Trump SHATTERS Historical Record AND GOP Voter Turnout, Democrats Don't Stand A Chance In November
Trump SHATTERS Historical Record AND GOP Voter Turnout, Democrats Don't Stand A Chance In November. Donald Trump's town hall on Fox News shattered a historical record at 4.2 Million viewers. This happened just after record voter turnout in what some are calling a meaningless GOP primary as Trump is the presumptive nominee.Even though Trump supporters and republicans have no reason to go vote in the primary they are choosing to do so anyway,At the same time Democrats are getting decent voter turnout but are completely divided.As most people vote on tribal and partisan lines how can the Democrats, which are split between far left and liberal, actually muster a defense against Trump record smashing campaign?
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
If I had to make a bet right now about who would win in November, it would be Donald Trump, hands down.
And I think you would be a crazy person to bet on Bernie Sanders or Joe Biden.
And the numbers don't lie.
Recently at a town hall, Donald Trump shattered a historical record for the most viewers in a cable town hall.
With 4.2 million, beating out basically everyone ever.
We also saw pretty strong turnout for the Republican primaries, even though Donald Trump is running uncontested.
I mean, for the most part.
He does have like Bill Weld or something, but no one has any real reason to go out and vote for Trump in a primary.
He's guaranteed to win.
He's the incumbent, yet they're doing it in droves anyway.
According to Gallup now, voter enthusiasm among Republicans is higher than among Democrats.
Meanwhile, you're looking at Bernie, who's starting to tank in the prediction models, tanking in the polls.
Joe Biden is skyrocketing.
He's got the delegate count, but the dude doesn't even know where he is, and Trump is already going after him.
I think we're dealing with a foregone conclusion.
Donald Trump is going to win.
Bernie's plan for new voters failed.
Joe Biden is like, It's weakened at Biden's.
That's the way I see it.
He's an old candidate.
He's out.
He can't think straight.
He's being propped up by the establishment in desperation to keep out Bernie Sanders.
But let's be real.
This was the best the Democrats had to offer.
A 78-year-old socialist who just had a heart attack and a 77-year-old guy who often doesn't know where he is and mutters incoherently.
Both of these things are ripe for partisan political attacks in a campaign season.
Combine the negatives with Trump's positives, and you will never convince me Trump is gonna lose.
I'm sorry.
I'll be the first to admit I was wrong in 2018.
I said Republicans will sweep.
I do not see how this will actually happen, but I was wrong.
You see, I missed that there were many Democrats who were campaigning on kitchen table issues, saying that they were going to fight for health care and deal with real problems the Americans were concerned about.
But I think many of those voters were betrayed, when instead of doing that, the Democrats then went to impeach Donald Trump.
Which says to me, many of these voters probably now feel a bit dejected.
But more importantly, we're dealing with a record-breaking economy.
Now, there are some global concerns, and the markets are going a little wild right now.
But a new jobs report just came out, showing it was another epic month.
Unemployment goes down again 3.5%.
The numbers don't lie.
When people are happy, they're not thinking about politics.
Now, of course, there are some big issues globally that have people concerned, but for the most part, everything is lining up with a Donald Trump 2020 landslide.
So let's take a look at what happened with this town hall, the GOP turnout in a primary they didn't need to turn out for, voter enthusiasm, as well as the potential pitfalls the Democrats are actually facing.
Before we get started, however, head over to TimCast.com slash donate if you would like to support my work.
There's many ways you can give, but the best thing you can do, share this video.
Of course, this one is just definitely going to play into the confirmation biases of people who want Trump or who are disaffected liberals mad at the Democratic Party.
But maybe if you share it, some people who might not normally see this will see it.
And at the very least, it does help my channel.
Also, don't forget to subscribe.
Hit that notification bell because YouTube is actively suppressing political commentary content.
I don't know how long I'll last, but for now, it's the best way to make sure you get my content.
Let's read the story.
Fox News election town hall with Trump is the most watched in cable history.
Fox News' town hall with President Trump, the most watched election town hall in cable news history, according to early Nielsen media research.
The event, co-moderated by Bret Baier and Martha McCallum, averaged 4.2 million viewers from 6.30 to 7.30 p.m.
The record-setting town hall dominated cable news, topping MSNBC's 1.4 million viewers and CNN's 1 million viewers combined.
Fox News also beat CNN and MSNBC combined in the key news demographic of adults aged 25 to 54, averaging 744,000 during the town hall.
Trump, speaking with Bayer McCallum in Joe Biden's hometown of Scranton, PA, suggested that the new Democratic frontrunner's repeated gaffes could be a sign of a competency issue, honing a line of attack that Republicans aren't expected to repeatedly deploy if Biden becomes his party's nominee.
But it's not just something that Republicans are going to deploy, because progressives have already been deploying it.
Because anyone who is sane knows that Joe Biden Ain't thinking straight.
He called Cory Booker a president.
I think he called Bernie Sanders a president.
I'm not kidding.
In the debate, he said what the president said.
Oh, I mean, future president to Cory Booker.
The gaffes aren't just about simple mistakes or misstepping.
It's about him literally forgetting what town he's in.
My favorite clip is when Joe Biden turns his back to the audience and starts speaking at the wall at a screen on the wall.
What is he doing?
He really has just lost the plot.
There was one clip where he turns around, fiddles around, no one knows what he was really doing.
Some people argued at this debate, Joe Biden forgot where he was.
I gotta be honest, I'm not trying to be mean, but I think he was turning around to fix his teeth.
That's why he struggles to speak sometimes.
I do not think Biden has what it takes and he's gonna get torn to shreds.
But let's get to the negatives in a second.
Politico.
Trump drives massive turnout in primaries, despite token opposition.
His campaign is fine-tuning its get-out-the-vote machine months ahead of the general election, a daunting challenge for Democrats.
Political Reports, the massive turnout is a reflection of organic enthusiasm among conservatives and a sophisticated effort by Trump's campaign to rev up its get-out-the-vote machine ahead of the general election.
Trump and Vice President Mike Pence traveled to Iowa and New Hampshire ahead of voting, and the campaign flooded the two states with high-profile surrogates and launched a Facebook advertising blitz, reminding supporters to cast ballots.
The efforts are paying off.
With Republicans turning out in historic numbers, Trump received more than 31,000 votes in the Iowa caucus, surpassing the 25,000 Democrats who turned out during Obama's successful 2012 re-election bid.
Trump's share was more than four times the number of Republicans who caucused during George W. Bush's 2004 re-election campaign.
The vote totals in New Hampshire were even starker.
The president received 129,696 votes, more than doubling Obama and Bush's totals.
While it's unclear what the figures might portend for the general election, the president's job approval numbers remain stuck in the mid-40s in most surveys.
However, outside of Politico's reporting, Donald Trump recently shattered his all-time aggregate high.
All-time.
Real clear politics.
Tracking all of the polls showed that I think he broke 46.3%.
Now, mind you, that's not the highest for any president.
However, Trump is beating Barack Obama for around the same time, at least in this time period.
If we expected Barack Obama, if we saw him get re-elected, And Donald Trump is now polling higher than Obama did.
It's safe to say there are more metrics that show Donald Trump is gearing up for a landslide.
I'm going to stop here real quick.
I'm going to show you more.
It's going to get all the Trump supporters really excited.
But just keep in mind, hubris will be your downfall.
They say a little more than a year after the president's party suffered sweeping losses in the midterm elections, Republicans are bent on ensuring that Trump wins a second term.
There is a personal vote for Donald Trump that is unshakable, said John Kuvillain, a Louisiana-based pollster who has been tracking the primary totals.
Republican voters are willing to go out to vote for Trump even though he doesn't have a formidable primary challenge.
Kuvilin has also been monitoring early totals in Tennessee, which holds its primary on March 3rd.
Despite the lack of a serious contest, Republican turnout in the state is down only 3% from 2016, when the party was in the thick of a fiercely competitive primary.
Let me reiterate, you don't need to go out and vote for Trump!
He's gonna win no matter what!
He's the incumbent, the party loves him, they rally around him, yet Trump supporters are so enthusiastic and adamant about voting, they're going out...
Well, they don't need to!
That, to me, is shocking.
I think the reason the moderate Democrats won in 2018 is because Trump wasn't on the ballot.
He's a new guy.
It's the Trump party.
It's the Trump movement.
When Trump was on the ballot in 2016, people hit that box R across the board.
In the midterms, without Trump, people didn't show up, unfortunately.
That was New York Times data saying Trump's core base actually didn't show up in large numbers, only some did.
And Democrats won because of it, and then they impeached Trump because of it.
This time, you will see a return of the Trump supporters with a vengeance.
Over impeachment, particularly.
The people in these districts that had Democrats come in and then vote to impeach Trump are likely angry about it.
I'd be willing to bet so.
Donald Trump raised record amounts of money.
He absolutely strived during the impeachment process.
Now, of course, the people who hate him will always hate him.
You can't change that.
But think about the Trump voters who voted in 2016 and in their districts flipped Democrat.
Those people are fired up and ready to go.
To quote Barack Obama.
Now, check this out.
Primaries show Trump GOP strength.
It's essentially the same data we saw from Politico, a little bit more updated, and they say this.
Trump won the Texas primary with 94.1% of the vote.
In 2004, the last time an incumbent Republican president ran for re-election, George W. Bush, a former Texas governor, won with 92.5%.
This year, Trump won with 1.889 million votes out of 2 million Republican votes cast.
Democrat Joe Biden won Texas with 716 with 2,075,000 Democratic votes cast.
Winning a higher percentage of the Texas primary vote than a former Texas governor indicates Trump's power in the party.
And having such a large number of Republican votes in an essentially meaningless GOP primary compared to the Democratic votes in a hotly contested and enormously consequential primary also suggests Republican muscle.
But it also suggests Democrat failure.
Let me stress this point for you one more time.
Take this to the bank.
No one needed to vote for Trump, but 2 million people turned out for the Republican primary.
For the Democratic primary, 2 million people turned out.
Now, there was just around 70,000 more people on the Democrat side, but that was the vote that mattered.
That was the one where the Democrats were supposed to come out and say, this is the person I want.
Nobody had to come out for Trump.
Donald Trump sets a foregone conclusion, yet somehow, In a GOP primary that was meaningless, they mustered voter turnout on par with the Democrats.
What do you think's going to happen when you then ask the Republicans to stand up for a meaningful election in November against a Bernie or Biden?
I think we're going to see massive, massive voter turnout.
Now, take a look at this.
It's another story in line with a similar thing.
Trump's Super Tuesday results broad appeal beyond a United GOP.
This is where it goes one step beyond.
Yes, Trump rallied the GOP, but it's actually beyond this.
He's getting moderates.
