The WNBA is Run By Morons, Latest on Betting Scandal

On today’s edition of The Scott Jennings Show, Scott covers the Blanche confirmation, new polling out of South Carolina and Michigan, the proposed Dulles Airport renovation, and the ongoing WNBA gambling scandal. Jonathan Cohen joined the program to discuss the growing sports betting controversy surrounding the WNBA, while former New Hampshire Gov. John Sununu broke down the closely watched race for New Hampshire’s U.S. Senate seat and its implications for control of the chamber. Later, Jesse Arm examined new Manhattan Institute polling on welfare, crime, government waste, and voter priorities, followed by Rep. Richard Hudson’s analysis of why House Republicans believe they are well positioned heading into the midterm elections. The show concluded with Joshua Monnington discussing his latest The Federalist article on Barack Obama’s influence on today’s Democratic Party. 

https://www.duke-energy.com/poweringamerica 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
The voice of free speech, the truth delivered common sense
for the American people. Welcome to the scudgeon.

Speaker 2 (00:11):
And shade gambling scandal in golfing the WNBA today. It's
involving two of the bigger names in the league. We've
got the brazen details for you in just a few moments.
We have new polling out in key Senate races in
South Carolina and in Michigan. Plus the Department of Energy
with a huge announcement in Kentucky major economic development News.

(00:34):
Will bring you the details a little later in the show.
Today's Thursday, July the thirtieth. I'm Scott Jennings Broadcasting for
Sale and we come to you live today from Knoxville, Tennessee.
And on this day, in nineteen sixty five, President Lyndon
Johnson signed Medicare and Medicaid into law. It created the
largest expansion of federal health coverage in American history, and

(00:59):
the setting of that was deliberate. It was at the
Truman Library in Independence, Missouri. Now twenty years earlier, Harry
Truman had become the first president to propose national health insurance,
and there, with Truman watching, Johnson signed the bill and
presented the first Medicare cards to Harry and Bess Truman.
Over the years, though Medicare has become a complicated mess

(01:21):
for a lot of folks. That's why we here at
the Scott Jennings Show partner with our friends at Chapter Now.
My own mother signed up for a plan that looked
perfectly fine, good coverage, nothing obviously wrong with it. Then
she talked the Chapter to see what they had to say,
and turns out there was room for improvement. Chapter found
her the exact same plan G coverage that she already had,

(01:45):
same benefits and same protections, but for over six hundred
dollars less per year. Most people assume if nothing seems
wrong that they might already or are probably already in
the right plan. But the system is so confusing that
people read really know what they're missing. That is why
we partner with Chapter. They compare every Medicare plan nationwide

(02:07):
and they tell you which one makes the most sense
for you.

Speaker 3 (02:09):
If you're already on the.

Speaker 2 (02:10):
Best plan, they'll tell you that too, Just honest advice
for every American. It's a free call. There's no pressure.
You talk to a real person who knows how the
system works. You dial Pound two five zero and save
Medicare plan or go to ask chapter dot org slash Jennings.
Other news today Capitol Hill, there's still no resolution in

(02:30):
the Senate Judiciary Committee for Todd Blanche. He is the
acting Attorney General. He's up for confirmation to have the
job permanently. But Senator John Cornyn of Texas is bulking.
He wants some information and some changes from Blanche on
the president's settlement with a federal government over his leaked
tax returns. This has to do with that weaponization fund

(02:53):
you heard about, and Cornn hasn't gotten the answers he
wants yet. So today's committee vote on Blanche has been postponed.
Complicating matters here is you guessed it politics. Trump endorsed
Krnan's opponent in the Texas primary, Ken Paxton. Ken Paxton
won that primary, and now Cornan is a free agent.
He's not subject to the political strings of the Trump

(03:14):
White House. Take a listen to Cornan's comments here and
cut number four.

Speaker 4 (03:18):
He was saying he thinks that this might be because
you don't like him.

Speaker 5 (03:23):
You know, I voted with him ninety nine point three
percent of the time. That has nothing to do with it.
This is about making sure that even if you're the
president of the United States, you don't get favorable terms
from the government and a settlement of a lawsuit that

(03:45):
ordinary citizens would not get, like protection from audits by
the IRS into the foreseeable future. So I think this
is about making sure that we maintain the integrity of
our justice system and fairness for everybody involved.

Speaker 2 (04:03):
Now, the President himself seemed to acknowledge the riff with
Cornn maybe a problem on this nomination. He was asked
about it in the Oval Office yesterday. Here's the President
cut eight.

Speaker 6 (04:13):
I can say as Todd Blanche is outstanding, and I
thought he's I thought it was pretty routine because he's
so good. He just wouldn't find a better person.

Speaker 3 (04:22):
So I don't know.

Speaker 6 (04:23):
Maybe John Cornan's upset with me because I didn't endorse him.

Speaker 7 (04:26):
I don't know what it is.

Speaker 2 (04:28):
Just a little while ago, the President weighed in on
social media. The President says, quote, I have no objection
to temporarily withdrawing Todd Blanche's name if they meaning Cornn
and North Carolina Senator Tom Tillis, do not do the
right thing, and then putting him back in. After corn
and Tillis are out of office. That's the end of

(04:50):
the president's statement. Seems the President may be signaling retreat here,
at least temporarily, rather than give in to the demands
of Corn and Tillis over his settlement with the irs.
Fluid situation, and we'll keep an eye on it for you.
There's an unfolding scandal and the w n b A
today has to do with gambling on games by two

(05:10):
of the better known players in the league. The league's
official social media account posted and then quickly deleted, a
video showing two stars, Paige Buckers and Angel Reese, apparently
making a four hundred dollars bet on the outcome of
their team's game. So these two players were betting on

(05:31):
the games in which they were playing. Here's the video,
since deleted. Cut one.

Speaker 8 (05:37):
At All Star weekend, you and Angel made a bet
with each other on this game?

Speaker 9 (05:40):
Is up, Benility.

Speaker 7 (05:42):
This is how the rich state rich.

Speaker 10 (05:43):
If you got rich, you gotta say, if you gotta
say this money, I'm gona see you next week on Winday.

Speaker 11 (05:47):
Yeah.

Speaker 7 (05:48):
Hi, no practice, Oh I practice.

Speaker 11 (05:51):
I mean, I know you're lose, but if y'all lose,
if y y'all will you get how.

Speaker 7 (06:00):
Any now?

Speaker 3 (06:09):
All right? So what happened?

Speaker 2 (06:10):
Well, Atlanta beat Dallas eighty two to eighty one, and
Angel Reese, who plays for Atlanta, afterward posted on her
social media the word dubs w for the word win,
and she had a hashtag quatro scientos, which is Spanish
for four hundred, referencing the four hundred dollars. And then
in her postgame press conference, Angel Reese said she expected

(06:33):
to get her money.

Speaker 3 (06:34):
Here's Reese cut seven.

Speaker 7 (06:36):
Yeah, I'll be requesting my Apple Hay after this.

Speaker 3 (06:40):
Now here's the problem.

Speaker 2 (06:41):
The WNBA's collective Bargaining Agreement explicitly prohibits players from wagering
anything of value on a league game, with possible penalties
ranging from a fine to suspension or even dismissal from
the league. This episode leaves the league in embarrassing position.
Its own social media account published evidence of two prominent

(07:05):
stars violating the league's gambling rules, then attempted to make
it disappear, and one of the players involved has clearly
admitted to this in a league sanctioned press conference. This
episode is just the latest in a string of public
relations problems for the Women's Basketball League. Right now, Congress
is asking for information from the commissioner on whether the

(07:28):
league is violating Caitlin Clark's civil rights by allowing her
to be pummeled night after night. And then there's the
case of Sophie Cunningham, who expressed the opinion recently that
men should not be allowed to play in women's sports,
and for saying that decidedly non controversial opinion out loud,
she's now being berated and scolded by people in and

(07:49):
around the league, and so are her fans. Two sixteen
year old girls attended a Seattle Storm game wearing shirts
supporting women's sports and carrying a sign thanking Sophie Cunningham
for her stance. An owner of the Seattle franchise, then
named Celeste Keaton confronted the two girls, and she cursed

(08:11):
at them, and she called them insane, leaving one of
them in tears. Look at this interaction cut nine. This
is a grown adult owner of a professional sports team
bullying teenagers who want to protect women's sports from biological males.

