Speaker 1: Well Whiskey from power Line blog dot com and produced
Speaker 1: by Ricochet dot com.
Speaker 2: This is the Three Whiskey Happy Hour with your bartenders
Speaker 2: Steve Hayward, John Yu and power Lines International Woman of
Speaker 2: Mystery Lucretia.
Speaker 3: Got a given that whiskey where you're being in loud down?
Speaker 4: Well, Hi, everybody, We've got the three Whiskey Happy Hour
Speaker 4: band back together again in person, drinking Glenn Levit and
Speaker 4: Maker's mark in John U's office in Berkeley.
Speaker 5: And hot chocolate and hot chocolate.
Speaker 4: You can put whiskey in hot chocolate, you know, I know.
Speaker 4: And and we have a mystery guest, a very special
Speaker 4: guest who's actually just lurking in the background and hiding.
Speaker 4: But I think John we should out her anyway. It's
Speaker 4: Judge Janis Rogers Brown.
Speaker 6: But hello, Hi, say hi, there goes your confirmation to
Speaker 6: be Attorney General in the trunk.
Speaker 5: A Supreme Court.
Speaker 4: Well, all right, and all those things. I actually think
Speaker 4: though that and you may want to jump in on
Speaker 4: this Judge. We should tell listeners why they were late.
Speaker 4: I put an announcement they were going to be late
Speaker 4: with the podcast, but why we're in person? Yes, what
Speaker 4: are you doing? The last three days. You want to
Speaker 4: start and we'll correct you.
Speaker 6: Guys, the audience will sympathize with me so bad. And
Speaker 6: locked in a room with Steve and Lucretia for three
Speaker 6: days arguing about natural law, I have undergone the worst
Speaker 6: punishment that the civil society could ever impose on me.
Speaker 6: Three days. There was no release, no escape. Lucretia would
Speaker 6: not stop yelling at me.
Speaker 5: Oh I never even got a chance to yell at you.
Speaker 5: It would never allow me to wait a minute.
Speaker 4: John. Three days, and how many times did I make
Speaker 4: mentioned to Clean Air Act? Not one?
Speaker 1: Not one.
Speaker 3: In fact I mentioned it more than you. Sort of shocking,
Speaker 3: you know.
Speaker 6: So we offered a class for the listeners. Actually we
Speaker 6: should offer it online, you know, because it was a
Speaker 6: great class. We had a class thirty students, which was
Speaker 6: triple our enrollment from last year. Right, and we went
Speaker 6: through the different theories of how to interpret the Constitution.
Speaker 6: But I would say because of my co instructors here
Speaker 6: a heavy bias towards natural rights.
Speaker 3: Even though I am a skeptic, I gave them full
Speaker 3: full rain to.
Speaker 6: Talk about their what could do all theories to their
Speaker 6: hearts content.
Speaker 4: I haven't even had much whiskey. Yet you would you
Speaker 4: haven't either way to it yet? Really really well, you know,
Speaker 4: first of all, sometime we ought to do a really
Speaker 4: organized podcast on long economics and what we think are
Speaker 4: its defects. But we want to do that an organized
Speaker 4: wag otherwise it could be a train wreck like our
Speaker 4: show on Prudence a few weeks ago.
Speaker 3: Wow, it wasn't a train wreck. You guys were the wreck.
Speaker 3: We were fine.
Speaker 5: We were I will, I will confess. And I told John,
Speaker 5: who doesn't look at the comments, but he counts on me.
Speaker 5: He counts on me to tell him what the comments are,
Speaker 5: and the commenters count on me to tell John what
Speaker 5: their comments are. And in that particular week, they were
Speaker 5: more pro John than they were pro lucretia. That's happened
Speaker 5: every week. That's happened once in history, in pre human posthuman,
Speaker 5: in history once and that was that week.
Speaker 4: But I do I'd like to get your impressions. I mean,
Speaker 4: you're around more the students than we are, John and
Speaker 4: Judge Brown. If you have a sentiment or thought on this,
Speaker 4: I thought that as the three And by the way,
Speaker 4: we were in the classroom six hours a day for
Speaker 4: three days right at least Yeah, and then yeah, lots.
Speaker 3: Of listeners have felt like twenty four hours a day.
Speaker 4: Well, there were lots of side conversations during breaks and
Speaker 4: lunch and all the rest of that. I mean, it
Speaker 4: was a continuous conversation three days. I did get there
Speaker 4: very bright students, many of them are pretty liberal progressive.
Speaker 4: I'd say what you'd expect here. I did think that
Speaker 4: by the last day today, that the sort of tone
Speaker 4: and direction of some questions, while still many very skeptical,
Speaker 4: had changed. I thought they were sort of getting some
Speaker 4: of the things we were trying to get across, and
Speaker 4: I won't say being converted, but I thought there's a
Speaker 4: noticeable change.
Speaker 5: And the questions I got after the fact, Yes, definitely so,
Speaker 5: But that may have been just because they were trying
Speaker 5: to be nice. They probably felt sorry for me because
Speaker 5: John was being so mean to me the whole time.
Speaker 4: I was.
Speaker 6: All right, well, one way, sure, I think that many
Speaker 6: of the students had never heard any of this before.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 6: I was particularly like natural rights, which right and is
Speaker 6: treated as like this archaic thing that was banished with the.
Speaker 3: Horse drawn carriages.
Speaker 6: Yeah, and so actually talking about the means of thinking
Speaker 6: about law and more for two thousand years was actually
Speaker 6: rather interesting and I didn't feel guys disagree. I didn't
Speaker 6: feel like liberal students were Rawlsians like they used to be.
Speaker 6: I think they're a little bit at c they're liberal,
Speaker 6: but they don't really have a guiding.
Speaker 3: System of thought anymore.
Speaker 6: They can thank the new Progressives for that, because the
Speaker 6: new Progressives have torn down Rawlsianism, but they haven't replaced
Speaker 6: it with anything just a.
Speaker 5: Crude kind of human rights, you know, yeah, in the
Speaker 5: very basic kind of crude sense of human rights. Give
Speaker 5: you an example of a conversation I had with a student.
Speaker 5: How can you say that there's a social contract that
Speaker 5: should be legitimate and recognized today because who's consenting to it?
Speaker 5: And how do you show consent? And I said, well,
Speaker 5: one of the ways you do it is is through
Speaker 5: is the right to emigrate. The fact that you can
Speaker 5: leave the country if you no longer want to be
Speaker 5: bound by the social contract and the constitution created pursuant
Speaker 5: to it, you can leave the country. Well that's you
Speaker 5: know that that that that doesn't make any sense because
Speaker 5: you might be too poor to leave.
Speaker 6: By the way, listeners, there were many volunteers who wanted
Speaker 6: to help Lucretia emigrant voluntarily.
Speaker 5: But my point is this that that rather than think
Speaker 5: about theoretically, from the point of view, how important the
Speaker 5: right to emigrate really is. And I said, professor you,
Speaker 5: isn't it true you cannot emigrate from North Korea, you
Speaker 5: could not emigrate from East Germany and so on. It was, well,
Speaker 5: if you don't have if you're not rich, if you know,
Speaker 5: if you're poor, then you can't. You don't have the
Speaker 5: means to immigrate. So I said, interesting that there are
Speaker 5: literally thousands of supposedly impoverished people who are emigrating to
Speaker 5: the United States. I can't go the other way. Why
Speaker 5: couldn't they go the other way? Sorry, please go ahead, Jim.
Speaker 6: But then, but you don't believe in secession, So why
Speaker 6: can't people emigrate out of the country and mass?
Speaker 5: But I do believe in the right to revolution. Yeah,
Speaker 5: but you don't think either, No, because Cecil emigration, it's
Speaker 5: not the same as immigration. It's it's share and Amy
Speaker 5: Schumer and let me see who else. But they say
Speaker 5: they here's the point, they say, if this new dictator
Speaker 5: gets into office, this horrible, autocratic, absolutist dictator gets in office,
Speaker 5: I'm going to leave the country. What does that really mean.
