Episode 219 National Guard to New Mexico: Trump's Bold Move Explained

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
wildfire, you can't get this out.
Running, running, running.
Yeah, I'm here on the runrunning, running, running.

Speaker 2 (00:10):
Yeah, watch out, here we come.
Okay, another, uh, an emptychair.

Speaker 3 (00:16):
Yeah, yeah yeah, I know, I, I gotta, I gotta do the
magic here behind, behind theuh audio board with ava college.

Speaker 2 (00:26):
It's, it's put us under some pressure yeah, it's a
definite uh different, becausethen it puts all the pressure
back on on ella and uh, let's behonest, yeah, ella's, she's
busy girl yeah, she is.

Speaker 3 (00:35):
Sometimes she's too busy for us.
She doesn't exactly have timefor us all the time, and so, uh,
we'll do this.
Yeah, and as many of you knowwho listen to the show, I'm not
the greatest puncher in theworld here, so we're just going
to see how this goes.

Speaker 2 (00:47):
No, you do great, you do great.
Um, I have to make a littlecomment, though, right off the
top.
We're not going to have timefor comments today Cause you've
packed.
You know we have stacked a fullshow and so we want to get to
it.
But I did have to make acomment because one of the
comments that came in off of ourYouTube channel was they
appreciate our show a littleless chitchat, mark.

Speaker 3 (01:06):
Oh, a little less chitchat, a little less chitchat
, yeah, yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:08):
And I'm just thinking , I'm offended by that comment,
quite frankly.
I mean you know here's the thingwe're not a news show, so we're
not going to.
We both worked in news andyou're not allowed to say
anything really in news.
Right, you have to just readthe news.

(01:28):
I feel like you can get thatanywhere.
But I feel like the joy ofpodcast reason I listen to
podcasts is for the commentaryof what the hosts have to say.
So I'm just thinking if youwant to just get the news, read
the paper or watch whateverprogram you want, if you want
some chit chat, you go to apodcast.

Speaker 3 (01:39):
Yeah, you get some chit chat right here.
We have a full bowl of chitchat.

Speaker 2 (01:42):
We have dogs howling, our kids are part of the
process, so, like, if that's notyour game, well, I apologize,
but like I don't see us changinganytime soon, so I'll tell you.

Speaker 3 (01:51):
You're right, though.
We do have a uh, a pack show.
There's no question about that.
I'll just give you a couple ofquick highlights here.
There's a lot in this thing,but the national guard is being
sent to new mexico, thank you.
The national guard is beingsent to New Mexico by Trump, so
how is that going to go over?
That is going to be very, veryinteresting, so we'll talk about
what they may actually do whenthey're here.

(02:11):
Jd Vance was on Meet the Pressthis morning.
Some interesting things fromhim National Guard crackdown,
and then a lot of thisredistricting stuff and what's
going on.
It was interesting to hear hisperspective on that.

Speaker 2 (02:24):
Yeah, and some scary news with Newsom.
Honestly, like I am not lookingforward to sharing this content
, but we got to do it yeah no,it's.

Speaker 3 (02:32):
It's super interesting.
Actually, gavin Newsom hassurged ahead to be the
democratic nominee way out,obviously until 2028, but he is
leaving everybody else in hiswake and he's doing it in a very
specific way that may lookfamiliar to people and we've got
a deep dive on that Plus.
Look, the economy is an issuefor Trump it is.

(02:52):
Prices are an issue, there's noquestion.
If there's something that'sgoing to derail this
administration, it's going to bethat.
So we're going to continue.
We've been talking about that alot and we've got some numbers
in an article from the WallStreet Journal talking about
that and some of the prices.
And then we're also going totalk about some voter
registration stuff.
And in New Mexico it is gettingcloser, there's no question,

(03:12):
and a lot of people don't reallyrealize how much closer things
have gotten.
Even since we ran.
Things are significantly closeras far as how many people
identify with all the parties,and we will talk about those
numbers getting closer andcloser.
We'll hit the Cracker Barrelthing real quick, but from a
different perspective.

Speaker 2 (03:29):
Right, A little bit of a stock issue and just the
stock market game when it comesto some of these rebranding of
these companies.
How does it play into investors?
So we need to talk about that.

Speaker 3 (03:40):
And then CBS is being has been bought by Skydance,
which is a new company, and it'sowned by someone who I think
has a lot less interest in beingpartisan, and that's David
Ellison, who runs Skydance CBSand deciding all the stories and

(04:01):
how they handle them.
But the ownership group thatowns CBS now, I think, has an
opportunity to start to set CBSback into more of a honest
broker on both sides, and Ithink you're seeing some little
indications that that mayactually be happening.
Southwest, they may end upflying overseas, meaning into

(04:23):
Europe.

Speaker 2 (04:23):
We'll hit that.
I have some comments on thatone.

Speaker 3 (04:26):
And our guy Zoran Mandani, the socialist candidate
for mayor in New York, who isthe favorite to be the next
mayor of New York.

Speaker 2 (04:34):
He's a new weightlifter right here.

Speaker 3 (04:36):
Well, yeah, I mean the guy has got some juice,
right, I mean.
So he got caught into somethingthat candidates get caught into
, okay, and that is doingsomething that is not in his
wheelhouse, right, and when thathappens, working out.
Yes, and when that happens itmakes you look like a bit of a
fool.
Okay, and so we'll talk aboutthat.

(04:57):
And there is.
Believe me, I had someonesuggest I get on a horse once.

Speaker 2 (05:01):
I was going to say the whole thing for you is
horseback riding.

Speaker 3 (05:04):
I can't do, I cannot do it.
Let's not put Mark on a horse.

Speaker 2 (05:07):
I look like a fool, yeah.

Speaker 3 (05:08):
It just doesn't work.
I absolutely get it.
So we're not here to laugh athis lack of prowess in this
particular situation, but we arehere to point out that when
you're a candidate boy, don't dothat, All right.

(05:30):
And then we've got some greatvideo of a mountain lion and
we've got a great video of abear that came to visit us in
Angel Fire.
So we have all that stuff going.
But first, the biggest storyright now going out there,
especially when you look atwhat's going on in the state of
New Mexico, is the fact that wenow have a situation where the
National Guard is coming intoNew Mexico via the president of
the United States, who says waita minute, we need some stuff
going here, we need some helpwith the National Guard.

Speaker 2 (05:48):
Now everybody talks about DC and what's happened to
DC and we will get to that.
That is not really what this isNow.
This is different.
Yeah, yeah, here's the headline.
It says Trump mobilizing up toseventeen hundred National Guard
troops in 19 states to widencrime and immigration crackdown.
So these deployments are goingto 19 different states.
New.
Mexico just happens to be one ofthem, and here's a poll quote

(06:11):
from it.
It says the troops, who willlargely be activated across
Republican controlled states,will serve in support of the
administration's immigration andcustoms enforcement operations,
or ICE, as well as other lawenforcement priorities.

Speaker 3 (06:23):
according to comment from unnamed Pentagon officials
and documents obtained by FoxNews, ok, but the one thing is
it says that we're largelyRepublican states.
We are clearly not.
No, so if you're, if you'regoing into a Republican state,
you're getting a lot ofcooperation from the governor of
that state.

Speaker 2 (06:36):
Texas, by the way, is getting one of the largest
deployments of this.
I guarantee you Abbott is downthere saying, yeah, please come
on.
I guarantee you Abbott is downthere saying, yeah, please come
on.
We'll take your support Right,you know absolutely.

Speaker 3 (06:45):
But we don't fit into that category.

Speaker 2 (06:47):
No.
Clearly we do not fit in thatcategory and, honestly, what's
interesting is we have beenlooking for any comment from
anybody here in the state of NewMexico, whether it's a governor
or, I don't know, a mayor ofsome sort anybody, yeah.

Speaker 3 (07:01):
So far nothing Crickets I toward anybody, yeah,
so far nothing Crickets.

Speaker 2 (07:02):
I'm not even seeing anything from media, really,
except for a couple ofconservative outlets.
I'm not seeing any othercoverage of this so far.
So I'm wondering what's?
Are we going to see some more?
Somebody going to talk aboutthis, but we're obviously
talking about it.
So just what's interesting,though, is is to note, is these
guys are not coming in as actuallaw enforcement officers.

