Transcrição completa de Discouraging & Humiliating

enthusiasm for Trump and Darlene from King of the Hill? Graham, uh, um, uh, Every district, or is it every county in South Carolina, which is the ruby reddest of states, every county got bluer. Every single one. I mean, there was a miserable lack of enthusiasm among Republicans. Almost unbelievable. 00:03:20 Speaker 6: It's short, so let's go ahead and hear a little bit from her concession speech. Tonight was not the result any of us wanted in this room. 00:03:29 Speaker 1: Or around the country, but we cannot. 00:03:31 Speaker 8: Exit the fight. 00:03:33 Speaker 3: This is a tough cycle, and all of us need to be involved as we chart a path forward. 00:03:39 Speaker 6: I'm sorry, my heart rate went to two, and I almost fell over. Your heart rate should be higher than two. Yeah, I honestly believe she didn't want to be senator. She's like, how did I get caught up in this? This is going to be the most miserable six years of my life. How quickly can I resign? 00:03:55 Speaker 3: But anyway, Trump talked her into it to running and she hated the process. She didn't want to be a senator. They could barely force her at gunpoint to go up there and make that concession speech. She mumbled her way through it, then went back home and breathed the sigh of deep, deep relief. 00:04:11 Speaker 6: Guaranteed. I want to be at home with my cat knitting and, you know, doing what I do. I had a good life. I like this. Do not discount the possibility that John Fetterman will simply eat many of the new senators. I think that is a wow. That is just not helpful at all. Trump did tweet out last night before he calmed down. I thought I was happy with the way Trump handled it on the broadcast last night. When he got on there and he said, congratulations to the Democrats, you know, you fought a good fight and, you know, I'm willing to work with you and all that sort of stuff. I accept the results. When nut jobs had been predicting he was going to call out the army and lose his mind and all that sort of stuff. But he did tweet this out during as the results were coming in last night. I wasn't on the ballot. And if I was, we would have won in a landslide. Thank you for your attention to this matter. OK, if you say so. 00:05:02 Speaker 3: Does he believe that? 00:05:04 Speaker 6: I don't know. 00:05:05 Speaker 3: I don't know either. 00:05:07 Speaker 6: And then maybe the biggest question that is hanging out there right now, and I would guess they're going to have meeting upon meeting upon meeting about this until January 20th behind closed doors, the Democrats to figure out what they want to do. Robert Garcia, Democrat, California. He will be the chair of the House Oversight Committee. That's a committee that starts subpoenaing people and doing investigations. And he had a two word message that he tweeted out last night. Lawyer up. Now, that's just one house member. 00:05:36 Speaker 3: Ron Wyden of Oregon said one word, subpoenas. 00:05:39 Speaker 6: Okay, that's just a couple

house members. They don't get to make the decision on their own. 00:05:43 Speaker 3: Wyden's a senator. 00:05:46 Speaker 6: Hakeem Jeffries and Kamala Harris have indicated, and Chuck Schumer, have indicated that they don't think impeachment is the road to go down. Whether or not they can hold back their horses, I do not know. I agree with what Gary Dietrich said last hour. That's not what the country wants. People didn't vote for you. Some people did. But you didn't win overwhelmingly last night, especially in places like Texas, because they're all excited about impeaching Donald Trump. 00:06:12 Speaker 3: Right, right. You know, anything beyond what I'm about to say might be true, but it's just kind of missing the main point. People care about their family finances, trusted Trump to make them better. He made them worse. That's it. Everything else is just details. And so the depth of anger over that surprised me a little bit because of the loathing of the Democratic Party that most Americans hold. Their approval ratings are horrific, just historically miserably low. And yet, even in the reddest states, people either didn't turn out or they said, you know what, I'm going to punish you by giving my vote to the Democrats, even though I hate them. That's how fundamental... inflation is, and you know, you can say pocketbook issues or the kitchen table issues or the economy or Jeff it's inflation. If inflation is high, nothing else matters. 