He's getting regular people.
There were 10 million people around, 9.4 million, who voted for Barack Obama and then switched to Donald Trump.
They went from Democrat to Republican.
Donald Trump has united the GOP, but he's also attracting disaffected liberals, which results in them leaving the Democratic Party or rejecting the name or the title liberal.
And now I'll, well, I'll just show you the data.
In this story from Gallup, it's a poll, I'm sorry, this poll from Gallup.
I've shown this before, check it out.
As Americans continue to lean more Democratic than Republican in their party preferences in 2019, The ideological balance of the country remained center-right, with 37% of Americans on average identifying as conservative during the year, 35% as moderate, and 24% as liberal.
But take a look at this.
It actually went down for liberals.
We can see there's been a steady increase.
Very slow.
In 92, 17% of this country said they were liberal.
In 2018, 26% did.
this country said they were liberal in 2018, 26% did.
However, in 2019, it dropped two percentage points.
And those who identify as conservative increased by two percentage points.
And actually, since around 2014, people in this country who identify as moderate increased from 34 to 35.
And I think I know why.
The left has left liberals behind.
And now people who used to be liberal, people who might call themselves politically homeless today, don't consider themselves liberal.
They call themselves moderates.
It's kind of crazy that someone like me, who used to be decently far left as a punk rock skateboarding kid, now views himself as a moderate or a centrist, when I was a textbook liberal during the Obama era.
But the left in this country has shifted so far left, they've left everyone behind.
Many people have said that I didn't leave the left, the left left me.
Am I confusing you yet saying left enough?
But you get the point.
More people are starting to identify as conservative, moderates have had a slight gain and are maintaining their presence, and liberal is going down.
Take that one to the bank, because there's more.
Republicans currently hold edge in election enthusiasm from Gallup.
Enthusiasm for voting in 2020 is fairly high among Democrats and Republicans, although Republicans have the slight edge in the pre-Super Tuesday poll, as they did in most recent presidential election years at this point in the campaign.
Republicans are also expressing the most enthusiasm they have in the early months of any election since Gallup first measured this in 2000.
The current 64% feeling more enthusiastic easily beats the prior high of 53% in 2012 and 2004 for this time of year.
Democrats' enthusiasm, 58% in turn, well exceeds where it stood at a slightly later point in 2016, which was 43%, and in February 2012, at 45%.
In March of 2000, it was 33%.
It matches the level recorded in January-February of 2004, but is considerably lower than February of 2008.
So I'll tell you this.
Republicans have 64% enthusiasm.
Democrats have 58%.
Hubris will be your downfall.
I gotta say, I don't really have a horse in this race at this point.
I'm fairly ambivalent.
I'm not gonna cry if Trump wins.
Actually, I gotta be honest.
Basically, whoever wins, I'm going to laugh.
And I really mean that.
If Trump wins re-election, I'm gonna laugh at the horrible campaign run by Democrats.
If Biden wins, I'm gonna laugh because I would be shocked at how someone like that could actually win.
And if Bernie wins, it'll be the same thing.
The Democratic establishment gets their comeuppance, and I find it kind of funny.
Now, I know a lot of people who are both Bernie or Trump supporters might be like, no, you must support my side.
I'm not here to play games, man.
I'm gonna tell you how I actually feel.
And I'll just laugh.
Because I'm an adult.
You can't take everything so personally.
When Trump won, I laughed.
If Bernie wins, I'll laugh all the same.
It is what it is.
But let's be real.
Those who are adamant about remaining in an ideological bubble and only listening to the sweet nothings of their preferred party will not see the truth.
And the truth is Trump has the numbers behind him.
And it is staggering!
I'm not making these numbers up!
Donald Trump has 4.2 million viewers on his town hall shattering a historical cable TV record.
I can't make this stuff up.
But let's talk about approval rating polls.
I've seen many progressives highlight this poll or that poll saying, oh look, Donald Trump's approval rating is the worst ever.
Okay, I can respect that.
I just pulled up a poll from Gallup.
It's very specific, talking about the amount of people who identify as liberal.
I think it's fair to use individual polls in certain contexts, and I'm worthy of that criticism to an extent.
But when it comes to the president's approval rating, This is the aggregate.
I always try to make sure I'm looking at the average polling when it comes to whether or not people are favorable, unfavorable, or approve of Donald Trump's job.
When it comes to the economy, Donald Trump has a decently good approval rating.
So, a lot of people might try and argue, no, he doesn't have the numbers.
I'm telling you, I'm not making it up.
See, the thing is, I don't really care if Trump wins, if he deserves to win, he does, if Bernie deserves to win, he does, if Biden does, and so be it.
And because of this, I think, in my opinion, I'm not tied to these fringe partisan tribes that really drive voter turnout and opinion.
In an article from Vox, they said, they say this, even voters who pay close attention
to politics are prone, in fact, more prone to biased or blinker decision making.
The reason is simple.
Most people make political decisions on the basis of social identities and partisan loyalties,
not an honest examination of reality.
And they could I couldn't have said it better.
Many of these people who want Bernie to win can't take a look at reality.
Bernie can't.
Many of the people who just desperately want to beat Trump can't see reality.
Trump has the numbers.
He is crushing it.
Now, I'm not saying don't try.
Everyone should try.
Everyone should vote.
Do your thing.
But I think reality is clear.
I think what we're seeing is many people who just can't accept because their tribe says so that they're going to lose.
Now, look, I'll be honest.
I think if Trump was doing bad, you'd see Trump supporters saying something similar because when polls come out that are bad for Trump, we hear something similar.
Oh, but the polls were wrong in 2016.
It's true, they were wrong.
And I gotta admit, they're probably wrong today, but it's hard to know exactly what to make of these things, so I can only really hope that the polls have fixed themselves for the most part.
But yeah, the polls have been wrong in the Democratic primary.
Now let's take this one to the negatives of the Democrats and we'll wind this down and be on our merry way.
You see, Bernie Sanders has been unable to muster the support he needed.
All the progressives were saying, Bernie will light up new voters just like Trump did.
However, Bernie didn't do it.
It did not happen.
The New York Times says, yes, more Democrats came out to vote in most of the Super Tuesday states than in 2016, but many of them weren't there to support Mr. Sanders.
In fact, his share of the vote fell in some crucial states.
While he won half of the vote in Vermont in the returns available so far, Mr. Sanders has not exceeded 37% in the other three states he won last night, indicating the possibility of a ceiling on his level of support in the primaries.
Without question, Mr. Sanders' margin right now in California is a big deal, but let's take a closer look at two states.
We're not going to get into that.
The point is, They've repeatedly talked about Bernie lighting up new voters.
But here we can see it from NPR.
Bernie Sanders' call for young voters isn't working out the way he planned.
You made a bet on a demographic that said they support you because they want to fit in, not because they actually cared.
And now you will reap what you have sown.
Imagine trying to convince a group of people with no money to buy a product from you.
They'll tell you all day and night how much they love your product.
It's fantastic.
And then when you say, will you buy it?
They'll say, we don't have any money.
That's what Bernie is doing with youth vote.
You want to get them out.
They never come out.
13% youth vote in the Democratic primary.
18 to 29 year olds.
And I don't even think 29 is that young.
You can't get a 29 year old to come out and vote for you, dude.
Bernie Sanders could not muster it.
But let's be real.
With all of these results in, we are now seeing the prediction models from FiveThirtyEight.
Who will win the 2020 Democratic primary?
Joe Biden at 88%.
I think this is meaningless at this point.
538's prediction model has been so ridiculous and bounced and flipped so often, I just think all of these polls and stats are probably bunk, and it's hard to know exactly what to expect.
But Joe Biden is now in the lead.
An 88% chance of taking the Democratic nomination.
Bernie Sanders now sitting at 2%.
And also, hang in there, Tulsi Gabbard.
She's at less than 1 in 100, with 0%.
For whatever reason.
You know, you guys know I think Tulsi's a cool person.
I think she'd be a great candidate.
I gotta admit, I'm glad she is still in the race to an extent because she's substantially better than Sanders and Biden.
She's not gonna win.
I didn't think she would.
I didn't think most of them would.
But let's be real.
78-year-old socialist who just had a heart attack and a 77-year-old guy who's confused about where he is and mutters half the time?
I mean, I'm sorry, man.
I'll take Tulsi as the candidate any day.
And if this is what the Democrats want, they deserve to lose.
Because right now, Donald Trump has fired up the ad campaigns, the smears against Joe Biden.
I shouldn't say smears.
That implies it's out of context or change of the context.
Samuel D. Finkelstein tweets, these are the Trump campaign's ads attacking Biden's cognitive decline.
Biden's response, his campaign has been avoiding public events and TV appearances to limit his exposure.
If he's the nominee, these ads will run 24-7.
He's defenseless.
He'd lose.
This guy's right.
Absolutely right.
I don't think Biden could ever go up against Trump.
During the town hall that Trump did with Fox, Trump called out Biden's gaffes and his nonsensical statements.
And it was brutal.
I mean, look.
They're all old.
But let's be real.
The youngest person in the race right now for any major party is Tulsi Gabbard with a 0% chance of winning.
I'm gonna be fair to Tulsi.
She's in the race.
But of the primary contenders, all old white men, of which the Democrats should care, but probably don't.
Donald Trump is the youngest. I get it, Tulsi is, but Trump is the youngest of the principal contenders.
Isn't that strange?
And I got to admit, of all of them, Trump is the most spry.
I mean, Bernie Sanders, there was a video of him going viral recently of him wheezing,
and he just had a heart attack.
I'm not trying to drag him for that.
It's just reality.
Joe Biden, I mean, you got to watch these ads.
The compilations put together by progressives and by Trump, brutal.
Joe Biden will never survive a debate with Donald Trump.
It would be brutal.
Donald Trump is spry.
I wouldn't call him a spraying chicken, but Donald Trump has the energy.
I mean, look, to an extent, I would say Bernie does as well, but Bernie's got, he's got health troubles.
That's just the way things are.
I'm going to end this now by pointing, by wrapping this up in the circular firing squad that is the left.
You see, Joe Biden is getting targeted.
Those tweets, those are from Bernie supporters who are trying to show you, rightly so, that Biden does not have the capabilities.
I'm sorry, dude.
What do you want me to do, though?
Choose the 78-year-old guy who just had a heart attack?
Sorry, I think it was smart of Tulsi to stay in the race.
At least, for whatever reason, she's not likely to win.
But, man, I'll tell you what.
If I had to cast my vote, it's not going to be for the old guys who I think have health issues, you know?
So, I don't think she'll win because for whatever reason, Democrats really want these old guys.
But Bill Maher, on his show recently, called out this woman who wrote an op-ed about Chris Matthews which resulted in him getting fired.
