📄 Extracted Text (14,484 words)
[00:00:00] Do you think JD would mog Gavin Newsome?
[00:00:02] >> Yes, I do think he would mo him.
[00:00:03] >> I'm really enjoying neoton that long.
[00:00:05] >> I have also been lusting after Greenland
[00:00:07] my my whole life.
[00:00:08] >> I don't buy that.
[00:00:09] >> Oh, come on.
[00:00:09] >> I know it's uncouthed to say it, but
[00:00:11] like am I wrong?
[00:00:11] >> For media matters. He's joking. It's not
[00:00:14] true. He's not joking.
[00:00:23] >> Matt first first time that Matt wants to
[00:00:24] talk foreign policy. So, I'm like I'm
[00:00:27] all ears, man. Let's do it.
[00:00:28] >> I mean, no. Don't Don't put it all on
[00:00:30] me. I just It's more for you guys.
[00:00:32] >> I know. But normally we mention any
[00:00:34] place that that is outside the United
[00:00:36] States and I can see Matt's eyes glaze
[00:00:38] over.
[00:00:39] >> Green Greenland is the only country
[00:00:40] outside the US that I care about.
[00:00:43] >> And it's meant to be inside the US.
[00:00:44] >> Yeah, exactly.
[00:00:45] >> I just love that we have as a listed
[00:00:47] topic the slave trade.
[00:00:48] >> Yeah. No, I'm I'm hoping we can all
[00:00:51] Matt is going to take the arisatilian
[00:00:53] pro position.
[00:00:55] >> You said that. I was I was thinking
[00:00:56] about Aristotle, too.
[00:00:58] That's nothing.
[00:01:00] >> Will Gavin Newsome be the next
[00:01:02] president? Daily Wire's very own Ben
[00:01:04] Shapiro just became Paul Allen sitting
[00:01:06] down with Patrick Baitman of California.
[00:01:08] We will hear all of the juicy details.
[00:01:10] Then Matt, I believe, is calling for a
[00:01:12] civil rights movement for white people
[00:01:14] as he releases his new mini documentary
[00:01:17] on the slave trade. What is a slave? No,
[00:01:20] I don't think it's called that. Anyway,
[00:01:21] he's going to be giving the history on
[00:01:22] that. And then we will be going all the
[00:01:26] way into Greenland. I don't think it's
[00:01:27] coincidental. Denmark has said that they
[00:01:29] will not sell Greenland to the United
[00:01:31] States. Then France came out and they
[00:01:33] said the French military will defend
[00:01:35] you. And then immediately Denmark said,
[00:01:37] "Okay, listen. We'll make a deal." So,
[00:01:38] we will get into all of those things on
[00:01:41] friendly fire. Gentlemen, wonderful to
[00:01:44] be with all of you. Happy New Year and
[00:01:45] merry Christmas. Christmas is still on
[00:01:47] until February 2nd as far as I'm
[00:01:49] concerned.
[00:01:50] >> Wow. I didn't realize it lasts that
[00:01:52] long, Michael. Why?
[00:01:52] >> Yeah. I go through to Lent myself. Yeah.
[00:01:55] >> Yeah. I actually I I count Christmas as
[00:01:57] lasting through until the next advent.
[00:01:59] So, I've still got all the decorations
[00:02:00] up in my set. It's amazing. I haven't I
[00:02:03] haven't seen you guys in a little while.
[00:02:04] And Ben, you were just over with uh Mr.
[00:02:07] Slimy himself.
[00:02:08] >> I was with Gavin Newsome at the
[00:02:10] governor's mansion in California, which
[00:02:11] by the way is very tiny. Uh it it is the
[00:02:13] tiniest governor's mansion. It is a very
[00:02:15] very small building in Sacramento. You
[00:02:17] have to brush thousands of homeless
[00:02:20] people out of your way just to just to
[00:02:21] get to it. Um, but you know, it was uh
[00:02:23] it was it was definitely an interesting
[00:02:24] experience. I had a little bit of time
[00:02:26] off camera with Gavin Newsome. I'd met
[00:02:29] him briefly before and and like most
[00:02:31] politicians, he's very good in person. I
[00:02:33] I will say just as a class of of people,
[00:02:35] politicians in person way better than
[00:02:36] politicians on camera, just generally
[00:02:39] speaking. And we all know a bunch of
[00:02:40] politicians. And I think that this is
[00:02:42] the the general rule about literally all
[00:02:44] of them. So off camera, he's he's very
[00:02:46] friendly. He's very gilous. he will kind
[00:02:48] of get a little more honest with you
[00:02:50] than than he might uh in terms of his
[00:02:51] positions on on camera. And then I was
[00:02:54] out there because he had invited me to
[00:02:55] come on his podcast that that's a
[00:02:57] podcast where he has I guess once every
[00:03:00] couple weeks I believe. Usually it's
[00:03:01] somebody of the left, occasionally he'll
[00:03:02] have somebody of the right. Famously he
[00:03:04] had Charlie Charlie Kirk on the show.
[00:03:06] This is back during last summer and it
[00:03:09] was about a 2-hour show. It was a little
[00:03:11] bit under two hours. We we covered a lot
[00:03:12] of ground. Before I get to your epic uh
[00:03:15] sit down with him, because I want to
[00:03:16] know if he's going to be the next
[00:03:17] president, I really hope he's not. I
[00:03:19] want to get to a more an even more epic
[00:03:22] topic, which is of course
[00:03:24] >> the Pen Dragon cycle, Rise of the
[00:03:25] Merlin, which is coming out. It's coming
[00:03:27] to Daily Wire Plus. This is the latest
[00:03:29] reason that you have to subscribe,
[00:03:31] become a Daily Wire Plus member right
[00:03:32] now. This just amazing, elaborate,
[00:03:36] multi-continental
[00:03:37] journey. If only we had waited a little
[00:03:39] longer to make it, we could have shot it
[00:03:41] in Greenland. Uh just a beautiful,
[00:03:43] beautiful series. And by the way, if you
[00:03:45] uh if you go check it out right now, you
[00:03:48] can go to dailywire.com/shop and get the
[00:03:50] Pen Dragon Cycle Rise of the Merlin
[00:03:53] board game, which is very, very cool.
[00:03:55] Depending on how long this goes, maybe
[00:03:57] we can all play it together, guys. Send
[00:03:59] Send me one of those.
[00:04:01] >> I It's good. This is looking I don't
[00:04:02] know. We spent some money on this. This
[00:04:04] is a nice looking board game. Anyway, uh
[00:04:05] go check it out right now. Become a
[00:04:07] Daily Wire Plus member. January 22nd, it
[00:04:10] all happens and then possibly in January
[00:04:13] of 2029, our whole country falls apart
[00:04:16] if Gavin Newsome becomes president.
[00:04:18] >> It turns out that that series is the
[00:04:20] only thing more ambitious than Gavin
[00:04:21] Newsome.
[00:04:23] >> We have a trailer. We have a trailer,
[00:04:24] right? Play the trailer.
[00:04:26] >> What was it like, Marlin, to be alone
[00:04:28] with God?
[00:04:31] >> Is that who you think I was alone with?
[00:04:33] >> There is a new pirate work in the world.
[00:04:35] I've seen it. A God who sacrifices what
[00:04:36] he loves for us. I learned of Yazu the
[00:04:39] Christ, and I have become his follower.
[00:04:41] >> Trust in Yazu.
[00:04:42] >> Great light, great darkness. Such things
[00:04:44] mattered to me then.
[00:04:45] >> What matters to you now, Mistress of
[00:04:47] Lies?
[00:04:48] >> The Pen Dragon Cycle: Rise of the
[00:04:49] Merlin, a seven-part series, premieres
[00:04:52] January 22nd, only on Daily Wire Plus.
[00:04:56] >> I mean, it is as good or better than
[00:04:58] anything that you will see on HBO. And
[00:05:00] and you won't get the gratuitous sex and
[00:05:03] uh and the and the insane nihilism. So,
[00:05:07] I'm sorry. I know it's a massive
[00:05:08] disincentive for for Oh, wow.
[00:05:10] >> Uh well, no. So, they they cuz they said
[00:05:13] we're going to play the pen dragon
[00:05:14] trailer and they came in and gave me
[00:05:16] this fake sword.
[00:05:17] >> I said, "What is this for?" It's a So,
[00:05:19] this is a bit where I'm supposed to pull
[00:05:21] the I don't know what I'm supposed to do
[00:05:23] with this, but it's They gave me the
[00:05:24] sword and said, "Well, you could do a
[00:05:25] bit where you have a sword.
[00:05:28] >> What's the bit?" Like, I I have a sword.
[00:05:30] What am I supposed for the lady in the
[00:05:32] lake? That'll be uh
[00:05:34] >> Does anyone in my ear want to tell me
[00:05:35] what the bit is with the sword? Is there
[00:05:37] a thing I'm supposed to be doing with
[00:05:38] it?
[00:05:38] >> Uh, just don't hurt yourself.
[00:05:40] >> I think I'm supposed to just have the
[00:05:41] sword and you guys are supposed to laugh
[00:05:42] hysterically because Matt Walsh has a,
[00:05:45] you know, is holding a
[00:05:45] >> sword. You could use it to smash in the
[00:05:47] windows of illegals in Minneapolis or
[00:05:49] something. You use it for like a very
[00:05:50] practical political purpose.
[00:05:52] >> It's not even a real It's It's plastic.
[00:05:54] If you if you wish to buy Matt a real
[00:05:56] sword, then you can get a subscription
[00:05:57] to Daily Water and you can watch Pen
[00:05:59] Dragon and then we can pay for actual
[00:06:01] metal swords that that Matt can use to
[00:06:02] go and I don't know, chop down trees and
[00:06:05] whatever part of rural America he is in
[00:06:07] right at this very moment. Uh anyway,
[00:06:09] back to back to Gavin. So, so Newsome uh
[00:06:12] I I will say that he is good on his
[00:06:15] feet, right? right? He's squirly enough
[00:06:16] that he he knows his talking points well
[00:06:18] enough that if you hit him on California
[00:06:20] policy, he's he's able to sort of shift
[00:06:23] responsibility, his big moves, he likes
[00:06:25] to shift responsibility onto local
[00:06:26] officials for failures and then take
[00:06:28] credit for any state successes. Uh or he
[00:06:30] he likes to make sort of grandiose
[00:06:32] claims about the robustness of
[00:06:34] California and if you point out it is
[00:06:36] not as robust as he has said that it
[00:06:37] would be, then he'll start talking about
[00:06:38] Louisiana. So you see that sort of stuff
[00:06:40] happen a lot. So, for example, I was
[00:06:42] dinging him on California's income tax
[00:06:44] policy because it's driving business out
[00:06:45] of the state. And his immediate response
[00:06:47] was, "Well, yeah, but we're we're fairer
[00:06:49] than say Louisiana." And here's how that
[00:06:51] kind of went. I think we have the clip.
[00:06:53] Lowering the income tax rates in the
[00:06:54] state.
[00:06:54] >> Well, Cal California has tax. I mean,
[00:06:57] there's 16 states right now. Let's talk
[00:06:59] about those 16 states.
[00:07:00] >> Why don't we talk about California?
[00:07:01] That's
[00:07:02] >> going to that tax their low wage earners
[00:07:04] more than California taxes its high wage
[00:07:06] earners. Let's talk about those lowering
[00:07:07] those tax rates in those 16 states.
[00:07:10] >> Okay. So again, notice notice what he
[00:07:11] tends to do is he will misdirect away
[00:07:13] from the actual topic. And even when it
[00:07:15] comes to the topic of taxes, he'll he'll
[00:07:17] misdirect because the point I'm making
[00:07:18] is not a fairness point. It is a an
[00:07:21] efficacy point. Meaning you're driving
[00:07:22] every taxpayer out of your state, which
[00:07:24] is what's happened in in California.
[00:07:26] He'll shift it over to Louisiana and
[00:07:27] then he will have his online minions
[00:07:29] talk about how he owned everybody by
[00:07:31] showing that you pay a lot of tax in
[00:07:32] Louisiana as a poor person based on
[00:07:34] excise taxes and such. So that's kind of
[00:07:36] one of his squirrely strategies. there's
[00:07:37] certain places where he is less squirly
[00:07:40] and that's kind of what's interesting. I
[00:07:41] will say the thing that I found
[00:07:42] interesting is his overt attempt to
[00:07:45] moderate his sort of online persona. So
[00:07:47] there there are a couple of points where
[00:07:48] he did this. Uh one of them most
[00:07:50] obviously was on ICE. So he his his
[00:07:52] crazy social media account his press
[00:07:55] office account which has been dedicated
[00:07:57] to trolling President Trump for a while
[00:07:59] had tweeted out that he that that they'd
[00:08:01] engaged in ICE had engaged in state
[00:08:03] sponsored terrorism. And I asked him
[00:08:05] straight up about it and really pushed
[00:08:06] him on it.
