December 10, 2025 • 12 mins
Samuel, the former co-chair of Donald Trump's Indiana campaign, shares his thoughts on 'if' redistricting is voted through.
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 (00:02):
You're listening to the Hammer and Nigel Show. Hello, my
name is Nigel Jason Hammer right over there with a
very special Inn studio guests.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
The clock is ticking on, changing of the congressional maps.
Sounds like we got to vote tomorrow. And joining us
now to talk a little bit about this, the former
co chair of Donald Trump's Indiana campaign, Tony Samuel, joins us. Hey, Tony,
welcome back, my friend.
Speaker 3 (00:25):
How are you guys? Thanks for having me, especially thanks
for having me on your last day here in the studio.
I'm honored.
Speaker 2 (00:31):
Turn the lights out when you leave. We're asking a lot
of our guests to do that. Make sure you turn
all the faucets off and turn the lights off. That's
all we're asking.
Speaker 3 (00:38):
And I heard your reasoning of what you don't want
to see when you look out the window, and that
made perfect made perfect sense. It might still be going
on the block, but maybe again, just.
Speaker 1 (00:49):
To be clear, the show's still going on. We're just
moving Forcibley.
Speaker 2 (00:52):
That's correct, correct, all right? So this time tomorrow we'll
probably be talking about the vote vote that's taking place
at the Indiana Senate scheduled to be tomorrow. Things could change,
but we believe this vote is happening tomorrow. Before we
get into any of the nuts and bolts here, just
big picture, Tony. Do you think the redistrict plan is
(01:14):
a good idea?
Speaker 3 (01:15):
It is a good idea, And the reason being is
when you vote for a president in a presidential election,
this time it was twenty twenty four, you vote for
that president because you share his vision, his policies. You
expect him to run the country the way you've voted
and the way he's campaigned. You do that for a
four year term. You don't do it so then a
(01:37):
different makeup of Congress can come in and obstruct him,
as we saw in his first term when he got
elected in twenty sixteen. So you do it for a
four year term. And that's kind of my rationale or
the basis. So the midterms, since the terms are the problem,
and so if I can jump into it, if you want,
the way I see it as president is elected by
(01:58):
winning the electoral college. We all know two hundred and
seventy votes out of five hundred and thirty eight Those
electoral college votes are awarded to the president when he
wins most states by even one vote by the popular vote,
it's a winner take all system. He wins a state,
he gets all of those electoral college votes in forty
(02:21):
eight states and Washington, DC, just not in Maine and Nebraska.
They do it a little differently, where Maine has four
electoral college votes, Nebraska five. But in Indiana, as you know,
we have eleven nine US House seats and two US
Senate seats. So when a president wins and in Indiana
he's won in twenty sixteen by fifty seven percent, twenty
(02:44):
by fifty seven percent of then in twenty twenty four
by fifty nine percent, I'm saying those districts, those nine
comngressional districts should reflect the same popular vote margin. And
you do that for a US senator. US Senate races
are statewide, so and those those are also the same
popular vote margin that the president wins.
Speaker 2 (03:04):
So you feel like it should be based off of
the electoral college results.
Speaker 3 (03:08):
Then absolutely, because that's how the presidency is based.
Speaker 2 (03:11):
So what would be your response to somebody who's listening
right now that's like, but wait a minute, I feel
like our governor should be the one that makes these decisions.
I'm picking people that are making decisions for us in Indiana. Yes,
they're going to Washington, d C. They're going to work
for the president. But I want somebody from Indiana to
make these decisions, and maybe you know there are some
(03:34):
pockets in Indiana that are a little bit different. What
would be your response to that person.
Speaker 3 (03:38):
The response is, when you win those electoral College votes,
that's how the presidency is based. So you win eleven
but nine US House districts, you can you can draw
the maps as long as they're fair, and you know
that's the whole purpose here is to have fair representation
in Washington, d C. You can draw the maps any
(03:58):
way that you want, as we're seeing as we're seeing
over there in the state House right now. But it
should be I'm saying it should be based on that
popular vote because it's the it's the it's the popular
vote in Indiana that gave Donald Trump, and doesn't matter
who who the presidential candidate is or what year it is.
It should be based on the same vote total in
(04:18):
each district, the same margin, and I should say the
same baseline vote.
Speaker 1 (04:22):
I'm for in Tony, I'm for redistricting. I think that
I think it's a good idea. Is there any guarantee though,
that if this happens and it runs through the Senate
and it's voted on and redraw the maps, that those
two seats get flipped. I mean, like, what are the chances? Well,
(04:42):
if it's what I'm saying is like I'm kind of like,
you know, playing Devil's advocating.