00:07:11 Speaker 6: If I was Hakeem Jeffries, who will be the speaker of the house or Chuck Schumer, who's going to be the leader of the Senate, I would get my guys and women in a room and close the door and take away their cell phones. So nobody can recording this and say, look, we're the least popular we have ever been in our party's history. 00:07:32 Speaker 2: All right. 00:07:32 Speaker 6: We had a great night the other night, but let's not forget, we are as unpopular as we have ever been. Enthusiasm for us being in charge could vanish like that. All right? Let's keep that in mind, everyone. 00:07:45 Speaker 3: Let's just enrich our cronies. That's why we're here. 00:07:48 Speaker 6: We are not FDR in 1932. Everybody keeps thinking they're FDR in 1932 when he had something like 88 senators elected. and 85% of the House members, and you could do whatever the hell you wanted. That isn't what's going on. 00:08:06 Speaker 4: Yeah. 00:08:07 Speaker 3: Hakeem Jeffries will be the Speaker of the House of Representatives. He will become a household name, and I just wanted to warn everybody, including Katie, that I will be referring to him as Haktua Jeffries. 00:08:18 Speaker 6: Ooh. 00:08:19 Speaker 3: So, just fair warning. 00:08:22 Speaker 6: And so Mike Johnson has already announced he will not run for Minority Leader in the Senate for the Republicans. Steve Scalise has announced he will run, and Jim Jordan, because he thinks we have too many jackets in government right now. 00:08:36 Speaker 3: Oh, yeah. We need more people in shirt sleeves. Let's bear our forearms and get to work. Exactly. Says Jim Jordan. 00:08:43 Speaker 8: All right. 00:08:44 Speaker 3: All right. All right. So what do you want to know about the Virginia abortion thing? 00:08:48 Speaker 6: Ooh, do I want to know this? So they locked in yesterday in their state some pretty extreme abortion law. I didn't even want to read the details. 00:08:58 Speaker 3: Yeah, you know what? I couldn't find my favorite analysis of it. It is fairly difficult to get through the veil of the mainstream media's coverage of this because they're all pro-abortion. And the ballot measure itself needs interpreting. 00:09:12 Speaker 6: Because they use language like reproductive freedom and stuff like that when they're talking about killing babies. 00:09:18 Speaker 2: Right. 00:09:19 Speaker 3: And in blue states, and Virginia used to be reddish, then purplish, and now it's pretty blue. In blue states, the ballot measures are brutally dishonest. I mean, California, there have been some through the years that have been absolutely hilarious. I mean, the stop robbing old ladies for their pension checks measure would be called by the Democrats deny funding to schools measure. 00:09:46 Speaker 4: Right. 00:09:47 Speaker 3: So here's the actual wording. Should the Constitution of Virginia be amended to protect the freedom to make personal decisions about prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, birth control? abortion, miscarriage management and fertility care. 00:10:03 Speaker 2: Wow. 00:10:04 Speaker 6: Protect freedom to make personal decisions. That's what we're voting on. 00:10:08 Speaker 3: And protect doctors, nurses and patients from being punished for these decisions and allow for restrictions on access to abortion services. during the third trimester of pregnancy, except when the patient's health is at risk or the pregnancy cannot survive. And the thing, you have to get really into the analysis of this because, for instance, the third trimester part, the way it's phrased, you think, well, okay, thank God there are going to be restrictions on access to abortion during the third trimester. 00:10:35 Speaker 6: Everybody hates that. Look at the polling. Democrats, Republicans, liberals, conservatives, men, women, people do not like Third trimester abortion. 00:10:46 Speaker 3: And again, this will be a broad brush description because I don't have the analysis that I thought was really, really good in front of me. I couldn't find it. But the long and short of the third trimester stuff is that the limitations are extremely tenuous and easy to get around. I have a doctor who says, yeah, yeah, he puts out a cigarette. Yeah, the health is at risk. So, yeah, it's OK. Where do I sign? And you can have a third trimester abortion. Now, that may be a slight overstatement, but it's close to accurate. 00:11:17 Speaker 2: All right. 00:11:18 Speaker 6: I just saw we got to play this again because it's been a couple hours