Bill Maher said, She said, I was afraid to name him at the time out of fear of retaliation.
I'm not afraid anymore.
And he says, thank you, Rosa Parks.
I mean, Jesus effing Christ.
I guess my question is, do you wonder how Democrats lose?
Well, she responded with, F you, Bill Maher.
I like Bill Maher, man.
I think he said some really dumb things in the past, but he stands by his dumb things.
He doesn't back down in the face of pressure from anybody.
He just says it, and that's refreshing.
It really is.
It's similar to what people think about Trump.
So I'll tell you this, if you're a Trump supporter and you look at the things Bill Maher says and you're like, how could he say that it's so awful because he once called for a recession to beat Trump?
Think about that same feeling Democrats have for Trump.
Trump's unwillingness to back down.
He's going to call you out, he's going to insult you.
That's what people like about Bill Maher.
But here's the problem.
Let's take it back to the tribal issue.
And I'm going to explain to you once and for all why Trump, in my opinion, is guaranteed the victory.
The people who vote, the people who tend to vote, vote for partisan loyalties and social identities.
Bernie Sanders supporters are calling for Bernie or bust.
They won't support Joe Biden because of their partisan loyalties and their social identities.
Donald Trump has unified the GOP.
90% plus support, they're rallied around him.
4.2 million viewers, record GOP turnout.
It's ridiculous, the people coming out to vote for this guy.
Meanwhile, on the Democrat side, it's two parties fighting over one position.
There's no social identity unity.
They don't view themselves the same.
They call Joe Biden a conservative.
I'm not exaggerating when I say that.
So there will not be any partisan loyalty to support Bernie or Biden.
If Bernie gets the nomination, we've already seen some Biden supporters straight up say, never, never Bernie.
So what do you think's going to happen come November?
Social identity takes the front line, and Donald Trump sweeps with a landslide victory.
I'll leave it there.
Stick around.
Next segment will be at 6 p.m.
YouTube.com slash TimCastNews.
Thanks for hanging out.
I will see you then.
He has decided that misogyny should be a hate crime.
How you actually define misogyny, I don't know, because basically everything is, and if a woman says something that's even remotely anti-intersectional, she's internalized misogyny, so I guess you can have internalized hate crime.
But I think what he's really trying to say, as they note in the independent article, Is that he thinks it should be a hate crime if someone targets someone else based on gender.
However, he specifically says misogyny.
Now, why do you think it is that Mr. Sadiq Khan has come out now saying this should be the case?
Could it be that a, I don't know, women's group is going to be hosting a debate and the election is soon?
I gotta tell you, man.
These weirdos love identity pandering, no matter how much it fails.
I don't get it.
They're literally sticking their hand in the fire, saying, ow, and then doing it again.
But even worse, they're watching other people get engulfed in flames, run around screaming, and jump off a cliff.
And then they decide to put their hand in the fire, too.
You'd think Sadiq Khan, mayor of London, would have looked at what happened to Jeremy Corbyn, but it could be.
Because London is a particularly left-leaning major city.
He knows this will play well, but I will tell you this, and we'll get to the story.
If all your politicians do is every single election one-up themselves on identity pandering or extremist policy, how long until you have a lunatic running your city?
And how long until they have policies that literally make no sense?
They contradict each other.
We are getting there.
You know, like in New York, I bring this up all the time, you can literally make up a gender identity.
I'm not kidding.
And the reason this is bad, in my opinion, is that it undermines gender protections because literally anyone can say they're anything and you can't do anything about it.
So how can you protect someone when someone could call themselves, I don't know, Florbogender?
It becomes contradictory and confusing.
But I also want to drag Jeremy Corbyn on this one.
Apparently he's a vegetarian and he went to a kebab award.
Don't ask me why, but this is another example of the insanity of identity pandering.
Having a vegetarian go to a kebab award ceremony or something.
He got booed!
Yeah, why would you go?
It makes no sense.
Let's read the first story from The Independent.
Sadiq Khan calls for misogyny to be recognized as hate crime.
Review underway into whether gender should be included in list of protected characteristics.
You know what I'm saying?
You know why this stuff happens?
Because when you go to a group of women and say, we're going to make misogyny a hate crime, they all clap and cheer.
You then don't go to the other groups and say that too.
So most of them don't know about it and they also don't see how it would negatively impact them.
But if you keep doing this, we're gonna have a whole bunch of weird segregation laws, where it's like, okay, you're a woman, but you're also short, and you're skinny, so that's body shaming, thin phobia, what's that?
You have thin hair?
Thin hair phobia.
At what point does it stop?
You're gonna just be like, okay, let's check off all the characteristics, and your crime is determined based on the fact the individual had these characteristics.
London Mayor Sadiq Khan has issued a call for misogyny to be recognized as a hate crime.
Sort of like if you tweet at somebody, which we know in the UK is basically a crime anyway.
The mayor said that female gender should be included in the list of protected characteristics treated as aggravating circumstances, which currently includes disability, race, religion, orientation, or transgender identity.
Mr. Khan, who is fighting for re-election to City Hall in the 7th of May election, said he would also back moves to end a two-tier hierarchy of hate crimes, which sees incidents aggravated by racial or religious hatred prosecuted more harshly than those based on sexual orientation.
Speaking ahead of a women of the world mayoral debate.
Oh, that's why he's saying it.
I get it.
Mr. Khan said, the safety of all Londoners is my first priority.
And as a proud feminist, I find it simply unacceptable that any woman or girl in our city should experience these devastating crimes.
I think this actually makes you anti-feminist.
It's weird, isn't it?
If you were a real feminist, based on, you know, what the definition of the word was supposed to be, you'd be advocating for equality under the law, not protection and a special class under the law.
Because if you're a protected class, you are not equal, right?
And at what point do you that, well, here's the problem with the UK not having a constitution.
We can't do that here in the United States.
Because everyone needs to be, you know, everyone is protected equally.
It would not jive with our civil rights law.
Over there, they can be like, men aren't protected.
So they're literally heading towards, if you're a white male, then it's basically going to be a crime just for that.
The safety, you know.
Quote, I want all women to feel safe in London.
Whether they are going to work or enjoying the culture and entertainment that London has to offer.
It is time for every Londoner to call out sexist and misogynistic attitudes.
Wherever they encounter them, in the workplace, at school, on the streets, on public transport.
Okay, okay, hold on a minute.
Attitudes?
He said he wants misogyny to be a hate crime?
No, no, no, okay, I think specifically he's saying that the female gender should be protected.
But it worries me when he then goes on to say that attitudes.
As many of you know, if you say naughty words on the internet, you can be arrested in the UK.
What a nightmarish place to live.
You guys are built in 1984 over there.
What's your deal?
But I can only imagine.
With the policing they do of Twitter accounts, you know, people who say mean words or make videos about their pog doing silly things, people are gonna start getting arrested for saying offensive jokes.
There was, you know, following the Count Dankula case, which I'm sure most of you are aware of, there was a woman who posted rap lyrics, and she got arrested for this.
What do you think's gonna happen if you, if, okay, here's what I want you to do.
Vote for this guy, alright?
And then try and sing that Britney Spears song, Hit Me Baby, one more time and see how long it takes for them to show up at your door- show up at your doorstep.
Show up at your doorstep.
Quote, I am proud to support calls to recognize misogyny as a hate crime and for all hate
crimes based on protected characteristics to be treated equally.
This election is a two horse race between me standing up for our values and the Tory
That's why I'm asking Londoners to lend me their vote, so I can continue standing up for our city and being a proud feminist in City Hall.
Well, most of you are probably aware of what happened back in December when the Labour Party got crushed.
In one of the most brutal defeats that ever experienced in like 80 or 100 years.
Some areas that had not voted for the conservative party since like 1930 flipped, shocking everyone.
It might- I mean, look.
I would be surprised if London flipped to the Tory candidate.
I'm not big on UK politics, I don't know a whole lot, but if I was going to base it off of my understanding of the politics we see here in America, because there are similarities, I could never imagine New York turning red, but Bloomberg was a Republican, so it's not out of the question.
I just assume these polarizing times, you've got cities that are indoctrinated and downright nuts.
You know what, man?
I left New York City.
It was getting crazy, it was getting weird, and I don't want to be there anymore.
So now I'm in South Jersey, basically the Philadelphia suburbs, and I don't want to be in these big cities because they're being dominated by these fringe, lunatic ideologies.
But something weird and dangerous that's happening is, it's not affecting, you know, it ripples out from these cities, and it always has, but they've lost the plot.
Completely.
Like, they are absolutely going insane.
The policies, the laws they are enacting, Look, man, go to New York City and you will see the worst of all of these policies enacted that don't make sense.
Go to San Francisco, you will see the worst of all of these policies that don't make sense.
For one, San Francisco is literally the nightmare dystopias that we've envisioned going back to the 60s.
A tech oligopoly.
Super wealthy billionaires living atop ivory towers.
Meanwhile, their streets are riddled with homeless and feces and garbage everywhere.
And what do they do about it?
Nothing.
But over in Berkeley, which is part of the Bay Area, they have signs on their window with a revolution fist, because if you don't, they'll smash your windows out.
You've got cult-like ideology, complete oligarchy, and the activists, well I should air-quote activists, target small businesses and not the major tech corporations.
Over in New York, you have the greater vision of gun control, which spawned Stop and Frisk.
We recently saw a video go viral, where it was a young black man, and he got stopped for, we can only assume no reason, or for suspicion, you know, he was under suspicions, and a bunch of cops run up, throw him down, he gets arrested, and he yells, I never thought it would happen to me, something like that.
I never understood why conservatives would defend that behavior, because what's happening in New York City, and what's been happening in New York City, is based on these lunatics chasing after far-fringe left-wing ideology that's contradictory.
I did a podcast episode with a guy named Corey DeAngelis, and he was saying that you look at these Democrats, and they're in favor of Pell Grants, which is the government giving you money so you can choose which school you want to go to.
But then when it comes to actual public, you know, K-12, They're opposed to a voucher system, which is basically the same thing.
It's contradictory.
It seems to make no sense.
Yet for some reason, conservatives come out, like Donald Trump, defending stop-and-frisk.
Why?
It's a gun control measure, and it targeted, for the most part, minority communities.
Bloomberg cheers for this.
He defended it over and over again.
Yeah, and I know he's apologizing for it now.
But what you're seeing with Sadiq Khan Wanting to criminalize misogyny is exactly the problem with these big cities.
Their policies don't make sense.
They have no principles.
They're like, what do I gotta say to whatever group to get elected?
And then these groups are gonna go back and say, we want you to enforce this law.
Congratulations.
Stop and Frisk in New York was basically, we want to get guns off the streets.