Speaker 3 (04:46):
Sure, sure, what you would have is you wouldn't have
a seventy percent district here in central Indiana and the
Indianapolis area that goes one way. You would spread those
votes out and they shouldn't be. It shouldn't be. There
shouldn't be a seventy percent Democrat district or of fifty
six fifty eight percent district in northwest Indiana because going
(05:09):
back to that electoral college, when when you use those
to pick the president, if it wasn't that way, then
I wouldn't be arguing this. But when it is that way,
why do you then give to electoral college essentially two
votes away in Congress and a new Congress because you
you didn't match the popular vote. So to your question,
(05:29):
if you spread out those seventy percent in the others
and you try to get now, it's not going to
be exact in every district, but you try to get
to that same baseline vote. Yeah, it actually makes it
more fair for a Democrat running in the current sixth
or the fourth or just about any other you know,
Republican district because there's there's more than that fifty seven
(05:53):
baseline vote in those Republican districts. What you have now
is a seventy percent district here in the Indianapolis area,
and then you have over sixty percent Republicans in the
seven Republican districts. You would actually have more fairness. And
if you did this across the country. You know, one
statistic we hear every election is that there's only a
(06:15):
handful of congressional seats that are competitive. Really, from what
I've read, it's like sixty nine seventy congressional seats out
of four hundred and thirty five. If you did this,
you would have fairness across the more fairness across the board.
But what another way of looking at it is the
Democrat states do this already. So there are ten Democrat
states that are blue states because they vote president for
(06:39):
a Democrat president each time, and then they have zero Republicans,
all Democrat congress people. Massachusetts is the perfect example, because
they have the same number. They voted for Biden and
then they voted for Commonland that sixty percent range. They
didn't just give Republicans two seats two years later.
Speaker 2 (06:59):
I was going to ask, do you do any states
go along with this concept that you're talking about here?
Speaker 3 (07:03):
I don't think they explain it that way. I think
Democrats were just more aggressive on this, smarter if you
want to say, and they didn't allow any Republican seats
in those states. Whether they use this argument, I haven't
heard it before, you know, based on the electoral college
and the popular vote. But that's the reasoning. The problem
(07:25):
really with this debate here in Indiana it's been going
on for several months now, is the messaging has been
poor all across the board.
Speaker 2 (07:34):
That's been a Republican problem for a while. Like outside
of Donald Trump, who is you know, he gets his
messages across Republicans from a local level, so even a
national level, they're not the best at getting their message
out there.
Speaker 3 (07:48):
Yeah, and I agree one hundred percent with that, And
that's why I've given it so reason. I've given it
so much thought. So I'm on this television political television
show called in Focus on Fox fifty nine CBS four hure, Yeah,
thank you. And it's also sometimes I don't know if ay,
but it's on, so people are watching. It's also on
in Fort Wayne and tear Out and Evansville at different
(08:10):
times to the weekend. So we get this. I get
this question every time I'm on for the last three
or four months. I've given a lot of thought. Of course,
I'm a Trump guy. You guys know that. So you know,
there's those reasons when you vote for Trump to be
your president, and you see the progress that he's making
in all kinds of areas, the economy, stopping drugs at
the border, stopping wars around the world, all of these things.
(08:32):
Crime in our big cities. You don't want to see
what happened in that first term. Again, so it makes
sense politically, it makes sense for the voter. It's fair
to the voters that are voted for him. And then
again it's because that baseline Republican vote in the state.
We're talking about a different state, Illinois that always votes
for a Democrat for president. You know this would apply
(08:54):
to them as well. Their districts should match that same
baseline vote, but they would there would be more fair.
I think if they went by this kind of methodology.
Speaker 2 (09:06):
One more thing here, Tony, before we let you go,
Tony Samuel with us, a former co chair of Trump's
Indiana campaign. Let's say the votes are not there. That's
kind of what we're hearing right now as of today.
Could change, but we're hearing the votes are not there
to pass this through and the Senate tomorrow. What's going
to happen to some of those lawmakers senators in Indiana
(09:27):
that vote no on this because you've got people like
Turning Point USA other packs involved here, Like, what's going
to happen because some of these guys aren't up for
reelection this year? Is the public going to remember this?
Is this something that two or three years from now
Rod Bray is going to have a hard time with.
Speaker 3 (09:46):
It could be that this is just me speaking here.
I hate seeing that kind of thing. I mean, I
think when you get into politics, people are going to
have disagreements. At The job here is to educate. I
didn't have to, like, you know, put together my talking points.