Speaker 3 (08:37):
I'll tell you what. Let's do this.

Speaker 2 (08:39):
Let's allow every w NBA team who plays against Seattle
to add males to its roster. And see how the
games turn out. Maybe that'll sober miss Keaton up as
it relates to the difference between men and women in sports.
At least the WNBA knows it has a problem here.
They've banned this team owner from attending the next five

(09:02):
home games. The WNBA is clearly a deeply troubled organization,
never turns a profit. It has two stars, Clark and Cunningham,
who are physically and verbally assaulted for failing to conform
to the league's woke agenda, and it is now embroiled
in a gambling scandal involving Angel Reese, routinely touted as

(09:22):
a star by the league, but who often can't make
a simple layup. We're going to talk more about this
gambling situation with Jonathan Cohen, an expert on the explosion
of sports gambling in the United States. He's coming up
right after the commercial break. Now, let's talk about supplements.
When you think about supplements in your diet, two things
matter the most.

Speaker 3 (09:40):
Does this thing work? Can I trust it?

Speaker 2 (09:43):
We hear from people every single day whose lives have
been changed by one of these supplements. It's called relief factor.
I'm going to let their stories do the talking. Here's
the story from Jony. Now, before Relief Factor, Joni said
that her husband could not open his hands in the morning.
It was so pained that he had to give up
playing the guitar. Now, after Relief Factor, he wakes up

(10:05):
with flexibility and he is back to playing music. They
Jony and her husband are both recommending Relief Factor to
friends as a way to once again enjoy the things
that they love. Could you be the next person sending
in your Relief Factor story to the Scott Jennings Show.

Speaker 3 (10:22):
Maybe it's easy to find out.

Speaker 2 (10:23):
You can get a three week supply of relief Factor
for just seventeen dollars and seventy six cents. It's waiting
for you. Go to relief Factor dot com or call
one eight hundred and four relief And when you get
it and you take it, I think you might be
sharing your Relief Factor story with us very soon. More
news after this. It's Scott Jennings on Salem. Stay with us, Hey,

(10:44):
it's Scott Jennings. Have you ever thought about how important
reliable energy is to your life? You know, it does
more than just light up your home. It creates opportunities
for entire communities. Large and small alike. That is why
Duke Energy is more than just energy provider. Through smart
investments in technology and grid infrastructure, they're adding enough capacity

(11:06):
to power nearly eleven million new homes over the next
five years, and they're doing it while keeping costs as
low as possible. They're deploying new rate structures to ensure
that large energy users pay their fair share. They've announced
more than five billion in customer savings, including three billion
from federal tax credits, and they're boosting the efficiency of

(11:27):
natural gas plants, saving customers nearly three hundred and fifty
million dollars. Just like American ingenuity and innovation, Duke Energy's
commitment to putting customers first never stops. Learn more at
Duke dash Energy dot com. Slash Powering America is.

Speaker 12 (11:43):
The author of the best selling book, A Revolution of
Common Sense.

Speaker 7 (11:48):
Cheers Scott Jennings.

Speaker 3 (11:51):
Thursday, July the thirtieth.

Speaker 2 (11:52):
Scott Jennings broadcasting live today from Knoxville, Tennessee, and we're
continuing coverage of this story unfolding with the w NBA.
The league posted a video and then deleted it showing
Angel Reefs and Page Buker's two players in the league
making a wager a wager, a bet on a game

(12:13):
in which they were playing against each other. The video
was posted, it was deleted, and then Angel Reeves in
a press conference after the game said she's expecting to
get paid her team won the game. The problem is
this activity is clearly in violation of the w NBA
league bylaws that prohibit players from wagering anything of value

(12:34):
on a game. You could be fine, suspended, or even dismissed.
What should the WNBA do about this? Joining us to
discuss Jonathan Cohen, who is author of the book Losing
Big America's Reckless bet on sports gambling. Jonathan, thanks for
coming back into the Scott Jtting Show. Give us your
reaction when you saw this story. Does the WNBA have

(12:56):
a huge problem on its hand here?

Speaker 10 (12:58):
I mean, this is just somblematic of the way that
the leagues are trying to have it both ways when
it comes to gambling. That they're insisting, Oh, gambling can
be fun. You can have fun. You can gamble on
the outcome of our games that will increase our media
package deals, that will increase our team values, and so on,
and it will not have anything to do to threaten
the integrity of our product. Whoops, it had something to

(13:19):
do to threaten the integrity of our product. And people
are going to get really confused and really judgmental, and
really suspicious if gambling, if athletes, even in a joking manner,
suggest that they're gambling on the outcome of even the
All Star Game.

Speaker 2 (13:32):
So this gambling video was posted in the lead, and
clearly the WNBA knows it has a problem. A lot
of people out there immediately are going back to the
Pete Rose situation, who was banned from baseball, can't even
get into the Hall of Fame because he bet on baseball.

Speaker 3 (13:47):
Do you see these two situations as similar in a way?

Speaker 10 (13:52):
I mean, the Pete Rose situation I think is of
course sort of more serious, as he was betting on
a game while he was a manager I believe, of
the team, so the teams involved in some of those games.
I don't think he threw the game necessarily, as he
did it sort of over a long standing period. But
in general, I mean, again taking into account of this
is the All Star Game. So I don't know if anyone
really cares about any All Star game, but we are

(14:14):
talking about athletes or managers gambling on a sport in
which they have some say over the direct outcome, and
even if you are gambling on yourself to win, it's
just suspicious. And the fear is that this is gonna
people are going to think that sports are professional wrestling,
where everything is rigged and everything is scripted because all
the athletes have money on the line. And it's of

(14:35):
course very different from Pete Rose. But I see, I
take your comparison. I think it's a fair one to
make in some respects.

Speaker 2 (14:41):
Okay, So Jonathan Cohen, by the way, as our guest,
he's author of the book called Losing Big, America's Reckless
Bet on Sports Gambling. Jonathan, if you were the commissioner
of the w NBA, what would you do here?

Speaker 3 (14:54):
Would you find them? Would you suspend them? Or is
it more serious than that?

Speaker 10 (14:58):
Well, she's got all sorts of other problems. She didn't
need this one. I assure you that she's I think,
by all accounts, are of the least trusted of the
commissioners in modern professional sports. I think again, this video,
which was sort of clearly made in jest, but I
think gambling just cannot be treated as a joke when
it comes to when it comes to professional sports and

(15:19):
when it comes to professional athletes. So I'm not saying
that they need to be made an example of they
need to be suspended or you know, fined or anything
super serious, but clearly this is beyond the pale, and
clearly this has to be the It's almost lucky. I
think for the NWNBA to have a wake up call
like this, that's all in the grand scheme, pretty benign,

(15:42):
because it could have been a lot worse. It could
have been an athlete over the course of many months
gambling on gambling on their own rebounds or something, because
of course that's something you can bet on. It's an
individual WNBA players rebounds. So now I'll defer to you
on the on the what you think so the judgment
should be. But I think they should be thinking they're
lucky that it was only four hundred bucks involved.

Speaker 2 (16:03):
Yeah, you raise an interesting question about how the leagues
are trying to integrate sports gambling into their arenas and
into their coverage, and at the same time they still
have bylaws that prohibit players from being involved with gambling
of any kind. We've seen this already in other leagues.
We've seen NBA, MLB dealing with this. Do you think

(16:23):
that the politicians need to get involved with encouraging the
sports leagues to clean this up? I think the average
fan out there, Jonathan now assumes, assumes that players are
involved with gambling of some kind.

Speaker 10 (16:37):
I think you're right. I think, first of all, I
don't think it's true. You know, I think a very
very small percentage of professional athletes have ever gambled or
will ever gamble on themselves. But I think a very
large percentage of the public believes that it happens or
that it can happen. And that's the problem. The most
precious commodity that supports leagues have is not their product,
it's the perception of the integrity of their product. We'll

(17:00):
start to think that these games are raped. People already
think that the NFL is rigged in favor of the
Kansas City Chiefs, and if people think that it's really rigged,
like actually rigged by gamblers, that's going to be a
huge problem. So you know, whether politicians need to get involved.
You know, I'm always wary of data, as I suspect
you are as well. But clearly something has a change

(17:21):
and for the leagues, there's just too much money for
them to sort of really police it beyond sort of
the baseline requirement of maintaining their integrity.