[00:08:08] One was a narrative that was immediately
[00:08:10] pushed by the Trump administration and
[00:08:12] Secretary of Homeland Security Christine
[00:08:13] Nome that she was a domestic terrorist
[00:08:14] who was attempting to run over officers
[00:08:16] with her car and was legitimately trying
[00:08:19] not just this officer but multiple
[00:08:20] officers. That was the original
[00:08:21] statement. I said at the time I thought
[00:08:23] that was untrue. And then your press
[00:08:26] office tweeted out that it was state
[00:08:27] sponsored terrorism which I mean
[00:08:30] Governor I have to ask you about that
[00:08:32] that that sort of thing makes our
[00:08:34] politics worse. I mean, it does. And our
[00:08:37] our our ICE officers obviously are not
[00:08:38] terrorists. A tragic situation is not
[00:08:41] state sponsored terrorism.
[00:08:42] >> Yeah, I think that's fair.
[00:08:43] >> Okay. So, again, you can see him trying
[00:08:44] to like take his own press office and
[00:08:46] just chuck it under the bus. He's doing
[00:08:47] a couple of things. One is he will kind
[00:08:49] of rhetorically appeal to the radicals
[00:08:50] in his base. And then when he's called
[00:08:52] on it, then he will back really quickly
[00:08:54] away from it because he still wants to
[00:08:55] win moderates for 2028. By the way, our
[00:08:57] sponsor Kelshi in the prediction markets
[00:08:59] shows that he is right now the leader in
[00:09:01] the clubhouse among Democrats for the
[00:09:04] 2028 nomination. Hold on, hold on before
[00:09:07] I want to hear because you saw him
[00:09:09] actually personally, I want to hear what
[00:09:11] you think about him for 2028, but before
[00:09:13] you sully the the opinions of the, you
[00:09:16] know, you sway our our fellow uh DW guys
[00:09:19] here, do you think Drew and Matt, do you
[00:09:23] think that Nome's the guy for 28? No, I
[00:09:25] I think he's the I think he's the Jeb
[00:09:27] Bush of of the Democrats. I think, you
[00:09:29] know, one of this one of the continual
[00:09:32] arguments we have had on this show and
[00:09:34] when it was backstage is, you know, uh
[00:09:36] Ben and Jeremy would always say that if
[00:09:38] Michelle Obama win runs should win
[00:09:40] against anybody. And I think I don't
[00:09:42] think it's underestimating the American
[00:09:44] public. I think it's misunderstanding
[00:09:45] the American public. They actually are
[00:09:47] the American public actually is keyed
[00:09:49] into issues more than the media wants
[00:09:51] them to be. more the media wants them to
[00:09:53] look at people what they look like and
[00:09:54] how they behave and whether they do this
[00:09:56] or that and what words they use but the
[00:09:58] but the people actually do care about uh
[00:10:00] about topics and issues especially when
[00:10:02] they affect them. I I think Nome is a
[00:10:05] haircut a sleazy haircut and and I think
[00:10:07] that that's doesn't play. I think the
[00:10:09] fact that they anybody who runs against
[00:10:11] them is going to bring up the fact that
[00:10:12] they have spent 40 billion uh dollars
[00:10:15] almost on fixing the homeless issue and
[00:10:18] their homelessness has gone up 30%.
[00:10:20] Where's the money for the the uh bullet
[00:10:23] train? Where the hell did that those
[00:10:24] billions of dollars go? Money disappears
[00:10:27] in California because like any one state
[00:10:30] uh one party state, it's full of graft.
[00:10:32] It's just a completely
[00:10:33] >> But Drew, wouldn't you also say that
[00:10:34] Bill Clinton and Joe Biden were greasy
[00:10:36] haircuts? I mean, sleazy haircuts.
[00:10:38] >> Bill Bill Clinton was one of the great
[00:10:40] and Barack Obama. This is the other
[00:10:41] thing about Democrats, by the way. We've
[00:10:43] had we've had three Democrat presidents
[00:10:44] over the last, you know, several
[00:10:46] decades. Obama and Clinton were two of
[00:10:48] the greatest politicians of my lifetime.
[00:10:50] They were fantastic uh wholesale
[00:10:52] politicians and Joe Biden won under very
[00:10:55] suspicious circumstances. Let's face it.
[00:10:57] I mean very, you know, weird
[00:10:58] circumstances. So So I I don't know. The
[00:11:01] drift the drift in this country is to
[00:11:03] the right. The drift in the west is to
[00:11:04] the right. And in Europe, they're
[00:11:06] basically stamping it down, but we don't
[00:11:07] have the capability of stamping it down.
[00:11:09] And I think Gavin Newsome is toast the
[00:11:12] minute his record comes up. and and the
[00:11:14] social stuff, the the way he handled
[00:11:16] COVID, the way he had everybody he shut
[00:11:18] down John MacArthur's church and or
[00:11:20] tried to and harassed them while he was
[00:11:22] dining out at a French restaurant with
[00:11:24] his friends without a mask. I mean, the
[00:11:25] guy is just he's too easy a target to
[00:11:28] really make it once the national uh
[00:11:31] attention is on him. And I just don't
[00:11:32] think he's Look, I I understand he's
[00:11:34] ahead in the polls. Anything can happen.
[00:11:37] It's way too far away to actually
[00:11:39] predict it. I'm not making a prediction,
[00:11:41] but I he's just not the guy I'm looking
[00:11:42] at. It's AOC who keeps me up at night.
[00:11:44] >> Is the question uh whether he's going to
[00:11:47] win the presidency in 2028 or whether
[00:11:49] he's the Democrats guy in 2020.
[00:11:50] >> Even just even start with just the
[00:11:52] nomination.
[00:11:53] >> Yeah. Because well among Democrats
[00:11:56] uh Gav I guess I could put this sword
[00:11:58] down. Gavin Newsome among Democrats has
[00:12:02] a has something that no other Democrat
[00:12:04] has that that I'm aware of on the entire
[00:12:07] national stage, which is that he can
[00:12:09] actually talk to people. like he could
[00:12:11] sit down and talk to Ben. He can go on
[00:12:13] any podcast and have a conversation and
[00:12:16] yeah, he's lying the entire time, but
[00:12:19] but he's he's willing to do that.
[00:12:20] There's I I I mean, can you name any
[00:12:22] other Democrat at any level who could
[00:12:25] even potentially run for the presidency
[00:12:27] in 2028 who would who could go on say
[00:12:31] Joe Rogan and have a conversation for
[00:12:33] two and a half hours? Uh Gavin Newsome
[00:12:36] could easily do that. And again,
[00:12:38] although what he's saying is of is
[00:12:40] almost always false, everything he
[00:12:42] believes is wrong and he's lying almost
[00:12:44] always. Uh he's at least able to go do
[00:12:46] that in that environment. And he's the
[00:12:48] only Dem not only the only Democrat on
[00:12:51] in the field right now who could do
[00:12:52] that. He's the only Democrat in the last
[00:12:53] like 20 years who has that kind of
[00:12:55] ability. Uh I think what so that's an
[00:12:59] argument for why all things being equal,
[00:13:01] he has a good chance of being the, you
[00:13:04] know, the nominee for the Democrats in
[00:13:05] 2028. don't think he's going to win the
[00:13:06] presidency for a lot of the reasons that
[00:13:08] uh that Drew just articulated. But
[00:13:11] >> J, assuming that JD is the presumptive
[00:13:13] nominee, you think JD would mog Gavin
[00:13:16] Newsome?
[00:13:16] >> Yes, I do think he would mo agree.
[00:13:18] >> I do. But but then uh not that I know
[00:13:20] what mog means, but I I think he would.
[00:13:22] >> No one does. But the the problem for
[00:13:24] Gavin Newsome is that like the obvious
[00:13:26] thing in the for a Democrat is that he's
[00:13:29] a white male and in a primary like is
[00:13:34] would the Democrat voters be willing to
[00:13:36] say, "Hey, we tried a woman and she
[00:13:40] failed. We tried a black woman, she
[00:13:42] failed even worse. So now we're just
[00:13:44] going to go back to a white guy because
[00:13:46] they're the only ones who can win." Uh I
[00:13:48] I don't know that the Democrat party
[00:13:50] will say or something like that. So,
[00:13:52] I'll say this. He is he is smoother on
[00:13:54] his feet than virtually any of the
[00:13:56] Democrats that I've talked to. Uh, and
[00:13:58] I've talked to a fair number of them. He
[00:14:00] is also I think that there's a a more
[00:14:03] than decent likelihood he's the nominee
[00:14:05] in in 2028 because his chief rival is
[00:14:08] AOC, meaning that AOC is not a black
[00:14:12] woman. She's a Hispanic woman actually.
[00:14:14] And as if you if you look at the
[00:14:16] Democratic voting base, particularly in
[00:14:18] the South, that is a heavily black
[00:14:20] voting base. uh there's no evidence that
[00:14:22] that crosses over to quote unquote the
[00:14:23] people of color category, a category
[00:14:25] that has never existed nor will ever
[00:14:26] exist in real life. And and you you've
[00:14:29] already seen cases in which the black
[00:14:31] vote has mobilized behind a white person
[00:14:33] to stop another white person or a
[00:14:34] Hispanic. So I I I would not be
[00:14:36] surprised if he's able to pull out the
[00:14:38] nomination. I I will say that again the
[00:14:40] game that he's playing, which is a smart
[00:14:41] game, is he's usually rhetorically
[00:14:43] radical with regard to President Trump
[00:14:45] personally and with regard to Trump. you
[00:14:47] know, that that makes you real popular
[00:14:48] inside the Democratic party. But he's
[00:14:50] trying to moderate on a lot of the
[00:14:51] issues where he actually is most
[00:14:52] radical. Like in that interview, he
[00:14:54] suggested that he's cooperating with
[00:14:55] ICE, which I find, you know, very
[00:14:56] difficult to believe, shall we say. Um,
[00:14:59] in that interview, he tried to pretend
[00:15:00] sort of moderation on the trans issue.
[00:15:02] His state is not moderate on that issue
[00:15:03] at all. And that brings up sort of the
[00:15:05] second question that you're you're
[00:15:06] raising, Michael, which is how does he
[00:15:08] do in a general election if it's JD Van.
[00:15:10] So, you know, obviously the number one
[00:15:11] question there is going to be how's the
[00:15:13] US doing, right? If the economy sucks,
[00:15:14] JD, he's got a real problem. And I think
[00:15:16] everybody acknowledges that
[00:15:17] circumstantially. That's just the
[00:15:19] reality. Um, as far as sort of
[00:15:20] head-to-head as candidates. Yeah. I I
[00:15:23] will say that I look my biggest question
[00:15:26] mark for JD is can he grow any part of
[00:15:30] Trump's coalition? I look at Trump's
[00:15:31] coalition and I think to myself, Trump
[00:15:34] has maxed out in many ways many parts of
[00:15:36] that coalition. What is the part that JD
[00:15:38] grows that Trump was unable to grow?
[00:15:40] Because this was a fairly narrow
[00:15:42] election. If you look, it was a couple
[00:15:43] hundred thousand votes in a couple of
[00:15:44] different places and very very high
[00:15:46] turnout because again people really
[00:15:48] really love Trump in a way that you know
[00:15:50] again that's not a rip on JD. That's
[00:15:52] just a reality.
[00:15:53] >> But you've been saying for a while Ben
[00:15:54] and this is something I totally agree
[00:15:55] with that almost all of this is going to
[00:15:57] depend on the economy which I think is
[00:15:59] getting better. I mean even the Wall
[00:16:00] Street Journal which has been
[00:16:01] hysterically depressed ever since the
[00:16:03] tariff thing comes out is admitting that
[00:16:04] the economy is actually turning around
[00:16:06] and doing pretty well. And the other
[00:16:08] thing is also, you know, again, I I
[00:16:10] don't think we we talk too much and the
[00:16:12] media likes this. They want to talk
[00:16:14] about everything uh as as people's faces
[00:16:16] and their style and the way they talk.
