Bernie Sanders Far Left Revolution has Already Failed, Democrats Keep Losing Because Of Their Bubble
Bernie Sanders Far Left Revolution has Already Failed, Democrats Keep Losing Because Of Their Bubble. Bernie Sanders, the far left, socialists, and even many establishment Democrats seem to be trapped in an echo chamber so bad that they can't figure out why they keep losing.Democrats and progressives keep losing to Republicans for a lot of reasons the first of which is an inability to actually reach regular people.A left wing politician from Sweden recently called out Sanders campaign as being too far left and have no "regular people"This is what many of us have been saying for a while and because they refuse to accept reality they will end up losing to Donald Trump and the republicans every single time.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
It's starting to look like Bernie Sanders' far-left revolution has failed.
He is tanking in the polls.
Joe Biden is now skyrocketing the polls, and the 538 prediction model has Joe Biden with a 94% chance to win the Democratic nomination.
Now, take it all with a grain of salt, because polls can and have been wrong, and prediction models, I don't even know what they're worth, because I flip back and forth all day and night.
But Bernie Sanders, for a brief period, was the frontrunner, and the progressives thought they were going to win.
You can actually see the gradual meltdown in the faces of some progressive pundits as they start to realize they're losing.
Which brings me to why they keep losing.
In an op-ed today for the New York Times, one of the arguments put forward is that they are stuck in a bubble.
They have crafted a narrative with misleading questions and polls to fluff themselves up to make it seem like they're doing better than they really are.
And you can see this when you look at the meltdown of the Young Turks.
On Super Tuesday, they were convinced.
Cenk Uygur said, this is it.
We're going to win.
I'm so excited.
Convincing himself they were going to win.
And as the day went on and Joe Biden started to win, the shock was In fact, at one point, the Young Turks host was nearly in tears.
At least, to me, it seemed like he was about to cry.
What we're seeing now from progressives is claims that the Super Tuesday primary was rigged.
And I don't mean rigged in the sense that the DNC uses their crony establishment connections to prop up their friends and push down those they don't like.
I'm talking about they're actually arguing the exit polls don't match the hard votes.
This can't be right!
How is this possible?
Well, it's possible that Bernie Sanders is a 78-year-old socialist who just had a heart attack, and Americans don't want socialism.
It's also possible that Bernie Sanders is so far left that even the Scandinavian countries he's praised as an example of what he wants have rejected him.
Not kidding.
Denmark in the past has said, no, Bernie, we're not socialists, we're social democracies.
And recently, the ruling party of Sweden said that Bernie Sanders was far left, and in an event, there were no regular people.
Because Bernie Sanders is trapped in bubble world along with the rest of these far left activists.
When we look at voter enthusiasm, a poll shows that older people are favoring Joe Biden.
They're excited.
But younger people are upset by Biden and they want Bernie Sanders.
The problem is young people don't vote.
Young people don't work and young people aren't running the economy for the most part.
It's working class middle Americans who are doing this.
And guess what?
It turns out they don't want socialism.
Now, if you were to ask me, I'm shocked to see they're going for Biden when you've got Tulsi.
But man, they really hate Tulsi Gabbard.
Fine.
I know there were a bunch of other Democrats that were still running, but to choose of these two people to me is just downright shocking.
I do not see how Donald Trump loses in November.
But the Democrats have spoken.
It looks like everyone's saying Joe Biden.
Joe Biden dominated on Super Tuesday and going into Michigan, this big and very important state.
Joe Biden is leading Bernie Sanders by like double digits, substantially, like 20 plus percent, or in some polls around 16 percent.
But it's huge.
Bernie Sanders is just out.
And instead of talking about why they failed, They keep themselves trapped in this echo chamber, where all they can do is cry foul and scream, it was rigged against us!
The system is rigged against us!
Now, I'll stop.
I'll be fair.
I do think the DNC plays dirty games.
They let Bloomberg in the debate.
They changed the rules to make it easier for the guy, and then changed the rules to make it harder for Tulsi.
Yeah, I absolutely think they're playing games.
But with Bernie, it's something different.
The polls are swinging against him.
The voters didn't turn out.
Okay, look, I like Tulsi, but I know she's not gonna win.
I'm a realist.
I'm not gonna pretend like the whole thing is rigged.
To a certain extent, I want to separate- Let me make sure I separate this language.
I mean rigged in the sense that a guy actually went and stole a box of ballots and ran off with it.
And switched it and stuffed the ballot.
I know the establishment plays dirty games.
That's a fair assessment.
But to act like the hard numbers are being changed is just absurd.
These people have trapped themselves in an echo chamber where they were convinced they were going to win, and it led to their downfall.
Because when even the Scandinavian countries say you are too far left, if you don't listen, Then you're gonna lose!
Because even the far-left countries think you've gone too far left.
So let's break down exactly what's going on.
We'll take a look at some polls and see why it is that these progressives and many Democrats in general just cannot accept why they are going to lose.
Let me make one more point.
People look at my content, particularly on this channel, and they say, look at all the things Tim is saying about Trump, it's all good for Trump, he's defending the president.
Uh, nope.
Now I think I'm biased, for sure.
A lot of people say I'm objective, whatever, you can call me whatever you want.
But I'm telling you what I see as I see it.
And I see a Democratic Party that is completely out of touch and fractured.
And I see Donald Trump with a record high approval rating in the past month, with a record economy, save certain issues that, you know, the market was going pretty wild, oil prices were dropping.
There's a lot of, you know, uncertainty moving forward, but unemployment is way down, and things seem to be going pretty well for Trump, for the most part.
We'll see how things play out in the next coming weeks.
But these are all facts.
And with record turnout from the GOP on Super Tuesday when they didn't need to vote for him, to ignore that is to fail.
So they'll look at me and say, Tim's biased, he's conservative and all that stuff, and I'm like, I'm just looking at the numbers, and the president is mustering that support.
This is exactly why they lose.
Let's check this out.
Here's a story from Vox.
The problem with saying the Democratic primary is rigged.
An expert on actual election rigging debunks the conspiracy theory.
Now, before we move on, make sure you go to timcast.com slash donate if you'd like to support my work.
There's several ways you can give, but the best thing you can do is share this video.
YouTube.
The other day, I did a video on Trump's voter turnout, and they flagged it, and I can't even tell you what they flagged it as because even saying it would probably result in this video getting flagged again.
It was an accident, they said.
But in reality, it seems like YouTube... Well, here's the facts.
They're actively suppressing my content to a certain degree.
I've got to be careful about how I frame this, but they've, you know, hurt... Channels like mine and others have been hurt in the algorithm.
We're no longer getting recommended.
Not to new subscribers, at least, and they've made it much more difficult.
We also deal with false flagging and things like that, which suppress video viewership and such.
So, if you want to help me overcome that, sharing this video really does help.
But also, don't forget, a lot of you haven't subscribed, and if you want to make sure you get my content in the future, hit the subscribe button below, hit the notification bell, that way you'll at least sometimes get an email when my videos go live.
I don't want to read this story from Vox too much, because you get the gist of it.
Let me just read a little bit.
They say, In the last couple weeks, people from President Donald Trump to supporters of Bernie Sanders to top Republican operatives have begun to loudly proclaim the Democratic presidential primary is being rigged against Sanders in favor of former Vice President Joe Biden.
Now before I move on, I want to say, I agree it's rigged in the sense the establishment will change the rules to benefit Biden.
They'll, you know, use their crony connections to push out Sanders, who is not a Democrat.
But I'm specifically calling out vote manipulation, like literally changing votes.
Let's read.
The conspiracy theory is that establishment members of the Democratic National Committee and liberal media elites are so terrified that Democratic voters might elect Sanders, a Democratic Socialist, to be the party's nominee that they're actively conspiring to ensure that doesn't happen.
Importantly, the Sanders campaign itself doesn't make this case, but it's an increasingly popular narrative.
Hashtags like RiggedDNC and RiggedPrimary were even trending on Twitter last week.
But experts who've studied actual rigged elections in places like Russia say the notion that the Democratic primary is being rigged is completely bogus, and they warn that perpetuating this narrative could deeply harm the legitimacy of the election and faith in U.S.
democracy itself.
Now I want to qualify what I've been saying.
I think it's fair to say they've been playing games.
If you want to call it rigged, Vox is wrong.
It's just, I think you're being hyperbolic.
I've done that too.
I think that's fair.
However, there are a lot of people who are adamant that Bernie Sanders is only losing because the system is rigged against him, because the establishment is playing dirty games.
I am not necessarily of either opinion that Bernie is a socialist America should reject or the DNC is rigged.
The reality is both are true.
Americans overwhelmingly do not want to see their taxes go up for whatever Bernie wants to do and see private healthcare abolished.
Well, depending on what you read, but it seems to be the case.
It's also true that the DNC is trying to keep Bernie out.
They're both true, but to what degree each plays a role, I can't tell you.
But what ends up happening is you get progressives who are absolutely entrenched in the belief that Americans want socialism.
They say things like we are truly a progressive nation and they espouse polls and numbers that frame it in their favor instead of looking at reality.
Gallup, for instance, says America is center-right.
That's true by most anecdotes and by the data.
Now, when you look at individual polls, you can probably start to create a narrative to convince yourself Americans want far-left policy.
But let me tell you something.
Even if that were the case, when Scandinavian countries say, y'all are too far left, Bernie, then perhaps the problem isn't that Americans are progressive, it's that you have gone off the deep end.
I want to show you now a real hard example of what's actually happening.
Michigan Democratic primary poll.
Biden is at 51% and Sanders is at 27%.
I'm sorry.
You are just not popular.
Okay, I shouldn't say it that way.
Bernie's absolutely popular.
But you are not what the Democratic voters, most Americans, want.
You have convinced yourself that your revolution is what Americans are after.
You use polls to selectively prop yourselves up.
And I have talked about this problem over and over again.
Keeping in mind, I do use individual polls myself.
I try to point out polls can be wrong and have been wrong.
And when it comes to approval ratings, I use aggregate polling, which can still be wrong, but at least is much better than individual polls.
And I have seen so many progressives, they wait until static appears and then say, aha, that proves it.
Static in polling operates as such.
If an organization produces 10 polls that all say Bernie Sanders is unpopular, all of a sudden there's one poll that says Bernie Sanders is very popular.
Progressives like to grab that one poll and say, there it is.
Bernie Sanders is polling so high that proves it while ignoring the rest of the polls.
That's called noise.
Sometimes blips occur.
The same is true for Donald Trump's approval rating.
There are some stories, some outlets that have said, boom, Donald Trump's approval rating higher than ever.
I don't necessarily like to use that.
I like to use the aggregate.
There's also been polls that they say his disapproval higher than ever.
And what have I seen?