Speaker 2 (17:29):
Jonathan Cohen is the author of the book Losing Big
America's Reckless bet on sports gambling. Jonathan, thanks for joining
us here on the Scott Shenning Show. Quick note from
our friends at the Market Institute. They're calling attention to
an issue the bureaucrats don't want to talk about, and
that is that Alzheimer's is becoming an economic time bomb.
Cases in the United States are going to double by

(17:50):
twenty sixty to fourteen million. This is going to be
a burden, a heavy burden on families, on Medicare, on Medicaid,
on our national healthcare system, on our workforce in the
United States. We are simply not dealing with this. We're
waiting until it's too late. We do have tools like
blood tests that can help with early detection, we're just
not using them properly. Four and five voters say they'd

(18:13):
rather support candidates who want better access to Alzheimer's detection.
Join this conversation. Join this issue at Marketinstitute dot org.
More after this on The Scott Jenny Show. You've heard
the narratives, now get the truth. It's The Scott Jenny Show.

Speaker 3 (18:30):
Thursday July the thirtieth. Coming up.

Speaker 2 (18:32):
In just a few seconds, we're going to talk about
the big Senate race going on in New Hampshire.

Speaker 3 (18:37):
It's flying under the radar just a bit.

Speaker 2 (18:39):
But is this one of the Republican Party's best pickup
opportunities of the twenty twenty six midterm?

Speaker 3 (18:46):
I think maybe yes. John E.

Speaker 2 (18:49):
Sununu joins us in just a few seconds. First, a
word from our friends at the AAARP. If you are
like me, you've been paying into Social Security your whole
working life. That's your money. You earned it. But special
interest groups in Washington are pushing cuts to Social Security,
and at a time when Americans are depending on it

(19:10):
now more than ever. That's why the AARP is fighting
to stop the cuts and protect your money. If you
agree that social Security should be protected, take the pledge
to do that today at AARP dot org slash we
earned it all right, New Hampshire twenty twenty six. A
lot of Senate races going on. The one that's getting

(19:31):
the least attention but maybe should get more is New Hampshire.
This is a high stakes race, an open seat battle
featuring a seat that Democrats have held in the form
of Jeene Shaheen.

Speaker 3 (19:45):
She's out. Now there's an open seat.

Speaker 2 (19:47):
The Democrat front runner is Representative Chris Pappis. That is
on the Democrats side and on the Republican side, there
are two candidates running. The front runner is Johnny Sinunu
and he's also running against a fellow name Scott Brown.
So Sonunu he's the one that Republicans think has the
best chance to pick this up. Let's hear a little

(20:08):
bit from his campaign and cut three.

Speaker 8 (20:11):
Congress chef seems loud, dysfunctional, even angry. Well, somebody has
to step up. Somebody has to get things done. Laser
focus on the economy, jobs, our debt and making our
lives more affordable. As Senator of just one job, stand
up for the people of New Hampshire every single day.

(20:34):
The New Hampshire Way needs to be the American way.
I'm John Sunu and I approve this message.

Speaker 2 (20:42):
And joining us live to discuss this and the campaign
in general is John Sonunhu. Sir, Thanks for joining us
here on the Scott Jennings Show. You've been in politics
and then you were out of it. Talk to us
about your journey and what led you to run for
the United States Senate here in twenty twenty six.

Speaker 9 (21:00):
Thanks Scott.

Speaker 8 (21:01):
Great to be with you, you know, seeing you fight
in the good fight for a long time. I feel
like the proverbial radio show, A longtime listener, first time caller.

Speaker 9 (21:09):
Right, it's good to be with you. Look, I'm an
engineer by training.

Speaker 8 (21:13):
I worked in technology and manufacturing successfully for several years
before ever running for office. But I felt that kind
of background problem solving New Hampshire small business, that's what
we needed more of in politics in Washington in particular.

Speaker 9 (21:31):
Enjoyed my time serving in the House and Senate.

Speaker 8 (21:34):
I was able to write legislation banning internet taxes, protecting
our national forest here in New Hampshire, protecting the families
of law enforcement officers killed.

Speaker 9 (21:43):
In the line of duty.

Speaker 8 (21:44):
So you know, I think I have a good track
record of stepping up getting things done.

Speaker 9 (21:49):
And after the Senate I went back to the private sector.

Speaker 5 (21:52):
Right.

Speaker 8 (21:52):
What I love technology innovation, startup firms, big firms. Served
on the board of some really high tech companies, great company.
My family has a Ski Area Watervo Valley. I served
as chairman of the board for the Ski Area. So
you know, it's a great New Hampshire experience, small business experience.
And I'm running because this race is just incredibly important

(22:13):
in New Hampshire. We need someone who can be effective
in Washington, get things done with the administration, get things
done in Congress. You saw the ad, right, It's about affordability, jobs,
the economy. That's what people want to talk about. That
they want solutions in real answers, not just a lot
of rhetoric. And that's what our campaign has been about.

Speaker 3 (22:35):
Talk to me about the dynamics in the fall.

Speaker 2 (22:37):
Looks like you're going to be running against this fellow Congressman,
Chris Pappis, and you're going to be running under the
Republican banner most likely here And you know, look, the
two parties have their brands. We've got Donald Trump sitting
atop the Republican Party. Chris Pappis, you know when he
was in the House with Nancy Pelosi, voted with her
ninety nine percent of the time. How much of this

(22:58):
is going to be a battle over who is going
to be labeled as a party person or who can
win the label of independent voice.

Speaker 8 (23:08):
Well, look, if you want to be recognized as someone
who's independent, someone who can get things done, you need
to get things done. And I just talked about a
handful of things that I did for the state of
New Hampshire successfully, sometimes working with Democrats. Sometimes we had
democratic leadership in the Senate, we had Democrat presidents in

(23:28):
some of those cases, but I was able.

Speaker 9 (23:30):
To pass legislation.

Speaker 8 (23:31):
Chris Pappus has attempted very little in his eight years,
and Conquerors he's accomplished even less. He's been on the
Transportation Committee for eight years and yet New England, New
Hampshire ranks last in New England in federal highway fund
so he's just been totally ineffective. You mentioned the voting record,
and it's worth underscoring. When Nancy Pelosi was Speaker, he

(23:55):
voted with her two hundred and twenty two out of
two hundred twenty.

Speaker 9 (23:58):
Three recorded votes.

Speaker 8 (24:00):
First of all, that's not New Hampshire. It just simply
isn't representing New Hampshire. And second of all, you cannot
be effective when you're simply voting the party line like that.
So it's really a contrast of effectiveness, styles ability to get.

Speaker 9 (24:16):
Things done for New Hampshire.

Speaker 8 (24:18):
I've done it before, I'll do it again and equally important,
that's what this entire campaign has been about. I'm not
looking for another job. I'm not looking to make anyone
in Washington happy. I've had a successful career in the
private sector. I'm just focused on what's right for New Hampshire,
standing up for the people of this state every single day.

Speaker 3 (24:40):
Talk to us about the issue of energy.

Speaker 2 (24:42):
Seems to me this is a huge issue in most
of New England. Energy prices going up. A lot of
it has to do with what's going on at the
state level. I think there's a real contrast between your
views on energy and what PAPUS has done. Talk to
us about this, and I assume it's something that's coming
up in your conversations with voters across the state.

Speaker 9 (25:02):
It does. It does.

Speaker 8 (25:03):
Look on the affordability side three issues, and I'll focus
on energy here, but you've got housing, you've got healthcare,
and certainly energy and energy covers a number of different pockets.
But look first and foremost, it's about continuing to produce domestically.
We've achieved energy dominance in the United States because of

(25:24):
our willingness to explore responsibly, to produce responsibly, and export
all over the world. Second, we need better infrastructure, better
transmission natural gas pipelines, and that's what permitting reform is
all about. Here in New Hampshire, we can't get a
gas pipeline with the necessary capacity to come up from

(25:45):
the South Atlantic mid Atlantic to New Hampshire through Massachusetts.
They block it every step of the way. New York,
they block it every step of the way. And that's
simply not right. It's not right for America. Certainly it's
bad for New Hampshire. So permitting reform, I don't necessarily
approve every project, but it will give people a time

(26:05):
frame eighteen months where they'll get a yes or no,
and that makes all the difference when you're investing in
these big infrastructure projects to bring the cost of energy down.
And the last thing I'll say is, you know, we
don't need new energy taxes. That's obviously something my opponent,
Chris Papp has supported in the past. They talked about
higher gas taxes. He voted for one hundred billion and

(26:27):
new energy taxes under Joe Biden, and that certainly didn't
solve the problem. We saw gas prices go to five
dollars under Joe Biden and the kind of policies pap
is supported.

