And there it is.
At least according to Vox, these researchers are saying the food market is not where it started, or at least not connected to the first cases.
These discrepancies add new urgency to a question many are already asking.
Did China downplay the outbreak early on, and if so, why?
They say, there are a few key differences between China's early reports of this outbreak and the findings in the new Lancet study focused on the first 41 patients.
These are the most concerning.
One, more than a third of the earliest cases had no connection with the market.
As you can see from this Lancet chart, by the time China alerted the world to the outbreak on December 31st, there were already numerous cases detected with no connection to the market.
Two, the outbreak's first or index case also had no connection to the market.
Three, there was direct evidence of human-to-human spread as early as January 2nd.
Four.
More than half of these early cases were people under the age of 64, and half of people in the ICU were between 25 and 49.
Okay, now that's freaking me out!
Typically, with most outbreaks, as a young virile male, I have nothing to worry about.
Young people are typically fine.
If you're below the ages of 15 or old in the age of 50, maybe you can be concerned.
But now they're saying 25 to 49.
Well, those aren't the people dying, but they're the ones who had it, so that is pretty disconcerting, they say.
So what's going on?
There are a few potential explanations for the discrepancies between the early reports out of China and the information in these studies.
One is that authorities in Wuhan who were first reporting on the outbreak didn't have enough information to piece together an accurate picture of the virus before releasing it into the world.
They say, Tom Friedman, the former director of the CDC, likened the potential misreporting to the fog of war early in an outbreak.
Another related explanation is that China's rigid bureaucracy caused delays in getting out information.
Let me stop you right there, okay?
And I'll keep this one short.
It's not their rigid bureaucracy.
It's their censorship, as the Wall Street Journal reports.
China's censorship helped spread the virus.
Consider the Spanish flu, which killed 50 million in 1918-19 as governments at war suppressed the news.
I'll tell you this.
Call it bureaucracy, fine.
It contributes.
But China's censorship has absolutely been making it difficult for people to talk about what's going on.
They say they're deleting fake news.
We really don't know.
We don't know because China China doesn't have free speech, free expression, and a free press.
And so these people are posting videos claiming things are worse than they are, and we don't know what's real and what isn't.
But that means, if the people can't send warning messages, we can't react properly.
Thanks to China's censorship, if there's someone about to board a plane, and we don't know about this, they're gonna board that plane.
And they're gonna land wherever they land, and they're gonna spread this virus.
So let me wrap this one up.
I don't know if we're facing something serious.
Keep calm.
See what happens.
But I will say, I don't know if it's normal.
Maybe I'm wrong, but flu season happens all the time.
We don't have rapid response teams building four new emergency hospitals over this.
China seems to know more than they're letting on.
Or they're wasting money, which I really doubt.
We'll see what happens.
I'll leave it there.
Stick around.
Next segment's coming up in a few minutes, and I will see you all shortly.
I almost can't believe this story is real, but then I kind of can.
Look, you know, under Trump, a bunch of things people said would never happen happened.
They complained the economy would tank and the economy did really, really well.
They claimed the trade war would be bad, but now we're trouncing China and we're doing way better economically.
And, Washington Examiner, race relations and position of minorities is better under Trump than Obama.
I almost don't want to believe it, because it's kind of like, well, that doesn't seem right.
We have all these hate crime hoaxes.
It seems worse than ever.
We've got the woke social justice left, the screeching.
Yet for some reason, people think things are better.
And then even with all of that fake, you know, the fake hate crime stuff, Justice Millet, all that stuff, I'm kind of like, well, you know what, man?
Maybe Trump really has done something better.
And everybody was wrong.
Because these people predicted things about Trump that always tend to be wrong.
I look at this shocked.
And then I say, well, no.
At this point, I'll tell you what.
My bias isn't in favor of anything Trump is doing in the presidency.
It's against the media.
Because they seem to get it wrong all the time.
Let's read this story from the Washington Examiner.
They say race relations and position of minorities is better under Trump than Obama.
Satisfaction with race relations in the United States has jumped under President Trump.
The latest indication that the Republican is making significant inroads with blacks and other minorities in advance of the 2020 presidential election.
New details from a Gallup survey on satisfaction said race relations and the position of minorities under Trump are far higher than they were under President Barack Obama, the nation's first black president.
