May 30, 2023 • 37 mins
McCarthy and Biden come to agreement on debt ceiling, spending increases but at a lower rate. Biden on Democrats unhappy with the deal. Bud Light boycott on full display over Memorial Day weekend. Will women give up Target the way men gave up Bud Light? The View's Sonny Hostin: white women fall in line with husbands to protect the patriarchy.
Follow Clay & Buck on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
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 (00:00):
Welcome to today's edition of the Clay Travis and buck
Sexton Show podcast.
Speaker 2 (00:05):
Welcome in Tuesday edition Clay Travis buck Sexton Show. I
hope all of you had a great long weekend if
you were able to take Monday off. We certainly want
to thank everyone who allows us to have the freedoms
that we hold so dear, and we know that that
comes with a cost too many families across the country.
(00:26):
So we hope as well that you are able to
spend some time honoring the sacrifices of so many that
have come before us as part of your Memorial Day
celebration and festivity. But we are excited to be here
with you after several days being away and we have
(00:48):
not spent Let's start off here, by the way, we're
going to be joined by Tim Scott, Senator from South Carolina,
who has announced that he is running for president. He
will join us at one o'clock Eastern. That is the
top of the next hour, almost exactly one hour from now,
so you can put that on your horizon as we
continue to talk with everyone who is running for president
(01:10):
that will come on the show, both Democrat and republic
and we've talked to RFK Junior. Obviously, Joe Biden is
terrified to come on this program because if he spent
very much time talking with us at all, it would
demonstrate his clear dementia and the fact that he is
unable to do this job. But we will talk to
Tim Scott at one. We've got a lot of different
stories to dive into. Joe Manchin is down twenty two
(01:35):
points to Jim Justice in West Virginia. What does that
mean both for the Senate looking ahead to next year,
but also for potential a potentially a presidential run. Donald
Trump has changed his position on Disney. We will discuss
Sam Ponder at ESPN is a bigot, according to USA
(01:55):
Today for believing that men should not be able to
compete against women. Lulu lamon which I feel like I
mispronounced all the time. But they have fired two employees
for calling the cops. But we begin with a story that, frankly,
we have not spent that much time on.
Speaker 3 (02:13):
Just real quick calling the cops for stealing for people
stole and they called the cops and then they got
fired for calling the cops on the thieves.
Speaker 2 (02:19):
Anyway, Yes, which is emblematic of the world in which
we live right now, so all that to be discussed
as we move throughout the course of today's program. But
we haven't spent very much time talking about the debt
ceiling because we told you that eventually this was going
to get resolved, and it appears that it has gotten
(02:42):
resolved over the weekend. An agreement between Speaker Kevin McCarthy
and President Biden their negotiation teams. Here is cut one
Kevin McCarthy explaining what exactly is going to happen.
Speaker 4 (02:57):
There is so much in this as positive and measure
to all the other debt seelings. When Republicans had the presidency,
the Senate, and the House, did they ever cut spending. No,
they increased it. We were able to do this when
the President said he wasn't even going to talk to us.
This is really a step in the right direction. It
puts as a trajectory that's different. We put a statutory
(03:18):
cap on only spending one percent for the next six years,
so we let government grow but at a slower rate.
Speaker 2 (03:24):
Okay, so Buck, it appears this is going to pass.
There are going to be upset members on the right
who are refusing to vote for this. I think they're
around twenty Republicans so far who appears are going to
be opposed to this. It appears there also will be
some members of the Democrat Party on the left that
(03:47):
are opposed to this agreement as well. What I would
say is fairly significant in general is yes, it slows
the rate of growth, but it effectively takes us to
already five trillion dollars in debt, and at some point,
I think we just have to recognize that our national
(04:09):
debt is never going to get paid off.
Speaker 1 (04:12):
And I mean, am I crazy buck?
Speaker 2 (04:15):
When you look at this like it seems like we've
just decided that the national debt doesn't matter. Both Republicans
and Democrats, I think you frame.
Speaker 1 (04:23):
It this way.
Speaker 3 (04:25):
This is probably the best deal you could get under
the circumstances with a Senate majority in the hands of
Democrats and a White House with a Democrat president. But
that's it's really tough to feel like, oh great, you
know this is this is a moment in time where
(04:45):
you'd have to say to yourself, we are now faced
with both parties effectively spending endlessly running the debt up
to a place where service on the debt is going
to increasingly crowd out spending really a part of this,
and it's not politically, it's not politically advantageous to talk about.
(05:07):
This is that there's an intergenerational theft that's going on,
which is that the benefits that have been promised for
the older generation are way beyond what is paid into them,
which people don't Again, people don't want to hear.
Speaker 1 (05:22):
This is just numbers, it's true.
Speaker 3 (05:24):
And then the debt burden passes on to the younger
generation now, which is why you see a lot of
people complaining, you know, in their twenties, their thirties, into
their forties, I can't afford a house anywhere. I can't
you know, I can't get out of student loan debt.
There are structural things in the economy that we accept
because of politics, that we shouldn't accept as a matter
(05:45):
of what is fair and what is ethical, I think,
and that's why you have both parties spending too much money.
Bottom line, spend too much money. I mean, what do
we run the debt up six trillion under Trump?
Speaker 1 (05:57):
Right? I mean?
Speaker 3 (05:58):
Trump great economy, no question about it. Economy was phenomenal
until the fourth year of COVID, of course, but then
we spend six trillion dollars.
Speaker 1 (06:06):
That's a big.
Speaker 3 (06:07):
Problem, and it was a big problem also politically because
then Biden comes in like a truemaniac and spends an
additional two trillion dollars when we should be absolutely going
in the other direction and not doing it, and then
he wanted to spend five trillion more on top of that.
Which you realize is we are in a competition for
which political party can be a bigger version of Santa
Claus the free stuff for everybody, or the stuff that
(06:30):
you get more than you pay into it. And this
just puts us on a trajectory for eventual real financial
hardship as a country and even possibly ruination. I mean,
you look at the history of fiat currency. You look
at what inflation has done historically in different countries, and
it has caused economic collapse. But you know, I say this,
and everyone I think on the right, well not everybody,
(06:52):
but a lot of people shake their heads and they'll say, yeah,
that's right. We need to do something about the debt.
And I say, all right, so we need to do
some means testing for social security, We need to raise
the retirement How dare you, sir, how dare. It's okay, fine,
this is this is where we are. Everyone wants to
pretend they want to deal with this and it's a
huge problem. And then you talk about the only ways
you could realistically do Clay, we even this notion of
(07:14):
automatic spending.
Speaker 1 (07:15):
Think about this.
Speaker 3 (07:16):
This just means the politicians all get to wash their
hands of it. Oh sorry, that's the automatic spending. Yeah,
that's where seventy percent of the spending comes from. It's
the automatic spending. We are cutting what is it three
the three percent increase or something. I mean, the numbers,
the numbers don't even really matter because the numbers are
so insignificant. We are slightly limiting the increase in the
(07:37):
spending the federal government's going to do, which is already
way beyond our means.
Speaker 1 (07:42):
And we think that's we think that's a victory.
Speaker 3 (07:44):
You know, this is taking an alcoholic and saying you
can't have thirteen shots of tequila, you can only have twelve.
Speaker 2 (07:49):
The reality is when you refuse to look at social
Security or Medicare, and that seems to be the general
consensus of both political parties, then there is no way
to balance the federal budget. And scarily, Buck What is
becoming the case is the debt on the national debt,
(08:10):
in other words, the interest that we have to pay
on our national debt, particularly as we're now talking about
five and five and a quarter percent interest rates. That's
going to start crowding out a lot of the discretionary
spending as well. You basically can't balance the budget by
analyzing discretionary spending. And so people don't want to talk
(08:34):
about it because I think it makes everybody so uncomfortable.
But I do think it's worth mentioning. The Tea Party
started because we hit ten trillion dollars in national debt.
That was in twenty ten. Since twenty ten, we have
added over twenty trillion dollars in national debt. That's the
(08:57):
last thirteen years, So we are adding over a trillion
dollars a year to our national debt. At this point,
it just feels like everyone is pretending that this doesn't
exist and that it's not going to be a major
hindrance on future economic growth. But it feels to me
like both parties are engaging in magical realism here in
(09:20):
pretending that the biggest issue isn't a big issue.
Speaker 3 (09:24):
Look, you've got you've got Trump running ads saying Ronda
Santis wants to cut your Medicare, and you have Rondas
Santas saying I'm just look at the Republican primary. He's like,
I'm not going to touch your medicare because they both
know whoever says they're going to touch medicare is going
to lose. Meanwhile, people sit around saying we're spending too
much money, We're spending too much money something like, and
(09:44):
again we could have there's some great minds on this issue.