Speaker 3 (26:39):
Talking to John E.

Speaker 2 (26:40):
Sanunu, Republican candidate for the United States Senate in New Hampshire,
let's shift focus to national security and international affairs. A
lot of people are focused on what's going on with Iran.
This has been going on for several months now. It's
had an impact obviously on energy prices and gas prices
out there fluctuated a little bit based on what's in
the news on any given day. What are you telling voters?

(27:02):
How would you handle this if you were a United
States senator? The president has broad latitude on national security,
But what's your opinion about this conflict and when and
how it should come to an end.

Speaker 8 (27:14):
Well, look, it wasn't the best timing, and I've said
that publicly wouldn't have been my choice. But at the
same time, our focus should simply be on what's in
America's national security interest, denying them access to a nuclear weapon,
degrading their ballistic missile program, and destroying their ability to

(27:34):
fund terrorism through proxies like AMAS and Hezbella. I think
on the nuclear side and the ballistic missile side. We've
made great strides, accomplished most of those goals, and the
focus right now needs to be on getting the straight open.
It's in our interest, of course, but it's in the

(27:54):
interest of the regional players. In Saudi Arabia is I
think leading an effort to gauge the Gulf States into
taking a much more active role in protecting the straight.
Europe and China should both be involved as well, because
they've got a vested economic and national security interest, and
I think if and as they step up, we'll put

(28:15):
together a plan that gets the job done.

Speaker 3 (28:18):
Talking to John E.

Speaker 2 (28:19):
Sanunu, Republican candidate for the United States Senate in New Hampshire,
I talked to us a little bit about the politics
and the mechanics here. We still have a primary to go.
It looks to me like you have a healthy lead
over Scott Brown. Interesting, you both have been in the Senate.
Scott Brown served in the Senate. You served in the Senate,
and you both come back now to run forward again.
Pappus is on the Democratic side. He has a primary

(28:43):
as well, and he's getting a little bit of criticism
in his primary on the left from taking money from Apak.
Is that coming up in your conversations with voters how
they're viewing candidates in their relationship with Jewish donors in
this cycle.

Speaker 8 (29:00):
Well, look, I haven't spoken a lot to Democratic primary voters,
and I'll let them battle it out. You know, given
that he's been in Congress for eight years, it is
quite surprising that he's being held close to fifty percent
right now in his primary. The last poll had his
lead and maybe about twenty twenty two percent, which isn't

(29:22):
great for an incumbent. I don't take anything for granted
on the Republican side. I mean, we've been campaigning hard.
You put up an ad there that you know, we're
spending money advertising making sure we get the message out
about bringing down the cost of living, energy security and
the like. So we're running full blast in this primary.
It'll be September eighth. And at the same time, we

(29:46):
need to keep making the contrast with Chris pappis his
effectiveness on the Transportation Committee as an effectiveness as a leader.
Now Hampshire has even lost the Democrat First in the
Nation primary because Chris pap in our Democrat congressional delegation
has no sway, no clout. I mean, what's amazing to me.

(30:08):
It was twenty three votes I think for South Carolina,
nineteen votes for Nevada.

Speaker 9 (30:14):
New Hampshire only got four votes in the DNC.

Speaker 8 (30:16):
And that's just testament to the fact that Chris Pappus
can't get it done for New Hampshire. Whether it's whether
it's politics, whether it's policy, whether it's substance or funding
or leadership, it's just not there.

Speaker 2 (30:31):
We're going to continue our conversation with john SONUNU, Republican
candidate for the US Senate New Hampshire, in just a moment. First,
I want to welcome a new partner into the Scott
Shetting Show. It's called Nobel Gold Investments. You hear a
lot about investing in gold and silver these days. The
real question was never should I invest? But who can
I trust when I make the decision to do it.

(30:53):
I would recommend you turn to Noble Gold Investments. They
take something that feels complicated, they make it very simple.
Whether you're interested in bars and coins or and just
holding gold and silver in an ir Noble Gold is
there to guide you. They are one of America's most
trusted and respected precious metals dealers, and they put your

(31:14):
interests first.

Speaker 3 (31:14):
Here's what I like about Noble Gold. There is no.

Speaker 2 (31:17):
Pressure, there are no gimmicks, and when you call up
and talk to them about your personal questions, they give
you answers that are tailored to your personal situation. This
is not a one size fits all pitch to get
you to buy gold. They give you answers that are
specific to you and your portfolio.

Speaker 3 (31:37):
Give them a call.

Speaker 2 (31:38):
The number is this eight seven seven six four six
five three four seven or visit Noble Gooldinvestments dot com.
One more thing. It is America two fifty. Noble Gold
is celebrating. They will send you a free ten ounce
US Independence silver bar when you open a new qualified

(31:58):
account Noble Gold Investments dot Com. Tell them Scott Jennings
sent you. More with john Sonunu when we come back
on the Scott Jennings.

Speaker 12 (32:05):
Show, when he's done the Oval Office, start owning the libs,
let's seenn he's here with us.

Speaker 7 (32:11):
It's the Scott Jennings Show.

Speaker 2 (32:14):
Thursday, July thirtieth, Common Sense for the American People. Big
conversation today with john Sonunu, candidate for US Senate in
New Hampshire. Senator, you were in the Senate for one term.
You've left, You've done a lot of things in the
private sector. Now you've come back. What's your opinion, what's
changed more since you left the Senate? Washington or Johnson UNU.

Speaker 9 (32:39):
Well, I've certainly changed.

Speaker 8 (32:40):
I mean I've been out working in the private sector
for fifteen years. You learn a lot, you see a lot,
and I'm a firm believer I want people who have
had real world experience to bring it to public service
and help solve problems.

Speaker 9 (32:54):
And so I've certainly changed a little. Look, Washington's changed
as well. You know, it's a little bit more.

Speaker 10 (33:00):
Course.

Speaker 8 (33:01):
I think a lot of that's driven by social media.
It's driven by the fact that people go on social media,
politicians just to try to generate followers, to try to
you know, generate a cult to personality. They're often not
really worried about actually getting things done. I mean, you
see that with some of these socialist candidates around the country.

(33:21):
You know, you wonder if they're really serious about doing
anything or getting the things done that they claim to
want to do, or are they just trying to rawl
arouse and build a following. I mean, do they really
want to abolish the Senate? Do they really want to
abolish our borders and defund the military? These are really
crazy ideas that would fundamentally undermine and destroy the fabric

(33:45):
of American security and our foundation of government. I will
say this though, The socialists are having impact already on
Congress and on candidates like Chris Bappis, the one I'm
running against. He he voted again. It's the Defense Authorization Bill. Now,
this is a bill that funds the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard,
supports thousands of New Hampshire workers. Both Democrat members of

(34:09):
Congress and Maine voted for it, but PAPIs voted against
because he's afraid of the socialist left. They're moving him
to the left. You mentioned support for Israel. On the
last vote, a vote to cut off aid to Israel.
Chris Pappis couldn't decide if he was forward or against it,

(34:31):
so he voted present.

Speaker 9 (34:32):
Again.

Speaker 8 (34:34):
The fear and the influence of the left on candidates
like Chris Pappis, it's already undermining what I think is
in the interest of New Hampshire because he's failing to
take a real stand and I'm sure it's happening all
over the country.

Speaker 2 (34:49):
Let's do a little rapid fire on a few issues.
More nuclear power, yes or no?

Speaker 9 (34:55):
Big yes. Yeah. We have c book in New Hampshire,
unbelievably successful.

Speaker 3 (35:01):
Should men ever compete in women's sports?

Speaker 9 (35:05):
No? No, And this is an issue of difference.

Speaker 8 (35:08):
Chris Pappus is on the other side here, unfortunately, and
it's not where the people in New Hampshire are.

Speaker 2 (35:14):
Should voters be required to show identification? And generally, where
are you on the Save Act?

Speaker 8 (35:21):
Support the Save Acts? Support the idea of voter id
at the polls. We have it in New Hampshire. I
mean many states have it now. It's not even controversial anymore,
and it's a shame that we can't set a national standard.

Speaker 2 (35:35):
Should members of Congress be banned from trading individual stocks?

