December 19, 2024 • 23 mins
In this episode, Mary Katharine and Karol discuss the recent announcement by PolitiFact regarding its 'Lie of the Year.' They explore the Democratic Party's struggles with messaging, particularly regarding Biden's age and capabilities, and how media narratives shape public perception. The conversation also touches on the contentious issue of congressional pay raises amidst public discontent. Normally is part of the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton Podcast Network - new episodes debut every Tuesday & Thursday.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
Hello, guys, welcome back to normally. The show with normal
is takes too when the news gets weird. I am
Mary Katherine Ham.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
And I am Carol Marcowitz him Mary Catherine, how are
you you know?
Speaker 1 (00:14):
I'm all right. I'm trying to recover before Christmas. I've
got time. I got a little bit still.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
It sounds very sexy, So the audience is getting an
additional treat on this lovely Thursday.
Speaker 1 (00:25):
That's what I'm going for. If only it were painless,
I'd be for it permanently. But here we are.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
Well, we hope you feel better soon, even if you
know that means we lose the Kathleen Turner thing.
Speaker 1 (00:39):
So let's get to the news, shall we, Carol it.
I was sort of surprised by this one every year PolitiFact,
which is an alleged fact checking organization which is very
left leaning and very obviously so in the targets it
chooses to fact check and the way that it fact
(01:01):
checks things. It announced a lie of the year, as
it always does, and wouldn't you know it, it's not
like the president is incapacitated and we lied to you
about it and he remains incapacitated and can't do his job.
It's not that one. The one that it is is
(01:21):
the one where Donald Trump said that people were eating
dogs and cats eating the Dartenfield, Ohio. That's the lie
of the year. Everyone. He amplified, they say before sixty
seven million television viewers. And his debate against Democratic presidential
nominee Vice President Kamala Harris, who was i'll put in
(01:43):
parentheses covering up the fact that the current president was incapacitated.
Trump took his anti migrant, the US borders out of
control campaign agenda to a new level.
Speaker 2 (01:54):
Yeah, that level is to the presidency. He took that
level to the presidency. Friends, what's so interesting about that?
And we've mentioned this on the show before, but this
kind of stuff only hurts Democrats. They think that they're helping,
but they're actually hurting. So this ongoing lie that Joe
Biden was just fine and that they thought they were
(02:16):
doing a good thing for Joe Biden and for Democrats.
They thought covering up this very obvious thing that was
happening was going to be a positive, and it ended
up being a giant negative. And I think some people
are facing that reality now and other people clearly are not,
but it's just it's backfiring on them, and yet they
(02:37):
can't stop doing it.
Speaker 1 (02:39):
Well. And the other side of the coin too, is
that Trump, although he should be more careful about the
specific anecdotes he tells, he was speaking to real problems
that real people have in communities that have been overrun
by undocumented immigrants, and Democrats couldn't allow themselves to speak
to those issues for fear of being politifacted Lie of
(03:02):
the Year yet fodder, Right, it's because you can't tell
people anything along these lines, including what Jade Vance brought up,
the actual overtaking of apartment complexes in a rwer Colorado,
which continues, by the way, there was a kidnapping this
week there by a Venezuelan gang. You're sort of like
just not allowed to make reference to those things, right,
(03:22):
and that we.
Speaker 2 (03:23):
Tend to help Democrats either, Yeah, well, that's that's really it.
You have to keep pretending that it's not happening because
you don't have kind of the right messaging on it.
What are you going to do say it is happening,
but we have no interest in stopping the flow at
the border. Kind of can't go both ways, and so
they keep running into this problem, right, They keep running
into this issue where their ideas are deeply unpopular. So
(03:47):
what they do is they point to Republicans and say, yeah,
our ideas are unpopular, but their.
Speaker 1 (03:52):
Ideas are racist.
Speaker 2 (03:53):
And it's like nobody's falling for that anymore. Nobody cares,
and it's just it's not a thing anymore.
Speaker 1 (03:58):
Having watched Democrats are argue amongst themselves and cancel all
the rest of us for so many years other it's
as you know, as a right leaning person, it's so
fun to like, I come pre canceled, so I don't
worry as much about what I say. But watching them
do that, I do think they have lost the plot
when it comes to how to discuss things, because the
(04:20):
very successful tactic was just bully people until they shut up.
But they found that in twenty sixteen that forcing people
to shut up is not the same as convincing them
about your bulliefs, right, And so they've found out yet
again in the same jarring way when the American people
like Donald Trump, that they hadn't convinced people. But I'm
(04:43):
not sure they know how to do that.
Speaker 2 (04:45):
Yeah, I think they're going through a series now where
They're angry about what happened with Joe Biden and the
whole lie that he was fine, but they kind of
don't have anybody to blame.
Speaker 1 (04:56):
Let's roll the clip from Pod Saves America.
Speaker 3 (04:59):
There was a couple of White officials that went on
background to political for the story, and some Biden aids
acknowledged the president's absent from the broader discussions about how
to address Trump's coming presidency in the future of the party.
They say that they say it's rooted in two factors.
One Biden's own recognition that few are eager to hear
from him, and his own lingering personal belief that he
(05:19):
doesn't owe much more to a party that unceremoniously pushed
him aside. And then another White House official former White
House official said he's been so cavalier and selfish about
how he approaches the final weeks of the job, which
was aliging for a former White House official. I mean, like,
I get the recognition that maybe people aren't willing to
hear from him. Is understandable that he might think that
(05:39):
right the party thing I hope is not true, because
I don't know what do you guys think he could.
Speaker 1 (05:44):
Be doing quiet quitting.
Speaker 4 (05:46):
Yeah, I think that's what we're getting, or.