I'm trying to remember, oh gosh, well, even like my
friend Ben Dominic is very strong on the healthcare issue.
There are a few other people I can think of,
but one of them is escape being my my mind
right now. But they can break down all the numbers.
(10:04):
Is the point something like a huge percentage, a huge
majority of spending that is even being done for medicare
happens in the last six months of a person's life.
So there and there's very little, uh, you know, oversight quality.
Speaker 1 (10:17):
Of life and that it's actually being gained there, right.
Speaker 3 (10:20):
And how the building is actually being being done. And
ovik Roid, by the way, that was the name I
was trying to remember he was fantastic. He's fantastic on
the healthcare side of things because he's a realist. But
people don't want to hear it because we've we've gotten
into a competition for who can do a better job
of distributing the spoil system. And that's where we are.
(10:40):
There was a moment when the Republican Party seem to
be really at least willing to talk about being opposed
to this. And as you point out, Clay, that was
twenty trillion dollars ago. Yeah, and you have to wonder
as well, if spending doesn't matter, why does inflation, you know,
just stink so much? Well, because spending does matter, If
debt doesn't matter, why not just spend endless amount of money.
(11:01):
This is very straightforward stuff. But we have a political
system now where anybody who talks about being financially responsible
will lose. That's it. And so we can sit around
and i'm people because I'll get emails and I'm sure you.
Speaker 1 (11:13):
Get them too.
Speaker 3 (11:14):
You guys need to talk about the debt ceiling. No,
they're going to raise the debt ceiling. Republicans are going
to do a bare minimum. They're going to take one
nibble on the edge of the giant cookie that is
our federal debt, and they're going to pack themselves in
the back. Meanwhile, Democrats are going to continue to use
it as a spoil system. It doesn't change, and people
could say, well, this doesn't sound particularly useful. I think
(11:36):
the first step is understanding where we are as a country.
We're just going to keep spending until the financial disaster hits.
That's the plan right now, Republican Democrat. No one wants
to stop it. You try to stop it, you lose,
and then you're not in power. And so then what's
the difference do you? How do we change this?
Speaker 2 (11:52):
I mean, I think we should have, unfortunately gone back
in time. I wish we had had most states buck
have balanced budget requirements. In other words, you can't run
trillion dollar deficits if you're the governor of California, or
if you're the governor of Florida or New York or
one of these places. And as soon as we gave
(12:15):
politicians the ability to go into debt, and to be fair,
sometimes going into debt makes sense to beat the Nazis
in World War two. I keep hammering this home because
I think it staggers people. We spent more money on
an inflation adjusted basis on COVID than we did to
win World War Two.
Speaker 3 (12:33):
That's because if we hadn't done it, we wouldn't be
worried about inflation, because we'd all be spending Deutsche marks, right,
I mean, you know we can all understand at some
level or whatever.
Speaker 1 (12:43):
I think it was deutsch marks back in the day. Too.
Speaker 3 (12:45):
This is there are sometimes, obviously where you have to
go into debt to save your nation. We didn't have
to do that for COVID. We spent six trillion dollars
during COVID. People wonder why didn't inflation hit more? Why
didn't inflation hit more than the twenty twenty two elections,
which you know, everybody on the right basically got wrong.
And it's I think in part because a lot of
(13:08):
people looked at it and they said, well, Biden spent
two trillion dollars, the guy before spend six trillion.
Speaker 1 (13:12):
In one year.
Speaker 2 (13:14):
I think also, and this is even more debilitating their buck.
I think a lot of people have just lost faith
in government in general, and so the consequences of actions
aren't as big a part of elections as they should be,
which is one of the reasons why I'm concerned that
Biden's gonna win again in twenty four.
Speaker 1 (13:31):
I'm sorry, I feel a little bit like, did you
ever see the movie Best in Shows for Guests madea.
Speaker 3 (13:37):
Remember remember when he goes to visit I goes to
visit like the boyfriend of his ex boyfriend or whatever
of his wife, and and it turns out that guy
is a hostage negotiator. And he sits there and he's like, so, like,
what's the secret big hostage negotiator to the guy goes, well,
they all jumps. I don't I'm not trying. I'm not
trying to be that guy right now, but I'm just saying,
(13:59):
you know, it's a you know, it's a rough situation.
It's oh, he's a crisis negotiator, not a hastain negotiator,
because they all jump, and I'm like, we're not all
jumping necessarily. We can actually fix something here. But everyone
has to be very honest about the fact that, I mean,
Republicans taking a victory lap on this.
Speaker 1 (14:15):
It's kind of sad.
Speaker 3 (14:16):
I know it's the best possible, but you know, is
your offense celebrating clay when they make a goal? Line stand,
I don't think so well. And here it's a good
sports analogy from you to start the week. Here, here's
the way to think about it. I don't feel like
we're ever.
Speaker 2 (14:31):
Going to stop the national debt from increasing. So the
question becomes, and I hate to say that, but there's
been no suggestion that I've seen in any sort of
political leadership that's going to change. At what point does
this long ticking national debt time bomb explode on all
of us?
Speaker 1 (14:49):
And what does it look like?
Speaker 2 (14:50):
Because there are economic consequences to making poor choices, as
all of you out there know. But unlike the rest
of of the United States, you can't just declare bankruptcy
as a country and wipe out all your debt.
Speaker 3 (15:05):
I had a feeling, by the way, it's reich Reich Marx,
not deutsch Marks back in the not.
Speaker 1 (15:09):
But you know, same idea. Yes we have what I said.
Speaker 2 (15:12):
So we've got a really good start to the week there.
We're all our economy is eventually going to blow up.
It's just a question of when, and we maybe have
forestalled that for a small period of time. Happy Week,
Verizon at and T T Mobile. If you're with them,
you're overpaying. Pure Talk can save your family over nine
hundred dollars a year, and right now you can get
(15:33):
unlimited talk, text, ultra fast five G data for just
twenty bucks a month. What about the coverage, It's phenomenal.
Pure Talk uses the most dependable five G network in
the country. So grab your phones, dial pound two fifty
and say the keyword Clay and Buck to get unlimited talk,
text and plenty of data for just twenty bucks a month.
Pure Talk's amazing US customer service team will make switching easy.
(15:55):
Choose a veteran owned company that cares about keeping jobs
in America and saving you money. Pick up your phone
and dial pound two fifty say Clay and Buck for
unlimited talk and text with plenty of five G data
for just twenty bucks a month. Now pound two five
zero again say Clay and Bucks. Save an additional fifty
percent off your first month thanks.
Speaker 1 (16:17):
To pure Talk making sense in an insane world. Clay
Travis and Buck Sexton, the.
Speaker 3 (16:23):
House Democrats who have reservations about this compromised film talk
to what would you tell them?
Speaker 2 (16:30):
I'm not gonna tell you?
Speaker 1 (16:31):
Why not cook you night? Don't get on and say
tell him what a good deal without How about this
was one hundred percent deal for the Democrats? Did make
it help me get a past? Who's got the better deal?
Speaker 4 (16:41):
Will? Who?
Speaker 1 (16:42):
Did he canna help me get a past?
Speaker 4 (16:44):
Coome on?
Speaker 1 (16:46):
He said.
Speaker 3 (16:46):
So that's Biden getting asked some questions, you know, Biden
telling some reporters to get off his lawn as he's
getting into the helicopter there.
Speaker 1 (16:54):
But notice that it's he's making.
Speaker 3 (16:56):
It sound like clay that somehow this is a hard
sell for some of the Democrats in the House that
they get truly by the numbers, you know, almost everything
that they possibly would want realistically, and that's not enough.
Speaker 1 (17:12):
That's not enough.
Speaker 3 (17:13):
I mean, you have Democrats who are complaining about this
as though this is somehow a stingy a cheap.
Speaker 1 (17:19):
Bill for them.
Speaker 2 (17:21):
Yeah, you know, I also think this the stock market
reaction today, Buck is just indicative of how the stock
market never believed there was ever any danger of there
being a default, because if there had been, the market
would have soared today. Instead, as we're sitting the dows
down a little bit, the S and P five hundred
is effectively unchanged. This for all intentsive purposes, has been
(17:44):
a negligible market story from the get go, because people
assumed this is going to get resolved. Now it has
and basically nothing has changed, and unfortunately, in the grand
scheme of things.
Speaker 3 (17:57):
Come back into some of your calls here in a
second eight under two eight two two.