Progressives will latch onto disapproval higher than ever to claim Trump is in the worst shape he's ever been in.
But when you compare it to 10 other polls, it's just noise.
You don't need to ignore it, but you factor it into all of the other polls.
It's why it's important.
Which brings me now, away from Michigan, to aggregate national polling.
I'm sorry, Americans in the Democratic Party just do not want a socialist.
Now it is fair to say there is a civil war in the Democratic Party.
You have 35% of people wanting Bernie, and 50.3% wanting Biden.
I'm surprised to see this, because Bernie was the frontrunner for a brief period.
But Joe Biden was polling in the lead for quite some time.
And this shows me, well, one thing I've stated many times is that the Democratic voters seem not to have any principles because they'll vote for whoever they think is going to win.
But it could just be that people don't care about policy, which I think is fair to a certain extent.
Or it could be that most Americans were maintaining their support for Biden, at least 17%, because they don't want socialists or they don't want socialism.
Take a look at the culinary union in Vegas.
Now it seems like for the most part that many of these union workers defied leadership and ended up voting for Bernie Sanders, but they said they didn't want to lose their private health insurance.
However you want to weigh that is up to you.
Leadership said it's bad.
Many union voters still went out and voted for Bernie.
So whether or not Medicare for all is something America truly wants, You're going to find polls across the board saying one thing or the other.
All I can really tell you is that, in the end, it is, to an extent, a rejection of socialism.
But it also is, to an extent, the Democratic establishment propping up the person they want.
But it comes down to the Democratic voters.
The voters themselves are just saying they want Joe Biden.
And now we can see who will win the 2020 Democratic primary.
Joe Biden at 94%.
I want to show you why I think they lose, and it's part of this op-ed, which I found really interesting from the New York Times.
The simple reason the left won't stop losing.
Progressives need to care more about winning.
I'm sorry, this is from yesterday.
I said it was from today.
It's from yesterday.
It's fascinating.
He makes a really interesting point.
I got to read you a tidbit of this.
How did the political left squander the opportunity that was the 2020 primary campaign?
The Trump presidency has created tremendous energy among progressives.
More than half of the Democratic voters now identify as liberal.
Most favor Medicare for All.
A growing number are unhappy with American capitalism.
This year's campaign offered the prospect of transformational change, with a Democratic nominee who is more liberal than any in more than half a century.
Instead, the nominee now seems likely to be a moderate white grandfather who first ran for president more than 30 years ago, and whose campaign promises a return to normalcy.
True, Bernie Sanders could make a comeback, but it would need to be a big one.
Among people who voted on Super Tuesday itself, rather than voting early, before Joe Biden won South Carolina, Biden trounced Sanders.
The race would have to change fundamentally for Sanders to win.
If he doesn't, the obvious questions for progressives is what went wrong and how they can do better in the future.
I think there are some clear answers, empirical answers, that anybody, regardless of ideology, should be able to see.
I'd encourage the next generation of progressive leaders to think about these issues with an open mind.
The biggest lesson is simply this.
The American left doesn't care enough about winning.
Well, to an extent I disagree, because I've said repeatedly, That the polls show they only want to nominate who they think will win.
But let's read.
He says, it's an old problem, one that has long undermined left-wing movements in this country.
They have often prioritized purity over victory.
They wouldn't necessarily put it in these terms, but they have chosen to lose on their terms rather than win with compromise.
Let me break down what I think he's saying.
He's saying something different to what I just said.
The progressives, the purity test.
You must be perfect, period.
You can never back down.
There is no compromise.
And if that's the case, you're gonna lose because you gotta compromise with the swing voters.
He says, let me jump down.
Progressive activists are right about public opinion on some of these issues.
Most Americans do favor higher taxes on the rich, legalization of marijuana, additional gun control.
But too many progressives aren't doing an honest analysis of the politics.
They are instead committing what the journalist Matthew Iglesias has called the pundit fallacy.
They are conflating their own opinions with smart political advice.
They are choosing to believe what they want to believe.
And that could not be a truer statement at all.
It's exactly what I've seen.
When I make a video, Donald Trump record GOP voter turnout in incumbent primary season.
Donald Trump record town hall ratings.
They say, Tim, why are you defending Trump?
I'm not.
I'm simply telling you what's happening.
And if you reject the facts on the successes of Donald Trump, you will lose.
When I said impeachment would fail, don't do it.
They lost.
I said over and over again, the scandals are bad, you need to break away and talk about kitchen table issues, and they refused, and they lost.
It's not just the progressives, it's the Democrats for the most part in general.
They just see what they want to see.
This is their grand plan.
Scandal.
Impeachment.
And it was so obvious that it wouldn't work.
When I say, you need to become more moderate, they say, no we don't, more progressive, and then guess what?
The progressive wing didn't show up to vote.
Bernie Sanders ended up capturing just regular Democratic voters who were enthusiastic about him.
The youth voter, they went after that too, did not work.
Kitchen table issues that young people don't care about.
And you pandered on identity, and I said don't do it, and what happened?
Elizabeth Warren got slammed.
And she dropped out and lost because she started pandering on identity.
And this was exposed by Project Veritas when her own staff members were saying they were tired of it.
But they didn't listen.
They only see what they want to see.
So for me, I can call it out.
And they'll say, nope, Tim's only saying this because he must be right-wing, instead of realizing the facts are not on your side.
That's why Donald Trump won in 2016.
They could not see out of their bubble.
You want to see a really bubble-breaking story?
Check this out from The Week, a left-wing publication.
Democratic Socialist Bernie Sanders is too far left for Sweden's ruling Social Democrats, officials said.
Sweden!
Of all places!
A Swedish official for the Social Democrats has said Bernie Sanders is too far left.
If that is not a wake-up call, I do not know what is.
And I'll give you a hard example of what they're talking about.
Now for one thing, they first say that, let me show you a quote.
We were at a Sanders event and it was like being at a left party meeting, he told Sweden's Svenska Dagbladet newspaper, according to one translation.
It was a mixture of very young people and old Marxists who think they were right all along.
There were no ordinary people there, simply.
But they're convinced that Bernie Sanders is a centrist.
I'm not exaggerating.
This is the bubble they're trapped in.
There was a meme going around among Bernie supporters showing Bernie as a centrist.
Are you nuts?
Even Sweden says he's too far left.
Far left Sweden says Bernie is too far left.
Yet the activists in America insist that he is a centrist.
Joe Biden is actually conservative.
They have lost the plot.
I'll give you a hard example.
From the debate, Pete Buttigieg said, quote, what is a radical idea is completely eliminating all
private insurance and part of how you know it is that no industrialized country has gone that far. Buttigieg
said he used Denmark to illustrate his point, saying that even they have not abolished the
possibility of private insurance in In fact, in many of these countries that have a national health service, you have your base level care, and then you have private insurance for more serious ailments.
Something I've actually said is probably a good idea.
Think about it this way.
Let's say you break your hand.
Well, getting a stint and your hand, you know, properly set and everything, the bones set, most doctors can do that if they have the time.
In fact, there's probably some, you know, paramedics who can probably set that up for you.
Now, that's not that difficult to do.
You go in, they say, we're going to patch you up.
Let's say you need stitches.
We can patch you up.
But let's say you have a more serious ailment that requires a very expensive treatment.
That's where things become difficult.
Now, in many of these countries, they go one step further.
They will cover all the costs of even more difficult-to-cure ailments.
I don't go that far.
The point is, Bernie Sanders and some of the other candidates said outright no private insurance, just Medicare for All.
When even Denmark doesn't do that, and Bernie has said he wants to be like Denmark, it's no surprise then that Sweden's social democrat from Sweden, that's the left-wing party in Sweden, mind you, said Bernie is too far left.
This is what we end up seeing in every circumstance.
Labor civil war over Medicare for All threatens its 2020 clout.
In union-heavy primary states like California, New York, and Michigan, the fight over single-payer health care is fracturing organized labor because many union members and much of the union leadership is in favor of you choosing what health care you want.
Now, I certainly think it would be great if we guaranteed coverage for everybody.
But getting rid of competition in the healthcare marketplace will only lead to more problems.
I don't know how you solve these problems.
I think it's a great ideal.
But is it truly possible?
Probably not.
And I think, what I've typically said is, you know what makes sense?
A public option, some base level care, perhaps, and then you get supplemental health insurance.
That guarantees that everyone gets access to simple care.
Like if you need stitches or to fix a broken, like to set a broken bone and get like a small cast or something.
Don't ask me though, I'm not the expert.
All I can really do is tell you that what they've proposed is not wildly popular on the left.
It's popular with the activists who live in a bubble and just see what they want to see.
You can see it exactly in Cenk Uygur on The Young Turks, melting down.
Look, I'm not trying to be mean to the guy.
I want to make sure I make this clear every time.
But he was nearly in tears when Bernie Sanders lost on Super Tuesday.
He got fourth place in a moderate district in California, CA 25.
He ran.
He got fourth place, 5% of the vote.
Not only did he not even crack the top three, he's famous!
You'd think with all of his money and his wealth and the people who follow him, that would have gotten him something.
But no, Twitter is not real life.
The internet is not an example of your home district.
What these people online don't realize, the Twitterati, the far left, and the Democrats who chase after them, is that what they're seeing is, imagine, I'll put it this way, imagine if every city in this country had 10 people, like literally every, had 10 people who are progressive.
When they all follow you, you think that you've got the majority support because look how many followers you have, hundreds of thousands if not millions.
But when it comes to actually voting in that district, it's dominated by moderate voices.
They have tricked themselves into thinking this is what America wants.
And then you see Kirsten Gillibrand, Elizabeth Warren, pander to the identity crowd and fail miserably.
And then Bernie Sanders refrains a little bit, but goes for the socialist message.
It gets him a little bit, a little far because, you know, there are people who support more progressive values.
That's true.
But in the end, Biden wins.
They have tricked themselves into believing things that aren't real because instead of assessing reality, they are just patting themselves on the back saying, we're winning, we're winning.
They don't want to see the facts.
They don't like looking at my videos where I talk about the Democrats spiraling out of control, the Civil War tearing them apart, or Trump winning.
They don't want to hear it.
They say, Tim's just framing it to benefit the conservatives.
No, you know what, man?
I've called out Trump on a lot of different things.
The fact remains, right now, he is doing really, really well.
Again, we'll see what happens in the coming weeks to the economy, but so far, he's been doing well, and the Democrats have been doing everything wrong.
Impeachment failed.
The scandals, all the scandals, none of it worked.
They didn't campaign on kitchen table issues, and now they're risking losing their House majority, and that's what they get.
I have only told you what I see is really happening, and it turns out, at least to a certain degree, I've been right.
Bernie Sanders appears to be failing.
Now, I will give you this caveat.
It is entirely possible 538 flips around again.
