10/28/24: Trump MSG Rally With Kill Tony, Trump May Win Popular Vote, Pollsters Making Things Up

Krystal and Saagar discuss Trump's MSG rally, Trump could win popular vote, MSNBC says hard to ignore Trump surge, pollsters making things up.

 

To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show AD FREE, uncut and 1 hour early visit: www.breakingpoints.com

 

Merch Store: https://shop.breakingpoints.com/

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hey, guys, ready or not, twenty twenty four is here
and we here at breaking points, are already thinking of
ways we can up our game for this critical election.

Speaker 2 (00:08):
We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade
the studio ad staff, give you, guys, the best independent coverage.

Speaker 3 (00:15):
That is possible.

Speaker 2 (00:16):
If you like what we're all about, it just means
the absolute world to have your support.

Speaker 3 (00:20):
But enough with that, let's get to the show.

Speaker 2 (00:25):
Good morning, everybody, Happy Monday. Have an amazing show for
everybody today.

Speaker 3 (00:29):
What do we have, Crystal.

Speaker 1 (00:29):
Indeed, we do coming down to the wire here of
course in terms of the election, So we have a
lot of news for you there. Trump has this big
Madison Square Garden rally yesterday and it was really something,
even the Trump campaign distancing themselves from some of the
remarks that were made at that rallies. That will bring
you all of that. We've, of course, also got all
of the latest polls to try to figure out where
this race is. Spoiler alert, it's still fifty to fifty

(00:51):
and very close. We've got some comments from Michelle Obama
directed towards men in particular, and also a little hot
mic moment from commal hair where she seems to indicate
that they have ground to make up there among men
in the country.

Speaker 4 (01:04):
So we'll bring you that as well.

Speaker 1 (01:05):
Trump winning some Muslim American endorsements in the state of Michigan.
Absolutely wild scene there given past history. Jeff Bezos deciding
seemingly to curry favor with Trump by withholding an endorsement
by his paper, The Washington Post, dooking a lot of
controversy there. The La Times also deciding not to endorse
in this race. They're giving a different reason though for

(01:27):
their rationales. We'll break all of that down for you.
We have doctor Treza Parsi on to talk about the
very latest with regard to Iran and Israel. Israel finally
launching that, you know, what they describe as a retaliatory
attack towards Iran. There's a lot that's interesting there, so
we'll get into that as well.

Speaker 2 (01:42):
Absolutely can't wait for that before we do. Thank you
twelve our premium subscribers. We're coming down to the wire
eight days until election day. Right now, we are filming
content today with Logan Phillips, our election partner. He'll be
here on election night as well. Go ahead and sign
up Breakingpoints dot Com, so you get exclusive access both
to some of that premium election and content. Our predictions
will drop there first on who's gonna win, what are

(02:03):
electoral maps, and all that will be in addition to
some great subscriber benefits on election night. So Breakingpoints dot
Com you can become a subscriber. But as Crystal mentioned,
Trump was at Madison Square Garden.

Speaker 3 (02:13):
Let's get to it.

Speaker 5 (02:14):
I don't know if you guys know this, but there's
literally a floating island of garbage in the middle of
the ocean right now. Yeah, I think it's called Puerto Rico.
All right, heck, yeah, that's cool. Black guy with a
thing on his head. What the hell is that a lampshade?
Look at this guy? Oh my goodness. Wow, I'm just kidding.

(02:37):
That's one of my buddies. He had a Halloween party
last night. We had fun. We carved watermelons together. It
was awesome.

Speaker 3 (02:44):
In fact, she is the devil. Whoever screamed that out?
She is the Antichrist.

Speaker 6 (02:51):
And there's not one moment I've ever been with him
off camera he's spending his time grousing about people he hates. Ever,
he's talking about the people and the country he loves
in his private time. Trust me, you.

Speaker 7 (03:03):
Know something, Trump maniacs. I don't see no stinking Nazison here.
I don't see no stinking domestic terrorists in here. The
only thing I see in here are a bunch of
hard working men and women that are real Americans.

Speaker 8 (03:24):
Brother.

Speaker 2 (03:27):
So that was before Donald Trump even took the stage.
It was as I described, full maga. I would put
it as a mini RNC effectively. Lots of controversy this
morning over Tony Hinchcliffe's joke there about Puerto Rico. In fact,
the Trump campaign themselves have come out and they've distanced
them from it. Let me go ahead and read you

(03:49):
what they said in a statement this morning quote the
joke does not reflect the views of President Trump or
the campaign. So I'm sure there will be a lot
of bedwetting over this on both sides. What I mean
by that, Crystal is not the liberal freak out over it,
But on the Republican side there's a big debate over like,
why should you even apologize over a joke. I like
Tony and think he did a great job specifically at

(04:11):
the Tom Brady Roast and previously. The thing is and
this is what I've been thinking about. The reason why
is that you shouldn't necessarily just have an edgy campaign
guy or sorry, edgie comedian at a campaign event, because
it appears as if that is a reflection of the
campaign as opposed to at a roast or elsewhere. Now, look,

(04:32):
in general, if making a joke about Puerto Rico is
literally enough to push you over the edge, I don't know.

Speaker 3 (04:36):
I think it's frankly kind of.

Speaker 2 (04:37):
Ridiculous, but maybe people vote that way. The point remains
that there are five hundred thousand people of Puerto Rican descent,
apparently in the state of Pennsylvania.

Speaker 4 (04:45):
I saw it's one of the largest.

Speaker 2 (04:47):
Old friend Chuck roacha who runs that Latino focused Nystra
pack or whatever, and he's already raising money.

Speaker 3 (04:54):
He's like, give me money so I can text this
to everybody.

Speaker 2 (04:57):
Bad Bunny came out and endorsed Kamala Harris immediately after
this came out. So look, will it make a big difference.
I don't know, but I think that the point stands
that in general, like nine days out for this, the
Puerto Rico joke, it just doesn't appear to be helpful.
I guess the countercase to what I would say is
everyone said that about Springfield, everyone said it about God.

(05:19):
I covered twenty sixteen Judge Curiel Casier Khan and all this.

Speaker 3 (05:22):
Stuff didn't matter.

Speaker 2 (05:23):
If anything, the controversy he's so racist this time, look
at this, all of that.

Speaker 3 (05:27):
It didn't work right.

Speaker 2 (05:28):
So I'm not so sure it's going to be like
totally determinative. The way I saw MSG and the rally
yesterday I tweeted this was this was basically a mini RNC,
the most storied of venue in the country.

Speaker 3 (05:41):
There. If their goal was to dominate the conversation, to.

Speaker 2 (05:44):
Have a gigantic media spectacle, I think they succeeded.

Speaker 3 (05:48):
That conversation now centers around them.

Speaker 2 (05:50):
And the only question is is it twenty sixteen when
that dynamic is to his benefit or is it twenty
twenty two when this being on full display is going
to repel voters.

Speaker 3 (05:59):
I genuinely have no answer to that question.

Speaker 4 (06:01):
Yeah, I mean it was like dark RNC. This was like.

Speaker 1 (06:06):
You flag fly, I mean, you got not just to
fixate on Tony is honestly to miss.

Speaker 3 (06:12):
The overall I agree, but even the rest.

Speaker 4 (06:13):
Of you know, even if you're just letting me in Tony.

Speaker 1 (06:16):
Not only do we you know, called Puerto Rico a
pile of trash in the ocean. There were insults at Jews,
at black people. He said they were, you know, carving
watermelons instead of pumpkins. There were insults at Latino's, you know,
sexual disgusting, sexual joke, even just with Tony. But even
if you put that aside, you got this other dude

(06:37):
calling Kamala literally the devil and the anti Christ. The
whole thing, the whole positioning of it is this sort
of like worshipful uh situating as Trump is like gonna
save us like the Jesus Christ figure against Kamala the
anti Christ. You had another speaker who referred to her
effectively as a sex worker, saying she had her you know,

(06:58):
pimplant handler her. You had Hulk Hogan at another point
we played part of his comments.