Speaker 1 (18:01):
Eight eight two.
Speaker 3 (18:03):
Fellow gun owners, you agree with me. It is our
responsibility to keep our firearms training sharp and up to date.
But there's a way to do that now without expensive AMMO.
It's called the Mantis X, a firearms training system that
is a no ammo, all electronic way to improve your
shooting accuracy. It simply attaches to your firearm like a
weapon light. It connects to your smartphone and the Mantis
(18:23):
X app. The mantis X gives you data driven, real
time feedback and your technique through drills and courses. It's
a game changer and you'll notice how quickly you improve
right off the bat. Look, I love my Mantis X
here at home. I'd say it's a must have for
every gun owner. Once you get it set up and
you see how much real time feedback you get with
data about your trigger pull, about your side alignment, about
(18:43):
how well you're going through the basic mechanics of firing
your weapon. You're gonna realize this just makes you a
better shooter all around. Start improving your shooting experience today.
Go to mantisx dot com. You'll see next time you're
at the range after using your mantis X how much
it helps. Go to m A and txmantisx dot com.
Speaker 2 (19:03):
Welcome back in Clay Travis bucksexon Show. Appreciate all of
you hanging out with us.
Speaker 1 (19:08):
Buck.
Speaker 2 (19:10):
One story that is out there that is not going
away bud Light.
Speaker 1 (19:16):
It was a Memorial Day weekend.
Speaker 2 (19:18):
I know a lot of you out there had Memorial
Day cookouts. We certainly did hear in the Travis household
probably consume some alcoholic beverages, Beer prominent among those. Over
the weekend. I keep getting inundated with pictures from you
guys of sporting events, concerts, people refusing to buy bud Light,
(19:43):
and also grocery stores and Buck over the weekend. It
got to the point where in many parts of the country,
and I know a lot of you probably saw this
if you went into your grocery stores to buy things
over the weekend, they were giving away budd Light. I mean,
we know that there are expiration dates on some of
(20:04):
these cans, you could basically get bud Light. A lot
of places were doing fifteen dollars rebates. They were doing
whatever they could to get rid of their product. And
you and I were just talking about this off air.
Not only is this an amazingly successful boycott, the likes
of which, frankly we've never seen, but leave aside the politics,
(20:29):
but can you remember a boycott of a product that
was so significant that thirty percent of its overall product?
Speaker 1 (20:40):
This is the new numbers. The sales are down thirty percent.
Speaker 3 (20:44):
You know, when you think about how boycotts generally work,
they're supposed to show a portion of the consumer base
no longer will buy a product for the following reason. Yeah,
and never before, I think, and this goes to your
what you're bringing up. Has a a brand managed to
(21:07):
offend effectively it's core demographic and a vast majority of
it's demographics. So it's just like the most the most
consistent bud Light drinkers, and most of the bud Light
drinkers overall are people who do not like the transgender
(21:29):
influencer ad that they did.
Speaker 1 (21:30):
So you know, it's.
Speaker 3 (21:34):
It's kind of it's it's hard to see how they
can turn this around. We were just talking about it before.
What's the way, what's the way that you change this uh,
this brand? You know, I mean you think of brand
redos that have happened in the past.
Speaker 1 (21:49):
What was the pizzeria? Was it Papa John's? No, No,
was it? I don't know. I don't know which one
it was. There was a there was a pizza was
a Domino's.
Speaker 2 (21:58):
Dominoes supposedly had the worst pizza. Are you talking about
just rebranded basically?
Speaker 1 (22:04):
Right?
Speaker 2 (22:04):
There was.
Speaker 1 (22:05):
There was a whole campaign. I remember the campaign.
Speaker 3 (22:07):
I'm trying to remember which pizza Rea it was where
they they ran and they're like, look, we got lazy
and our pizza sucks.
Speaker 1 (22:12):
That was Dominoes. I was domino yeaheah, yeah.
Speaker 3 (22:16):
Right, but that was an interesting They're like, look, we
understand we started selling you crap product. So we've gotten
better ingredients, We've got a new formulation. We're now giving
you pizza worthy of the name. Give it a shot.
I think that worked, if I recall, it was certainly
an interesting approach to take, but they were willing to
say what we were doing before was not up to
(22:38):
our standards. We were selling you trash and calling it pizza.
They didn't call it, they didn't put it that way,
but that's basically what they were saying.
Speaker 2 (22:44):
Yeah, Dixie chicks out there is a good example. Like historically,
I think of someone who turned off their core demo
and never really recovered. But if I were running bud
Light at this point, I would be looking at numbers
and I would be concerned about this buck. A boycott
is one thing because over time people can forget about
(23:07):
a boycott. What has happened now with bud Light is basically,
if you drink a bud Light, you are a pussy
willow Right, you gotta be careful that, like you are
being insulted. Oh you're the kind of guy who drinks
a bud Light. Now you don't even want to be
seen holding one buck? Yes, I mean well, it's turned
(23:28):
into a national national joke. I just checked it because
I was curious because I had some memory of the Dominoes.
The first thing that comes up when you google this
online is the store behind Dominoes. We're sorry for sucking campaign. Yeah,
but then all the articles assessing it are miracle turnaround
revitalized its failing brand. You know it worked, but this
(23:50):
is why I'm bringing it up. Honesty with your consumer
can be a magnificent thing, can have a real cleansing effect,
can really you know, can sort of cast out some
of the cobbs, can make things better. Bud Light has
not had that with its audience. I think the best
thing they could do would be to say, guys, we're
(24:12):
never going to do any anything woke or political like
that again. We're sorry we did it.
Speaker 3 (24:18):
And you know we all agree, and you know, make
a joke of it, lean into it a little bit,
and make it okay again. If they could get bud
Light drinkers to laugh with the brand instead of at
the brand, that would I think that's the only way
you could turn this thing around. I talked about you
were there when I did the experiment, about the fact
that guys don't even want to be seen as having
(24:38):
a bud Light.
Speaker 2 (24:39):
I'll give you another story. I was at a Memorial
Day cookout. Only beer that wasn't there was bud Light.
One of my neighbors was telling a story about another neighbor.
We have the recycling bins. Don't get me started, Buck,
You and I are on the same opinion on recycling,
total waste, total time everybody. I've been saying, my wife
(25:00):
is on me all the time about the fact that
I won't distinguish between what I put in the recycle whatever.
So another neighbor was telling a story he sometimes will
put some of his stuff in the recycling bin. And
right after the bud light story, one of my neighbors
was not really committed to light beer. And I think
this is a big part of this, right, most people
out there are not hardcore bud light, Core's light or
(25:24):
Miller light. In other words, if Guinness had offended people,
let's pretend Guinness was really popular. The difference between a
Guinness and a bud light is pretty substantial. Everybody can
tell the difference. It even looks different in a glass.
Speaker 3 (25:36):
This the beer drinkers in our audience all the time. Yeah,
is no one could tell the difference.
Speaker 2 (25:42):
But the difference between a bud light, Miller light, and
a Cores light is not so substantial that your day
or your evening is ruined if you have a Miller
light instead of a bud light. And one of my
neighbors was so upset about the bud light thing that
he took all of his bud lights, poured him out
and just put it in the recycle. Ben He said,
(26:02):
like there was like fifteen or sixteen of them, and
the other neighbor went up to him and said, hey,
you got a bud light, And immediately this neighbor just
went off about how furious he was about the bud
light situation, not only Buck And this is what a
lot of people miss. It wasn't just the Dylan mulvany.
It was the double barrel of the Dylan mulvainy coupled
(26:25):
with the new head of marketing who was insulting the
people who drank bud light. Already they have out of
touch humor, they're too freddy. Well, so you insulted the
base of your audience. And this is significant because I
think it ties in with target men won't stand for this.
Transgender bs men just say screw it. We actually feel
(26:48):
bad for women who are pretending to be men. We're like, yeah,
you're not going to be as big and strong and
fast as an average man. You're kind of if you're
a woman pretending to be a man, let's be honest,
you're probably a puny man. And we just kind of
feel sorry for you. Whereas women are having men take
over there advertising, they're taking over what it means to
(27:12):
be a woman. Hell there being named women of the year, Buck,
there's no man of the year that used to be
a chick, and so men just stop buying it.
Speaker 1 (27:20):
And the only way to your point that I think.
Speaker 2 (27:23):
That bud Light can come back is to actually say
we apologize, we screwed up, and just own it and
directly address it, which they haven't been willing to do
so far because I think they're afraid of being called
anti LGBTQ IA, whatever the heck it is.