[00:16:18] And I I admit all that is important, but
[00:16:20] people actually do pay attention to
[00:16:22] certain things. Like for instance, the
[00:16:24] parade of U-Hauls leaving California
[00:16:27] looks like a Howard Hawks cattle drive.
[00:16:28] I mean, people are just like deserting
[00:16:30] the the state. And the state, as we all
[00:16:32] know, is paradise. if he left it alone,
[00:16:34] if he took the people out, it would be
[00:16:36] it would be paradise. And I it's just
[00:16:38] he's ruined everything that he touches.
[00:16:39] And I just
[00:16:40] >> I mean, listen, I left his state to make
[00:16:42] this Wait, wait, we we all left his
[00:16:44] state. We all left his state because
[00:16:46] again, I don't think that his state was
[00:16:48] well run. But there is one thing that I
[00:16:49] do know, and that's that you need life
[00:16:50] insurance. You do. That's just the
[00:16:52] reality. You need to start the new year
[00:16:54] with clarity and security. You need to
[00:16:55] lock in your life insurance today
[00:16:57] because let's face it, you and I I
[00:16:59] specifically mean Andrew Clayven might
[00:17:00] die this year. Policy Genius is an
[00:17:02] online insurance marketplace that allows
[00:17:03] you to compare quotes from some of
[00:17:05] America's top insurers side by side for
[00:17:07] free. Their licensed team helps you get
[00:17:08] what you need fast so you can get on
[00:17:10] with your life. You can easily find what
[00:17:11] you need. Coverage amounts, prices,
[00:17:13] terms, no guesswork, just clarity. And
[00:17:15] Policy Genius will help you find your
[00:17:16] most affordable policy that meets your
[00:17:18] needs. They'll answer your questions,
[00:17:19] handle the paperwork, advocate for you
[00:17:21] throughout the process. Policy Genius
[00:17:22] has thousands of fivestar reviews on
[00:17:24] Google and Trust Pilot from customers
[00:17:25] who found the best policy fit for their
[00:17:28] needs. Drew, tell me about what you're
[00:17:31] going to do to protect your family
[00:17:32] should you die this year.
[00:17:33] >> Well, actually, you know, I don't like
[00:17:35] to bring this up because it violates my
[00:17:36] contract, but I actually died last year
[00:17:38] and the payout from my life insurance
[00:17:40] was so good that my wife was able to,
[00:17:41] you know, marry her tennis instructor
[00:17:43] and, you know, live a really the way she
[00:17:45] had wanted to for the last 45 years. So,
[00:17:47] I think it's really it is important.
[00:17:49] Look, you disappear, you your your
[00:17:51] earnings go with you and that leaves
[00:17:53] your family on the line. So yeah, it's
[00:17:55] important especially for people like me
[00:17:57] or people like you, Ben, who might
[00:17:59] finally they might finally catch up with
[00:18:00] you and just carry you.
[00:18:03] >> Well, that's a dark thought for me this
[00:18:05] year. With Policy Genius, real users
[00:18:07] have gotten 20 year $2 million policies
[00:18:09] for just 53 bucks a month. Ease the way
[00:18:10] to protecting a wonderful life. Head on
[00:18:12] over to policygenius.com/fire
[00:18:14] to compare life insurance quotes from
[00:18:16] top companies. See how much you could
[00:18:17] save. That's policygenius.com/fire.
[00:18:20] So here's my question. And Drew, I agree
[00:18:22] with you obviously about all of Gavin
[00:18:23] Newsome's policy failures. The the the
[00:18:25] real question to and I even agree with
[00:18:26] you obviously about the economy. It's
[00:18:28] hard to disagree with a 5.3% GDP growth
[00:18:30] in Q4, you know, following a 4.5% GDP
[00:18:33] growth in Q3. I mean, that's those are
[00:18:35] really, really good numbers. Here is the
[00:18:37] problem, and I go back to it just
[00:18:38] coalitionally speaking. You look at
[00:18:40] Trump's coalition. It's a very weird
[00:18:41] coalition, right? It's a different
[00:18:42] coalition than the sort of historic
[00:18:43] Republican coalition. and it's blue
[00:18:45] collar voters, his heavy share of
[00:18:46] Hispanics, slightly outsized portion of
[00:18:49] of black males particularly, uh, and and
[00:18:52] skewing younger than than traditionally.
[00:18:54] It's hard for me to see exactly where JD
[00:18:57] grows any part of that coalition. He's
[00:18:59] going to win fewer Hispanics than than
[00:19:01] President Trump did. Trump has a sort of
[00:19:03] weird capacity to move beyond his own
[00:19:06] person. He he's kind of everybody's idea
[00:19:07] of a rich person in their various ethnic
[00:19:09] group. It's it's really really funny.
[00:19:11] Like if you talk to uh you know if you
[00:19:13] if you talk to my people, you talk to
[00:19:14] the Jews, he's like, "Oh yeah, he's like
[00:19:15] every rich Jew that I know." And then
[00:19:17] you talk to like a white Italian guy,
[00:19:18] he's like, "Yeah, he's like just like
[00:19:19] the rich Italian guys I know." You talk
[00:19:20] to a Syrian like just he he's bizarrely
[00:19:24] every person and no person at the same
[00:19:25] time, Donald Trump in a weird way.
[00:19:27] That's not true of JD Vance who is a
[00:19:29] very talented politician but clearly a
[00:19:30] politician. And and so you take sort of
[00:19:33] Trump's comments about ICE and he's not
[00:19:35] going to it doesn't come across the same
[00:19:37] way as JD Vance online. My my chief
[00:19:39] critique of JD in this way is that I
[00:19:40] think JD is too online and he needs to
[00:19:42] get off X. This is also my chief
[00:19:43] critique of everyone because I think X
[00:19:45] rots your brain. If you're a politician
[00:19:46] and you're using that as your echo
[00:19:48] chamber telling you which direction to
[00:19:50] row, I think you're going to end up
[00:19:50] rowing in the wrong direction.
[00:19:51] >> Doesn't that under undercut your point
[00:19:53] on Trump who is the tweeter and she
[00:19:55] >> No. No. Trump is not on X. That's not
[00:19:56] true. Trump Trump tweets but he does not
[00:19:58] read X. Trump is not online. Trump
[00:20:00] literally they print out things for him
[00:20:01] and put them in front of him. You know
[00:20:03] this this is a factual truth, right?
[00:20:04] Right? They will literally he doesn't
[00:20:06] like Trump does not spend any time at
[00:20:07] all on CNN.com or New York Times.com.
[00:20:10] They literally print out if there's a
[00:20:11] tweet that he has seen, it's because his
[00:20:12] staff literally prints out the tweet on
[00:20:14] physical paper and puts it in front of
[00:20:16] him.
[00:20:16] >> Okay, but how does how does how does
[00:20:18] Gavin Newsome grow the the coalition?
[00:20:20] Cuz isn't this conversation Gavin versus
[00:20:23] Katie Vance? Gavin Newsome grow it.
[00:20:25] >> So the the way that So again, when it's
[00:20:27] two choices, then shrinking your
[00:20:29] coalition is growing the other guy's
[00:20:30] coalition. So if you have a Hispanic
[00:20:32] voter, he's only going to go in one of
[00:20:34] two directions. If that guy does not
[00:20:35] vote for JD Vance and now he votes in
[00:20:38] the election and doesn't just go home,
[00:20:39] he's going to vote for Gavin Newsome. So
[00:20:40] I think that Gavin Newsome does win a
[00:20:42] larger share of Hispanic voters than
[00:20:45] Donald than Kla Harris won in the last
[00:20:48] election.
[00:20:48] >> I don't I think there's a there's a
[00:20:49] counterargument here. One is a lot of
[00:20:51] people were predicting that Trump had
[00:20:52] maxed out his coalition the first time
[00:20:54] and you know people were upset they
[00:20:56] weren't getting exactly what they
[00:20:57] wanted. You know, all these
[00:20:58] disappointments and then what happened?
[00:20:59] and he goes on to win the popular vote
[00:21:01] the second time. So, if JD were able to
[00:21:03] maintain Trump's coalition, that alone,
[00:21:05] he'd he'd be great. And and let's say
[00:21:07] that things change because obviously in
[00:21:09] 2024 almost half the voters were
[00:21:10] millennials and zoomers, skewed a little
[00:21:12] younger. I in in my meanderings through
[00:21:15] the young right, I think the young right
[00:21:16] does like the vice president a lot. Uh
[00:21:18] but but the other thing so, you know, to
[00:21:20] me that's a bonus. Uh I do think he this
[00:21:22] guy is very very talented in that he
[00:21:25] came up as this you know Ohio guy. This
[00:21:28] guy who wrote a very famous memoir about
[00:21:30] his lower class upbringing and he goes
[00:21:33] on succeeds at very high levels. He
[00:21:35] plays well in Silicon Valley. He plays
[00:21:37] well with uh rural people who want
[00:21:39] industrial policy. He plays well you
[00:21:41] know he's I think he's got a lot of
[00:21:43] talent. But this actually gets to my
[00:21:44] point visav Nome which is Nsome I is
[00:21:49] overestimated. We're all talking about
[00:21:50] how slick he is. The thing he's most
[00:21:52] famous for in politics is just being
[00:21:54] really deceitful, you know, and he and
[00:21:55] he's and Nicki Minaj had that whole
[00:21:57] line. He goes, "Oh, he's so sexy. He's
[00:21:59] so slick. He's so this." So, he I think
[00:22:02] he's being overestimated in in the ways
[00:22:04] that people overestimated. Guys like
[00:22:05] Bado Oorc, these also rans who fell
[00:22:08] away. I I don't think it's always great
[00:22:09] to be the the top guy in the race a year
[00:22:12] or a year and a half out. But second of
[00:22:13] all, there was a great interview once
[00:22:15] between Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.
[00:22:18] And Clinton said, he goes, "You know,
[00:22:19] George and I have benefited from the
[00:22:21] same thing, which is we've both been
[00:22:23] underestimated. Me because I'm a nice
[00:22:25] guy and they thought I was all nice and
[00:22:27] they thought he was kind of dumb." And
[00:22:29] you think about the winning presidential
[00:22:31] candidates.
[00:22:32] >> They tend to be very underestimated.
[00:22:34] Trump doesn't know anything. He's
[00:22:36] totally ignorant. You know,
[00:22:37] >> go ahead and run, Donald. Yeah.
[00:22:38] >> Right. Yeah. Barack Obama, he's black in
[00:22:40] a racist country. Bill Clinton, he's
[00:22:42] Bubba. Bush is stupid. You know, Ronald
[00:22:43] Reagan is a cowboy. On that subject
[00:22:45] though, I I have to say last time we
[00:22:47] were here, which is not that long ago, I
[00:22:49] I would have bet money, and I'm not a
[00:22:51] betting man, but I would have bet money
[00:22:52] on J. D. Vance being the nominee. Right
[00:22:54] this minute, I'm a little uncertain if
[00:22:56] that's if we're actually talking about
[00:22:57] the next nominee because he's not, you
[00:22:59] know, every time I mean, Trump has been
[00:23:01] very going very hard on foreign policy
[00:23:03] and he has people around him in the
[00:23:05] press conferences, mostly Rubio. And
[00:23:08] Vance is nowhere to be seen because
[00:23:09] Vance is one of these guys who's trying
[00:23:11] to take MAGA and turn it into
[00:23:12] isolationism, which it never was.
[00:23:15] >> I don't I don't buy that.
[00:23:16] >> Oh, come on. Where is he? Why isn't he
[00:23:19] in these meetings?
[00:23:20] >> Well, I'll give I'll give you an
[00:23:20] example. So, this was very interesting.
[00:23:22] I don't know if you guys caught this
[00:23:23] interview with Sorab Amari. Right after
[00:23:25] the Venezuela strike, Sorab posted it
[00:23:28] again and he said, "Wow, these comments
[00:23:29] the vice president made a couple weeks
[00:23:31] ago really hit differently now." and he
[00:23:33] was being asked, you know, his his
[00:23:34] involvement in the the admin. And he
[00:23:36] said, I'm getting it a little little
[00:23:38] off. It's not verbatim, but this is the
[00:23:40] thrust of it. He said, "Look, if let's
[00:23:42] say hypothetically there were an action
[00:23:45] to be taken by the administration that
[00:23:47] would look really good for Marco that I
[00:23:50] would not be all that publicly involved
[00:23:52] in, in part because you don't have the
[00:23:53] president and the vice president in the
[00:23:54] same place often outside of the White
[00:23:56] House where, you know, Marco would be
[00:23:58] center stage and I I would seem to be
[00:23:59] more in the background. If I were
[00:24:01] optimizing for 2028, I would try to kill
[00:24:04] that action. But if I were optimizing
[00:24:06] for the good of the country and just to
[00:24:08] be a good person, I would encourage that
[00:24:10] action. And you know, it's kind of
[00:24:11] unclear what he was talking about there.