The polls were wrong about Biden in some states.
What do I really know?
I honestly can't tell you.
I can tell you that I've been right on some things and they don't want to hear it.
But I really do think that Biden's going to be the nominee.
I think that's where we're headed.
And that's surprising to me because I was wrong in the past about this.
This is the reality for me.
When I look at the current data, I will give you my opinion, and that will change as the data changes.
I thought Biden was out.
I was like, there's no way this guy's the frontrunner.
I was absolutely wrong.
But I'm not rooting for or against Biden, Bernie, or Trump.
That's the big issue here.
The people who want Bernie to win will just say good things about him.
In fact, there was a really funny post.
Some journalists were sharing tweets from Elizabeth Warren's campaign staff, and one of the quotes, I'll paraphrase, was yelling at a journalist saying, I should have expected you not to support our campaign fully, or something like that.
As if the journalist would do that!
Well, yeah, guess what?
That's what these people think.
They think that if you come in as a journalist, all you're gonna do is tell the world how great this person is.
Nah.
I supported Tulsi Gabbard.
I supported Andrew Yang.
And I have no problem saying Tulsi is wrong about nuclear power and Yang is wrong about his flagship program on UBI.
But I like them for a lot of other reasons that I thought was worth getting them on the debate stage.
If you can't accept your faults and your failures, you will lose.
It is Life Lesson 101.
If you keep telling yourself you did it right or it's not your fault, then how will you ever solve this problem?
And that's what we're seeing now with progressives.
They refuse to accept their failures.
And so what's going to happen?
The Democratic establishment will sweep in.
Donald Trump will dominate in November.
But we'll see.
Because I'll tell you what.
I don't think I'm always right.
I'm looking at the data right now.
I'm looking at the reactions to Super Tuesday right now.
For all I know, the polls are wrong.
Bernie Sanders sweeps tomorrow.
And you know what?
Take that one with you.
Because if I'm wrong, I'll be the first to admit it.
I thought the Republicans were going to win in 2018.
I was wrong.
In the House, I mean.
I thought Joe Biden was completely out.
Boy, was I wrong.
I'm wrong often enough.
But it's more so about this.
When I'm giving you an opinion, I'm basing it on current data.
And things change.
I think it's silly to believe that anyone could predict the future, which is why I really don't like doing it.
Look at this wild rollercoaster of them trying to figure out what was gonna happen.
And they're supposed to be the smart ones who can predict this stuff.
No one really knows for sure.
The polls are wrong half the time.
We have no idea.
What I can say, though, is that overall, it really does just seem like the far left refuses to accept when they made mistakes.
And if that's the case, they will never solve these problems to actually win in the future.
I'll leave it there.
Stick around.
Next segment's coming up at 6 p.m.
YouTube.com slash TimCastNews, and I will see you all there.
No matter how many times we see an instance of social media censorship being completely biased against the right, you still get these fake news journalists saying that there's no evidence that these companies are biased.
And they'll say, you're just misconstruing an enforcement action, blah blah blah.
They'll say so-and-so claimed, comma, without evidence, comma, that a social media company was biased.
You know why they don't do that to me?
They just say Tim Pool's opinion on social media censorship echoes that of conservatives.
Well, the reason it's said about me is because I always show evidence whenever I talk about it.
It was back in, I think, May of 2015.
I'm sorry, 2017.
I can't remember the exact date.
When Gizmodo, the left-wing publication, said employees at Facebook routinely suppressed conservative news outlets in the Facebook trending section.
It is a fact.
And now we have more evidence.
This story...
Let me tell you a story.
If you missed this yesterday, you really gotta check it out.
There's a man named Carlos Maza.
He's a socialist.
He worked for the left-wing site Vox.
I think he got fired or he left.
His show was cancelled.
We'll put it that way.
I'll put cancelled in air quotes.
We don't really know what happened.
But he's making his own YouTube videos.
He's the guy who got Steven Crowder demonetized.
He tweets about how we can't take advice from the rich.
Well, as it turns out, he comes from a family of extremely wealthy individuals.
And according to the New York Post story, he's registered to vote at an $11 million mansion.
And I think it was Boca Raton.
Congratulations, good sir.
You are a silver spoon socialist.
Someone who's never in any capacity experienced any hardship in your life trying to tell working class individuals how they should spend their money or where their money should go.
I love it.
It's always these silver spoon socialists, isn't it?
When I was at Occupy Wall Street, I can't tell you how many people that were there were trust fund kids.
Their parents just paid for everything.
How else do you think these people could not work and organize a protest like this?
They think they know what's best for everyone else, but they've never done anything hard.
Well, here's what happens.
Carlos Maza, this guy, he tweeted these images of James Carville's house.
What's that?
The tweets are still up!
Surprise, surprise.
Now, I mentioned yesterday that this was an instance of social media censorship.
John Levine had his Twitter account locked.
He's the guy who actually did the report exposing Carlos Maza as a silver spoon socialist.
However, he got his account back.
He says, update.
Twitter locked me out of my account last night over some of the Carlos Maza reporting.
A rep for the company tells me that their action against me was an error.
Too long, didn't read.
I'm out of Twitter jail and all my original postings here remain live.
He said, I want to thank everyone who made a fuss about it.
This is the tweet the hall monitors didn't want you to see.
Get it everywhere.
What's that?
The tweet's gone.
You see, here's what ended up happening.
You want to talk about bias in social media.
John Levine then tweeted a second update.
Despite initially calling their decision to lock my account an error, Twitter locked me out again a few hours later over the same Carlos Maza story.
I have reluctantly deleted the tweet, and I'm sharing with you some of the timeline here.
This is Orwellian.
Let's pull up John's tweet.
So, John initially had the company say, oh, we're sorry for suspending you.
And they came back and suspended him again.
I'd be willing to bet perhaps there's something to this in the, you know, Carlos Maza coming from a, let me slow down.
Carlos Maza's extremely wealthy family, which is probably well-connected in the tech industry, considering his stepdad started a company called Ultimate, I think it was called Ultimate Softwares, what they discovered.
Apparently the company was sold for $11 billion.
At least according to the New York Post.
So perhaps someone's privileged Silver Spoon family stepped up to protect him.
Because Carlos Maza has faced no suspension for inciting violence,
calling people to violence, and posting the home of James Carville.
That gets a free pass!
Welcome to the game.
Welcome to social media censorship.
So here's what Twitter said upon further investigation.
These tweets violate our Twitter rules.
Specifically, our private information policy.
The account will remain locked until the tweets are removed.
And that brings me to the Daily Caller story.
John Levine had to remove some of his reporting.
Because Twitter said, only in the journalist's instance.
Well, I'm sorry, the conservative journalist.
I guess, I don't know, I don't want to call John if he's not a conservative, but... New York Post.
Well, this has to be removed.
But Carlos Maza saying, milkshake them all and posting photos of James Carville's house?
Well, that's just fine and dandy, ain't it?
Let's read a little bit of the story.
And then I've got some personal news about me facing some of this political bias, and you're gonna love this one.
Yeah.
New York Post reporter Jonathan Levine deleted his tweets exposing self-described socialist Carlos Maza's ties to his elite wealthy family after he was locked out of his account twice by Twitter.
Levine reported on Maz's wealthy family origin Saturday, revealing that the former Vox employee's family has multiple mansions in Florida, excuse me, and an expensive high-rise apartment in New York's Upper West Side.
Oh man, you gotta love these socialists.
Remember when Bloomberg called out Bernie, saying, the most prominent socialist in this country is a millionaire with three houses, what am I missing here?
And Bernie's response was, yes, I work in DC, I live in Vermont, and like most Vermonters, I have a summer camp.
Or like many Vermonters.
I'm sorry, dude.
That was your excuse to try and justify having three houses?
Dude, come on.
No, are you kidding me with this?
Limousine liberal and silver spoon socialist.
I love it.
I love it.
The reporter also tweeted out photos of Maz's family mansion, resulting in Twitter locking him out of his account for violating their privacy information policy until he was forced to delete the posts, according to Levine.
Despite initially calling it- Yeah, we read that part.
He said it was Orwellian.
Maza's parents, according to the Post's sources, helped pay for his one-bedroom apartment in Manhattan's East Village.
Levine claims that a one-bedroom apartment in that neighborhood typically costs an upward of $3,000 a month.
Yes, that's true.
Maza might have roommates.
I don't know.
I'm not gonna make assumptions about how much they're giving him.
Quote, my mom and her fiance are very wealthy thanks to a software company they started together when I was a kid.
As a result, I've gotten to live a life of tremendous privilege.
Let me just point something out to you guys to understand these socialists.
When you grow up and literally everything is given to you on a silver platter, with a silver spoon right in your mouth, And then you go to school where everything is given to you by the administration, you're told what to do, and you spend no money to go there because, like Maza admitted, he got to go to school debt-free.
Of course they're gonna become communists and socialists.
They're sitting there thinking, life is hard.
How come no one's giving me stuff?
Why doesn't the government give me stuff?
Hey, that's a good idea.
If everyone just got free stuff from the government, then life would be better for everyone.
Right, that's what they think.
They don't understand that when you tax people, it's everyone paying.
And if you tax people more than they have, then they don't have any money, and there's an upper limit to what you can actually get out of people.
And if you're taxing everyone's money, then they know that if they work for anyone to get money, they will get nothing, so why bother doing it?
Socialism doesn't work!
It doesn't work.
It makes no sense.
They have these utopianist visions only because they live in bubbles.
This is some kind of derangement.
I'm not kidding.
When you have never experienced any kind of struggle, you've never had to grow your own food, hunt for your own food, or even work a job to buy your own food, of course you don't realize the conservation of energy.
That you must have an input, that you must have income in order to spend.
Well, they don't.
Everything to them is this perpetual money machine, where all they do is sit around complaining and money just appears!
Yeah, that's socialism for you.
So, Maz has admitted he has a safety net, so we get that.
Let's get back to social media censorship.
Here's the post, I covered this yesterday, where he was, you know, posting pictures of James Carville's house, out exterior too.
And then we have this.
Milkshake them all.
Humiliate them at every turn.
Make them dread public organizing.
Carlos Maza literally called for crimes.
That's battery.
Throwing an object at someone.
Assault and battery in some jurisdictions.
Like in Illinois, you get assault and battery charge for that.
That's still on Twitter.
Twitter hasn't taken it down.
He's literally inciting violence against Trump supporters.
Yet John Levine, a reporter who exposed him as a hypocrite and uber-wealthy elite with a silver spoon in his mouth, he's the one who gets locked out of his account.
Now, could it be political bias?
I would say absolutely yes.
Could it be that Maza's family are tech-centered multi-millionaires with connections and made a phone call?
Yeah, I think that's probable too.
Because Carlos Maza is basically a toddler, right?