Speaker 3 (05:48):
Yeah, that's what that seems to me what he is doing.
Speaker 1 (05:50):
Yeah, oh instead, yes, got it.
Speaker 3 (05:52):
You know, but instead of just complaining that he's not
out there, I'm wondering what we think, right.
Speaker 4 (05:56):
I'm trying to like separate my like frustration with base
lead Joe Biden in his final year and culminating that
debate and hanging on that like how much we paid
for having somebody who just wasn't an articulate and comprehensible messenger,
not just on behalf of his own presidency, but on
behalf of like progressivism democracy, right. And I am very
angry about that, And I'm a little bit mad at
(06:17):
myself for not being more honest about how I felt
or not seeing it as plainly because I think we're
obviously paying dearly for it.
Speaker 1 (06:24):
I guess what I'm more concerned about.
Speaker 4 (06:25):
Is less like, am I seeing Joe Biden enough? Maybe
he's right that people don't want to hear from him.
It's more like, do I feel confident right now that
Joe Biden behind the scenes is thinking of every single
way he can try to future proof the White House?
That he's thinking through all the different levers of powers
that kind of creative ways in which he can do
everything to protect everyone from like undocumented DOCTA recipients to
(06:47):
trans people to the benefits of the inflation reduction. I
think there are very smart people thinking about that, and
I hope they succeed. And it sounds like from that
memo the White House but out that they are thinking
about the best ways to do that. But do I
think Joe Biden himself is like a command being thinking
about this, like right now, don't I just honestly don't.
Speaker 3 (07:05):
Maybe he is.
Speaker 1 (07:06):
You can't tell, we can't tell.
Speaker 2 (07:07):
Yeah, So we'll talk about the future proof in the
next segment, because that's also kind of a big deal
that all these people are saying, like, hey, Joe Biden
has to be doing stuff to stop Donald Trump, who
just got elected by the American people, from implementing the
agenda that the American people elected him to implement. We'll
get into that in a second. But the admission, the
admission that perhaps maybe we didn't see Biden for who
(07:33):
he was. Eric Erickson points out today on his show
or yesterday on his show that the fundraiser in California
where Joe Biden had to be led away off stage
with a you know, Obama holding onto his back, The
one where George Clooney eventually had to say that Biden
had to go because of what he saw that night.
Erickson points out that these guys, these Pod Saves America
(07:56):
guys defended Joe Biden at the time they covered him,
and now they're mad about it.
Speaker 1 (08:02):
Well, the thing is, it wasn't a secret, right, We
could all see it. This is what made it. I
think it compounded their problem because people continued to not
believe the Democratic Party because Democratic Party was telling them
something that was very obviously untrue on its face. In
February of twenty twenty four, there was a poll with
like eighty six percent of Americans think that Biden is
(08:25):
too old to be serving another four years as president.
So in February twenty twenty four, eighty six percent of
the American people could see this. And you're telling me
that Pods of America guys who have interaction with people
close to the president couldn't see it. Number one, Yeah,
we shouldn't be listening to you for advice, right. Number two,
By the way, this isn't even uh, the oldest poll
(08:49):
that shows this, There was plenty before that too.
Speaker 2 (08:51):
I think that that's absolutely right. What it is is
either they were blind to it or they're lying. And
either way you have to kind of look at that
and be like, well, why are we.
Speaker 1 (09:03):
Listening to you now?
Speaker 2 (09:05):
And again, you know, they're Obama kind of staffers who
now have a podcast. They're clearly on the left there,
but they're very popular on the left and they're very
listened to, and they're very respected, and I think that
that's kind of funny that they lie to their audience
and they lied to their own side, and that they
continue to either lie or you know, not admit that
(09:28):
they didn't see something I other than the small admission
that they made here.
Speaker 1 (09:33):
Well, and the crazy thing is, I think they're like
better than a lot of the party leadership and talking
about these things. They've been more willing to say it
than others, which tells you how far behind the others are. Again,
at least six months or was it four months between
that poll and the debate that we all saw, And
there are polls from Fallow twenty twenty three as well,
(09:54):
when Dean Phillips they represented from Minnesota, was like, hey, guys,
we should probably run someone against him because he is
very old, and everyone was like nah. Right. Meanwhile, the
New York Times, way back when when conservatives were pointing
out that the president was wandering all over and people
were having to guide him by the hand, such and such,
(10:15):
the New York Times said, no, there these are cheap fikes.
There's a manipulated video, cheap fix.
Speaker 2 (10:21):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (10:21):
But now it's like, yeah, I guess that was real. Oops.
Speaker 2 (10:25):
Right, The headline at the New York Times is a
weary Biden heads for the exit. It's just amazing, you know.
Actually the subhead is even better. Still stinging from the election,
President Biden is pushing for his final priorities, but has
absent in himself from the national conversation about Donald Trump,
after warning repeatedly that he was a threat to American democracy.
(10:47):
I think what the New York Times doesn't get was
I didn't lied about that. He doesn't really think Donald
Trump would brought to democracy. Obviously.
Speaker 1 (10:53):
That's it.
Speaker 2 (10:54):
It's not that he is too tired to take on
Donald Trump. It's that he really doesn't think it's going
to be the problem democracy is going to survive the
Trump presidency.
Speaker 1 (11:04):
And is also looking out for number one right now,
which is what here's always done. And this is yet
another thing they fooled themselves into thinking, is that Biden
is some sort of selfless country first leader when he
never exhibited those traits, and then they're surprised when they
do unceremoniously push him aside because he's not a selfless
(11:26):
country first guy who was gonna step down. Yeah, there's
surprise that he's like, well, I guess I'll do do
us best for me now, right, What a surprise.
Speaker 2 (11:36):
We are shocked over here. We'll be right back on normally.
