Speaker 1: And Hi, how are you welcome to the Big Podcast
on this eleventh day of November. It's Tuesday, the eleventh
of November, year of Our Lord, twenty twenty five. My
name is Tom Sullivan. It is a Veterans Day, and
so a big shout out and congratulations and cheer and
thank you to all the veterans in the audience today.
Appreciate you coming by, Appreciate you on many, many levels. Well,
where do you want to start today? We've got last
night the Senate did their vote and past the budget bill,
so that means that they are going to reopen the
government after it goes over to the House of Representatives
and the House has to gather and Mike Johnson, the Speaker,
looks like it's going to be a Wednesday afternoon vote.
Once that happens, then it goes over to the White House.
President signs it and the government is back in business.
There are a number of people to chime in on this,
I guess the first one is let's start with for
those of you that are travelers, what do you want
to know? Well, is the airspace going to be back
working or the air traffic controllers going to be back working?
Sean Duffy, the Secretary of Transportation, gives this his best guess.
Speaker 2: If we see the government reopen this week, could we
see delay for Thanksgiving travel?
Speaker 3: So it depends on how are we going to have
air traffic controllers come into work. And if we have
the controllers showing up, I know, I think we're going
to be back to you know, regular flight schedules with
regard to controlling the airspace will be up and up
and running.
Speaker 1: Well, let's hope. So it all depends upon again, the
airlines have to they had to go through and completely
rejigger their schedule, so now they have to rejigger it again,
and the air traffic controllers will be back to work,
I presume pretty quickly. So I would expect if you're
traveling for Thanksgiving that it's going to be close. But
I think things should be back to normal by the
time we got there. But how did how did this
hole shutdown come about? I mean, what a disaster this was.
Mary Catherine Ham always has an interesting observation.
Speaker 4: Yeah, they put themselves in this position. He put in
in this position. And I've seen a lot of dumb
shutdowns that achieved nothing, But this was a very dumb
shutdown that achieved nothing. And the problem for Democrats, of course,
is that there really are people hurting, and a lot
of those people are their own constituents, and so it's
been sort of astonishing to see the party that loves
government rejoice that the government was shut down long enough
to help them boost numbers in two state elections, hurting
people in the process, as they always say, when there's
a shutdown from the other side, and then when a
couple of people get sense and say, wait, but we
like the government to operate, let's open it again, they
get mad at those guys, and they've demoralized their base
in the process. This is because the ask that they
were doing, which was for the extended Obamacare subsidies, which
by the way, have no income cap go to rich people,
go to a lot of fraud, were meant to be
temporary and in an emergency situation during COVID when they
asked for those that wasn't really the ask. The reason
they were doing the shutdown was because everyone was ticked
off and they wanted to show they were fighting, but
they were never going to get anything because Johnson Trump
soon all turned out to be immune to the media
pressure over this, which was not put on Democrats as
it should have been, and was put on Republicans.
Speaker 2: And here we are.
Speaker 4: They've taken their big electoral win and turned it to
demoralization for their base.
Speaker 1: So she thinks this was all to do about nothing.
I hurt somebody calling it the Seinfeld shut down because
Seinfeld was the show about nothing, and this shutdown was
basically about nothing. So that brings up the question about
and there's a lot of knives that are out for
Chuck Schumer. Let's start with David Axelrod, big big, big Democrat,
who had this to say.
Speaker 5: David Ashrodam, do you think the Schumer could be in
trouble here with the left flank of the party.
Speaker 6: I think he's been in trouble. I think he is
in bigger trouble now. I honestly, I think Sena Schumer's
been there since nineteen eighty two. I guess is that
he won't be leader of the party in two and
twenty seven after this election, unless something really surprising happens.
But one thing I want to say that we haven't discussed.
We're talking about the internal strife within the Democratic Party.
Democrats had internal strife before these elections last Tuesday, and
they unified because they had a bigger concern, which was
Donald Trump. And I think one of the problems Republicans
have to consider now is Democrats did do a very
good job of shining a bright light on this Affordable
Care Act issue, on the general issue of health care costs,
and now Republicans were steadfast in opposing a solution to it.