Speaker 8 (35:41):
Yes, I think they should, but let's be clear, that's
barely real reform. I mean I support term limits. I
think members of Congress should pay for their own health care.
They shouldn't get any subsidy until they fix what they broke.
And if you vote to shut down government, you shouldn't
get paid. And that's exactly Chris Pappus is on the

(36:02):
front of that line.

Speaker 9 (36:03):
He voted a dozen times to shut down government.

Speaker 8 (36:05):
He still collected a paycheck even though you know TSA
and the air traffic controllers got stiffed.

Speaker 3 (36:11):
Who gives better political advice? Your father or your brother?

Speaker 8 (36:17):
What?

Speaker 3 (36:17):
I can't hear you.

Speaker 9 (36:20):
They're both very knowledgeable.

Speaker 8 (36:22):
Look, my brother's more current, but my father has obviously
more experience.

Speaker 9 (36:27):
But my dad always said, not.

Speaker 8 (36:29):
Just to me publicly, he said, Look, the only advice
that's taken is advice that's asked for, and he's always
been very respectful of that.

Speaker 3 (36:40):
All Right, This is John Sinunu.

Speaker 2 (36:42):
He is the Republican candidate for Senate in New Hampshire.
He isn't a primary, it's coming up in September. Uh,
but most polls indicate that he has a comfortable lead.
I John, I think this one's flying under the radar,
but it might be one of the Republicans' best pick
up opportunities. Looks like your website is sinwnew senator dot com.

Speaker 3 (37:02):
I'll give you the last word ten seconds.

Speaker 8 (37:05):
Well, I appreciate you having me on, appreciate any support
out there. Look that the race is about New Hampshire,
but it's important to the country.

Speaker 9 (37:12):
I'm excited about it.

Speaker 8 (37:13):
It's going well and in New Hampshire it's town to town,
person to person.

Speaker 9 (37:17):
That's why we're winning.

Speaker 3 (37:19):
All Right.

Speaker 2 (37:19):
That's John Snunu that voice you're hearing, candidate for Senate
in New Hampshire. This is one of the biggest races
of the twenty twenty six mid term. We're going to
take a break. We'll have more news right after this.
It's common sense for the American people. We broadcast it
on Salem. I'm Scott Jennings. Don't go anywhere. Quick check
of the headlines here. On Thursday, July the thirtieth, just

(37:39):
a few minutes ago, President Trump at the White House
announcing what he's calling the Freedom Haulers Initiative. This is
to get illegal alien truck drivers off American roadways and
replace them with American veterans.

Speaker 3 (37:54):
Here's the President cut twelve.

Speaker 13 (37:56):
Thank you all for being here as we take action
to get illegal alien truck drivers off the American roadways.
We're doing a very strong movement and we have had
such support for this and replaced them with proud American veterans,
and it's about time.

Speaker 2 (38:18):
If you're interested in this, initiative Look it Up Freedomhaulers
dot dot dot gov. Now, the president's contending with some
economic numbers today that he's not going to love. Gross
domestic product last quarter clocking in at one point five percent.
The expectation was somewhere between one point eight and two percent.

(38:38):
Last quarter it was two point one. So economy growing
but slowing down just a bit. Politics news South Carolina,
the race is on to replace Lindsey Graham in the
United States Senate. First polling is out on the Republican
primary from Emerson College. They find twenty two percent support
Congressman Ralph Norman, nineteen percent support Darlene Graham, who's Lindsey

(39:00):
Graham's sister and has the support of President Trump. Russell Frye, congressman,
has twelve and Mark Sandford, the former governor and congressman,
has eleven. Quarter of the voters undecided the election. Snap
election happens on August the eleventh, and Emerson, by the way,
also out today with the poll in the Michigan Senate
race Democrat primary coming up on Tuesday.

Speaker 3 (39:22):
This Tuesday, and.

Speaker 2 (39:23):
The Socialist Progressive Abdul l Sayed has a commanding lead
over Hayley Stevens. She has the backing of the Democratic establishment.
Fifty four percent to thirty nine percent is the score
that comes up on Tuesday. I tend to think Abdul
l Sayed would be easier for Republican Mike Rodgers to defeat.

(39:45):
We'll see what happens next week. We'll be tracking this
race closely for the rest of the year. Speaking of polling,
a lot of new data coming out from our friends
at the Manhattan Institute on a number of topics, including
welfare reform. Joining us to discuss this new data, Jesse
arm with a Manhattan Institute Jesse, talk to us about

(40:05):
this data. What are the top line results of the
new Manhattan Institute survey.

Speaker 14 (40:10):
It's great to be with you, Scott, thanks for having me.

Speaker 3 (40:13):
Look.

Speaker 14 (40:14):
Thirty years after Bill Clinton signed welfare reform into law,
the Democratic Party has largely abandoned the politics it once
embraced in favor of something that is much more activist centric.
This is the movement has now embraced universal benefits, unconditional
cash assistance, and democratic socialism across the board, and our

(40:38):
new polling at the Manhattan Institute suggests that the American
public has actually not made the same shift, despite the
fact that the political class that rules democratic politics has
something like nearly three quarters of voters seventy four percent
support work requirements for welfare recipients.

Speaker 3 (40:55):
Sixty yes, seventy percent.

Speaker 2 (40:56):
Hold on, Hold on, you're saying to me that three
quarters of American voters support work requirements for Medicaid or
for welfare. Three quarters of the American people.

Speaker 14 (41:11):
That's not all I'm telling you. Let me tell you
more of these numbers I memorized before the right. Okay,
sixty seven percent favored targeted assistants over universal benefits. Eighty
percent prefer providing benefits through food, housing, and healthcare over
unrestricted cash and Scott. What's interesting about all of this
is the fact that this is not new stuff. This

(41:33):
was the welfare reform of the nineteen nineties. This was
Bill Clinton's Democratic Party, and the Democratic Party of today
couldn't be further from that. Socialism is ascendant. Abdul Elsaidism,
whatever that's all about, is ascendant. And it's not your
father's Democratic Party anymore. It's not JFK's Democratic Party, and
it ain't Bill Clinton's Democratic Party.

Speaker 2 (41:54):
This is an important political question because I spent all
last summer sitting at a desk CNN being assured by
everybody else that was sitting out there that work requirements
in Medicaid were going to be the death of the
Republicans in the November twenty twenty sixth election, And of
course they wanted to ignore the fact that Bill Clinton

(42:16):
was working on this back in the nineties. But this polling,
to me is astonishing, and Jesse, it suggests to me
that Republicans who voted for the big, beautiful bill, who
voted for work requirements ought.

Speaker 3 (42:28):
To lean into it in the upcoming election. Is that
what the poll tells you.

Speaker 14 (42:34):
I think that's absolutely correct.

Speaker 3 (42:36):
There is a broad public.

Speaker 14 (42:38):
Consensus that neither party actually, to be perfectly honest with you,
Scott fully owns at this point, Americans continue to favor
this Bill Clinton formula of combining compassion with responsibility, okay,
pairing this meaningful support for those in need with expectations
of work program integrity and public organ and while Democrats

(43:01):
have increasingly I think distanced themselves from that approach, Republicans
have not always presented it effectively or defined the fact
that they own this issue. And what our polling suggests
is that there remains a substantial political opening for candidates
who want to champion welfare, pragmatism and mainstream public safety ideas.

(43:22):
I should also mention we attested these ideas that a
lot of these DSA candidates are running on about abolishing
police prisons in the border very unpopular across the board
every demographic, including those who are the most left leaning
voters in this country. And I think that, you know,
the moderate politics that helped Clinton build a durable electoral
coalition are still up to grabs, and I think Republicans

(43:43):
are a whole lot closer to them, somewhat ironically today
than this Democratic Party.

Speaker 2 (43:48):
Jesse arm is with the Manhattan Institute talking about a
broad set of new polling questions just released from Manhattan. Jesse,
you had an interesting question about the death penalty. We
don't see data on this very often. How do Americans
feel about the death penalty here in twenty twenty six.

Speaker 14 (44:05):
Yeah, this is a pretty interesting one. The death penalty
is quite popular, and that matters. That matters from the
standpoint of the fact that Americans believe in retribution for
egregious crimes. They will not be made to feel bad
for believing both that this is a just outcome and
that it serves some kind of deterrent effect. Americans are

(44:28):
actually not only in favor of the death penalty in
instances of capital crimes by the offender as well. They're
also interested in pursuing the death penalty for child rapists,
for terrorists who wish to blow up Americans.