now. 00:11:21 Speaker 4: Oh, yeah. 00:11:22 Speaker 6: When we come back, I just saw El Sayed up on the TV. Has there ever been anybody more pleased with his own act than he was last night? He made Barack Obama look like your local Methodist minister in terms of pleased with himself. 00:11:39 Speaker 3: Well, his gloating and touchdown dancing over his prone opponent was unbelievable. 00:11:45 Speaker 6: That's not usually the way we do things. 00:11:48 Speaker 2: No, no, no. 00:11:49 Speaker 3: So you're a much more hardworking, decent American than that gentleman. Don't get me started. You've accumulated a little bit of wealth the right way, but you don't love some of the pretensions of high finance. You ought to make a call to our friends at BlueCollarDollar.com. and have a real down-to-earth conversation about your financial future. 00:12:09 Speaker 6: Consultation is complimentary. If you've saved $ 250, 000 or more, there's no obligation at all. In a couple of minutes, it's all it takes to get started with people who understand your way of life and the value of your time. 00:12:19 Speaker 3: And you're not a trustafarian or you're not laying around with the idle rich. You're a working person. They understand the value of your time, so they make it simple. Dial pound 250 on your cell phone. It prompts a blue-collar dollar. Dial pound 250, say blue-collar dollar for a brief conversation about their services, a little get acquainted. You're going to like them. Take control of your financial future. Dial pound 250 and say blue-collar dollar. 00:12:42 Speaker 1: Armstrong and Getty are not clients of Talon. They are paid endorsers and receive compensation for this endorsement, which creates a financial incentive to promote Talon. Advisory services are offered through Talon, LLC, and SEC-registered investment advisor. Learn more at bluecollardollar.com. Armstrong and Getty. 00:13:04 Speaker 2: The Armstrong and Getty Show. 00:13:09 Speaker 6: My name is Abdulrahman Mohamed Al Sayed. 00:13:19 Speaker 9: And I am so proud and honored to stand here as your senator-elect from the great. 00:13:25 Speaker 6: State of Michigan. That is Al Sayed, who won up in Michigan quite easily. He goes on in his acceptance speech. 00:13:34 Speaker 9: Up until right about now, you might have noticed I always say, inshallah, or God willing, whenever the outcome of this race was mentioned. But today, tonight, we can turn that inshallah into alhamdulillah. 00:13:52 Speaker 3: Allahu Akbar. 00:13:54 Speaker 6: So the next step we're going to play is unique in my memory. Where a candidate for a major office wins and doesn't go with the whole gracious acceptance speech of my opponent just called me and and congratulated me on the win. It was a hard fought battle. And they said they're willing to work with me and blah, blah, blah. And I'm willing to work with them. And, you know, and if the crowd boos, you know. 00:14:17 Speaker 3: No, no, no, no, no. I want to be a senator

for all. 00:14:19 Speaker 6: Yeah. Yeah. Everybody does that. I don't even remember Trump not doing that when he won the two times he won. but El Sayed was not having any of that. Here he is after he beat Mike Rogers last night. 00:14:31 Speaker 9: I want you to let him know, let him know that we together fighting for something bigger. 00:14:37 Speaker 6: We won. 00:14:40 Speaker 9: So Mike, enjoy your retirement. I know you got a house in Florida and two yachts. See, you chose hate and Michigan chose hope. May we never have to see the likes of you in the state again. 00:15:00 Speaker 6: Whoa. So another norm broken. I guess the era of concession speeches where you say nice that you don't continue the campaign. That era is over, apparently. 00:15:12 Speaker 3: Yes, it is. Yes, it is. To what extent will Abdul Rahman Mohammed El-Sayed show his true colors in his stint as a senator for as long. 00:15:23 Speaker 4: As it lasts? 00:15:24 Speaker 6: I don't know. In terms of the I want to be a senator for all Americans, he continues to stick his thumb in the eye as we roll on. 00:15:31 Speaker 3: J.D. 00:15:35 Speaker 6: Habibi. 00:15:39 Speaker 9: There is this delicious irony in the fact that you're constitutionally obligated. 00:15:45 Speaker 6: To swear me in in January. And that is too much. 00:15:54 Speaker 3: So you know what that means? 00:15:57 Speaker 6: Wolverine one, Buckeye zero. 00:15:58 Speaker 3: Again, that's a funny line in Michigan, but yeah, there's not a lot of brotherhood in the Muslim Brotherhood, apparently. 