(07:23):
They're coming in as a supportsystem for some of these command
centers, so the guardsmen willbe serving under Title 32,
section 502F, authority in whichthey technically remain under
state command and control, butthey can assist with federal
missions and are paid withfederal funds.
The status allows them to avoidrunning afoul of a federal law

(07:44):
limiting military involvement indomestic law enforcement.
So again, this is in a supportfashion running fingerprints or
helping with paperwork, thingsof that nature to alleviate some
of the pressure at some ofthese detainment centers is my
understanding Right, and so thequestion then becomes how does
New Mexico react to this?

Speaker 3 (08:03):
What happens when?
What happens when we seeNational Guard's been activated
from within the state by the way, that they're going to be
people that live here.
They go down to, say,alamogordo, or they go down to
Columbus, new Mexico, to helpwith some of what's going on
with ICE enforcement and thingslike that.
That's what's going to beinteresting here.
I am sure you're going to hearsomething from the governor on

(08:24):
this very shortly.
I don't think necessarily thisis going to be an Albuquerque
thing, but I don't know.
You just don't know where it'sgoing to be, but with the
assistance of the National Guard, in already in Albuquerque, for
the governor's already done,potentially in Espanola,
although we're not hearing muchat all about that.

Speaker 2 (08:41):
Right, we're trying to dig into that a little bit
more to see if that's actuallyhappening.
I mean, the rumor is thebudget's been aligned for it,
but again, we're just trying tofigure this out and see, like,
what actually is taking place.

Speaker 3 (08:52):
So if you're expecting to see a situation
like you're seeing in DC, whereyou know where they bring in the
National Guard, try to dosweeps and get things cleaned up
, you're not likely to see thathere.
This is all likely going to becentered around, you know,
immigration enforcement here,but we don't know how it's going
to shake out and obviously,given the contentious history
between the governor and thepresident, I don't know how this

(09:14):
is going to show.
It is interesting that wehaven't heard anything.
I am surprised at that.
I'm surprised there haven'tbeen statements.
I'm sure there will be tomorrowand we'll have to see how it
all shakes out.

Speaker 2 (09:23):
Yeah, we'll have to.
We'll have to check that out.
But what is working for DC isthis is having the National
Guard in DC.
It's unbelievable the resultsthat they're seeing in DC in
such a short amount of time.
I mean I think they're on 10days of this so far seeing a
massive decrease in crime.

Speaker 1 (09:46):
Jd Vance was on the morning on Meet the Press this
morning and really just gave aquick synopsis of what they're
seeing so far.
In DC, crime has dropped over35 percent of the nation's
capital in 10 days, because ofwhat Donald J Trump has done
Accomplished.
I think that there's so muchmore that we could do.
Absolutely not.
It's not mission accomplished.
When you make such big progressin a matter of a week and a
half, I think that you step onthe gas and try to make DC even
more safe.

Speaker 3 (10:07):
So that is interesting because what it
tells you is that they areexpanding some of these efforts
because I think they feel likeit's working and I do think,
despite all the other stuffgoing on, and we'll get into
approval numbers and everythingelse this is largely popular
into approval numbers andeverything else.
This is largely popular.
It's largely popular withpeople that live in these cities

(10:28):
where there is high crime andthere's some understanding or at
least some willingness to admitthat they're probably going to
go into Chicago pretty quicklyand try to deal with those
issues.
Chicago, very violent city,right, and so you know, you
start to see Vance say wait aminute, let's keep going, let's
keep doing this.
And this gets to where thisadministration is.
They're all gas and no brake.

Speaker 2 (10:47):
Right, yeah, he says that.
No, why would we slow downright now?
You know, I mean there's talkabout potentially arming these
National Guard.
I don't know if that's going tohappen or not.
Right now they're not armed, asof the most recent report that
I've read.
What was interesting is I can'tremember the date, so pardon
for that but they said for thefirst time in several years I
want to say it's even over adecade there was not a reported

(11:09):
homicide.

Speaker 3 (11:10):
In at least a week.

Speaker 2 (11:11):
Right, in at least a week which is like history
making in DC.
So clearly, the people that arewalking these streets, that
live in these streets, whetheror not they're publicly saying,
hey, this is working, Iguarantee you they're feeling
safer on the streets.
I mean, how can you not whenyou see a presence out there and
just more eyeballs out therehelping support those local
police officers?
Yeah, no doubt.

Speaker 3 (11:30):
Okay, but it was not the only thing that Vance talked
about.
So he also talked about what'sgoing on with this redistricting
fight, and we've seen, you know, a lot of it.
Come home to New Mexico, wherewe've seen our leaders stand up
and say, oh, I can't believethey're doing this when they've
already gerrymandered New Mexicoright, I mean it's crazy and so
.
But one of the things peopledon't talk about enough is not
the redistricting, because youhave a lot of these states that

(11:52):
have already been gerrymanderedto the hill, like you can't
gerrymander, but they're goingto, you know.
Obviously they'regerrymandering Texas a bit more.
Illinois has already beengerrymandered beyond belief.
All right, some of these otherstates like New York, have been
gerrymandered.
California has beengerrymandered too, but they
think they can gerrymander itmore.

Speaker 2 (12:08):
I know.

Speaker 3 (12:09):
OK, you know, but this is where you are Right.
I mean, this is what, what thisis, but?
But the bigger issue is thecensus.
People don't talk about thecensus, enoughs, census and why
the census matters.
And then what it was takenunder the Biden administration.
It was taken in a way that that, too, ended up being political

(12:32):
and it ended up changing thebalance of power, and I think
you're going to see the Trumpadministration try to do
something about that as well.
But this is the census and thisis what JD Vance has to say
about it.

Speaker 1 (12:42):
Fewer House seats than we should have One if the
Democrats hadn't aggressivelygerrymandered, and two if
illegal aliens weren't countedin the census for purposes of
apportioning congressional seats.
The best estimates I've seen isthat California, for example,
has five additionalcongressional seats than it
should have because they countillegal aliens for the purpose
of apportioning representatives.

(13:02):
Meanwhile, ohio, my home state,lost a representative.
We're literally losingrepresentatives for American
citizens in order to givecongressional representation to
illegal aliens.
Republicans are trying tobalance out the scales a little
bit for basic fairness and forthe integrity of our democracy,
which the president cares aboutas much as anybody in the
country.

Speaker 3 (13:22):
Okay, interesting stuff, so I want to explain this
just a little bit.
So what he's talking aboutthere is the fact that when you
take a census, what you do isgather the total number of
people.
They don't distinguish betweenpeople that are here legally and
people that are here illegallyin a census.
All right, now.
Now they want to change whetherthey should do that or not.
That's definitely where theTrump administration is and it

(13:44):
makes sense.
But but what they do basicallyis they say, ok, california has
X number of people, so you know,you get a congressional seat
for every roughly 600000 peoplethat you have in your state.
That's how it works, ok, so soif you go and flood a state with
people, legal or illegal, theyget more seats, even though.
So you got a state likeCalifornia which is losing
population like crazy.

Speaker 2 (14:04):
It's bleeding people and they're losing so many
voters and people.
Business owners are floodingand leaving the state.

Speaker 3 (14:10):
It's the number one egress state, right, right.
So they continue to grow, andthat's why.
And so what Vance is saying is,basically, you should count
citizens, you don't need tocount non-citizens, basically,
and so that very much makessense.
But at the end of the day, thisisn't saying all these people
are voting.
This is saying, basically, theway the apportioned

(14:31):
congressional seats isdetermined by this.
So there is a difference there.
And Vance isn't saying they'reall voting.
Ok, they're not, but at leastnot in massive numbers, although
there's plenty of debate aboutthat too.
So we don't need to get intothat in massive numbers,
although there's plenty ofdebate about that too, so we
don't need to get into that.
But here's what's withoutquestion they are being counted
in the census, and so, becausethey're being counted in the
census and every 600 people getsa congressional seat,

(14:52):
california has morecongressional seats than they
should, given the number ofactual Americans that are in
that state, and so that's whatthey're trying to deal with, and
they're going to have to dealwith it, and I'll tell you.
I think what we're headed forhere is a royal rumble between
JD Vance and Gavin Newsom.

Speaker 2 (15:12):
Well, that's terrifying to me because I
thought first of all I thinkNewsom is a one-trick slick pony
.
I mean, that's how I feel aboutthe guy.
He's always like he feels likea used car salesman to me.
Whenever I've heard him speak,he just comes off to me Like I
mean, I don't know, I don't know, he just feels very uh, like
he's.
He's doing his podcast andtalking about himself all the

(15:32):
time.
Like I just feel like it'sweird and he's trying to pose
himself as a centrist, obviouslyin a hopes that he's going to
run for governor.