Race relations scored the highest satisfaction advance, 14 points from 22% at the end of the Obama administration to 36% this month, said Gallup.
What?
And the position of blacks and other racial minorities in the nation jumped 9 points from 37% in January 2017 to 46% right now.
What?
Wow!
Now I will say, man, we know, under Trump, unemployment is down across the board for the Black and Latino communities.
For everybody, basically.
So perhaps that's a contributing factor.
But man, I'd imagine with all of the woke lefties, they'd be complaining things were worse.
But maybe there's a different truth buried here.
That the woke fringe left is such a fringe minority, they dominate the conversation with insane ideas that no one believes.
You know what, man?
This is Trump's victory march right here.
Because if minority voters who traditionally vote for Democrat are telling polling agencies, actually, we're doing pretty good.
We feel great.
Donald Trump's gonna win.
You know, we've seen multiple polls now saying support in the Black community for Donald Trump is like 30 to 36%.
That's got Democrats shaking in their boots.
Because the rule goes, if 20% or more of the Black community votes for a Republican, the Democrats will never win until they get that number back down.
They say, the poll bolsters several others that have shown Trump picking up support from Blacks and Hispanics 10 months before Election Day.
Some notable polls have shown Black support at up to 34%, though GOP pollsters suggest that once the
Democrats pick a nominee, support for Trump will drop back to 12 to 14%. But that
would be historic for a Republican presidential candidate and could turn the race for Trump,
they added.
White House officials have credited the rise in support from African Americans and other
minorities to the improved economy, historically low unemployment for blacks, Hispanics, and women,
prison reform, and urban renewal programs. I'm going to stop right here.
Trump prison reform.
That criminal justice reform bill?
Bipartisan support?
Everybody loved that.
Everybody was happy with that.
And you know what?
What's funny is, the media loves to hate on Trump no matter what he does.
When Trump does something everyone does like, they just don't talk about it.
Nobody wants to mention that it was a slam dunk.
You get Democrats and Republicans on board, we do real criminal justice reform, people are going to be happy about it.
That's really moving the country forward.
And that's going to earn Trump a ton of support.
Because you even hear people in the black community saying, you've got to hear about what Trump is doing here, it makes sense.
What's more, Gallup said the nation's average satisfaction rate is at a 15-year high.
America's average satisfaction rating for the 27 issues Gallup has tracked consistently since 2001 is now 47%.
This is up three points from a year ago and is the highest since the January 2005 poll.
Today's average satisfaction is roughly on par with the level of the early 2000s.
Only in 2002 was the average for this metric substantially higher than it is today.
The average 53% recorded that year reflected heightened satisfaction as Americans were in full quote rally around the flag mode shortly after the 9-11 attacks.
I'll tell you what man, this is crazy.
Now, a lot of people talk about how if you get war or crisis, the president's approval rating is going to go up.
Trump is getting these approval boosts in relative peacetime.
Now, I say peacetime, I know, I know.
You know, we're still, you know, stuck in Iraq and Afghanistan and other stupid wars which we're not supposed to be in.
But what I mean is, we've had no 9-11.
There's no great crisis.
We've got a bunch of lazy millennials sitting around eating Sour Patch Kids, watching, you know, anime or whatever.
And everything seems to be going pretty well.
The economy's booming, unemployment is down.
People are having a good time of it.
I mean, there's still a lot of people who complain all day and night and try and cause chaos.
We got the impeachment stuff going on.
But Trump's earned an approval rating without the aid of some catastrophe.
I say aid, not in a positive sense.
I mean, literally, when something chaotic happens, the president rises to action and people then say, thank you for doing this.
Technically, I guess you can say there was a crisis that was being addressed and it's being addressed by Trump.
We had the opioid crisis, we had unemployment, the loss of manufacturing, and the economy is improving dramatically.
So I'm sure it's safe to say a lot of people are looking at this and saying the president is doing it right.
And now American satisfaction is at a 15-year high.
Something no one thought possible, and that's truly amazing.
But I think what we're really seeing here makes sense.
Nationalism.
Donald Trump's all about improving the American circumstance, right?
So when you had people like, you know, Hillary or Obama, even Bush, Clinton, their whole thing was internationalism.
They were the world police.
They were the ones traveling around the globe trying to figure out how we can change the world and make it in our image.
Trump has changed all that.
Trump's withholding aid from countries because he's like, why should America pay for this?