So to get into that second topic of them openly
saying that Biden should be trying to stop the Trump agenda.
That doesn't seem like people who love democracy, Mary Catherine.
That does not seem democratic to me at all. Donald
(11:57):
Trump was elected. He was elected you know, pretty overwhelmingly.
He won every single swing state. I don't even like
to talk about the popular vote because we don't count
you know, pop a vote is irrelevant and irrelevant metric
that we insist on counting for some reason. But he
won decisively. And the idea that these pods save America.
Guys and others are trying to say Biden should implement
(12:21):
policies that will make it more difficult for Donald Trump.
Speaker 1 (12:24):
To act his policies. That's a problem, Carol. What you
don't understand is that democracy, by definition is what democratic
leadership likes. And if you democratically do things that democratic
leadership does not like, that is not democracy and it
must be undermined. So, whether it's so much, whether it's
(12:45):
the intelligence community or media or a combination of the two,
they're going to come for you because the democracy did
a bad thing. Yeah, So when the democracy does the
bad things, you got to do worse things to fix
the democracy.
Speaker 2 (13:00):
You got to punish that democracy. They've been that so yeah,
they actually they call it our democracy, right, they literally
mean only their type of democracy.
Speaker 1 (13:09):
Yes, we're in the punished democracy segment of this program
right now.
Speaker 2 (13:14):
Yeah. So here's Julie Rojinski Raginsky on CNN talking about
just this very thing.
Speaker 5 (13:22):
The people around him should be thinking about these things.
You need to proof democracy, proof, for lack of a
better world word, this coming administration. I mean, Donald Trump
stands for everything that Joe Biden does not stand for.
And if Democrats are true to their values. They will
do everything they can with the power they have right now,
(13:43):
which is limited to prevent Donald Trump from doing the
things that he's already nowtive.
Speaker 1 (13:48):
For administrative sabotage. I mean, is that I'm not at
all what I'm arguing.
Speaker 5 (13:52):
You're saying they should proof that you should somehow prove
the government is able to be I.
Speaker 2 (13:56):
Have no, Yeah, that's exactly what she was saying.
Speaker 1 (13:59):
Scott.
Speaker 2 (14:00):
You know our national heroes, Scott Jennings so great, takes
on five people every night on Sandend. But yeah, here
he's talking about how she's openly saying that they need
to kind of create safeguards around things that matter to
them so that Donald Trump can't affect the change. But
again he was elected to effect.
Speaker 1 (14:22):
And the pod Save bros. Also say like, hey, let's
send out as much money as possible, as fast as
possible under who knows what rules, with no safeguards for fraud.
I mean, that's never They never worry about that, Probably
to go to as many nonprofit buddy groups of theirs
as possible. It seems to me there's some kind of
(14:42):
memo that's gone out about messaging on this because both
of these guys refer to this as proving, but a
couple of days ago people were referring to it as
Trump proofing, and somebody told them that that wasn't smart.
I think got that right. So is that proving? They're
like our democracy, So now they're like, oh, let's make
(15:03):
it sound much more elevated than just sabotaging the guy
who was just elected who we don't like. So they're
going with a different kind of proofing. I long for
the days like two thousand, when all the sabotage you
got for George W. Bush was people removing the w's
from the keyboards. I remember, it's like trashy, But I
would take trashy and low level pranking sure over this
(15:26):
kind of thing anyway.
Speaker 2 (15:27):
It's also just crazy that they're talking about it so openly.
I think that that's like a sign that they still
don't understand what happened to them. The American people did
not want what you were selling. They did not want
your program at all. So you're literally saying to the
American people, we know better than you, me a talking
head on CNN or me. You know a guy who
(15:49):
sits on a microphone knows better than what the majority
of the country wanted for itself, and it's just it's
just very offensive.
Speaker 1 (15:57):
Well, and part of the reason they rejected it is
the lying to their faces plus the condescension. So it's
like this is a perfect combination, yep, of all of
those things that people rejected, because it's like, well, you
can't lecture me about norms when you're the one who
wants to tear them down to Trump proof this incoming administration.
(16:20):
And I just think they're exemplifying what handed them the
l to begin with.
Speaker 2 (16:25):
Right and grasping that l real tightly and refusing to
let it go.
Speaker 1 (16:29):
It's going to be a rough road, I think. By
the way, I was interested to see that Jerry Connolly,
who is an aged and somewhat infirm leader of the Democrats,
is beat AOC, an up and coming useful leader in
a leadership fight for the Oversight Committee in Congress, which
is like a bunch of boring words, but the point
(16:49):
being that once again, like seniority one, instead of handing
over the reins to someone who might have a little
bit better handle on how to message in a new
and actually does have a little bit more populist vibe
than a lot of the Democratic establishment. So I'm not
sure if the road is going to be smooth. That
being said, I'm not sure IOFC is widely popular either.
(17:10):
I'm just saying right right, no.
Speaker 2 (17:12):
But the Democrats, I mean, they are also still holding
on to the whole smoke filled rooms. That's how people
make decisions time period, Like Nancy. As long as Nancy
Pelosi is anywhere near Congress, this is going to continue
to operate this way. She doesn't need to be in charge,
she just needs to be there in order for what
(17:34):
she wants to happen to happen. And I think that
AOC really didn't stand a chance in a place where
Nancy Pelosi exists.
Speaker 1 (17:43):
By the way, I should say for the record, I
do think that conservatives underestimate AOC at their peril because
I think she's smarter and more interesting then she gets
credit for. So we will see what happens to her
as this party moves forward.
Speaker 2 (17:57):
We're going to take a short break and come right
back with normally.