Speaker 3 (44:42):
But fail and succeeding to do so.

Speaker 14 (44:44):
There are a whole lot of outcomes in which Americans
have an appetite for a much harder approach to crime
and punishment, and increasingly, I think the Republican Party has
this temptation to go soft on some of these questions.
Should not, and they should be weary of the fact
that the American people believe in this as a virtue

(45:06):
as well.

Speaker 2 (45:07):
All Right, you've seen a lot of data here, Jesse,
things that are working for both parties, things that aren't working.
If you were a Democrat, what would concern you the
most about the data here in your latest survey.

Speaker 14 (45:19):
Well, I think what I'd be concerned about is the
fact that Democrats are incentivized to say exactly the things
in primaries that they are going to be hurt by
in general elections. So the Democratic Party has this ascendant
force right now. It's the DSA, It's Democratic Socialists, It's
people who have sympathies for Islamists and people who engage

(45:41):
in Jihati terrorism.

Speaker 3 (45:43):
Okay. And you know who's not a part of that train.

Speaker 14 (45:47):
Who's this big loyal constituency to the Democratic Party for many,
many years at this point, but who are consistently preferring
Andrew Cuomo Overszaron Mamdani, preferring Haley Stevens over abdual l said,
you know, Jasmin Crockett, even over James Tallerico in Texas,
it's the black voters, Okay. The majority of black voters,

(46:09):
which have been a massive piece of the Democratic constituency
for such a long time, are increasingly seeing their preferences replaced.
The central story of the American left at this point
is no longer one about slavery being America's original sin,
and working class and middle class black folks who just
want to have good life and pursue you know, freedom

(46:34):
and prosperity. Increasingly it is this more radical story. Somewhat ironically,
as the Democratic Party gets whiter, gets richer, gets more
highly educated, there's this new activist centered story about the
global South and America as sort of an imperial evil
that is not uniquely evil, because there's also all these

(46:56):
other Western imperial powers, whether it's the UK, or whether
it's Israel, or really you name it, anyone who kind
of fits into this colonizer bucket. That's the new central
story on the left, and it's replacing the things that
black voters care about. Who are the most loyal voting
block for the Democratic Party?

Speaker 2 (47:15):
Fascinating stuff. Jesse arm Is with the Manhattan Institute, Thanks
for the data today. When it comes to supplements, my friends,
two things matter to you.

Speaker 3 (47:23):
Does this work? And can you trust it?

Speaker 2 (47:25):
Rather than me tell you the answers on behalf of
relief Factor, I would rather let our customers do the talking.
Here's a note from Mark. He was in tears because
of daily hand joint discomfort. After a week of relief
Factor fifty percent better. Now after several months he barely
notices any pain at all. Could you have a similar

(47:47):
story that you'll be sending into us? I hope, so
try it out. Three weeks of relief Factor cost seventeen
dollars and seventy six cents.

Speaker 3 (47:54):
What a bargain.

Speaker 2 (47:55):
It's waiting for you at relief factor dot com or
by calling one eight hundred for Relief. I hope you'll
send us your relief Factor story very soon. Major economic
development news from the Department of Energy.

Speaker 3 (48:08):
We have that story next.

Speaker 7 (48:09):
Stay with us the very definition of never backed down. Here,
Scott Jennings.

Speaker 2 (48:16):
It is Thursday, July the thirtieth broadcasting for Salem Common
Sense for the American People on location today in Knoxville, Tennessee.
Let's talk energy and economic development, shall we. The Commonwealth
of Kentucky has landed what could become one of the
largest private investments in the history of that state. The

(48:37):
Trump Administration's Department of Energy has announced a partnership to
redevelop part of the old federal nuclear site in Paduca
into an enormous artificial intelligence and high performance computing campus.
The investment they're talking about here is huge, one hundred

(48:58):
billion dollars privately funded by the way, and it has
a massive economic impact about eight thousand construction jobs, followed
by six hundred permanent jobs once this campus is up
and operating. This is not a simple case of just
another data center that's plugging into the existing electrical grid.

(49:20):
And leaving people wondering whether their utility builds are about
to shoot through the roof. The developers here are also
planning to build the energy infrastructure needed to power it.

Speaker 3 (49:33):
This is a key point. Next.

Speaker 2 (49:35):
Stra Energy is the company here, and they are planning
to construct two gigawatts of new natural gas generation, and
this would upgrade the region's transmission system and add as
much as two point six gigawatts of battery storage. The
AI campus itself expected to require about one point eight gigawatts,

(49:57):
So in other words, the project is going to produce
and store more electricity than the data center consumes, and
the excess power is going to flow onto the regional
power grit.

Speaker 3 (50:11):
This is a good thing for every regular rate payer.

Speaker 2 (50:15):
Americans on data centers are worried about how these data
centers are going to affect their electrical bills, and this
project seems to get it just right. President Trump has
been talking a lot lately about this rate payer protection pledge,
and that means these facilities cannot simply consume enormous amounts

(50:35):
of electricity and force small businesses and families to subsidize them.
The companies that are benefiting from the AI boom I
think should help pay for the new generation that's needed
to support it. And that's what's happening here. The Energy
Secretary is named Chris Wright. He was in Paducah to
announce this project, and he says, this is an example

(50:56):
of how America can build the infrastructure necessary to win
the AI race, but not burden everyday average American rate payers.

Speaker 3 (51:06):
Let's listen to Chris Wright and cut eleven.

Speaker 11 (51:08):
So we've got a number of industrial sites around the
country that we're key in World War two and post
World War two efforts. And then as those efforts ramped down,
those sites became quiet, jobs left those regions and were
revitalizing those regions to allow the development of massive new
power generation data centers in additional advanced manufacturing to bring

(51:33):
jobs and opportunities across rural America, allow us to lead
China and the AI race and push down electricity prices
after four years of inflated prices under President Biden. Of course,
there's a fear campaign going on right now. And why
it's going on is the Democrats, since the election of
President Obama, have spent seventeen years pushing up electricity prices.

(51:58):
Blue states have fifty percent higher electricity prices than red states,
and now they figure they've got the perfect scapegoat. It
wasn't our bad green policies, it was data centers that didn't.
Of course, it's total nonsense.

Speaker 2 (52:14):
Here's my take. I actually have two takes. Number one,
Chris Wright is dead on. You have Democrats trying to
deflect attention from their own policies and blame something for
higher energy prices. That's not to blame. Number two, In
my opinion, this is what intelligent economic development ought to
look like. You take federal land that's already served an

(52:36):
important national purpose and put it back into productive use.

Speaker 3 (52:39):
You know this Paduca side. I'm familiar with it. I'm
from down in that area.

Speaker 2 (52:43):
It wants enriched uranium for America's nuclear energy and national
security programs, and the government is continuing the necessary environmental cleanup.
But the property has available land, it has transmission capacity,
it has water infrastructure, fiber connectivity. These are the assets
that you need for a modern computing campus. Number two,

(53:04):
they are requiring new energy production to accompany this project
and to meet new energy demands. You can't build the
AI economy with slogans and wishful thinking. Artificial intelligence is
going to require extraordinary computing power, and it needs reliable
electricity every second of the day. That means things like
natural gas, It means transmission lines, it means storage, and

(53:28):
it ought to mean a major expansion of America nuclear
power as well. Finally, this is being built in America's heartland,
right in Middle America, Western Kentucky. Congratulations on the project.

Speaker 3 (53:42):
This is a good thing.

Speaker 2 (53:43):
It's a good thing for the Trump administration, good thing
for Kentucky, good thing for America in general. Richard Hudson,
Congressman from North Carolina, is next. Stay with us on
the Scott Chitting.

Speaker 12 (53:53):
Show, saving question civilization, one busted leftist narrative at a time.

Speaker 7 (53:59):
It's Scott Jenny.

Speaker 3 (54:01):
Show coming up in sixty seconds.