So they started disproportionately targeting black and brown neighborhoods, poor people.
And I'm surprised to see that anybody who would be in favor of 2A... I understand there's a lot of issues with criminals and guns.
Don't get me wrong.
I live in Chicago.
I grew up there.
But...
It's a blue city with Democrats, and this is their vision of how they want to run things.
They're complaining about it, and they want the same rules for the rest of the country?
I'm out.
I could not imagine living in New York, and you say something like, howdy ma'am, ma'am, excuse me, or you say sir, and they accuse you of misogyny.
What is he actually meaning by this?
But look, I don't want to play extremes and act like you'll walk up to a woman and say, howdy ma'am, and they're going to arrest you.
But think about how insane things have gradually been getting.
And I want you to go take a look at what goes on in Berkeley, just down the street from the university.
Every business, for some reason, they have these posters in the window, okay?
Every business is an exaggeration, but they put the posters in the window, with like the revolution fist, and it says, all people welcome, and safe space, and stuff like that.
And I actually asked them why, and they said, their window, you know, I talked to one business, said, their windows would get smashed out.
It is increasingly getting insane in these big cities.
I think the internet has a lot to do with it, but I can't imagine how this becomes livable in the future.
People are going to want to leave, and the people who stay are the people who like living in the cult, I guess.
The story goes on to say the Crown Prosecution Service defines a hate crime as a range of criminal behavior where the perpetrator is motivated by hostility or demonstrates hostility towards the victim's disability, race, religion, orientation, or identity.
Mr. Khan's manifesto will call for misogyny to be classified as a hate crime too.
What does that mean?
I mean, he said misogyny.
If we're basing it off of Twitter feminists, then arguing with a feminist is misogyny.
Mansplaining is misogyny.
And a woman arguing against another woman against this law would be internalized misogyny.
Welcome to 1984-2020.
The Law Commission is currently conducting a review of hate crime legislation, including an assessment of whether it should be extended to include a wider range of sex or gender characteristics, age, physical characteristics, or membership of specific subcultures.
Are you kidding me?
Could you imagine if they were like...
So you attacked a skateboarder.
That's a hate crime.
What's that?
This is literally Fahrenheit 451.
Have you ever read that?
I gotta be honest.
I've only read the snippets.
But the general idea, my understanding, I could be wrong, fact check me.
I know, I do feel silly commenting on what the book is about, not having read it.
For the most part, I think I've read it like 20 years ago or something.
But anyway.
The general idea was that every single group kept getting offended.
You can't make fun of cat owners because the cat owners get offended, then the dog owners, then the trade unionists, then the teachers.
And eventually everything becomes a protected class.
So they start burning literature because everything is offensive to everyone.
London is doing this.
Vote for it.
Congratulations.
But I will add something.
We will carry on with another hope.
What we saw with the defeat of the Labour Party might show that there is a limit.
You can only push so far before the rubber band snaps.
And this, to me, is how insane it is.
They say the commission has already identified misogyny as a possible concern, which could be covered by the legislation.
It is expected to report in 2021.
You know what?
Do it.
I don't live there.
You live in London.
You live in the UK.
I feel bad for you.
Maybe you should leave.
Maybe it's time to GTFO because maybe when Count Dankula got arrested for making a silly video on the internet, that was the point where you should have realized your country is losing it.
But okay, okay.
I'll be fair.
Brexit happened and now you have the crushing defeat of the Labour Party in December.
So perhaps Perhaps I'm wrong, and now is the time to stay and reclaim your freedoms and your liberties, which it would seem Londoners and people in the UK are doing.
But with London being, you know, an urban metro center, which is just riddled with this kind of weird ideology, I'm not convinced they'll flip, but we'll see what happens.
Now, I do want to drag Jeremy Corbyn for just that reason.
We have this story, which shows how insane these people really are.
Vegetarian Jeremy Corbyn gets mixed reception at British Kebab Awards.
The Labour leader says his test of a kebab restaurant is, quote, does it contain salad and do they have good falafels?
He got booed.
Why would a vegetarian go to a kebab event?
I don't know.
Maybe I just don't get the culture.
But it shows how fringe and how whittled down identity is becoming.
Why would you?
What are you thinking?
This guy's not popular?
Okay, let's read this.
It does seem silly.
As a well-known vegetarian, one of the last places you would expect to find Jeremy Corbyn is at the British Kebab Awards.
Yes.
Also, I'm surprised to find that there are British Kebab Awards.
But the Labour leader was up on stage at the event on Tuesday night, presenting the award for Best Kebab Restaurant in North and West London to Kabul City Restaurant.
Why?
Video footage from the event shows there were some boos as Mr. Corbyn got up on stage.
I'm willing to bet The booing wasn't just because he's a vegetarian, although probably, but it's because everyone hates the dude.
He got crushed.
And they have chased after this fringe ideology and these people who just believe weird things, or believe nothing I think is the better way to put it, and they lost because of it.
You know what I think?
I think they don't actually believe anything.
I've seen these British feminists on Twitter.
I've seen what they say.
And they will flip their opinion in two seconds if enough angry people tweet at them.
They have no principles.
They will stand up for nothing.
The other day I did a video about Bernie Sanders being smeared as an asset of the Soviet Union.
And I slammed the New York Times for doing it.
I don't care if you want to dig up the past and accuse Bernie of being a spy for Russia or whatever stupid nonsense.
They're arguing that it was basically The Russians or the Soviets, I'm sorry, we're using him as a propaganda tool.
They literally do the same thing to Trump.
If you want to see, you know, if you come to me, I'm going to tell you, I do not think the media should be doing this.
Argue the ideas.
Argue what they do now.
When I look at these people, they're people who just say whatever they need to say whenever they need to say it.
There's nothing there.
Jeremy Corbyn will flip in two seconds the moment someone boos him or gets angry at him.
I wouldn't be surprised to find if the guy was eating meat tomorrow because he got booed when he went up on stage.
Oh, is that it?
If Twitter feminists started spamming him, he'd be like, you're right, vegetarianism is wrong.
Because I've seen it.
Look at...
Well, I'm not gonna name anybody.
I was about to.
But there are some Twitter feminists that have a decent amount of followers, and I have seen them tweet things in defense of women, got attacked for being transphobic, and then apologized, retweeted them, quote-tweeted themselves saying, I didn't realize I was wrong, I'll do better.
People like, you know, David Hogg or whatever, you know that guy?
He tweeted something, I think it was about Christopher Columbus, like, Happy Columbus Day!
And then he got attacked for it and immediately said, Oop, I'm sorry, Columbus was bad.
They have no principles, they have no real opinions, they are just weird drone-like NPC characters who have a bunch of weird Borg-like tendrils in the back of their head who will say whatever the Horde tells them to say.
That's no way to live.
And that's no way to create policy to run a city.
When you have people like that, don't be surprised when they come out Saying that misogyny should be a hate crime just before an election when they're speaking at the woman's, you know, about to speak at the woman's whatever, women of the world mayoral debate.
Oh, oh, you're having an event for women and he just comes out and says this?
You think he actually cares?
These people are insane, sociopathic grifters who will say whatever they have to say to get the keys to the castle.
Do not give it to them.
Don't.
Otherwise, you'll end up with Sadiq Khan, who says stupid things and acts stupid laws.
But you know what?
You reap what you sow.
You want to vote for Jeremy Corbyn, congratulations.
Because if the Labour Party actually put up someone sane, with principle and some policy ideas, perhaps they wouldn't have been crushed so horrifyingly in the December election.
Now I must say, as I wrap this up, I am not British.
I know little of their politics outside of these general issues, and there are probably many other people who can speak much better.
But I do think it's fair to say that there are overwhelming similarities between the freak ideologies emerging in the UK and in the United States.
And we can look to some of their elections to see just how, you know, there's been a kind of mirror image almost.
Brexit, then Trump.
We're now looking at this December defeat of the Labour Party, and we're moving into the 2020 elections.
Let me just tell you.
I might do something on this later today.
Donald Trump did a town hall on Fox News, which broke the record For any cable town hall ever at 4.2 million viewers.
The biggest town hall in cable TV history.
What does that mean?
I honestly don't know.
But I think it's fair to say that in America, the media is wrong.
They are full of crazy people who say crazy things, and regular Americans do not like this kind of psychotic behavior.
I think a lot of people who mature and become adults start realizing, sticks and stones, man, break my bones, words will never hurt me.
So these young people who screech, screech on the internet, You then see people like Bernie and Warren and Gillibrand start parroting these lunatic opinions, but those people don't vote!
I'll tell you what, man.
You want to pander to people who don't vote?
Go do it, and you won't win.
And that's why you got crushed December 13th.
So we'll see how this plays out in November.
I'll leave it there.
Stick around.
Next segment's coming up at 1 p.m.
on this channel, and I will see you all then.
In an interview on Channel 4 in the UK, Richard Hatchett, who they say is the doctor leading efforts to find a vaccine for the coronavirus, says it is much more lethal than normal flu.
Quote, this is the most frightening disease I have ever encountered in my career.
Now, are these people fear mongering or are they being serious when they say this is going to get really bad?
It's really tough to know for sure.
You got a bunch of people saying, oh, calm down.
It's not gonna be a big deal.
And now, in what may be one of the weirdest turn of events, Democrats are twice as likely as Republicans to call the coronavirus an imminent threat.
Now, this video is not gonna be about politics, but I do wanna point out, Democrats, if you freak out over this and Trump supporters don't, guess who's going to vote in November?
This is bad news for Democrats if they think this is more serious than Trump supporters do, regardless of what's true or not.
Let's talk about the severity of the coronavirus.
I don't want people to freak out.
It's the last thing I ever want.
But it really does feel like there's a tug of war going on between people who are trying to claim it's not a big deal at all, and people trying to claim that it's a serious crisis.
When I saw that interview from Channel 4, I think it's fair to say, take this seriously.
A man was tasered after a fight over toilet paper breaks out in Big W. And I have a bunch of videos.
This is from Rita Panagi on Twitter.
A bunch of videos of people fighting in stores.
It seems like over toilet paper for the most part, because that's the craziest thing to me.
If people are going to fight, they apparently fight over toilet paper like crazy.
But this would show you that whether or not this is going to be as bad as some people are saying it is, the panic is real, and you should absolutely take this seriously.
I've stated this before, I'll say it again, forgive me, but it is important.
People wanted to rag on me for saying, pick up some emergency food supplies, go to the store and buy some, get your shopping done now.
Well, now you can see how bad it is.
But one of the more interesting things I've seen that I want to highlight, and we can talk a bit about the political ramifications once we get through this, It's a Twitter thread from Liz Specht.
Now, she says that she is an associate director of science and technology, supporting alternative proteins for a sustainable food culture at, uh, she has a UCSD PhD.