Speaker 1 (18:03):
I'm glad you mentioned smoke filled rooms because a lot
of people are mad once again, Carol at things happening
on the Hill. Okay, so there has to be a
continuing resolution, which is the giant stupid bill that Congress
must pass to hold spending levels where they are so
that things don't not get paid for. And this happens
(18:26):
because Congress doesn't do its job and pass regular budget
and funding bills, and so they have to do this
big old one at the end of the year. This
one would keep the government running until March of next year,
and the deadline was coming up. But of course, as usual,
Congress doesn't care that the deadline's coming up, and so
now they're working on it furiously. Right before they had
favor relatable. Now this means, yeah, I understand, I get it.
(18:50):
That's actually a very normally vibe. But what happens is,
especially in a tight house where you don't have very
many votes, is that Democrats are going to have to
get a bunch of stuff, and you're gonna have to
hand out a bunch of treats to get this paid
for and get this to pass. One of the things
that apparently is in this one is a or proposed
to be in this one. We'll see if it actually
(19:12):
ends up in there is a pay raise for Congress.
Speaker 2 (19:17):
Yeah, I feel like they're you know, not reading the room.
People are not interested in giving Congress a pay raise
just now.
Speaker 1 (19:26):
No, and it seems to be a rather large one. Again,
this is all in motion, so don't quote me on
any individual stat because these negotiations change quickly. But they
currently receive one hundred and seventy four thousand, as well
as reimbursements for meals of lodging. If in what they
currently have in this CR, their salary would go to
two hundred and forty three thousand, which jump my goodness. Yeah, now,
(19:51):
I think there are arguments for like, hey, it's been
ten years since there's been a cost of living adjustment. However,
as you note about the room, the room is not
friendly to this idea. The room is quite populist right
now in this country, and the idea that a bunch
of mostly millionaires who are in Congress should get a
large percentage increase in their salary while people are suffering
(20:14):
is not looked upon in a friendly way. No, it's not.
And you know it's interesting.
Speaker 2 (20:20):
When AOC first got to Congress, she actually was like,
this is all we're getting paid.
Speaker 1 (20:25):
I remember that.
Speaker 2 (20:26):
She was not told about congressional salaries and look, there
is an argument to be made because I think a
lot of people don't get into public service because some
of the you know, salaries that they make are just
not that high. You have to want to be there
and all of that. Plus once you're done there, you
get to go work in lots of different devices thing
(20:49):
where you make a bunch of money. Not to mention,
allegedly a lot of these people are making a ton
of money in the stock market, where they're just amazing here,
just not alusition, so good at it. They can really
go to any financial firm as long as they remain congresspeople. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (21:07):
Well. The discussion of this pay raise led to an
interesting conversation between CNN's Mono Raju and Senator Dick Durbin
of Illinois.
Speaker 6 (21:18):
Oh that's news to me, that's good news. You know
what has it been ten years or fourteen years and
no cola, no change at all? And I think it's
about time something sound here's a piece of part kidding
give yourselfing there is. How would I not know about
a lot of as But.
Speaker 1 (21:33):
I mean, I mean, people look at the performance of Congress,
say why should we give them more money?
Speaker 6 (21:37):
What about the media think about that.
Speaker 1 (21:39):
Fir At second, I were not paid by public money.
Speaker 6 (21:41):
I know you're not, but I mean half of your
listeners are not there anymore. You're still getting the same
baycheck what's going on?
Speaker 2 (21:47):
It was so good. Who knew Dick Urban had that
in him.
Speaker 1 (21:50):
Dick Turbin goes full Trump, irritating people. BANDU right, it's great.
Speaker 2 (21:56):
It's so good because you know he meant it.
Speaker 1 (21:58):
He meant it.
Speaker 2 (21:59):
He have to think about that. It came off his
tongue like he had it ready to go, and I
was impressed.
Speaker 1 (22:06):
Durbin's like, you think I'm trash. We're both trash. We're
in the trash together, and we should all get paid
a bunch of money being crashed. That is that's the
message that unites the American people. I think, I agree,
I agree, And you know he's read how.
Speaker 2 (22:20):
Are these media outlets surviving with half of their audience
gone and they're lecturing other people on like their you know,
support level. It's crazy.
Speaker 1 (22:31):
By the way, you can tell Durbin's been in Congress
for so long and not in any danger because he's like, uh,
that sounds awesome, gave me more money. Why would anyone
object to that that's great.
Speaker 2 (22:41):
Yeah, yeah, it's hard to lose Illinois, you know.
Speaker 1 (22:44):
Oh my goodness. We're led by the very best, we.
Speaker 2 (22:47):
Really are, and maybe we should pay them more so
we get some slightly better people.
Speaker 1 (22:51):
And well that's the question, right, I feel like we're
being hit hostage. But also could we get better people?
Speaker 2 (22:56):
I don't know, Yeah, yeah, maybe we could. That would
be really really good. So we've mentioned this on X
but we are going to be having and ask us
anything episode, possibly more than one. We've got like thirty
questions so far. People can email us at normallythepod at
gmail dot com, or tweet at us, or we posted
(23:17):
a form where you could submit your questions anonymously if
you're into that sort of thing, So get your questions in.
We are going to answer them. It's going to be.
Speaker 1 (23:25):
Amazing and maybe my voice will be better, we'll see.
Speaker 2 (23:28):
Yeah, we're going to root for that.
Speaker 1 (23:29):
We're root from Mary.
Speaker 2 (23:30):
Catherine to feel better by then. Thanks for joining us
on normally normally airs Tuesdays and Thursdays, and you can
subscribe anywhere you get your podcasts. Thanks for listening, and
when things get weird, act normally
Hello, guys, welcome back to normally. The show with normal
is takes too when the news gets weird. I am
Mary Katherine Ham.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
And I am Carol Marcowitz him Mary Catherine, how are
you you know?