Maybe they'll change their mind, but this is a heavy
burden for them to carry into the midterm elections. Is
and healthcare has not been fixed. The Affordable Care Act,
Obamacare was an attempt by one party. Remember, not a
Republican voted for that. That was totally done by the Democrats,
using legislative tricks, parliamentary tricks to get that passed. And
when you do that at the time, people said, every
time Congress has done that in history, it always turns
out to be a disaster. And so it hasn't fixed
health care. I don't know if some of you may
be very much in favor of wanting government health care.
I personally am opposed to it because it's tried in
many places around the world and it's not something that
I want to participate in.
Speaker 2: Maybe you do.
Speaker 1: Mark Alford, he is a Republican, he is from the
state of Missouri, and he says, when they get back
to work, they're going to start working on trying to
do something about.
Speaker 2: Healthcare working hard in our district.
Speaker 7: It's going to be good to get back on that
floor tomorrow and vote for this continuing resolution, the same
one basically that we voted on September nineteenth to fully
fund the government, and now three appropriation bills that we
have previously passed are going to be attached to that. Look,
we have to provide I think some relief for health care.
Healthcare that the Democrats broke it. It has really devastated
our healthcare system. Premiums have gone up. These subsidies that
are going directly to the insurance companies are not right.
I agree with President Trump maybe we should look at
giving this money back to the American people and let
them decide what to do with that money. But this
has got to go through regular order, and I think
when Jake was talking with Speaker Johnson, that's what Speaker
Johnson was saying. We can have these conversations. Number One,
it was not time to have this conversation while the
Democrats were holding the American people hostage. Now that that
is just about over, we can start having these discussions
through regular order, through the appropriate committees, and then to
get it to the House floor. This has got to
be a bipartisan deal though. You know, the healthcare system
broke under Obamacare, and as President Trump said, well, I'm
not going to repeat his exact words for it, but
it's not ideal, and we're going to have to work
together to get this fixed because the solutions are going
to be tough. I don't think we're ever going to
go back to the way things were, but definitely something
has to be done. I think Speaker Johnson is committed
to that, and I think most Republicans are as well.
Speaker 1: That's interesting, but it's not going to happen before the
end of January. They're not going to solve the nation's
healthcare twenty percent of our nation's economy. They're not going
to solve it. And by the way, it's not about healthcare.
It's about health care insurance. And that is where the
premiums and the subsidies that the government has been giving
to people on Obamacare. They don't go to the people,
they go to the insurance companies. Still, the insurance companies
have been raising the price of insurance health insurance to
the point where people can't afford it. The other thing
about Obamacare, which has always been wrong, was they wanted
to make sure they I guess they think we're all
too stupid to handle this on our own. We're good
at purchasing things, and they require that instead of going
out and buying an insurance policy that fits your needs.
Obamacare has a requirement that all insurance policies, health insurance
policies must include ten things. The problem with that is
there's things like a birth in delivery care, obstetrics, and gynecology.
I don't want that policy. I don't need that policy.
There's things that are just you're not going to need. Why,
they'll let you decide what you want to buy. So
that was what the congressman made a mention about the
President making a comment about giving the money to the
people directly. Well. Health savings accounts currently exist. The way
they work is you get a credit card, you put
money onto that credit card and that it will grow
without taxation, and you can only spend it on pharmacy.
Doctors' offices called the medical hospitals, whatever it might be
in medicine. If they did that for everybody and said
here is your health card and you can use it
how often or as little as you want, I think
that's promising. That take a lot of work to get
that all figured out, but I think it's very promising.
But back to Chuck Schumer, So Axelrod says he's not
going to stay as the head of the the Democrats
in the US Senate. He doesn't see it. You know
who weils doesn't see it.
Speaker 3: Bernie Sanders, Well, he's leading you all in the Senate
right now.
Speaker 2: Do you think he should be replaced by whom?
Speaker 8: Well, that's the point, you know. The question is if
somebody look again, Schumber's views are very different than mine.
He is an establishment Democrat, no secret, I am not.
I hope that by electing new members of the Senate
we will have in fact new leadership. But right now,
you know, it is what it is.
Speaker 1: So he doesn't want humor to be the leader. And
he's from the far west side of the isle. Who
does want be the leader? John Fetterman weighed in about
his views about the reopening of the government.