Speaker 4 (07:04):
Another point he.

Speaker 1 (07:04):
Seemed to make a hawk tua joke about Kamala. You
had Byron Donalds, who is a black congressman, introduced literally
with Dixie, the facto anthem of the Confederacy. And then
of course you have Trump doing his normal thing talking
about that enemy within, talking about using the anli and

(07:25):
Enemies Act, which was last use for Japanese internment. So,
you know, the overall question of the rally or why
it even existed.

Speaker 4 (07:34):
To me, it's less about an electoral.

Speaker 1 (07:35):
Consideration and it's more about creating a sense of inevitability
and sort of like domination. You know, and we already
seen and we're going to talk about the Washington Post,
like Jeff Bezos pulling his endorsement.

Speaker 4 (07:48):
You see some.

Speaker 1 (07:49):
Elites basically hedging their bets, trying to not get on
Trump's bad side because they're afraid of that quote unquote
retribution that could come. So having this very you know,
ominous spectacle in the center of a very diverse, deep
blue city, Yeah, I think that's more what it's about.

Speaker 4 (08:09):
And it ties into.

Speaker 1 (08:11):
There could be a vibe with it because it seems
it's like a lot of bravado. It's basically projecting like
we are already so confident that we've won this thing
that we can send Tony Hinchcliff out there to insult
a major critical demographic group in a swing state. Like
it almost has the vibes of like Hillary Clinton popping
the champagne on the plane on election Day, which also
by the way happened on the way to New York.

(08:33):
But for them it's sort of true because even if
they lose, they're going to claim that they won. And
that's the other goal of this rally and the one
they're doing New Mexico, the one they're doing Virginia, whatever.
Trump constantly talking about how you know, they've got him
with ninety three percent odds that he's gonna win, et cetera,
et cetera, bolstering polymarket and all of these odds makers

(08:55):
that show a you know, wildly improbable probabilities in favor
of Trump is to create the sense of inevitability so
that if they lose, their supporters will all be primed
to think this could not have been fair, it must
have been rigged. And so you know that's part of
the goal of this rally as well. And yeah, I

(09:16):
mean it was like, I found it very disturbing. I
found it really ugly. And to your question of like,
you know, the electoral implications and the calculus that went
into this, et cetera. We were talking after the Rogan
interview about how the goal for Commlin these final days
is like I can be commander in chief the golf
for Trump is like, I'm not a fascist, I'm a

(09:37):
bro right hanging out with Joe Rogan. Don't think that
this rally really served his interests in making him seem
less scary, less dark it. You know, if anything feeds
into the closing message of the Harris people of like, listen,
you should take seriously what John Kelly, Mark Milly, Jim Mattis,
Mike Pence have to say about who this guy actually is. So,

(09:58):
you know, I don't buy that it's them electorally. And
they also have a different coalition than they did in
twenty sixteen. You know, in twenty sixteen, it was all
about juicing the white working class vote, worked for him
obviously enough to win an electoral college. This time, they
are really reliant on eating into Democratic margins with black
and Latino men.

Speaker 4 (10:17):
So that I think is part of why.

Speaker 1 (10:20):
Whereas in the past in twenty sixteen, you know, if
there was some racist joke made or whatever, Trump would
never have apologize for it. I think the fact that
they're trying to court that different coalition, or really electorally
dependent on that different coalition, is what leads even the
Trump campaign to be like that was too far.

Speaker 3 (10:37):
See I don't know.

Speaker 2 (10:37):
I have a totally different read. I didn't see that.
I mean, I think you're prime to see darkness or
you're seeing darkness. I'm trying to look at it as
like basically an entertainment event. When you literally have hul
Cogan like ripping his shirt off and coming out and
like we're not nutsies here, and then you had what
Tony Inchcliff and the comedian. The aspect of it to
me was just pure camp and entertainment. You could see
darkness if you want to, and you're taking it seriously.

(10:59):
But the whole point of Trump is that most people
don't take him seriously, specifically the people who vote for
him or are inclined to do that. So for them,
like they see, if anything, the media bed wedding, they
love it.

Speaker 3 (11:10):
There's nothing they love more.

Speaker 2 (11:11):
Than to see people call him a fascist or a
racist or compare it to Nazi msg. That's the best
thing that could happen for them, because they wear it
on their sleeves. Then why are they well, okay, they're
does isself the one comment. But this antichrist stuff, that's like,
first of all, that's like any Republican evangelical man not
endorsing it. I've always found it creepy and weird, but
that's what they do. Well, let's continue with the Hull Cogan,

(11:33):
Tucker Carlson's speech. Almost all of it is basically a
round a vibe of our opponent as a joke. There
is a sense of an ability, there is domination. But
also what we're missing is there was a lot of
like laughter and frankly, like exuberance in the room for
what they're projecting. I saw another electoral thesis, which is
swing state voter time is over at this point, like
they've either made their decision or not. This is just

(11:55):
purely about driving out the base. And with that regard,
I mean, look, I've spent too.

Speaker 3 (11:59):
Much time now in Republican areas.

Speaker 2 (12:01):
I've talked about this previously, and some GOP people will
hate this. There is a deep element of Trump's support
which is on the nose and for lack of a
better word, crass. Like in twenty twenty, I remember I
told the story a lot. I was driving through you know,
rural Nevada, and I just saw this gigantic sign this
farmer had and it just said Trump, fuck your feelings.

(12:21):
And I've thought about that sign a lot, because I
think that is everything. I was recently in Pennsylvania at
like one of those pumpkin patches or whatever, and there's
literally like grown men walking around with like f your
Feelings t shirts and I'm voting for the convicted felon
bumper stickers with truck nuts. As we'll get to, there
is a deep element of that, and those people love

(12:42):
this and you can hate it if you want, but.

Speaker 3 (12:45):
They like it, you know, just it's the whole Maga mema.
There's a are you offended yet? You know I'm a white.

Speaker 2 (12:52):
Christian male, Like does that piss you off? That is
a deep part of Trump culturalism, which is aimed directly
at the beating heart of institution and of Washington. So
I see this as the apotheosis of maga. The question
in my mind is it twenty twenty two or is
it twenty sixteen? In general, for Trump, this stuff doesn't stick.
It usually doesn't hurt. This whole fantasy about Latino and

(13:16):
black man. I mean, we've talked about this before. It's
nice to win a couple more percent, but the vast
majority of the electric's some seventy four to seventy five
percent is white. Fifty five percent of those people no
college degree, median voter in this country, fifty five year
old white dude. Yeah, but yeah, I mean I know
they're you know, their culturally will be signs most with them.

Speaker 1 (13:31):
Offended by this whole situation is a lot of those
white college educated okay, vote.

Speaker 3 (13:40):
That's already right.

Speaker 4 (13:41):
I mean, they're they're not.

Speaker 1 (13:43):
I mean that's where listen, I think you're right that
this is the kind of beating heart apotheosis of Maga.
And that's what I find so disturbing. I think the deal,
the implicit deal that Trump has with his support is basically,
you give me unending loyalty, and listen, if you watch

(14:06):
this and you didn't think that this was like, you know,
worship of a cult hero. I don't know what you
were looking at. You give me unending loyalty, and I
will give you permission to indulge the ugliest parts of yourself.
That's what was on display here. I mean, Tucker came
close to saying it. He said something to the effect of,

(14:27):
you know what we love about Trump is he's given
us permission to tell the truth, which is of course
preposterous when you look at a guy and Donald Trump
who probably lies more than like literally any other political
figure we've ever seen. But what he means by that
is now, like we can tell the racist joke about
black people and watermelons, or you know, call Puerto Rico
a pile of garbage.

Speaker 4 (14:47):
We can label our political.