In her tweets, she says that she is a biologist, not an epidemiologist, but she makes some interesting points.
First, before I read this, This is going to be scary stuff.
I mean it.
And the last thing anyone should do is panic.
When you panic, you make your situation worse.
The best thing you can do is remain calm, strategize, and figure out what to do and how to do it.
But to give you the gist of what she says...
As the coronavirus cases increase, and as testing increases, and we realize how widespread this is, she actually thinks that by May, by the 5th of May, we'll see two million cases, I believe she's saying in the United States.
Yes, in the United States.
One million by the end of April.
So in two months, there could be a million people, which means we're looking at massive national spread, potentially global spread, which is why that other guy said it's the most terrifying disease, you know, he's ever seen.
The reason is, With Ebola and other extreme diseases that are terrifying with a really high mortality rate, they don't travel very far because of the mortality rate.
What's worrisome is diseases that have long incubation periods, like coronavirus, that can transmit while people are asymptomatic, like coronavirus, and have a decently high mortality rate of around 3 or so percent.
I mean, maybe more.
I mean, if you had Ebola that was silent and traveling around, that'd be freaky.
And then all of a sudden, two weeks later, everyone gets sick and just drops dead.
Yeah, that'd be freaky.
But with 3%, you have a mix of people who don't react, don't prepare, you have supply chain disruption, and then you have widespread infection rates.
But let me read to you what Liz says.
She tweets, I think most people aren't aware of the risk of systemic healthcare failure due to COVID-19 because they simply haven't run the numbers yet.
Let's talk math.
Let's conservatively assume that there are 2,000 current cases in the US today.
Let me actually make this a little bigger.
She says this is about eight times the number.
Excuse me.
Of confirmed lab-diagnosed cases.
We know there is substantial under-DX due to the lack of test kits.
I'll address implications later.
Under-overestimate.
We can expect that we'll continue to see a doubling of cases every 6 days.
This is a typical doubling time across several epidemiological studies.
Here I mean actual cases.
Confirmed cases may appear to rise faster in the short term due to new test kit rollouts.
We're looking at about 1 million U.S.
cases by the end of April, 2 million by May 5th, 4 million by May 11th, and so on.
Exponentials are hard to grasp, but this is how they go.
I'm going to stop here and just say, while many people are going to tell you to remain, you know, remain calm, nothing's going to happen.
Others will say the end is nigh.
Truth is always closer to the middle, but I will tell you at the very least, South by Southwest cancelled.
Facebook, you know, telling their employees, Amazon telling their employees, stay home.
Google I.O.
cancelled.
These are major conferences.
There are going to be major hiccups in the economy, in the supply chain.
It is happening, and I hope you have taken simple precautions to prepare for potential disruption, especially if what she is saying is true, and we do make it to millions of cases.
Look, I'm not gonna play any crazy games where I scream the end is and I go buy your gold.
I am gonna say take reasonable precautions.
Assuming this woman is who she says she is, says who she says she is, we're looking at a PhD biologist warning people that this could get really bad.
I don't know what else you can expect, but I will tell you this.
Don't let anyone shame you, and Vox.com, the left-wing Vox, that is not, it is not overreacting to prepare.
Let's read more.
She says as the healthcare system begins to saturate under this caseload, it will become increasingly hard to detect, track, and contain new transmission chains.
In absence of extreme interventions, this likely won't slow significantly until hitting 1% of susceptible population.
What does a caseload of this size mean for the healthcare system?
We'll examine just two factors, hospital beds and masks, among many, many other things that will be impacted.
The U.S.
has about 2.8 hospital beds per 1,000 people.
With a population of 330 million, this is 1 million beds.
At any given time, 65% of those beds are already occupied.
This leaves about 330,000 beds available nationwide, perhaps a bit fewer this time of the year with regular flu season.
Let's trust Italy's numbers and assume that about 10% of cases are serious enough to require hospitalization.
Keep in mind that for many patients, hospitalization lasts for weeks.
In other words, turnover will be very slow as beds fill with COVID-19 patients.
By this estimate, By about May 8th, all open hospital beds in the U.S.
will be filled.
This says nothing, of course, about whether these beds are suitable for isolation of patients with highly infectious virus.
If we are wrong by a factor of 2 regarding the fraction of severe cases, that only changes the timeline of bed saturation by 6 days in either direction.
If 20% of cases require hospitalization, we run out of beds by May 2nd.
If only 5% of cases require it, we can make it until May 14th.
2.5% gets us to May 20th.
This of course assumes that there is no uptick in demand for beds from other non-COVID causes, which seems like a dubious assumption.
As healthcare systems become increasingly burdened, prescription shortages, people with chronic conditions that are normally well-managed may find themselves slipping into severe states of medical distress, requiring intensive care and hospitalization.
But let's ignore that for now.
Alright, so that's beds, now masks.
Feds say we have a national stockpile of 12 million N95 masks and 30 million surgical masks.
There are about 18 million healthcare workers in the US.
Let's assume only 6 million healthcare workers are working on any given day.
She says this is likely an underestimate as most people work most days of the week.
But again, I'm playing conservative at every turn.
As COVID-19 cases saturate virtually every state and county, which seems likely to happen any day now, it will soon be irresponsible for all healthcare workers to not wear a mask.
These workers would burn through N95 stockpile in two days.
If each worker only got one mask per day.
One per day would be neither sanitary nor pragmatic.
Though this is indeed what we saw in Wuhan, with workers collapsing on their shift from dehydration because they were trying to avoid changing their PPE suits as they cannot be reused.
How quickly could we ramp up production of new masks?
Not very fast at all.
The vast majority are manufactured overseas, almost all in China.
Boy, was that a mistake!
Anyway, that was me by the way, not her.
Even when manufactured here in the U.S., the raw materials are predominantly from overseas, again, predominantly from China.
Keep in mind that all countries globally will be going through the exact same crisis and shortages simultaneously.
We can't force trade in our favor.
Now consider how these two factors, bed and mask shortages, compound each other's severity.
Full hospitals, few masks, workers running around between beds without proper PPE equals very bad mix.
Healthcare workers are already getting infected even with access to full PPE.
In the face of limitations this severe, it's only a matter of time.
Workers will start dropping from the workforce for weeks at a time, leading to a shortage of workers that then further compounds both issues above.
We could go on and on about thousands of factors, number of ventilators, or even simple things like saline drip bags.
You see where this is going.
Importantly, I cannot stress this enough, even if I'm wrong, even very wrong, about core assumptions like percentage of severe cases or current case number.
It only changes the timeline by days or weeks.
This is how exponential growth in an immunologically naive population works.
Undeserved panic does no one any good, but neither does ill-informed complacency.
It's wrong to assuage the public by saying only 2% will die.
People aren't adequately grasping the national and global systemic burden wrought by this swift moving of a disease.
She says, I'm an engineer.
This is what my mind does all day.
I run back of the envelope calculations to try and estimate order of magnitude impacts.
I've been on high alarm about this disease since January 19th, after reading clinical indicators in the first papers emerging from Wuhan.
Nothing in the last six weeks has dampened my alarm in the slightest.
To the contrary, we're seeing abject refusal of many countries to adequately respond or prepare.
Of course, some of these estimates will be wrong, even substantially wrong.
But I have no reason to think they'll be orders of magnitude wrong.
Even if your personal risk of death is very, very low, don't mock decisions like canceling events or closing workplaces as undue panic.
These measures are the bare minimum we should be doing to try and shift the peak, to slow the rise in cases so that the healthcare systems are less overwhelmed.
Each day that we can delay an extra case is a big win for the system.
And yes, you really should prepare to buckle down for a bit.
All services and supply chains will be impacted.
Why risk the stress of being ill-prepared?
Worst case, I'm massively wrong, and you now have a huge bag of rice and black beans to burn through over the next few months, and enough robotism to trip out.
Don't say that, Liz!
You have enough Robitussin to make sure that if you get a cold in the next coming months, you'll be okay, you'll take care of your cough, and you'll have rice and beans for taco night.
Please, don't make jokes about that.
Especially not on the internet.
They'll come for you.
One more thought.
You've probably seen multiple respected epidemiologists have estimated that 20-70% of the world will be infected within the next year.
If you use 6-day doubling rate I mentioned above, we land at 2-6 billion infected by sometime in July of this year.
I gotta say, man, now it's getting freaky.
What she's saying is really starting to freak me out.
She goes on to say, obviously, I think the doubling time will start to slow once a sizable fraction of the population has been infected, simply because of herd immunity in a smaller susceptible population.
But take the scenarios above, full beds, no PPE, at just 1% of the US population infected, and stretch them out over a couple extra months.
This timeline roughly fits with consensus endgame numbers from these highly esteemed epidemiologists.
Again, we're talking about discrepancies of mere days or weeks, one direction or another, but not disagreements in the overall magnitude of the challenge.
This is not some hypothetical fear-mongering worst-case scenario, this is reality, as far as anyone can tell with the current available data.
That's all for now.
Standard disclaimers apply.
I'm a PhD biologist, but not an epidemiologist.
Thoughts my own, yadda yadda, stay safe out there.
Addendum.
To anyone who found this useful or interesting, highly recommend you follow TRVB, who actually does modeling and forecasting for a living.
This thread is a great place to start.
As of right now, apparently there is a... It's hitting governments.
I'm not an expert.
Of course I'm not.
I'm a guy on the internet complaining about his feelings.
I can't tell you how bad this will really be, or what you should do, other than what I would do for myself.
And I'll tell you what I did.
I ordered emergency food a long, long time ago.
Because tornadoes happen.
Hurricanes happen.
Earthquakes happen.
Floods happen.
And I think it's smart for you to do the same thing, not just for the coronavirus, for just yourself in general.
Now, I have done promos in the past.
I'm not going to do that today because I'm completely honest when I say I don't like doing it, but there are things you can do.
So just Google search emergency food if you think it's something you need.
If you haven't already, calmly go do your routine shopping.
Grab an extra bag of rice if it's available.
The last thing you or anyone should do is panic buy anything.
These videos of people fighting over toilet paper is disturbing.
You're not... That's ridiculous.
However...
This story from The Guardian.
It has arrived.
Italian Democratic Party leader announces he has coronavirus in a video.
A PhD biologist tweeted, you should prepare to bunker down.
I'm going to take her word for it.
Not just hers, but a lot of people talking about the severity.
Someone going on an interview and saying this is the worst thing they may have ever seen.
People were joking about a pandemic hitting in the 2020s.
Well, we're here.
I don't know if it'll be the Spanish flu of 1918.
I don't want to over, you know, speculate.
But think about the... I call this the coronavirus wager.