Speaker 3 (15:39):
I mean I don't think he's trying to be a centrist Now
.
I think he's adjusted that.
I think he did that a littlebit with the Charlie Kirk stuff.
Of course he did.

Speaker 2 (15:45):
He did like the Charlie Kirk.
I mean he's having all thesepeople on his podcast Meanwhile
you got people losing theirhouses to fire and he's closed
off water supply.
I mean it's just like.
I just feel like.

Speaker 3 (15:52):
No, no, hold on, you're getting into the record.

Speaker 2 (15:59):
I'm leaving his state because of the way he's running
his operation.
You have the highest taxes.
Okay, hold on, though stopjumping the gun.

Speaker 3 (16:06):
Stop jumping that that is not the story we're
talking about right now.
This is the story we're talkingabout to fight trump.
Kavin newsom acts more like him.
He has been tweeting out stuffin caps, he's been insulting
people.
He's been absolutely trying tomimic trump, okay.
So I want to talk about thisbecause it's an important fact.

(16:27):
It's an interesting thing, andto me and I think what we've
seen in this country over thepast I don't know five to seven
years since really Trump came onthe scene is authenticity is
king.
Be who you are, don't apologizefor it.
Stand up for what you believein and let the chips fall where
they may, and that usually is abetter thing.
Who you are, don't apologizefor it.
Stand up for what you believein and let the chips fall where
they may, and that usually is abetter thing for you politically

(16:49):
Okay.
But this is completely theopposite.
This is a guy going.
I'm going to mimic my opponent,or a guy I view as my opponent,
my political opponent, sort of.
I mean they won't be on thesame ballot together, but but
you know what I mean.
I mean so I'm going to mimicthis guy and let's see how this
goes Now.
I think what's interesting hereis it is working.
It is absolutely working.

(17:12):
Now I'm not telling you it'sgoing to work in a general
election, and don't accuse me ofthat.
I know what his history is withcrime in California, the
incompetence of what happenedwith the fires, the issues with
the homelessness In California,the incompetence of what
happened with the fires, theissues with the homelessness,
the issues with a state that hasbeen absolutely collapsing from
its biggest cities to itssmallest towns.
There's no doubt he has aterrible record.

(17:33):
I'm not getting into all that.

Speaker 2 (17:39):
I'm just saying his approach, right now seems to be
working.
I don't really know, but we'llthrow it to Harry Eaton at CNN.

Speaker 3 (17:46):
Harry, Eaton Harry, I can never say his name.

Speaker 2 (17:49):
I'm just going to say Harry from now on H.
Harry from CNN.
Okay, because he's got thelatest data, so let's listen to
him.

Speaker 5 (17:56):
I absolutely think it's showing signs of working.
And let's take a look at thevoters who know Gavin Newsom
best, those voters out inCalifornia, those California
Democrats, california Democratsand Newsom for governor.
You go back to 2023, just 35percent wanted him to run for
president.
Look at the percentage now whoare excited for a run for

(18:16):
president for Gavin Newsom.
What is that?
That's a 40 point climb, mygoodness gracious, a rising tide
of support for Gavin Newsom.
Remember, back in 2023, themajority of Democrats did not
want Joe Biden to run foranother term, but California
Democrats and Gavin Newsom'shome state did not want him to
run either.
And now 75 percent are excitedfor him to run.

(18:36):
And more than that he's gettinga higher percentage of the vote
than Kamala Harris in her homestate.
He is beating the former vicepresident, who, of course, was
the Democratic nominee in twenty, twenty four, ok, ok.

Speaker 2 (18:47):
My argument would be this yeah, who else is actually
out there?
That's that's getting any majorleague attention.
Aoc, what Kamala thinking aboutrunning again?
I mean really, if that is it, Ithink they're grappling.
They know that Kamala can't winbecause, I mean, I think that
that's just what she has shown,that she got buried alive on
that vote.
So I think they're like, okay,well, that's a loser vote for us

(19:10):
.
Aoc, give me a break.
I mean she's.
I think they don't you know,and I just think Gavin Newsom is
the most in the public eyeputting himself out there
constantly.
That's what this is about.
I don't think this is like hey,I think this guy's qualified to
be president.
I think they're saying we don'tlike Trump.
This is the only shot we gotright now, so we're going to

(19:30):
throw.
I think if somebody else stepsin, that's an actual, I don't
know better choice for thedemocratic nominee that his
numbers will drop.

Speaker 3 (19:38):
Okay, that's fine, but I think what this gets down
to is Democrats are dying forsomeone to stand up and fight,
and that's what he's doing.
He is absolutely letting it rip.
Okay, now, I think in the longterm it will not help him in a
general election.
I think trying to mimic anothercandidate, trying to be that
person, it doesn't work.
Okay, I don't think that'sgoing to work.

(19:58):
But I do think right now, inthis moment, democrats look at
him and say, at least somebody'strying to fight from their
perspective.
Right, they're looking at it,going, oh, you know, and we look
at it and go, oh, my gosh, comeon, guy.
Ok, but it's interesting and Ithink one other interesting
point on this, and that is thathow does this play when you talk
about how things shake out in,potentially in the presidential

(20:23):
race and where he stacks withthe other candidates?
Because about a month ago, okay, he was kind of he was doing
that little centrist thing,right, he's like I talked to
Charlie Kirk, he'll talk toSteve Bannon, and then he'll go
and he may say, yeah, yeah, theprobably shouldn't be men and
women's sports, you know, forhim that was like a big thing,
right, and he does these thingsand he's kind of in that pack

(20:44):
where you get 10% right Witheverybody else.
Well, guess what?
Now that he's gone this route,when you do stack them against
the AOCs of the world, as youmentioned, things have changed.

Speaker 5 (20:54):
Does what we're seeing in California translate
nationally?
Chance of being the 2028Democrat nominee according to
the prediction markets.
Back on June 1st, before allthis strategy, before all this
confrontation with Donald Trump,you saw Gavin Newsom 11% AOC at
10, bruder Judge at 8.
Look at where Gavin Newsom hasshot up to now 27%.
Now is the clear frontrunner,not a 50% plus, but still the

(21:15):
clear frontrunner, at leastaccording to the prediction
markets.
What we're seeing in Californiaisn't staying in California, at
least at this particular point.

Speaker 2 (21:22):
Okay, I'm going to go ahead and say I just think it's
because nobody else has comeout yet Like really a major
front runner.
You know, like there is nomajor front.

Speaker 3 (21:36):
Who is that person?
I don't know.
Like what about, uh, what's?

Speaker 2 (21:38):
her name, uh, from Michigan, the governor, yeah.

Speaker 3 (21:43):
Would she be somebody that would would run again,
okay.
So here's a really good point.
So I was having a conversationwith a friend of mine a couple
of days ago and I and I told him, I said, you know, newsome,
newsome vance, will be a closerace.
It will be because, as bad asnewsome's record is, he at least
can defend it in a slickery way.
Right, he's just a car salesmanright, but he will.
But he will defend it in aslickery way right, he's just a
car salesman, right, but he will.
But he will defend it in a moreeffective way.
As bad as his record is, he'sgoing to be maddening because

(22:05):
he's going to cause, he's goingto be at least a decent defender
of his own horrendous positions.
He is, he is.
But here's the thing thatfriend of mine brought up as we
were, as we were chatting.
He said it's not about that,it's not about California and

(22:26):
New York or anything he goes,it's about Michigan, it's about
Wisconsin and it's aboutPennsylvania.
You think you go to thosestates and the slickery Newsome,
it works out for him and that'sa pretty good point.
It's a pretty good pointbecause Vance, I think, is a
much better candidate in thoseStates because Vance, populist
he is, he's kind of a union guypopulist, and so I think he
makes a good point.
It's very possible then.
Then that gets to your point onwhitmer, who would be better in
michigan and wisconsin andpennsylvania.

Speaker 2 (22:48):
gretchen whitmer would be better than him oh, and
speaking of that, what aboutpennsylvania governor?

Speaker 3 (22:53):
oh yeah, exactly right, but now, now that gets to
a different point, which iswill they nominate him?

Speaker 2 (22:57):
and everything else but Right and they won't.

Speaker 3 (22:59):
Or Wes Moore, like you've got other people.
Okay, there are other people,but it just right now.
Newsom is the guy.
Because of what he's done, I'mgoing to just go ahead and say I
think he's going to fizzle down.