Speaker 3 (27:40):
Yeah, I also think that for a lot of conservatives
there's a gut check moment to your point about the
differences in the beer. And while I like to make
fun of you antagonizing the true beer connoisseurs, the the
beer officionado is being able.
Speaker 2 (27:56):
To you're a true beer connoisseur er, you're not drinking
bud Light in the first place.
Speaker 1 (28:00):
Fair PoID, I guess.
Speaker 3 (28:02):
But there's there's drinking a beer brand that you're used to,
and then there's where do you go to buy most
of the stuff for your household in a given week.
I think for a lot of the people listening, maybe
it's Walmart, but maybe it's Target, right, women, I mean
it's Target. It's Target. My wife loves Target. Not gonna lie,
she loves Target. She goes Target all the time, likes
(28:24):
to get stuff at Target. And I told her recently,
I said, honey, we got to stop doing.
Speaker 1 (28:28):
Well now you go.
Speaker 3 (28:29):
Now you're talking about driving another say, she's laid off
the Target. Recently, She's laid off the Target. Of course,
now I'm just buying more things online. But see, this
is the problem. You need to have the infrastructure of
choice in place. Because if you're gonna stop buying from Target,
but then all of a sudden you're just getting it
from Amazon, have you really made a change in terms
(28:49):
of what you're supporting the politics are supporting. It can
become complicated. So so a beer brand. I'm just saying
this is for me, This is like the table stakes
of the right. Is willing to do something thing? Are
we willing to do more about Target? Are we willing
Disney Plus? To be fair, I think a lot of
people I was now now granted I was, I was,
you know, mooching off of somebody else in my family's
(29:12):
Disney Plus. But we made a decision to cancel Disney
Plus when they fired Gina Carano. But I wonder if
people are going to stop shopping at Target for a
while to really get the message across. It's a lot
tougher to stop shopping at Target than to switch from
bud Light to Miller All.
Speaker 2 (29:26):
I think that's one hundred percent right. Also, a lot
of women Target is the upper income version of Walmart,
so brand wise, they actually think of themselves, Oh I'm
not and again I'm not an expert here, but what
I see is a lot of women see themselves as, oh,
I'm not a Walmart shopper, I'm a Target shopper, right
(29:48):
Like it's a little bit in their mind higher class.
So you're also asking them buck to go into a Walmart.
And to be fair, my experience, and I'm the worst
person to analyze shopping, but my limited experien in these
big stores is.
Speaker 1 (30:01):
Walmart is huge and overwhelming.
Speaker 2 (30:04):
There's so many superstores, whereas Target isn't as massive of
a store. It's easier to go in and out of.
But I do wonder how many of the women listening
to us right now are willing to make that choice,
willing to make that change. My wife has said before,
That's why I asked about Kerry. She's gotten frustrated, not
about the politics, but you know she'll get in the
car and be like, I'm never shopping at Target again.
(30:26):
They did X, Y or Z something that she was
upset about, and then three weeks later she's back at Target. Right,
And you don't ever want to be the husband who's like, yeah,
sure that's going to last. You have to presume that
it is. It doesn't last. Well, this we'll see small
business owners are benefiting from an IRS tax refund programs
called the Employee Retention Credit. That's the ERC company that
(30:46):
really knows the nuances of this program and how to
get your company a possible refund. Innovation Refunds. In fact,
Innovation Refunds has already completed over seventeen thousand returns for
many different kinds of businesses. I'm talking about construction, retail, restaurants, bars, hotels,
so many more. They are a lot out there saying
(31:06):
they specialize in ERC tax refunds. Not every company is
the same. Innovation Refunds has hundreds of five star Trust
Pilot and Google reviews and they're certified with the Better
Business Bureau. Trust your business with the experts at Innovation Refunds.
Go to get Refunds dot com right now to start
the process, and in about ten minutes you could be
(31:27):
on your way to receiving money for your business. Know
upfront charges, they don't get paid unless you get paid.
Innovation Refunds has already helped clients claim over five billion
dollars in payroll tax refunds through the ERC, and they
may be able to help your business too. Go to
Get Refunds dot com or download the app from the
(31:47):
app store today.
Speaker 1 (31:49):
Get Refunds dot Com.
Speaker 2 (31:51):
Don't miss a minute of playing Buck and get behind
the scene access to special content.
Speaker 1 (31:57):
For members only. Subscribe to c and be twenty four
to seven. Welcome back to Clay and Buck.
Speaker 3 (32:03):
We're gonna be talking to presidential candidate and Senator from
South Carolina, Senator Tim Scott in just a few minutes
about his campaign and why he's running, why he's the
guy who should be the next president of the United States.
So we're pleased that will be joined by Senator Scott
here in just a few moments. Clay, there are a
(32:26):
couple of stories I wanted to get to in the
in the next hour. This just this just popped up
on the radar. You know, we often we often make
fun of the stupidity of the view, but also sometimes
I think the view crosses over as a show and
there are there are a couple of million people who
watch it every day. It has an influence on the
(32:46):
perspective of particularly I think a lot of low information
Democrat voters. So if you're getting your politics from the View,
I think you tend to be a low information Democrat voter.
But this was this was a moment that that stuck
out to me. Here their resident legal expert, Sonny Houston.
(33:06):
I just want you to hear the way she speaks
about married white women for a moment, play twenty four.
Speaker 5 (33:13):
I have a similar theory and it's born out when
you look at the studies and when you read books
like this book that came out a long time ago
about she owned property as well, meaning white women own
slaves as well. I think that women, white women in
particular want to protect this patriarchy here because it's to
their benefit. They want to make sure that their husbands
(33:34):
do well, they want to make sure that their sons
do well. They want to make sure that their children
do well, and they want to make sure that they
do well. Most of the women and some of these
studies are married white women, and they do fall in
line with what their husbands are doing.
Speaker 3 (33:49):
Married white women fall in line well. Interesting, she pointed
out that there are white women who owned slaves. There
are also black men who own slaves in the South,
which is a not all of them, yes, not often
discussed part of history.
Speaker 1 (34:03):
It's indusrting how many people actually knew that. Listening to this,
it's a fact.
Speaker 3 (34:06):
Libs will look at you like, but they'll not wait
a second, is oh, that's a fact of history.
Speaker 1 (34:11):
So I think it's interesting.
Speaker 3 (34:12):
She goes, well, there were white women who owned slaves,
what does that have to do with what's going on today?
There were black men who owned slaves in the South,
but you wouldn't bring that up in the context of
what's happening today in you know, politics and race relations
in the country. People would think that was a bizarre,
a bizarre point. And yet here we are. She's basically
(34:32):
there's like a it's just a resentful and strange little monologue.
She went on, there, what was that all about? White
women are propagating the patriarchy. A lot of white women
are huge libs who were trying to tear down the patriarchy.
Speaker 1 (34:46):
Whatever that means.
Speaker 2 (34:48):
The biggest proponent of the woke cottage industry is actually
white women. I mean, it is a huge portion. We'll
talk a little bit later in the showbuk about all
these crazy white women trying to defend dudes participating in
women's athletics, and they're like the primary defenders of this absurdity.
I actually think white women are, by far as a group,
(35:13):
the most left wing.
Speaker 1 (35:14):
When you actually break down it's not it's instant.
Speaker 3 (35:18):
Not married white women. Well, they're married to a certain
extent married women. Now, of course there are a lot
of married white women who are quite liberal, but overall
the data shows that married women tend to be more
traditional in their view and often more conservative. And I
think it's it's just interesting to note the way that
(35:40):
she can speak about a group of people in that way,
and that's supposed to be fine. Imagine if you took
any other race and said married fill in the blank women,
they just do what their husbands tell them, and they're
propagating oppression in this country.
Speaker 1 (35:56):
Or they're doing whatever it may be.
Speaker 3 (35:58):
The easy with which Democrat mouthpieces now across the political spectrum,
we'll speak of collective guilt of white people in general,
but also more specifically here white married women. It's unsettling,
like this is the country we live in now where
(36:19):
you're those white married women are a problem.
Speaker 1 (36:22):
No, no, we don't do that here.
Speaker 3 (36:25):
We don't do that thing in this country. We say
people of a certain race or a problem. I'm sorry. Well,
they do that a lot on the view. And actually
it's a perfect segue to Tim Scott, who's going to
join us next, because you'll remember both Sonny Houstin and
Joy Behar denigrated the announcement of Tim Scott for president
because of his race. In fact, Joy Behar Bucker remember,
(36:47):
even said that she understood what it was like to
be a black man more than Tim Scott. We played
that audio for you. It was next level dumb, even
for Joy Behar. We'll ask Tim Scott about those comments.