I because I'm on that show and because I care
about you know, what happens in the country, and I
know those guys in the state House. So I've talked
(10:06):
to a few of them, but I don't like saying,
you know, seeing somebody's get going to get taken out
for this reason or this vote or not, it's an
important vote. They the state legislators need to realize they
have a national responsibility here. Yeah, they're elected for state policy,
but this is the one time they can affect national politics.
They can affect you know, the fetanyl coming into the
(10:27):
country right and killing you know, hoosiers, and that's what
that's where they need to take it seriously. I don't like,
you know, the threats that are going on, but I
do think they've got to think about it as a
national responsibility.
Speaker 2 (10:40):
Does Indiana have a soft Republican problem? And I talked
about this a lot when Governor Holcombe was the governor.
I've made it perfectly clear. Wasn't the biggest fan. You
couldn't tell if this dude was a Democrat or a Republican.
He wanted to lock you up for not wearing a mask.
It feels like there's a lot of people that say
(11:00):
I want to make Republicans great again, channeling that Donald
Trump make America great again. We need to make Indiana
Republicans republican again. Does that make sense?
Speaker 3 (11:09):
It makes absolute sense. You know, when I first started
supporting Donald Trump, it was twenty fifteen, and people chuckled
at me and that kind of thing. And I've seen it,
you know, And these are a lot of them Republicans
that they just they never liked the guy's style, so
they were opposed to him in the first place. So
(11:30):
they still are, even though they might not say it
publicly anymore, they still are. That is a problem at
the State House because but the answer to that is,
look at the policies. You know, whether you like his
style or not. I happen to get a kick out
of it. I think you guys do it. He's the
funniest president we've ever had. But he cares about the
American people. I think everything that he does is motivated
(11:54):
by that. And folks over there in the State House,
and I know we're talking about Republicans, they need to
get over the fact that they didn't like him in
the first place.
Speaker 2 (12:04):
Right you know, Tony Samuel, we appreciate you, thank you
for taking the time for joining us. Stammer and Nigel
Show
You're listening to the Hammer and Nigel Show. Hello, my
name is Nigel Jason Hammer right over there with a
very special Inn studio guests.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
The clock is ticking on, changing of the congressional maps.
Sounds like we got to vote tomorrow. And joining us
now to talk a little bit about this, the former
co chair of Donald Trump's Indiana campaign, Tony Samuel, joins us. Hey, Tony,
welcome back, my friend.
Speaker 3 (00:25):
How are you guys? Thanks for having me, especially thanks
for having me on your last day here in the studio.
I'm honored.
Speaker 2 (00:31):
Turn the lights out when you leave. We're asking a lot
of our guests to do that. Make sure you turn
all the faucets off and turn the lights off. That's
all we're asking.
Speaker 3 (00:38):
And I heard your reasoning of what you don't want
to see when you look out the window, and that
made perfect made perfect sense. It might still be going
on the block, but maybe again, just.
Speaker 1 (00:49):
To be clear, the show's still going on. We're just
moving Forcibley.
Speaker 2 (00:52):
That's correct, correct, all right? So this time tomorrow we'll
probably be talking about the vote vote that's taking place
at the Indiana Senate scheduled to be tomorrow. Things could change,
but we believe this vote is happening tomorrow. Before we
get into any of the nuts and bolts here, just
big picture, Tony. Do you think the redistrict plan is
(01:14):
a good idea?
Speaker 3 (01:15):
It is a good idea, And the reason being is
when you vote for a president in a presidential election,
this time it was twenty twenty four, you vote for
that president because you share his vision, his policies. You
expect him to run the country the way you've voted
and the way he's campaigned. You do that for a
four year term. You don't do it so then a
(01:37):
different makeup of Congress can come in and obstruct him,
as we saw in his first term when he got
elected in twenty sixteen. So you do it for a
four year term. And that's kind of my rationale or
the basis. So the midterms, since the terms are the problem,
and so if I can jump into it, if you want,
the way I see it as president is elected by
(01:58):
winning the electoral college. We all know two hundred and
seventy votes out of five hundred and thirty eight Those
electoral college votes are awarded to the president when he
wins most states by even one vote by the popular vote,
it's a winner take all system. He wins a state,
he gets all of those electoral college votes in forty
(02:21):
eight states and Washington, DC, just not in Maine and Nebraska.