Speaker 1 (14:49):
Opponents as the enemy within and threatened to turn the
military on them, or label them literally the anti Christ
or the devil, or as one MAGA supporting evangelic pastor
has been calling her, like the Jezebel spirit.

Speaker 4 (15:03):
We can do all of those things.

Speaker 1 (15:04):
We don't have to pretend that we have this like
you know, veneer of polite society, and it's not about
it's really not about policy, because we've seen him be
all over the map. We've seen this policy platform this
time around totally different than what it was in twenty sixteen.

Speaker 4 (15:19):
At this same event.

Speaker 1 (15:21):
You had people who were, you know, spouting policy positions
that were totally at odds.

Speaker 4 (15:25):
With each other.

Speaker 1 (15:26):
Rudy Giuliani calling all Palestinians terrorists and you know, cheering
for war hawkishness. And then Tulsi Gabber goes up there
and is like, oh, Trump is the anti war candidate.
It doesn't have to be coherent because it's not about
that policy.

Speaker 4 (15:40):
So I don't know what.

Speaker 1 (15:41):
The electoral impact will be, you know, I genuinely I
don't think that this served the end that you and
I both were saying that Trump had. His goal in
the final days was humanized himself and to make it
feel preposterous that he was, you know, the sort of
like dictatorial, authoritarian, fascist figure. I don't think that this
helps him in that regard. You know, is it a

(16:01):
game change with thought?

Speaker 4 (16:02):
I don't know.

Speaker 1 (16:03):
But to me, it's just more it's less about the
electoral impact and more just about what this movement actually
promises to deliver, you know. I mean a core promise
that he's making that he talked a lot about here,
and actually we can play a little bit of the
Trump mashup. I don't know if it includes this part
or not, but something he's repeatedly promised is to use
the Alien Enemies Act of what is it, like seventeen

(16:25):
ninety eight or whatever, which was last used to justify
internment of Japanese Americans during World War Two.

Speaker 4 (16:34):
Like, that's a promise that he makes.

Speaker 1 (16:37):
He talks about the enemy within he you know, this
is like a core part of what's being cheered here.

Speaker 4 (16:46):
I think it's ugly.

Speaker 1 (16:47):
I think it's disturbing, And as I said before, I
think the core promise is like you can where your
fuck you're feeling sure, you can say, like you know,
all of the ugliest things that you would normally say
in private, it can now be out in the open.

Speaker 4 (17:01):
And that's what this is.

Speaker 2 (17:02):
A solibrations Again, Tho, where you're seeing it is disturbing,
and I'm like, I'm just looking at at analytically. What
it comes from is people feel truly like the Washington
establishment media institutions, et cetera, not only have left them behind,
and I'm not even talking about economically, it's almost almost
purely culturally. And their rage has now been bubbling for
almost twenty five years. So this is a logical and
frankly like very predictable and political expression.

Speaker 4 (17:25):
I think there's a lot to that.

Speaker 1 (17:27):
I also think that that rage can be directed towards,
you know, the corporate CEOs and billionaires and elite class
that have created vast inequalities in this country, or it
can be directed at, you know, a group of vulnerable
migrants to be scapegoated, which yes, I think is.

Speaker 2 (17:49):
Really this is a very common talking point. Again, the
fact is it's that reality. Yeah, but Democrats have tried it,
and the truth is that people don't like when millions
of illegal immigrants come to their country. That's not scapegoating,
it's a pure fact. It's no country on earth would
accept the level of illegal migration that we've had, and
they rightfully blame a lot of elites for washing that
away and just saying, oh, it's actually not a problem.

(18:10):
It doesn't matter if your community gets totally flooded or whatever.

Speaker 3 (18:13):
We've had this debate a million times is.

Speaker 1 (18:15):
To pretend like the whole problem in this country is immigrants.

Speaker 2 (18:20):
Is proposable, a big thing and it's ugly, is illegal immigration,
and now most people believe that. In fact, if you
look at you know, you're talking about alieness edition. If
there was an Axios poll or whatever and it was like,
how many Americans support putting illegal immigrants in camps and
deporting them, it was forty seven.

Speaker 3 (18:36):
Percent of the vast majority of independence.

Speaker 1 (18:39):
So I don't think it is our electoral point. I'm
really not just getting your electoral point. Although I do
think that the pulling on immigration is a lot more
complex than you say, because if you ask them also,
should there be a pathway to citizenship for people who
are here who are undocumented, they also say yes, and
they definitely don't support like let's totally close our borders
and have net zero migration. So putting the electoral point aside,

(19:02):
though it's a moral point, I think it's wrong.

Speaker 4 (19:05):
I think it's wrong. I think it's ugly.

Speaker 1 (19:07):
I think it's an inaccurate picture of where the problems
in this country actually stem from. I think it's cheap
to take shots at people who are, you know, largely powerless,
who are oftentimes escaping, you know, systems of persecution that
our country basically, you know, set up. Many of the
migrants who are coming here are fleeing from countries that
we have incredibly onerous sanctions on. So yeah, I think

(19:28):
it's it's cheap, it's ugly, and it's wrong, you know,
the electoral point, like, we'll see how it works out
next week. We'll have an answer to that very quickly.
But you know, my fear is that it actually is
too effective, that it does work, that there is a
large appetite for it.

Speaker 4 (19:44):
But I'm also not convinced of that yet.

Speaker 2 (19:45):
I mean fair enough, I guess I would just say
you can, you're what free to morally object, But it's
a democracy. People get to vote how they want, and
I don't generally believe in like tisting it people and
saying oh, it's actually not a problem, like we should
hear what it is. Like, Look, do I live my
life with your feelings T shirt and trucknuts?

Speaker 8 (20:03):
Now?

Speaker 2 (20:03):
I don't, And honestly I don't have a lot of
like I don't really get it period, but I can
anthropologically look at them and be like, Okay, well there's
something going on here, and for me, like full maga.
Basically of what that rally was is that is a
political and cultural expression of, frankly, a very ignored force
and of one which people feel is not accurately reflected

(20:25):
in their higher institutions of culture media, and at a
certain point, like you do have to if it wins,
people should ask a lot of questions about how did
that happen?

Speaker 3 (20:34):
What exactly led to this?

Speaker 2 (20:36):
If you want to make that corporate argument, you know,
I mean, frankly, look I don't even.

Speaker 3 (20:39):
Disagree, but the truth is is that people don't care.

Speaker 2 (20:42):
I hate to say it, but every time that they've
tried the so called deliverism and this argument in the
especially in the face of mass illegal migration, it's rejected
almost entirely.

Speaker 3 (20:53):
To the extent that Democrats have won any ground.

Speaker 2 (20:55):
It's with rich, college educated whites who are culturally look
at the truck nuts and the fuck your Feelings t
shirt and are repulsed by their fellows the elder people.

Speaker 1 (21:06):
While thing to say, though, when Republicans, when was the
last time they even won the popular vote?

Speaker 3 (21:10):
Uh, well, two thousand and four.

Speaker 1 (21:12):
So I mean, you act like this is the vast
majority of the country.

Speaker 4 (21:16):
Number one, I mean Democratic Democrats, even in the electoral
Number one.

Speaker 1 (21:21):
I mean, but that's pretending like the only thing anyone
cares about is immigration. Number one, Democrats have embraced a
very hawkas, but to pretend like, you know, the anti
immigrant positions one that isn't held by elite politicians is
at this point preposters. It's my view that doesn't exist
among elite politicians. You don't hear it from Democrats at
this point whatsoever. But number two, like there's this posturing,

(21:44):
like this is this overwhelming majority that's being ignored, and
it's like, no, actually, it's it is a minority, as
evidence by you know, every election since Donald Trump has
been on the scene, where he has never won the
popular vote, and where Republicans lost in twenty eighteen, loss
in twenty twenty two, et cetera.

Speaker 4 (22:01):
And you know, so it.