Speaker 2 (54:03):
We talked to the chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee,
Congressman Richard Hudson of North Carolina. But first, here is
a reality that the bureaucrats don't want to talk about.
Alzheimer's is becoming an economic time bomb and our country
is simply not ready. Cases are on track to double
the fourteen million by twenty sixty. This will put pressure

(54:25):
on families, the workforce, and an already strained Medicare and
Medicaid system. Here is what should get your attention. It's
American families that shoulder most of the burden. They cover
about seventy percent of the four hundred thousand dollars lifetime
care cost for any Alzheimer's patient. Now, our competitors in
the world, they're not standing still. China, in fact, has

(54:47):
launched a national priority to expand early diagnosis and treatment.
Why aren't we doing that here in the United States?
We have the tools like simple blood tests to spot
the early signs of alzheimer and it's good politics.

Speaker 3 (55:02):
Four and five voters.

Speaker 2 (55:03):
Say they are more likely to support a candidate who
prioritizes better access to Alzheimer's detection, diagnosis, and treatment. That
would be good for families, It would certainly be good
for the economy, and frankly to me, it sounds like
common sense. To get in on this conversation or join
the fight. Go to our friends at Marketinstitute dot org.

(55:23):
That is Market Institute dot org.

Speaker 3 (55:27):
All right.

Speaker 2 (55:28):
Earlier this week, we passed the one hundred day mark
until election day, and the National Republican Congressional Committee released
a memo about the GOP's position as it relates to
holding the majority in the November midterm. Here to discuss
that is the chairman of the NRCC, that's what we

(55:49):
call it in Washington. His name is Richard Hudson of
North Carolina. Mister chairman, thanks for joining us here on
the Scott Jennings Show. You released a memo one hundred
days to go. Tell us why do you think Republicans
are positioned to defy history and hold the majority this November.

Speaker 4 (56:08):
Well, thank you, Scott, it's great to be with you again. Listen,
there's no question we're going to hold this majority. Number one,
Republicans are on offense. You know, we've got great candidates,
We've got a battlefield that favors Republicans, We've got record fundraising,
and the polls are tightening in our direction. You know,
we're we're not just focused on campaign slogans. You know,

(56:29):
our majority in the House has been focused on the
American people and we've we have a clear agenda to
run on tax cuts, a secure border, an economy is working,
and finally, you know, this election is going to be
a choice and the American people are going to be
asked to decide do you do you do believe in
Donald Trump's agenda that is bringing this country back, or
do you want to follow the socialist agenda that Mam

(56:52):
Dommi and others are now pushing for the Democrat Party.
And so, you know, the indicators are going our way.
Were camp paying on promises made, promises kept, and this
election is going to be a choice election and the
Democrats are making that choice very easy for the voters.

Speaker 2 (57:09):
Mister Cherman, it seems to me you have a few
things going in your direction. One of them is, after
all the redistricting fights, it seems to me the Republicans
probably have netted out ten to twelve seats here.

Speaker 3 (57:21):
That's number one. Number two, you have a financial advantage.

Speaker 2 (57:25):
It is a substantial financial advantage for your committee and
for the Republican Party. And number three, and we've been
talking a lot about this on the show, it strikes
me that the Democrats and a lot of these purple
districts have been nominating or are about to nominate candidates
who are way way outside the main stream. Do you
see those three things as key advantages and maybe comment

(57:47):
on each of them.

Speaker 4 (57:49):
Sure, I think you're one hundred percent right. You know,
I felt like we had a favorable map coming into
this election before redistricting. You know, typically a midterm election
is a correction election, so presidential election to whatever party
the president's inn when they come into office, they usually
bring in a lot of extra seats, and in that

(58:09):
midterm you'll see the voters in those districts sort of
go back to their normal voting patterns, and you do
see these swings. But that's just not the case with
this map. It's a tiny map. There's so few seats
that are up for grabs. There's just a lot of
Republican seats are safe and a lot of Democrat seats
are safe. So when you look at the seats that
are actually up for grabs, there's more Democrats sitting in
Republican seats than Republicans sitting in Democrat seats. That became

(58:33):
even more the case after redistricting. On fundraising, you're exactly right,
you know, for the first time since I recall, the
Republicans have outraised the Democrat campaign committee and ability resources
to compete on a bigger map than Democrats are going
to be able to afford to play on. And the
reason is money follows momentum. And Republican donors understand what's

(58:55):
at stake, and so Republicans will have the resources to
tell our story, to to make this case to the
to the voters. And uh, I think that's a huge advantage.
And I think you know, another factor that is really
important is just just candidate quality. You know, and we
talk about sort of the leftward trend of the Democrats.
I mean, I've I've described it as a Bolshevik revolution

(59:17):
and Democrat primaries. You know, all the energy and all
the money is going to candidates. I'm not calling them socialists.
These are candidates who call themselves socialists and uh. And
they've you know, they put in writing what their agenda
is and it's it's anti American. And you know, we're
no longer uh a case in this country where Republicans
and Democrats are debating marginal tax rates for you know,

(59:38):
arguing over the size of the bureaucracy.

Speaker 14 (59:41):
Uh.

Speaker 4 (59:41):
The Democrats now are arguing to fundamentally destroy the institutions
that make our country great. And so you know, they
are nominating candidates that are unelectable and uh, and it's
it's you know, you look at these battleground districts, thanks
to President Trump working closely with US, helping US recruit candidates,
UH supporting candidates.

Speaker 11 (59:59):
Early.

Speaker 4 (01:00:00):
We've avoided primaries and almost all these competitive seats, whereas
the Democrats have had bruising primaries, very expensive primaries, and
as you say, they're electing these self proclaimed socialists that
make it very easy for us to draw a contrast
for the voters.

Speaker 2 (01:00:16):
That voice you're listening to Richard Hudson, Congressman from North Carolina.
He's part of the leadership in the House for the Republicans.
He runs the National Republican Congressional Campaign Committee. He's in
charge of getting Republicans elected in November a congressman. On
this issue of socialism taking over the Democratic Party, I
was reviewing some CNN polling today.

Speaker 3 (01:00:37):
Listen to this. You may not have seen this yet.

Speaker 2 (01:00:39):
The percentage of Democrats who say to CNN that they
are either enthusiastic or at least okay with their party
nominating socialists seventy three percent. You have three quarters of
the Democratic Party who had a minimum say yeah, I
think it's fine if we go down the socialist route,

(01:01:01):
and a lot more are enthusiastic about it. To me,
campaigns are about setting up bright lines. You couldn't have
brighter lines between this socialist agenda and the common sense agenda.
The speaker says, it's common sense first. Communism. Is that
a label that we're going to see the Republicans using
all over the country.

Speaker 4 (01:01:20):
Well, I think so. But you know, we're gonna tailor
every one of these races based on the districts they're
running in. You know, for example, we've got Carrie Buck
running in Nevada against Deano Titis. Carrie Buck's one of
the best candidates we've ever had.

Speaker 10 (01:01:33):
Uh.

Speaker 4 (01:01:33):
She's a former teacher, former principal of the year, her
husband's a retired police officer. One of her children's in
the military. She's held a Democrat state Senate seat. She
is exactly the kind of candidate we we look for.
And she's running against Dean Titus, who voted against no
tax on tips in Nevada.

Speaker 10 (01:01:51):
Yep.

Speaker 4 (01:01:51):
Uh, So you're going to be hearing a lot about
that vote, and I believe you know we're gonna we're
gonna prevail because of that. But you know, it is
a stunning number, Scott that seventy percent of Democrats would
be okay with socialist takeover. I mean to me, though,
it's really an indictment of our education system in America
that any Americans would think socialism is a good idea,

(01:02:14):
you know, I think, you know, the self proclaimed socialists
try to sell it as capitalism light or a counter
genillar version of capitalism. But anyone who studied history, anyone
who knows anything about economic theory, understands that socialism is
a transitory period between a free society and fatalitarianism and communism,

(01:02:37):
and it always leads to pain. It always leads to
suffering and death, and every American should reject socialism. So
what it tells me is that as we run these campaigns,
we got to connect the dots for the American people.
You know, it's not enough to say that this candidates
the socialist. Is to say this candid is a socialist.

(01:02:57):
And that means you will everything that you purchase for
your family is going to be more expensive. It means
that you will have less choices about your family's life
in terms of if you can't choose your doctor, you
can't choose the school. You know, these choices will be
made for you by a government, and good luck if
that government you knows benevolent or not. I mean, that

(01:03:18):
is not the world the Americans want to live in.

Speaker 8 (01:03:20):
You know.

Speaker 4 (01:03:21):
Republicans offer a different view, where we have a secure country,
a free country, a safe country, where every American can
live up to their potential and every American family can
afford the things they need. That is our vision for
the country. And we just have to connect the dots
to how dark and dreary and depressing the Democrat agend is.