If you go out and over-prepare right now, and there is no alarm and everything dies down very quickly, you're fine and safe.
If you over-prepare and the virus does hit everyone hard, you are fine and safe.
If you do nothing, and it turns out nothing happens, you're fine and safe.
But if you do nothing and it turns out this is serious, you are in trouble.
The safest bet you can make is to prepare, to take care of yourself, your friends and your family.
It has hit the Iranian government.
Around 10% of their members of parliament have contracted the virus.
Many officials in the government have died.
We're now seeing Italy.
My understanding is right now in Italy, there is no safe zone.
It's all infected and they're trying to shut things down.
What you need to understand, When people look at the number and they say, what, 3% mortality rate?
That's nothing.
I have a 97% chance of survival.
It's not about that.
It's about 100 people getting it, and 3 people dying.
It's about 100,000 people getting it, and 3,000 people dying.
And it's about rapid spread, which could get everywhere, and then lots of people will die.
You need to think about how this scales up and how many people could be impacted by how bad this could get.
People in government.
Remember, 3% is indiscriminate.
You will see people, officials, you will see agencies, bureaus.
That is a decently high number.
As this spreads around and impacts governments and the rest of the world, the more serious issue will be supply chain disruption.
I've said it a million times, I will say it now.
Italian Democratic Party leader announces he has the virus.
I'm stressing that again, because it will hit government.
And if you don't take care of yourself, don't be surprised when you are left high and dry.
You can laugh all day and night about how you were the smart one who didn't go out and rush.
But in the end, you're the grasshopper in the story of The Grasshopper and the Ants.
While the ants worked hard and prepared to protect themselves when winter came, you danced around playing your fiddle.
And then when the time came and winter hit, you knocked on their door begging for food, and they said, buzz off.
Don't be that person.
Because like Liz said, what's it, what's it, Liz specked, you'll have, you'll have rice and beans to last you for months.
The way I put it, taco night is awesome, and you're gonna have a whole lot of taco night, and I am totally down for that.
I'm not telling you to buy 50 pounds of rice and beans.
That would be ridiculous and it would spoil.
It's a bad idea.
Don't do it.
I'm telling you get a single bag and a thing, you know, a couple cans of beans and we might get hit by this.
If it's as bad as Liz is saying, which I hope it isn't.
Six billion people infected by July?
That's gotta sound crazy, right?
Look, it may be.
It may be the case.
As long as you don't panic, then we're all good.
As long as you just do what you gotta do, you know, get your firewood ready, make sure you've got standard resources, your first aid kit stocked up.
Let me bring this back home.
I mentioned this the other day.
There was a tornado in Nashville.
Some people lost their lives.
Homes were destroyed.
But the people who were there, who may have seen the coronavirus and prepared in certain ways, are much better off because of this, because of that fear, after a tornado.
Whether or not you care about the coronavirus, I will just say this one last time.
Tornadoes happen.
No matter what you think is in front of you, it is always smart to do right by yourself, and get ready for any potential disaster.
It was New York City when Hurricane Sandy hit, and no one expected it.
They think I'm in a city, I'm safe, it'll never happen to me, and then it did.
I'll leave it there, stick around.
Next segment will be at 4pm, youtube.com slash timcast, and I will see you there.
Recently we learned that several employees of the Young Turks were trying to form a union.
Now most of you know who the Young Turks are.
They're the progressive YouTube political commentary and news channel.
And they purport, they claim to support unions.
Yeah, when it came to their office, Cenk Uygur apparently pushed back, refused to recognize them, and then it even escalated.
Another story came out where apparently he was yelling at one of the employees who was laughing, threw some papers on the ground in a rage, and now we're hearing it's getting dirtier.
The Young Turks union fight gets nastier with charges of retaliatory firing and withholding raises from March 5th.
Now, the interesting thing is, Cenk Uygur tried claiming that it was a political hit job.
They were coming after him with these union attempts because he was running for office.
Well, the good news is, Cenk Uygur lost his attempt at running for CA25, Katie Hill's old seat.
He came in fourth place.
So this argument now no longer stands.
Let me tell you the reality.
These people don't care about anything other than winning.
They have no principles.
They do not believe in unions.
They don't care about healthcare.
They want to win.
Win.
That's it.
And that's why, when it comes to their house, and their employees say, pay up, we want better standards, they say no.
If they really believed in it, they would say, let's talk.
Let's read the story from In These Times.
They say, a contentious union campaign by the staff of the, I'm doing air quotes here, progressive news network, the Young Turks, is growing even more combative.
Today, the union filed two separate unfair labor practice charges, alleging that the company and its CEO, the popular liberal media figure Cenk Uygur, Withheld wage increases and bonuses from employees as a result of a union drive, and that they fired an employee as retaliation for union activity, charges that Uyghur denies.
On February 12th, about 15 TYT employees announced their intention to unionize with IATSE.
They expected to gain voluntary recognition from their famously liberal employer through a simple check of union cards, but were spurned.
The company insisted on holding a secret ballot election at work in order to recognize the union, a tactic typically considered to be anti-union.
Union.
Uygur disputed this, telling in these times that, quote, voluntary recognition means any
recognition process outside of an NLRB election.
But card check is generally understood to be what unions mean by voluntary recognition.
An intense staff meeting held the same day.
Uygur urged staffers not to unionize.
Well, that's weird.
Saying a union would be unsustainable given TYT's perilous financial position.
Uygur's position on the union has been widely criticized as hypocritical.
As in, also right now I'm criticizing him.
I'm calling him a hypocrite.
Coming from a man who made his name as a champion of progressive causes, TYT bills itself as the largest online news show in the world, with more than 200 million views per month in their network, mind you.
Uyghur, who at the time was running for Congress in California's 25th district, also suggested that the union fight was politically motivated, since IATSE was endorsing one of his opponents in the race.
On Tuesday, Uyghur lost the race, coming in fourth with about 5% of the vote.
Let me just say, maybe this should be a wake-up call to the Young Turks and progressives That when some people are trying to fight for a union and the company resists, it's not because they're evil and they're trying to pocket the profits.
Maybe it's because they can't actually sustain a union.
Now, in my opinion, I think his reaction to this is BS.
And if you want to be in a union and give your money away to someone else for membership dues with no guarantee of anything in return, by all means, do it with my blessing.
I don't care.
If you think you're going to come to me and you're going to say that we have to get money but there's no money to get, you're not getting the money!
So, calm down.
No, I think what we're really seeing is hypocrisy.
He just didn't want to deal with it.
Let's read on.
An employee of TYT involved in the union effort, who asked to remain anonymous out of fear of retaliation, said that the workers' annual discretionary raises, which represent a significant amount of money in a workplace where pay is already low, were scheduled to go into effect at the same time the union drive was announced.
Shortly afterwards, according to the worker, employees involved in the union drive were told that they were going to have to delay our raises and bonuses until the union stuff got sorted out.
And there it is!
The worker said that employees who are not in the proposed collective bargaining unit did get their raises.
Isn't that funny?
Why am I not surprised?
These people do not have principles, man!
One unfair labor practice charge filed to the National Labor Relations Board by IATSE today says that TYT is guilty of withholding predetermined wage increases and bonuses in response to a union's demand for voluntary recognition.
Uyghur said that the company was simply maintaining the status quo while the union drive was active.
Frankly, we can't win.
Because we all know that if we gave the raises, IATSE would be accusing us of bribing employees not to support the union, he said.
If IATSE doesn't object to TYT giving the raises, we would be more than happy to do so.
Apparently, only after a complaint was filed, though.
Sorry, buddy.
I'm not buying it.
Listen.
I don't trust the IATSE.
But how are you going to be their champion?
That's your shtick, right?
Congratulations.
They've now come for you.
You reap what you have sown.
Why should this be so difficult?
Just bend the knee, young Turks.
The employee fired today was Jako- Oh, whoa, whoa.
The employee fired today was Jacory Palmer, a technical director who occasionally appeared on the show as well.
Palmer said that he was the employee who was reprimanded by UGR for smiling during the meeting when the union was first announced, an incident reported by the Huffington Post.
His first day back acting as the head of the company after his congressional campaign ended, he fired me with no clear explanation.
I have no doubt that this was in connection to my co-workers and I organizing for a voice at work.
It was meant not only to remove a perceived troublemaker, but also as a warning shot to my co-workers without a doubt, this was retaliatory.
Throughout my time at TYT, I had made myself known as someone unafraid to vocalize injustices, especially in cases for fair treatment of my co-workers.
I have tremendous respect for that.
I found management very abrasive each time I tried to voice concerns my co-workers had brought to my attention.
Each time I hoped their progressive politics would govern their response, and each time I was wrong.
Uyghur said the company had, quote, no knowledge regarding the employee's support for the union or lack thereof, and that the firing was justified.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Wasn't this the guy who was smiling when the union thing was going on and then you fired him?
TYT's practice is to refrain from sharing details regarding personnel matters.
However, since IATSE has accused us of wrongdoing, We will respond in this case.
Uyghur said, there was an employee fired this week for violating the company's anti-harassment
policy.
TYT's ongoing engagement with this employee and disciplinary warnings regarding his misconduct
date back several months, predating any communications from the union.
Recently, we received several new complaints regarding the employee's behavior from that
former employee's colleagues.
The complaints were fully investigated and the company took appropriate action.
Aww.
Are you trying to say that this guy was exploiting the union system and bad press to hurt your company?
Well, guess what?
You've been cheering for this kind of stuff for a long time.
In response, Palmer said, all of the incidents they are referring to are incidents of me speaking up for my co-workers about injustice in the workplace.
The uproar over the raises and the dismissal has only added to the level of dissatisfaction inside TYT.
Employees are also upset that the company is trying to reduce the size of the bargaining unit.
Ugar said the company's request was reasonable and customary, but the TYT worker calls the idea of taking anyone out of the proposed union a no-go for us.
The events of this week have only strengthened the resolve of the employees to win a union.
If the company is going to punish us, the TYT worker said, that just underscores why it's important for us to organize.
And to me it underscores that you're all hypocrites for working for a company that pretends to support union values while fighting against you, and you'd actually consider staying there after all of this happened.
Man, I have zero- I have no sympathy- You got fired?
Good.
I don't care.
I have no sympathy for you.
While I will respect you standing up for what you believe in, I've done the same thing.
I've had bad bosses, I've filed complaints, and I've won as well.
You want to play games?
I will play back and I will use the rules and make sure we get what's fair.
That's called justice.
But I'll tell you this.
If you work for a company that espouses all of these values about protecting unions and union rights and union workers, and then when you speak up, they tell you to shove off, The fact that you would want to stay there speaks... it says a lot.
You know what I'd say?