Speaker 1 (22:03):
It also overstates how popular this mode of politics has
been proven to be. So, Like I said, listen, I'm
really not making an electoral point because I'm humble of
I don't know what's going to happen next week. You know,
maybe people love calling Puerto Rico an island of trash
and love calling for immigrants to be rounded up and

(22:24):
put in camps, and love you know, saying Kamala Harris
is the Antichrist, or at least just you know, are
happy to ignore it for whatever reason that could certainly
be the case. I'm making the point that, you know,
I immigrants are not the problem in this country. They
are not the reason why buying large housing prices are high.

Speaker 4 (22:43):
They are not the.

Speaker 1 (22:43):
Reason why it's so hard to afford healthcare. They are
not the reason why education costs have skyroad rocketed so dramatically.
They are you know, yes, there is an issue with
we need to get the border and control. I personally
think we actually be better off as a country if
we let in far more legal immigrants than we have.
But you know, I just think that this direction for

(23:06):
the country is ugly bad and wrong.

Speaker 4 (23:08):
Okay, my byeline.

Speaker 2 (23:09):
Again, I think that's fair. I've made various counter arguments
as to why. But in general, again, you want to
listen to people and you don't want to try and
override their concerns.

Speaker 3 (23:17):
And if that I fundamentally.

Speaker 2 (23:19):
Believe, and I actually tweeted the other day, I don't
think it's the economy stupid.

Speaker 3 (23:23):
I think it's immigration stupid.

Speaker 2 (23:25):
I think that if Trump wins this election, specifically if
he also wins a popular vote, which I think there's
a twenty seven percent chance according to Nate Silver, it
will be the clearest mandate and or electoral signal in
modern history, especially because a lot of the retconning of
twenty sixteen.

Speaker 3 (23:39):
If we go back and look if there was.

Speaker 2 (23:41):
A study done by the CSPI, I want to say
we talked about it in twenty twenty, where the vast
majority of people who voted for Trump did so because
of immigration. And I've just come around to the fact
that immigration is the singular defining issue of the Republican Party.
I think abortion is now the defining issue. Either of
those two reconcilable questions will be determined on election day
as to what it is, and democratically it does need

(24:04):
to be solved or at least found like some sort
of status quo like we did previously in eras, because otherwise,
you know, if you care about taxes or whatever, the
vast majority of people these days are not voting on that,
they can claim what they want. I've seen too much
swing state data on immigration for Republicans. It is literally
the number one thing that they're running at Reublicans.

Speaker 4 (24:25):
No, it's not.

Speaker 1 (24:25):
No, the Republicans have reduced their ads spending on immigration,
but they're they're predominantly spending money on trans panic and yeah,
but they are like taxes economic space.

Speaker 2 (24:38):
I disagree with that because the trans ad is all
about illegal immigration. It's specifically when you watch it, they're
like talking about transgender surgeries for illegal migrants from the
clip of twenty and nineteen. I mean, look, you've said
it before too. A lot of that is just coding
Comma as too liberal. Is that immigration trans whatever. I mean,
at the end of the day, it's not economic. I
know that one on Democrats they're trying with taxes, which

(25:00):
talked about with Logan last week, but a huge part
of it is just abortion too. So you know, what
does the mandate say if Kamala wins. I would say,
if Kamala wins, that the mandate is actually that this
maga you know, fear feeling stuff does not land in
the way that I think it does, and people should
be very humble about that too, which they won't. I
think You're right, they'll say that the election was stolen,

(25:20):
but vice versa. You know, if that if that wins,
people should really take a step and be like, Okay,
what's going on here?

Speaker 3 (25:26):
You know, why did this happen?

Speaker 9 (25:28):
Yeah?

Speaker 1 (25:28):
Maybe, although it's also like, you know, the election is
probably going to be decided by like a tines se
liver of votes.

Speaker 3 (25:33):
Maybe yeah, So you.

Speaker 4 (25:35):
Know there will be many things last to everything.

Speaker 2 (25:39):
Should I say that ninety percent of people agree with
me or with you?

Speaker 3 (25:42):
Of course not.

Speaker 1 (25:42):
Yeah, I'm just saying, like I think there's a tendency
sometimes in an election that's very narrow to read into
that like, oh, the public overwhelmingly thinks this. So the
public overwhelmingly thinks that when it's really like, you know,
twenty thousand people in Wisconsin whatever, you know. So I
don't think that our deep divide in the country. I
don't think we'll learn anything that more, much more profoundly

(26:04):
different about the deep divides that exist in the country,
depending on whether this is a narrow win by Trump
or a narrow win by Kamla.

Speaker 4 (26:11):
All right, should we hear let's.

Speaker 3 (26:13):
Talk about plate Trump. I was just gonna skip it right.

Speaker 4 (26:15):
So to me, it's the same shit. There's that.

Speaker 3 (26:17):
Here's the thing.

Speaker 2 (26:18):
To me, Trump is a secondary character almost for this
because Trump himself and what he says does not matter.

Speaker 3 (26:25):
As we see at the rally.

Speaker 2 (26:26):
You can be anti war, and you can say the Palasais,
what did he say? Are raised at age two years
old to slaughter people. The contradiction is the point. The
contradiction is the fact that the cultural saying fuck you
to the elites.

Speaker 3 (26:39):
That's it.

Speaker 1 (26:40):
That's basically to the elite, okay, fine deliverable immigrants.

Speaker 2 (26:44):
To elite tastemakers who think that it's okay to have
twelve million people illegally let in your country, or who
don't think it's that big of a deal or whatever
it's about, you know, even culturally to the extent I mean,
I've talked about this before. You can't turn a TV
on without seeing like some transgender couple or whatever in
a TV show shoehorned and got for no reason.

Speaker 3 (27:04):
I mean, it's annoying. It is annoying.

Speaker 2 (27:06):
I mean, right, because it's obviously a social agenda, of
which is held by a small.

Speaker 1 (27:11):
Social agenda trying to be imposed as theory of people.

Speaker 4 (27:15):
Well, no, you don't hate transparent you think that they do,
so I don't.

Speaker 2 (27:19):
Think that people hate trans people. I don't hate trans people.
I think people should be able to do what they want.
I don't like gender ideology and specifically the way that
it's message towards children or I mean, we haven't covered
this yet, but there was a landmark study about puberty
blockers that somehow got held up at the NIH because
it happened to prove that it didn't work so well
for the people.

Speaker 7 (27:37):
Who do that.

Speaker 3 (27:37):
Those are legitimate issues. And that's my point is that,
but you.

Speaker 4 (27:41):
Didn't start with that.

Speaker 1 (27:42):
You started with seeing a transgender couple in a commercial.

Speaker 3 (27:45):
Which is what, which is a signal of what, which
is what.

Speaker 1 (27:48):
Signal of Hey, it's cool to be who you are,
no big deal, which is something that most Americans agree with.
Which is why the like, you know, transgender panic in
twenty twenty two didn't pan out because people like, all right, whatever,
does they care more about other stuff? Because you know,
it's the only Kelly out there being like, oh, high
school athletes, transgender high school athletes is my number one issue.

(28:11):
Like that's an insane fringe view, but it actually is. Hell,
I don't think I don't think you do hold that view,
but that is like a kind of a core bul
Like she gets a lot of praise for that in
the Republican Party, and you know, so that's become a
center of energy among this group as well.

Speaker 2 (28:27):
But the trans thing was just a metaphor for the
idea that social liberalism dominates at the very high commanding
heights of the American culture, from Disney to Wicked or whatever,
and that people are annoyed by it to the point where, yeah,
they like the maga apotheosis because they want those people

(28:49):
to cry tears and to feel bad.

Speaker 3 (28:51):
I sympathize. I understand that feeling. Do I think it's
all that productive. No, not necessarily, but I mean it's politics, right.