Speaker 5: It's obviously not that much of a dictator, because if
Speaker 5: you can leave the country, this is not an absolute dictator.
Speaker 4: Also, they never do it, so that's that's all.
Speaker 5: I mean, that's that goes without being saying.
Speaker 4: But I'm willing to charter the heavy Michael Moore. By
Speaker 4: the way, John, this glen live at fifteen is drinking.
Speaker 5: I'm yeah, yeah, because people are mad at us for
Speaker 5: forgetting that. We're actually a three whiskey happy.
Speaker 6: Right, So we have these so people should know if
Speaker 6: they visit my office, I won't talk to you and
Speaker 6: the uns you bring me a gift because I'm Asian
Speaker 6: and so people have learned to bring me alcohol.
Speaker 3: So I have a huge box of alcohol sitting in
Speaker 3: my office, which is just the gifts.
Speaker 6: And I have a Costco size Maker's mark and a
Speaker 6: brand new bottle of glen Livett which Steve opened without
Speaker 6: asking for.
Speaker 4: Permission, not prior appropriation, acquisition.
Speaker 5: Lost benefit analysis. Okay, that's very sexist of you.
Speaker 3: I don't even know what this is.
Speaker 4: Well, we're not going to do a whole inventory right now.
Speaker 4: That's a Maderra oh from.
Speaker 3: Yeah is that Jefferson's favorite.
Speaker 5: I think so yeah, and that wine maker is actually
Speaker 5: a good you know, without a video, this doesn't work, John.
Speaker 4: Well, okay, but I've got really Steve Well. I'm going
Speaker 4: to ask John onemore question. This will divert him. One
Speaker 4: last question about the whole lot of econ thing.
Speaker 3: Uh.
Speaker 4: Isn't it correct to say that Ronald Coast was one
Speaker 4: of the really seminal figures who started off the whole thing?
Speaker 4: Did you ever meet him?
Speaker 3: By the way, No, I think he Uh did he
Speaker 3: die in like ninety one or.
Speaker 5: Just fell asleep.
Speaker 4: I'm not going to go on.
Speaker 6: I met Coast might be one of the most influential
Speaker 6: you know axioms in law that's been applied.
Speaker 4: To love Well. I did get to medium two three times.
Speaker 4: He was a member of the Philadelphia Society. He was
Speaker 4: a little short guy, British and very friendly.
Speaker 5: Uh.
Speaker 4: And the Coast. I was going to say, we we
Speaker 4: spare the students reading the problem with social cost, which
Speaker 4: is this very dense essay. But I'll just pass along
Speaker 4: that this is in some of the histories of it.
Speaker 4: But I actually heard Milton Friedman tell the story that
Speaker 4: you know, he presented his thesis on this is the
Speaker 4: cornerstone of an economics which I'll want get into. But
Speaker 4: of course, but it was he presented to, you know,
Speaker 4: a workshop that included Friedman and George Stigler and the
Speaker 4: Nobel Prize winner and Aaron Director and all these famous
Speaker 4: Chicago economists. They start out very skeptical at the beginning,
Speaker 4: and Friedman said, we were absolutely convinced he was right
Speaker 4: by the end. It is that's an amazing I.
Speaker 5: Can explained very quickly, but we have absolutely no context
Speaker 5: for this discussion.
Speaker 4: I don't even know what you want to go ahead.
Speaker 6: So the basic idea of the coast theorem is UH
Speaker 6: basically says this, no matter what the legal rule is, UH,
Speaker 6: the arrangement of property rights will reach its most efficient outcome.
Speaker 6: The only thing that changes is the distribution of wealth.
Speaker 6: So the way to put it is, if you are
Speaker 6: in a factory and you want a pollute in the river,
Speaker 6: it doesn't matter whether the law says you can't pollute
Speaker 6: or you can't pollute. The pollution will occur or not
Speaker 6: based on whether it's efficient. Yeah, and it's just a
Speaker 6: question of who gets more money.
Speaker 4: At the end.
Speaker 6: Is the factory going to keep it by polluting. What
Speaker 6: does the factory pay people downstream when they pollute? Yeah,
Speaker 6: this simple insight has been incredibly influential in the law.
Speaker 5: But my problem with it always, as I said to
Speaker 5: you in the class, is that it assumes that you're
Speaker 5: making an economic only argument and you're not at all
Speaker 5: considering the moral implications. Who cares about pollution? Who cares
Speaker 5: about pollution one way or the other? Why is pollution
Speaker 5: even an issue? Why are you? I mean you have
Speaker 5: you begin with an assumption that pollution is somehow a
Speaker 5: bad thing, and then you decide based on supposed cost
Speaker 5: benefit analysis. How to you're limited to here?
Speaker 3: Now Steve Hayward now the front man for polluting interests.
Speaker 4: He thinks pollution is a good Now, kids, if you
Speaker 4: keep going, I'm going to bring up the Clean Air
Speaker 4: Act again. So let's move on to the first subject.
Speaker 4: That will I'm sure be of more interest than our
Speaker 4: drinking habits and our classroom habits. Uh okay, nothing happened
Speaker 4: this week on in the election front. In this sense,
Speaker 4: Kambella did more word salads from her word salad shooter
Speaker 4: the pole. New polls came out, a ton of them.
Speaker 4: They all are unchanged. They'll say it's essentially tied.
Speaker 5: Was this little thing called a debate or interview by.
Speaker 3: I think some desperation the.
Speaker 4: Well, that's why I'm coming to the question is every
Speaker 4: We've always tried to look at poles and all these
Speaker 4: other things, and I talk too much about them. My
Speaker 4: proposition is the body language of the election, if I
Speaker 4: can use that as a metaphor, it just looks very
Speaker 4: definite that Trump is pulling ahead. He looks confident, he's
Speaker 4: having fun.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 4: I thought he killed it at the at the Al
Speaker 4: Smith dinner.
Speaker 6: Uh.
Speaker 4: And he's you know, more of his rallies are happening
Speaker 4: with bigger crowds and lots of enthusiasm. He's enjoying himself,
Speaker 4: which looks to me, and that's always the look of
Speaker 4: a winner in these presidential campaigns. I think, I don't know,
Speaker 4: I mean, what else is there to say? I don't know.
Speaker 6: I mean, I would think that, like you said last week, Steve,
Speaker 6: there's internal poles, which actually costs real money, right, and
Speaker 6: the campaigns only have and they're not really telling us
Speaker 6: what they say.
Speaker 3: But if you look at the way they're acting, yes,
Speaker 3: you would think.
Speaker 6: Harris's internal poles show her losing and Trump's show him winning, right,
Speaker 6: so he's he looks happy he's going on.
Speaker 3: I mean, I watched the clip of his appearance at
Speaker 3: the Smith dinner.
Speaker 6: He was having a great time making fun of people.
Speaker 6: You don't do that if you're like ten points behind. Yeah,
Speaker 6: and you would say, Harris realizes she's got to pick
Speaker 6: up more votes because she went on Fox. Waltz has
Speaker 6: been on Fox twice now. I mean the interview was
Speaker 6: actually quite illuminating and that she still won't answer substantive questions.
Speaker 6: But that's good for the American people to see. But
Speaker 6: it also shows she's they're gambling. They're in gamble mode,
Speaker 6: which you don't know if you're a head, right, And
Speaker 6: it's totally contrary to their you know, play it safe
Speaker 6: campaign so far.
Speaker 5: And somebody sent me what was supposedly in Insider piece
Speaker 5: of information about Kamala Kamalama ding Dong's campaign manager, whose
Speaker 5: name is Julie something or other I forget anyway who
Speaker 5: The claim is that after the debacle of the Al
Speaker 5: Smith dinner and her showing us some stupid video that
Speaker 5: went over like rocks a Led Zeppelin, Yes, like a
Speaker 5: Led Zeppelin that Kamala m ding Dong called up her
Speaker 5: campaign manager and just made her cry, yelled at her,
Speaker 5: screamed at her. If I lose, it's because you don't
Speaker 5: know how to do your job. And da da da
Speaker 5: da da. And so that that was yet another piece
Speaker 5: of information that the whole thing is kind of imploding
Speaker 5: a bit.