Speaker 1 (00:14):
I'm all right. I'm trying to recover before Christmas. I've
got time. I got a little bit still.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
It sounds very sexy, So the audience is getting an
additional treat on this lovely Thursday.
Speaker 1 (00:25):
That's what I'm going for. If only it were painless,
I'd be for it permanently. But here we are.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
Well, we hope you feel better soon, even if you
know that means we lose the Kathleen Turner thing.
Speaker 1 (00:39):
So let's get to the news, shall we, Carol it.
I was sort of surprised by this one every year PolitiFact,
which is an alleged fact checking organization which is very
left leaning and very obviously so in the targets it
chooses to fact check and the way that it fact
(01:01):
checks things. It announced a lie of the year, as
it always does, and wouldn't you know it, it's not
like the president is incapacitated and we lied to you
about it and he remains incapacitated and can't do his job.
It's not that one. The one that it is is
(01:21):
the one where Donald Trump said that people were eating
dogs and cats eating the Dartenfield, Ohio. That's the lie
of the year. Everyone. He amplified, they say before sixty
seven million television viewers. And his debate against Democratic presidential
nominee Vice President Kamala Harris, who was i'll put in
(01:43):
parentheses covering up the fact that the current president was incapacitated.
Trump took his anti migrant, the US borders out of
control campaign agenda to a new level.
Speaker 2 (01:54):
Yeah, that level is to the presidency. He took that
level to the presidency. Friends, what's so interesting about that?
And we've mentioned this on the show before, but this
kind of stuff only hurts Democrats. They think that they're helping,
but they're actually hurting. So this ongoing lie that Joe
Biden was just fine and that they thought they were
(02:16):
doing a good thing for Joe Biden and for Democrats.
They thought covering up this very obvious thing that was
happening was going to be a positive, and it ended
up being a giant negative. And I think some people
are facing that reality now and other people clearly are not,
but it's just it's backfiring on them, and yet they
(02:37):
can't stop doing it.
Speaker 1 (02:39):
Well. And the other side of the coin too, is
that Trump, although he should be more careful about the
specific anecdotes he tells, he was speaking to real problems
that real people have in communities that have been overrun
by undocumented immigrants, and Democrats couldn't allow themselves to speak
to those issues for fear of being politifacted Lie of
(03:02):
the Year yet fodder, Right, it's because you can't tell
people anything along these lines, including what Jade Vance brought up,
the actual overtaking of apartment complexes in a rwer Colorado,
which continues, by the way, there was a kidnapping this
week there by a Venezuelan gang. You're sort of like
just not allowed to make reference to those things, right,
(03:22):
and that we.
Speaker 2 (03:23):
Tend to help Democrats either, Yeah, well, that's that's really it.
You have to keep pretending that it's not happening because
you don't have kind of the right messaging on it.
What are you going to do say it is happening,
but we have no interest in stopping the flow at
the border. Kind of can't go both ways, and so
they keep running into this problem, right, They keep running
into this issue where their ideas are deeply unpopular. So
(03:47):
what they do is they point to Republicans and say, yeah,
our ideas are unpopular, but their.
Speaker 1 (03:52):
Ideas are racist.
Speaker 2 (03:53):
And it's like nobody's falling for that anymore. Nobody cares,
and it's just it's not a thing anymore.
Speaker 1 (03:58):
Having watched Democrats are argue amongst themselves and cancel all
the rest of us for so many years other it's
as you know, as a right leaning person, it's so
fun to like, I come pre canceled, so I don't
worry as much about what I say. But watching them
do that, I do think they have lost the plot
when it comes to how to discuss things, because the
(04:20):
very successful tactic was just bully people until they shut up.
But they found that in twenty sixteen that forcing people
to shut up is not the same as convincing them
about your bulliefs, right, And so they've found out yet
again in the same jarring way when the American people
like Donald Trump, that they hadn't convinced people. But I'm
(04:43):
not sure they know how to do that.
Speaker 2 (04:45):
Yeah, I think they're going through a series now where
They're angry about what happened with Joe Biden and the
whole lie that he was fine, but they kind of
don't have anybody to blame.
Speaker 1 (04:56):
Let's roll the clip from Pod Saves America.
Speaker 3 (04:59):
There was a couple of White officials that went on
background to political for the story, and some Biden aids
acknowledged the president's absent from the broader discussions about how
to address Trump's coming presidency in the future of the party.
They say that they say it's rooted in two factors.
One Biden's own recognition that few are eager to hear
from him, and his own lingering personal belief that he
(05:19):
doesn't owe much more to a party that unceremoniously pushed
him aside. And then another White House official former White
House official said he's been so cavalier and selfish about
how he approaches the final weeks of the job, which
was aliging for a former White House official. I mean, like,
I get the recognition that maybe people aren't willing to
hear from him. Is understandable that he might think that
(05:39):
right the party thing I hope is not true, because
I don't know what do you guys think he could.
Speaker 1 (05:44):
Be doing quiet quitting.
Speaker 4 (05:46):
Yeah, I think that's what we're getting, or.
Speaker 3 (05:48):
Yeah, that's what that seems to me what he is doing.
Speaker 1 (05:50):
Yeah, oh instead, yes, got it.
Speaker 3 (05:52):
You know, but instead of just complaining that he's not
out there, I'm wondering what we think, right.
Speaker 4 (05:56):
I'm trying to like separate my like frustration with base
lead Joe Biden in his final year and culminating that
debate and hanging on that like how much we paid
for having somebody who just wasn't an articulate and comprehensible messenger,
not just on behalf of his own presidency, but on
behalf of like progressivism democracy, right. And I am very
angry about that, And I'm a little bit mad at
(06:17):
myself for not being more honest about how I felt
or not seeing it as plainly because I think we're
obviously paying dearly for it.