Speaker 2 (23:09):
I just don't think that in three and a half years,
or even two and a half years, Ithink you're going to see the
truth of him kind of bubbling up.
I think you can only be phonyfor so long and I think that
people will see through that.
I think what you're saying isauthenticity does matter, and I
think the painful lesson that welearned with Biden is they
tried to use this like smoke andmirrors for everybody and say,

(23:31):
hey, this doesn't matter, it'snot, it's not a big deal, he's
fine, he's great, he's great.
They lied to the Americanpublic so badly.
I don't think he was interestedin some walking phony, you know
, given.
I think it could be a verydifferent situation again if you
had Trump back on the ballot,which you won't this time, right
?
So I just think Vance isn'tTrump, he's not, and I just

(23:51):
think you know they're going totry to push him into that.
Oh, absolutely.

Speaker 3 (23:55):
I mean the opposing side is going to say he's Trump
2.0 or whatever as they should.
That's whatever any, anycompetent political party would
do.
Yeah, I mean that's not, buthe's not.

Speaker 2 (24:06):
He's not Trump.
So I just think it's going tobe an interesting dynamic and I
think we'll see more peoplecoming out.

Speaker 3 (24:14):
OK, but by the way, I've got a little piece of
breaking news as we're doing theshow.
Yeah, my friend Vince Torres,the incomparable Vince Torres,
we've had him on the show We'llhave him again.
He's fantastic.
He just tweets me a newRasmussen reports poll.
We were talking about thecensus, okay, and he just sends
us.
And it's like Vince is notlistening to what we're doing
right now we do this and then weput it up right after we do it,

(24:34):
but Vince has no idea whatwe're doing.
But, he sends this.
Rasmussen reports says Sundayafternoon crosstabs a new
citizens only census.
In other words, they polled ifthe American people support just
counting American citizens inthe census and should we do it
right away?
Should we?
You know you usually do itevery 10 years right, Should we
say?
wait a minute.

(24:55):
This was so bad what happenedin 2020 and big errors found
that we got to change it.
So it says this 36% of peoplestrongly approve of a new census
right now.
Okay, 21% somewhat approve sothat's 57% of people.
Okay, 10% somewhat disapprove.
24% strongly disapprove Okay,so 57%.

(25:17):
A massive majority of Americanssay do it again now.
Okay, now here's the otherthing.
Should it count illegalimmigrants?
Okay, 52% say no.
Yeah, 36% say yes and 11% arenot sure.
Wow, so that's.
That's super interesting.
So that is that is exactly whatthe Vance stuff gets to.

Speaker 2 (25:40):
Right that we just talked about.
I guess we don't know exactlywhat goes into all of that, like
what will, uh, redoing thecensus actually look like, as
far as you know, how much moneydoes it cost, how much effort
goes into it, how long does ittake?

Speaker 3 (25:54):
Does the money matter ?

Speaker 2 (25:55):
No, not in my opinion .
I think that it should beabsolutely be redone, but I just
feel, like you know, it'd beinteresting to see what are our
numbers here in new mexico.
I think would be so fast Idon't think we're a huge.

Speaker 3 (26:06):
I don't think we have a massive illegal.

Speaker 2 (26:07):
No I, I actually agree with you they leave our
state because there's no, nowork here but anyway so we just
go.
We'll discover that another day.
No, I think it would befascinating, as a study is, to
see what changes in what stateif they do that, if they end up
doing that, and then I mean, Idon't know, that's kind of an
interesting.
Well, yeah, thank you, vince,for breaking news.
I appreciate it.
It's super interesting.

Speaker 3 (26:27):
So, anyway, that's kind of funny to me that he
nailed that that quickly.
But all right.
So let's talk about somethingelse here.
And again, this is something.
Talk about the 2026, for peoplewho think Republicans are going
to roll in 2026, even thoughvoter trends are heading in
their direction, I don't thinkthat's happening.
Okay, and here's another storycame in the Wall Street Journal.

(26:47):
It said Hispanic voters inTexas are starting to turn on
Trump.
Okay, now, the reason for thisis not immigration enforcement.
The reason for this is not lawenforcement in general, or the
National Guard or Russia or anyof those things.
It is simply the economy.

Speaker 2 (27:07):
It says here, but there are signs Hispanic voters
in Texas and nationally aresouring on Trump, which makes
the party's redistrictingstrategy a risk ahead of the
consequential midterm elections.
The rightward shift in theregion, which began in 2020,
came largely in response toeconomic factors, especially the
cost of food and goods.
Now voters say they are feelingthe pinch of those things more
than ever.
So it goes back to this youknow energy prices, our interest

(27:31):
rates, all of that.
It says an April poll by uh you, you notice?
U S, a nonpartisan Hispanicadvocacy organization, measured
the support of Trump's first 100days among Hispanic voters.
They found 61 percent ofrespondents in Texas and 59
percent nationally disapprovedof his performance.

(27:51):
The group overwhelmingly rankedcost of living and the economy
as the most important issues,and a majority of Texas
respondents said they believecurrent policies will make them
worse off next year.

Speaker 3 (28:03):
Okay, so some of that gets back to the media coverage
of the tariffs, right?
Oh, prices are going up.
Prices are going up when thathas not happened in a
significant way.
So that's one thing he'sdealing with.
But this is what we said fromthe very beginning that the
economy is an issue here.
Prices are an issue here.
Prices are an issue.
And no, trump didn't do this.
He didn't push prices up.
He didn't.
He wasn't president when it allhappened, and Biden was.

(28:23):
And now interest rates are skyhigh because of trying to
respond to that.
Now they've been slow to bringinterest rates back down, but we
keep talking about the factthat Trump says over and over
again you got to cut interestrates, they got to continue to
bring down the price of energy,they have to bring down prices,
and it's really hard to bringprices down once they've already
gone up.
So these things are reallydifficult.
This is a tough thing.

(28:44):
So that's why, when you look atcandidates that are running in
2026, this is what you're goingto be up against You're up
against serious headwinds.
And it's not that it's Trump'sfault that the prices are where
they are.
It's not.
But he's still got to wear itnow.
It's his economy now.
Now, if, if the roles arereversed and Trump had pushed

(29:04):
prices way up because ofterrible spending decisions,
like Biden did, the media wouldbe making excuses for Biden.
In other words, if Biden camein behind Trump, you know, and
had to deal with, these highprices, these roles were
reversed.
Yeah, you're right, exactly theway to say it.
Thank you.
Uh, the rules were reversed.
Right now there would be well,this is not Biden's fault.
I mean, what is Biden supposedto do?
The media would keep drummingthat home and people would

(29:25):
eventually hear that.
Enough to be like, yeah, it'snot his fault, it's the other
guy's fault.

Speaker 2 (29:33):
Well, the media is not going to do interesting to
see.
I mean I and I hate to say itlike this, but I wonder how many
businesses will keep priceshigh and then blame it on
tariffs without it actuallybeing a tariff issue.
I don't even know if you couldget away with that, but I am
curious, cause I you hear thatexcuse, like I even heard that
in line.
I was at a grocery store and awoman was saying how, how high
her food was or whateversomething that she was buying,

(29:55):
and the clerk was like, yeah,it's been that high for a while.
And the woman said, oh, it'sbecause of the tariffs.
And I just had it literallytook everything in me to say the
tariffs aren't imposed yet,cause this was, like you know,
three months ago when I was likethis has zero to do with
tariffs.
But I didn't say anything.
I didn't.

Speaker 3 (30:12):
I wanted to, but the facts remain, which is, if
you're a voter and you'redealing with these prices,
telling you that it's notTrump's fault doesn't matter.

Speaker 2 (30:21):
Right, it's perception.

Speaker 3 (30:22):
Yeah, and it doesn't, you don't care.

Speaker 2 (30:24):
Right.

Speaker 3 (30:24):
You're like bring them down?
Do something here.

Speaker 2 (30:27):
And meanwhile he is fighting for that inflation to
go down.
I mean he is like, I mean he'sin a, he is, he is in a fight
for those interest rates to come.

Speaker 3 (30:34):
Well, there's no question, the interest rates I
mean, and now Powell didindicate that they probably will
cut interest rates in September.

Speaker 2 (30:40):
Let's just see how much and make sure they count
Well, no it's interesting.

Speaker 3 (30:43):
But just one other quick little picture here.

Speaker 2 (30:46):
Yeah, because I love a good Krispy Kreme.

Speaker 3 (30:47):
I know you do, but I mean you look at these prices.
I'm not paying that.
It's crazy.

Speaker 2 (30:51):
Yeah, no, a single donut, flour and water and maybe
a little sugar.

Speaker 3 (30:57):
It's nuts in your own 12 pack.
That's the one where you'relike you go get some kids in a
classroom or whatever.
You got a birthday you got 30kids in the classroom.