00:16:06 Speaker 4: No. 00:16:07 Speaker 6: I hate you, you hate me, and you have to swear me in to take a suck of that. Is not what people usually do? 00:16:13 Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah. You know, J.D. Vance ought to do an hour-long, and I would be happy to co-write this for him if you'd like, an hour-long description of of how Islamism is fundamentally incompatible with the U.S. Constitution for a number of reasons, including the fact that it sorts citizens into the categories of Muslim and non-Muslim, or dhimmi, under law, and it treats them differently and brutally if you're non-Muslim. Do an hour-long speech of that, then turn and say, all right, I got to swear in Abdul Rahman Muhammad Al-Sayed. And do you hear all that? Did you catch all that? Okay, now you're going to swear allegiance to the Constitution. Okay, let's get this done. That'd be kind of fun. 00:16:57 Speaker 6: Well, to your point, he went on with his usual stick here. 00:17:01 Speaker 3: I want to say something here. 00:17:02 Speaker 7: See, they try to call you hateful if you believe that Palestinian kids should get to grow up in the land of their forefathers without being murdered by our tax dollars. 00:17:16 Speaker 9: If you believe in equal rights to peace, dignity, and self-determination. 00:17:20 Speaker 6: That's not hate, it's love. 00:17:25 Speaker 9: Michiganders, we want our taxes spent here. 00:17:28 Speaker 3: For schools here, and health care

here, and infrastructure here. 00:17:32 Speaker 9: We don't want our money sent to do apartheid or genocide or war. 00:17:35 Speaker 3: He does such a good job of shooting down points nobody has ever made. And combating arguments that nobody would ever pose. 00:17:44 Speaker 6: Doubling down on genocide from the stage in your acceptance speech. 00:17:50 Speaker 7: Yes. 00:17:51 Speaker 3: Wow. That is 100% critical theory, victim oppressor, settler, colonist, neo-Marxism. 100%. 00:18:03 Speaker 6: You know what I would have loved? I would have loved a Bill Clinton speech. Could have been on stage debating that point with him last night. We had a deal for the Palestinians. They could have raised their kids in their own land, but they walked away from it twice. 00:18:15 Speaker 3: Because they wanted to kill the Jews. They wanted it all, and to kill the Jews was the problem. 00:18:21 Speaker 6: Lonnie Chen's one of the best political pundits around, and we're going to talk to him coming up next. I have some stats that will blow your mind, and I want to hear him react to them also. 00:18:31 Speaker 2: Armstrong and Getty. 00:18:48 Speaker 6: What is our assignment? 00:18:49 Speaker 10: First, Americans want Washington to bring down the cost of living. Second, Americans want us to clean up corruption in government. They know that Trump is the most corrupt president in American history. No American should have to make trade-offs at the supermarket while Trump is making insider trades on the stock market. And third, they want us to check on Trump's chaos at home and abroad. We've seen too many Americans die on our streets and in uniform overseas because of Trump's erratic judgment. The American people don't know what the heck we're fighting for in Iran. He's never made it clear. 00:19:26 Speaker 3: He changes his mind. 00:19:30 Speaker 6: So that's Chuck Schumer is going to be the leader of the Senate laying out why why he thinks the Democrats won and what people want out of him. How big an ass whipping was it last night? I hadn't come across these numbers. This will lead us into talking with Lon He Chen. So the 94 revolution, it was called when the Republicans took back the House after 50 years, the Democrats, the Democrats running it. Republicans won the popular vote by six point eight points. The wipeout with Bush's midterm in 2006, Democrats won by seven point nine. 2010, when Obama got wiped out, it was 6.8 win for the Republicans. 2018 was 8.6. The D's are on track for a 13 point popular vote win across America. You have to go back to Watergate 1974 to get those kind of numbers. This is, as Tim Alberta, who's a guy who crunches numbers, said this is an election to which every future midterm will be compared. 