Speaker 1 (37:00):
I'll play back
Welcome to today's edition of the Clay Travis and buck
Sexton Show podcast.
Speaker 2 (00:05):
Welcome in Tuesday edition Clay Travis buck Sexton Show. I
hope all of you had a great long weekend if
you were able to take Monday off. We certainly want
to thank everyone who allows us to have the freedoms
that we hold so dear, and we know that that
comes with a cost too many families across the country.
(00:26):
So we hope as well that you are able to
spend some time honoring the sacrifices of so many that
have come before us as part of your Memorial Day
celebration and festivity. But we are excited to be here
with you after several days being away and we have
(00:48):
not spent Let's start off here, by the way, we're
going to be joined by Tim Scott, Senator from South Carolina,
who has announced that he is running for president. He
will join us at one o'clock Eastern. That is the
top of the next hour, almost exactly one hour from now,
so you can put that on your horizon as we
continue to talk with everyone who is running for president
(01:10):
that will come on the show, both Democrat and republic
and we've talked to RFK Junior. Obviously, Joe Biden is
terrified to come on this program because if he spent
very much time talking with us at all, it would
demonstrate his clear dementia and the fact that he is
unable to do this job. But we will talk to
Tim Scott at one. We've got a lot of different
stories to dive into. Joe Manchin is down twenty two
(01:35):
points to Jim Justice in West Virginia. What does that
mean both for the Senate looking ahead to next year,
but also for potential a potentially a presidential run. Donald
Trump has changed his position on Disney. We will discuss
Sam Ponder at ESPN is a bigot, according to USA
(01:55):
Today for believing that men should not be able to
compete against women. Lulu lamon which I feel like I
mispronounced all the time. But they have fired two employees
for calling the cops. But we begin with a story that, frankly,
we have not spent that much time on.
Speaker 3 (02:13):
Just real quick calling the cops for stealing for people
stole and they called the cops and then they got
fired for calling the cops on the thieves.
Speaker 2 (02:19):
Anyway, Yes, which is emblematic of the world in which
we live right now, so all that to be discussed
as we move throughout the course of today's program. But
we haven't spent very much time talking about the debt
ceiling because we told you that eventually this was going
to get resolved, and it appears that it has gotten
(02:42):
resolved over the weekend. An agreement between Speaker Kevin McCarthy
and President Biden their negotiation teams. Here is cut one
Kevin McCarthy explaining what exactly is going to happen.
Speaker 4 (02:57):
There is so much in this as positive and measure
to all the other debt seelings. When Republicans had the presidency,
the Senate, and the House, did they ever cut spending. No,
they increased it. We were able to do this when
the President said he wasn't even going to talk to us.
This is really a step in the right direction. It
puts as a trajectory that's different. We put a statutory
(03:18):
cap on only spending one percent for the next six years,
so we let government grow but at a slower rate.
Speaker 2 (03:24):
Okay, so Buck, it appears this is going to pass.
There are going to be upset members on the right
who are refusing to vote for this. I think they're
around twenty Republicans so far who appears are going to
be opposed to this. It appears there also will be
some members of the Democrat Party on the left that
(03:47):
are opposed to this agreement as well. What I would
say is fairly significant in general is yes, it slows
the rate of growth, but it effectively takes us to
already five trillion dollars in debt, and at some point,
I think we just have to recognize that our national
(04:09):
debt is never going to get paid off.
Speaker 1 (04:12):
And I mean, am I crazy buck?
Speaker 2 (04:15):
When you look at this like it seems like we've
just decided that the national debt doesn't matter. Both Republicans
and Democrats, I think you frame.
Speaker 1 (04:23):
It this way.
Speaker 3 (04:25):
This is probably the best deal you could get under
the circumstances with a Senate majority in the hands of
Democrats and a White House with a Democrat president. But
that's it's really tough to feel like, oh great, you
know this is this is a moment in time where
(04:45):
you'd have to say to yourself, we are now faced
with both parties effectively spending endlessly running the debt up
to a place where service on the debt is going
to increasingly crowd out spending really a part of this,
and it's not politically, it's not politically advantageous to talk about.
(05:07):
This is that there's an intergenerational theft that's going on,
which is that the benefits that have been promised for
the older generation are way beyond what is paid into them,
which people don't Again, people don't want to hear.
Speaker 1 (05:22):
This is just numbers, it's true.
Speaker 3 (05:24):
And then the debt burden passes on to the younger
generation now, which is why you see a lot of
people complaining, you know, in their twenties, their thirties, into
their forties, I can't afford a house anywhere. I can't
you know, I can't get out of student loan debt.
There are structural things in the economy that we accept
because of politics, that we shouldn't accept as a matter
(05:45):
of what is fair and what is ethical, I think,
and that's why you have both parties spending too much money.
Bottom line, spend too much money. I mean, what do
we run the debt up six trillion under Trump?
Speaker 1 (05:57):
Right? I mean?
Speaker 3 (05:58):
Trump great economy, no question about it. Economy was phenomenal
until the fourth year of COVID, of course, but then
we spend six trillion dollars.
Speaker 1 (06:06):
That's a big.
Speaker 3 (06:07):
Problem, and it was a big problem also politically because
then Biden comes in like a truemaniac and spends an
additional two trillion dollars when we should be absolutely going
in the other direction and not doing it, and then
he wanted to spend five trillion more on top of that.
Which you realize is we are in a competition for
which political party can be a bigger version of Santa
Claus the free stuff for everybody, or the stuff that
(06:30):
you get more than you pay into it. And this
just puts us on a trajectory for eventual real financial
hardship as a country and even possibly ruination. I mean,
you look at the history of fiat currency. You look
at what inflation has done historically in different countries, and
it has caused economic collapse. But you know, I say this,
and everyone I think on the right, well not everybody,
(06:52):
but a lot of people shake their heads and they'll say, yeah,
that's right. We need to do something about the debt.
And I say, all right, so we need to do
some means testing for social security, We need to raise
the retirement How dare you, sir, how dare. It's okay, fine,
this is this is where we are. Everyone wants to
pretend they want to deal with this and it's a
huge problem. And then you talk about the only ways
you could realistically do Clay, we even this notion of
(07:14):
automatic spending.
Speaker 1 (07:15):
Think about this.
Speaker 3 (07:16):
This just means the politicians all get to wash their
hands of it. Oh sorry, that's the automatic spending. Yeah,
that's where seventy percent of the spending comes from. It's
the automatic spending. We are cutting what is it three
the three percent increase or something. I mean, the numbers,
the numbers don't even really matter because the numbers are
so insignificant. We are slightly limiting the increase in the
(07:37):
spending the federal government's going to do, which is already
way beyond our means.
Speaker 1 (07:42):
And we think that's we think that's a victory.
Speaker 3 (07:44):
You know, this is taking an alcoholic and saying you
can't have thirteen shots of tequila, you can only have twelve.
Speaker 2 (07:49):
The reality is when you refuse to look at social
Security or Medicare, and that seems to be the general
consensus of both political parties, then there is no way
to balance the federal budget. And scarily, Buck What is
becoming the case is the debt on the national debt,
(08:10):
in other words, the interest that we have to pay
on our national debt, particularly as we're now talking about
five and five and a quarter percent interest rates. That's
going to start crowding out a lot of the discretionary
spending as well. You basically can't balance the budget by
analyzing discretionary spending. And so people don't want to talk
(08:34):
about it because I think it makes everybody so uncomfortable.
But I do think it's worth mentioning. The Tea Party
started because we hit ten trillion dollars in national debt.
That was in twenty ten. Since twenty ten, we have
added over twenty trillion dollars in national debt. That's the
(08:57):
last thirteen years, So we are adding over a trillion
dollars a year to our national debt. At this point,
it just feels like everyone is pretending that this doesn't
exist and that it's not going to be a major
hindrance on future economic growth. But it feels to me
like both parties are engaging in magical realism here in
(09:20):
pretending that the biggest issue isn't a big issue.
Speaker 3 (09:24):
Look, you've got you've got Trump running ads saying Ronda
Santis wants to cut your Medicare, and you have Rondas
Santas saying I'm just look at the Republican primary. He's like,
I'm not going to touch your medicare because they both
know whoever says they're going to touch medicare is going
to lose. Meanwhile, people sit around saying we're spending too
much money, We're spending too much money something like, and
(09:44):
again we could have there's some great minds on this issue.