If I worked for a company because they told me the fight here is the fight for these values, and then I saw them betray those values, I would say, I'm out.
I'd walk away.
I would quit.
Why would you fight to stay a part of an organization that is lying about what it believes in, is manipulating people into claiming they support these values, and in the end they do not?
Why would you do that?
Walk out.
Each and every one of these people should quit on the spot.
Or is the money too good?
What's more important to you, your money or your principles?
Because I'll tell you what.
I would sleep on a park bench before I would sell out my principles.
And if I thought That my boss was lying about what he said on his show to his 200 million people per month.
I would give him the middle finger and I'd go out and I'd make a video saying these people are liars.
I'm out.
I will sacrifice the income.
It's not worth it.
Apparently to these people it is.
We'll see how it plays out.
But I don't have any respect for anybody who's going to sit there and claim they're being mean to us and trying to shut down our union, but they're a progressive outlet.
Okay, I'll tell you what.
If you stay, then I fully expect you to support, from this point on, organizations that call for busting unions.
If you want to stay an employee of an organization that is going to bust a union, I hope then you express your opinion of why it's a good thing to work for that company.
Or is it all about the paycheck?
As I said, these people have no principles.
It's simple.
You say, wow, I just found out the guy claiming to be a progressive who wanted to run for office isn't.
He's just another guy, you know, another capitalist, as they would say.
If that's the case, walk away, bro.
What's the problem?
Nah, it's all about money for everybody, isn't it?
I'll leave it there.
Stick around.
I got a couple more segments coming up in a few minutes, and I will see you all shortly.
Oh boy, does this one go back and boy, does it get crazy.
Remember when J.K.
Rowling, you know, she's a lady who wrote Harry Potter.
Remember when she tweeted in support of this woman?
She said something about, you know, biological gender being real.
It was basically defending a woman whose contract wasn't renewed because she expressed her opinion about women's rights on Twitter.
And it was this whole debate over transgender rights.
Well, anyway, J.K.
Rowling got, I'm doing air quotes here, cancelled.
I mean, she's still super wealthy.
And active, you know, somewhat politically.
I mean culturally.
But the woke crowd went after her.
And they went after her hard.
Now, I gotta be fair to everybody here.
J.K.
Rowling's been getting slammed by basically everybody for the longest time for pandering to these people and retconning the Harry Potter universe to cater to their fringe political ideology.
Well, finally, J.K.
Rowling said, I can takes no more, and she tweeted in defense of a woman who was advocating for biological females.
In response to this, J.K.
Rowling got harassed so bad, apparently, and threats even, that she is now building massive security gates at her home due to the threats.
This is what you get when you speak up against the horde, the raging mob of Twitter.
They have no principles, no integrity.
They don't care about you.
They don't care about any ideals.
They will just say what needs to be said because they are a hornet's nest.
I have seen these Twitter feminists.
They have 100 plus thousand followers, say all this stupid nonsense, and then one day accidentally step over the line and get swarmed themselves and just flip their opinion like a switch.
Because they don't have one.
They're just... It's just word vomit.
Let's read about J.K.
Rowling's Security Gates.
Rowling is installing security gates at her $2 million home in Perthshire as part of a revamp of her Scottish estates.
The author had plans approved to erect a pair of 1.2 meter high gates outside Killychessie Estate near Aberfeldy.
The property already has guards stationed 24 hours a day.
Rowling, 54, became the target of transgender activists in December for defending a researcher sacked for saying men cannot change into women.
The Harry Potter writer was branded a TERF, a derogatory term meaning trans-exclusionary radical feminist.
She has also faced a backlash for supporting the anti-independence campaign in Scotland.
She moved with her family from Edinburgh to Kilchessie in 2015.
The 162-acre estate, which she bought in 2001, has two halls, a dining room, a drawing room?
A morning room, seven bedrooms, and a swimming pool.
There is also a two-bedroom extension on the west wing and a swimming pool covered with copper domes.
Rowling has also received permission to spruce up her $2 million home in the city with a new kitchen, scullery, boot room, and pantry.
Wow!
I would like a boot room.
Is a boot room where you put your boots?
Anyway, let's get serious.
I don't know if they're exactly saying this is because of the threats and attacks she got.
I'm gonna go ahead and assume that though.
Alright, she's gonna do 1.2 meter high gates.
It's not particularly large, but she's putting up gates in front of her home, and they're insinuating it's because of the disputes on Twitter.
I think it's fair to say.
After all the harassment and threats, she probably considered her security options, and she went for a light approach.
1.2 is not particularly high at all.
But the bigger issue here is not whether or not she faces real credible threats, but the harassment people endure and the expenses they pay to do it.
Mind you, 1.2 meters high is what, like four feet or so.
So not a really big deal, to be honest.
But, I thought it was interesting because it does highlight the fringe lunatics on the internet and how they can actually drive you to take some minor precautions.
Granted, I think the average person can hop over whatever she's building.
I don't know, unless they're spiked or something.
They're 1.2 meter high gates, not particularly high anyway.
But I wanted to highlight something else I thought was interesting.
Johnny Depp revealed reason J.K.
Rowling defended him from Amber Heard's abuse allegations.
J.K.
Rowling has been playing with fire for a long time.
She has been courting the woke insanity by pandering to these people.
But there have been a few moments of clarity, I would say.
Johnny Depp, as we now know, was a victim of abuse from Amber Heard, and people threw him under the bus.
They were trying to get him fired from his role in the Grindelwald movie, the Harry Potter film.
Apparently they did get him fired from Pirates of the Caribbean.
I'm surprised they're still making Pirates of the Caribbean, but sure, fine, you know, whatever.
I'll probably go see it if they make another one, whatever.
I don't know, actually, maybe not.
But anyway, I digress.
They wanted to get him fired from the job on the Harry Potter film, The Crimes of Grindelwald, and J.K.
Rowling said no, based on what they viewed, and I think it's probably because Johnny Depp had recordings and he proved it and she stood by him.
In the face of mounting public pressure, J.K.
Rowling said no way and stood in defense of Johnny Depp.
I respect that tremendously.
It's a bummer that she's got to put up gates or whatever around her house now because people are sending her these messages.
I will say, I got to be fair, 1.2 meters height, not a big deal.
So it might not be the most extreme thing ever.
But I do think it's still interesting.
And I want to read this story as well about Johnny Depp.
So this is from International Business Times, that report.
Johnny Depp revealed the reason J.K.
Rowling defended him from Amber Heard's abuse allegations.
Depp faced intense backlash and scrutiny after his ex-wife accused him of being violent and abusive.
Disney also dropped him from Pirates of the Caribbean.
However, there are a few people who stood by him.
The Harry Potter author showed her support to Depp by casting him in her movie Fantastic Beasts.
We revisited why Rowling defended Depp because Twitter users have been praising her lately for choosing to support the Minamata actor who turned out to be the actual victim after Herd confessed in an audio recording that she hit him and she started their fights.
Well, how about that?
In a statement, Rowling wrote that based on their understanding of the circumstances, she and the filmmakers were not only comfortable in sticking with the original casting, but genuinely happy to have Depp play a major character in the flick.
The move was criticized, but Depp said Rowling made such a decision because she knew the truth.
I'll be honest with you.
I felt bad for JK having to field all these various feelings from people out there.
I felt bad that she had to take that, Depp told Entertainment Weekly about the criticisms Rowling received after casting him.
The fact remains I was falsely accused, which is why I'm suing the Sun newspaper for defamation for repeating false accusations.
JK has seen the evidence and therefore knows I was falsely accused, and that's why she has publicly supported me.
She doesn't take things lightly.
She would not stand up if she didn't know the truth, so that's really it.
Just like Rowling, Rowling, Rowling, Paul Bettany also defended Depp publicly and he was mocked by social media users.
The Avengers Age of Ultron actor called Depp the sweetest, kindest, gentlest man he has ever known.
Several urged him to delete the tweet, but the actor didn't remove it.
Bravo, good sir!
Bravo!
Four years later, many are still commenting on Bettany's post, but this time, they're showing their support for Depp.
All of the people who threw him under the bus, and it was Bettany, J.K.
Rowling that stood by him, and now he's actually going after the fake news.
Anybody willing to stand up for their friends, their family, for what they believe in, you have my respect.
Even if I disagree with you on your causes, you have to You have to be strong and defend what you really believe.
It's when you have no spine and when you have no principles.
Those are the things that really, really get me angry.
The people who attacked Depp.
They have no principles.
They don't care.
They're just the online mob.
The people who attacked J.K.
Rowling over her tweet about, you know, that woman who got... It wasn't that she was fired.
Her contract wasn't being renewed.
These people have no principles.
They are cannibalistic humanoid underground dwellers.
Did I get it right?
They're freaky little golems from the Lord of the Rings, and they're swarming around, desperate to feel.
They're just devoid of emotion or empathy, and they want to cause suffering.
It's all they do.
They don't care to help anybody.
That's why they get offended on your behalf.
These people are lunatics.
So I'll throw out my respect to Rowling, to Johnny Depp himself for standing up and fighting his way through this, for Paul Bettany to actually defend him.
I say, according to a recent report, Depp might reprise his role as Captain Jack Sparrow in Pirates of the Caribbean.
Some executives are reportedly lobbying for his return due to the overwhelming support from the public in his favor, and I'll tell you this.
If Johnny Depp does come back for Pirates at this point, I'll go see it.
I'll definitely go see it.
He will have my support.
This man was falsely accused, he was injured by this woman, and everyone just wanted to see him burn.
He did nothing wrong.
Could you imagine what your life would be like to have everything thrown upside down by some vindictive lunatic who just wants to cause pain?
Guess what?
That's what these weird mob SJW leftists are on Twitter.
The same thing that happened to Johnny Depp.
The accusations, the attacks, the smears, the canceling attempts.
And actually work are the same thing they did to J.K.
Rowling.
So I'll tell you this.
I wouldn't be surprised if the targeting of J.K.
Rowling was the vultures lying in wait.
They were mad that she came to his defense because these people are just demonic fringe creatures lurking in the shadows.
They don't participate in real life.
It is a horde of lunacy.
They went after Johnny Depp and she defended him.
And you know what happens then?
They turn and they look and they growl with their shrieky demon grins.
Maybe I'm giving them too much credit by calling them demons because demons kind of cool.
Nah, they're like freaky little golem creatures in loincloths skulking around the internet.
I'll tell you what, man.
I look forward to seeing any future movies with Johnny Depp.
I'm glad to see that he's made his way out of this.
I hope J.K.
Rowling can remain safe for all of the pandering she has done.
I can say yes to an extent.
She will reap what she has sown.
But I wouldn't... Look.
She's gonna do the right thing.