Speaker 2 (28:58):
We have to learn a little bit from what Vox Popular,
you know, is kind of trying to send a signal
on and that's what I would hope that people take
away if Trump does win the election. Unfortunately, I don't
think that that's necessarily the case. But that's kind of
why I say Trump is not what he says doesn't matter.
He's a figure. Is is like a like a lightning
rod or whatever for whatever cause that you know, pisses

(29:21):
people off in the way that you want to. I
think immigration is the bigger part of that, but there's
it's a big tent, you know, for grievance. That that
explains why Rudy and Tulsey and RFK and all these
people can be pro Trump all at the same time,
and the internal contradictions are the point. You know, I
increasingly believe that about MAGA. Let's move on to the

(29:43):
next part here as skipping Donald Trump and talking here
about the popular vote and also about some Trump efforts
to run up the score and possibly set the stage
for a stop to steal two point zero. Let's start
with Harry Enton about that possibility of Donald Trump winning
the popular vote.

Speaker 3 (29:59):
Let's take a listen.

Speaker 9 (30:00):
Trump may finally get his great white whale. Harris versus
Trump national margin. You mentioned that New York Times poll
a tie that's actually right in the middle of the spectrum.
When we're talking about recent polling data, you don't have
to look very far to find Donald Trump ahead nationally.
He was up by two points in the CNBC poll,
up by three in the Wall Street Journal poll. Very
close races within the margin of error. But then the

(30:21):
same thing on the other side, right, you have Harris
up by three points according to IPSOS. The say twenty
four you gov poll it's a bunch of academics also
has Harris up by three. But the bottom line is
with the popular vote, which we really haven't focused upon,
a very very tight race, John. Fact is, Donald Trump
is very much in a position he could win the
popular vote, which of course is something he would.

Speaker 2 (30:43):
Absolutely love to do and would be something very different
than we have seen compared to last time in the polling,
compared to last time.

Speaker 9 (30:51):
Exactly right. So I went back through the time machine,
all right, I went back through the time machine to
see where were the past two races. At this point
in the campaign, Look, Harrison, the average poll right now
is up by one, well within the margin. Ever, you
go back four years ago, Joe Biden was well ahead
of Donald Trump in the national popular vote polls. He
was up by nine even Hillary Clinton was up by

(31:13):
six points. So now Donald Trump is in a position
he really hasn't been before at this point in the
campaign where he could truly compete. And we can truly
say that the popular vote at this point is way
too close to.

Speaker 3 (31:23):
Cole okay, so very clearly it's possibility.

Speaker 8 (31:26):
I guess.

Speaker 2 (31:26):
My one quibble though, is that he was using polls
and not the actual results from twenty sixteen to twenty twenty.
And did you notice that right right? Because the actual
twenty sixteen popular vote was two point one for Hillary.

Speaker 3 (31:39):
Let's see what it was for I think it was
four and a half. I was, yeah, it was quite high.

Speaker 2 (31:44):
Yeah, it's in fifty one point three to forty six
point eight. And I guess the reason there was a
massive historical turnout in all states, so we actually won
more of the popular vote because it had a lot
more Blue voters in places like New York, California and
elsewhere that came out.

Speaker 3 (31:58):
But that, yeah, in addition, so it is an interesting point.

Speaker 1 (32:01):
Yeah, I mean, one of the things that's fascinating here
is that between twenty sixteen and twenty twenty, Republicans actually
opened up more of an electoral college advantage. And now,
based on the twenty twenty two results and based on
the polling you know, as it exists currently going into
twenty twenty four, it looks like they may actually have
less of an electoral college edge than they did even
in twenty sixteen, which shows you these coalitions aren't exactly

(32:23):
static that they move around. I mean, do I think
Trump's going to win the popular vote?

Speaker 4 (32:26):
Probably not.

Speaker 1 (32:28):
In both twenty sixteen and twenty twenty he got around
like forty seven percent of the vote. I think it
would be a stretch to see him getting an actual
over majority.

Speaker 4 (32:40):
But you can't rule anything out.

Speaker 1 (32:41):
And I will say, if Trump wins the popular vote
and loses the electoral.

Speaker 3 (32:46):
College, there's a three percent chance that will be that will.

Speaker 1 (32:49):
Be the end of the electoral college. It will be
over for the electoral college. And I just want to say,
like back when Hillary lost because she won the popular vote,
and lost the electoral College. I wasn't one of those
people around there bitching. Yes, I went the electoral College
to go away, But those were the rules of the game,
and she understood them that she played. And so even
if you know Trump wins the bopular and loses the

(33:11):
electoral College, you don't get to cry about the rules
of the game as they are set up and established today.
But you know, he's clearly trying to project a lot
of confidence. Like I said, I think the New York
City rally was an attempt to create the sense of inevitability.
He also we can put this up on the screen
A five. They announced they're going to do a campaign
in Salem, Virginia. Now, Pole just came out a high

(33:33):
quality poll from Washington Post showing you know, Virginia looks
like it's not a swing state. It looks the same
as it did last time. I think it was six
okay was the margin.

Speaker 3 (33:43):
So you know Virginia better than I do. What is
what's the vibe in Salem? Is it like southern VIRGINI I.

Speaker 1 (33:47):
Think Salem is southwestern Virginia. I'm pretty sure so this
is I can look it up, but I'm pretty sure.
This is like in the mountains in southwestern Virginia.

Speaker 3 (33:55):
I thought about it going and then I saw it
was a three hour drive time. I'm like, that's not
gonna happen.

Speaker 4 (33:58):
Yeah, yeah, let me see. Yeah, yeah, yeah it is.

Speaker 1 (34:03):
It's almost like to the Virginia line over close to ROANOK.
So yeah, this is like this is rural Appalachian Virginia.
I'm sure he has a lot of supporters there. They'll
be very excited to see him. Is he going to
win the state of Virginia this I would be willing
to say absolutely not. He's also doing a rally in
New Mexico. Is he gonna win New Mexico? Also, there

(34:25):
is zero indication he's going to win the state of
New Mexico. You even have a fake Ramaswami in the.

Speaker 3 (34:29):
New York Yeah. New York is a swing state.

Speaker 4 (34:31):
It's said the rally like do people just like being
lied to?

Speaker 1 (34:35):
I don't know, because that is also preposterous and there
is no no data to back it up whatsoever. But
the plan here is to create the sense of like, oh,
we're going on the offense, even in places like New
Mexico and Virginia and New York. Can you imagine we're
going on. I saw people tweeting like, Oh, We're gonna
win New.

Speaker 4 (34:52):
Jersey, Like, no, you are not.

Speaker 1 (34:53):
But the idea is to create the sense that it's
a done deal, the election's over. Trump's gonna win, even
though every you know analysis out there says it's a
coin flip. And then if he does lose, you created
the sense that it was over and there was no
way Democrats could win. And so then your your fans
are going to be primed and ready to believe that

(35:15):
if you don't win, this was stolen, and they'll be
ready for whatever, you know, conspiracy theory you want to
put out there as to why this was unfair, unjust
and you were robbed, et cetera, et cetera. And so
I genuinely think that is part of the strategy of
going to places like Virginia, New Mexico, New.

Speaker 3 (35:30):
York, et cetera.

Speaker 2 (35:31):
I think that's definitely part of it. I was wondering
too with Salem. I was like, Okay, well, what's the
big brain case for it? Is like, like you said,
Appalachia trying to get some North Carolina folks maybe to
drive over.

Speaker 3 (35:43):
Could be you know. I was like, OK, I could
see that, but you could just go to Yeah, you could.

Speaker 4 (35:47):
Just go to not that to North Carolina.

Speaker 3 (35:49):
Actually, I mean I don't know.

Speaker 2 (35:50):
You know, I read stories about people at these Trump rallies.
You drive for fifteen hours or whatever, so you never know.
In terms of New Mexico, it's funny. Last time around,
I remember tracking this Trump was they were like, we're
gonna win New Mexico.

Speaker 3 (36:02):
New Mexico's in play.