Speaker 4: There's a detail led Zeppelin. There's a detail all of
Speaker 4: that that does connect with one bit of news I
Speaker 4: think from the last twenty four hours as we're talking
Speaker 4: here Saturday afternoon. Part of that account who's who leaked it?
Speaker 4: Part of that account is that Harris is blaming her
Speaker 4: campaign manager for her decision not to go to the
Speaker 4: Al Smith dinner. And the reasoning was, oh, Vice President Harris,
Speaker 4: you don't want to get too close to Catholics. You'll
Speaker 4: upset the LGBTQ two community. And that's why you shouldn't go.
Speaker 5: The population exactly Catholic overall thirty in Pennsylvania, the must
Speaker 5: win state.
Speaker 4: Now, progressives think who is their favored people to whom
Speaker 4: they listen to and bend over to. And so this
Speaker 4: is something that happened here. I've been seeing this as
Speaker 4: all over Twitter.
Speaker 1: So this is not.
Speaker 4: These accounts. We don't know how true they are, but
Speaker 4: they have a ring of truth to them. At some
Speaker 4: appearance yesterday, I guess it was somebody, you know, Harris
Speaker 4: has got a crowd and all that, and somebody says
Speaker 4: Jesus's Lord, and Harris stop says, oh, honey, I think
Speaker 4: you're at the wrong rally. Really, let that sink in
Speaker 4: for a minute. Really you want to say something like that.
Speaker 4: I mean that sort of ratifies the problem they have.
Speaker 5: With being a nothing else. There there are some constituencies
Speaker 5: traditionally aligned at the Democratic Party who actually believe that
Speaker 5: Jesus's Lord. I mean, go figure, what a concept? Yeah,
Speaker 5: what a concept. Yeah. It really is a little bit
Speaker 5: sad the bubble these people live in, where a vision
Speaker 5: of America is defined by these supposedly marginalized but really
Speaker 5: marginal constituencies that seem to drive all of their very
Speaker 5: bad policies. And on that note, Steve, I'd like to
Speaker 5: just add that I think it's been very interesting. John
Speaker 5: had commented on this to me earlier too, that, or
Speaker 5: maybe it was you, one of you two said the
Speaker 5: sleeper issue of this campaign that was you, But John
Speaker 5: was talking about it too. The sleeper issue of this
Speaker 5: campaign is tapping into the what would the right word be,
Speaker 5: the ickiness, the achiness of the transgender movement, and the
Speaker 5: fact that probably ninety percent of Americans are opposed to
Speaker 5: most of the agenda of the radical transgender group. Most
Speaker 5: people don't really want to be mean or cruel or
Speaker 5: outright discriminatory to somebody who's transgender, but they don't want
Speaker 5: to celebrate it. They don't want to see transgender men
Speaker 5: in little girl's locker rooms and bathrooms. They don't want
Speaker 5: to see transgender men you know that weigh two hundred
Speaker 5: and eighty pounds, have been bench lifting all their life,
Speaker 5: come in and compete against a woman, you know, on
Speaker 5: and on and on, or kill somebody nearly a in
Speaker 5: a boxing match, and the idea that somehow that's a
Speaker 5: winning issue. Even there is even evidence now that kamal
Speaker 5: Emma ding Dong in her campaign have to walk away
Speaker 5: from it.
Speaker 4: Well, but you can't. This is the whole thing, and
Speaker 4: they're hoping that they can scrape by and not have
Speaker 4: to confront it. I don't know if you you guys
Speaker 4: were having an argument at lunch and I was at
Speaker 4: the end of the table and the football game was on.
Speaker 4: But what I figured out was we were It was
Speaker 4: Berkeley versus North Carolina Wolfpack in the way we've demented
Speaker 4: college football and.
Speaker 3: Athletics, and just now they lost.
Speaker 4: They lost Kallas. Oh boy, they'll be bad traffic. There's
Speaker 4: a lot of.
Speaker 3: Angry physicists on campus.
Speaker 4: But while we're at lunch and you guys were arguing,
Speaker 4: I noticed is the game was on, but we were
Speaker 4: getting a North Carolina feed because I kept seeing North
Speaker 4: Carolina political ads, which we won't get here in California.
Speaker 4: But the newest one from Trump they had up was
Speaker 4: talking about the trans business and the slug line at
Speaker 4: the end was Kamala Harris is for they them, Donald
Speaker 4: Trump is for you. Wow, that is real.
Speaker 5: Why are you.
Speaker 6: For me too? I mean so, having spent a week
Speaker 6: in Philadelphia two weeks ago, every ad for Republicans, for President,
Speaker 6: for Senate, for McCormick, for members of the House has
Speaker 6: at the end Kamala Harris and the Democrats want to
Speaker 6: use taxpayer money to pay for the sex change operations
Speaker 6: of people in prison and for illegal aliens.
Speaker 3: Every single ad has a little thing at the end.
Speaker 6: Now, so they must have figured out this is a
Speaker 6: real vulnerability for the Democrats because it's like they're all
Speaker 6: hitting it as a unified issue.
Speaker 4: Now, yeah, and it is.
Speaker 5: I think one of those issues that the squishy middle
Speaker 5: has sort of refused to pay too much attention.
Speaker 1: To, and.
Speaker 5: What this is doing is bringing it front and center.
Speaker 5: Of course, it shows up on the publications that we read,
Speaker 5: the news stations that we watch, and it's very much
Speaker 5: a salient issue there. Judge Brown and I were discussing
Speaker 5: this last night. But the average voter, even the average
Speaker 5: kind of liberal left leaning suburban mom who shouldn't have
Speaker 5: the vote, Sorry the suburban mom, but they're a little
Speaker 5: bit ignor, I think, either purposely so on their port
Speaker 5: or kind of cynically so on the part of the
Speaker 5: you know, the powerful left about how extreme some of
Speaker 5: these things really are. Or they are convinced that somehow
Speaker 5: this is the trendy, happy thing to believe in, and
Speaker 5: if they don't believe in it, they won't be accepted
Speaker 5: at the cocktail parties, or you know, their kids will
Speaker 5: be shunned at the soccer game.
Speaker 6: I don't know, No, well, I think it's actually people
Speaker 6: can't believe it's true. So one species of these ads
Speaker 6: was like, it's actually true. She actually said it. Everyone
Speaker 6: thinks it's like, you know, Fox or Donald Trump made
Speaker 6: it up. So they produce a clip of her seeing
Speaker 6: this in great detail because people I remember when I
Speaker 6: first heard that in the I guess it was in
Speaker 6: the debate, right, it was in the Trump Paris debate.
Speaker 3: I was like, nah, we made that up. That's too
Speaker 3: good to be true.
Speaker 6: They she can't really be in favor of gender change
Speaker 6: up orations for illegal aliens.
Speaker 5: And actually, but it's actually people on death row.
Speaker 6: And I think the New York Times wrote a story
Speaker 6: saying it's actually true, like that was the headline.
Speaker 3: Yes, it's actually true. Kamala Harris does support this.
Speaker 5: And did they do that because they were proud of
Speaker 5: it or did they do that because they're turning on
Speaker 5: kamalamading doong.
Speaker 1: Oh.
Speaker 6: There have been several, I would say, somewhat negative stories.
Speaker 6: I know you don't read the New York Times, so
Speaker 6: I do it for you, But there were several There's
Speaker 6: a bunch of negative stories about Harris because there are people,
Speaker 6: you know, jump you know, the rats are leaving the ship.
Speaker 3: There are people who are saying, oh, they've screwed up Pennsylvania.
Speaker 6: That was a big New York Times story last week
Speaker 6: that the campaign isn't turmoil, they're just wasting money.
Speaker 4: So this is right.
Speaker 6: It's got to be internal campaign people have seen the
Speaker 6: polls too, and they don't want to take credit for
Speaker 6: the defeat. Yea, because if you lose the Trump this time,
Speaker 6: all those people never held another job in campaign politics.