Speaker 9: I mean so relieved. I mean, I think my party
crossed a line of now putting forty two American so
it should be a forty two million Americans with their
snap benefits and making flying less safe and that kinds
of chaos and not paying our military. I mean that
that was a red line for me that I can't
cross as a Democrat. And I think that's been described
country over the party and now that I think that's
been the truth throughout it, and it's only wrong to
shut our government down. And I'm relieved. But the people
now that are going to get paid and fed, and millions,
millions of America they're going to be flying now that's
going to be made more safe and restored. I was
not in a conversation or I never got any outreach.
Everyone understood I was. I really kind of led the
charge back in March, and then I said, I know
we'll be back in September, and I said, I know
where my vote will be then too. It's always a
hard yes to keep our government open. I mean, that's
my principle, because it's wrong to shut our government down.
And now we knew that we would put those forty
two million Amreamericans for snap and paying our military and
you know, the Capitol police. I mean people have went
five weeks without being paid. I mean that's a violation
of my core values. And I think that it's our
parties as well.
Speaker 1: So Fetterman's glad to see things open back up again.
But he was asked a question about, well, who do
you think is running the Democrat Party at least in
the Senate.
Speaker 9: I no one, No one really knows. And and I
think my values are reflected in my vote and the
things that I support here. And if that might put
me at odds with with parts of my party, I'm
okay with that. I mean, we need to be a big,
a big party, a big tent party. So for me,
it's like these are pretty reasonable. I mean, you know,
my party has always been opposing shutting our government down.
I'm not sure why it's controversial now to devote these things.
And I refuse to put all these people in the
middle of this policeolitical kinds of brinkmanship.
Speaker 1: He doesn't know who is in charge of his party
in the Senate, eh, But that's John Fetterman. He's a
maverick and he kind of goes his own way anyway,
I don't think he really cares who's in charge. But
what do Americans think? What do the polls say? Harry
Benton always on top of this stuff.
Speaker 5: What about Democrats nationwide feeling about Chuck Schumer? I think
the word of the day is terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible,
to quote another Charles Barkley, when it comes to Chuck Schumer.
Look at this least popular dem Senate leader ever. I
looked at all of the polls going all the way
back since nineteen hundred and eighty five. The one was
the lowest rating among Democrats is in fact, Chuck Schumer.
Look at this, He's underwater with Democrats, his own party.
He's underwater. He's at minus four points. That makes him
the least popular guy for a dem Senate leader going
all the way back since the mid nineteen eight at least.
Speaker 2: Why why why why?
Speaker 5: It's because Democrats they want a fighter, They want a fighter.
Speaker 2: That's why.
Speaker 5: Take a look here, Democrats, Dems in Congress do too
little to oppose Trump. During the first term. It was
just forty six percent in twenty seventeen. That's the percentage
of Democrats who said that the Dems in Congress are
doing too little to a post down Trump. Look at
where we are now, sixty nine percent. That is an
increase of get this twenty three points. The super super
duper majority of Democrats believe that the Democrats in Congress
are not doing enough to oppose Donald Trump. And that
of course is a big, big, big, huge criticism of
Chuck Schumer. And that is why he is underwater. Okay,
so you know, you see this opening slide here, and
you see, of course that Chuck Schumer is underwater with
Democrats nationally. But of course, the ultimate way to get
Chuck Schumer out of office is to beat him in
New York State. To how do New York State democrats
feel about Chuck Schumer? And take a look here the
net fait among New York Democrats. Chuck Schumer is above
water with the Democrats in his home state, but just
by sixteen quints. Look at Alexandria Costo Kratz running way ahead.
If she decides to challenge Chuck Schumer come twenty twenty eight,
she's got a real leg up on the competition. I
dare say at this point she would be the favorite
to beat him, which would be something that would just
blow my mind, even just a few years ago, giving
a Chuck Schumer, of course as a New York born
brad type of guy.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, AOC people have said, oh, there's no way,
there is no way that she's going to be anything.
But she keeps getting re elected, and she keeps going
up in the polls, and there is an element of
the Democrat party that likes her a lot. So Steve
news Come, he is a reporter for a shows and
he was basically talking about how the people of New
York if you want to replace Chuck Schumer with AOC
or anybody else, well, let's check on how the people
of New York feel about Chuck Schumer.