[00:24:13] After the Venezuela strike, it seems
[00:24:15] clear as day to me that's what he's
[00:24:16] talking about. I think the idea that JD
[00:24:18] is some isolationist.
[00:24:20] >> I don't I think he's he's positioning
[00:24:22] himself that way. He's been very close
[00:24:24] with Tucker Carlson, who I I don't know
[00:24:25] if Tucker Carlson believes anything at
[00:24:27] this point. I have no idea. But I mean,
[00:24:29] he's he's he's actually kind of on the
[00:24:31] phone, remember, on that signal call
[00:24:32] that was bugged. he was the guy who was
[00:24:34] say calling for restraint. Uh, you know,
[00:24:36] he's not always like uh it doesn't seem
[00:24:38] to be on line with the president's
[00:24:40] foreign policy, which which frankly I
[00:24:42] think is working out great right now.
[00:24:44] You know, I think it's going very well.
[00:24:45] So, I I don't know. I'm I'm not saying
[00:24:47] look, I'm not counting him out by any
[00:24:49] stretch of the imagination. I'm just
[00:24:50] saying the guy who looks great is Marco
[00:24:52] Rubio. And I I I keep
[00:24:54] >> Here's the thing. I think my Marco Marco
[00:24:56] has basically already said that he is
[00:24:57] not going to run if Shady runs. And and
[00:24:59] I think that that's probably true. And I
[00:25:01] and I think that right now if if you're
[00:25:02] looking at the the vice president,
[00:25:04] obviously his benefit is that he is the
[00:25:06] vice president. No one's no one's
[00:25:07] underestimating that he's incredibly
[00:25:09] talented. He for sure is. I think that
[00:25:11] there there are a couple of systemic
[00:25:12] factors that are running against him
[00:25:14] because I I sort of did a bit of a deep
[00:25:16] dive into this. I mean, the reality he's
[00:25:17] the vice president who currently has a
[00:25:18] 40% approval rating. Uh vice presidents
[00:25:21] who have a 40% approval rating running
[00:25:23] after presidents who have a 40% approval
[00:25:24] rating don't typically do amazing in
[00:25:26] general elections. Uh and and so, you
[00:25:28] know, maybe that changes, maybe that
[00:25:29] changes radically. Uh but I think that
[00:25:31] the sort of core assumption that a lot
[00:25:32] of Republicans are making that there's
[00:25:34] sort of a cakewalk into the presidency
[00:25:35] for the vice president. Uh that that I
[00:25:37] don't see. And I will say that I do
[00:25:39] think that the mememory, if you do care
[00:25:40] about the very online, every meme of
[00:25:42] Marco Rubio, that the big meme of Marco
[00:25:43] Rubio obviously is Marco having a
[00:25:45] different job every day, right? Is the
[00:25:47] secretary of state now. Now, now he's
[00:25:48] like a gladiator. Now, it's just him in
[00:25:51] that pose being like annoyed that he's
[00:25:52] been given a new a new job as king of
[00:25:54] Venezuela or now the the new governor of
[00:25:56] Greenland or whatever it's going to be
[00:25:58] today. And then all the memes of JD or
[00:26:00] that JD is fat with weird hair and like
[00:26:03] that that's not kind of where you want
[00:26:04] to be just in in sort of meme land.
[00:26:06] >> I I disagree. It gets back.
[00:26:09] >> You should talk to your guest
[00:26:09] clavvicular. Okay. Like you're
[00:26:11] guesticular
[00:26:13] which is hilarious. I don't I don't
[00:26:14] think the looks maxing uh you know
[00:26:16] methaddicted 19-year-old is
[00:26:18] representative of the American voter.
[00:26:19] And I hope this is why this is why I
[00:26:21] disagree though and it gets to my point
[00:26:23] on Newsome is I think I think it was so
[00:26:26] smart of the VP to lean into the goofy
[00:26:28] meme. And the reason I think it was so
[00:26:30] smart is you want to be underestimated
[00:26:33] so that the reality can surpass
[00:26:34] expectations. So even down to the
[00:26:36] physicality, the fact that the meme is
[00:26:37] he's like this big fat guy, but then you
[00:26:39] see him, he's not a big fat guy, he's
[00:26:40] actually a pretty th relatively thin
[00:26:42] guy. He the meme is that he's kind of
[00:26:43] like short. He's actually very tall. The
[00:26:45] meme is that he's kind of dumb. He's
[00:26:47] extremely intelligent. So I think all of
[00:26:49] those things play really well. Even to
[00:26:50] the point ideologically some people
[00:26:52] tried to pin him down on he's an
[00:26:53] isolationist or he's this or he's that.
[00:26:55] But he's defended the administration's
[00:26:56] actions in Iran, in Venezuela quite
[00:26:59] viferously. And so I don't know to me
[00:27:01] like if if if I were in this position I
[00:27:03] would not want the memes to be making me
[00:27:05] out to be the really cool guy. I frankly
[00:27:08] you even saw this with Trump in 2015
[00:27:10] 2016. All the meery was that he was like
[00:27:12] a big dumb idiot. And I I think to be
[00:27:14] underestimated actually puts you in a
[00:27:15] better position
[00:27:16] >> and he doesn't and he's not any and he's
[00:27:17] not taking himself too seriously. So
[00:27:18] that's that's which is a rare quality
[00:27:20] for a politician people appreciate. But
[00:27:22] the question is for Republicans, what
[00:27:24] other Republican I mean to go to Ben's
[00:27:25] point about Trump's coalition.
[00:27:27] >> Uh what other Republican has a better
[00:27:29] chance of of at least maintaining most
[00:27:31] of Trump's coalition if not expanding
[00:27:33] it? And I don't see anybody outside. I
[00:27:35] mean there there are others who might
[00:27:36] have a shot. There are others who I
[00:27:38] could like in that spot, but I think JD
[00:27:39] Vance certainly would have the best shot
[00:27:41] of that. And as far as as far as
[00:27:42] approval ratings go, it's like every
[00:27:44] president and vice president my whole
[00:27:46] life has had terrible approval ratings.
[00:27:48] It feels like uh I just I don't think it
[00:27:50] like means anything. Um it just it's
[00:27:52] just it's part of the real the political
[00:27:53] reality we live in that they you just
[00:27:55] hate whoever's in there and they get bad
[00:27:56] approval ratings. And it still just goes
[00:27:58] to I don't see anyone else in the and
[00:28:01] this could change obviously. We're still
[00:28:02] a couple years out, but I don't see
[00:28:03] anyone else in the Republican field.
[00:28:04] look at them and say, "Well, you know,
[00:28:06] we know what Trump's coalition is, and
[00:28:08] that guy over there re really is going
[00:28:11] to resonate with that coalition more
[00:28:12] than JD Vance."
[00:28:14] >> And and I have to say, by the by the
[00:28:15] way, I wasn't suggesting he won't be the
[00:28:16] nominee or the next president because
[00:28:18] that was that has been my certainty. I'm
[00:28:19] just saying that my certainty is a
[00:28:21] little less certain uh nowadays, but I'm
[00:28:23] sorry. Go ahead. Go ahead.
[00:28:24] >> Well, just just what Matt was saying, I
[00:28:26] I ag I agree with this. I think, you
[00:28:28] know, the incumbency is a big deal. And
[00:28:30] think about having Donald Trump's
[00:28:31] policies without Donald Trump, you know,
[00:28:34] the Trumpian of Trump that people don't
[00:28:36] like. A lot of people don't like his
[00:28:37] brashness and his his big mouth and all
[00:28:39] that stuff. And you if you if we thought
[00:28:41] we could get MAGA without Trump, I think
[00:28:43] a lot of people would turn up.
[00:28:44] >> Oh, see, I totally I I disagree with
[00:28:45] this. Actually, I've completely flipped
[00:28:46] on this. I think that I think that MAGA
[00:28:48] is Trump. I think that that MAGA without
[00:28:50] Trump is boring and stupid in many ways.
[00:28:52] Uh because I just don't think as a
[00:28:53] concept that holds together. There's no
[00:28:55] everyone keeps trying to say what is
[00:28:56] MAGA? And so you have the isolation of
[00:28:58] saying MAGA is America first meaning
[00:29:00] America alone. And then you have people
[00:29:01] who are saying no no no what MAGA really
[00:29:03] means is XY MAGA means whatever Donald
[00:29:05] Trump says MAGA means. That's the
[00:29:06] reality. And trying to take away the the
[00:29:08] sizzle from the steak and then say yes
[00:29:10] but now it's very nutritious. Like
[00:29:11] that's that's not the thing. And and if
[00:29:13] I were going to look at here's what I've
[00:29:15] said about JD. I'll say about Rubio too.
[00:29:17] Every politician must form their own
[00:29:19] coalition. Anybody who thinks they're
[00:29:20] just going to pick up the last guy's
[00:29:22] coalition they're wrong. It never ever
[00:29:24] ever works in weird circumstances. Biden
[00:29:27] did that, didn't he?
[00:29:28] >> But in in what way in what way did Biden
[00:29:30] do that?
[00:29:30] >> He was just running on Obama's third
[00:29:32] term, basically in strange
[00:29:34] circumstances.
[00:29:34] >> Okay. The the 2020 election, as I think
[00:29:37] we will all acknowledge, those of us who
[00:29:38] think that that he won and those who
[00:29:39] bizarrely think that that he lost are
[00:29:41] the are the we will acknowledge that was
[00:29:44] the weirdest election of our lifetime
[00:29:45] and that that those circumstances are
[00:29:47] are not replicable absent some sort of
[00:29:50] massive pandemic that shuts down the
[00:29:52] entire world. Democrats,
[00:29:53] >> right, unless unless we just, right,
[00:29:55] unless unless we do it again. I mean,
[00:29:56] which could, but it's but the biggest
[00:29:58] problem is that if you look at here's
[00:30:00] the thing. I look at JD and I look at
[00:30:01] JD's coalition and it looks like Trump's
[00:30:03] coalition but smaller. I look at Rubio's
[00:30:05] coalition and if I were going to build a
[00:30:07] coalition as a Marco Rubio, it would not
[00:30:09] actually be Trump's coalition. It would
[00:30:10] be Rubio's coalition, meaning more
[00:30:12] college educated white people, more
[00:30:13] Hispanics, fewer blue collar white
[00:30:15] voters, right? I mean, that that's
[00:30:16] actually what his coalition would look
[00:30:18] like. Probably more women, right? Like
[00:30:20] his coalition just looks different. And
[00:30:21] when we dismiss that kind of thing, it
[00:30:23] ignores the fact that that's actually
[00:30:24] what Trump did. He didn't just replicate
[00:30:26] George W. Bush's coalition. He built an
[00:30:28] entirely new coalition where he went to
[00:30:30] low propensity voters who weren't voting
[00:30:32] and got them in his camp. My guess is
[00:30:34] somebody like Marco Rubio dropped some
[00:30:35] low propensity voters and maybe
[00:30:37] convinces some more higher propensity
[00:30:38] voters who voted for Mitt Romney but not
[00:30:40] for Donald Trump to come back. Now
[00:30:41] again, I'm not saying that means that
[00:30:42] Rubio wins or that JD loses. I'm just
[00:30:44] saying that when I look at JD Vance, I
[00:30:46] cannot see how if Donald Trump got 77
[00:30:49] million votes in the last election
[00:30:50] cycle, how JD Vance gets to 79 million
[00:30:53] votes in the next election cycle. very
[00:30:55] difficult for me to see that and that's
[00:30:56] a problem for Republicans. That's not a
[00:30:57] question just for JD. That's a problem
[00:30:59] for Republicans. They should keep that
[00:31:00] in mind. So when I'm saying Gavin could
[00:31:01] be the next president, I'm not talking
[00:31:03] about Gavin because he's so
[00:31:05] intellectually superior and such an
[00:31:06] amazing c. I'm saying we have now had a
[00:31:09] series of binary elections in which
[00:31:10] everyone was kind of squirrely about all
[00:31:13] the candidates that we came down to the
[00:31:14] final two and there were a couple of,
[00:31:16] you know, core bases who were like,
[00:31:17] "Yeah, I love it." And then a huge swath
[00:31:19] of the middle was like, "Man, I this is
[00:31:22] man, this kind of sucks." And if you
[00:31:23] look at the Galllet poll right now, more
[00:31:25] than 45% of Americans are now
[00:31:27] identifying as politically independent.