00:20:36 Speaker 3: Good Lord. To discuss that and more, welcome Lanhee Chen, David and Diane Steffi Fellow in American Public Policy Studies at the Hoover Institution and the Director of Domestic Policy Studies at Stanford University. Lanhee, welcome, sir. Thank you. Good to be with you. 00:20:50 Speaker 6: I mean, you look at Watergate 74, pretty easy to figure out why voters were choosing one party over another. Coming out of Watergate, right? How about this one? What's your explanation? 00:21:03 Speaker 8: I think there's a lot of things. I mean, I think first of all, what you saw was just a lot of voter frustration with the state of the economy. I mean, I think the reality is that this economy has been really tough for some period of time. And it's not just like the last two years. I think it has been a sustained period of inflation, eating away at paychecks, rising costs for energy and housing. Again, I don't think this is new. But I do think that voters wanted to send a signal that whatever is happening in Washington isn't working. And I do think that that was part of it. I think that there is also a sense– I mean obviously Chuck Schumer is prone to some embellishment. But I do think that there is some frustration that that lack of progress on those economic issues is related to what people perceive as being the administration not keeping its eye on the ball. on important issues. 00:21:53 Speaker 3: And, and yes, it was. 00:21:54 Speaker 6: What do you mean keeping his eye on the ball? Trump was at the reflective pool the day before the election, making it clear that that was not here about the caulk, the best copper piping you can get keeping the eye on the ball. That's not fair. 00:22:08 Speaker 3: All right. So you are, you are an intelligent and sober commentator as I am neither. I would like to assert something and get your reaction to it. In the presidential election, last one, America said, look, Trump, you're a bit of a nut job. 00:22:28 Speaker 6: You're erratic. 00:22:29 Speaker 3: We didn't like January 6th. You know, we're not sure what to think of you, but by golly, you got that economy humming and my life was pretty good. So we're going to elect you. Just get that right. 00:22:42 Speaker 6: Here's the case of the country. 00:22:43 Speaker 3: And he didn't. Is there much more to it than that? 00:22:49 Speaker 8: Yeah, I mean, listen, that is, again, I think that's the overlay. But I mean, we could talk about all sorts of issues that I think were contributing factors that made it worse, right? I think we all expected that the House would go to the Democrats. I think we thought the Senate would be close. But what makes it a historic election is the factor you mentioned. Plus, let me give you one example, data centers, okay? In a lot of states, there was a ton of advertising run by Democrats on how Republicans were too cozy with tech. And as a result, they basically argued Republicans wanted to put data centers up in all these communities. And that was an issue that further accentuated this feeling amongst people that Republicans were out of touch. And I think that that's an example of an issue that was under the radar. It was under the radar in some ways. But

that was responsible for even worse outcomes in places like Texas and Ohio, where Republicans really got creamed in a way that people didn't expect. So, yes, I think you guys are right about the overall issue. 00:23:54 Speaker 3: Well, and one more thing, because unlike a Clinton who might have brilliantly triangulated that issue in one way or another, Trump just said, if you're against him, you're stupid. 00:24:09 Speaker 8: Yeah, I mean, listen, I think– Sometimes this is one thing I will say. I listened to and participated in a lot of analysis last night. I'm sure there's a tendency to overthink these things. There's a tendency to overthink these things as well. 00:24:23 Speaker 3: OK. 00:24:24 Speaker 8: And to try to read more into it, then people were pissed and they wanted to send a signal. And that's what we have. 00:24:30 Speaker 6: But you got it. I mean, I knew it was big, but I didn't know it was almost Watergate big. That that is something that is an unhappy electorate. 