They do it a little differently, where Maine has four
electoral college votes, Nebraska five. But in Indiana, as you know,
we have eleven nine US House seats and two US
Senate seats. So when a president wins and in Indiana
he's won in twenty sixteen by fifty seven percent, twenty
(02:44):
by fifty seven percent of then in twenty twenty four
by fifty nine percent, I'm saying those districts, those nine
comngressional districts should reflect the same popular vote margin. And
you do that for a US senator. US Senate races
are statewide, so and those those are also the same
popular vote margin that the president wins.
Speaker 2 (03:04):
So you feel like it should be based off of
the electoral college results.
Speaker 3 (03:08):
Then absolutely, because that's how the presidency is based.
Speaker 2 (03:11):
So what would be your response to somebody who's listening
right now that's like, but wait a minute, I feel
like our governor should be the one that makes these decisions.
I'm picking people that are making decisions for us in Indiana. Yes,
they're going to Washington, d C. They're going to work
for the president. But I want somebody from Indiana to
make these decisions, and maybe you know there are some
(03:34):
pockets in Indiana that are a little bit different. What
would be your response to that person.
Speaker 3 (03:38):
The response is, when you win those electoral College votes,
that's how the presidency is based. So you win eleven
but nine US House districts, you can you can draw
the maps as long as they're fair, and you know
that's the whole purpose here is to have fair representation
in Washington, d C. You can draw the maps any
(03:58):
way that you want, as we're seeing as we're seeing
over there in the state House right now. But it
should be I'm saying it should be based on that
popular vote because it's the it's the it's the popular
vote in Indiana that gave Donald Trump, and doesn't matter
who who the presidential candidate is or what year it is.
It should be based on the same vote total in
(04:18):
each district, the same margin, and I should say the
same baseline vote.
Speaker 1 (04:22):
I'm for in Tony, I'm for redistricting. I think that
I think it's a good idea. Is there any guarantee though,
that if this happens and it runs through the Senate
and it's voted on and redraw the maps, that those
two seats get flipped. I mean, like, what are the chances? Well,
(04:42):
if it's what I'm saying is like I'm kind of like,
you know, playing Devil's advocating.
Speaker 3 (04:46):
Sure, sure, what you would have is you wouldn't have
a seventy percent district here in central Indiana and the
Indianapolis area that goes one way. You would spread those
votes out and they shouldn't be. It shouldn't be. There
shouldn't be a seventy percent Democrat district or of fifty
six fifty eight percent district in northwest Indiana because going
(05:09):
back to that electoral college, when when you use those
to pick the president, if it wasn't that way, then
I wouldn't be arguing this. But when it is that way,
why do you then give to electoral college essentially two
votes away in Congress and a new Congress because you
you didn't match the popular vote. So to your question,
(05:29):
if you spread out those seventy percent in the others
and you try to get now, it's not going to
be exact in every district, but you try to get
to that same baseline vote. Yeah, it actually makes it
more fair for a Democrat running in the current sixth
or the fourth or just about any other you know,
Republican district because there's there's more than that fifty seven
(05:53):
baseline vote in those Republican districts. What you have now
is a seventy percent district here in the Indianapolis area,
and then you have over sixty percent Republicans in the
seven Republican districts. You would actually have more fairness. And
if you did this across the country. You know, one
statistic we hear every election is that there's only a
(06:15):
handful of congressional seats that are competitive. Really, from what
I've read, it's like sixty nine seventy congressional seats out
of four hundred and thirty five. If you did this,
you would have fairness across the more fairness across the board.
But what another way of looking at it is the
Democrat states do this already. So there are ten Democrat
states that are blue states because they vote president for
(06:39):
a Democrat president each time, and then they have zero Republicans,
all Democrat congress people. Massachusetts is the perfect example, because
they have the same number. They voted for Biden and
then they voted for Commonland that sixty percent range. They
didn't just give Republicans two seats two years later.
Speaker 2 (06:59):
I was going to ask, do you do any states
go along with this concept that you're talking about here?
Speaker 3 (07:03):
I don't think they explain it that way. I think
Democrats were just more aggressive on this, smarter if you
want to say, and they didn't allow any Republican seats
in those states. Whether they use this argument, I haven't
heard it before, you know, based on the electoral college
and the popular vote. But that's the reasoning. The problem
(07:25):
really with this debate here in Indiana it's been going
on for several months now, is the messaging has been
poor all across the board.
Speaker 2 (07:34):
That's been a Republican problem for a while. Like outside
of Donald Trump, who is you know, he gets his
messages across Republicans from a local level, so even a
national level, they're not the best at getting their message
out there.