He's a little kid who doesn't work for anything, and he sits around crying and demanding that he wants something.
And of course, he plays the thing where he's like, I'm trying to advocate for a system that would take power away from me.
No, you're not.
No, no, no, no, no, no.
We know how these things work.
People like you want to be the party in charge.
And you will always demand stuff.
Well, ignorant people like Mazza don't understand what happens after they get their little revolutions.
Because they're the first people to go.
But let's move on now.
I got a couple more things to cover in terms of censorship and social media.
And this next one will be a little bit personal.
I tweeted this the other day.
YouTube decided that my video talking about massive GOP voter turnout and Trump's town hall ratings constituted discussions of, quote, modern acts of terror and demonetized my video.
Awesome.
Yep.
So on my main channel, which is youtube.com slash Timcast, very different from this one, I typically And for the most part, only talk about the current political cycle.
This is part of an ongoing algorithmic evolution where YouTube is trying to box me into a corner.
It's why I started this channel in the first place.
Because I am not stupid.
I'm not saying I'm the smartest person in the world, but hey, I take precautions, right?
So at a certain point, when I was making videos for my main channel, I decided to create this channel for what I would call runoff content.
Content that I don't think was big enough to be the biggest story of the day in certain circumstances.
I then started making many segments.
So I do about five segments.
I do five segments on this channel every day.
And I do one segment on my main channel.
Now over time, YouTube has started making the rules crazier and crazier and more and more difficult to actually produce content on my main channel.
They're squeezing out basically everyone.
Fortunately, the people who run YouTube don't pay attention to this channel, so it seems to be okay in certain regards.
So here's what happens.
If I do a video on this channel that talks about something, I don't know, shocking or whatever, some breaking news, maybe there's something happening around the world, it will probably be demonetized.
It's typical.
Almost every video I do on this channel gets demonetized initially.
Rarely do they get monetized right away.
About a day later, they get monetized.
So like 90% of all the videos I produce on this channel are good a day after the fact.
Which brings me to the first problem.
YouTube deciding that my video was a modern act of terror when I was literally talking about Fox News ratings makes means that in the first day when 95% of all views come in, you get nothing.
Nothing.
And then they go, oops, my bad!
And they reinstate it.
And then you get nothing.
Because the views don't come back.
People already saw the video.
And you know what?
Fine.
I get it.
It's why I diversified.
But on my main channel, something else happens.
They actively suppress videos if they flag them as modern acts of terror.
This demonetization wasn't just about taking income away.
It was about making sure people could not see it by limiting the reach.
On this channel, which is not part of what's called self-certification, if my video gets demonetized, and they typically do, they still go out to the same amount of people regardless.
So even though I won't make money, I don't really care because YouTube is running these videos like normal on my main channel.
Well, I call my main channel, but YouTube.com slash Timcast.
If they flag a video, they suppress it.
They shadow ban it.
I started getting messages from people saying the video wasn't appearing, that it was improperly displaying comments, likes, and views.
And that's exactly what happens when they look at my video and falsely flag it.
And it's happened recently.
One of the big problems is that there is a news story, which I'm not going to mention, that, when it first broke, was totally okay to talk about.
I made a video, and they said, you're all good, this subject is totally fine for monetization.
And then two weeks later, when the story escalated, they said, no, we've gone back and decided to demonetize this video.
And what happens is, the more videos you have demonetized, the higher risk your channel gets.
Now they're trying to demonetize everything.
But the point is, when they demonetize this video about Trump and they put these strict rules on my main channel, they make it so that the only thing I can do on that channel is specifically talk about, say, the Democrats and the Republicans.
Some people have asked me, why is it that your main channel now almost exclusively talks about Trump, Democrats, Republicans, Congress, politics, whatever?
And it's because the channel is effectively dead.
That's it.
Now, you still see those videos, right?
Well, they're not being recommended, and if I deviate from those subjects at all, they suppress the content and they demonetize it.
So I have a choice.
I can put my political commentary stuff pertaining to Trump, Democrats, Republicans, etc., which I still do a lot of on this channel, or I can just say I can't do anything on the channel.
I tried making a video about Antifa when there was this big thing that happened.
They suppressed it, and called it Modern Acts of Terror.
And when the video went live, it got something like 2-3% of the views it normally gets, because YouTube shadowbanned it completely.
It didn't appear in my channel, it didn't appear in anyone's feeds.
I went in the video, I had to blur a bunch of stuff, and like mute some stuff, and then all of a sudden, boop, back to normal, and the views shot back up.
That's the game that YouTube's been playing with my main channel.
That's the censorship.
And this is where it gets... The worst example is this.
That when I make a video saying, fine, I will play by your rules, I will make this video specifically about political content, you know, political issues happening in this country, and I gotta admit, I do think it's fair to say that the primaries, the election, and things I talk about are rather pertinent.
I say, fine, we'll talk about this.
They falsely flagged my content, calling a discussion about Fox News ratings a modern act of terror.
And then the video gets suppressed, and then it makes no money, and I'm sitting here thinking, what am I supposed to do?
That's what YouTube has been doing to not just my channel, but many other channels.
There are many channels who have it worse than I do, because I actually have a contact at Google, and when this finally happens, I'm like, well, there we go!
There's the day wasted on that content.
I reach out to Google and they say, we're getting right on it.
And then a day later say, we fixed it for you, no problem.
You fixed it for me?
A human being watched my video and flagged it as terror.
It was confirmed by manual review that talking about Trump and his record ratings and GOP voter turnout was terrorism.
And so the video gets suppressed.
And a day later they reinstate it, but it's too late.
They stopped recommending it.
It makes no money.
That's how it works.
And if that continues, don't be surprised if it has a negative impact on the politicians you like, be it left or right.
You know, for the life of me, I can't figure out why people on the left who are supposed to fight against this have been advocating for a long time.
Except for one thing.
It benefits them.
Now, they'll claim that LGBT creators are being negatively impacted, that's true.
They'll say, oh, we get suppressed too.
Yeah, to a certain degree.
But as soon as you come out and say, look, here's evidence.
John Levine of the New York Post got suspended and then reinstated and then suspended again.
They'll say, that's just an anecdote.
That's not evidence.
Then you'll say, yeah, well, what about me?
This is like the 80th time this has happened.
I have a list of videos.
There's like eight videos.
So there's a program on YouTube called self-certification.
Meaning, when you upload a video, you list if there's any offending content in your videos, like swearing or discussion of modern acts of terror.
And I put no, of course, because I'm a milquetoast fence that are talking about Donald Trump and Democrats.
And 99% of everything is okay.
But periodically, they go in and falsely flag my videos.
And sometimes I say, what's the point?
The video is dead.
It's already beyond its, you know, 24 hours.
The views won't come back.
The news has become less relevant.
It made no money.
Why bother dealing with it?
And then what happens is they use that to justify suppressing more of your content, saying, well, you're high risk, look at all of these demonetizations.
So even though all my videos should be monetized, even though I don't even swear in these videos, doesn't matter.
They'll go in, I did a video, it was about, I think, Bill Maher, and they confirmed it.
I have no idea why.
And there's nothing that you can do about it.
Cause a human being at the company said so.
Now mistakes happen, I get it.
And maybe this is a mistake.
But the mistakes always flow in one direction.
Or, I'm sorry, they tend to flow in one direction.
There have been many people on the left who have been suspended and banned, particularly the anti-war progressives.
But here's how it always plays out.
It always plays out with some fringe, lunatic leftist who comes from a, you know, a multi-million dollar, you know, multi-millionaire family, literally advocating for violence, and Twitter says, you're all good, buddy!
And that's it.
And the reporter who exposes the guy is the one who gets suspended on Twitter.
Give John a follow.
Levine Jonathan on Twitter, because he's the one who's exposed this, and he's taking a hit for it.
Twitter is a trash website.
YouTube has its problems.
But I will wrap up with saying this.
There are some pros and there are some cons.
The pros to social media is that, look, for all the faults of YouTube, I'm doing really well.
You're able to hear my voice right now on this platform.
They do recommend my content to a certain degree.
So I'm complaining, but I want to make sure you realize I do think there's a net positive to YouTube and Twitter for the most part.
There's another big mistake being made by these companies that needs to be addressed.
When you only ban the crazies on the right and you ignore the crazies on the left, you drive people in droves to Donald Trump.
You want to know why?
From the outside, the untrained observer, the uninitiated passive liberal or moderate in this country, someone who is not sure who they're going to vote for, logs into Twitter and what do they see?
A lunatic socialist screaming about attacking people in the streets.
And the other crazy people of the right, they're all gone.
So the only right-wing people they see is a suit-wearing man with a tie saying, well, I for one think our economic policy could use a good reform and Donald Trump's tariffs have been a net boon for this government.
And you're like, well, I don't know if that's true, but I don't know.
I hear what you say.
And then you look to your left and there's Maza saying, throw milkshakes at people!
And you're like, that is not a policy position that I would like to support.
That doesn't seem to make sense.
And that's one of the biggest pitfalls.
The backfiring of social media censorship.
If these companies don't realize it, and they haven't, they're going to create an environment where you have psychotic leftists creating cancel culture, which has happened, trying to destroy people's lives, which is happening, and you are going to have anyone on the right who might be deemed crazy or fringe purged.
So the only visible people will be clean-cut conservatives with good opinions, with strong arguments.
They think they're going after their ideological opponents because they're only going to allow certain ideas to flourish, but instead they allow people like Carlos Maza to say insane things and get away with it.
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.
Chaos is erupting in Italy.
Riots breaking out at 27 prisons.
Six prisoners die.
People are trying to flee as a massive quarantine is enacted on the northern areas of Italy.
16 million people being locked down, and their stocks have plummeted by 11%.
All of this due to coronavirus fears.
This is panic.
And I said before, panic is probably going to be worse than the virus.
Now, there is good reason to overreact, but never to panic.
Before we get into this, I want to talk about what happened this morning because a lot of people are falsely claiming that the drop in stocks today is based on the coronavirus.
For those that aren't familiar, this morning, when trading began on Wall Street, there was an immediate and massive drop-off.
It triggered one of the, air quote, circuit breakers.
I believe it was 7% loss.
They froze trading for 15 minutes.
It's recovered a little bit, but as of right now, it is down 5.59%.
This has everything to do with Saudi Arabia dumping oil and dropping the prices and probably very little to do with the coronavirus.
We've seen the market going up and down due to coronavirus fears.
There's an impact on airlines, for instance.
This massive drop is because overnight the price of oil dropped dramatically, mostly due to Saudi Arabia.
These are, for the most part, entirely different news stories.
Of course, blue check marks on Twitter are conflating the two and screeching that it's Donald Trump's fault.
He's not getting his, you know, handle on the coronavirus.