Speaker 2 (36:03):
Jason Miller, who currently works with the campaign, he kept
saying that over and over again. And the action result
is he lost it by I think a bigger margin
in twenty twenty than he did in six years. So yeah,
I don't think that New Mexico is gonna happen. I mean,
I guess the case is maybe some people drive over
from Arizona from to New Mexico, but in general, right.

Speaker 3 (36:22):
The domination is the point.

Speaker 2 (36:24):
Now the risk is that, hey, man, you probably should
go to Wisconsin. Because I may have incorrectly been decided,
but I saw someone say he hadn't been to Wisconsin
or in that area in like three weeks, which is
a long time. I mean, that was a huge talking
point after twenty sixteen. So there could be a lot
of overconfidence in the Trump campaign right now.

Speaker 3 (36:48):
We see it's not there.

Speaker 2 (36:49):
You go, it's only been a month. You know, it's
been a month since you're in Wisconsin. Now, maybe it's
just a sign of hey, we're gonna win Wisconsin.

Speaker 3 (36:54):
We're not worried about it. There's some signs in that direction.

Speaker 2 (36:57):
I mean, you know, we were just talking with Logan
and he thinks was and is like the smallest or
the best state now before him in terms of but he.

Speaker 4 (37:05):
Still has them losing in the average.

Speaker 1 (37:07):
So it's I mean, no one could think like, even
if you feel like Wisconsin is moving towards Trump, you
certainly can't think like all.

Speaker 4 (37:12):
This is done and you know it's a wrap now.

Speaker 1 (37:15):
I do see he's going to hold a rally in
Milwaukee a couple days before the election.

Speaker 4 (37:18):
Okay, so that's on their radar. I listen.

Speaker 1 (37:21):
I mean a lot of these campaign decisions on the
Trump side too, are just about like his ego, Yes, right,
like he wants to pretend like New Mexico's in play.

Speaker 4 (37:28):
He probably maybe even believes it.

Speaker 1 (37:29):
Right at the rally last night, he said he thinks
they're going to win Colorado. You are not gonna win Colorado.
But you know, he may have convinced himself of that,
and so part of it is just like playing to
his ego as well. And then I also think there's
a sense that since politics are so national, does it
really matter if you do the rally in Sale in

(37:49):
Virginia versus in North Carolina.

Speaker 3 (37:52):
That was my other case was that it's just like
it's all a show, and.

Speaker 1 (37:56):
It's a national show, and the particular location, like whether
it's in ped Slovania or in Virginia or whatever, it
doesn't ultimately matter all that.

Speaker 2 (38:04):
U That's what I was thinking, because I was, you
know again the Madison Square Garden thing. At first thought
it was dumb. I'm like, why are you doing it?
And then I was like, oh, well, even if you
live in like bumfuck wherever, like you know what Madison
Square Garden is. So you see a picture of Madison
Square Garden and Trump in a packed arena where they
literally had to turn people away, and you know what,
it is same in terms of I mean, actually I
remember in Iowa and in New Hampshire last time around,

(38:26):
Trump did not spend that much time or on the
ground in twenty sixteen, Ted Cruz and the Marco made
a lot of talking points about that, but what ended
up being correct. The correct strategy was just going Fox
News or go wherever, hold a rally, say whatever you want,
people into it it, watch it, vote for you. I mean,
obviously was he got second I think in Iowa. But
that was a big media strategy where the ground game

(38:49):
was shook up entirely by the nationalization my politics. And
if you look at this time around, I mean Ron
DeSantis and Nicki Haley and these people, they spend a
ton of time on the ground. Vivek didn't go to
all ninety nine counties in ilank. Yeah, it didn't matter, right,
how much you get five percent of the vote something
like that.

Speaker 1 (39:05):
Yeah, And Chick was really the first person kind of
understand that back in twenty six it was, you know,
because he didn't run like a traditional campaign.

Speaker 4 (39:13):
Really it was very like more like Rocky too.

Speaker 3 (39:16):
You think it's ramshackle now.

Speaker 2 (39:17):
Back then it was a wild It was the Trump
helicopter and like five guys, one of them we used
to work for the UFC.

Speaker 5 (39:23):
That was it.

Speaker 1 (39:23):
Yeah, and you know, it was enough to win the
popular road to get the job done and you know
the rules of the game as they existed, so so
that that may be part of it too.

Speaker 3 (39:32):
Is like the.

Speaker 1 (39:34):
More traditional campaign heads on his team are like, Hey,
he wants to do this thing for his ego and
it doesn't really hurt, so.

Speaker 4 (39:41):
Why not go to Virginia.

Speaker 2 (39:42):
I don't know, I think I am yeah, I think
that that's the correct strategy. Probably the nationalization matters most.
And yeah, like you said, for stop the steal two
point zero, if that's what you want to set up,
you're like, well, you know, the inevitive ability. I mean,
I just feel like at the point this cake is baked,
like they're going to say it no matter what, like
whether they're going to Salem or whether they're going away,

(40:04):
it doesn't matter. I mean, the level of like delusion
up here, specifically for a lot of these boomers like you,
there's not a word you could say to these folks
about why the election was not stolen. So he's got
it in the bag.

Speaker 7 (40:16):
And I was.

Speaker 2 (40:16):
You know, if you go on Twitter, the amount of
election just straight up bullshit that you will consume on
a daily basis is unbelievable to me. I think Trump
is doing quite well on the race. I think he's
got a more better than not shot of winning. Do
I think he's a ninety three percent chance of winning? No,
who even comes up with this stuff? Yeah, that's where

(40:37):
I'm like, okay, I'm I was thinking about this. Republicans
seem booied psychologically, are buoyed by this sense of inevitability.
Democrats are neurotic, and they're convinced that they're going to lose. Now,
every big thing I've ever accomplished in my life, even
if I ever had a good chance of doing it,
I always acted like I was gonna lose, just to
make sure you do everything to make sure that it

(40:58):
doesn't happen. So there are just screens of overconfidence to
me right now and bravado and ego.

Speaker 3 (41:04):
It's just I don't know, karma is real, all right,
Like it'll check you very quickly.

Speaker 4 (41:08):
It's a coin flip election.

Speaker 1 (41:10):
Yeah, that's what it is, a coin flip election, and
you know, no one can say which direction the polls
might be wrong, Like we don't know. Maybe they are
underestimating trial. That's that's very possible, but you don't know that.
So yeah, I mean part of it is just they
like to pretend. I mean, it's part of like the

(41:30):
ethos of like owning the Libs. Part of owning the
Libs is like we're destroying you and we're dominating. You're
gonna we're going to New Mexico, We're going to we're
going to New York where you know, we're eating your lunch.

Speaker 4 (41:40):
You're going to be destroyed.

Speaker 1 (41:41):
You're gonna be as one speaker at MSG said, you're
going to be slaughtered on election day. It's part you know,
that's part of what like fuels this movement is the
sense of like, you know, we're destroying you and owning
the Libs, et cetera. And then from the Trump perspective,
this and the you know, Trump influencers. I do think

(42:02):
it's more concerted strategy to lay the groundwork for. But
if we do lose, we're going to claim we want
it anyway, and you are all going to believe it,
and they are all going to believe it. And I
think there will be much that we're going to talk
more tomorrow about some of the specific, like organized efforts
that they put in place to lay the groundwork for
that challenge.

Speaker 4 (42:20):
If they were you know, to narrowly lose or to
lose at all the election. Next week. We're going to
get more into the specifics of that.

Speaker 1 (42:27):
But you know, when you see like Elon talking about
potential voter fraud and Marjorie Taylor Green claiming that they're
switching votes, and then this organized effort of all these
lawsuits across a bunch of different states that they've already
put into place, you had some dude in North Carolina
suggesting they should just preemptively hand the Electoral College votes
over to Trump.

Speaker 3 (42:47):
Makes you see that, Yeah, I did, and he's actually
a member of Congress.