Speaker 3 (07:48):
Yeah, and I agree one hundred percent with that, And
that's why I've given it so reason. I've given it
so much thought. So I'm on this television political television
show called in Focus on Fox fifty nine CBS four hure, Yeah,
thank you. And it's also sometimes I don't know if ay,
but it's on, so people are watching. It's also on
in Fort Wayne and tear Out and Evansville at different
(08:10):
times to the weekend. So we get this. I get
this question every time I'm on for the last three
or four months. I've given a lot of thought. Of course,
I'm a Trump guy. You guys know that. So you know,
there's those reasons when you vote for Trump to be
your president, and you see the progress that he's making
in all kinds of areas, the economy, stopping drugs at
the border, stopping wars around the world, all of these things.
(08:32):
Crime in our big cities. You don't want to see
what happened in that first term. Again, so it makes
sense politically, it makes sense for the voter. It's fair
to the voters that are voted for him. And then
again it's because that baseline Republican vote in the state.
We're talking about a different state, Illinois that always votes
for a Democrat for president. You know this would apply
(08:54):
to them as well. Their districts should match that same
baseline vote, but they would there would be more fair.
I think if they went by this kind of methodology.
Speaker 2 (09:06):
One more thing here, Tony, before we let you go,
Tony Samuel with us, a former co chair of Trump's
Indiana campaign. Let's say the votes are not there. That's
kind of what we're hearing right now as of today.
Could change, but we're hearing the votes are not there
to pass this through and the Senate tomorrow. What's going
to happen to some of those lawmakers senators in Indiana
(09:27):
that vote no on this because you've got people like
Turning Point USA other packs involved here, Like, what's going
to happen because some of these guys aren't up for
reelection this year? Is the public going to remember this?
Is this something that two or three years from now
Rod Bray is going to have a hard time with.
Speaker 3 (09:46):
It could be that this is just me speaking here.
I hate seeing that kind of thing. I mean, I
think when you get into politics, people are going to
have disagreements. At The job here is to educate. I
didn't have to, like, you know, put together my talking points.
I because I'm on that show and because I care
about you know, what happens in the country, and I
know those guys in the state House. So I've talked
(10:06):
to a few of them, but I don't like saying,
you know, seeing somebody's get going to get taken out
for this reason or this vote or not, it's an
important vote. They the state legislators need to realize they
have a national responsibility here. Yeah, they're elected for state policy,
but this is the one time they can affect national politics.
They can affect you know, the fetanyl coming into the
(10:27):
country right and killing you know, hoosiers, and that's what
that's where they need to take it seriously. I don't like,
you know, the threats that are going on, but I
do think they've got to think about it as a
national responsibility.
Speaker 2 (10:40):
Does Indiana have a soft Republican problem? And I talked
about this a lot when Governor Holcombe was the governor.
I've made it perfectly clear. Wasn't the biggest fan. You
couldn't tell if this dude was a Democrat or a Republican.
He wanted to lock you up for not wearing a mask.
It feels like there's a lot of people that say
(11:00):
I want to make Republicans great again, channeling that Donald
Trump make America great again. We need to make Indiana
Republicans republican again. Does that make sense?
Speaker 3 (11:09):
It makes absolute sense. You know, when I first started
supporting Donald Trump, it was twenty fifteen, and people chuckled
at me and that kind of thing. And I've seen it,
you know, And these are a lot of them Republicans
that they just they never liked the guy's style, so
they were opposed to him in the first place. So
(11:30):
they still are, even though they might not say it
publicly anymore, they still are. That is a problem at
the State House because but the answer to that is,
look at the policies. You know, whether you like his
style or not. I happen to get a kick out
of it. I think you guys do it. He's the
funniest president we've ever had. But he cares about the
American people. I think everything that he does is motivated
(11:54):
by that. And folks over there in the State House,
and I know we're talking about Republicans, they need to
get over the fact that they didn't like him in
the first place.
Speaker 2 (12:04):
Right you know, Tony Samuel, we appreciate you, thank you
for taking the time for joining us. Stammer and Nigel
Show
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by Audiochuck Media Company.
The Brothers Ortiz
The Brothers Ortiz is the story of two brothers–both successful, but in very different ways. Gabe Ortiz becomes a third-highest ranking officer in all of Texas while his younger brother Larry climbs the ranks in Puro Tango Blast, a notorious Texas Prison gang. Gabe doesn’t know all the details of his brother’s nefarious dealings, and he’s made a point not to ask, to protect their relationship. But when Larry is murdered during a home invasion in a rented beach house, Gabe has no choice but to look into what happened that night. To solve Larry’s murder, Gabe, and the whole Ortiz family, must ask each other tough questions.