Speaker 10: Yes, certainly a lot of criticism for the minority leader.
Speaker 1: This week.
Speaker 10: To start this week, I would say that while it's
coming from inside of his own party, it's not coming
from inside of his own caucus at least not at
this point. I mean a lot of the criticism is
coming from national Democrats, House Democrats who are upset that,
you know, Senate Democrats sort of weren't able to hold
the line in these health care negotiations. But until that
criticism comes from inside the Senate Democratic Caucus realistically, you know,
it really just won't have that much of effect on
mister Schumer because those are the ones who decide whether
he's leader or not. And again he's not up for
reelection until twenty twenty eight, so yes, a lot of criticism,
but not coming from from home at least time yet.
Speaker 1: Well New York can reelect him, maybe, but that doesn't
make him leader. Sounds like to me the Democrats in
the Senate are looking for somebody besides him, But the
Democrat Party has deeper problems than Chuck Schumer. I was
listening to an interview with Jonathan Carl. He is the
top political reporter for ABC News, been around a long time,
seems like a pretty straight shooter. He was on he
wrote a book called Retribution. He's interviewed Donald Trump a
number of times and written I think two or three
books about Donald Trump, but this latest one is called Retribution.
So he's on the media circuit promoting his book. So
Katie Kerrk has a podcast and she invited him on
to talk about his book and about President Trump. But
he went down this road of a story about the
bad blood in the Democrat Party between the Obama crowd
and the Biden crowd listen to this.
Speaker 2: No, it wasn't an interview, just just I saw him.
You know, I don't know if you if you saw
that he was out to dinner in Washington, d c.
He went to he went out to dinner with a
former Senator, Mark Pryor at Cafe Milano. Sat right there
in my dining room, right there in the dining room,
in front of everybody. I happened to be there. And
you know what else was there was was Barack Obama
who was also a dinner at Cafe Milano. But they
didn't cross paths. They were you know, and it was
wild seeing the Secret Service, you know, the armored SUVs
had to kind of like Biden's had to move to
make room for Obama's. They didn't interact. But but I
went over and just had you know, had a few
words with them, and.
Speaker 11: They didn't interact at all. They were in the same restaurant.
What's what's their relationship? Like, that's weird that they lend.
Speaker 2: Really bad really really Yeah. Yeah, it's uh, the the
Biden and the people around him very much, which blame
Barack Obama for the effort to push Biden out of
the out of the campaign, I document this.
Speaker 11: You mean that earlier one where Hillary ran instead or
you're talking about.
Speaker 2: No, no, well that I mean that, yes, but no,
I'm talking about this time around. I had extensive interviews
with Hunter Biden for this book over the course of
the campaign and then after it was over, and Hunter
Biden is just you know, he's got real anger towards
Barack Obama, and I think he's channeling not just Hunter,
but but but the Biden family. He believes that. For instance,
the George Clooney op ed that was such a big
moment where Clooney calls on.
Speaker 11: A step down.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and they said, you know, he says to me
on the record, Hunter says, do you really think that
he would have done that if Barack Obama didn't say
it was okay? I mean, do you really believe? And
remember that moment at that fundraiser in California where Obama
basically leads Biden off the stage. Yes, I do. There's
another real moment that went viral. Hunter describes being there
at that fundraiser and saying he wanted to jump up
on the stage and say you don't grab the President
of the United States.
Speaker 12: Like that.
Speaker 2: Nobody does, I mean really like angry knowing that it
would become this moment. So it's not a good relationship.
If they had wanted to see each other, they absolutely
would have. They were, gosh, that far apart in the.
Speaker 11: Restaurant something, you know, former president and his vice president
and then you know who becomes ultimately becomes president, not
even speaking when they're at the same restaurant. Does I
wanted to ask you, and then we'll get back to
the book. I think there's so many things I want
to talk to you about. But you know, do you
think that Joe Biden or Hunter for that matter, and
Joe Biden's inner circle take any responsibility for the timing
of his decision? And do you think they regret, you know,
his not being a one term president and saying as
much so the field could be open and the best
candidate could run against Donald Trump? Do they have any
you know, regrets about that?