Speaker 4: Well, they're gonna want to blame her same way. Well,
Speaker 4: Hillary is a bad candidate and the Russian stall.
Speaker 5: Oh that's true, right, No, not the Russian part, but well,
Speaker 5: I mean Hillary is a bad candidate, Kamalama ding Dong
Speaker 5: is a bad candidate. But they're also bad candidates because
Speaker 5: they stand for things that most Americans truly, truly don't
Speaker 5: believe in.
Speaker 4: Well, the interesting thing to me is, I mean, I
Speaker 4: think if I look closely at this, one of the
Speaker 4: reasons this is one of those the trans most intuitive
Speaker 4: issues the Trump campaign, and maybe some polls or maybe
Speaker 4: the candidates figured out, wait a minute, this is the
Speaker 4: sleeper issue. I call it sleeper because how does Pew
Speaker 4: poll people. They ask you, here's twenty issues to rank,
Speaker 4: and they don't include you know, identity politics and looker
Speaker 4: and transgender stuff. Other people ask you for open ended question,
Speaker 4: well do you think your top issues? And not many
Speaker 4: people are gonna name that, and so it does remind me.
Speaker 4: You know, you can go back to nineteen seventies, actually
Speaker 4: go back to the sixties and Reagan's running for governor
Speaker 4: and he starts complaining about the mess on the campuses,
Speaker 4: and his manager's saying, this isn't showing up in our polls.
Speaker 4: Nobody's talking about this, but Reagan had an intuition about it,
Speaker 4: and sure enough, you've got a huge response in campaign appearances.
Speaker 4: Fast forward ten years. He says we're not giving away
Speaker 4: the Panama Canal, damn it, and the audience would go nuts.
Speaker 4: And that was not showing up as a main campaign
Speaker 4: issue in polls, but it struck a chord with people,
Speaker 4: right it was anyway, because they.
Speaker 5: Usually don't ask what are your top five issues? They
Speaker 5: also don't ask the put abortion as and I'm always
Speaker 5: hesitating to even say yes to that because they don't
Speaker 5: want it to appear as if somehow I'm pro abortion,
Speaker 5: because it's not. I mean, you could at the very
Speaker 5: least put pro abortion pro life as options you're not.
Speaker 5: Abortion isn't an issue for you if you're anti abortion?
Speaker 5: Does that make sense? And they do that with a
Speaker 5: lot of things. Yeah, they do that, say with gun
Speaker 5: rights right, is gun right our gun rights important to you? Well,
Speaker 5: that depends what do you mean by gun rights? You
Speaker 5: know our gun policy and you know that you just
Speaker 5: don't know what they're going to make of it, so
Speaker 5: you can't really get an honest answer out of people. Also, Steve,
Speaker 5: you're right, would transgenderism be my number one topic? No?
Speaker 5: Would it be my number four?
Speaker 3: Maybe?
Speaker 4: Well, you know I've been saying that, No, we're gonna
Speaker 4: down the range. I've been saying for a while that
Speaker 4: there the two key issues in this election. Really it's
Speaker 4: just one. It's wokery and national identity. Those of course overlap,
Speaker 4: and that's really what this election is about because the
Speaker 4: exactly and so the campaign's not talking about the national debt,
Speaker 4: which I think is a crisis. They're not talking about
Speaker 4: the state of the world, which is a crisis, and
Speaker 4: you kind of wish they would. On the other hand,
Speaker 4: if we don't settle these other problems, you know, the
Speaker 4: economy and war overseas will be the least of our problems, right,
Speaker 4: and so we'll see how it goes. The gives me
Speaker 4: a chance to do a segue to a related issue
Speaker 4: that overlaps and that's more directly woke y. So I
Speaker 4: think if you followed this, you might remember when the
Speaker 4: so called female swimmer, Leah Thomas was at Penn UH
Speaker 4: and the Penn administration threatened the women on the team,
Speaker 4: you may not dissent. You'll lose your scholarships. You might
Speaker 4: be I mean they were, and you know, telling people
Speaker 4: not to complain. Well, now fast forward here for four years,
Speaker 4: whatever it's been, we're now up to I think five
Speaker 4: universities that have decided to Oh, by the way, I
Speaker 4: said at the time, because we're also in high school
Speaker 4: track meets of people who were well, let me finish
Speaker 4: the other example. I suggested the time.
Speaker 3: This is what class was like, this bickering between felt
Speaker 3: divorced couple of.
Speaker 4: You can't Well, the point is is they said you
Speaker 4: can't complain. I suggested at the time that what the
Speaker 4: other female swimmers should do, and women and women's track,
Speaker 4: they should go to the starting line. The gun goes off,
Speaker 4: and they stand there and allow the transgender swimmer to
Speaker 4: swim alone, a good old fashioned silent protest that would
Speaker 4: outrage people, but it would make a statement. Now no
Speaker 4: one did that, except now they are. I let that
Speaker 4: part out. Now five colleges have said we are not
Speaker 4: going to allow our women's volleyball teams to play San
Speaker 4: Jose State. By the way, they did the right argument
Speaker 4: with this, because we don't want to subject our women
Speaker 4: athletes to the risk of injury from a man playing
Speaker 4: for the women's team who hits the ball so hard
Speaker 4: they injure people. And so now people are standing up
Speaker 4: to it. Now. The University of ad Arino, the administration
Speaker 4: put out their own statement saying we don't approve what
Speaker 4: our team decided here, but nonetheless, more and more teams
Speaker 4: are doing it. So we're now having a preference cascade
Speaker 4: more important. So maybe the tight is turning, and I
Speaker 4: guess the question will be what will be success or
Speaker 4: a real turning point. But the other data point is
Speaker 4: this amazing in the New York Times magazine from Nick Confessatory,
Speaker 4: who's a leftist reporter. He's the guy who dragged the
Speaker 4: emails out of me and John some months ago for
Speaker 4: no purpose. Yeah it's that guy, say, well, he didn't
Speaker 4: inturns to it, but it was him and uh so,
Speaker 4: Nick Confessatory wrote, University of Michigan doubled down on DEI,
Speaker 4: sub had what went wrong? Now the headline writer, I
Speaker 4: think we can tell what went wrong from the first
Speaker 4: part of the headline right. But there's some amazing things
Speaker 4: of the story just too. It's a very long article.
Speaker 4: Uh he said, this was his narrative. These growing bureaucracies
Speaker 4: represented a major and profoundly left leaning reshuffling of campus power.
Speaker 4: You wouldn't have seen that in the New York Times
Speaker 4: about de I or anywhere in the mainstream media. And
Speaker 4: then the other one, I like, and this is just
Speaker 4: too out of a lot of absolute slams that the
Speaker 4: whole thing for large swath of students and professors, Michigan's
Speaker 4: DEI and have become simply background noise, like the rote
Speaker 4: incantations of a state religion. My analysis always but that's
Speaker 4: like blaring car alarms we always ignore these days.
Speaker 6: There was one fact that I thought was amazing was,
Speaker 6: according to him, the studies that Michigan themselves undertook was
Speaker 6: they found that racial tension on campus has gone up
Speaker 6: in correlation with more DEI professionals who just predicted this right,
Speaker 6: I would have thought it had no effect, but actually
Speaker 6: to cause it to go up is incredible because totally counterproductive.
Speaker 5: Yeah yeah, yeah, because what I mean, how do you
Speaker 5: if you believe in racial equality. One of the precepts
Speaker 5: to that is you really cannot emphasize whatever differences that
Speaker 5: you create that might be evident or not evident between
Speaker 5: the races, between the sexes and so on. And the
Speaker 5: more you talk about that, and the more you differentiate
Speaker 5: on the basis of that, the more you remind people
Speaker 5: that they have less in common instead of more in common.
Speaker 5: I mean, I know that sounds so trite and obvious,
Speaker 5: but it's not obvious to the left. It's not obvious
Speaker 5: to these DEI people. And the real problem I see,
Speaker 5: I call them the DEI pimps, that that.
Speaker 3: There's a whole bunch more places we've been banned.