Well, what do you think happens when Trump says we're not going to give away money to other countries?
Surprise, surprise, our own country starts to do a lot better.
What do you think happens when Trump says we are not going to prioritize non-citizens getting benefits and getting jobs in our country?
We're going to make sure if you're a citizen and you're paying taxes, you are first in line for that job promotion or access to resources.
I don't understand why people on the left think that doesn't make sense.
Like, we're part of a community, right?
We all pay our subscription fee, our taxes.
We all contribute in some way, even if we disagree politically.
Wouldn't it make sense we're first in line for what we pay for?
Now, Trump is one of the first presidents in a long time to be doing that, and that's why a lot of people like him.
Now, I actually lean a little bit more towards internationalism than Trump and Trump supporters do, but I'm, you know, moderate type, so I totally get what Trump is doing and why he's doing it, and I understand it.
Even Bernie Sanders used to, until he decided to start pandering to earn that woke left vote, because it was the closest thing he could get.
Sanders, as a socialist, couldn't actually get regular Americans to support him, so he went after the young people, Who are socialists, for some reason.
But let me tell you what's really, really fascinating to me about this poll.
Why I absolutely just didn't want to believe that people believe race relations are better.
Check this out.
This is a story from June 25th.
It says, hate crime hoaxes are more common than you think.
A political scientist found that fewer than 1 in 3 of 304 such allegations was genuine.
I don't care.
How many hate crimes are hoaxes or not?
The fact is, we have a bunch of stories about hate crimes, we have a consistent narrative about white men, and we have all of these stories about hoaxes as well.
With the rise of the woke far left, I'd imagine the perception would be that things are getting worse.
But for some reason, it's just not true.
Maybe that's what they're really after.
Maybe the woke far left is desperately trying to create the perception of race relations getting worse when they're getting better and better.
I think one of the contributing factors is, like, Candace Owens and Kanye West, for sure, in the black community, rallying support around Republicans and bringing people together.
I mean, granted, look, they're both divisive characters to a certain degree, But they're kind of changing, you know, how the lines are drawn.
And the rise of support from these communities and groups like Latinos for Trump, you now have Republicans actually diversifying.
Here's what I love.
When Candace Owens comes out, supports Trump, you'd think that would, the left would then say, we're glad to see Republicans are embracing diversity.
They're not.
They attack Candace, they attack Kanye, they insult them, they call them slurs.
But the Republicans are doing what you asked for.
This is why there's no winning with whatever the modern iteration of the left is.
One example I love citing, they're trying to build a high-speed rail in the UK to reduce carbon emissions, environmental activists are blocking it because they don't think they should build it, and I'm just confused as to what you really want.
If Kanye West comes out for Trump and Candace Owens comes out for Trump, shouldn't the Democrats be like, we really appreciate that our colleagues in the Republican Party are truly embracing diversity?
But they're not.
They still rag on them for being white men and ignore or smear Candace, Kanye West, and all the others who are active Trump supporters who happen to not be white.
I think it's fair to point out.
That on the left, there is a weird bubble perspective bore from these big urban centers, and they have no idea what Republicans actually think.
And that's where you get me a moderate.
I grew up in a big city, but I actually talked to Republicans to see what they think.
So I have a general view that's more understanding of what both sides actually want to talk about.
Whereas the left views Republicans as complete boogeymen, the right tends to understand the left are just naive.
And that's the saying.
Republicans think Democrats are naive, but Democrats think Republicans are evil.
And it probably has to do with the fact that if you grew up in a big city, you don't hear what these people are saying.
It's really, really simple, actually.
When you live in a city, you talk to all your friends and play a game of telephone.
You watch the news.
If you live in a rural area, you less frequently talk to your local communities because you're not as close and it's not as dense population-wise, but you're still getting the same media.
So you hear what they think, and you hear what your neighbors think, and you get a more broad view.
I'll leave it there though.
You get the point.
The main factor here that I think is fascinating is that you'd expect this to not be the case, but something Trump is doing is working.
So, look man, it doesn't matter if you like the guy or hate the guy, it doesn't matter if you like Bernie or don't, I think running from the facts will guarantee your defeat.
So I'll tell you this, if you're a Bernie supporter, you have to look at the data, recognize it as true, respect that, and that's your first in to talk to voters to see what you need to do to actually earn their vote.