And I will say, I think Donald Trump is playing this much too lightly.
In fact, many of the Trump supporters have come out saying, oh man, basically the same thing.
But I get it.
There's a real challenge here.
Let me show you this tweet from Will Chamberlain.
He is a Trump supporter, conservative.
He said perhaps the worst tweet of the presidency in response to this tweet from Donald Trump, who said last year 37,000 Americans died from the common flu.
It averages between 27,000 and 70,000 per year.
Nothing is shut down.
Life and the economy go on.
At this moment, there are 546 confirmed cases of coronavirus with 22 deaths.
Think about that.
And Will said this is the worst tweet of the presidency.
Rockin' a hard place, man.
So, I agree the tweet is bad.
I think Trump could do better.
I don't think it's the worst possible tweet he's ever made, to be completely honest, because you need to look over at what's happening in Italy.
And in this regard, I can't tell you what the right course of action is for the president.
He needs to make sure people don't panic, but I personally think he needs to do more to let people know you've got to take care of yourself.
But perhaps it's a powder keg.
And no matter what Trump says, if he says anything in the direction of this could be bad, people will panic like they are in Italy.
Let's read this story from CNBC.
They say Italy's massive coronavirus quarantine provokes panic and prison riots.
Stocks fall 11 percent.
Italy's extended quarantine restricting the movement of people in its industrial northern heartland have provoked panic among residents and accentuated the country's north-south divide.
Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte signed a decree on Sunday imposing restrictions of the movement of people in the northern region of Lombardy, the epicenter of the outbreak in Italy, and 14 other provinces across the north until April 3rd.
The measures now affect more than 16 million people, banning them from moving in and out of those areas.
The publication of a draft decree Saturday afternoon by newspaper revealing the forthcoming wider quarantine measures prompted panic among residents trying to get out before the restrictions came into force after midnight.
Media reports said bars and restaurants emptied, and thousands of people tried to leave the region in cars and trains, where there were reports of shoving and pushing by passengers.
Violent protests have broke out in 27 Italian prisons against coronavirus restrictions, with many inmates asking for an amnesty due to the virus emergency, news agency ANSA reported Monday, citing local sources.
Some 20 inmates had managed to break out of Foglia prison in Puglia during a riot Monday morning, ANSA said, citing local sources.
Shopkeepers in the area were told to close their shops in the vicinity of the prison.
Prison unrest broke out in a prison in Modena Sunday afternoon after inmates were informed that visits from relatives had been banned to prevent the spread of infection.
In the south, relatives of detainees in a poggioreal prison in Naples, I'm trying to pronounce these words, clashed with police against the government ban.
Now, before we move on from there, here's the update from CNN.
Six dead in Italy prison riots after visits suspended due to coronavirus.
CNN reporting.
Six prisoners have died in a Modena prison after riots broke out in several Italian jails following the suspension of visits to curb the spread of the virus.
Riots occurred on Sunday in Modena, Frosinone, Naples, Pavia, Alessandria, and Foglia prisons, according to a statement by the Italian Justice Ministry.
The disturbances ended on Sunday evening.
During the Modena prison riot, prisoners occupied the entire prison, including the infirmary, where they got hold of various drugs, including methadone.
Director of the Italian Penitentiary System, Francisco Bosentini, said in an interview Monday.
Two of the dead died of an overdose, one of inhalation of toxic smoke, and three died after all the inmates were moved to another prison.
Those deaths are still being investigated.
Basantini explained that a prison in Salemo, in southern Italy, was the first to riot last Saturday, leading to a wave of revolts.
Now we have bedlam in Italy, and I'm going to warn you right now, if you think it can't happen here, you are wrong.
Now, you absolutely should not be panicking, because if you've been watching me, and you've been listening, you probably already went out and bought some supplies.
But I'm gonna tell you something crazy right now, man.
We went shopping the other night, and for the most part, no real problems.
You go to the store, there's not massive lines, but I was surprised to see, in the local Walmart near me, tons of supplies are gone.
Toilet paper has been mostly bought out, water's mostly bought out.
I think it's funny that the first thing people go for is toilet paper, I don't know why.
Seriously.
And not food.
That, to me, is kind of strange, but okay.
There was a lot of food that was basically sold out.
And, you know, some supplies.
But for the most part, there are a bunch of stores in my area and everything seems to be decently okay for now.
That's just my area.
I honestly, I'm kind of surprised to see there have been a shortage of some supplies.
The shelves are, you know, stripped bare of a lot of products.
I really didn't want to believe or just didn't believe it would actually come here.
When I heard the stories about New York and Washington and Hawaii, I'm like, because they have confirmed cases.
Well, now Philly has some confirmed cases.
The shops near me have started panicking as well.
But take a look at this story.
Fauci on shutting down coronavirus epicenters.
Anything is possible.
I hope you're paying attention to this stuff.
I hope you are not panicking.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, said Sunday that he doubted the U.S.
would have to impose measures as draconian as total shutdowns ordered in some regions in northern Italy to halt the spread of coronavirus, but said, anything is possible.
Excuse me.
We have to be realistic.
I don't think it would be as draconian as nobody in or nobody out, but if we continue to get cases like this, particularly at the community level, there will be what we call mitigation, where we have to essentially do social distancing.
Keep people out of crowded places, take a look at seriousness, do you really need to travel?
And I think it's particularly important among the most vulnerable, Fauci said.
I'm going to come back to this, but now I want to point out why Donald Trump is wrong.
Given the spread we've seen, anything is possible.
And that's why we've got to be prepared to take whatever action is appropriate to contain
and mitigate the outbreak, he added.
Fauci also addressed reports that health experts on the White House's coronavirus task force
had been overhauled on the recommendation that elderly people refrain from air travel.
I'm going to come back to this, but now I want to point out why Donald Trump is wrong.
In this tweet, he said, last year, 37,000 Americans died from the common flu.
It averages between 27,000 and 70,000 per year, right?
He said there's only 546 cases.
Okay, hold on.
Here's the problem.
Current flu season has been in effect for several months.
I think maybe even two or three months longer than coronavirus has.
And coronavirus is expanding exponentially.
They're saying every, you know, between seven and nine days, the number doubles.
The reason why we are seeing substantially more flu infections is because it's been around a lot longer, and it's not just that.
It's that the flu does occur all throughout the year, but flu season is in a particular point.
The numbers they've tracked for this year start in October, I'm pretty sure.
It is entirely possible flu could be worse, but if the mortality rate of coronavirus is 34 times higher than that of the flu, I think it's something we absolutely need to be paying attention to.
And Trump is mis... Look, I get it, man.
I don't... It's very difficult.
I look at this tweet from Trump and I say, I don't like it.
It's my initial reaction.
Know this, if Trump tweeted right now, you need to take care, you know, be prepared, we're working with CDC, this could be serious, the media would slam him for inciting panic.
In Australia, when the Prime Minister came out and said, hey, coronavirus is bad, people raided stores, started fighting over toilet paper, there's literally a woman got arrested, a guy got tased, and they would blame Trump for that.
Challenge is, it seems Trump's only option is to try and keep people calm.
I'm not going to pretend like I know what the right answer is, but you know how I'm talking about it, right?
I'm saying this could be serious, and please do not panic.
I can't stress that enough.
You will hurt yourself if you do.
But based on my opinion and how I'm addressing it, I kind of feel like Trump would need to say something more direct, but Man, talk about a rock and a hard place.
This is why you'll never see me be interested in politics.
Certainly some Trump supporters are calling him out, saying it was not a good idea.
But it is hurting Trump.
I believe it's fair to say it is hurting Trump to a certain degree.
Trump recently hit his highest approval rating ever at 46.3 in the aggregate, and he's fallen down now to 44.7.
First of all, 44.7 is still really, really high for his presidency, but he is taking a hit in his approval rating, probably because of the criticism he's getting over the coronavirus.
I'm not going to tell you that he's blundering this, making the worse even worse.
I lean towards he probably should be a little more, I don't know, serious and alarmed.
He's really trying to downplay it.
But all I know is that if Trump came out and said, this is going to be serious, bunker down, they would say Trump is inciting panic and then go after him.
So what do you do?
I think no matter what happened, Trump was going to be blamed for this.
They're even trying to blame him for the market dropping when that was Saudi Arabia.
So it is what it is.
But let's get back to the story from the Hill.
Fauci said, quote, Here's the deal.
No one overruled anybody about saying this, so let me say it loud and clear now.
Right now, I am telling the American people based on everything that's agreed upon in the task force.
If you are an individual with an underlying condition, particularly an elderly person with an underlying condition, you should start to distance yourself from the risk, and above all, don't get on a cruise ship.
He also addressed the specific case of the Grand Princess cruise ship which will dock in the port of Oakland after being turned away from San Francisco.
I recommend very strongly in our meetings that we get those people off that ship.
We don't want to have a repeat of what we saw with the Diamond Princess.
Where the ship became almost a hotspot of transmission.
I feel strongly about getting them off there, Fauci said.
Appearing on NBC's Meet the Press, Fauci emphasized the risk to elderly and otherwise vulnerable people, telling Chuck Todd, I think right now something that's important that I hope the American people appreciate is that the risk of getting into trouble with this infection is overwhelmingly weighted towards people with underlying conditions and the elderly.
You don't want to go to a massive gathering, particularly if you're a vulnerable person.
My understanding is right now the average age of death is 81, which is exactly what we would have expected.
Underlying conditions, the elderly, people with weaker immune systems.
There are people who have been younger who have died.
We have seen videos of people collapsing in the street, but that's probably substantially less.
The mortality rate is high right now.
It's possible that once we start screening, the mortality rate will drop dramatically.
I believe the mortality rate in South Korea is 0.6 for two reasons.
When you have a more accurate picture of how many people are infected, you can actually just do the math better.
More importantly, when you're screening people, you're catching it early and hospitalizing them before it gets too late.
So that's a good reason to actually start launching these tests, which the government, the U.S., said they're going to be doing.
We'll see what happens.
Now here's where things start to get pretty worrisome.
We saw how bad it got in Iran.
10% of the members of parliament are infected, several government officials are dying, and now this.
Coronavirus case at CPAC brings outbreak closer to Trump, threatening to upend his routine amid re-election bid.
Not just that, but Ted Cruz is going to be self-quarantining.
Many people at CPAC were shaking hands and meeting with somebody who has now tested positive.
There's concern that the virus may have been spread to basically everyone.
Donald Trump is 73, so I certainly hope, at least in private, he's taking things very, very seriously.
And everybody knows Trump is a germaphobe.
He doesn't like shaking hands and things like that, so maybe that's gonna play to his favor right now.
There's concerns over, say, Bernie and Biden.
One of the things that they've been talking about—actually, I don't know if I have the story pulled up.