Speaker 5: Because they I think they actually know that and don't care.
Speaker 5: I think that they are aware of the fact that
Speaker 5: that DEI practices, that critical race theory consultants who come
Speaker 5: in and force white people to confess their white guilt
Speaker 5: and that they're white racist and that they have privilege
Speaker 5: and all those other things. Who really thinks that that's
Speaker 5: gonna have a positive outcome. They can't think it. There's
Speaker 5: no way. It's a power trip for them, and they
Speaker 5: don't care how much it hurts.
Speaker 4: There's a lot of money in it.
Speaker 5: There is, but there's only money in it because people
Speaker 5: are stupid enough to pay for it. Well, they're not
Speaker 5: doing the cost benefit analysis.
Speaker 6: John, She's saying that to me because I was defending
Speaker 6: utilitarianism in class.
Speaker 3: But I agree with you. It doesn't even pass the
Speaker 3: cost benefit analysis. And I agree these are really expensive,
Speaker 3: these programs. I mean, I don't does the story say
Speaker 3: how much Michigan spent like, I mean it was outrageous?
Speaker 6: Feel like, was it like two hundred and fifty million
Speaker 6: dollars over twenty years on the.
Speaker 5: Well, it depends on how you look at it too.
Speaker 5: It depends on how you catalog it, because you can
Speaker 5: you can count just the provosts who are like, we
Speaker 5: have seven of them who are in one way or
Speaker 5: another confined to not just DEI, but DEI for a
Speaker 5: special marginalized group. We have seven of them, and they
Speaker 5: all make We have seven and they all make high
Speaker 5: six figures. Yeah, Okay, so so start there. That's a
Speaker 5: lot of money. But every college has a deim available.
Speaker 3: I'm available for half.
Speaker 5: I think we overachieving Asians that need to be overachieving.
Speaker 6: There was I have to say, in class, there was
Speaker 6: this one student who did make this comment that I
Speaker 6: was just shaking my head. He was an Asian kid,
Speaker 6: and he said, I come from a privileged background where
Speaker 6: all US Asian families send our kids to special.
Speaker 3: Tutoring after school. And he felt so bad about it.
Speaker 6: He's like, not because he was forced to go to
Speaker 6: math school after class, but we felt bad that no
Speaker 6: one that everyone else didn't get to too.
Speaker 3: And I was in there going, god.
Speaker 6: Did marka I broke and I was like, I'm glad
Speaker 6: I didn't have to go to force math class after
Speaker 6: after school.
Speaker 3: Why would you want to make everybody do it?
Speaker 6: But he thought a fair and just society everyone into
Speaker 6: an overachieving Asian.
Speaker 5: And then they get into Harvard that was the point,
Speaker 5: and then they give it. Would you managed to do
Speaker 5: without after school math classes? John, But you did spend
Speaker 5: all of your free time studying. Let's be honest. I
Speaker 5: did spend a lot that yeah, yeah, which is which
Speaker 5: is culturally unfair, that's what he.
Speaker 6: Said to Yeah, he said it was culturally unfair that
Speaker 6: his the Asian families want their kids to study and
Speaker 6: other kinds of families don't.
Speaker 5: Well, because remember very very smart, will older white gentleman
Speaker 5: who confessed to me after the fact that he had
Speaker 5: actually had a perfect LSAT score a four point zero,
Speaker 5: graduating from his undergraduate alma mater, and he had applied
Speaker 5: to twenty law schools and the only one that led
Speaker 5: him in was this one.
Speaker 3: I'm not allowed to usuration and missions.
Speaker 4: Yeah, and.
Speaker 5: And he was very bright and very insightful, and yeah
Speaker 5: he was didn't apologize for having his white privilege because
Speaker 5: I don't believe he thought he had it. Let's just
Speaker 5: leave it at that. But yeah, it was It was
Speaker 5: interesting to listen to that and to to listen to
Speaker 5: students talk about out what they considered inequities that really
Speaker 5: could be had to be solved before you could move
Speaker 5: to more important questions. Does that make sense? What I'm
Speaker 5: saying this is the.
Speaker 6: Listeners will realize Lucretia and I have totally different attitudes
Speaker 6: towards teaching because she listens to the students.
Speaker 5: Let me just point out that John confessed to me
Speaker 5: he learns nothing from his students. So there you go.
Speaker 3: Well, I didn't say that exactly, but close to it.
Speaker 5: Yeah, close to it. We learned a lot over the years.
Speaker 4: Well, I was asking about it. Have we turned a
Speaker 4: corner here? And it's encouraging to see the New York
Speaker 4: Times up on this and encouraging to see so the
Speaker 4: sports team stand up to the men and women's sports.
Speaker 4: But here I'm ur usually the one who says nothing
Speaker 4: good is happening. I'm optimistic. I think that nothing is
Speaker 4: going to happen meaningfully until some university presidents and or
Speaker 4: trustees decide to clean house and Austin right, some places are.
Speaker 5: Doing Florida Florida's But can I take a diversion for
Speaker 5: a second on Florida, the whole state of Florida and
Speaker 5: their their university state system. The legislature has directed the
Speaker 5: whatever the Board of Governors is called there that no
Speaker 5: more required courses that advance and it wasn't just DEI
Speaker 5: but basically advanced DEI unproven theories like critical race theory,
Speaker 5: identity politics, or that are too specific to be catalogued
Speaker 5: as a too specific or perhaps a little bit too
Speaker 5: advanced to be cataloged as a General ED course, and
Speaker 5: they forced the universities to go through their General ED
Speaker 5: catalog and get rid of or move those required gen
Speaker 5: ED classes to electives. And then the board whatever I forget,
Speaker 5: I apologize whatever the board was, went back and double
Speaker 5: checked their choices and removed it even more. And DeSantis
Speaker 5: came out and said, when you know, everyone, everyone and
Speaker 5: their brother was complaining about this because when they took uh,
Speaker 5: let's see myth magic and non binary. I mean, it
Speaker 5: was just these crazy, stupid courses that have been added
Speaker 5: to their gen ED And you know, of course you
Speaker 5: take away those courses from certain programs and those programs
Speaker 5: die because nobody wants to take their courses. But DeSantis'
Speaker 5: argument was, if they're popular, if you're really depriving students
Speaker 5: of the benefit of these wonderful courses, they'll take them. Yeah, right,
Speaker 5: if they're electives.
Speaker 3: You better start drinking, because you're starting to sound like Steve.
Speaker 5: Sounds like Steve what an insult?
Speaker 6: Well, okay, so he really cares about academic organization and
Speaker 6: classes and you do, oh, I know, and the disciplines
Speaker 6: and everything.
Speaker 3: So now you care, So all.
Speaker 4: Right, let me.
Speaker 5: This is wait a minute before Steve answers, I care,
Speaker 5: and I want you to know that since I have
Speaker 5: been a dean, I have eliminated nine programs from my college.
Speaker 4: That must have been you a popular person, I'm so popular,
Speaker 4: not well, all of them that needed.
Speaker 5: To be well.
Speaker 4: Here's so. First of all, these sort of civic education
Speaker 4: centers being set up around the country in red states
Speaker 4: at flagship universities very promising. They're hiring killer faculty. I'll
Speaker 4: bet they'll be popular. The permanent faculty hates it. A
Speaker 4: lot of these universities. I'm worried they're going to work
Speaker 4: very hard to try and marginalize those centers. They probably
Speaker 4: won't succeed, but it's still going to be a fight
Speaker 4: about all that, and all right, so watch that. The
Speaker 4: second thing is civic education is so bad. I'm not
Speaker 4: civic education, and even liberal college presidents saying, oh, the
Speaker 4: problem is civic education is so bad, and you know so,
Speaker 4: But the K twelfth crriculum is so bad that you're
Speaker 4: not gonna get much progress until essentially you smashed the schools.
Speaker 4: Make that proposition. But then the third thing is that
Speaker 4: you and I have argued this before John a long
Speaker 4: time ago, but I want to bring it up again. Well,
Speaker 4: we need to have robust protections for free speech. And
Speaker 4: my argument back is, okay, we've seen that fail here
Speaker 4: at Berkeley recently with Simica Rothman.