Speaker 2 (31:05):
This is exactly my case.
I do birthdays.
I know my kids are older, but Icelebrate birthdays in our
class every year, every month,just because I.
It's kind of a fun thing that Ido in my classroom to build
like unity.
And I'm telling you, these kidswant donuts, they want the
gourmet cookie I won't name thebrand because I don't want to
get in trouble but they wantthese high end stuff and it's

(31:26):
it's flour and sugar and it isastronomically expensive.
I will drop about $70 a monthin birthday treats easily.

Speaker 3 (31:35):
Well, yeah, and if you look at this, if you were to
go do your class of 30, allright.
For example, you'd spend 60bucks to give them all a donut.

Speaker 2 (31:44):
Yeah, and that's before tax honey.

Speaker 3 (31:46):
Unreal.
Yeah, let's not forget all theglorious taxes.
No, you're right about that.

Speaker 2 (31:50):
I budget about $70 for birthday treats a month in
my classroom.

Speaker 3 (31:53):
Okay, so yeah, it's not cheap anymore.

Speaker 2 (31:55):
I mean back in the day when our moms used to make
us cupcakes or whatever.
Yeah right, I mean exactly If Icould bake, I would just make
them.
But let's be honest, nobodywants me baking anything.
Oh no, you're terrible, you'reterrible.

Speaker 3 (32:05):
One other thing You're terrible.

Speaker 2 (32:06):
Thanks honey.

Speaker 3 (32:15):
Thank you for your support.
You look at what see?
Not much change, and the reasonwhy is because, despite people
looking at the economy andsaying this is not great, it's
got to be better, trump's better.
I'm mad at Trump for this, okay.
So how do you feel about theDemocrats?
Well, on all places that theysay this, I would say this is a

(32:36):
bit of a shock.
Say this.
I would say this is a bit of ashock, but ABC News, on their
Sunday morning show, decided tolay out where we could be at and
why.
When you look at these bigswings in Congress and we've had
them, obama's had them, trumpsaw it in 2018, you're not
likely to see that this timearound, and you'll learn why in
this soundbite.

Speaker 7 (32:56):
A very, very rough midterm election, particularly
when it comes to the House.
Barack Obama lost 63 seats.
Trump lost 40.
He lost 40.

Speaker 6 (33:05):
Remember how angry he was the day after that midterm.
I mean that changed hispresidency.
He doesn't want it to happenagain.
But Democrats are facing someserious headwinds as well.

Speaker 7 (33:16):
Yeah, and this is just a stunning analysis that
the New York Times has out.
In the last couple of days,You've seen nationwide a drop in
Democratic registration numbers, and in the battleground states
it's just as stark.
Look at this the share ofregistered Democrats down almost
four points in Arizona justsince 2020.
Nevada more than eight points.
North Carolina, Pennsylvaniaall of these big battlegrounds

(33:38):
have lost Democrats in largenumbers again just this decade.
So that just tells you howtough it's going to be for
Democrats to fight their wayback when it comes to control of
Congress or, potentially, thepresidency.
Down the road.
It's hard to create a wave ifvoters are fleeing your party.

Speaker 6 (33:52):
Extraordinary.
Democrats have lost more thantwo million registered voters
just in the past four years andRepublicans have gained Rick.
Thank you very much.

Speaker 3 (34:01):
Thank you, rick.
So it's just crazy.
I mean, it really is.
And when you look at thosenumbers you say holy cow, right,
that's so.
That's why you're not going tosee a wave election.
It is not going to happeneither way.
Right, yes, because it's tough.
Trump being in the midterm isjust tough.
It's the way it is.
And, on the same token,democrats are hemorrhaging
voters and, by the way, it's notjust those States, it's new

(34:23):
Mexico.
Okay, look, right here Just alittle graph.
I'm just a simple meteorologist, but I made a little graph.

Speaker 2 (34:28):
Okay, nice, all right .

Speaker 3 (34:30):
So you go back to 2014,.
Democrats had advantage,meaning 16% more Democrats in
the state than Republicans.
So if everybody voted theirparty, Democrats win by 16.
Okay, and then, so for to giveyou an idea, when we ran it was
about 14.
Okay, and then now it's down to9.9.

Speaker 2 (34:50):
That's great.
Yeah, there's definitely someright.
It's still tough, though, and Ithink that that's one thing I
want to make sure you address isthat you know we keep getting
lots of messages saying who areour candidates for the midterms?
Who's you know running for anysort of House seat?
Who's running?
Who's running for governor?
Why is it so quiet?
I think it's.
I think it's very crystal clearto those of us that have been

(35:13):
in this before.
It's a midterm election withTrump in office and in New
Mexico, with the Democratshaving a nine point advantage.
It's still too tricky.
It's still a very I mean I'lllet you address this more.
You're you're much morefamiliar with this but it's
still just a very tough race toget into in a Trump midterm,

(35:35):
with them having at least a nineto 10 point advantage still.

Speaker 3 (35:38):
Right, and I think it's, yeah, I think it's.
Anytime you have these midterms, it's tricky, right.
It really is.
Whichever party's in power, youthink about those things, and
so, at this point it's I thinkit's part of the reason you
haven't seen anyone announce forgovernor.
Really, at this point, I thinksomebody will.
I think there'll be goodcandidates and it'll be an
interesting.
It'll be an interesting, it'llbe an interesting race, but it's

(35:59):
going to be tough.
It's really going to be toughand so.

Speaker 2 (36:03):
But you never know either you never know, there is
still a lot of time.
I mean as a reminder uh, markdidn't get into the governor's
race last time until the Octoberof the October before the
primary.
So that's, I mean it's, it'scoming around the bend here for
whoever's going to announce, butit's not like people, you know,
I it will just be interesting.

(36:23):
I don't think this is going tostay quiet for long.

Speaker 3 (36:26):
Well, even that and what I mean by tough is just it.
Yet and you don't know isbecause someone could get in and
the circumstances could workout perfectly.
This is the same.
I say this every single time toevery candidate.
It's my standard advice.
It is be prepared to have yoursuccess or failure determined by
things that are completely outof your control.
And that's just the way it is,and that's exactly how it played

(36:47):
out for us.
We didn't have any control ofthe things that caused us to
lose.
We just didn't.
And now do we run the perfectrace?
No, but we ran a pretty danggood pretty dang good race, yeah
, and so and so you know.
So you and I'm proud of that,but it happens, right, I mean,
and people make choices.
That's I totally live with that.
But you just have to be able tounderstand the fact that as you
step into these things, youryour success or failure is now

(37:11):
again, this isn't always thecase.
There are plenty of people thatrun garbage races but there are
but if you're really good, yoursuccess or failure is likely
not going to be based on you.
So those are tough things.
You have to be able to acceptthat, and it's interesting stuff
, no doubt.

Speaker 2 (37:26):
And I also think that these district races, the house
races in particular, that weget people write us all the time
about that.
I think people really need tounderstand how those districts
have been gerrymandered and theyreally have.
Districts have beengerrymandered and they really
have, and so it's like are yougoing to go in there and and
raise enough money and be ableto take somebody out when you
don't have the percentage ofvoters in those districts?

(37:47):
that you need to win thosedistricts Like.
People don't understand allthat Mark.
They just think this person'sthis person's driving us crazy.
She's making terrible decisionsin DC yes, she is, but will
there be enough voters to votein favor for change?
And that is somethingstatistically matters.
You have to have the stats onyour side to be able to win and

(38:08):
to be able to raise enough moneyto win.

Speaker 3 (38:10):
Yeah, no, you're right, you're exactly right.
So just give you an idea,that's CD1, where Stansbury is
currently the office holder.
That's probably a plus 15district really, the way it
votes right now.

Speaker 2 (38:25):
Four Dems.
Four Dems, yeah Right, and Idon't think, a lot of our
conservatives and even Democratswho are writing us saying we
need change.
We don't want her in there, nordo we, but you do have to
understand the science and thedata behind those districts, and
I think that that is somethingthat, like I, had no idea about
until Mark ran.