If she's gonna defend somebody who's fired, if she's gonna defend Johnny Depp, I think she's doing the right thing, and I will always encourage doing the right thing, and I will always call out the lunatics who are trying to drag people down, shut them down, end their lives, etc.
So, you know what, man?
I rag on Pirates of the Caribbean a couple times because it's like they've done so many of them, but you know what?
For Johnny, I'll go see one more.
I'll go see one more.
Actually, the last one was pretty good.
I gotta be honest.
I think the ones in between... The first one was great.
Started to go downhill from there.
The last one was actually the second best, in my opinion.
So, we'll see how it plays out.
Stick around.
I got one more segment coming up in a few minutes, and I will see you all shortly.
So Bill Maher has some choice words for the feminist writer who essentially got Chris Matthews fired.
But let's stop and I'll give you the full context.
See, Chris Matthews had been at MSNBC I think for like 20 years.
He is a liberal commentator and he's 74 years old.
Kind of an old dude with old sensibilities.
In fact, he probably says things that are borderline inappropriate.
Well, he just lost his job because, I'm gonna do air quotes here, he resigned amid controversies around Bernie Sanders and some things he had said to some women.
One of those women is named, I believe her name is, was it Laura Bassett?
Laura Bassett.
Now apparently, she was going on his show or something, and she was getting her makeup done, and Chris Matthews said something to the effect of, why haven't I fallen in love with you yet?
So an old guy made a passive comment that's probably inappropriate in the workplace.
Does that warrant him losing his job or having an op-ed directed his way to destroy his life?
Probably not, but that's what happened anyway.
In response to this, you know, Chris Matthews apologizes, resigns.
He's gone.
The left loves eating itself.
Bill Maher has come out and mocked the journalist.
Dare I say, rightly so, good sir.
Let's read the story from the Daily Mail to see the latest on what's happening.
Bill Maher mocks GQ journalist who accused his friend Chris Matthews of gross and sexist comments as he calls her Rosa Parks and says married guys just want to flirt for two seconds.
Bill Maher on Friday came to the defense of Chris Matthews and mocked the female journalist who accused the ex-MSNB host of flirting with her, sarcastically comparing her to civil rights hero Rosa Parks.
Matthews departed the cable network after journalist Laura Bassett named him in an article for GQ magazine as the famous television host who made suggestive comments to her before she appeared on his show in 2017.
Mar, the host of HBO's Realtime, said that he will miss Matthews, who bid farewell to viewers on his Nightly Hardball program on Monday after decades on air.
He then slammed Matthews' former employer, MSNBC, for yielding to cancel culture, which Mar called a cancer on progressivism.
Mar said, MSNBC used to run this thing.
This is who we are.
Well, I didn't like who you were this week, and I don't think a lot of people who work there like this either.
And I think this cancel culture is a cancer on progressivism.
And it's not the first time he's said it.
Liberals always have to fight a two-front war.
Republicans only have to fight the Democrats.
Democrats have to fight the Republicans and each other.
Mar then defended Matthews for a series of gaffes for which he was criticized in recent weeks.
Days before resigning, Matthews made some dumb comments.
I'll just say that.
I think it's fair to point out the dude says dumb things.
But to get fired over this was suspect.
So what they highlight here in the Daily Mail article is that Matthews He claimed that Bernie Sanders winning in some primaries was, in Nevada basically, was akin to the invasion of France in 1940.
Calm down, buddy.
Calm down.
You know, you're getting a bit out there.
But is it the end of the world?
No.
Here's the funny thing.
As soon as he did that, the progressive woke lunatics came out to play.
And they unleashed the hounds, one of which was Laura Bassett, who said, he's the evil man who said nasty things to me about him wanting to fall in love with me.
You know, it reminds me of this episode of American Dad.
Have you ever seen it?
Where, uh, if you're not familiar with the show, I love American Dad, good show.
Seth MacFarlane, good job.
Stan is the dad, Francine's the wife, and Francine ends up getting a job at the CIA where Stan works, and all of the people who work there flirt with each other as a joke, for fun.
Not because they're really engaging in anything, it's just flirty banter.
And then Francine gets a job there and Stan freaks out like, oh no, what if she finds out?
But the reason I bring this up is not because it's like a direct analogy or a relation, it's just interesting to see the contrast between a show that portrays flirting as mindless fun that everyone can partake in, men and women alike, yet in the real world, heavens, if you tell the woman she's beautiful and she looks stunning today, she'll say, I can't work now, he said a compliment to me, oh no.
It's mind-numbing to me.
You don't work there.
You don't have to come back.
The dude said something to you.
So what?
Sticks and stones, man.
I'm sorry, the delicate flower is withering because of the nasty words of the old man.
Viewers were angered over this.
Okay, so they say, on his HBO show Friday, Marr said Matthews should not have made the analogy.
Though he sarcastically remarked, I hope the victim's got some closure.
Matthews was also criticized for mixing up the names of two African-Americans, Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina and Jamie Harrison, a Democrat who was running against incumbent Lindsey Graham.
Let's see.
The Real Time host also slammed the criticisms of Matthews after his controversial exchange with Warren following her February 25th Democratic presidential debate in Charleston.
Chris Matthews demands to know why Warren believes the women who accused Bloomberg of telling her to kill her unborn child.
You're confident of your accusation.
During the interview, Matthews challenged Warren over her assertion that Michael Bloomberg, the billionaire media mogul, mistreated a female employee by saying, you know, kill her on-board child.
Bloo- uh, yeah, okay, we don't need to know who Bloomberg is, we get it.
So he said, uh, you believe he's lying, Matthew's asked of Warren of Bloomberg's denial.
I believe the woman, which means he's not telling the truth.
Oh, here we go, how fun.
And why would he lie, Matthew said, just to protect himself?
Yeah, and why would she lie?
I just want to make sure you're clear about this, Matthew said.
That was so tepid, he didn't even say, it's not like he came out and said, she's lying, I trust the man.
He said, so why do you, why did he lie, to protect himself?
Right, that's just a regular question.
Remember when journalists used to ask questions not because they believed, but because they were providing an opportunity to say, can you explain this?
Writing in GQ, Bassett said that it was this exchange between Matthews and Warren that prompted her to identify Matthews as the man who was gross and inappropriate with her.
Mar said Bassett and others overreacted to the Matthews-Warren exchange, mockingly saying that the MSNBC host was mean to the senator.
During the Friday show, Mar then described what Bassett said Matthews told her in 2017 before appearing on his program.
"'Why haven't I fallen in love with you yet?' Bassett says Matthews told her.
"'Keep putting makeup on her.
I'll fall in love with her,' Matthews is said to have told the makeup artist who was working on Bassett.
On another occasion, Matthews is said to have told Bassett in the makeup room, make sure you wipe this makeup off her face after the show.
We don't make her up so some guy at a bar can look at her like this.
And what does that even mean?
Who cares?
Morrow said Matthews said some things that are kind of creepy to women.
You know, I just, guys are married for a million years.
They just want to flirt for two seconds.
He said to somebody, Laura Bassett, four years ago, she's in makeup, he said, why haven't I fallen in love with you yet?
Yes, it's creepy.
She said, I was afraid to name him at the time out of fear of retaliation.
I'm not afraid anymore.
Thank you, Rosa Parks.
No, thank you, Bill Maher.
I appreciate you calling these people out.
I mean, Jesus effing Christ.
I guess my question is, do you wonder how Democrats lose?
No, I don't wonder.
I get it.
How many people who are watching Mar get it too?
You know what?
I don't know what else to tell you, man.
I can appre... Listen.
The way... Bill Maher might be one of the last tough liberals that exists.
Period.
Because so many of them just bend the knee and screech and cower in fear for these people.
Bill Maher don't... You don't care.
Now, has he said stupid things?
You betcha.
Bill Maher says a lot of dumb things.
I'm sure he recognizes that he's the smartest person in the world.
I'm sure... You know, he pointed out... He once said we need a recession.
To deal with Trump.
And people slammed him heavily for it.
And then he was like, yeah, people are mad, but so what?
Whatever.
I actually respect that.
I think it was a dumb thing.
But, you know, look, I got no problem if he came out and said, maybe it was a little harsh.
You know, I'll do better.
Whatever.
Fine.
I don't expect him to come and apologize.
I don't expect him to lose his job.
I expect people like me to say, Bill, that was stupid.
And for him to say, yeah, well, whatever.
What do you want him to do about it?
OK, that's fine by me.
I get it.
I actually respect when someone refuses to bend the knee.
Now, if you say something bad, I don't like it.
We can still talk.
We can still get along.
I don't need you to bend to my whim.
But for these people, you have to.
And that's why Chris Matthews lost his job.
Rosa Parks, a historic... They then go on to explain Rosa Parks because the British outlet.
I'm not going to explain to you who she is.
One of Mar's guests, Caitlin Flanagan, a noted critic of the Me Too movement, criticized Bassett saying, how fragile can one woman be?
Ugh, cringe.
Mar then joked, is Bassett a compliment victim or a compliment survivor?
Ah, I'm loving it!
Bill Maher, keep it coming.
Bassett first wrote of being made to feel uncomfortable by a prominent host back in 2017.
At the time, though, she didn't name Matthews.
Again, Matthews was never my boss.
I'm pretty sure that behavior doesn't rise to the level of illegal sexual harassment, Bassett wrote in GQ.
But it undermined my ability to do my job well.
If you can't work because someone said a flirty line to you, you do not belong in this industry.
Because on Twitter, I assure you, people are going to post substantially worse things about you, Bill Maher will say worse things about you, and now you've drawn the ire of any self-respecting individual who thinks you stepped on the line because you're a dainty, delicate snowflake who can't handle minor comments.
Bassett began her onslaught by highlighting the well-documented allegations against the host.
Look, I don't care.
I really, really don't.
Look, if you're gonna get bent out of shape about this, I don't know what to tell you.
You gotta choose your battles.
You chose wrong.
Now, the guy got fired.
Congratulations, you win.
But you really do gotta choose your battles.
And if you can't handle some stupid words from somebody, could you imagine if Chris Matthews called her ugly?
So I'll give this credit to Matthews for resigning, and I'll give the credit to Bill Maher.
I will absolutely stand by my defense of Maher when he calls these people out, and I hope you agree with it too.
Because here's what we can agree on.
Bill Maher's got Trump derangement syndrome.
He's got it bad.
Bill Maher has said some dumb things like calling for a recession, but Bill Maher absolutely pushes back on the crazy people who are dominating the left.
And hey, I agree with him and I respect him for doing it.
I don't need to agree with you on policy.
I don't need to think you're the smartest person in the world.
I think what we need to agree on is being a mature adult who can handle mean words, being a mature adult who is responsible to ourselves, And for that, I can respect Bill Maher in this regard.