Speaker 3: Just three days ago. John eastmanth spoke, true, but I
Speaker 3: don't protest the disruption.
Speaker 4: But well, that's because of the You know, if you've
Speaker 4: been here a year ago, it'd be different. But you know,
Speaker 4: the whole Israel thing has taken over everything on campus.
Speaker 4: Is right, But here's my point is, even a commitment
Speaker 4: to free speech doesn't mean very very much if there
Speaker 4: aren't people on the campus to speak the heterodox things.
Speaker 4: And that I don't mean just a guest speaker now
Speaker 4: and then. But your faculty is deranged. Until you change
Speaker 4: your faculty and make it more have more ideological breath,
Speaker 4: all the guarantees of free speech and free expression aren't
Speaker 4: going to do very much. That's my view.
Speaker 3: So I don't agree with that.
Speaker 4: I know you don't, because the law.
Speaker 6: School experience is is because of the Federal Society. I mean,
Speaker 6: all the things I heard about conservative constitutional law came
Speaker 6: exclusively from visiting speakers from the Federal Society, mostly appellate.
Speaker 3: Judges, like famous conservative judges.
Speaker 5: But like Jenice Rogers Brown, she was still a kid.
Speaker 3: Back when we're in law school.
Speaker 6: But yeah, but that's what I mean, Like if Janice
Speaker 6: Rogers Brown comes to your in law school and speaks,
Speaker 6: and you go, you don't need a classic constitutional law
Speaker 6: because you already heard it, and then but that was
Speaker 6: the that's the replacement. And actually the Federal Sciety has
Speaker 6: been remarkably successful. They have any cultivating the interests of
Speaker 6: conservative students, even to most of these law schools have
Speaker 6: no conservative con law professors.
Speaker 5: But look at how far up the chain you have
Speaker 5: to get before you see that kind of ideological diversity
Speaker 5: at being able to be effective, and that is to
Speaker 5: say federalist. Then we have the Federalist Society, and once
Speaker 5: in a while they have something for undergraduates, but not
Speaker 5: very often or underge you can, So that's I think
Speaker 5: that's Steve's point.
Speaker 4: Yeah, it's very hard to replicate the Federal Society in
Speaker 4: undergraduate levels or in under disciplines. I mean, law school
Speaker 4: I think is kind of kind of suey generous because
Speaker 4: people are going there as a professional program and not
Speaker 4: necessarily as I mean some people go to you know,
Speaker 4: we go to Harvard Yale because you want to be
Speaker 4: a law professor. But a lot of people in undergraduate
Speaker 4: or in graduate political science or history programs or whatever,
Speaker 4: they're there for a different thing, and the nature of
Speaker 4: it's different. Let me give you a second example, though,
Speaker 4: and here I'm gonna throw down big. A few days back,
Speaker 4: maybe we could go. A professor at the University of
Speaker 4: Kansas caught on tape said, you know, you men, you
Speaker 4: men who don't any men who don't vote for Campbell
Speaker 4: Harre should be taken out and shot. You just line
Speaker 4: them up and shoot them. And then he thought betteran says,
Speaker 4: maybe I shouldn't say that. Please take it off the tape.
Speaker 4: I don't want the dean to hear about it. Well,
Speaker 4: poorest that dean heard about it. He was immediately suspended.
Speaker 4: And then a day or two later, the announcement came
Speaker 4: for the administration that Professor so and so is no
Speaker 4: longer with the University of Kansas. Wow. It did not
Speaker 4: say whether he oh, no, see, I disagree. Let me
Speaker 4: give you two more little bits of information about it.
Speaker 4: The announcement didn't say whether he'd been fired or whether
Speaker 4: he left voluntarily didn't say what a status was. I
Speaker 4: don't know if he's a tenured professor or you know,
Speaker 4: a lecturer or somebody without the kind of protections of tenure.
Speaker 4: But you know our friends that fire the Foundation for
Speaker 4: Research or Free Expression or whatever it's called. And some
Speaker 4: other civil libertarians said, oh, I don't know about this.
Speaker 4: Maybe even Keith Wittington might have I'm not sure. Yeah,
Speaker 4: see you know what I mean.
Speaker 3: See I would.
Speaker 4: Have agreed with that once upon a time, some years ago.
Speaker 4: But my point now is, if there are any adults
Speaker 4: in higher education, they have to start with the premise
Speaker 4: that things are bad because we have allowed our university
Speaker 4: to be taken over by crazy people. We need to
Speaker 4: clean house. We need to clean these people out of
Speaker 4: this place by whatever means necessary.
Speaker 6: Because if you unministrators clean out people who are unacceptable,
Speaker 6: the first people they're gonna clean out are gonna be conservatives.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 5: I think that's that's probably that's probably true. It really is.
Speaker 5: It's a catch twenty two because on the other hand,
Speaker 5: so if you're a student in that professor's class and
Speaker 5: you're even the slightest bit inclined to think about voting
Speaker 5: for for Donald Trump.
Speaker 3: You're really going to vote for Donald Trump?
Speaker 6: After the professor goes off like that, you're good because
Speaker 6: the one thing college students all have in common is
Speaker 6: they hate their elders.
Speaker 5: Well, but but what's gonna happen in the space of
Speaker 5: that class. It's one thing for some crazy person like
Speaker 5: me to stand in front of your law school class
Speaker 5: that's made up of mostly not entirely mostly left.
Speaker 3: Wing was triggering left and right. It's like she had
Speaker 3: two six six shooter colts in her hands. So many
Speaker 3: people triggered by her in just like one hour.
Speaker 5: But did anyone was did Was there any evidence whatsoever
Speaker 5: that I alienated as student?
Speaker 3: I couldn't tell over in the back row.
Speaker 7: How many times did you have to drag me away
Speaker 7: from a gaggle of students after the after a session
Speaker 7: was over because because they wanted to talk, so they
Speaker 7: probably didn't.
Speaker 6: I think you were probably the first conservative woman professor
Speaker 6: they'd ever heard from. There are very many, no, but
Speaker 6: I'm saying I bet like they'd never seen a creature
Speaker 6: like lucretia.
Speaker 5: That sounds like bad, but but but there is a
Speaker 5: serious point to it, and that is that no I
Speaker 5: know and I appreciate that. But my point is is
Speaker 5: that if you are the kind of opinionated person and
Speaker 5: I you know, anybody who's not opinionated doesn't deserve to
Speaker 5: stand in front of a group of people because they
Speaker 5: if you haven't made up your mind about important questions,
Speaker 5: you have no business teaching anyone. However, there is a
Speaker 5: way to do that, and that you know. I never
Speaker 5: insulted a student. I took every dumb question seriously. I'm kidding,
Speaker 5: I'm kidding. I took every question seriously. I returned to
Speaker 5: their questions and wove them into my responses later in
Speaker 5: the in the discussion.
Speaker 3: No one observer, I don't think they were satisfied with
Speaker 3: your answer.
Speaker 5: No, I don't think so.
Speaker 3: But I also it was a lot of resistance. There
Speaker 3: was a lot of rest on this podcast. There was
Speaker 3: a lot of resistance.
Speaker 5: But they'll think about it after this. They won't automatically
Speaker 5: just write a paper that they think will make me
Speaker 5: happy because they know I don't expect that. I don't
Speaker 5: expect that to just to hear. I can't tell you
Speaker 5: how many times I talk to students at at my
Speaker 5: college at the university who say, you know, I just
Speaker 5: I just I'll just say what the professor wants to
Speaker 5: hear because they need a good grade. Yeah, that's that's
Speaker 5: it happens all the time. Well, because there's nobody that
Speaker 5: they disagree with except maybe you.
Speaker 4: I don't know, people do it so much.
Speaker 5: Yeah, you're the one owned. Maybe it was.