Speaker 3 (38:45):
But I will say that there there has to be some you
know tidal wave of of pushbackin certain areas, of of certain
districts that have to come backto where they've historically
been.
And I don't know if they will.
You know, sometimes thingschange, like the Albuquerque
Heights have have gone really,really far left.
So that's tough.
It's tough when you're makingthe choice on are you going to
run, and you know what are yougoing to do, and you look at the

(39:06):
numbers and you say, holy cow,you know places where we used to
have swing districts around,say you know Candelaria and and
Tramway and things like that,where you'd have some swing
districts in there.
They're not swing districtsanymore, they're just not.
And so those are tough things,but anyway, okay.
So we're off the election stuff,but it's interesting.
So the reason we present youall this stuff is just to show
you it's a muddled picture, it'sgoing to be tricky and I

(39:29):
wouldn't look for a wave, butwhenever we get information we
want to bring it to you and giveyou as much as we stuff.
So anybody who tells youRepublicans are going to roll, I
think they're crazy.
And anybody who tells you theDemocrats are going to sweep in
and take the Senate and roll inthe house and have big
majorities.
Nope, that's not happeningeither.
The data just disagrees withboth of those uh hypothesis at

(39:52):
this point.

Speaker 2 (39:53):
And I would just say that when people are like, what
can we do?
I think getting more people toregister as Republicans in our
state is dire, like I think thatthat's going to be a huge.
It's a huge issue and it willremain an issue to get younger
people also to get more activeand get more involved in the
party.
That's I feel very passionateabout that.
I think that's very importantto do.
Okay, let's move on.
I'm off my soapbox on that oneCracker Barrel kind of an

(40:17):
interesting story here that'skind of come out this week.
New York Post took a differentturn on this whole Cracker
Barrel remarketing, making theirlogo.
Yeah, Charlie Gasparino did this, yeah, made a little change.
It says Cracker Barrel'smarketing fiasco shows investors
are making woke a massive riskfactor.
So basically the breakdown ofthis it says here if the Cracker
Barrel market puke has anythingto teach Wall Street, it's that

(40:45):
investors who are decidingwhere to put their money must
add corporate wokeness to theirmenu of risks to digest.
In fact, making woke andinvesting risk factor in some
cases as important as thedirection of interest rates and
inflation seems so obvious thatI hesitated to even write this
column.
Recall Bud Light's DylanMulvaney fiasco or Target's CEO
Brian Cornell's recent exitfollowing his ill-fated
obsession with DEI.
Okay, so is going woke hurtingthese brands on Wall Street?

(41:10):
And basically this writer issaying, yes, it kind of is.
While it's not mainstream, thereare some savvy Wall Street
types adding woke risk to theirmodels.
They're just not using thatexact terminology.
Bob Sloan, founder of the dataand analytics firm S3 Partners,
is among them.
For weeks he's been watchingCracker Barrel stock for an
unconventional catalyst thatcould send it higher or lower.

(41:31):
So again they're trying to sayyou know, is this going to be a
short term or long term?
Whatever those you know playingthe Wall Street game?
What caught Sloan's eye a fewweeks ago is what S3 specializes
in looking at investorsentiment around a stock.
That is, the degree to whichinvestors believe in the stock
and were active longs they mightbuy more under the right

(41:52):
conditions, for example, andthose who were bearish,
so-called active shorts, bettingagainst it and then willing to
double down on their bets.
Sloan noticed the active longand short sentiment was pretty
evenly split and, quote thatmeans all it takes is some event
to move shares significantly ineither direction, he tells me.
So what is that?
Well, the catalyst, of course,was this new logo, which was

(42:13):
perceived as woke overtones.
Gone was Uncle Herschel and hisbarrel on that logo.
Remaining was the company nameagainst its standard yellow
background.
What's the lesson they've kindof are learning here?
They said that.
Well, the internet erupted.
The stock on Thursday lostnearly $100 million in market
value.
And so, basically what this guyis saying, the Sloan guy that

(42:34):
follows these stocks, he'ssaying, quote the moral of the
story is, if you're going to doa rebranding of this type, with
long and short sentiments soevenly split, you should wait.
But as outlined in my book thisis the writer again he wrote a
book called Go Woke, go Broke.
He says, waiting is often notan option For all the customer
backlash against woke imagemaking.

(42:54):
It remains a staple inmarketing departments looking to
appeal to new audiences,including those that don't exist
.
So I mean, his takeaway,obviously, is these guys are
trying to make money on thestock market, regardless of if a
company wins or loses, right,like they're playing both sides
of the fence on that which.
I don't know anything about thestock market, really, when it
comes to that but I have watchedmovies.

(43:16):
I did watch, you know, wallStreet and all that stuff.

Speaker 3 (43:19):
No, that's critical.
That is critical.
No, it's an interesting pointin one that you know.
So this whole, apparentlybehind the scenes, cracker
Barrel has definitely been muchmore pushing the DEI stuff than
is, I think, publicly known.
Okay, so there's a lot ofpeople out there talking about
this.
We're not going to get into thespecific examples, but but I

(43:40):
think overall here what'sinteresting is you have a very
down home kind of conservativebrand it really is and the
question is does your leadershipmatch that conservative brand?
Now, when you look at the actuallogo, I don't know.
You know everybody's gettingall you know, all fired up
because uncle Herschel's notthere on the logo anymore.
I get it, I understand.

(44:00):
I mean, you know there are alot of different logos that
change over time.
Was this some affront to theiryou know their customer?
I don't know.
But I do think there is someportion of this where you have a
company here that and you seeit the same way all the time
which is their leadershipdoesn't match their customer.

(44:20):
They don't understand thecustomer, they don't get them
and if and if they think thatthey're going to be able to
replace their current customer,which they don't like as much as
a potential other customer orexactly what you just said in
the article a customer thatisn't even there.
You know, I don't.
I think that's craziness, butwhat's interesting about it is
when you do genuinely look atwhere people sit with your stock

(44:41):
and if you're sitting dead,even right, if you don't have a
bunch of people that are long onyour stock and meaning long
meaning they're they're in withyou, right, and they're in for
the positive results with you,if you've got a really a lot of
people with a long position inyour stock, well you know you've
got some more headroom there tomess around.
But obviously Cracker Barreldidn't.
Now Cracker Barrel probably isnot in huge trouble.

(45:03):
I wouldn't think, but I don'tknow at this point.

Speaker 2 (45:05):
So well, I would just say that I was just literally
having this conversation with myfriend, debbie, this past week
about these products that decideto change either their image,
their logo or their spokespeople, thinking that they're going to
address a new market.
And we're sitting here becausewe both have background in
marketing, right, we both havedecades of working in marketing.

(45:26):
We're like what are theseclowns thinking?
Like why would they come in andtry to shift something to get
somebody that they think mightbe more appealing?
For instance, there is a prettycontroversial spokesperson
coming in for a makeup line andthis makeup line appeals to
young girls.
Right, that's kind of theirtarget market.
Well, tiktok took off andbasically, is these girls are

(45:49):
furious about this newspokesperson that's coming in
for this.
Well, that's their market,that's their person that's going
to buy these products.
Are these young high school andcollege age girls wake up and
realize, like, be careful whoyou pick to be your spokesperson
.
Or you think that I mean thistarget CEO?
Holy cow, I who knows wherethat guy's going to land, right,
cause those were some tragicdecisions that he made for the

(46:13):
Target brand that had massiveimpacts, not understanding the
mom market as much at Target.
So anyway, I'm just saying likeas somebody who has a marketing
background, just be careful whyyou rebrand things and be
careful of the perception.
And you have your small littleworld as a marketing person
inside one of these corporateoffices and you're not really in

(46:33):
touch with the current customer.

Speaker 3 (46:35):
That's still value you know, so incredibly valuable
.
It's the number one sin of a ofa bad marketing department
which is not knowing yourcustomer or not respecting them
or not liking them Like they,they pay your bill.
You love them.
You should love them and youshould know them to their core.
I don't care what it is, it youis.
It could be absolutely theother way.
It could be Whole Foods andyou're like, hey, you better

(46:56):
know your customer, right?
Your customer isn't a rancherdown the road.
That's likely not your customerat Whole Foods, just like your
customer at Cracker Barrel isnot likely to be somebody who is
on the far left.
That's just not what that brandis.
Everybody knows that.
Not that you don't have some ofthose people at Crossover, but
in general, know where yourbread is buttered.

Speaker 2 (47:18):
I just think.
I think this is really.
This has shaken up a lot ofindustry that I've seen
personally.
I have friends that work indifferent brands throughout the
country and they are seeing likewhen they bring in a new CEO
who thinks, oh, they've got whatit takes to figure this out.
I won't name the actual brandhere, but it was a NFL
cheerleading program.
They brought in somebody new tobe in charge of marketing for

(47:40):
that and wanted to scrap thecalendar and I remember I told
you this right, they wanted toscrap the cheerleading calendar
because they thought, oh, thisis too sexist, people don't want
this anymore.
Meanwhile, the people that Iknow work on that calendar and
try to make it still a reallylike nice calendar.
It sells.
People buy it, mainly men whobuy it and young men buy it

(48:01):
right.