I thought I did.
Okay, I do.
I do have it here.
Despite virus risk, 2020 hopefuls keep up campaigns for now.
Bernie and Biden are both old.
They're very close to the median age and having a high risk.
To being susceptible to the coronavirus, and they are going out and high-fiving people and shaking hands.
I hope they take this seriously.
I really, really hope they do.
It would be a very, very strange thing to see them, for whatever reason, unable to continue.
And Tulsi Gabbard is still in the race, so...
I don't know what would happen if Joe Biden and Bernie were now unable to continue their campaigns.
I'm not saying because they lose their lives.
Maybe they get sick.
Maybe they get incapacitated.
I'm just saying they should take this seriously.
Look, people want to say, like Trump was saying, it's like the flu.
Please, man.
This could be way worse.
Now, the panic is what I think we should be more concerned about, to be honest.
That's why I said, have emergency food, go shopping, because the panic is worse often than the disease itself.
Check this out.
We have this tweet from Steve Stager.
He is the gentleman anchor for Nine News in Denver.
A united flight from Eagle, Colorado to Newark, New Jersey.
I believe Newark.
So I'm assuming that's Newark, New Jersey, but there's probably a ton of places named Newark where planes probably fly to, but Newark is the obvious one.
Because a single passenger was sick on the flight, they didn't make any arrests.
The flight redeparted for Newark, according to United.
So I'm assuming that's Newark, New Jersey, but there's probably a ton of places named
Newark where planes probably fly to, but Newark is the obvious one.
People on a plane saw someone sick and freaked out.
So right now we have 546 cases in the US.
It's likely to be in the thousands, maybe tens of thousands, because most people, as Trump said, get it, don't even notice, go to work, they cough a bit and they're fine.
Most people get some kind of minor cold and don't even realize.
18% are hospitalized, 3.4% globally have died.
The numbers right now are very, very low, and for the time being, it really does seem like you're much more likely to get the flu than you are to get the novel coronavirus.
But the coronavirus, people have no immunity to, and panic sets in.
How you get people to prepare without panicking, I have no idea.
Look, I've had people message me saying, Tim, you're freaking out too much, you're, you know, you're stressing people out, things like that.
It's like, listen, I don't know what to tell you.
I see a lot of people trying to claim it's the media hype making everything worse.
Maybe that's the case.
It could just be the media's latched onto the story.
But take a look at the actions of China, and in this instance, as much as I'd love to, I'm not going to blame the media.
China locked down their country.
They barricaded people in their homes.
They knew something we didn't.
Now Italy is under hard quarantine as the virus continues to spread throughout the entire country.
And they're having riots in their prisons.
The rioting, fair to say, is panic.
Maybe the quarantining of 16 million was a panic, but people started fleeing.
But take a look at what China is doing.
And I'm gonna go ahead and err on the side of, look, I think China's nuts.
But they knew something we didn't.
Maybe they knew the actual death rate.
There's videos of people being barricaded in their homes, people being dragged away.
People are locked in their houses.
There's men in suits walking in a building, spraying the disinfecting chemicals everywhere.
China reacted to this in a way we've never seen for these other viruses like SARS and MERS, at least to my understanding.
Then we saw the US military announce back in the beginning of February, a month ago, that they were going to prepare for a full-blown global pandemic.
Actions speak louder than words.
You've got all these agencies and other governments reacting to it to an absurd degree.
And it could be because everyone's panicking, or it could be because it's actually really, really bad, and they're not going to tell you because they're trying to prevent a panic.
And that is what's worrisome, and that only makes panic worse.
When the Surgeon General came out and said, please stop buying masks, they don't help, what happened?
A ton of people rushed to go buy masks.
So, listen.
Hopefully it's nothing.
We want to be wrong on this one.
But there are some people saying, I think it was the American Hospital Association predicting 94 million infections, I think, globally.
Maybe even in the US, I'm not entirely sure.
But they're saying by July, we could see 94 million infected.
There you go.
Maybe they just hate Trump.
Maybe.
That's what some people think.
They think, oh, everyone just hates Trump, so they're using us against him.
There was an article in the New York Post saying that things are going to start calming down.
We've hit the bell curve.
I honestly don't know.
I'm not going to play politics on this one.
To the best of my personal ability, from what I've read and what I've seen, you can blame the media and say they're hyping things up, but you've got to look at the militaristic actions of China and these other governments, and it seems like it's more serious than they're actually letting on.
And that may be because if they came out and said what was actually happening, people would freak out even worse than they already are.
Take it all with a grain of salt, and you're gonna have to figure this one out for yourself.
That's the best I can do.
I'll leave it there.
Stick around.
Next segment's coming up at 4 p.m.
YouTube.com slash Timcast.
It is a different channel, and I will see you then.
Feminists have been protesting in Mexico for quite some time on and off, and recently with International Women's Day, we saw another wave of violent protests and rioting, mostly from feminists, which resulted in quite a... Well, I'm gonna... I'm just gonna say it.
It's funny.
I mean, it's funny and kind of scary.
Mexico City feminists accidentally firebomb themselves in pro-abortion protests.
Now, this is the post-millennial.
I do not believe it is a fair and accurate assessment to call it a pro-abortion protest.
I know a little bit about the Mexican protests.
I was actually just down there, and I talked to some people.
But before we get into all that, let's read and see what they say, and I'll try and break down what's going on.
And, uh, yeah, they actually did firebomb themselves.
Oof, cringe.
Hard cringe.
They say, a demonstration turned violent protest in Mexico City yesterday saw parts of the city flipped upside down by International Women's Day protesters.
Protesters ransacked typically calm city spaces near the Metropolitan Cathedral, as well as the National Palace, which is where Mexico's president, André Manuel López Obrador, commonly referred to as AMLO, resides.
A video of AMLO trying toothpaste, apparently.
Okay.
The march was organized by feminist groups, and according to the government of Mexico City, brought out over 80,000 women.
Many public landmarks were vandalized, including bus stations, monuments, and private property.
The Hermosillo Cathedral was also destroyed as violent protesters were seen smashing glass as churchgoers indoors used pews to blockade the doors.
A viral video shows a protester tossing a Molotov cocktail at the president's residency,
an attempt which swiftly backfired. Now I'm just gonna play this little clip and I think,
you know, look, I think everyone's okay. But, uh, let's...
So for those that are listening, what happened was, is a group of feminists, it is mostly women,
and someone comes up behind them and tries throwing a Molotov, which falls right into
the crowd, bursts into flames, and ignites one of the women, which they then rush to try and put out.
There's a saying, I think it's very important, play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
In this instance, when you don't know what you're doing and you want to throw firebombs at people for stupid reasons, congratulations.
The story goes on to say the firebomb ended up hitting a feminist group.
At one point in the video, a feminist protester can be seen with her pants on fire before quickly being doused with a fire extinguisher.
Tensions in Mexico remain high as the country continues to go through social and economic woes.
Gender-based violence is a particularly striking issue in Mexico.
As an estimated 10 women are killed in the country each day, the government has been accused of inaction on the issue.
City officials did say that the majority of the protesters marched peacefully.
It was the masked petrol bomb-throwing radicals, officials say, that turned the situation violent.
Seven people were arrested.
Thirteen were taken to hospital, reports EFE News Agency.
Now, I don't know why the Postmillennial wanted to call it a pro-abortion protest, because as far as I know, based on my sources, who are actually in Mexico, and the other stories I've read, and the people I've personally talked to, That wasn't the case.
The issue was violence against women, which I will also partially debunk.
I think it's fair to say, if 10 women per day are being killed, protesting that is fine.
Just because there are other problems elsewhere doesn't mean you can't complain about problems that affect you, so I respect that.
I don't respect someone throwing a Molotov cocktail, and especially not when it lands on them.
Please don't do that.
The reality is, the protest, as far as I know, wasn't a pro-abortion protest.
The protest has to do with gender-based violence.
We can see this story from the Washington Post.
Not like I trust the Washington Post all that much.
Tens of thousands of Mexican women protest femicide, gender-based violence.
So, look, I'm sure, to an extent, these feminists are pro-choice, but to frame it as a pro-abortion protest is just not accurate.
But let's talk about statistics, and then I'll tell you a story.
See, I'm not complete... Look, I think protest is good.
I think if you face problems, and you want solutions, and you go out and peacefully protest, and even engage in civil disobedience like blocking roads, more power to you.
Now, if you engage in civil disobedience and you get arrested, yeah, that's paying the price.
You're trying to, you know, you're breaking the law, you get a slap on the wrist, you'll pay the price for what you did, but I respect civil disobedience.
Violence and destruction?
Not so much.
There are complicated questions pertaining to American history, like the Boston Tea Party.
It's actually a really interesting point that was brought up by Hank Newsom of Black Lives Matter, saying, You know, many Americans will celebrate the Boston Tea Party, which was an act of vandalism, I believe, against, you know, private imports of tea, because of the tea tax, and they destroyed it all by throwing it in the water, and they wore masks to do it.
Interesting points to bring up.
Regardless of our history, I am not a big fan of people getting violent and smashing private property and breaking things, but I do think civil disobedience is that good middle ground.
Here's what's really going on, though.
In Mexico, they're protesting femicide, saying women are being targeted.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
I've heard it all before.
You see, feminists like to claim they're the victims of all of this whatever.
You know what, man?
I just don't want to hear it.
You know why?
Check this out.
Homicide victims by gender, by country.
And what do you think we're going to find?
Well, let's hop on down to old Mexico here at number four with the most amount of homicides.
And then we can see 10.7 of the victims are female.
Let's do some quick math.
If they're claiming that 10 women die per day and women make up 10% of those that are killed, doesn't stand to reason that 90 men are killed every day?
Homicides?
So don't let me stop you from protesting.
Because I'll be honest, I don't care if you want to protest something that's not as big a deal as something else.
If it affects you and you're upset about it and you want to see it solved, I can respect that.
However, often we see left-wing protests, like Black Lives Matter particularly.
There was this comic that went viral about Black Lives Matter, where there were two houses.
One was on fire, and the other one was catching a little bit of the fire.
And it was a white guy spraying the hose on the house with a little bit of fire, saying, all lives matter.
And there was a black guy next to him, like, looking confused why he won't spray the house, it's actually burning down.
That's the argument they say.
Why are you addressing the small problem instead of the big problem first?
I would like to apply that same logic here to Mexico.
Because you actually have 90 men per day.
I mean, the stats probably don't add up that way, but if only 10% of the people killed are women, 90% are men, shouldn't you be protesting, I don't know, violence?
And I'll even go one step further and say just violence in general, including the women.
But I'll tell you what.
Like I said, if they want to protest, that's fine.
And I do take issue with Post Malone calling it a pro-abortion protest.
Because when I was down in Mexico, this is basically what I was told.