I'm trying to remember, oh gosh, well, even like my
friend Ben Dominic is very strong on the healthcare issue.
There are a few other people I can think of,
but one of them is escape being my my mind
right now. But they can break down all the numbers.
(10:04):
Is the point something like a huge percentage, a huge
majority of spending that is even being done for medicare
happens in the last six months of a person's life.
So there and there's very little, uh, you know, oversight quality.
Speaker 1 (10:17):
Of life and that it's actually being gained there, right.
Speaker 3 (10:20):
And how the building is actually being being done. And
ovik Roid, by the way, that was the name I
was trying to remember he was fantastic. He's fantastic on
the healthcare side of things because he's a realist. But
people don't want to hear it because we've we've gotten
into a competition for who can do a better job
of distributing the spoil system. And that's where we are.
(10:40):
There was a moment when the Republican Party seem to
be really at least willing to talk about being opposed
to this. And as you point out, Clay, that was
twenty trillion dollars ago. Yeah, and you have to wonder
as well, if spending doesn't matter, why does inflation, you know,
just stink so much? Well, because spending does matter, If
debt doesn't matter, why not just spend endless amount of money.
(11:01):
This is very straightforward stuff. But we have a political
system now where anybody who talks about being financially responsible
will lose. That's it. And so we can sit around
and i'm people because I'll get emails and I'm sure you.
Speaker 1 (11:13):
Get them too.
Speaker 3 (11:14):
You guys need to talk about the debt ceiling. No,
they're going to raise the debt ceiling. Republicans are going
to do a bare minimum. They're going to take one
nibble on the edge of the giant cookie that is
our federal debt, and they're going to pack themselves in
the back. Meanwhile, Democrats are going to continue to use
it as a spoil system. It doesn't change, and people
could say, well, this doesn't sound particularly useful. I think
(11:36):
the first step is understanding where we are as a country.
We're just going to keep spending until the financial disaster hits.
That's the plan right now, Republican Democrat. No one wants
to stop it. You try to stop it, you lose,
and then you're not in power. And so then what's
the difference do you? How do we change this?
Speaker 2 (11:52):
I mean, I think we should have, unfortunately gone back
in time. I wish we had had most states buck
have balanced budget requirements. In other words, you can't run
trillion dollar deficits if you're the governor of California, or
if you're the governor of Florida or New York or
one of these places. And as soon as we gave
(12:15):
politicians the ability to go into debt, and to be fair,
sometimes going into debt makes sense to beat the Nazis
in World War two. I keep hammering this home because
I think it staggers people. We spent more money on
an inflation adjusted basis on COVID than we did to
win World War Two.
Speaker 3 (12:33):
That's because if we hadn't done it, we wouldn't be
worried about inflation, because we'd all be spending Deutsche marks, right,
I mean, you know we can all understand at some
level or whatever.
Speaker 1 (12:43):
I think it was deutsch marks back in the day. Too.
Speaker 3 (12:45):
This is there are sometimes, obviously where you have to
go into debt to save your nation. We didn't have
to do that for COVID. We spent six trillion dollars
during COVID. People wonder why didn't inflation hit more? Why
didn't inflation hit more than the twenty twenty two elections,
which you know, everybody on the right basically got wrong.
And it's I think in part because a lot of
(13:08):
people looked at it and they said, well, Biden spent
two trillion dollars, the guy before spend six trillion.
Speaker 1 (13:12):
In one year.
Speaker 2 (13:14):
I think also, and this is even more debilitating their buck.
I think a lot of people have just lost faith
in government in general, and so the consequences of actions
aren't as big a part of elections as they should be,
which is one of the reasons why I'm concerned that
Biden's gonna win again in twenty four.
Speaker 1 (13:31):
I'm sorry, I feel a little bit like, did you
ever see the movie Best in Shows for Guests madea.
Speaker 3 (13:37):
Remember remember when he goes to visit I goes to
visit like the boyfriend of his ex boyfriend or whatever
of his wife, and and it turns out that guy
is a hostage negotiator. And he sits there and he's like, so, like,
what's the secret big hostage negotiator to the guy goes, well,
they all jumps. I don't I'm not trying. I'm not
trying to be that guy right now, but I'm just saying,
(13:59):
you know, it's a you know, it's a rough situation.
It's oh, he's a crisis negotiator, not a hastain negotiator,
because they all jump, and I'm like, we're not all
jumping necessarily. We can actually fix something here. But everyone
has to be very honest about the fact that, I mean,
Republicans taking a victory lap on this.
Speaker 1 (14:15):
It's kind of sad.
Speaker 3 (14:16):
I know it's the best possible, but you know, is
your offense celebrating clay when they make a goal? Line stand,
I don't think so well. And here it's a good
sports analogy from you to start the week. Here, here's
the way to think about it. I don't feel like
we're ever.
Speaker 2 (14:31):
Going to stop the national debt from increasing. So the
question becomes, and I hate to say that, but there's
been no suggestion that I've seen in any sort of
political leadership that's going to change. At what point does
this long ticking national debt time bomb explode on all
of us?
Speaker 1 (14:49):
And what does it look like?
Speaker 2 (14:50):
Because there are economic consequences to making poor choices, as
all of you out there know. But unlike the rest
of of the United States, you can't just declare bankruptcy
as a country and wipe out all your debt.
Speaker 3 (15:05):
I had a feeling, by the way, it's reich Reich Marx,
not deutsch Marks back in the not.
Speaker 1 (15:09):
But you know, same idea. Yes we have what I said.
Speaker 2 (15:12):
So we've got a really good start to the week there.
We're all our economy is eventually going to blow up.
It's just a question of when, and we maybe have
forestalled that for a small period of time. Happy Week,
Verizon at and T T Mobile. If you're with them,
you're overpaying. Pure Talk can save your family over nine
hundred dollars a year, and right now you can get
(15:33):
unlimited talk, text, ultra fast five G data for just
twenty bucks a month. What about the coverage, It's phenomenal.
Pure Talk uses the most dependable five G network in
the country. So grab your phones, dial pound two fifty
and say the keyword Clay and Buck to get unlimited talk,
text and plenty of data for just twenty bucks a month.
Pure Talk's amazing US customer service team will make switching easy.
(15:55):
Choose a veteran owned company that cares about keeping jobs
in America and saving you money. Pick up your phone
and dial pound two fifty say Clay and Buck for
unlimited talk and text with plenty of five G data
for just twenty bucks a month. Now pound two five
zero again say Clay and Bucks. Save an additional fifty
percent off your first month thanks.
Speaker 1 (16:17):
To pure Talk making sense in an insane world. Clay
Travis and Buck Sexton, the.
Speaker 3 (16:23):
House Democrats who have reservations about this compromised film talk
to what would you tell them?
Speaker 2 (16:30):
I'm not gonna tell you?
Speaker 1 (16:31):
Why not cook you night? Don't get on and say
tell him what a good deal without How about this
was one hundred percent deal for the Democrats? Did make
it help me get a past? Who's got the better deal?
Speaker 4 (16:41):
Will? Who?
Speaker 1 (16:42):
Did he canna help me get a past?
Speaker 4 (16:44):
Coome on?
Speaker 1 (16:46):
He said.
Speaker 3 (16:46):
So that's Biden getting asked some questions, you know, Biden
telling some reporters to get off his lawn as he's
getting into the helicopter there.
Speaker 1 (16:54):
But notice that it's he's making.
Speaker 3 (16:56):
It sound like clay that somehow this is a hard
sell for some of the Democrats in the House that
they get truly by the numbers, you know, almost everything
that they possibly would want realistically, and that's not enough.
Speaker 1 (17:12):
That's not enough.
Speaker 3 (17:13):
I mean, you have Democrats who are complaining about this
as though this is somehow a stingy a cheap.
Speaker 1 (17:19):
Bill for them.
Speaker 2 (17:21):
Yeah, you know, I also think this the stock market
reaction today, Buck is just indicative of how the stock
market never believed there was ever any danger of there
being a default, because if there had been, the market
would have soared today. Instead, as we're sitting the dows
down a little bit, the S and P five hundred
is effectively unchanged. This for all intentsive purposes, has been
(17:44):
a negligible market story from the get go, because people
assumed this is going to get resolved. Now it has
and basically nothing has changed, and unfortunately, in the grand
scheme of things.
Speaker 3 (17:57):
Come back into some of your calls here in a
second eight under two eight two two.
Speaker 1 (18:01):
Eight eight two.
Speaker 3 (18:03):
Fellow gun owners, you agree with me. It is our
responsibility to keep our firearms training sharp and up to date.