[00:31:29] Not because they actually are, but
[00:31:30] because they don't want to be identified
[00:31:32] as either member of either party.
[00:31:33] >> That's right. That's right. Yeah.
[00:31:35] >> But that's But see, this is the thing. I
[00:31:36] mean, as you've pointed out, Ben,
[00:31:38] Trump's policies, you know, eliminate
[00:31:40] Trump there, but his policies are fairly
[00:31:42] middle of the road. I mean, I think some
[00:31:44] things he's more right and some things
[00:31:45] he's more left, but he's not he's not a
[00:31:47] radical in any uh shape or form. It's
[00:31:50] just that the our politics has been so
[00:31:52] radicalized that he sometimes looks like
[00:31:54] it. And I can't help feeling that you
[00:31:56] could pick up the the Trump MAGA and
[00:31:58] present it in a somewhat more
[00:32:00] statesmanlike way. And you know, I I I
[00:32:02] always feel that the what the people are
[00:32:04] asking for is normaly. They're asking to
[00:32:06] kind of get back to the way we're
[00:32:08] supposed to be. And and I could see
[00:32:10] Vance selling that really easily. I you
[00:32:12] know, I don't see why he can't do that.
[00:32:13] The other the other issue I I see your
[00:32:15] point, Ben, that and I agree with it
[00:32:16] that MAGA is what Trump says it is, but
[00:32:18] I think where I disagree is I think that
[00:32:21] Trump actually has a pretty coherent
[00:32:22] policy vision, though it's often called
[00:32:24] incoherent or capricious. And you see
[00:32:26] this especially with foreign policy,
[00:32:27] like what does America first mean? I was
[00:32:29] just debating some guys on this the
[00:32:30] other day on Piers Morgan show. And
[00:32:32] there's some people who insist America
[00:32:34] first means conservative or libertarian
[00:32:37] isolationism. I don't think that's what
[00:32:38] Trump ever meant. some people uh that
[00:32:40] say the alternative is a liberal
[00:32:42] internationalism whether we're you know
[00:32:44] talking about I don't know like George
[00:32:45] W. Bush or something spread liberalism
[00:32:47] and democracy overseas. I think Trump's
[00:32:49] is this third option which is a
[00:32:51] conservative imperialism. I think he's
[00:32:53] been consistent about it. He ran in in
[00:32:56] the first term on destroying ISIS. That
[00:32:58] obviously doesn't mean you're just going
[00:32:59] to only focus within your borders but
[00:33:01] when he does intervene it seems to be in
[00:33:03] this way that's a little bit more
[00:33:04] restrained. we're going to have these
[00:33:06] real tactical, you know, in-n-out kind
[00:33:08] of hits in the Middle East and then
[00:33:10] we're going to focus a little more in
[00:33:11] the Western Hemisphere, but in the
[00:33:12] Western Hemisphere that's going to have
[00:33:13] cascading effects that do affect Iran,
[00:33:16] Russia, China. And so to me that that
[00:33:19] it's it's a a third option that is kind
[00:33:21] of coherent and that therefore could be
[00:33:23] replicated by whoever succeeds.
[00:33:24] >> He's also always thinking about China.
[00:33:26] He's always setting us up to fight the
[00:33:27] Cold War with China. I mean everything
[00:33:29] he does, you know, when you look at
[00:33:30] Venezuela, the Chinese ran for their
[00:33:32] lives like a lot of running Chinese
[00:33:35] after they got took Madura out of there.
[00:33:36] They were set they were setting up shop
[00:33:38] in Venezuela and now not so much. You
[00:33:40] know, now they're sort of thinking,
[00:33:41] well, maybe we can use this as an excuse
[00:33:43] to go into Taiwan, which eventually
[00:33:44] they'll do, but they but they're not in
[00:33:46] Venezuela anymore. And I think Trump is
[00:33:48] thinking about that all the time. I
[00:33:49] think if you everything he does in in
[00:33:51] terms of
[00:33:52] >> I mean, I totally agree with that. I
[00:33:53] think that the danger in trying to
[00:33:54] intellectualize MAGA is that I think
[00:33:57] that when you abstract into sort of
[00:33:59] absolute terms what his foreign policy
[00:34:01] is then when you zoom back in into what
[00:34:04] the specific decisions that are made are
[00:34:06] by somebody who's not Trump, they don't
[00:34:07] necessarily match up. I think that for
[00:34:10] example, you could make easily the case
[00:34:11] right now and I I'll make two varying
[00:34:13] cases. One is that President Trump is
[00:34:15] what I think he is, which is sort of a a
[00:34:17] hawkish realist, which is that he only
[00:34:19] wants to get involved in the most
[00:34:20] minimal possible way to achieve the
[00:34:21] maximum possible effect on behalf of
[00:34:23] American interests abroad and that's not
[00:34:24] restricted to the Western Hemisphere.
[00:34:26] Right? That he will he will bomb the
[00:34:27] Ford nuclear facility in Iran if he
[00:34:29] feels that that's necessary. Maybe he'll
[00:34:31] go ahead and he'll take a military
[00:34:32] action in Iran if he believes it'll be
[00:34:34] necessary right now, but only if it
[00:34:35] achieves his desired effect. He's not
[00:34:36] going to just do something like fire a
[00:34:38] missile at a camel and hit him in the
[00:34:39] ass sort of for show, right? Like so
[00:34:41] that that's that's sort of one version.
[00:34:42] And then there's an equally coherent
[00:34:44] version that I find really offputting
[00:34:46] and I think would be wrong in policy,
[00:34:48] which is this sort of multipolar
[00:34:50] hemispherism, right? This idea that what
[00:34:52] Trump's actually trying to do is create
[00:34:54] a western hemisphere free of foreign
[00:34:55] intervention, but he's totally fine with
[00:34:57] Russia dominating both the Near East and
[00:34:59] Eastern Europe and maybe a little bit
[00:35:00] Western Europe. And he's fine with China
[00:35:02] dominating Taiwan and the Far East.
[00:35:04] Right? That vision has actually been put
[00:35:06] forward by people who consider
[00:35:07] themselves in sort of the MAGA camp. And
[00:35:08] because Trump is not, I would say
[00:35:10] rhetorically coherent in the way that he
[00:35:12] approaches these issues. Even though I
[00:35:13] think you can read the policy line in
[00:35:15] the ways that I've presented, and I
[00:35:17] think the first one is much more
[00:35:18] accurate than the second, I think that's
[00:35:19] why you're seeing concerns about, you
[00:35:21] know, when people say, well, what is
[00:35:22] MAGA? Those are real open questions
[00:35:24] because again, ideology does sort of
[00:35:26] matter and President Trump doesn't
[00:35:28] really have one. And so he's the best
[00:35:29] pragmatist you'll ever find without a
[00:35:31] root ide. But what that means is very
[00:35:33] difficult to have an ideological heir.
[00:35:35] How how do you have an ideological
[00:35:36] without the only listens to the the MAGA
[00:35:39] people talk and think, "Thank God
[00:35:40] somebody's finally talking about
[00:35:42] America's benefits again." Is that the
[00:35:45] only person who hears that? Like these
[00:35:46] guys come out and they say, you know, we
[00:35:47] want this to be good for America because
[00:35:49] that's who we work for. I think it was
[00:35:50] Rubio who said that. And I thought,
[00:35:52] thank you. You know, like I suddenly
[00:35:54] remembered that all this stuff that we
[00:35:56] hear like, you know, you're a racist if
[00:35:57] you don't open your borders. It's like,
[00:35:59] screw you. You know, this is my country.
[00:36:01] I want to defend my country. It's a
[00:36:03] multi-thnic country. It's got everybody
[00:36:04] here. I don't want to let in foreigners.
[00:36:06] That doesn't make me a racist. And I
[00:36:07] just I think this is the first time I
[00:36:08] don't hear us being accused of anything.
[00:36:10] They remember that we actually pay their
[00:36:12] salaries.
[00:36:13] >> Yeah. There there's something kind of
[00:36:14] funny about when when Trump goes in and
[00:36:15] he says, "We're going to Venezuela for
[00:36:17] the oil," which is not even exactly
[00:36:19] true. I mean, like we would be justified
[00:36:21] in part, but it actually does have a lot
[00:36:23] more to it and a lot more principle and
[00:36:25] everything. And Ben, I think you make a
[00:36:26] great point, which is you can't quite
[00:36:28] tell exactly what this is. Or you could
[00:36:30] read in two things because it there is a
[00:36:33] retrenchment that's going on. There's no
[00:36:34] question about that. That's what the
[00:36:36] assertion of the Donro doctrine is
[00:36:37] about. That's what Greenland is about.
[00:36:38] And the question is, is the retrenchment
[00:36:41] a a way that we can make sure that we're
[00:36:44] strong, we're, you know, we're not
[00:36:45] spread too thin so that we can preserve
[00:36:48] American strength around the world, or
[00:36:50] is the retrenchment this kind of
[00:36:51] surrender that says we just don't want
[00:36:52] to be involved anywhere else? And I
[00:36:54] agree, it's kind of ambiguous right now,
[00:36:56] but I just don't see any real uh
[00:36:58] American politician on the right running
[00:37:00] to say I want to make America weaker.
[00:37:02] You know, that's the that's the opposite
[00:37:03] of of what of what MAGA literally
[00:37:05] >> Well, then you'd have to become a
[00:37:06] Democrat.
[00:37:07] >> That's right.
[00:37:08] >> That's their actual platform. I mean,
[00:37:10] >> hey, Gavin Newsome just tweeted
[00:37:12] something out about me that's hilarious.
[00:37:13] Okay. Really?
[00:37:19] >> Yeah. Yeah. He he tweeted out like,
[00:37:21] "Here's what Ben Shapiro is hiding."
[00:37:23] It's like gets President gets Gavin
[00:37:25] Newsome gets Ben to criticize Trump's
[00:37:26] tariffs. What?
[00:37:29] What? gets gets Ben Shaper to oppose the
[00:37:32] invasion of Greenes.
[00:37:33] >> What?
[00:37:35] >> Gets Ben Sper to say the Republicans are
[00:37:36] gonna have a hard time in the midterms.
[00:37:37] Man, well, with that kind of Wow. Wow.
[00:37:41] >> They nailed you. You got mine.
[00:37:43] >> Brutal. I got mine.
[00:37:44] >> You got news. Okay. Brutal.
[00:37:45] >> All right. Speaking of a very hard right
[00:37:47] turn, Matt, you I think are what you're
[00:37:49] defending slavery now. You want you want
[00:37:51] to bring slavery back. Is do I
[00:37:53] understand that right?
[00:37:55] >> Very pro. Well, it's a look, it's a it's
[00:37:57] a controversial issue with slavery. Are
[00:37:59] we are we for Are we against it? There
[00:38:01] are arguments. I There are arguments on
[00:38:03] both sides, guys. Okay. Both sides make
[00:38:05] interesting arguments. Sorry.
[00:38:08] >> Could you get me off the show, please?
[00:38:09] >> For for media matters. He's joking. It's
[00:38:11] not true.