Speaker 1 (42:50):
That's just incredible, unbelievable. So I mean there, Yeah, they
are laying the groundwork and it will not be hard.
It will be much easier this time around to convince
all of their people that the election was stolen than
it was last time around.

Speaker 4 (43:02):
And that's part of what's going on here.

Speaker 3 (43:03):
There you go.

Speaker 1 (43:04):
All right, So, speaking of that coin flip election, we
have Logan Phillips from Race to the White House joining
us to talk about exactly where things stand. The latest
polls break all of that down for us, and also
to answer this question of whether or not pollsters are
hurting because you see hurting like with the d I
feel like I always it sounds like hurting, I.

Speaker 3 (43:20):
Mean her ding. They probably are hurting.

Speaker 1 (43:23):
They're probably also hurting emotionally. But anyway, because they're all
getting like the exact same results, So is that likely
or are they kind of trying to fudge the numbers
a little bit so that they're not too much out
over their skis in the event of either a Trump
or a Kamla victory.

Speaker 4 (43:36):
Let's get right to it all right, guys.

Speaker 1 (43:40):
Election Day, as you probably know, is literally a week
from tomorrow, which I'm having trouble rapping my head around.
But joining us sound to breakdown where the polls stand
as of today is our friend Logan Phillips of Race
to the White House and offering exclusive content here at
Bring Points.

Speaker 4 (43:54):
Great to see Logan, Yeah, of course.

Speaker 1 (43:58):
So we've got a little clip here from Steve Kernaki
over at MSNBC talking about how the poles have trended
somewhat towards Trump.

Speaker 4 (44:05):
Let's take a listen to that.

Speaker 8 (44:06):
One thing we have noticed in the last couple of days.
This is not all of the polls that are out
there now, but we have seen a number four in
the last four days that have shown very small but
in the context of this close race, potentially meaningful movement
in Trump's direction. I don't want to overstate it, but
at the same time, it's hard to ignore these four.
The CNBC poll came out the other day as Trump

(44:27):
ahead by two, the Wall Street Journal poll trump ahead
by three. These are national numbers Sienna and the New
York Times A tide race, CNN a tide race. The
significance here is broader movement again we're seeing in Trump's direction.
To put this in some context, here is our current
national polling average. Let me call that up on the
screen for you. Right here, Harris continues to lead nationally.

(44:49):
I want to stretch that, but we've been tracking this
every week on the air. Here a couple of weeks ago,
this number was at three for Kamala Harris, her leading
the poll average now down to one point because of
some of the numbers that I just showed you. Of course,
the swing states, the battleground states, are going to be
what decide this election. And look how close those are.

Speaker 3 (45:08):
We see one point two nationally.

Speaker 8 (45:10):
Just about all these swing states are even tighter than
that one of.

Speaker 1 (45:14):
Those poles that Karnaki references, there is the New York Times,
Theano Pole, which of course people pay a lot of
attention to.

Speaker 4 (45:20):
You can put this up on the screen.

Speaker 1 (45:21):
This is I believe, their final final national poll before
election day, and it does show the two of these
candidates tied for eight percent. So what are you seeing
in terms of the trends as we head in here
to the final stretch.

Speaker 10 (45:34):
Yeah, the trends are that the race went from Razor
tight with Harris having a slight edge to Razor tight
with basically being even maybe the slightest vetch of Harris
in the key swing states. So the movement is real,
fortunately for Harris, and it's unusual'll say this for a
Democrats perspective. The election is decided by the Electoral College
versus the national vote, and while Trump is gaining in
swing states, the gain is a little more subtle, except

(45:55):
maybe in Wisconsin where it seems to be getting a
little faster.

Speaker 2 (45:58):
Got it right, So if we stick with them and
we continue down some of the data points that we have,
can we put the next one up on the screen.
We saw here, you know, multiple show things showing tied.
Now as you just mentioned, Can you lay out why
maybe the popular vote will not be as a deciding
factor this time around? So what I mean by that
is usually the rule of thumb with Republicans is that

(46:20):
if the Democrats are losing the popular vote or even
polling in the popular vote within one or even two points,
and that usually means that there's an electoral college bias
to the Republicans. Something we've been trying to prime the
audience for is this may be changing because of Republican
shifts in deep blue states places like California and in
New York. Should we read into it that way and
contextualize it in the swing states?

Speaker 10 (46:40):
Like you said, yeah, I do think that Harris probably
needs to win the popular vote to win, and on
average she's leading the polls by like one and a
half to two points. Okay, nationally speaking, but the change
and how much of an edge you need can change dramatically,
And honestly, there have been cycles even in this millennium
twenty four twenty twelve where Democrats lost the popular vote
they easily could have won the election, especially two thousand

(47:01):
and four, So we actually see cycle to cycle. This
changes all the time because individual states change all the time.
If Texas becomes a proper straight down the middle state,
Democrats could easily lose the popular vote and run the
electoral college, for example, which is not where we're now we.

Speaker 2 (47:15):
Are yet, right, So this could be more of a precursor,
possibly of things to come, This trend very possibly.

Speaker 1 (47:21):
Yeah, what are some of the demographic realignments that have
led to that shift in terms of the popular vote
electoral college vote dynamic.

Speaker 10 (47:29):
I think that Democrats are doing a bit better in
the suburbs now they c hereinly did in twenty twenty two,
and that is making helping them a little bit in
states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin. Honestly, every single one of
the swing states, right is also kind of what's putting
Texas in play too. Plus, Democrats appear to be doing
a little better at the white vote relative to how
they were doing in sixteen and perhaps twenty at least

(47:49):
relative to where the popular vote is, so that means
that they're, you know, the alignment of voters might be
a little closer to just where the swing states happen
to be. It doesn't mean that that inherently would give
you an edge. It is just the absolute ran and
which states happened to be the most competitive American politics
at this point in time.

Speaker 1 (48:03):
Is this a continuation of some of the trends that
we saw in the mid terms because Republicans, you know,
that red wave didn't materialize, but there were a few
states where they were kind of did right, Florida and
New York in particular, California somewhat to a lesser extent.
What are some of the peculiar dynamics in those states
which are not swing states that have led Republicans to

(48:23):
either you know, gain ground in New York, gain even
more ground in the state of Florida.

Speaker 10 (48:28):
Yeah, I think some of it has to do with
focal politics. Kathy Hocals in particularly popular in New York.
Cromo had was popular until we had all his ethical
issues that force you out of office. And it's you know,
when you have a stay of one party rule for
long enough time, it can lead to some inefficiencies in
government and people can over time turn against that. So
that might be a problem there as well. You know,

(48:50):
crime has been a problem in New York. It's gone down,
but you know, still important to people and New York
probably due to federal reasons hasn't always had the resources
and needs. As you have a lot of immigrants and
asylum sequens've come to the state who don't yet have
this status that they may or may not get depending
on the individual. It's able to get a job, they
have to wait like a year for it. So now
the state has to provide for them because of the

(49:12):
slow federal policy, and so that's making people more That's.

Speaker 2 (49:15):
Been a big long island staten island thing. Let's put
the next one up here from CBS. So this was
one of the few that had it just fifty forty nine,
not just tied. But if you take a look at
that battleground figure, we have it fifty fifty. I mean,
so when we're talking here, logan like even also in
your own models, and you're looking at those battlegrounds says,
how do you suss out like the reality of a

(49:36):
point three advantage or a point four or something like that,
because it just seems so within the margin of error
that it's difficult to you determine even with an average
when we're talking about edges that are that small.

Speaker 10 (49:48):
Yeah, you're sure to have the edge, you know. We
can look at hundreds to pass a long absolutely, yeah, yeah, yeah,
there's a correlation. Even THO doesn't feel like there's anything.
But the fundamental nature of this stuff is the assumptions
that we make about the electorate. They're always going to
be wrong in some way. We just don't know what
parts if they're going to be wrong, right, So it's
just like you a little more room to be wrong
in one direction. If you have a point four lead,

(50:10):
then you're down point four.