Speaker 4: I don't know. I don't think so. I mean I
Speaker 4: do had this one experience. I had a kid who
Speaker 4: took three classes from an undergraduate student, and it turns
Speaker 4: out he was a big liberal. He told me he
Speaker 4: didn't agree with any of my views, but he liked
Speaker 4: the stuff by His family are very close personal friends
Speaker 4: with the Pelosis. Yeah, but I said to why why
Speaker 4: are you taking you know, you came back for more,
Speaker 4: And he says, oh, I like the style of class.
Speaker 4: There's no other classes like this.
Speaker 3: It's because both you and Pelosi could benefit from better wigs.
Speaker 4: You know, we've got to put away to live it.
Speaker 5: At this point, I told this story once, but it's
Speaker 5: been a long time, so I'll tell it again. So
Speaker 5: I'm teaching a class in ethics and I assign an
Speaker 5: essay based on the myth of Guy G's from Plato's
Speaker 5: from Plato, and you know, the guy who finds the ring.
Speaker 5: It makes him invisible, et cetera, et cetera. So I
Speaker 5: assign a very back in the day before AI, you
Speaker 5: would assign a very specific prompt so they couldn't use
Speaker 5: a bot paper, right, that's how you did it. Now.
Speaker 5: I don't know what you do, but anyway, I signed
Speaker 5: a very specific prompt, and I get this paper from
Speaker 5: a student who I know is a Special Forces soldier.
Speaker 5: You know, smart guy. But this and this and this
Speaker 5: not impossible that he would have been a left wing lunatic,
Speaker 5: but unlikely. So he writes this stupid paper saying how
Speaker 5: Plato would have been an environmental activist greeny and would
Speaker 5: in favor of any methods necessary to combat climate change,
Speaker 5: which had zero zero to do with the prompt. So
Speaker 5: I give him an F. Of course, actually that's not true.
Speaker 5: I give them an E because we don't do s
Speaker 5: at my university anyway. And then it bothers me. It
Speaker 5: really bothers me. So finally I reach out to him
Speaker 5: and I say, okay, I have to ask why did
Speaker 5: you do this? He says, I've been doing this all
Speaker 5: through my college career because I know this is how
Speaker 5: I get an a if I say what I really think.
Speaker 5: And it was at the beginning of class, the beginning
Speaker 5: of the semester.
Speaker 4: Figured out yet and figured me out. And I try.
Speaker 5: I try really hard not to be not I don't
Speaker 5: hide my views, but not to be strident like I
Speaker 5: might have been today. I try really hard with undergraduates
Speaker 5: because they don't want to immediately set them off in
Speaker 5: one direction or another. I want to present things anyway.
Speaker 5: So there's an example of it happening. But I'm told
Speaker 5: by students that it happens all the time, so much
Speaker 5: so that that that kid thought that was the right
Speaker 5: thing to do with me.
Speaker 4: Can you imagine, Well, not after the second or third class,
Speaker 4: but that would be where a thing worth trying to
Speaker 4: get out with a survey, although it might be hard
Speaker 4: to get honest answers. But I'm not sure you did
Speaker 4: hear people say that some and maybe our pow Michael Anton,
Speaker 4: will try and research that's work for his book on Berkeley,
Speaker 4: which I won't tell listeners anymore about at the moment.
Speaker 4: All right, I'm kind of out of topics, but you know,
Speaker 4: we're tired. After three days of all this. We can wrap.
Speaker 4: Unless you went to lighting each other. Well, we can
Speaker 4: do a lightning round.
Speaker 6: I want to hear how you guys think the campaign
Speaker 6: is really going, Like, do you think Trump is gonna win?
Speaker 1: Oh?
Speaker 4: Yeah, I do.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 4: I mean you know we're going to have two more
Speaker 4: podcasts for election Day. Well, I mean the betting markets
Speaker 4: are now opening up to like sixty forty I think, But.
Speaker 6: There's been the manipulation with betting markets by dark shadowy
Speaker 6: private money.
Speaker 4: You know, dark money, the darkest of dark money.
Speaker 5: Well, actually it would be in this case, right, because
Speaker 5: because the new narrative is the only thing you can
Speaker 5: really trust is the betting markets, because the polls themselves. No, no,
Speaker 5: I'm saying I hate to use that word, but I'm
Speaker 5: not saying I believe that. But because the betting markets
Speaker 5: have real money involved, unlike the polar pollsters who just
Speaker 5: want to get close enough so that people will take
Speaker 5: them seriously in the future. Right, good track.
Speaker 4: Record, Yeah, pretty good track record. Yes?
Speaker 5: What did they say in twenty sixteen?
Speaker 4: I don't remember now, Yeah, I think so. And but
Speaker 4: been Nate Silver's model, which you know he's been wrong
Speaker 4: in the past. I down god him. Nate Bronze after
Speaker 4: one of those electionists. But his model is you know,
Speaker 4: it's respected, it's see the plausible. He's got Trump pulling
Speaker 4: ahead right now.
Speaker 5: What about Alan Lichtman.
Speaker 4: Oh no, he's a buffoon. Yeah, he's a total buffoon.
Speaker 5: But he's predicted nine out of ten the last eight.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I know he's a buffoon and model of his
Speaker 4: stupid and eas of moron.
Speaker 5: Okay, there you have it. You guys are worse than me.
Speaker 4: I did say that. He did, right, he's one wants
Speaker 4: to get Yes.
Speaker 5: Actually that's an opinion, that's not a yellowed.
Speaker 3: Figures.
Speaker 4: Yeah. No, I'll go back to see the beginning, the
Speaker 4: body language, the body politic. I should have put it
Speaker 4: that way. It's just looking more and more like a
Speaker 4: Trump win.
Speaker 3: And your odds are sixty forty.
Speaker 4: Yeah, and remember and I think by the way, it
Speaker 4: could be by a substantial margin. I think there, you know,
Speaker 4: opinion will break for him late. Won't be like Reagan
Speaker 4: Carter in eighty, but I think the dynamic may go
Speaker 4: that way. And uh so. Mark Halpern, the old ABC
Speaker 4: News reporter, He said the other day on Tucker Carlson
Speaker 4: that if Trump wins, it's going to set off the
Speaker 4: largest wave of a mental health crisis in American history.
Speaker 6: That does bring one issue up, an additional issue before
Speaker 6: what is what Chucker Carlson and all these like World
Speaker 6: War two deniers that it's not Germany's.
Speaker 3: Yeah, then it was the British and the Americans who.
Speaker 5: Caused discussed this already.
Speaker 3: Can you explain it to me? I don't remember. He explains,
Speaker 3: why is Tucker carl And promoting these kinds of He's just.
Speaker 5: A bit of a forgive the expression, Maverick.
Speaker 3: Has some limits. I would think, I would think the
Speaker 3: factual historical.
Speaker 4: Reality, it could be that while he was at Fox,
Speaker 4: remember those strip shows, as they're called, right an hour
Speaker 4: day every day. Those are very demanding, a big production staff.
Speaker 4: They write a lot of the copy, they do the questions,
Speaker 4: they're talking in your ear. Now he's off on his own.
Speaker 4: I know he's got some staff, but now he's really
Speaker 4: the boss, and he doesn't have a producer. He doesn't
Speaker 4: have the network, which which would have had some control
Speaker 4: over him or some guardrails for him, and now he
Speaker 4: doesn't have any of that. And I don't know. I
Speaker 4: think he's just gone a little bit nuts.
Speaker 3: So I was just going to say the.
Speaker 6: Counterpart to him, that's a good story, is making what's
Speaker 6: he built her career and is doing really well and
Speaker 6: very pro chump. Yeah, but I mean just as it's
Speaker 6: done a good job being responsible, right commentator and on.
Speaker 5: Her with no product behind her as nearly as I
Speaker 5: can tell, are very limited. Can I just make a
Speaker 5: comment about jd Vance? Yeah, and just first of all,
Speaker 5: of course, I'm gonna remind you, I'm going to be
Speaker 5: like the wife you remember that argument. I'm a total
Speaker 5: jd Vance fangirl. I think that jd Vance is the
Speaker 5: best politician I guess I used that word that to
Speaker 5: come out of the Republican Party in the last thirty years,
Speaker 5: and that if the future of the Republican Party rests
Speaker 5: on JD Vance, we are in great shape, especially when
Speaker 5: we compare it to the abysmal situation in the Democratic Party.