00:24:41 Speaker 8: Yeah, I mean, I actually thought, you know, one of the theories I had going into last night was that what would limit the ability of Democrats to have a huge majority in the House was that we had many fewer what were publicly perceived as competitive seats, right? So if you think about the makeup of the country, and you think about congressional districts across the country, if you go back 20 years, there were roughly double the number, double to triple the number, actually, of seats in That were politically competitive. In other words, the margin between between Democrats and Republicans was pretty tight in those districts. Those districts have basically disappeared. And so people thought, well, that puts a cap on the number of seats that could swing because you've got, say, Republican seats, safe Democrat seats. What we saw last night is actually, you know, there's a number of these seats that we thought were not swing seats that actually became swing seats. 00:25:35 Speaker 4: Right. 00:25:36 Speaker 8: You have Democrats winning seats that Trump won by 9, 10 points. California, here's a good example. In California, in 2011, 15 years ago in 2011, there were 19 Republicans in the House. There were 11 in 2021. Guess how many there will be today, Max, or in January when the new Congress takes over? Four. Four Republicans from the entire state of California in the House of Representatives. That is a remarkable number to me. So anyway, it's just interesting because what happened last night is seats that were not supposed to be swing seats became swing seats. 00:26:14 Speaker 3: Lonhee Chen on the line. So, Lonhee, let's focus on the future. Let's be future-oriented. And you've been at the heart of this, folks who don't know Lonhee's resume. He's been a campaign advisor and analyst as campaigns form and candidates decide to run and the party searches for its identity online. What is the next two years going to look like on the Republican side of the aisle? 00:26:39 Speaker 8: I mean, I think it's a lot of soul searching, to be honest with you, because I do think that there are these I mean, I think you've heard a number of Republicans this morning already talking about it. You know, Ron DeSantis gave an interview where, you know, basically he said, you know, people got fed up with Trump. He didn't say Trump specifically, but his point was, you know, this point we've been talking about, which is the administration took its eye off the ball. You had J.D. Vance even saying, listen, the coalition that Trump-Vance put together in 2024 is not the coalition anymore. There's going to be a lot of discussions about, A, what the winning coalition for Republicans will look like in the future. That's a political conversation. But B, what are the issues and what's the posture that Republicans should be taking on these issues? Because ultimately, while Democrats did win a big victory last night, they've now got to govern, right? They've got the Congress and they've got to figure out what they're doing. What does the Republican Party in opposition in the Congress look like? And then just the last thing I'll say is this, which is there is a possibility that Democrats overread their results from last night for some kind of mandate. and they overreach and try and do something like Medicare for All, which we've talked about before, then where does that leave Republicans, right? Does that leave them as the party in opposition, or do they want to actually put forward some ideas? So I think there's all of these things that are going to be discussions going on in the background. And then you set that against the last two years of Donald Trump, and is he going to be a lame duck, or is he going to be really aggressive? pushing forward on executive action and the things that he cares about. So it's going to be a super interesting next couple of years as we think about the future of the Republican Party. 00:28:21 Speaker 6: Since we got you on the phone, I want to ask you about California. You are maybe the world's leading expert on California and then the way it's governed and how hard it is for a Republican to win, as you got more votes as a Republican a couple of years back than any Republican has gotten in a very, very, very long time. And I remember you saying after you lost, even though you got the endorsement of all the major newspapers that almost never endorsed a Republican and you still didn't win. And you talk about California being ungovernable. 00:28:50 Speaker 8: What? 00:28:51 Speaker 6: Well, first of all, what does that mean? Why is California ungovernable? And and why? 00:28:57 Speaker 2: Why? 00:28:59 Speaker 6: Why is it just like embedded in our politics that a Republican can't win? 00:29:05 Speaker 3: Oh, my gosh. 00:29:06 Speaker 8: And we could spend hours. I know. 00:29:08 Speaker 6: I know. We could get you wound up on this one. 00:29:11 Speaker 8: I guess I guess the first thing I'd say is