Speaker 2 (01:03:42):
Congressman, in your memo, this one hundred day memo, you
had the national generic ballot at four points for the Democrats,
not an insturmountable lead by any stretch of the imagination.
Some other news outlet polling this week has a little
wider but basically the generic vat it is floating slightly
Democrat at this point. Do you feel okay about that?

(01:04:05):
And maybe talk to our listeners about the generic ballot?
It seems to me if you go into election day
and the Democrats have less than a five point lead,
they're going to be in trouble here.

Speaker 4 (01:04:15):
You're exactly right, Scott. You and I have been around
campaigns a long time, you know. I remember one of
the first lessons I learned what was conventional wisdom is
if the Democrats generic ballot is six points or more,
you're going to have a tough time. If it's less
than six, then it's Republican Disneyland. So you know, that's
kind of the dividing line in my mind. And so,

(01:04:38):
and I think it's become even more of the case
that a lot of folks don't answer polls, and a
lot of conservatives in particular, don't trust these polls. And
so if you look at Republican polling, it always lags,
and we always do better.

Speaker 8 (01:04:54):
You know.

Speaker 4 (01:04:54):
And the other thing I would point out is a
lot of these polls that Democrats are pointing to are
nationwide polls. You know, we don't have a nationwide election
this November. We have a district by district election.

Speaker 12 (01:05:05):
You know.

Speaker 4 (01:05:05):
In some cases we have Senate races which are state
by state, but in the case of Congress, these are
district by district, community by community fights in these and
so we look at polling in these competitive districts, and
in the districts that we care about, the numbers are
moving our way, and we feel really good about about

(01:05:26):
the Poland.

Speaker 2 (01:05:28):
I think the coverage of the midterms is also skewed.
It seems to paint a picture that Republicans are on
defense everywhere. You mentioned that race in Nevada, which, by
the way, we had to buck on the show yesterday,
and there are other races main second district, North Carolina's
first district, New Mexico to Texas thirty four, Washington three.

Speaker 3 (01:05:49):
I won't mention all the names, but here's the one
thing they have in common.

Speaker 2 (01:05:52):
They all have Democratic incumbents or Democrat held seats today,
and in my opinion, Republicans are on offense in all
those districts, and so I think the coverage this year
is going to be, Oh, Republicans are on defense here,
but you all have actually put the Republican Party on
offense in a number of districts, which is a testament
to your leadership at the NRCC and candidate recruitment. That's

(01:06:14):
Richard Hudson, Congressman from North Carolina, chairman of the National
Republican Congressional Campaign Committee. Mister chairman, You've got a huge
job ahead of you and we wish you the best
of luck saving the country from the Communists this November,
and we will talk to you throughout the November cycle.

Speaker 3 (01:06:31):
Thanks for joining us today. We got to take a break.
More to come on the Scott Jennings Show right after this.

Speaker 7 (01:06:35):
If the leftists haven't had enough yet, there's more. This
is the Scott Jenning Show, all right.

Speaker 2 (01:06:41):
Rounding out the show here on Thursday, July thirtieth, and
rounding out my week. I'm going to take a few
days off after today. The world travels of Scott Jennings
have worn out. Scott Jennings, I got to get some
vacation before the summer ends. So we're going to round
out today, take a couple of days off, and get
back in here next week. By the way, in the
United States Senate, just a few minutes ago, along party

(01:07:05):
lines fifty to forty seven, a resolution has passed allowing
for seventy four of the President's nominations to move forward,
including TSA and FEMA administrators, the US Archivist, White House
Budget Deputy Director, and the US Ambassador to Australia. This

(01:07:25):
is sort of an n block set of nominations that's
going to move forward. So some folks the President has
sent up will eventually very near future be in their
offices in Washington.

Speaker 3 (01:07:35):
That'll be good news. For those people.

Speaker 2 (01:07:37):
We've been talking on the show today. We've had some
polling and some analysis today about how the Democratic Party
is currently being taken over by In his entrall to
the socialists, these communists, these Marxists. And I was scanning
the morning headlines and one jumped out at me. The
headline was Barack Obama fathered Today's Marxist Democrat Party, and

(01:08:01):
I thought I'd dial up the author for a little conversation.
His name is Joshua Montington. He writes for The Federalist.
That's where you can find this piece. He joins us live, Joshua,
thanks for coming into the show here. Just talk to
us about your piece. It's your contention that Obama is
a direct line the father of all this socialism and

(01:08:22):
the Democratic Party.

Speaker 3 (01:08:23):
Give us your theory, thanks, Scott.

Speaker 15 (01:08:27):
Yeah, so last week there was this moment where Obama
was to get in a photo with WNBA superstar Caitlin
Clark and telling her, you know, you're fantastic, don't worry
about all this nonsense, you know, related to some controversy
over no calls where Caitlin Clark appears to get fouled
and nothing happens, and that happened in the wake of

(01:08:48):
a Usada Today op ed where the author basically accused
Caitlin of drumming up some sort of KKK style violence
because she complains when the ref doesn't.

Speaker 10 (01:08:57):
Call a foul.

Speaker 15 (01:08:58):
So people online were saying, oh, look at Barack you
he's so moderate, and I argue in the piece, no,
Barack Obama is no moderate. He's the one who pioneered
the radicalism that we see in the Democrat Party. And
it also ties in with this question is are the
DSA socialists like zorroon Mondani, are they the logical next
step in the radicalism of the Democrat Party or are

(01:09:22):
they hijacking the party? And I argue that they're just
walking the footsteps of Barack Obama's radicalism. They're a fulfillment
of the trend that he started.

Speaker 2 (01:09:32):
What do you think Obama's most radical legacy actually is?
Some people point to him and say, you know, for
his time, he actually did have more moderate positions in
the moderate than the modern Democrats. But I don't think
you agree with that. What is the most radical legacy
as we think back on his two terms?

Speaker 15 (01:09:53):
Yeah, Well, there's a couple of competing options. One would
be Obamacare, right, the supposedly Affordable Care Act, and we
were told you won't lose your doctor, won't add a
dime to the national debt.

Speaker 9 (01:10:05):
I don't know about you.

Speaker 15 (01:10:07):
My doctor stopped taking health insurance because of all the
government takeover of the healthcare insurance industry, the changes. He
wasn't allowed to do medicine the way he had done
it before. Premiums have nearly doubled since the institution of
the Affordable Care Act, So.

Speaker 9 (01:10:24):
That's a competitor.

Speaker 15 (01:10:24):
But I would argue, if you're going to look at
number one, it's the normalization of the oppressor versus oppressed matrix.
And way before we had the summer of violence in
twenty twenty, way before we had this nationwide black Lives
Matter movement, you saw Obama inserting himself into local interactions,
whether it was Ferguson, Missouri, where he implied that maybe

(01:10:48):
the police had acted incorrectly in shooting Michael Brown.

Speaker 9 (01:10:51):
He acted like there was a racial component.

Speaker 15 (01:10:54):
The same thing with the shooting of Treyvon martinted himself
into a situation where his got arrested by the police
because they mistakenly thought he was breaking in made it
sound like was a racial situation, even though he didn't
have all the facts. And I'd say the normalization of
the Marxist oppressor versus oppress matrix is probably his biggest

(01:11:14):
and most damaging legacy.

Speaker 3 (01:11:17):
I couldn't agree with you more.

Speaker 2 (01:11:18):
I think that way you've just described it, that is
the basic operating DNA of the modern Democratic Party. It's
what's fueling all these socialists in these primaries. And I'll
just tack one more thing onto it, this concept that
somehow the United States of America is rotten at its
core and that needs to be ripped out, root and branch,
because inherent to America is that the people who founded

(01:11:40):
or run America are themselves the oppressors.

Speaker 3 (01:11:44):
I think you've got it just right. The author is
Joshua Montington.

Speaker 2 (01:11:48):
He's got a piece in the Federalist dot com today
called Barack Obama father Today's Marxist Democrat Party. Joshua, thanks
for your time.

Speaker 3 (01:11:56):
Today.

Speaker 2 (01:11:57):
We're signing off from Knoxville, Tennessee, and for a few days,
please though join our special guest host. It's Salem. It's
common sense for the American people, and I'm Scott Jennings.
Thanks for listening, and we'll see you in a few days.