Speaker 2: The honest answer is not really. I mean, there's a
little bit. I talked extensively with Hunter about this, and
I asked him, at you know, what point was the
decision made that he would run for reelection? And he
said to me, you know, We never really made the decision.
The machinery just went. And I talked to other people
in Biden's inner circle about how about at the White House.
They never had a single meeting where they said here
are the pros and cons about running again. It was
never It was just like on autopilot. And I don't
think that there's I think that the regret that they
feel is that the party pushed him out and Kamala
Harris comes in and she lost. Biden himself has said
publicly that he believes that he could have won by
the way when he finally made that decision, and you know,
he calls Kamala Harris and says he's dropping out. And
I describe how Kamala Harris really pushes him to make
the endorsement immediately, which he ultimately does, you know, half
an hour after he announces he's dropping out. And there's
been a lot of talk about and reporting on how
Kamala Harris sat down and made over one hundred phone calls,
you know, to get people to support her campaign and
to get started. But Biden made a whole bunch of
phone calls that night too. You can imagine somebody his
whole career in politics. Now is it is over. He's
run his last campaign. He calls the people that made
it possible for him to be president, thanks them, encourages
most of them to support Kamala Harris. I was astounded
to hear that one person he did not call was
Barack Obama, the person that really made it possible for
him to be president by making a vice president. He
didn't call him. Then Obama did call. I learned to
talk to to Biden. He didn't take the call, and
the two of them did not speak for weeks. They
eventually spoke right before the convention, but can you imagine
I mean literally not taking the call.
Speaker 1: So behind the scenes of bad blood and the Democrat
Party between the two most recent presidents is not good.
Well it never was good. I mean back in twenty sixteen,
Joe Biden was fussing because his son bo was dying,
but he also was basically teed up to run for
president against Donald Trump in twenty sixteen, and instead Obama
rearranged things so that Hillar Clinton would be the Democrat
nominee and Joe Biden was really upset about that. And
even when he was vice president. There are many people
in the Obama administration that said, we were worried about
Joe Biden and the family business on the side under
the table type stuff that they did not like, and
they were worried about him. So there's never been any
love between the Bidens and the Obamas, even though those
are the top two most recent Democrat presidents. So they
have a lot of problems. I'm trying to figure out
where their leadership is going to be coming from. We
get to watch in the meantime. In other news, the
Supreme Court had another hearing today, this one on the
mail in ballots, which I'm anxious to see how they
figure this one out. They agreed to decide whether states
can continue to count late arriving male ballots. The justices
took up an appeal from Mississippi after a panel of
three judges nominated by the Republican president on the Fifth
US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last year the state
law allows ballots to arrive shortly after election day to
be counted, but the appeals Court said no violated federal law,
and Mississippi is one of sixteen states and the District
of Columbia that accept mail in ballots after election day
as long as they are postmarked honor before election day.
So Steve Laddick is a Supreme Court expert, and this
is his view of what's going on today at the Court.
Speaker 12: Issue is whether the federal statute that fixes election day
as that first Tuesday in November thereby preems thereby overrides
states that allow for the receipt of mail in ballots,
of absentee ballots, of overseas ballots that were cast by
election day but that weren't received till afterwards. The Fifth Circuit,
the Federal Appeals Court New Orleans held that the federal
law doesn't allow for that. That's what the Supreme Court
is going to be taken up. Yeah, I mean, okay,
it's going to be a big impact. I mean, just
to come back to the you know, late arriving mail
in ballots. I mean, let's be clear on what the
difference is. So when the rule is that your ballot
has to be postmarked by election day, then the voters
can control it. I mean, you know, when you go
to the mailbox, you know, when you go to the
post office. If the rule is that the ballot has
to be received by election day, well all of a
sudden we're you know, we're insert of a variable that
individual voters won't be able to control. How long will
the mail actually take? You know, if I mail it
four days before election day? Will I be c if
I mail it a week before? And we're seeing this
in these other cases too. You know, is the Supreme
Court going to say that states can't draw majority minority districts,
which will invite a number of states in the South
to redraw their district maps. I think the upside here
is that these rulings, which we expect by next summer,
could have a real impact on not just how we vote,
you know, in the midterm elections next November, but for
whom we're voting and when we vote. And I think that's,
you know, yet again the Supreme Court really inserting itself
into the middle of these historically very politically driven controversies. No,
I mean, you're you're you're you're absolutely right. So the Constitution,
Article one, section four says Congress can provide for the time, place,
and manner of elections of the House, the Senate, the Presidency.