[00:38:12] >> It's uh Well,
[00:38:13] >> he's not joking. Sorry. Go on. So, we,
[00:38:16] you know, I've got a this little uh this
[00:38:18] this not little, we have a series coming
[00:38:20] out starting on uh Monday, real history,
[00:38:22] and they're shorter, you know, shorter
[00:38:25] documentaries on um on various topics,
[00:38:29] very historical topics that have so
[00:38:32] often been uh lied about,
[00:38:34] misrepresented. And these are generally
[00:38:37] going to be topics that are talked about
[00:38:38] a lot. I mean, people talk about slavery
[00:38:40] all the time, but um I think the average
[00:38:44] American doesn't understands the topic
[00:38:47] very little because schools lie about
[00:38:50] it, media represent misrepresents it,
[00:38:52] Hollywood, um and there are all kinds of
[00:38:54] realities around these topics that are
[00:38:55] never never talked about at all. And
[00:38:57] we're going to start with uh with
[00:38:59] slavery. And uh it's it's look it's very
[00:39:02] interesting because although slavery
[00:39:05] comes up a lot in our political debates
[00:39:08] uh like I said I think you know the
[00:39:10] average person knows almost nothing
[00:39:12] about it because we're not taught about
[00:39:13] it in schools and um and that's because
[00:39:17] the the history that we've been taught
[00:39:19] and this is this isn't just something
[00:39:20] that started 5 years ago and in the age
[00:39:22] of wokeness or whatever. This is
[00:39:24] something that goes back generations. I
[00:39:25] mean, I can remember being in public
[00:39:26] school, uh, you know, 30 plus years ago
[00:39:31] and it was the same thing. And that's
[00:39:32] because the the education about American
[00:39:35] history that we get in the mainstream is
[00:39:38] designed to make us hate ourselves, uh,
[00:39:42] hate this country and feel guilty about
[00:39:44] it. And that starts with slavery. So, in
[00:39:46] the series, we're going to begin with a
[00:39:49] look at the, you know, a global look at
[00:39:51] slavery. Slavery existed as an
[00:39:53] institution across the entire world for
[00:39:56] thousands of years. If it's possible to
[00:39:58] carry the guilt of slavery in your blood
[00:40:01] somehow, as we're told white Americans
[00:40:04] do, if that's possible, then every
[00:40:06] single person who exists on the planet
[00:40:09] carries that guilt because slavery
[00:40:11] existed everywhere on the planet. And
[00:40:13] then we kind of narrow it in to slavery
[00:40:16] in America. Because even if everybody
[00:40:19] will acknowledge that, well, of course,
[00:40:20] slavery existed everywhere. Uh then they
[00:40:22] move to yeah, but slavery here was more
[00:40:24] brutal and it was worse. And that is
[00:40:27] also that is also not true. And we get
[00:40:29] into some of the facts about you know
[00:40:32] where where did these slaves come from?
[00:40:33] Well, they came from Africa. Uh how did
[00:40:36] the slave traders the European and
[00:40:39] American slave traders get their hands
[00:40:41] on those slaves to begin with? Well, it
[00:40:42] turns out that there were entire African
[00:40:44] empires uh who this is what they did. I
[00:40:48] mean, this this this is how they became
[00:40:49] empires is that they enslaved other
[00:40:51] African tribes and sold them. And not
[00:40:54] only that, but if you were captured by
[00:40:56] one of these um African tribes to be
[00:41:00] sold as a slave, the the best case
[00:41:04] scenario for you is that you'd be put on
[00:41:06] a ship and shipped specifically to North
[00:41:09] America. That would be the best case
[00:41:11] scenario. These are basic facts that I
[00:41:13] think uh most people don't know.
[00:41:15] >> As you mentioned or as you maybe
[00:41:17] intended to mention, this is coming out
[00:41:19] once a month on Daily Wire Plus. It's
[00:41:21] awesome. Obviously, we all agree with
[00:41:22] all of that. I can I just sound like a
[00:41:24] little bit of a lib though for a second?
[00:41:25] This is one of my most lib opinions, but
[00:41:27] it's correct. I, you know, when they
[00:41:30] talk about the legacy of slavery and the
[00:41:32] enduring, you know, challenges that come
[00:41:35] because their great great great great
[00:41:37] grandpa was brought on a slave ship. I
[00:41:39] don't think they're totally wrong. I
[00:41:41] don't think that comes from I don't, you
[00:41:43] know, in the sense that like look, I'm
[00:41:45] smoking a Mayflower cigar, a brand new
[00:41:46] blend that's extremely exquisite that
[00:41:48] I'm not yet going to debut for you all.
[00:41:50] But I I love the fact that some a very
[00:41:53] small number of my ancestors came here
[00:41:55] on the Mayflower. That makes me feel
[00:41:57] good about the country. It makes me view
[00:41:59] the country in a certain way. Makes me
[00:42:00] feel a kind of pride and ownership in
[00:42:02] the country. If my ancestors had come on
[00:42:05] a slave ship, even if I were rich, I
[00:42:07] were a rapper, I had, you know, gold
[00:42:09] teeth and everything and I was
[00:42:10] materially really well off, I would view
[00:42:13] the country differently. I would have a
[00:42:14] different relationship to it. And I
[00:42:16] think as conservatives, we say that
[00:42:17] heritage matters and tradition matters
[00:42:19] and all that. I all I'm saying is I kind
[00:42:22] of get it. And if I were a black guy in
[00:42:23] America, it would that would color my
[00:42:25] view. That's true. I think that's true.
[00:42:27] And I also think it's important, Matt. I
[00:42:30] completely agree with the history you're
[00:42:31] saying. I I know that history. And
[00:42:32] you're absolutely right about it. But I
[00:42:34] also think it's important while we're
[00:42:35] saying this that we should put out the
[00:42:37] the idea that slavery is bad. You know,
[00:42:39] we think it's bad there, it's bad here.
[00:42:41] We're against it. I think, you know,
[00:42:42] this is the Daily Wire official official
[00:42:44] Daily Wire. You know, our our co-founder
[00:42:47] is is a Jew. Let's take the Moses uh
[00:42:49] idea here like let the people go, you
[00:42:51] know, like always, you know, you read
[00:42:53] Aristotle and he says, "Well, some
[00:42:54] people are born. You just want to slap
[00:42:56] them." I just like Aristotle stop that.
[00:42:58] You know, it's like it's Aristotle means
[00:43:00] like different things by But people
[00:43:02] should not own other people. And I just
[00:43:04] I just think that, you know, of course
[00:43:06] it's true that, you know, it actually is
[00:43:08] true. I I mean, I live in the in the
[00:43:10] South and I people come up to me and
[00:43:11] they say, "Well, you know, slavery
[00:43:12] wasn't so bad." And I think, okay, but
[00:43:14] can we begin with no, you know, we like
[00:43:17] don't hold people slaves. And I think we
[00:43:20] we could put that on our our mast head
[00:43:22] maybe. But I but other than that, it is
[00:43:24] true that it was, you know, I won't say
[00:43:27] it was better here. It's just it's just
[00:43:28] an an evil. But it is it is true that we
[00:43:31] didn't start start it. We bought people
[00:43:33] from we bought people who had already
[00:43:35] been enslaved. And if you read I think
[00:43:36] at one point Matt I sent you uh the the
[00:43:38] memoir of m of the guy who made it
[00:43:41] into believe it was Nigeria the explorer
[00:43:44] and he just described a world of slavery
[00:43:47] when he got to Africa. I mean he he had
[00:43:48] some I can't even I can't remember the
[00:43:51] number but he said like something like
[00:43:52] 40% of the people were slaves. And of
[00:43:54] course if you got caught by the Arabs
[00:43:56] they also castrated you which was like a
[00:43:59] unpleasant thing in and of itself
[00:44:01] because you couldn't just then claim you
[00:44:03] were a woman and play soccer for the the
[00:44:04] team you could beat. You know, it was
[00:44:06] really bad. So So I mean I think you
[00:44:08] know I I agree with with Nolles as well.
[00:44:10] I think I do understand the guy who sold
[00:44:12] me my gun was a black guy and he said he
[00:44:15] said believe me I believe in gun rights
[00:44:17] because if I if I had gun rights I
[00:44:19] wouldn't be here. I actually so I
[00:44:21] actually disagree with with with Nolles
[00:44:22] on this and I'm I'm with Walsh I think
[00:44:24] uh on on the question of you know this
[00:44:26] kind of generational I would feel
[00:44:28] differently about about things I I think
[00:44:30] that the the history of black Americans
[00:44:33] is one of the most glorious things
[00:44:36] meaning like moving from slavery to
[00:44:38] freedom moving from you know abject
[00:44:41] slavery to participating in the building
[00:44:44] of the greatest country in the history
[00:44:46] of the world and becoming leaders in a
[00:44:48] wide variety of fields in that space is
[00:44:50] an amazing history and you know the and
[00:44:53] and the idea that you should carry with
[00:44:54] you some sort of generational stigma or
[00:44:56] shame or that you should feel internally
[00:44:58] uh as though that that is like obviously
[00:45:00] you know the history has consequences
[00:45:03] and you feel those consequences over the
[00:45:05] course of time. Um but yeah I I I'm not
[00:45:08] willing to sort of grant the premise
[00:45:10] that a history of slavery is so deep
[00:45:12] that it it ought to make you think that
[00:45:14] today's America is the problem. This is
[00:45:16] also the America that fought a civil war
[00:45:18] to abolish slavery. This is also the
[00:45:20] America that did the civil rights
[00:45:21] movement. This is also that's not what
[00:45:23] NS was saying though.
[00:45:24] >> Yeah, that's Can I just Can I say Can I
[00:45:26] say one thing? So, well, actually two
[00:45:28] things. First of all, to Drew's point
[00:45:30] that slavery is bad. Uh that's
[00:45:32] debatable. No, it's
[00:45:35] slaver's
[00:45:37] job is just to give me a heart attack.
[00:45:38] This is like this is great.
[00:45:40] >> No, sla obviously slavery is bad. But I
[00:45:41] do think that assessing that there there
[00:45:44] is a that there's an important point in
[00:45:46] in bringing up that it was a it was a
[00:45:48] global institution which is that it was
[00:45:50] bad. But when you're assessing the
[00:45:53] individual moral guilt of people who
[00:45:55] were involved in slavery say 500 years
[00:45:57] ago or 600 years ago their individual
[00:45:59] moral guilt is severely mitigated
[00:46:02] because it was a global institution. And
[00:46:05] at this time in history, they just
[00:46:07] didn't have concepts like universal
[00:46:10] human equality. Just simply did not
[00:46:12] exist for the majority of human history.
[00:46:14] And and that means that slavery was bad.
[00:46:17] But it also means that to kind of look
[00:46:19] at it through a modern lens and assess
[00:46:21] the kind of moral guilt on those people
[00:46:23] that we would on a slave owner today is
[00:46:25] incoherent. But secondly to to the black
[00:46:27] Americans today, I agree that the fact
[00:46:29] that they that you know if this is your
[00:46:31] actually your heritage, of course
[00:46:32] there's plenty of black Americans who
[00:46:33] came here afterwards and so that's not
[00:46:35] their heritage. But if
[00:46:36] >> Minnesota you mean you mean like
[00:46:38] >> Exactly. Yes. Fine. So if if that is
[00:46:40] your heritage then that's relevant. It's
[00:46:42] like your your heritage is very is very
[00:46:43] relevant of course. Uh but what is
[00:46:46] incoherent is to be mad about it. To be
[00:46:48] mad today that slavery that you know
[00:46:51] that your ancestors were enslaved is
[00:46:53] completely incoherent. Not only because
[00:46:54] it happened a long time ago. I mean,
[00:46:56] there is that it happened a long time
[00:46:57] ago. It didn't happen to you. So to be
[00:46:59] mad about a thing that didn't happen to
[00:47:00] you doesn't make a lot of sense. But
[00:47:02] also there's the other part of this
[00:47:03] which nobody really wants to say and
[00:47:05] every time I say it I get in a lot of
[00:47:06] trouble, but I'll say it again which is
[00:47:08] that okay, let's just be real about it.
[00:47:11] I if if you're a black person in America
[00:47:15] today and your ancestors were enslaved,
[00:47:18] you are better off today
[00:47:20] because of that than you likely would be
[00:47:23] if your ancestors had not been enslaved.
[00:47:25] That's the reality. If you had if your
[00:47:26] ancestors had not been enslaved, then
[00:47:28] guess what? Either you would not exist
[00:47:31] most likely or if you do exist, you'd
[00:47:33] exist in Africa. And it is better to be
[00:47:35] in America than to be in Africa. That is
[00:47:37] not an argument that slavery is okay.
[00:47:39] I'm not I'm not I'm not making an end
[00:47:40] justify that means argument. I'm only
[00:47:42] saying that to be mad about a thing that
[00:47:44] ultimately has actually benefited you
[00:47:46] today
[00:47:48] makes no sense. What would you prefer
[00:47:51] that you are in Africa right now?
[00:47:53] >> I actually just no is right. Nose has
[00:47:55] actually I mean looks actually said
[00:47:57] something that makes sense and is almost
[00:47:58] profound which I think we should all
[00:47:59] stop for a minute and just understand
[00:48:01] that a miracle is taking place in front
[00:48:03] of us.
[00:48:03] >> I I finally did it.
[00:48:05] No, I mean it doesn't matter whether
[00:48:07] it's rational or not. And Ben, I
[00:48:09] completely agree that even though you
[00:48:11] have these feelings, you should be able
[00:48:12] to overcome them and understand that you
[00:48:14] you've been given the gift of being born
[00:48:16] in America and that's a beautiful thing.