Speaker 3 (48:01):
Who actually are the fans of these teams?

Speaker 2 (48:03):
Correct, or at least the biggest, and you have this
new head of marketing comes inand says oh, it's sexist, we're
going to get rid of it.
Well, it's a massive fundraiserfor this organization.
So it was.
It was interesting to see thechanges that these people try to
make without understanding,like come in, get to know your
customer base before you startmaking all these changes.
That was.
I just don't understand howanybody hires a marketing exec

(48:25):
to come in and say, hey, youspend a year at our company
getting to know the quality ofour customer base and then you
figure out your strategy.
Yeah, no it makes sense, allright, I want to get to CBS News
.

Speaker 3 (48:37):
Okay, and that is because CBS has been bought by
Skydance.
Okay, and this is David Ellison, son of Larry Ellison, and I
don't think you're talking aboutthe Murdochs here.
Okay, they're not people thatwe're not about to tell you that
CBS News is going to become FoxNews.
It's not Okay.
They're not people that we'renot about to tell you that CBS
news is going to become Fox news.
It's not okay, it's not at all.
But I do think you may see CBStry to make a subtle shift back

(49:01):
toward sort of a equilibriumthat has not existed in that
organization for more than 20years.

Speaker 2 (49:07):
What is Gail King going to do with that?

Speaker 3 (49:09):
Well, that's a really good question.

Speaker 2 (49:11):
Gail King's not going to have anything to say anymore
.

Speaker 3 (49:12):
Well, it was interesting, right, so you
listen.
So what you're starting to seehere and Tony DeCoppo is the
quote we're going to show youright here.
Tony, on a couple of differentoccasions recently, has sort of
been a voice of reason on theCBS morning show.
He has what you listen to him.
You're like, yeah, makes sense,you know, and Tony's not some
activist.
Tony isn't pushing anything oranything else, but he talked
about the Smithsonian and hetalked about what the Trump

(49:35):
administration is trying to dowith the Smithsonian.
And he did it in a way thatyou're going to listen to it and
be like, yeah, makes sense, itmakes sense.
And so he got some pushback.
I don't have all of it, but hisyeah, gayle King was trying to
push back.
The other guy on set eventuallytried to push back a little bit
and everything else.
But Tony basically makes kind ofan interesting point here and I

(49:56):
think you're going to start tosee more and more the Tony
DeCopos of the world be able tosay wait a minute, what about
this?
And that's all you're lookingfor.
You're looking for both sidesto get their say and I do think
there's a piece of the marketfor a large, major network to
say we're not going tocontinually try to push one side
, because we know they've beendoing that forever and it does

(50:17):
not serve the country well.
So here's Tony DeCoppo on Trumptrying to have some influence
over the Smithsonian and howAmerica should be proud of who
we are and when we have theSmithsonian presenting things to
people.

Speaker 8 (50:30):
There's nothing wrong with presenting both the parts
of it that we're not necessarilyproud of, but also
understanding there's plenty tobe proud of Of reverence the
country's not above critique,but we shouldn't look at our
history with contempt either,and I think there is some room
for a correction back toward themiddle.
And in fact you know LonnieBunch, who heads the Smithsonian
, and Donald.
Trump and his administration.

(50:52):
In a letter.
There they're saying quite thesame things.
The mission of the Smithsonianis to forge a shared history, a
shared future not just context,but hope to lead the country and
communities together.
That's essentially the samelanguage that Donald Trump is
offering here, and I do thinkthere's room to say in American
history what you are describing.
That process of a journeytoward greatness, is very real

(51:13):
and we all have something to beincredibly proud of.
And you talk about overseas, Ithink the world and its people.
If you ask someone, is theworld and its people better off
because of the existence ofAmerica and its people?
To me the answer isunquestionably yes, and I think
people walking into theSmithsonian, when they walk out
of it, they should get somesense of that yeah, heck.

Speaker 3 (51:35):
Yes, tony decouple.
Yeah, I mean, that's not crazy,it isn't.
Don't talk about, you know, thethe very real things we've done
as a country which areproblematic, but by and large,
we're a force for good in theworld.

Speaker 2 (51:46):
There's nothing wrong with saying that right and
maybe you know for your titlenine exhibit just make it
correct.
All we're going to say.
We covered that one last show Iwould just tell you, I would
just tell you.

Speaker 3 (51:55):
I think Tony doing this is an indication of what's
happening.
I hope it's CBS and maybethat's wishful thinking.
Maybe you watch MargaretBrennan and you roll your eyes
and like I do just kind of sayit's crazy, but I but I do think
.
I think that is very, verypromising.
I really do.
I think what he said was great,made a lot of sense, and I hope
that CBS starts to move in adirection of saying look, our

(52:15):
job is to hold everybodyaccountable, make everybody
uncomfortable and stop pushingan agenda one side or the other.
And it's been one sided at CBSfor decades.
Back then Rather was one sided.
I mean it's been one sided fora long, long time.
Stop doing that.

Speaker 2 (52:31):
Well, as they believe viewers and ratings, cert
diploma, they have to make somechanges.
So, okay, southwest airlinesthinking about um expansion
overseas, so some, maybe someEuropean.

Speaker 3 (52:43):
Yes, european.
Well, they're the number onecarrier out of the sun port.
So the question is, where doyou want to see them go there?
They are eyeing going to Europebecause they they fly the seven
37 max which I think can go amax of like 3,700 miles,
something like that.
So again, you couldn't godirect out of Albuquerque or
Phoenix overseas, but you couldgo to New York or whatever, and
then New York to say London orNew York to you know whatever,

(53:06):
ireland or wherever, Anyinterest in that.
I thought this was greatbecause we fly southwest.

Speaker 2 (53:10):
We do fly southwest.
I'm just going to say this,though this was great because we
fly Southwest, we do flySouthwest.
I'm just going to say this,though Not that I've been to
Europe a lot, because I haven't,but the times I have flown I've
flown in a plane that is moreaccommodating than Southwest,
like bigger, bigger, so biggerseat arrangement.
You know you have like leg room, you have.
So I can't imagine like theplanes that we say take to

(53:31):
Denver or to DC or whereverwe're flying, or Houston.
I hope it's a different planethan that.

Speaker 3 (53:38):
Well, it's going to be a 737 MAX, that's what it's
going to be.

Speaker 2 (53:41):
Well, they better take some seats out to make some
room for a leg room, becausewhen you're flying 8, 10,
12-hour flights being cramped upin those planes to me I'm like,
oh gosh, maybe.
I'm like, oh gosh, I, I, I, I,maybe I'm old.

Speaker 8 (53:58):
I don't know, I think it'll be, I think it will be
one of those deals where theyprobably start off with you know
that roughly six, yeah, well,yeah, Like that roughly New York
to London six hours or fivehours.

Speaker 3 (54:05):
You know somewhere in there, somewhere in some of
those, you know Western Europe,you know destinations that won't
take you 10 hours to get to.

Speaker 2 (54:12):
But even okay, even basic service on the like some
of the other carriers going tointernational.
You get perks Like there are,you know, you're given food,
you're given you know more legroom, without having to upgrade
to like a business, say class ora first class, right.
If South, if South wants to beserious about this, they, I
think you have to make your base.

(54:33):
I mean, they only offer basicservice, right.
So you have to step it up alittle bit If you want to
compete with, say, jet blue orUnited or some of those guys, I
don't know that you do, butyou'll have to beat them on
price, right, you'll have tobeat them on price, and so we'll
see if it checks out.

Speaker 5 (54:47):
All right, let's move on, all right.

Speaker 3 (54:48):
Are you ready for this?

Speaker 2 (54:49):
Well, yeah, I mean, are you ready for this?
Maybe we should.
We should have what we shoulddo.
I should have recorded youdoing a bench press, Although I
don't allow you to do thatanymore, but we won't tell
people why, but anyway, stillyou, uh, or maybe we should have
recorded me doing a bench press.

Speaker 3 (55:02):
Be close.
I bet you may be able to dothis, so I will say this bigger
issue.
So Zora Mundani goes to like afitness day in New York city.
They do it all the time everyyear and there are different
like workout stations and thingslike that All good stuff, and
as a candidate, you go in andpeople ask you to do stuff all
the time, and so you gotta be alittle selective though, because

(55:23):
if you know that it's not yourbag, I don't recommend it.
It's the old Michael Dukakisriding in the tank situation.
Right, it's the.
It's the guy who hops on ahorse.
I remember, um, we had acandidate in the Senate race
that I ran against, uh Gavin,and he got on a horse and looked
like he, like he had nobusiness being on the horse, and

(55:44):
it's one of the things I'vealways said, like I'm never
getting on a horse for acampaign event, I'm just not
doing it.
Okay, I'm not doing the Bregman, I'm not throwing the chaps on
and going in that game.