that. If you look at the results from last night, I mean, I think it's pretty obvious that the blue tsunami, whatever they're calling it, certainly washed over California as well because I don't think any statewide contest is going to be closer than 20 to 25 points. 00:29:28 Speaker 3: Oh, my God. 00:29:29 Speaker 6: Just so from context. 00:29:30 Speaker 8: When I ran in 2022, I lost by about nine points, and that was the best performance we'd seen from a Republican in a while and seems like it will be for some time just because the gravity has gotten that much stronger in California in the intervening years. I think the problem is twofold, really. One is We have a ruling party in Sacramento that's really not willing to take on tough issues and really get to the heart of why we're having these challenges with public safety and with housing and homelessness and with our economy in California. You know, and Javier Becerra, who won the governorship last night, you know, I mean, he's just I don't think you if you surveyed 100 people, I think 100 would not be able to tell you what it is he's going to do as governor. and he's not particularly solutions-oriented, and this is what we've got. We've got a ruling class that's kind of interested in managing the decline. I think that's the first issue. 00:30:29 Speaker 3: Well, and they perfected the art of fixing democracy, but go on. 00:30:34 Speaker 8: Well, no, and then I think what they are, you know, what they are good at is preserving their leadership with all of the institutions in our state that make it hard for Republicans to win, and that's all of the, you know, all the public sector unions that are completely aligned with Democrats, the fact that they get to set the rules. So if you think about this stat I brought up earlier, why are there only four Republicans in the Congress from California? Well, because remember, they redistricted. The Democrats made the decision to redistrict the state with the consent of the voters back about a year ago. And that created the predicate for us to only have four Republicans in the House. And they can write the rules because that's what they do. And then the last thing I'll say is that, you know, I think President Trump's unpopularity in California has driven the lack of popularity of the Republican Party as well. And the party just has not been able to establish any kind of foothold, any kind of infrastructure in the state that would allow it to be competitive. So it's all those things, you know. I mean, it's a political problem. It's a policy problem. And it's just when people get in charge and nobody holds them accountable, they just kind of keep doing the same things over and over again. 00:31:46 Speaker 3: Wow. 00:31:46 Speaker 8: Wow. 00:31:46 Speaker 3: Maybe it's time to invent the California party and run as a C, not an R. 00:31:52 Speaker 6: God bless you. But who are you people that run as Republicans in California when you're going to lose by 20? 00:31:58 Speaker 3: Good for you. 00:31:58 Speaker 4: Yeah. 00:31:59 Speaker 8: I mean, this is it's it's it's a it's a challenge. And then and then you have a tough time recruiting candidates. 00:32:04 Speaker 2: Right. 00:32:04 Speaker 6: I'm sure. 00:32:05 Speaker 8: Like no one. 00:32:06 Speaker 3: I got a job. 00:32:06 Speaker 8: I got no one wants to go. No one wants to go and get beat in. I mean, this is why I a couple of actually last week I wrote an article in The L.A. Times. I actually suggested if you look at some of the offices in California, like some of the ones that deal with the money, right, controller and treasurer, that's the office I ran for and the other of what we call fiscal office in California. Why are we electing those in a partisan way, right? Those office holders ought to be people that don't have a party. They ought to just go in. They should be fix-it people. They should be people who just make things work right. And in California, we need more of that. We need more people that are just You know, I don't really care what party you are. Just go in and fix it. But it's become so polarized in this state. And the Democrats have such a stranglehold on it. We're just never going to have a conversation until we do something to really shake it up. And that's an idea that maybe we'll move to. 00:32:58 Speaker 4: Sorry. 00:32:59 Speaker 8: Sorry. 00:33:00 Speaker 2: Yeah. 00:33:01 Speaker 3: Wow. Blame the messenger. 