Speaker 1 (06:24):
I guess what I'm more concerned about.
Speaker 4 (06:25):
Is less like, am I seeing Joe Biden enough? Maybe
he's right that people don't want to hear from him.
It's more like, do I feel confident right now that
Joe Biden behind the scenes is thinking of every single
way he can try to future proof the White House?
That he's thinking through all the different levers of powers
that kind of creative ways in which he can do
everything to protect everyone from like undocumented DOCTA recipients to
(06:47):
trans people to the benefits of the inflation reduction. I
think there are very smart people thinking about that, and
I hope they succeed. And it sounds like from that
memo the White House but out that they are thinking
about the best ways to do that. But do I
think Joe Biden himself is like a command being thinking
about this, like right now, don't I just honestly don't.
Speaker 3 (07:05):
Maybe he is.
Speaker 1 (07:06):
You can't tell, we can't tell.
Speaker 2 (07:07):
Yeah, So we'll talk about the future proof in the
next segment, because that's also kind of a big deal
that all these people are saying, like, hey, Joe Biden
has to be doing stuff to stop Donald Trump, who
just got elected by the American people, from implementing the
agenda that the American people elected him to implement. We'll
get into that in a second. But the admission, the
admission that perhaps maybe we didn't see Biden for who
(07:33):
he was. Eric Erickson points out today on his show
or yesterday on his show that the fundraiser in California
where Joe Biden had to be led away off stage
with a you know, Obama holding onto his back, The
one where George Clooney eventually had to say that Biden
had to go because of what he saw that night.
Erickson points out that these guys, these Pod Saves America
(07:56):
guys defended Joe Biden at the time they covered him,
and now they're mad about it.
Speaker 1 (08:02):
Well, the thing is, it wasn't a secret, right, We
could all see it. This is what made it. I
think it compounded their problem because people continued to not
believe the Democratic Party because Democratic Party was telling them
something that was very obviously untrue on its face. In
February of twenty twenty four, there was a poll with
like eighty six percent of Americans think that Biden is
(08:25):
too old to be serving another four years as president.
So in February twenty twenty four, eighty six percent of
the American people could see this. And you're telling me
that Pods of America guys who have interaction with people
close to the president couldn't see it. Number one, Yeah,
we shouldn't be listening to you for advice, right. Number two,
By the way, this isn't even uh, the oldest poll
(08:49):
that shows this, There was plenty before that too.
Speaker 2 (08:51):
I think that that's absolutely right. What it is is
either they were blind to it or they're lying. And
either way you have to kind of look at that
and be like, well, why are we.
Speaker 1 (09:03):
Listening to you now?
Speaker 2 (09:05):
And again, you know, they're Obama kind of staffers who
now have a podcast. They're clearly on the left there,
but they're very popular on the left and they're very
listened to, and they're very respected, and I think that
that's kind of funny that they lie to their audience
and they lied to their own side, and that they
continue to either lie or you know, not admit that
(09:28):
they didn't see something I other than the small admission
that they made here.
Speaker 1 (09:33):
Well, and the crazy thing is, I think they're like
better than a lot of the party leadership and talking
about these things. They've been more willing to say it
than others, which tells you how far behind the others are. Again,
at least six months or was it four months between
that poll and the debate that we all saw, And
there are polls from Fallow twenty twenty three as well,
(09:54):
when Dean Phillips they represented from Minnesota, was like, hey, guys,
we should probably run someone against him because he is
very old, and everyone was like nah. Right. Meanwhile, the
New York Times, way back when when conservatives were pointing
out that the president was wandering all over and people
were having to guide him by the hand, such and such,
(10:15):
the New York Times said, no, there these are cheap fikes.
There's a manipulated video, cheap fix.
Speaker 2 (10:21):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (10:21):
But now it's like, yeah, I guess that was real. Oops.
Speaker 2 (10:25):
Right, The headline at the New York Times is a
weary Biden heads for the exit. It's just amazing, you know.
Actually the subhead is even better. Still stinging from the election,
President Biden is pushing for his final priorities, but has
absent in himself from the national conversation about Donald Trump,
after warning repeatedly that he was a threat to American democracy.
(10:47):
I think what the New York Times doesn't get was
I didn't lied about that. He doesn't really think Donald
Trump would brought to democracy. Obviously.
Speaker 1 (10:53):
That's it.
Speaker 2 (10:54):
It's not that he is too tired to take on
Donald Trump. It's that he really doesn't think it's going
to be the problem democracy is going to survive the
Trump presidency.
Speaker 1 (11:04):
And is also looking out for number one right now,
which is what here's always done. And this is yet
another thing they fooled themselves into thinking, is that Biden
is some sort of selfless country first leader when he
never exhibited those traits, and then they're surprised when they
do unceremoniously push him aside because he's not a selfless
(11:26):
country first guy who was gonna step down. Yeah, there's
surprise that he's like, well, I guess I'll do do
us best for me now, right, What a surprise.
Speaker 2 (11:36):
We are shocked over here. We'll be right back on normally.
So to get into that second topic of them openly
saying that Biden should be trying to stop the Trump agenda.
That doesn't seem like people who love democracy, Mary Catherine.
That does not seem democratic to me at all. Donald
(11:57):
Trump was elected. He was elected you know, pretty overwhelmingly.
He won every single swing state. I don't even like
to talk about the popular vote because we don't count
you know, pop a vote is irrelevant and irrelevant metric
that we insist on counting for some reason. But he
won decisively. And the idea that these pods save America.
Guys and others are trying to say Biden should implement
(12:21):
policies that will make it more difficult for Donald Trump.