[00:48:17] And I I agree with that. But but you
[00:48:19] know, heritage does matter and it does
[00:48:21] infuse you with a certain feeling. And
[00:48:23] you hear the name of the famous black
[00:48:26] comedian who went up against the trans
[00:48:28] people, uh, Chappelle. You know, I'll
[00:48:30] hear him say like it was really the
[00:48:31] black people who freed themselves. And
[00:48:33] you think like, no, it wasn't. It was
[00:48:34] white soldiers fighting. It was people
[00:48:35] from, you know, Maine and Vermont coming
[00:48:37] down and fighting uh for uh for
[00:48:40] liberation. It was it was not black
[00:48:42] people who freed themselves. You know,
[00:48:44] it there's a sense of shame that goes
[00:48:46] with this. There's a sense of shame. You
[00:48:48] know, when I was growing up, I think
[00:48:49] Jews had a sense of shame that stemmed
[00:48:51] out of the Holocaust. You know, why
[00:48:52] didn't you fight back? Why didn't you
[00:48:53] stop them? Which is a complete obviously
[00:48:55] a complete false understanding of what
[00:48:58] happened in that country and what it was
[00:48:59] like to live through it. But people feel
[00:49:00] these things and they affect the way you
[00:49:03] see the place that you're living in. And
[00:49:04] I think that's basically what Nolles is
[00:49:06] saying. And feelings, you know, I hate
[00:49:07] to I hate to break the Steen, but
[00:49:09] feelings matter. You know, the way
[00:49:10] people feel affects their lives. And so
[00:49:12] when you see things like when you hear
[00:49:13] the word pride, you immediately know
[00:49:14] you're dealing with shame. When you hear
[00:49:16] black pride, gay pride, you immediately
[00:49:17] know somebody is feels ashamed. And I
[00:49:20] think that you can't make it go away the
[00:49:21] way the left wants to make it go away by
[00:49:23] proclaiming that you're proud.
[00:49:24] >> Okay. Am I Am I wrong? Am I wrong about
[00:49:26] what I just said, though? Am I wrong?
[00:49:29] No, you're you're not wrong that that
[00:49:31] the you know I have had black people say
[00:49:33] to me had say to me slavery was bad,
[00:49:36] slavery was bad, but I'm glad I'm here.
[00:49:37] I have had black people say that to me
[00:49:39] and I understand it but you know still
[00:49:41] the history counts and I think we we can
[00:49:43] have some kind of compassion for that
[00:49:44] and understanding for it.
[00:49:45] >> I mean on a practical level obviously
[00:49:47] Matt you're history is all contingent
[00:49:49] right it's a it's a bunch of if then
[00:49:51] statements. So if X had not happened
[00:49:52] then Y would not happen. But that
[00:49:54] doesn't mean that you have to be super
[00:49:55] happy that X happened, you know, in and
[00:49:57] of itself. So I So that of course is
[00:50:00] >> I'm not saying you should be h No, no,
[00:50:01] I'm not saying you should be happy. I
[00:50:02] know you're not.
[00:50:02] >> Yeah. I'm not justifying it or saying
[00:50:04] you should be happy about it. What I'm
[00:50:05] saying is that to be to to now in your
[00:50:08] life today to be angry about it um just
[00:50:12] doesn't it doesn't make any sense
[00:50:14] because if the thing hadn't happened
[00:50:17] then you would not exist and or you
[00:50:20] would exist probably in a worse
[00:50:21] situation than you do today. Yeah. So, I
[00:50:23] think that I think that what we need is
[00:50:24] more specificity actually. What is it
[00:50:25] that what is it that you're angry about?
[00:50:27] That a bad thing happened in history or
[00:50:28] at the concept that may still be walking
[00:50:31] around of say black inferiority, right?
[00:50:33] That there's still some people who think
[00:50:34] that and that's what leads to slavery
[00:50:36] and so that's what you're actually angry
[00:50:37] at. That's justifiable. You know, you're
[00:50:39] right in the sense that like anything
[00:50:41] that happened historically, you can be
[00:50:43] angry at the if you had been then there,
[00:50:46] would you have been happy? No, you would
[00:50:47] have been very angry. You would have
[00:50:48] been upset, right? And I think we all
[00:50:50] agree with that. But I think we should
[00:50:51] be more specific about what it is we
[00:50:52] mean when we say angry at that. What is
[00:50:54] the that that we're
[00:50:55] >> I guess one way to think about it is
[00:50:56] just because we're conservatives, we're
[00:50:58] not libs ideologues who think that, you
[00:51:00] know, one action of politics can just
[00:51:03] erase the totality of human experience.
[00:51:05] You you would say, look, the 13th
[00:51:06] Amendment was great, but it doesn't it's
[00:51:09] not a magic wand. You know, the 14th
[00:51:10] Amendment or all the way up to, I don't
[00:51:12] know, Civil Rights Act of 1964 or
[00:51:13] whatever, all sorts of bungled policies
[00:51:15] that have actually made things worse in
[00:51:17] many cases. But but in any case, those
[00:51:19] aren't just magic wands that that erase
[00:51:22] a human identity or heritage or a
[00:51:24] feeling of tradition or place in a
[00:51:25] society. And so I guess my my point is
[00:51:28] my point is basically boiling down to I
[00:51:30] kind of get it. You know, identity
[00:51:32] really really does matter and uh the
[00:51:34] libs are totally wrong about their
[00:51:35] conclusions from that. But it's it's not
[00:51:37] to say that that isn't a real problem or
[00:51:39] a real phenomenon.
[00:51:40] >> They're also wrong about what identity
[00:51:41] is, but but I but I take your point.
[00:51:43] Yeah. I think one of the things that's
[00:51:44] actually quite important also is that if
[00:51:46] slavery was a human universal then the
[00:51:49] people who abolished it ought to get
[00:51:50] outsized credit.
[00:51:51] >> Yeah. Absolutely.
[00:51:53] >> Namely the British, right?
[00:51:54] >> Yeah. No, I mean really really the
[00:51:55] British. But but but the truth is that I
[00:51:57] mean slavery existed in legal form in
[00:51:59] Saudi Arabia into the 60s and and there
[00:52:01] is still slavery that is happening on a
[00:52:04] pretty wide scale particularly in the
[00:52:05] Middle East today. And and very often
[00:52:07] it's people who are being brought there
[00:52:08] as as wage laborers and then they're
[00:52:10] being basically their passports are
[00:52:12] taken away. They're being held there.
[00:52:13] They can't get out. I mean, that sort of
[00:52:15] stuff is happening like right now on the
[00:52:17] ground in a lot of places on Earth. So,
[00:52:19] you know, the stuff that we take for
[00:52:20] granted is not easily taken for granted.
[00:52:23] Well, it's controversial stuff and you
[00:52:24] can only make controversial stuff if you
[00:52:25] have subscribers like ours, which is why
[00:52:27] you should head on over to dailywire.com
[00:52:29] and go check out Matt's brand new series
[00:52:31] where he will be offending I I assume a
[00:52:33] wide variety of people over the course
[00:52:35] of the next year with with actual
[00:52:37] historical takes. So, that that's
[00:52:39] exciting stuff. Speaking of taking
[00:52:41] stuff, are we going to take Greenland?
[00:52:42] Should we take Greenland? This is, by my
[00:52:45] count, the first foreign policy
[00:52:47] intervention in American history, at
[00:52:49] least since the Louisiana Purchase, that
[00:52:51] Matt supports. Matt, you are pro just
[00:52:54] F-35 like like uh you know, Don Rumsfeld
[00:52:57] flying over nuke and taking the the ice.
[00:53:01] >> Uh I mean, I am I I want Greenland. I've
[00:53:04] been I have been uh I have also been
[00:53:07] lusting after Greenland my my whole
[00:53:09] life. and uh we just need to go take it.
[00:53:11] Look, look, I I uh I I am often labeled
[00:53:15] an isolationist and depending on how you
[00:53:17] define that, maybe I fit the bill, but
[00:53:19] my my my actual uh very simple foreign
[00:53:22] policy view has always been I've said
[00:53:25] forever is uh I'm in favor of anything
[00:53:28] that America does that actually advance
[00:53:29] the interests of Americans. And I think
[00:53:32] that very often uh we do things
[00:53:34] especially in far away places that
[00:53:36] supposedly are to advance the interests
[00:53:37] of Americans but actually aren't doing
[00:53:39] that and aren't really intended to do
[00:53:41] that. But if if that's if that's the
[00:53:43] goal is to help Americans make America's
[00:53:45] life make the lives of Americans better
[00:53:48] then at least it's it's it's potentially
[00:53:50] in the realm of something that I would
[00:53:51] support. And with Greenland I mean I can
[00:53:54] easily see uh the advantages. I mean
[00:53:57] there's of course what what Trump always
[00:53:58] talks about the national security
[00:53:59] advantages. Uh there's also, you know,
[00:54:02] there's the the resources that that are
[00:54:04] there. Uh it's a resourcerich uh
[00:54:07] country. You know, only like 12 people
[00:54:09] live there anyway. They're not making
[00:54:10] use of it. I will say that, you know, I
[00:54:13] think there are actually, you know, in
[00:54:15] actually militarily invading Greenland
[00:54:18] would probably wouldn't be necessary,
[00:54:19] first of all. I mean, you just send in
[00:54:21] one team of Navy Seals, you topple the
[00:54:23] whole country.
[00:54:24] >> Just one send in a seal. You can send
[00:54:26] one like actual actual seal. Yeah.
[00:54:28] >> Yeah. One actual seal. uh so that you
[00:54:30] know but but but doing that I think it
[00:54:32] would it wouldn't come to that that's a
[00:54:34] different conversation um maybe they
[00:54:36] could work something else out. I will
[00:54:37] just say though that uh it's interesting
[00:54:41] to me when people today get so offended
[00:54:44] by the very notion that we would try to
[00:54:48] acquire land that we would try to grow
[00:54:51] sort of the the empire and and in
[00:54:53] particular we would try to do it by
[00:54:54] force. It's interesting when people are
[00:54:56] so offended by that because how do you
[00:54:57] think America right now as it's
[00:54:59] currently constituted came to be? You
[00:55:02] know, America became what it is today,
[00:55:04] the continental United States plus
[00:55:06] Hawaii and Al and Alaska. That happened
[00:55:08] through purchasing land in some cases
[00:55:11] going to war, taking it by force,
[00:55:15] displacing people, kicking them out and
[00:55:17] taking the land for ourselves. That is
[00:55:19] how this country came to be. We
[00:55:21] conquered this land and we did it
[00:55:23] because we believed um that you know
[00:55:25] manifest destiny. It's what God wanted
[00:55:27] us to do. We knew that you know the
[00:55:29] American empire should should reign and
[00:55:32] um and we had leaders who were looking
[00:55:35] out for the interests of our people and
[00:55:37] that's that's how the entire world has
[00:55:39] taken the shape that it's taken. This is
[00:55:40] the way this is the way it goes. So,
[00:55:42] that doesn't mean that I'm going to
[00:55:44] support
[00:55:45] any uh effort to just go and conquer
[00:55:48] land, but it does mean that I'm not
[00:55:50] going to automatically rule it out
[00:55:52] because that's that's the only way that
[00:55:53] America exists in the first place. So,
[00:55:56] it's it's worth talking about.
[00:55:57] >> I'm Man, I I don't know what I'm going
[00:55:59] to do. I'm really enjoying Neocon, Matt
[00:56:01] Walsh. This is like my favorite version
[00:56:02] of Matt Walsh. This is this is really
[00:56:04] exciting.
[00:56:04] >> It's not it's not neocon. It's like
[00:56:05] >> I know I'm joking that I would never
[00:56:07] call you a neocon. I know all the things
[00:56:10] to call me. That's I'm I'm looking
[00:56:12] forward to globalist. I think that's
[00:56:14] going to be
[00:56:14] >> Matt Walsh. They got him. They finally
[00:56:16] got him. They got Walsh. They got Bush.
[00:56:19] >> Matt makes a really Matt makes an
[00:56:21] interesting point though, which is like
[00:56:22] we're supposed to be growing and strong.