And it could be wrong.
It's not just about women being murdered.
It's about violence against women in general.
And I think if you want to protest that, I don't see what's the problem.
If you want to go around bashing skulls and throwing molotovs, now I see the problem.
And you reap what you have sown when you molotov your own people.
Please don't do this.
That's insane.
But I'm gonna tell you a not family-friendly story.
You've been warned.
When I was there, I was talking with some people who live down there about what was going on.
I was there in December.
What's going on with the protests?
Why are they protesting?
Why is there graffiti?
And they said one of the stories, at least, is that a young woman was walking home when a squad car, police officers, started following her.
She got nervous because they were creeping behind her, went to a house, a random one, pretending like it was hers, and rang the doorbell, knocking, trying to get inside because she was worried.
As the story goes, and keep in mind, this could be incorrect.
This is what people were telling me on the ground.
The cops got out, took her in, Called their buddies, brought her to some location, and they proceeded to have their way with her against her will, to keep it at least a little bit, you know, the language a little bit simmered down.
If these things are happening, don't be surprised when you see protests as direct results of the individual actions.
So while we can look at the murder rates and say more men are killed, maybe these feminists should focus on that, it's also important to point out that some of the reactions are about individual people.
Like, they're not necessarily saying, you know, they're gonna ignore that men are killed too.
Many of these protesters are saying specifically, this woman.
We want accountability.
We want justice for this one woman.
And that was a catalyst for a lot of the big protests.
So now you can see, you've got a bunch of people marching.
And it looks like this protest was, for the most part, peaceful.
I got no beef.
You want to have a peaceful protest, march around, singing your songs?
I encourage that.
I'm stoked by that.
In fact, we have the First Amendment specifically saying, right, to assembly, protest, all that stuff.
We got that good stuff.
It's a part of freedom, and I respect it.
But it's the people who deserve the Malta.
You know, it's this.
When you go out and you do this, I'm sorry to say, but to an extent, you deserve this.
Now, I wouldn't wish this on anybody.
Fire is a scary thing.
You know, you can get burned real quick.
But if you're going to go around trying to throw firebombs at cops, well then, you hitting yourself is a bit of, I don't know, instant karma.
You don't have the right to injure other people and to cause harm to them simply because you want something implemented that can't be democratically implemented.
That's the important part right here.
These protesters, they go out and say, I want X. Well, guess what?
When it comes to the public, they don't agree.
You don't then have the right to go throw things at people.
And when you get hit, I can only laugh.
I'm sorry, man.
I hope everyone's okay.
I wouldn't want this to happen.
But what do you want me to say?
You tried to hurt someone else with fire, and instead, you just hit your own people.
It's better than the innocent being like, you know what?
I think the people who actually got hit were, to an extent, innocent.
They didn't know it was coming.
But what can I say?
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
So I'll wrap this up.
Look, man.
I don't know all the nuances of the protests down in Mexico City, but I got no problem with peaceful protesters, and I don't think anyone else should either.
But we should call this out every step of the way.
At least we get something that's kind of funny out of it.
I'll leave it there.
Stick around.
Next segment's coming up in a few minutes, and I will see you all shortly.
We've got some coronavirus updates for here at home and a couple that are really interesting.
Donald Trump is going to be overlooking a potential stimulus package to deal with the economic fallout of the coronavirus.
But I want to start with this story because it made me laugh.
Cuomo challenges Purell, Amazon, eBay by introducing New York-made hand sanitizer.
Now, you may be thinking that's the funny part.
It's not.
Just you wait.
You see, Governor Cuomo said, why should we not turn a hot profit during this emergency?
As people are rushing to the stores and buying up that hand sanitizer so they can make sure they don't get that disgusting coronavirus We're losing out on that green.
I got an idea.
Let's make New York brand hand sanitizer.
All we gotta do is brew alcohol in a bathtub, right?
Well, how do you think New York went about making that hand sanitizer?
I love it.
They decided to use prison labor!
Oh, don't you love the democratic institutions?
Where they lock people up for non-violent offenses and then go on to use them in prison to make cheap products which they then sell.
I will never understand why there are conservatives who will defend some of the policies of, like, Bloomberg and, you know, and de Blasio or Cuomo or whatever.
It's like, when they start— There's a video going viral.
It's got 13 million views.
of a young black man being pushed up against the wall by a cop saying, what did I do?
I didn't commit any crimes.
And then a bunch of cops run out, throw him to the ground, and arrest the guy.
Now, I don't know what happened.
And it is risky because, you know, if you come out too early and you're like, this is injustice, and it turns out he did something, you're gonna look like an idiot.
But let me tell you what, man.
I lived in New York for a while.
I know all about stop and frisk.
And I know all about the things Michael Bloomberg was doing.
Bloomberg straight up said, We need to stop more black and brown people.
Like, dude, that's not the issue.
The issue is poverty because of your policies.
Okay, please.
I don't get why, you know, Trump or any conservative would defend stop and frisk for two reasons.
It's literally a gun control measure that targets innocent people.
And then, and then, and two, those people often end up getting arrested on trumped up
charges to justify the stop in the first place.
Now it's true that it might help in some capacity, but as far as I can tell from the studies
done, it doesn't.
So here you have a city that pushes these Democrat policies, which keep these people
in poverty and poverty breeds crime.
And then Bloomberg justifying his gun control measures to by going after poor communities
and saying it's a racial issue.
Man, that guy is awful.
Just absolutely awful.
And here's what you get.
Those kids that end up getting arrested and charged on nonviolent offenses because, like, I mean, it's a violation of the Fourth Amendment.
They end up going to jail, some go to prison for various issues, and they end up then being used for cheap labor to produce hand sanitizer for the outbreak.
This is nightmarish dystopia stuff.
Please do not defend these people and their policies.
They are insane, racists, they are morons, they perpetuate poverty, and for some reason, I gotta throw a little shade to a lot of New Yorkers, they keep voting for it!
Tell me why I don't know.
Check this out.
This is from today, from The Verge.
Faced with shortages of hand sanitizer amid the new coronavirus outbreak, New York State
has decided to make its own.
The hand sanitizer will be made by inmates at correctional facilities, said Andrew Cuomo,
who announced the product's development at a press conference on Monday.
The inmates can make 100,000 gallons per week, according to Cuomo.
As the coronavirus outbreak in the U.S.
has spread, hand sanitizer has been flying off the shelves, while price gouging has pushed prices sky high.
New York declared a state of emergency related to the outbreak on Saturday.
So far, 142 people in the state have tested positive for COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus.
To prevent the spread of the disease, public health officials are asking people to wash their hands.
We get it.
New York's hand sanitizer, Cuomo says, will be 75% alcohol and will be made available to government agencies, prisons, schools, and transit agencies.
The first area to get the hand sanitizer will be New Rochelle, which is a large number of cases.
The hand sanitizer will be made by Cordcraft.
The part of the state's Department of Corrections and Community Supervision that manufactures products from license plates to pillows, the average wage of these facilities was about 65 cents per hour in 2015 to 2016, according to a report from The Gothamist.
Prisons are particularly vulnerable to outbreaks, including the current one.
Hey man, I know I was being a little hyperbolic when I said they want to cash in on that green.
What I mean to say is, buying these products is expensive.
If they can just get the inmates to do it, hey, cheap labor for cheap products, that's what we're talking about, right?
That's the good old Democrat policy.
Good on you, Andrew Cuomo.
Lock people up.
You get Bill de Blasio, you get Michael Bloomberg in New York City locking people up on Trump top charges.
Push these policies that perpetuate poverty because, as we all know, poverty breeds crime when people become desperate, when people are not educated, when people grow up without a father or a mother.
Yeah, then you can breed your poverty, lock these people up, and use them as cheap labor to supplement state products.
I find that all completely disgusting, and I'm surprised there'd be anyone who would defend any of this.
But let's move on to a little bit more interesting news in the financial area of the coronavirus.
So this is a story from this morning, or from this afternoon, I'm sorry.
Trump to weigh coronavirus stimulus options Monday, including paid sick leave.
Advisors were preparing to brief the president on a menu of options to shore up the economy, according to people familiar with the discussions.
Cool.
I'm down.
I mean, we'll see what this plays into, but keep in mind, if they do like a money printing thing or some kind of stimulus, that's going to cause inflation.
But, you know, it is what it is.
We've got a serious problem right now.
The market took a major hit, and this is mostly off of oil, but coronavirus plays a role in what we saw in the past few days.
So, anything the government can do to step in, this is exactly what they're for, in my opinion.
To sort of, you know, step in during emergencies because the market's taking major hits and we gotta, you know, kind of play referee on this one.
I don't know exactly what will happen, but I'm hoping to see them do something to make sure that whatever does happen, whatever panic ensues, people will make it through this one with very little harm to their business, to themselves, to their savings.
So, we'll see.
Right now, the stock drop-off we saw this morning has to do more with oil prices in Saudi Arabia and less to do with coronavirus.
But of course, coronavirus being the hot media topic, all of these media outlets gotta say that the coronavirus is the cause, which is just not fair.
Absolutely not fair.
It plays a role, I think it's fair to say, but the cause was that overnight, Saudi Arabia dumped oil like crazy, dropping it by like 20 or 30 percent, which is nuts.
And the market opened up, got hurt, got locked, so...
I'll leave that where it is.
But I want to talk now about the one last bit of the coronavirus updates here.
This is from CNN.
CNN has now decided to call the coronavirus outbreak a pandemic.
With this article from Sanjay Gupta, they say, starting today, you will notice that CNN is using the term pandemic to describe the current coronavirus outbreak.
It is not a decision we take lightly.
While we know it sounds alarming, it should not cause panic.
So why now?
The World Health Organization hasn't called the coronavirus outbreak a pandemic, nor has the U.S.
Center for Disease Control and Prevention.
At which point I'm going to stop and say CNN probably shouldn't call it a pandemic if the official international and national institutions aren't doing so.
But hey, Just like with the market, you know, collapsing, they gotta get their sweet, sweet, you know, rage bait in there.
They say, but epidemiologists and public health experts argue the world is already experiencing a pandemic because of the coronavirus.
There are now over 100,000 cases and over 3,000 deaths attributed to this new virus.
In one day last week, the number of new cases outside China, where the virus originated, was nearly nine times higher than the number of new cases in China.
This virus has found a foothold on every continent except for Antarctica.
In several countries, the number of cases continues to climb.
The thing is, while I certainly think it's important to track the coronavirus, I do believe the media is making things a bit crazier, for sure.
Not everybody.
There is a hard line to draw between when you're panicking and when you're not.
I think Trump and many of his supporters have begun downplaying this, and that can be bad, because the mortality rate is decently high.