But there's a way to do that now without expensive AMMO.
It's called the Mantis X, a firearms training system that
is a no ammo, all electronic way to improve your
shooting accuracy. It simply attaches to your firearm like a
weapon light. It connects to your smartphone and the Mantis
(18:23):
X app. The mantis X gives you data driven, real
time feedback and your technique through drills and courses. It's
a game changer and you'll notice how quickly you improve
right off the bat. Look, I love my Mantis X
here at home. I'd say it's a must have for
every gun owner. Once you get it set up and
you see how much real time feedback you get with
data about your trigger pull, about your side alignment, about
(18:43):
how well you're going through the basic mechanics of firing
your weapon. You're gonna realize this just makes you a
better shooter all around. Start improving your shooting experience today.
Go to mantisx dot com. You'll see next time you're
at the range after using your mantis X how much
it helps. Go to m A and txmantisx dot com.
Speaker 2 (19:03):
Welcome back in Clay Travis bucksexon Show. Appreciate all of
you hanging out with us.
Speaker 1 (19:08):
Buck.
Speaker 2 (19:10):
One story that is out there that is not going
away bud Light.
Speaker 1 (19:16):
It was a Memorial Day weekend.
Speaker 2 (19:18):
I know a lot of you out there had Memorial
Day cookouts. We certainly did hear in the Travis household
probably consume some alcoholic beverages, Beer prominent among those. Over
the weekend. I keep getting inundated with pictures from you
guys of sporting events, concerts, people refusing to buy bud Light,
(19:43):
and also grocery stores and Buck over the weekend. It
got to the point where in many parts of the country,
and I know a lot of you probably saw this
if you went into your grocery stores to buy things
over the weekend, they were giving away budd Light. I mean,
we know that there are expiration dates on some of
(20:04):
these cans, you could basically get bud Light. A lot
of places were doing fifteen dollars rebates. They were doing
whatever they could to get rid of their product. And
you and I were just talking about this off air.
Not only is this an amazingly successful boycott, the likes
of which, frankly we've never seen, but leave aside the politics,
(20:29):
but can you remember a boycott of a product that
was so significant that thirty percent of its overall product?
Speaker 1 (20:40):
This is the new numbers. The sales are down thirty percent.
Speaker 3 (20:44):
You know, when you think about how boycotts generally work,
they're supposed to show a portion of the consumer base
no longer will buy a product for the following reason. Yeah,
and never before, I think, and this goes to your
what you're bringing up. Has a a brand managed to
(21:07):
offend effectively it's core demographic and a vast majority of
it's demographics. So it's just like the most the most
consistent bud Light drinkers, and most of the bud Light
drinkers overall are people who do not like the transgender
(21:29):
influencer ad that they did.
Speaker 1 (21:30):
So you know, it's.
Speaker 3 (21:34):
It's kind of it's it's hard to see how they
can turn this around. We were just talking about it before.
What's the way, what's the way that you change this uh,
this brand? You know, I mean you think of brand
redos that have happened in the past.
Speaker 1 (21:49):
What was the pizzeria? Was it Papa John's? No, No,
was it? I don't know. I don't know which one
it was. There was a there was a pizza was
a Domino's.
Speaker 2 (21:58):
Dominoes supposedly had the worst pizza. Are you talking about
just rebranded basically?
Speaker 1 (22:04):
Right?
Speaker 2 (22:04):
There was.
Speaker 1 (22:05):
There was a whole campaign. I remember the campaign.
Speaker 3 (22:07):
I'm trying to remember which pizza Rea it was where
they they ran and they're like, look, we got lazy
and our pizza sucks.
Speaker 1 (22:12):
That was Dominoes. I was domino yeaheah, yeah.
Speaker 3 (22:16):
Right, but that was an interesting They're like, look, we
understand we started selling you crap product. So we've gotten
better ingredients, We've got a new formulation. We're now giving
you pizza worthy of the name. Give it a shot.
I think that worked, if I recall, it was certainly
an interesting approach to take, but they were willing to
say what we were doing before was not up to
(22:38):
our standards. We were selling you trash and calling it pizza.
They didn't call it, they didn't put it that way,
but that's basically what they were saying.
Speaker 2 (22:44):
Yeah, Dixie chicks out there is a good example. Like historically,
I think of someone who turned off their core demo
and never really recovered. But if I were running bud
Light at this point, I would be looking at numbers
and I would be concerned about this buck. A boycott
is one thing because over time people can forget about
(23:07):
a boycott. What has happened now with bud Light is basically,
if you drink a bud Light, you are a pussy
willow Right, you gotta be careful that, like you are
being insulted. Oh you're the kind of guy who drinks
a bud Light. Now you don't even want to be
seen holding one buck? Yes, I mean well, it's turned
(23:28):
into a national national joke. I just checked it because
I was curious because I had some memory of the Dominoes.
The first thing that comes up when you google this
online is the store behind Dominoes. We're sorry for sucking campaign. Yeah,
but then all the articles assessing it are miracle turnaround
revitalized its failing brand. You know it worked, but this
(23:50):
is why I'm bringing it up. Honesty with your consumer
can be a magnificent thing, can have a real cleansing effect,
can really you know, can sort of cast out some
of the cobbs, can make things better. Bud Light has
not had that with its audience. I think the best
thing they could do would be to say, guys, we're
(24:12):
never going to do any anything woke or political like
that again. We're sorry we did it.
Speaker 3 (24:18):
And you know we all agree, and you know, make
a joke of it, lean into it a little bit,
and make it okay again. If they could get bud
Light drinkers to laugh with the brand instead of at
the brand, that would I think that's the only way
you could turn this thing around. I talked about you
were there when I did the experiment, about the fact
that guys don't even want to be seen as having
(24:38):
a bud Light.
Speaker 2 (24:39):
I'll give you another story. I was at a Memorial
Day cookout. Only beer that wasn't there was bud Light.
One of my neighbors was telling a story about another neighbor.
We have the recycling bins. Don't get me started, Buck,
You and I are on the same opinion on recycling,
total waste, total time everybody. I've been saying, my wife
(25:00):
is on me all the time about the fact that
I won't distinguish between what I put in the recycle whatever.
So another neighbor was telling a story he sometimes will
put some of his stuff in the recycling bin. And
right after the bud light story, one of my neighbors
was not really committed to light beer. And I think
this is a big part of this, right, most people
out there are not hardcore bud light, Core's light or
(25:24):
Miller light. In other words, if Guinness had offended people,
let's pretend Guinness was really popular. The difference between a
Guinness and a bud light is pretty substantial. Everybody can
tell the difference. It even looks different in a glass.
Speaker 3 (25:36):
This the beer drinkers in our audience all the time. Yeah,
is no one could tell the difference.
Speaker 2 (25:42):
But the difference between a bud light, Miller light, and
a Cores light is not so substantial that your day
or your evening is ruined if you have a Miller
light instead of a bud light. And one of my
neighbors was so upset about the bud light thing that
he took all of his bud lights, poured him out
and just put it in the recycle. Ben He said,
(26:02):
like there was like fifteen or sixteen of them, and
the other neighbor went up to him and said, hey,
you got a bud light, And immediately this neighbor just
went off about how furious he was about the bud
light situation, not only Buck And this is what a
lot of people miss. It wasn't just the Dylan mulvany.
It was the double barrel of the Dylan mulvainy coupled
(26:25):
with the new head of marketing who was insulting the
people who drank bud light. Already they have out of
touch humor, they're too freddy. Well, so you insulted the
base of your audience. And this is significant because I
think it ties in with target men won't stand for this.
Transgender bs men just say screw it. We actually feel
(26:48):
bad for women who are pretending to be men. We're like, yeah,
you're not going to be as big and strong and
fast as an average man. You're kind of if you're
a woman pretending to be a man, let's be honest,
you're probably a puny man. And we just kind of
feel sorry for you. Whereas women are having men take
over there advertising, they're taking over what it means to
(27:12):
be a woman. Hell there being named women of the year, Buck,
there's no man of the year that used to be
a chick, and so men just stop buying it.
Speaker 1 (27:20):
And the only way to your point that I think.
Speaker 2 (27:23):
That bud Light can come back is to actually say
we apologize, we screwed up, and just own it and
directly address it, which they haven't been willing to do
so far because I think they're afraid of being called
anti LGBTQ IA, whatever the heck it is.
Speaker 3 (27:40):
Yeah, I also think that for a lot of conservatives
there's a gut check moment to your point about the
differences in the beer. And while I like to make
fun of you antagonizing the true beer connoisseurs, the the
beer officionado is being able.