[00:56:24] And it occurs to me the last time we
[00:56:26] seriously added territory was 1959,
[00:56:29] which coincidentally is the last time we
[00:56:31] were like really strong and growing. You
[00:56:34] know, it seems like since the 60s
[00:56:35] everything's been kind of going
[00:56:36] downhill. And uh you know if if we did
[00:56:38] acquire Greenland in a serious way that
[00:56:41] would expand the size of the United
[00:56:42] States by 22%. That would be not by in
[00:56:45] terms of people obviously but in terms
[00:56:46] of land that would be a huge
[00:56:48] >> shrimp the amount of shrimp we'd have
[00:56:50] you know
[00:56:50] >> the delicious shrimp would be there is a
[00:56:52] real question though does this violate
[00:56:55] you know this the NATO treaties or
[00:56:58] international law? But I I believe I I
[00:57:00] don't like to say this out loud because
[00:57:01] I know it's going to blow back on me,
[00:57:02] but I I believe that empire is a phase
[00:57:04] in the life of great nations. And I I
[00:57:06] don't think you can help it. And I think
[00:57:07] it's uh it's coming our way. I'm I'm
[00:57:10] sort of hoping I would go on so you guys
[00:57:12] have to deal with it. But but still, I
[00:57:14] think ultimately that it you're there's
[00:57:17] just an aoral truth about the fact that
[00:57:19] you grow or you die. And uh and I think
[00:57:22] uh you know, war with Denmark is going
[00:57:24] to be so much fun. And you know, I love
[00:57:26] the foreign minister of Denmark. He
[00:57:27] looks like a lawn troll, you know, and
[00:57:28] he's very civilizing things at the White
[00:57:31] House.
[00:57:32] >> He's such a civilized little guy and he
[00:57:34] says, "I agree with Trump in many ways
[00:57:36] that this, you know, but we can talk it
[00:57:37] out." And I think, "Yeah, let's just
[00:57:38] invade. Come on, let's let's let's go,
[00:57:41] you know."
[00:57:41] >> Oh my god. Okay. So, as as the as the
[00:57:44] apparently Abraham Lincoln, all of your
[00:57:46] imperialist ambitions to grab Texas and
[00:57:49] open it to slavery apparently like
[00:57:52] uh Yeah. Um I I am not in favor of the
[00:57:55] invasion of Greenland. I I think I I
[00:57:58] think that I think that
[00:57:59] >> I think it's great that you have to say
[00:58:00] it though. Media matters. Ben Shapiro, I
[00:58:03] am not in favor of the invasion.
[00:58:07] Like I listen, I'm I'm fine with with
[00:58:09] cutting whatever contract we want to cut
[00:58:11] with Greenland. If we can pressure them
[00:58:12] into selling the thing, that's fine. If
[00:58:13] we want to grab their mineral rights,
[00:58:14] that's cool, too. But like I I'm just
[00:58:16] I'm I'm wondering like I I do love the
[00:58:18] fact that really all this has come down
[00:58:20] to is that Donald Trump really wants to
[00:58:21] rename that place Trumpland and just
[00:58:23] increase the map and be like this is the
[00:58:25] thing that I got cuz that's clearly what
[00:58:27] this is, right? We have a military
[00:58:28] treaty with Denmark. We can build
[00:58:29] whatever the hell we want there. Like
[00:58:30] right now if we just decided to put
[00:58:32] 20,000 troops in Greenland without
[00:58:34] invading, we could just build a base and
[00:58:36] put our troops there. We literally can
[00:58:38] do that under current treaty. So this
[00:58:40] idea that like the Chinese are about to
[00:58:42] grab Greenland,
[00:58:45] the Russians are about to wade ashore in
[00:58:48] nuke and they're going to they're going
[00:58:49] to start shooting all the dogs from
[00:58:51] their dog sleds.
[00:58:52] >> I was hoping now that Trump had took the
[00:58:54] Venezuela ladies Nobel Prize. I was
[00:58:56] hoping that maybe
[00:58:58] I can't even with that one also. I can't
[00:59:01] even like oh my gosh, the taking of the
[00:59:03] the taking of the Nobel Prize is so like
[00:59:06] are you kidding me? Like what are we
[00:59:08] doing now? You know what it feels like
[00:59:09] to take the Nobel Prize? You know, you
[00:59:11] know how on eBay there will be some guy
[00:59:13] who won an Oscar and then he goes
[00:59:14] bankrupt and then he sells his Oscar and
[00:59:16] so you're sitting there and you've got
[00:59:17] like Marlon Brando's second Oscar on
[00:59:20] your on your mantle. What do you do if
[00:59:22] you're Trump? You just walk around like
[00:59:23] here's Maria Kach.
[00:59:26] >> I like the idea that she insisted she
[00:59:27] insisted the White House and she
[00:59:29] insisted you take she's like this little
[00:59:30] peaceful girl, you like I insist you
[00:59:33] take my Nobel Prize. All right. All
[00:59:34] right. I'm sure. Yeah. And and Oh my
[00:59:37] gosh. It's It's so good. And I And and
[00:59:39] obviously when we build the uh the
[00:59:41] greenhouse in in Greenland, then
[00:59:43] President Trump will obviously put the
[00:59:45] Nobel Prize in the greenhouse in in in
[00:59:48] Greenland.
[00:59:48] >> Well, I think look, I I think it's it's
[00:59:50] a good even if you disagree with uh with
[00:59:53] going in and conquering Greenland and
[00:59:55] making them our our slaves because
[00:59:57] that's another part of this we haven't
[01:00:00] you're absolutely up to. But even if you
[01:00:02] disagree with that, the fact that Trump
[01:00:04] has that the desire at all to kind of
[01:00:06] like expand in this way is is that's
[01:00:09] that's what presidents I like that. I
[01:00:12] mean that's that's what that's what our
[01:00:13] leaders should want to do. I like you
[01:00:14] said 1959, right, was the last time when
[01:00:17] it felt like um we were a country. Well,
[01:00:20] I would say it's actually 1969 to me.
[01:00:22] 1969 was the last time when it when when
[01:00:25] you know it felt like America was was
[01:00:27] was like reaching for something and that
[01:00:29] that's when that's when we landed on the
[01:00:31] moon of course and we actually did land
[01:00:32] on the moon first of all. Um, but I
[01:00:36] think there's also this kind of, and I
[01:00:37] know it's not the most compelling
[01:00:39] foreign policy argument, but there's
[01:00:40] this kind of spiritual truth, which is
[01:00:43] that, uh, if you're a great country,
[01:00:45] then you should be trying to expand,
[01:00:48] trying to reach for something, explore,
[01:00:51] go to unknown places. I mean, this is
[01:00:53] when America has been great. We talk
[01:00:55] about make America great again. Well,
[01:00:56] when America has been truly great, it's
[01:00:58] it's when it was driven by that desire,
[01:01:02] by manifest destiny. And then it's kind
[01:01:04] of like, well, we expanded. We took
[01:01:05] over, you know, the continental United
[01:01:06] States and we had Hawaii and Alaska and
[01:01:08] then and then we said, well, where where
[01:01:10] is there left to go? Then we started
[01:01:11] going up and and we're not really doing
[01:01:12] that as much anymore. At least that's
[01:01:14] now kind of in the private sector with
[01:01:15] Elon Musk. And uh and so Trump is the
[01:01:18] first leader in a while who says, "No,
[01:01:20] let's continue to try to expand and grow
[01:01:22] this empire." And I think that that's um
[01:01:25] I think like you said, Drew, if you're
[01:01:26] not if you're not growing, you're dying.
[01:01:27] I think I think there's like a real
[01:01:29] truth to that when it comes to to
[01:01:30] nations. There's a fact too which is we
[01:01:32] had been you know since the middle of
[01:01:34] the 19th century the state department
[01:01:35] has been eyeing Greenland. We've tried
[01:01:37] to buy it multiple times over the years
[01:01:38] including the 20th century and it is
[01:01:40] kind of weird that Denmark controls
[01:01:43] Greenland in in that you know Denmark
[01:01:45] has been downhill ever since Claudius
[01:01:47] killed Hamlet's dad. You know like it
[01:01:49] has not been it's not been a good few
[01:01:51] centuries and and so you think it's
[01:01:54] bizarre that that they're there. When
[01:01:55] Trump was in the Oval Office he said
[01:01:57] Denmark said they're going to double up
[01:01:58] their defenses. They added another dog
[01:02:00] sled. That's real. I thought that was a
[01:02:02] joke. That's not a joke. That's that's
[01:02:04] real. They have the serious dog sled
[01:02:05] Arctic defense, which I'm sure they're
[01:02:07] great people and great dogs, but you
[01:02:09] know that that's not really going to cut
[01:02:10] it. And so, you know, then then there's
[01:02:12] this argument that, well, this violates
[01:02:13] the spirit of NATO or something. And I
[01:02:15] think NATO is a cold war organization.
[01:02:18] It was developed in the Cold War to
[01:02:19] protect the American Empire uh you know,
[01:02:21] against the Soviet Empire and the Warsaw
[01:02:23] Pact. And it doesn't mean exactly the
[01:02:25] same thing after the fall of the Berlin
[01:02:27] Wall. And yeah, to your to your really
[01:02:29] to all of your points, well, no, not as
[01:02:31] much to Ben's, you know, cuz he doesn't
[01:02:32] want us to just gobble up the whole
[01:02:33] world. But to Matt and Drew's point, you
[01:02:36] know, we we're we're great. We grow,
[01:02:38] that's we become empires, that's what we
[01:02:40] do. And you just look at the map and you
[01:02:41] say, "This is kind of weird, especially
[01:02:43] with a more aggressive China and
[01:02:44] Russia." Whether or not they're actually
[01:02:46] going to land and put up a PF Changs and
[01:02:47] nuke, like the fact that they're a
[01:02:49] little little more on the move now means
[01:02:51] that, yeah, I think we need to get a
[01:02:52] little more serious, guys. And you know,
[01:02:54] Denmark, I think you're going to get on
[01:02:55] board. And I do think they're going to
[01:02:56] get on board.
[01:02:57] >> By the way, Kelshi says, according to
[01:02:58] our sponsors, Kelshi, 42% shot or 42% of
[01:03:01] the people who are betting on it say
[01:03:02] that that we're going to take Greenland.
[01:03:04] So, you know, we're going to find out
[01:03:05] and and if that's, you know, you can you
[01:03:07] might be able to tell. We'll see if
[01:03:08] there's like an insider spike right
[01:03:10] before Trump declares that we that we've
[01:03:12] taken Greenland. So,
[01:03:15] honestly, my my main objective my main
[01:03:16] objection to taking Greenland is just
[01:03:18] it's not even truly ideological. It's
[01:03:20] more like is why is this a a priority?
[01:03:22] Like Trump is like we must we must deter
[01:03:24] Russia. We must deter Russia from from
[01:03:26] going after Greenland. Like, you know
[01:03:27] what's a really great way to deter
[01:03:28] Russia? To fight a to to have the
[01:03:30] Ukrainians fight them. Like there's like
[01:03:32] engage in a gigantic ass land war in the
[01:03:35] middle of Eastern Europe. And it's like,
[01:03:37] no, no, no, no. They're not taking
[01:03:38] Greenland. Greenland Green like like
[01:03:41] that. This is where we draw the line.
[01:03:43] >> I care much more about Greenland than
[01:03:44] Ukraine. I don't am I in the minority
[01:03:46] here?
[01:03:47] >> No, you're probably not in the minority,
[01:03:48] but you're wrong. So, those are not the
[01:03:50] same thing.
[01:03:51] >> I think the shrimp is the one that turns
[01:03:53] me toward Greenland. Yeah. as I keep
[01:03:55] kosher so I don't care about the shrimp.
[01:03:56] That's what's happening right here.
[01:03:57] >> Let's see that explain.
[01:03:58] >> That's how it always comes down to that.
[01:04:00] It always comes down to that, you know.
[01:04:01] And because because we added Hawaii as a
[01:04:03] state in 1959, the vastness of the
[01:04:06] American Empire Sea, we can actually
[01:04:08] have coconut shrimp once we take
[01:04:10] Greenland. That's going to be so
[01:04:11] delicious.
[01:04:12] >> God, this is great.
[01:04:13] >> Guys, we I we have to go. There's two We
[01:04:15] have to We have to go and we need to go.
[01:04:18] >> Uh wonderful to see all of you.
[01:04:20] Wonderful to see all of you out there.
[01:04:21] Go become a Daily Wire member right now.
[01:04:23] And you can hear Matt Walsh vigorously
[01:04:27] defend slavery. This is friendly fire.
[01:04:29] We'll see you later.
[01:04:29] >> You're killing me here.
ℹ️ Document Details
SHA-256
yt_yQJ_T6korM8
Dataset
youtube
Comments 0