Speaker 1 (12:24):
To act his policies. That's a problem, Carol. What you
don't understand is that democracy, by definition is what democratic
leadership likes. And if you democratically do things that democratic
leadership does not like, that is not democracy and it
must be undermined. So, whether it's so much, whether it's
(12:45):
the intelligence community or media or a combination of the two,
they're going to come for you because the democracy did
a bad thing. Yeah, So when the democracy does the
bad things, you got to do worse things to fix
the democracy.
Speaker 2 (13:00):
You got to punish that democracy. They've been that so yeah,
they actually they call it our democracy, right, they literally
mean only their type of democracy.
Speaker 1 (13:09):
Yes, we're in the punished democracy segment of this program
right now.
Speaker 2 (13:14):
Yeah. So here's Julie Rojinski Raginsky on CNN talking about
just this very thing.
Speaker 5 (13:22):
The people around him should be thinking about these things.
You need to proof democracy, proof, for lack of a
better world word, this coming administration. I mean, Donald Trump
stands for everything that Joe Biden does not stand for.
And if Democrats are true to their values. They will
do everything they can with the power they have right now,
(13:43):
which is limited to prevent Donald Trump from doing the
things that he's already nowtive.
Speaker 1 (13:48):
For administrative sabotage. I mean, is that I'm not at
all what I'm arguing.
Speaker 5 (13:52):
You're saying they should proof that you should somehow prove
the government is able to be I.
Speaker 2 (13:56):
Have no, Yeah, that's exactly what she was saying.
Speaker 1 (13:59):
Scott.
Speaker 2 (14:00):
You know our national heroes, Scott Jennings so great, takes
on five people every night on Sandend. But yeah, here
he's talking about how she's openly saying that they need
to kind of create safeguards around things that matter to
them so that Donald Trump can't affect the change. But
again he was elected to effect.
Speaker 1 (14:22):
And the pod Save bros. Also say like, hey, let's
send out as much money as possible, as fast as
possible under who knows what rules, with no safeguards for fraud.
I mean, that's never They never worry about that, Probably
to go to as many nonprofit buddy groups of theirs
as possible. It seems to me there's some kind of
(14:42):
memo that's gone out about messaging on this because both
of these guys refer to this as proving, but a
couple of days ago people were referring to it as
Trump proofing, and somebody told them that that wasn't smart.
I think got that right. So is that proving? They're
like our democracy, So now they're like, oh, let's make
(15:03):
it sound much more elevated than just sabotaging the guy
who was just elected who we don't like. So they're
going with a different kind of proofing. I long for
the days like two thousand, when all the sabotage you
got for George W. Bush was people removing the w's
from the keyboards. I remember, it's like trashy, But I
would take trashy and low level pranking sure over this
(15:26):
kind of thing anyway.
Speaker 2 (15:27):
It's also just crazy that they're talking about it so openly.
I think that that's like a sign that they still
don't understand what happened to them. The American people did
not want what you were selling. They did not want
your program at all. So you're literally saying to the
American people, we know better than you, me a talking
head on CNN or me. You know a guy who
(15:49):
sits on a microphone knows better than what the majority
of the country wanted for itself, and it's just it's
just very offensive.
Speaker 1 (15:57):
Well, and part of the reason they rejected it is
the lying to their faces plus the condescension. So it's
like this is a perfect combination, yep, of all of
those things that people rejected, because it's like, well, you
can't lecture me about norms when you're the one who
wants to tear them down to Trump proof this incoming administration.
(16:20):
And I just think they're exemplifying what handed them the
l to begin with.
Speaker 2 (16:25):
Right and grasping that l real tightly and refusing to
let it go.
Speaker 1 (16:29):
It's going to be a rough road, I think. By
the way, I was interested to see that Jerry Connolly,
who is an aged and somewhat infirm leader of the Democrats,
is beat AOC, an up and coming useful leader in
a leadership fight for the Oversight Committee in Congress, which
is like a bunch of boring words, but the point
(16:49):
being that once again, like seniority one, instead of handing
over the reins to someone who might have a little
bit better handle on how to message in a new
and actually does have a little bit more populist vibe
than a lot of the Democratic establishment. So I'm not
sure if the road is going to be smooth. That
being said, I'm not sure IOFC is widely popular either.
(17:10):
I'm just saying right right, no.
Speaker 2 (17:12):
But the Democrats, I mean, they are also still holding
on to the whole smoke filled rooms. That's how people
make decisions time period, Like Nancy. As long as Nancy
Pelosi is anywhere near Congress, this is going to continue
to operate this way. She doesn't need to be in charge,
she just needs to be there in order for what
(17:34):
she wants to happen to happen. And I think that
AOC really didn't stand a chance in a place where
Nancy Pelosi exists.
Speaker 1 (17:43):
By the way, I should say for the record, I
do think that conservatives underestimate AOC at their peril because
I think she's smarter and more interesting then she gets
credit for. So we will see what happens to her
as this party moves forward.
Speaker 2 (17:57):
We're going to take a short break and come right
back with normally.
Speaker 1 (18:03):
I'm glad you mentioned smoke filled rooms because a lot
of people are mad once again, Carol at things happening
on the Hill. Okay, so there has to be a
continuing resolution, which is the giant stupid bill that Congress
must pass to hold spending levels where they are so
that things don't not get paid for. And this happens
(18:26):
because Congress doesn't do its job and pass regular budget
and funding bills, and so they have to do this
big old one at the end of the year. This
one would keep the government running until March of next year,
and the deadline was coming up. But of course, as usual,
Congress doesn't care that the deadline's coming up, and so
now they're working on it furiously. Right before they had
favor relatable. Now this means, yeah, I understand, I get it.