00:33:02 Speaker 6: Why don't you kill him? 00:33:04 Speaker 2: Wow. 00:33:05 Speaker 3: Lonnie Chen of the Hoover Institution, Stanford University. No, you're 100 percent right. It's always great to talk on. He thanks so much for the time. 00:33:11 Speaker 6: Thank you. 00:33:12 Speaker 8: Yeah. 00:33:13 Speaker 6: That is depressing, though. 00:33:15 Speaker 3: You know, he used fancier words, but he agreed with me. The Democratic Party in California has perfected the art of perverting democracy and holding power. because of the public employee unions. And don't forget, like the nurses unions, those are not public employee unions, but they are slavishly devoted back scratching back and forth money back and forth with the Democratic Party. The SEIU, which represents everybody from janitors to fast food workers to God knows what else. They will never, ever, ever allow their people to vote for Republicans. The fix is in the taxpayers being bilked. The gravy train, not the high-speed train, the gravy train rolls on. 00:33:56 Speaker 6: The high-speed gravy train. Now that is up and functioning. 00:33:59 Speaker 3: You got to put a cap because the gravy will slosh back and forth right out of your gravy train car. 00:34:04 Speaker 6: God, the average Republican loses by almost 20 points. That is incredible. 00:34:09 Speaker 3: Hey, sir, you're a prominent businessman and respected in your community. Would you like to stand in front of this herd of stampeding buffalo with a little sign that says stop? 00:34:20 Speaker

6: Now, it is going to be expensive and take a lot of your time. 00:34:23 Speaker 3: Sure, sign me up. And be discouraging and humiliating. 00:34:25 Speaker 6: Exactly. All right, we've got more on the way. Stay here. 00:34:30 Speaker 2: Armstrong and Getty. The Armstrong and Getty Show. 00:34:45 Speaker 11: The New Mexico National Guard saved 78 goats from floodwaters this week, and here's the thanks they got. The guard members nicknamed them the Bleat Brigade. Disaster response always brings the unexpected, said one guardsman. 00:35:01 Speaker 6: You see, I believe. 00:35:02 Speaker 3: Well, go ahead. 00:35:03 Speaker 4: Sorry. 00:35:03 Speaker 6: You see, I just thought we needed a break from all the election analysis. There you got goats being rescued by the Bleat Brigade. 00:35:10 Speaker 8: Huh? 00:35:12 Speaker 3: I've probably never had an original thought other than this one. Goats sound precisely like a human being trying to imitate a goat. 00:35:22 Speaker 6: They do. 00:35:22 Speaker 3: Shockingly so. 00:35:23 Speaker 6: They do. 00:35:24 Speaker 4: Yes. 00:35:27 Speaker 6: So I know a number of people who don't follow politics. I know I'm thinking of one particular woman I know. Fantastic mom. One of the best moms I've ever known in my life. My guess would be she was completely unaware that it was even Election Day yesterday. Very active in her kids' lives, in the school, volunteers all kinds of time, you know, all the good stuff a grown-up should do in their society. I don't even think she probably even knew that it was Election Day yesterday. Now, I'm not advocating that just because, you know, if you're governed by the people, if that's her experiment, some people got to do the governing, and if you don't do the governing, somebody else does it for you, and all that sort of stuff that is fairly obvious. But Just to the point of Tim Sandefur tweeted out this quote from Rush Limbaugh. I would guess Tim Sandefur is not a Rush Limbaugh fan, but this quote is the way you should look at things. My success does not depend on who wins elections. Don't live your life or your happiness on who got over this two year period until next time. I know people who do live their lives that way. They get a one person in particular. Just it was impossible for them to be happy while Trump was president. You only get so many years on Earth. 00:36:46 Speaker 3: Oh, that's a terrible way to live your life. 00:36:47 Speaker 2: Oh, my God. 00:36:48 Speaker 5: Yeah. 00:36:48 Speaker 6: Or the other direction. I knew people couldn't be happy as long as Obama was president. No, my happiness. I agree with Arsalan Baugh. My happiness does not depend on who wins elections. 00:37:00 Speaker 4: Right. 00:37:00 Speaker 3: I have nothing to add. That's brilliantly, simply true. 00:37:04 Speaker 6: We have another hour to come. If you miss a segment of the podcast, Armstrong and Getty On Demand, you should subscribe. Armstrong and Getty On Demand. 00:37:11 Speaker 2: Armstrong and Getty.