But it is fair to point out, in my opinion, that there's overreaction for sure, and CNN is now trying to justify why they're gonna call it a pandemic.
You know why?
It sells better.
They're gonna say, you know, the coronavirus has been upgraded to pandemic, and then not tell you, it's actually just their arbitrary editorial decision.
They write, some of these countries have sustained community transmission of a substantial sort.
That's true.
The specific criteria for a pandemic are not universally defined, but there are three general criteria.
A virus that can cause illness or death, sustained person-to-person transmission, and evidence of spread throughout the world.
The CDC says a pandemic is an epidemic that has spread over several countries or continents, usually affecting a large number of people, while an epidemic is an increase, often sudden, in the number of cases of a disease above what is normally expected in that population in that area.
In late February, CDC's Dr. Nancy Messonnier said, the fact that this virus has caused illness, including illness that has resulted in death and sustained person-to-person spread, is concerning.
These factors meet two of the criteria for pandemic.
As community spread is detected in more and more countries, the world moves closer towards meeting the third criteria, worldwide spread of the new virus.
Listen.
I understand we're all on a rock and a hard place.
For me, when I make videos, I don't want anyone to freak out.
But I also feel like this is a seriously important story.
High mortality rate, fast spread.
Regardless of whether or not there are other diseases that could or could be worse, we've got a serious issue right here.
We shouldn't downplay it.
It's also taking a major toll on panic buying on markets, supply chain, and the stock market itself.
So to ignore this outright would be a bad idea.
The other challenge is how much media is actually causing the panic itself, and that's another serious concern, but I don't know if there's anything we can do about it.
Humans react the way they react.
I'm not entirely convinced CNN should be calling it a pandemic right now, if the other, you know, if the international and national organizations that track this stuff are not doing it either.
They're gonna make that editorial decision, but for you, for the rest of you, you gotta make these choices on your own.
Whether or not you think it's really that bad, you gotta do your thing.
But I'll tell you what, people are panicking, and that's a bad idea.
I'll leave it there.
Stick around.
I got one more segment coming up in a few minutes and I will see you all shortly.
If there's one thing the Bernie Sanders progressive left and the Donald Trump populist right can agree on, it's that Joe Biden is facing a severe cognitive decline.
And while there are many people that want to argue Trump is as well, I'm sorry, it's just not anywhere near what Joe Biden is doing.
And just because Donald Trump has gaffes doesn't mean he's facing cognitive decline.
Granted, they're all really old people.
But anyway, more to the point.
In light of a recent video that went viral where Joe Biden said we can only re-elect Donald Trump, the media is pouncing on Bernie Sanders supporters.
Why?
Well, let me stop and tell you something.
You may have seen this video.
Dan Scavino, who works with Donald Trump, he handles his social media, said it was, I believe he said it was a St.
Louis rally, where Joe Biden said, we can only re-elect Donald Trump.
In fact, my understanding was that it was actually Kansas City, and the full quote from Joe Biden was, he does fumble and gaffe, saying we can't win, he says, we can't win re-election, we can't win this re-election, I'm sorry.
We can only reelect Donald Trump if in fact we get engaged in this circular firing squad.
We have to have a positive campaign.
That's the full quote.
So what happens is Joe Biden says we can only reelect Donald Trump if in fact, but in that like pause, the clip, it got clipped.
So you only hear Biden say we can only, you know, we can only reelect Donald Trump in my opinion.
That is an out-of-context quote, and I am no fan of anybody trying to prop that up, and so Twitter labeled it as a manipulated video clip.
Bernie Sanders supporters hopped on board with the same narrative, and Trump supporters and Bernie supporters went after Biden over this one, but I'm sorry, it was just not correct.
However, I'm going to be a bit in agreement with the Trump supporters who are kind of angry that Twitter slapped a label on the video saying manipulated media, because how many clips have been posted by anybody that don't get flagged as being manipulated?
And are they only now singling out Donald Trump?
The answer is pretty much, yeah.
That's the problem.
If you want to be upset that the video is out of context, don't worry.
You know, people do this thing all the time.
It's par for the course in politics.
I'm not surprised Dan Scavino would put out the clip.
Literally, they do this all the time my entire life.
So what's changed?
Social media companies and the press are biased against the president.
So he gets that special little tag when he retweets it.
Not only that, Donald Trump himself didn't make the video, he just retweeted it.
Dan Scavino got the rally wrong.
Someone may have just sent it to him.
So they're pointing out Biden said something.
Guess what?
You want to assume malintent, by all means go and do so.
I can't prove it.
It sounds like Dan Scavino just got something wrong.
They then slap a manipulated clip on it to make it seem then like Trump and Scavino or whoever else purposefully did this.
They could have just put something like, you know, this video is missing context.
Or just put a link like, listen to Biden's full comment in context or something like that.
The bigger issue I have though is with the flagging itself.
They're not going to go around, for the most part, flagging Joe Biden, is he?
Are they?
What about that clip where Joe Biden said, I'm running for the U.S.
Senate, and if you don't like it, vote for the other Biden?
Are they going to put a flag on that where they're like, in fact, Joe Biden is not running for the U.S.
Senate.
He's running for the president.
No, they don't do that.
When Joe Biden says something dumb and wrong, they don't put a flag on it.
He just gets to say whatever stupid nonsense he wants.
And when the president retweets it, you better believe they're going to swoop in and issue that marker because these companies are biased.
Case in point, the first segment I did this morning.
John Levine of the New York Post reporting on a socialist Got his Twitter account suspended, reinstated, and then suspended again.
Yet the dude he was reporting on, Carlos Maza, did literally the same thing.
He posted photos of James Carville's house.
He's even called for incitement and Twitter does nothing.
Look, man, I have no problem calling out If if Trump or anybody puts out a clip that's out of context, the issue I take in the bigger picture is that when you only have one sided enforcement, don't be surprised when no one believes you.
And there's the bigger problem.
I'm seeing a bunch of Trump supporters who believe the clip is legit.
And when I tweeted, I quote tweeted Dan Scavino and said, here's the full quote and I'll link to the video.
Someone said, no, that's a different rally.
And I'm like, different rally?
It's a verbatim quote in both clips.
You can play them side by side and see that the one clip ends before Biden even finishes his sentence when you hear the full sentence.
Listen, man, if it was intentional, which I can't say it was, Biden has so many gaps, you don't need to do it.
But regardless, social media companies are going to do it.
They're only going to enforce the rules in one direction.
You're going to see fact-checking agencies pounce.
Donald Trump's publishing disinformation to smear Biden.
Expect more.
Calm down.
Framing is everything.
Did Donald Trump publish or retweet a video that pulled Biden out of context?
100% absolutely.
I got no problem saying it.
Does Twitter enforce in only one direction?
80 to 90% of the time, they do.
They are more likely to remove a conservative.
Now, here's the funny thing.
What do you think CNN's upset about?
They have this story.
Twitter botches fact check of manipulated Biden video retweeted by Trump.
Twitter said it would take action against a misleading video of former Vice President Joe Biden that was retweeted by President Trump, a major action that courted blowback from the White House.
But then the social media company botched it.
On Sunday, Twitter said it would label a deceptively edited video posted by the White House social media director, Dan Scavino, as manipulated media.
By Monday, however, the label still wasn't showing up for some users.
Okay, this exemplifies exactly why Twitter is doing everything wrong, their bias doesn't work, It makes things worse.
But I'll give a good bravo to the media that were freaking out.
So now some people are going to see it and think it's true.
Other people are going to see it and think it's fake.
But not only that, I mean, look, what's your assumption that it's manipulated in the first place?
What does manipulated mean?
There's insinuations and it's really hard to balance.
But Twitter now is going to create two disparate realities where some people say it must have been a real clip and others look at it and see it saying manipulated.
But now here's the best part.
This exemplifies how Twitter is screwing up because Twitter can't possibly police literally every single clip uploaded to its platform.
So what's to stop someone from literally making a video, and then just what, the president doesn't retweet it?
So Twitter doesn't flag it?
Or what would happen if Nancy Pelosi or some Democrat published something that was misleading?
Are they going to flag that?
That's the problem.
Twitter doesn't have the capacity to fact check literally every single video.
So when they only do this, they create an assumption.
That if they don't see the tag, it must be true.
Now, I'm not going to pretend like Americans are stupid, but there are going to be some people who will see a fake video and believe it.
A lot of Trump supporters believed the clip ended where it ended.
It didn't.
When Twitter only can fact check in one direction, then the left will start believing fake news and the right will stop trusting media.
Where do you think that brings us?
Disparate realities and rapid polarization.
The problem with social media censorship in this regard, as I've put it, is that you'll have the right and the left, and the crazies that are associated with the right get purged, but the left is allowed to run rampant.
This is not going to help the left, it's going to hurt the left.
Because now people are going to go in believing insane things.
This is another perfect example of that.
If somebody is uninitiated, not politically active, and they go on Twitter and they see that tweet from Trump and it says, manipulated media, they go, huh, Biden never said that.
Then they look to the left and they see people screeching about Russiagate and other insane nonsense.
They go, oh, this must be true.
All of a sudden you're left with a lunatic who believes insane things.
And then they lose because sane, rational Americans are confused.
The way I try to explain to people is, when you have the left veering so far to the left, I believe part of it has to do with Twitter and Facebook and YouTube's inability, or lack of willingness, to actually police the crazes of the left.
Now take someone who voted for Obama.
They don't really pay attention to politics.
They're just sitting around playing video games.
Here's them, and the left veers to the far left.
One day, they walk outside.
It's been four years since the last presidential election.
And they're like, man, that Obama guy was really great.
You know, he did deport a lot of people.
I like his policy on immigration.
And then they go to a rally, and they're like, I wonder what the Democrats are talking about today, because I haven't been paying attention the past couple years.
And you get someone on stage saying, open borders!
No deportations at all!
Tear down the wall!
And they're just like, whoa, wait, what?
And then they look to their left and there's someone with a pink mohawk screeching about how biological males should compete against biological females.
And you're just like, wait, wait, hold on, how did I get to this point?
Who are these people?
I don't relate to them.
That's the bigger issue, I guess, but I won't make this one super long.
Suffice it to say, look, man, There's a little criticism to go around across the board.
I think it's BS, it's unfair, that you'll see a media pile-on when Donald Trump retweets something because it was taken out of context.
Yet, there are literally journalists for NBC and a bunch of other outlets who have done the same thing to me and they do it to Trump every single day.
Remember that clip from ABC where Trump was with the Prime Minister of Japan, and the Prime Minister splashes all of the fish into the koi pond so Trump follows suit?
The cameraman zooms in, deceptively editing a video, and that was ABC.
Where was the flag for that video?
So look, again, I've got no problem calling out the President if he does this, but I think it's fair to say the media does it every single day, and they don't get flagged for it.