Speaker 5: And we talked last time about the lack of a
Speaker 5: bench and there was a lot of there were a
Speaker 5: lot of positive comments about that. But I mean just
Speaker 5: his his almost Reaganite sorry mister analogy man, his response
Speaker 5: to what's that woman beat with the ugly sticks name
Speaker 5: radits marratics. Sorry, I haven't said a lookism thing. For
Speaker 5: a long time my fans expected John excuse me that
Speaker 5: that you know, uh, it was just a couple of
Speaker 5: apart It was just several what did you say, a
Speaker 5: few several apartment call.
Speaker 3: Not a lot?
Speaker 5: And do you hear yourself? You know, there hasn't been
Speaker 5: a politician willing to listen to the dumb questions being
Speaker 5: put forward by the original media and and come back
Speaker 5: with a response like that, that's a talent, but he's good.
Speaker 5: That's why you can do it.
Speaker 6: So once along upon time I did John Stewart's show,
Speaker 6: which is still concerned my greatest achievement.
Speaker 5: And over the Fox qutie pies.
Speaker 3: That I didn't beat the right, which is hard to do.
Speaker 6: So no, So the thing I realized is, you know,
Speaker 6: when politicians are trained to go on the media, they're
Speaker 6: told to repeat the same three things over and over again,
Speaker 6: right because what they don't want you to do is
Speaker 6: create a sound clip for the other side to use,
Speaker 6: so they don't care what the questions are. And what
Speaker 6: I learned from going on John Stewart, why I think
Speaker 6: I did well is I listened to the questions and
Speaker 6: I answered them by trying to turn all the assumptions
Speaker 6: of the questions. Back on the Questionner and John Stewart's
Speaker 6: a clever guy, but he's not prepared.
Speaker 3: You know, he's quick witted, but he's not deep. So
Speaker 3: it's easy to do.
Speaker 6: And I think that's what jdvans. This is a common
Speaker 6: law school thing that you get trained to do as
Speaker 6: a lawyer.
Speaker 4: JD.
Speaker 3: Van's is doing it. The you know, second string high
Speaker 3: school football coach can't do it.
Speaker 5: No, but a lot of politicians are lawyers. John, and
Speaker 5: even some of them jail. They get this media train
Speaker 5: and and and Kamala Kamala mad example. She she gave
Speaker 5: a defense of it. She said, because what's what? Which
Speaker 5: one was? It? Was it that I can't say that
Speaker 5: dumb name Charlemaun the wishes God. I'm not saying that
Speaker 5: he is not anyway God, he is not God. I
Speaker 5: don't know if you whatever, But anyway, whoever it was,
Speaker 5: I thought it was him who asked why don't you
Speaker 5: answer the questions? Why do you keep repeating the same
Speaker 5: thing over? And her answer back was, well, people are
Speaker 5: stupid and they need to hear things a whole bunch
Speaker 5: of Yeah. Basically, she didn't say stupid, she said she said,
Speaker 5: we know that unless most people hear something at least
Speaker 5: three times, they don't retain it. And she went in
Speaker 5: this whole ridiculous thing about the reason that I keep
Speaker 5: saying the same thing over and over again. I was
Speaker 5: born in a middle class household. I was raised in
Speaker 5: a middle class household. The reason she keeps saying that
Speaker 5: is because you know, people didn't hear the first seventeen times.
Speaker 4: She's actually not wrong about that from a marketing point
Speaker 4: of view. But when what you're saying is stupid. Yeah, Well,
Speaker 4: a last comment John about.
Speaker 3: Wait, we didn't get Lucretia's odds on the election.
Speaker 5: Oh yeah, they were sixty percent when you asked me
Speaker 5: three weeks ago, don't you remember? And you had a
Speaker 5: face of astonishment.
Speaker 3: Now is it still sixty at least ago?
Speaker 5: You know, a lot of things can happen. I know
Speaker 5: you are, but things can happen, and I don't want
Speaker 5: anyone to become complacent here.
Speaker 3: Vote.
Speaker 5: But I mean, if if you're smart enough to vote, vote,
Speaker 5: if you're smart enough to figure out where your precinct
Speaker 5: is and do all of those other things, then vote.
Speaker 2: No.
Speaker 1: I think it.
Speaker 5: Probably still remains in about sixty percent because I do
Speaker 5: worry about electoral fraud. I worry about some of them efforts. No, no, no,
Speaker 5: not John, like we've talked like we've talked about like
Speaker 5: manipulating election laws to make.
Speaker 3: It easier that's already occurred.
Speaker 5: Yeah, exactly, I'm not That's what I'm talking about.
Speaker 4: Happen.
Speaker 5: It depends on what you think, what you can. But anyway,
Speaker 5: we don't have to go into that today because we're
Speaker 5: already long.
Speaker 4: Well, probably one last thing about the which I'm not
Speaker 4: sure I think you must have known this, John, But
Speaker 4: of course remember listeners that your appearance on John Stewart
Speaker 4: happened a long time ago. I'm not sure still during
Speaker 4: the Bush years, but still the fury is over Bush
Speaker 4: and the oh yeah, you never see it achievement. Oh
Speaker 4: it's a classic. And what do you know about you?
Speaker 3: Admitted the next day that he lost.
Speaker 4: Well, that's just he apologized to the audience the next
Speaker 4: because the social media were furious with him for letting
Speaker 4: John off the hook.
Speaker 5: I love it, you know, I love it.
Speaker 4: The next day, John Stewart apologized the studio audience for
Speaker 4: failing to nail John.
Speaker 3: You and it.
Speaker 5: Aim I'm going to watch it.
Speaker 3: I'm going to do that when the show closed. You know,
Speaker 3: there's kind of like obituary. Yeah, right, and I was
Speaker 3: in every single one. It's the only one the better.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 5: I've never watched, so I don't really watch, so I
Speaker 5: was prepared. Okay, fair enough. I listen to them, think
Speaker 5: about I imagine they're all cuties, but I hardly ever
Speaker 5: see them. Is that driving? You don't believe in? Looks?
Speaker 4: You know, Stewart is back and somebody actually Anne Colder
Speaker 4: made the point he's actually trying to be funny, whereas
Speaker 4: Stephen Colbert and those other late night guys are not.
Speaker 4: There's angry partisans and all right, it's.
Speaker 5: Because I can't see it.
Speaker 4: You can't see it. Okay, well, all right, I get
Speaker 4: to do the Babylon be headlines because we're sort of
Speaker 4: improvising the way we do this today.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 4: Nine bad things in your life that are probably the
Speaker 4: Jews fault?
Speaker 3: What does that actually say?
Speaker 4: Nation shudders to imagine how horrifying the incriminating photos are
Speaker 4: that Kamela has the Mark, Cuban has the Mark has
Speaker 4: the way about Mark? Oh I botched that will never mind? Yeah, okay, Uh,
Speaker 4: Harris complains she was not informed the interview would include questions.
Speaker 4: After Fox interview, Kamala calls McDonald's to ask if her
Speaker 4: old job is still available. All right, John, that's enough
Speaker 4: for today.
Speaker 5: No, I was gonna do a Kamala.
Speaker 3: You've been touting about NASA.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I can't find that.
Speaker 5: Yeah, NASA wants to know how Elon Musk is so
Speaker 5: successful without employing any gay Muslim trans dwarfs, trans dwarfs.
Speaker 4: Like NASA does. Yeah, something like that. All right, let's.
Speaker 3: Close it out. So always drink your whiskey. Meat. Let's
Speaker 3: go Brandon and Steve. What is our new sign off?
Speaker 4: To quote Kamala? I can't think of a single thing.
Speaker 3: Did she say that?
Speaker 4: I can't think of a single thing. She's never spoken
Speaker 4: a more true and accurate thing in her life. Bye bye, everybody,
Speaker 4: You see you next week. H Ricochet joined the conversation.