Speaker 1 (50:11):
Rightly, right, let's put a five up on the screen.
This was a poll that I'm sure the Harris people
were very happy to see. This was ABC IPSOS poll
of likely voters. It has Harris up at fifty one,
Trump at forty seven. Greg Sargent opines here that it's
better for her than other national polls finding a tie
because she runs better among Latinos and blacks including men,

(50:31):
then those other poles, while holding on to the same
percentage of the white vote as Joe Biden.

Speaker 4 (50:36):
Per Ron Brownstein, This is the key. What do you
make of this pole? And how real do you think
that these shifts.

Speaker 1 (50:44):
That we've seen in other poles among black men, among
Hispanic men in particular, Given that you do have some
poles like this that really don't find any movement at all.

Speaker 10 (50:53):
Yeah, I mean, if SOS has generally been more favorable
for Harris this Cyclewar Times has generally been more conservative
favorable for Trump, so that might be what's that play here.
I think, ultimately the odds are that Trump has gained
in these polls. But in twenty twenty two, the polls
were off by like a point and a half. Maybe
the movement at the end was real. It just might
have been Democrats outright leading and then it went to

(51:14):
the slight Republican lead at the end. But there's no
way to know this for sure because you only have
one election. So maybe the polls two weeks ago and
the movement was completely made up, which is hard to tell.

Speaker 2 (51:22):
Yeah, I know, I mean, I know this can be frustrating,
and let's continue to the next one. Nate Silver, he
had a very good breakdown of actually each of the
individual swing states. I wonder if we could put it,
We'll put that tear sheet please up on the screen.
But I was looking at his Wisconsin model, and if
we check Wisconsin, what he has in front of there
is basically like a fifty three percent chance that Kamala

(51:43):
would win THEO would win Wisconsin. But you were just
saying that there has been some overall movement. You actually
see there exactly what you said, our one point sixth
advantage and a change from the last month. Is there
anything from you can look at from his overall analysis
and also maybe pair it with the early vote of
some signs where things can differently go.

Speaker 10 (52:05):
Yeah, there's been consistent Poule movement in Wisconsin. We thought
it might be true for Michigan, but we got a
bunch of high quality polls showing Hair still ahead by
it modestly in Michigan. So I think Wisconsin's is one
of Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin that I'm most worried about
for Harris, that it's most likely to flip.

Speaker 1 (52:21):
Interesting, So, for if you're the Harris campaign, what looks
like your best path to two seventy And conversely, if
you're the Trump campaign, what is your most likely path
to two seventy?

Speaker 10 (52:31):
Yeah, I still think for Harris it's the conventional Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania.

Speaker 3 (52:35):
All plus Omaha.

Speaker 10 (52:36):
Yes, but North Carolina is so close right now that
it easily could be the one that saves Harris, Like.

Speaker 1 (52:44):
If she loses Wisconsin but wins North she could win
North Carolina and that would be enough for.

Speaker 10 (52:48):
And if she wins North Carolina and Nevada, which you know,
I still think she's modestly favorite Nevado.

Speaker 3 (52:52):
So you're still very bullish on Nevada. So let's talk
about that, much less so than my most last Okay,
much last.

Speaker 2 (52:58):
Let's talk so because for everything I've seen right now,
I guess the bowl case for Trump is you've got
this like major Republican turnout. According to Joel Ralston, a
huge percentage of the votes have actually already been cast to.

Speaker 3 (53:08):
The overall electorate.

Speaker 2 (53:09):
The bear case for Trump is that there's a big
what is it other of people who are unidentified in party,
and that that other demographic is disproportionately younger people who
are most likely to vote Democrats. So the other category
being so large could be skewing it. But you're still
less bullish, So tell us why.

Speaker 10 (53:28):
Yeah, because the early vote has not been good for them. Now, yeah,
some of that's not counting a lot of the mail
in ballot that's going to be coming in, So maybe
it's not as bad for them as we think Okay,
the polling has been sort of good for Harris generally
underrate STEM so that doesn't assily Kerry cycles in cycle
in Nevada. In Nevada specifically it has up to this
point anyway. Yeah, Yeah, I mean I think it's I

(53:49):
think the case for Trump stuff again and stronger. That
being said, I mean, if you look at Maryland, for example,
I saw this great graphic from split Ticket this morning
the twenty twenty two election. You know, the breakout of
like how Republicans did an early voting relative to twenty
twenty suggested all sorts of good signs for them. No
one really thought that Dan Cox was going to be
Wes Moore in that.

Speaker 4 (54:08):
Race, but that's the governor's race.

Speaker 10 (54:10):
Governor. Yeah, thanks for saying that, So I and he
ended up winning by like the same margin. I think
that Joe Biden won Maryland and most exactly right, because
it's just the makeup of election day was also really different.
So this stuff is clused. But the makeup of the
electric can change. How independent and swing voters vote can
change as well.

Speaker 2 (54:31):
Okay, we were reading a little bit yesterday, Crystal and
I at different states and how they vote, so I
had no idea. For example, like ninety percent of Arizona
votes or votes early. So maybe if you could just
tell the audience like which states were the early vote,
maybe matters more. And then where also, like which states
on the same day could be determinative, Like with the Maryland.

Speaker 10 (54:53):
Like you were saying, yeah, in Maryland, I mean saying
that Maryland, I would say Nevada and Arizona, those are
states you're going to see a lot more early voting.
It's more important, you know, especially because Nevada has a
lot of clonary workers who are show to get election
day off so they try to get in early, right yeah.
And Georgia has a strong early vote. But even there, right,
like this is what it was the last few cycles,

(55:14):
you might change. Democrats got the big bank of votes
early on. Republicans came in droves at the end. So
I think for all of these states it's still going
to be a factor, but it's more that you know
each state by state.

Speaker 3 (55:25):
It's just hard to say.

Speaker 10 (55:26):
Right now because we don't have a voting pattern long
enough post twenty twenty, when more people got ento early voting,
right yeah, yeah.

Speaker 1 (55:33):
And the other thing is difficult is every state has
different sequencing in terms of like is it just mail in,
is it just early in person, which tends to be
more Republican, And so I think that's part of what's
accounting for. Like, if you look at those Blue Wall states,
you go, oh, that looks pretty good for Democrats. Then
you look at Novoda and you're like, oh, now it's
terrible for Democrats. Part of it seems to be that

(55:53):
different states have different sequencing, different percentages of the vote
that are expected to come in early, et cetera.

Speaker 4 (55:59):
So can be very difficult.

Speaker 1 (56:00):
Like you said, especially post twenty twenty, we really don't
have a model for this election, which is post COVID
but not during COVID, and what the makeup.

Speaker 5 (56:10):
Is likely to look like.

Speaker 10 (56:11):
Yeah, and I would say the general thing is right.
Over the last two weeks served in positive signs for
Republicans an incredibly competitive phrase, but much like perhaps a
lot of pundents were overreading the good signs for Kamala,
the same thing is happening now. And I think it's
in part due to past experience of headaches twenty twenty
and twenty sixteen. If you don't love to be wrong,
but I don't like to be wrong in the same
way twice or three times in a row.

Speaker 1 (56:32):
Well, that's a perfect segue and to the next conversation
we want to have about what has been kind of
like an online debate among nerds and data geeks, et cetera.

Speaker 4 (56:41):
Over whether or not the pollsters are quote unquote hurting.

Speaker 1 (56:44):
This is going to be posted later in the week
for everybody to take a look at as we head
into election day.

Speaker 4 (56:48):
It's going to be posted today for premium subscribers.

Speaker 1 (56:51):
If you want to become a premium subscriber and here
logan answer this incredibly important and interesting question, go.

Speaker 4 (56:57):
To Breakingpoints dot com. So get that right away. All right,
let's pug back up this graphic.