Speaker 2 (55:51):
You're also not wearing a cow.
I remember people just sayingwe need to get Mark some cowboy
boots and a cowboy hat.
And I'm like no, we don't likehave you ever looked at Mark's
head Number one, it's too bigfor a cowboy hat.
But you had, you know, lots ofsupporters that were like, can
we buy him a cowboy hat?
I'm like please don't.
Yeah, exactly.

Speaker 3 (56:09):
So Zora Mandani goes to do a bench press and, just so
you know, you're looking atabout 125 here on the bench.
He's got like 25s on each side,right, okay.
So here he is in action, zoraMandani.
Move up in the pole.
Move up in the pole, yeah, okay.
So there he is.
He's got a spotter who lookslike he's a pretty good sized

(56:32):
dude, right, but there he is.

Speaker 2 (56:35):
And his spotter never takes his hands off the bar.

Speaker 3 (56:37):
No, no, he doesn't, Never takes his hands off.
They're getting all set.
So this is where you just gotto have a campaign person who
says look, we're not going to dothis.
And again, for anybody wholifts any semblance of weight,
especially a guy like that, it'snot very much weight and he's
got to have this guy pulling itup for him and so look just as a

(56:58):
candidate could lift more thanit could bench press more than
it's a tough deal.
So I will say that.
So just again in the future,any candidate if you're not
comfortable with it.
It's not really that endearingto go get smoked at something
like that.
Just don't do it.

Speaker 2 (57:10):
Yeah, don endearing to go get smoked at something
like that.
Just don't do it.
Yeah, don't, don't do it.
Don't try to fake it, that'sthat's the biggest thing I mean.

Speaker 3 (57:14):
or if you know this is common, then go train a
little bit and get yourself, Imean cause one 20,.

Speaker 2 (57:19):
you know, really I remember a candidate I will not
name names, but against you waslike working a farm and I was
like, uh, like putting hay inthe back of a car or a truck or
something, and you could justtell this person had never
worked a farm a day in theirlife, or ranch, or whatever.
I was like please stop, pleasedon't do this.

Speaker 5 (57:37):
You look like a fool.

Speaker 2 (57:38):
And it's, it's just anyway don't do it.

Speaker 3 (57:40):
Just stay who you?

Speaker 2 (57:41):
are.
I don't know who Bregman is,that's another thing.

Speaker 3 (57:44):
but we'll figure out, but at least Bregman can ride a
horse Like it wasn't like youknow, he wasn't, like you know,
all over the place where he'slike oh my God, what is this
thing?
I'll give him that you know,and now he's in costume and
everything else.
I love the costume, but I, butI, I give him credit for that.
Like he can do that, like thisis a whole different deal.

Speaker 2 (58:07):
Like when Donnie's never he's never been inside a
some weights for my campaign,Like that would have never
happened.

Speaker 3 (58:13):
And I know I see RFK Jr do that stuff and he's got
the shirt off with the jeans onand he's in good shape.
He's in great shape.

Speaker 2 (58:20):
I think he's trying to.
He's also trying to run forhealth secretary, so I think
that that's a little differentthan the fact that he's trying
to say, listen, I'm a beacon ofhealth, this is what I I mean.
And he's also trying to appealto women and the women vote.

Speaker 3 (58:31):
Give me a break.
That's what he's a.

Speaker 2 (58:32):
Kennedy.
That's what he's trying to do.

Speaker 3 (58:34):
No, all right Okay.

Speaker 2 (58:35):
So I sent you this clip because, uh, the one that
you love your Sunday game dayvideo right, yes, and you love
your game cameras.
My biggest fear are thesecreatures showing up anywhere
near me, and especially the size.
This came out of Durango.
These are three massivemountain lions Like these belong

(58:57):
in, like, I don't know,beautiful Africa, I don't know.
I mean, I don't know, they'remassive.
Look how big these cats are.

Speaker 3 (59:04):
Well, the mom is, that's the mom.

Speaker 2 (59:06):
Okay, yeah, I'm sorry the kid, I'm sorry the babies,
they're still-.

Speaker 3 (59:10):
They're getting there .
They're getting there.

Speaker 2 (59:11):
Yeah, and these three are just tooling around this
guy's yard, yeah, right, sothey're just filming these
beautiful cats Yep Strollingaround the yard in Durango and
I'm like, oh my gosh, where'syour small dog?
Yeah, where is your children?
Yeah.

(59:33):
I'm sorry mom, this mom, shecould kill me if I go on a hike.
She can jump out of a tree andI am carve you up like a
christmas turkey.
Yeah, I mean.
So I'm like, if you ever, ifyou see these uh cats anywhere
near, I was like, oh my gosh,and I'm just like out watering
my lavender.
These people have lavendergrowing.
I'm like beautiful little spot,beautiful land, but I'm like
I'm sure this person is indoorsfilming this, because these cats
are like no doubt you're not,you're not expecting this.
So I'm just saying right now umno, I'm not interested in these

(59:56):
and these cats coming anywherenear um the spots at angel fire
that we're working on right now.

Speaker 6 (01:00:01):
So yeah, but they're pretty and then the little
babies, uh go after her.

Speaker 3 (01:00:06):
I think right yeah, they come in right here.
Yeah, they come diving in right.
Yeah, she gets it going acrossand then there they go.

Speaker 2 (01:00:12):
Yeah, no, no thanks, no thanks for that.

Speaker 3 (01:00:14):
It is.
They are stunning animals.

Speaker 2 (01:00:16):
Okay, another no thanks.

Speaker 3 (01:00:17):
There they are.
They're the two little guys.

Speaker 2 (01:00:19):
Yeah, they're tiny.
They're the size of Maverick orHusky.

Speaker 3 (01:00:24):
Yeah, well, he's actually laying right behind you
right now he's not that heavy.
No, stop, okay, all right,sorry.
One other visit.
We, as we said, we're shootinga show up in the Northern
mountains um that we'll havemore on as we wrap it up and
then bring you more details onit.
But our photographer, um JohnBeck, was inside the house the

(01:00:47):
rental house we're using upthere and this guy comes walking
up.

Speaker 2 (01:00:50):
Yeah.
This was yes, this was threedays, two, three days ago, holy
cow, speaking of 150 pounds, Imean this bear.
How big is this bear?
He looks huge and he's verycomfortable up on the deck.

Speaker 3 (01:01:00):
Oh yeah, just watch this, though he thinks.
See that it's a littlereflector, see the little red
reflector there.
It looks like a lollipop.
Yeah, he's going to kind ofgrab that and be like, is this
thing edible?
Like he's just checking aroundfor some food, trying to see if
there's anything.
He looks like he's prettyhealthy.
Oh yeah, he's healthy, allright he he's also a person that

(01:01:24):
I don't want to contend with,like he's a little, he's a
little guy's food and then he'slike oh, probably not.

Speaker 2 (01:01:28):
No, nothing, nothing good there.
Yeah, again, holy cow.
Like no, okay, yeah, that's itfor us.
We hope that you've enjoyedwhat we have brought you today.
If you have, please tell yourfriends about our show.
Please like and subscribe onour YouTube channel.
It means the world to us and wecan see comments when you like
and subscribe.
That's kind of how that worksnow, that algorithm.
So please like and subscribe,tell your friends about us, and
if you want to sign up for ouremail, please do that at our

(01:01:50):
website, which isNoDoubtAboutItPodcastcom.
Thanks so much, you guys, andhave a great start to your week.

Speaker 4 (01:01:56):
You've been listening to the no Doubt About it
Podcast.
We hope you've enjoyed the show.
We know we had a blast.
Make sure to like, rate andreview.
We'll be back soon, but in themeantime you can find us on
Instagram and Facebook at noDoubt About it Podcast.

Speaker 5 (01:02:13):
No doubt about it.

Speaker 4 (01:02:16):
The no Doubt About it Podcast is a Choose Adventure
Media production.
See you next time on no DoubtAbout it.

Speaker 3 (01:02:24):
There is no doubt about it.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Episode 219 National Guard to New Mexico: Trump's Bold Move Explained

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark

All Episodes

Episode 219 National Guard to New Mexico: Trump's Bold Move Explained

Stuff You Should Know