But you know, the norm has historically been for Congress
to leave this alone, for Congress to let states adopt
their own rules to have you know, rules and retailored
to the circumstances on the ground in their jurisdictions. This
is why this case is so weird. The federal statute
that the Federal Appeals Court, the Fifth Circuit claimed created
this received by date. All it does is it says
election day is the first Tuesday in November. People vote
in lots of contexts before election day, and that's been
true historically. So I think, at least in this case,
the Supreme Court felt impelled to step in because the
Fifth Circuit had held that the federal election day statute
does override these state laws. You know, I think the
Supreme Court, one way or the other, wasn't going to
let the Federal Appeals Court in New Orleans have that
last word. But there's a broader point here, which is
that there are so many folks out there who have
become very cynical of the Supreme Court, and I think,
you know, when the Court finds itself even having to
weigh in on these big election related disputes, really leaning
into that controversy because there's almost no way for the
Court to rule in these cases that won't divide Democrats
and Republicans, and that won't make the court look ideological
to at least one chunk of the country.
Speaker 1: Oh sure, people will be either be thrilled or disappointed
in whatever the court comes up with, but that won't
be until probably June when we get the results of that.
The big Supreme Court case is still the one they
heard last week, which is about tariffs. And even though
you can't read the tea leaves, from what the questions
were by the justices, it sounds like they weren't very
happy about the way tariffs are being assigned by the President,
that it is an issue that is reserved for the Congress,
not for the executive. But we'll see, because if they
rule against the president having the ability to issue tariffs,
it will be a massive financial shock to the system,
There's no question about it.
Speaker 2: And now.
Speaker 1: President Trump's tried to get your support somehow, as if
that's going to make a difference at the court. The
courts are not raw politicians. Yeah, they know about the
political world. But by President Trump saying we're going to
give two thousand dollars to well, he started off two
thousand dollars bonus to everybody from the tariff money so
that you would get on board the tariffs. But now
he's changed that to two thousand. It went to two
thousand all but the high earners will get a two
thousand dollar bonus. Then it went to two thousand dollars
bonus to low and middle class people. And I will
bet you a large lunch of the drive up window
that there's no bonus now or never from tariffs. It's
not going to happen. In fact, I do believe that
the court will rule to limit somehow the tariffs that
are being signed by the White House against all these
countries and products. They're so broad. I can see tariffs
there are specific, targeted and temporary, but these are everything
and anything that arrives on our beach. So I'm looking
for the tariff ruling to not be in the President's favor.
And if it's not, there's not going to be any
two thousand dollar bonus for anybody. I just don't count
on it, That's all I'm saying.
Speaker 12: All Right, so.
Speaker 1: We've got that, We've got Wall Street looks like they've
gotten fickle on as they decided that the technology stocks
were the big attractive stocks that were running the stock
market up. They make up a heavy percentage of the indexes,
but today they went a different direction. Market was positive,
but it wasn't for tech stocks. How up five hundred
and fifty nine points, new record high forty seven thousand,
nine twenty seven. The SMP up fourteen, the Nasdaq, which
is where the tech stoks live, mostly down fifty eight.
So now up five hundred and fifty nine, Nasdaq down
fifty eight. Gold was up eleven dollars to forty one
thirty three, and oil up almost a dollar to sixty
one dollars for a barrel of oil. That's it for today.
Thank you again to all my fellow veterans out there. Tomorrow,
I have got a big family event that I need
to and want to attend. So we've we had a
visit with the Salty and I recorded it. We're going
to play that conversation with Salty tomorrow, so I hope
you check in to find out what's going on with
mister Salty. Thank you for coming by today, Have yourself
a wonderful day, and we'll have the Salty conversation tomorrow.
Speaker 8: Find out what's going on.
Speaker 12: Thank you coming by.
Speaker 1: Wonderful conversation tomorrow.