(18:50):
That's actually a very normally vibe. But what happens is,
especially in a tight house where you don't have very
many votes, is that Democrats are going to have to
get a bunch of stuff, and you're gonna have to
hand out a bunch of treats to get this paid
for and get this to pass. One of the things
that apparently is in this one is a or proposed
to be in this one. We'll see if it actually
(19:12):
ends up in there is a pay raise for Congress.
Speaker 2 (19:17):
Yeah, I feel like they're you know, not reading the room.
People are not interested in giving Congress a pay raise
just now.
Speaker 1 (19:26):
No, and it seems to be a rather large one. Again,
this is all in motion, so don't quote me on
any individual stat because these negotiations change quickly. But they
currently receive one hundred and seventy four thousand, as well
as reimbursements for meals of lodging. If in what they
currently have in this CR, their salary would go to
two hundred and forty three thousand, which jump my goodness. Yeah, now,
(19:51):
I think there are arguments for like, hey, it's been
ten years since there's been a cost of living adjustment. However,
as you note about the room, the room is not
friendly to this idea. The room is quite populist right
now in this country, and the idea that a bunch
of mostly millionaires who are in Congress should get a
large percentage increase in their salary while people are suffering
(20:14):
is not looked upon in a friendly way. No, it's not.
And you know it's interesting.
Speaker 2 (20:20):
When AOC first got to Congress, she actually was like,
this is all we're getting paid.
Speaker 1 (20:25):
I remember that.
Speaker 2 (20:26):
She was not told about congressional salaries and look, there
is an argument to be made because I think a
lot of people don't get into public service because some
of the you know, salaries that they make are just
not that high. You have to want to be there
and all of that. Plus once you're done there, you
get to go work in lots of different devices thing
(20:49):
where you make a bunch of money. Not to mention,
allegedly a lot of these people are making a ton
of money in the stock market, where they're just amazing here,
just not alusition, so good at it. They can really
go to any financial firm as long as they remain congresspeople. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (21:07):
Well. The discussion of this pay raise led to an
interesting conversation between CNN's Mono Raju and Senator Dick Durbin
of Illinois.
Speaker 6 (21:18):
Oh that's news to me, that's good news. You know
what has it been ten years or fourteen years and
no cola, no change at all? And I think it's
about time something sound here's a piece of part kidding
give yourselfing there is. How would I not know about
a lot of as But.
Speaker 1 (21:33):
I mean, I mean, people look at the performance of Congress,
say why should we give them more money?
Speaker 6 (21:37):
What about the media think about that.
Speaker 1 (21:39):
Fir At second, I were not paid by public money.
Speaker 6 (21:41):
I know you're not, but I mean half of your
listeners are not there anymore. You're still getting the same
baycheck what's going on?
Speaker 2 (21:47):
It was so good. Who knew Dick Urban had that
in him.
Speaker 1 (21:50):
Dick Turbin goes full Trump, irritating people. BANDU right, it's great.
Speaker 2 (21:56):
It's so good because you know he meant it.
Speaker 1 (21:58):
He meant it.
Speaker 2 (21:59):
He have to think about that. It came off his
tongue like he had it ready to go, and I
was impressed.
Speaker 1 (22:06):
Durbin's like, you think I'm trash. We're both trash. We're
in the trash together, and we should all get paid
a bunch of money being crashed. That is that's the
message that unites the American people. I think, I agree,
I agree, And you know he's read how.
Speaker 2 (22:20):
Are these media outlets surviving with half of their audience
gone and they're lecturing other people on like their you know,
support level. It's crazy.
Speaker 1 (22:31):
By the way, you can tell Durbin's been in Congress
for so long and not in any danger because he's like, uh,
that sounds awesome, gave me more money. Why would anyone
object to that that's great.
Speaker 2 (22:41):
Yeah, yeah, it's hard to lose Illinois, you know.
Speaker 1 (22:44):
Oh my goodness. We're led by the very best, we.
Speaker 2 (22:47):
Really are, and maybe we should pay them more so
we get some slightly better people.
Speaker 1 (22:51):
And well that's the question, right, I feel like we're
being hit hostage. But also could we get better people?
Speaker 2 (22:56):
I don't know, Yeah, yeah, maybe we could. That would
be really really good. So we've mentioned this on X
but we are going to be having and ask us
anything episode, possibly more than one. We've got like thirty
questions so far. People can email us at normallythepod at
gmail dot com, or tweet at us, or we posted
(23:17):
a form where you could submit your questions anonymously if
you're into that sort of thing, So get your questions in.
We are going to answer them. It's going to be.
Speaker 1 (23:25):
Amazing and maybe my voice will be better, we'll see.
Speaker 2 (23:28):
Yeah, we're going to root for that.
Speaker 1 (23:29):
We're root from Mary.
Speaker 2 (23:30):
Catherine to feel better by then. Thanks for joining us
on normally normally airs Tuesdays and Thursdays, and you can
subscribe anywhere you get your podcasts. Thanks for listening, and
when things get weird, act normally
Popular Podcasts
Are You A Charlotte?
In 1997, actress Kristin Davis’ life was forever changed when she took on the role of Charlotte York in Sex and the City. As we watched Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte navigate relationships in NYC, the show helped push once unacceptable conversation topics out of the shadows and altered the narrative around women and sex. We all saw ourselves in them as they searched for fulfillment in life, sex and friendships. Now, Kristin Davis wants to connect with you, the fans, and share untold stories and all the behind the scenes. Together, with Kristin and special guests, what will begin with Sex and the City will evolve into talks about themes that are still so relevant today. "Are you a Charlotte?" is much more than just rewatching this beloved show, it brings the past and the present together as we talk with heart, humor and of course some optimism.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.