Speaker 2 (27:56):
To you're a true beer connoisseur er, you're not drinking
bud Light in the first place.
Speaker 1 (28:00):
Fair PoID, I guess.
Speaker 3 (28:02):
But there's there's drinking a beer brand that you're used to,
and then there's where do you go to buy most
of the stuff for your household in a given week.
I think for a lot of the people listening, maybe
it's Walmart, but maybe it's Target, right, women, I mean
it's Target. It's Target. My wife loves Target. Not gonna lie,
she loves Target. She goes Target all the time, likes
(28:24):
to get stuff at Target. And I told her recently,
I said, honey, we got to stop doing.
Speaker 1 (28:28):
Well now you go.
Speaker 3 (28:29):
Now you're talking about driving another say, she's laid off
the Target. Recently, She's laid off the Target. Of course,
now I'm just buying more things online. But see, this
is the problem. You need to have the infrastructure of
choice in place. Because if you're gonna stop buying from Target,
but then all of a sudden you're just getting it
from Amazon, have you really made a change in terms
(28:49):
of what you're supporting the politics are supporting. It can
become complicated. So so a beer brand. I'm just saying
this is for me, This is like the table stakes
of the right. Is willing to do something thing? Are
we willing to do more about Target? Are we willing
Disney Plus? To be fair, I think a lot of
people I was now now granted I was, I was,
you know, mooching off of somebody else in my family's
(29:12):
Disney Plus. But we made a decision to cancel Disney
Plus when they fired Gina Carano. But I wonder if
people are going to stop shopping at Target for a
while to really get the message across. It's a lot
tougher to stop shopping at Target than to switch from
bud Light to Miller All.
Speaker 2 (29:26):
I think that's one hundred percent right. Also, a lot
of women Target is the upper income version of Walmart,
so brand wise, they actually think of themselves, Oh I'm
not and again I'm not an expert here, but what
I see is a lot of women see themselves as, oh,
I'm not a Walmart shopper, I'm a Target shopper, right
(29:48):
Like it's a little bit in their mind higher class.
So you're also asking them buck to go into a Walmart.
And to be fair, my experience, and I'm the worst
person to analyze shopping, but my limited experien in these
big stores is.
Speaker 1 (30:01):
Walmart is huge and overwhelming.
Speaker 2 (30:04):
There's so many superstores, whereas Target isn't as massive of
a store. It's easier to go in and out of.
But I do wonder how many of the women listening
to us right now are willing to make that choice,
willing to make that change. My wife has said before,
That's why I asked about Kerry. She's gotten frustrated, not
about the politics, but you know she'll get in the
car and be like, I'm never shopping at Target again.
(30:26):
They did X, Y or Z something that she was
upset about, and then three weeks later she's back at Target. Right,
And you don't ever want to be the husband who's like, yeah,
sure that's going to last. You have to presume that
it is. It doesn't last. Well, this we'll see small
business owners are benefiting from an IRS tax refund programs
called the Employee Retention Credit. That's the ERC company that
(30:46):
really knows the nuances of this program and how to
get your company a possible refund. Innovation Refunds. In fact,
Innovation Refunds has already completed over seventeen thousand returns for
many different kinds of businesses. I'm talking about construction, retail, restaurants, bars, hotels,
so many more. They are a lot out there saying
(31:06):
they specialize in ERC tax refunds. Not every company is
the same. Innovation Refunds has hundreds of five star Trust
Pilot and Google reviews and they're certified with the Better
Business Bureau. Trust your business with the experts at Innovation Refunds.
Go to get Refunds dot com right now to start
the process, and in about ten minutes you could be
(31:27):
on your way to receiving money for your business. Know
upfront charges, they don't get paid unless you get paid.
Innovation Refunds has already helped clients claim over five billion
dollars in payroll tax refunds through the ERC, and they
may be able to help your business too. Go to
Get Refunds dot com or download the app from the
(31:47):
app store today.
Speaker 1 (31:49):
Get Refunds dot Com.
Speaker 2 (31:51):
Don't miss a minute of playing Buck and get behind
the scene access to special content.
Speaker 1 (31:57):
For members only. Subscribe to c and be twenty four
to seven. Welcome back to Clay and Buck.
Speaker 3 (32:03):
We're gonna be talking to presidential candidate and Senator from
South Carolina, Senator Tim Scott in just a few minutes
about his campaign and why he's running, why he's the
guy who should be the next president of the United States.
So we're pleased that will be joined by Senator Scott
here in just a few moments. Clay, there are a
(32:26):
couple of stories I wanted to get to in the
in the next hour. This just this just popped up
on the radar. You know, we often we often make
fun of the stupidity of the view, but also sometimes
I think the view crosses over as a show and
there are there are a couple of million people who
watch it every day. It has an influence on the
(32:46):
perspective of particularly I think a lot of low information
Democrat voters. So if you're getting your politics from the View,
I think you tend to be a low information Democrat voter.
But this was this was a moment that that stuck
out to me. Here their resident legal expert, Sonny Houston.
(33:06):
I just want you to hear the way she speaks
about married white women for a moment, play twenty four.
Speaker 5 (33:13):
I have a similar theory and it's born out when
you look at the studies and when you read books
like this book that came out a long time ago
about she owned property as well, meaning white women own
slaves as well. I think that women, white women in
particular want to protect this patriarchy here because it's to
their benefit. They want to make sure that their husbands
(33:34):
do well, they want to make sure that their sons
do well. They want to make sure that their children
do well, and they want to make sure that they
do well. Most of the women and some of these
studies are married white women, and they do fall in
line with what their husbands are doing.
Speaker 3 (33:49):
Married white women fall in line well. Interesting, she pointed
out that there are white women who owned slaves. There
are also black men who own slaves in the South,
which is a not all of them, yes, not often
discussed part of history.
Speaker 1 (34:03):
It's indusrting how many people actually knew that. Listening to this,
it's a fact.
Speaker 3 (34:06):
Libs will look at you like, but they'll not wait
a second, is oh, that's a fact of history.
Speaker 1 (34:11):
So I think it's interesting.
Speaker 3 (34:12):
She goes, well, there were white women who owned slaves,
what does that have to do with what's going on today?
There were black men who owned slaves in the South,
but you wouldn't bring that up in the context of
what's happening today in you know, politics and race relations
in the country. People would think that was a bizarre,
a bizarre point. And yet here we are. She's basically
(34:32):
there's like a it's just a resentful and strange little monologue.
She went on, there, what was that all about? White
women are propagating the patriarchy. A lot of white women
are huge libs who were trying to tear down the patriarchy.
Speaker 1 (34:46):
Whatever that means.
Speaker 2 (34:48):
The biggest proponent of the woke cottage industry is actually
white women. I mean, it is a huge portion. We'll
talk a little bit later in the showbuk about all
these crazy white women trying to defend dudes participating in
women's athletics, and they're like the primary defenders of this absurdity.
I actually think white women are, by far as a group,
(35:13):
the most left wing.
Speaker 1 (35:14):
When you actually break down it's not it's instant.
Speaker 3 (35:18):
Not married white women. Well, they're married to a certain
extent married women. Now, of course there are a lot
of married white women who are quite liberal, but overall
the data shows that married women tend to be more
traditional in their view and often more conservative. And I
think it's it's just interesting to note the way that
(35:40):
she can speak about a group of people in that way,
and that's supposed to be fine. Imagine if you took
any other race and said married fill in the blank women,
they just do what their husbands tell them, and they're
propagating oppression in this country.
Speaker 1 (35:56):
Or they're doing whatever it may be.
Speaker 3 (35:58):
The easy with which Democrat mouthpieces now across the political spectrum,
we'll speak of collective guilt of white people in general,
but also more specifically here white married women. It's unsettling,
like this is the country we live in now where
(36:19):
you're those white married women are a problem.
Speaker 1 (36:22):
No, no, we don't do that here.
Speaker 3 (36:25):
We don't do that thing in this country. We say
people of a certain race or a problem. I'm sorry. Well,
they do that a lot on the view. And actually
it's a perfect segue to Tim Scott, who's going to
join us next, because you'll remember both Sonny Houstin and
Joy Behar denigrated the announcement of Tim Scott for president
because of his race. In fact, Joy Behar Bucker remember,
(36:47):
even said that she understood what it was like to
be a black man more than Tim Scott. We played
that audio for you. It was next level dumb, even
for Joy Behar. We'll ask Tim Scott about those comments.
Speaker 1 (37:00):
I'll play back
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular Podcasts
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
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.