September 17, 2025 • 41 mins
The political landscape in Albuquerque has reached a fascinating tipping point, as revealed by exclusive polling data that might just predict the outcome of the upcoming mayoral race. The numbers tell a compelling story: incumbent Mayor Tim Keller faces serious headwinds with his unfavorability at 52% and a striking 60% of voters saying it's time for someone new.
Crime and homelessness dominate voter concerns, together capturing over 60% of what residents identify as their top issues. Despite this, the race has become increasingly nationalized, setting up what might be the most consequential dynamic of the election – will voters prioritize their frustrations with local leadership, or will their feelings about Donald Trump ultimately determine their choice?
The polling creates a fascinating tension. While Keller leads with 34% support to challenger Darren White's 21%, the high undecided number (30%) suggests significant voter uncertainty. What makes this particularly intriguing is the direct comparison between Trump's 62% unfavorability in Albuquerque and Keller's 60% "time for someone new" rating. This sets up an election that transcends typical local politics, becoming instead a test case for whether voters can separate their national partisan loyalties from their local concerns.
Additional polling for the New Mexico governor's race shows Secretary Deb Haaland with a commanding lead among Democrats, even winning moderate Democrats by a significant margin. This reflects national polling trends highlighted by Harry Enten showing socialism's growing popularity within the Democratic Party – a jump from +7 points in 2010 to +36 points today, helping explain why progressive candidates often outperform expectations in primaries.
For political observers watching these races unfold, the central question becomes whether New Mexico voters will prioritize local issues like crime and homelessness or vote based on national partisan identities. The answer could reshape politics in the state for years to come. Follow our coverage as we continue tracking the numbers that matter most in determining who will lead Albuquerque and New Mexico into the future.
Website: https://www.nodoubtaboutitpodcast.com/
Twitter: @nodoubtpodcast
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/NoDoubtAboutItPod/
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/markronchettinm/?igshid=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ%3D%3D
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
Okay, a little unusual day for us.
We've got Mark in the mountains, me in Albuquerque, ella
joining us today with her.
We actually got a camera forElla.
Yeah, I've never had a camerabefore, so this is very exciting
.
Speaker 3 (00:20):
Yeah, it's very exciting, did you?
Speaker 2 (00:20):
wave to the people, wave to the people.
Wave to the people, okay, waveto the people, okay.
So we're hoping that Mark'sWi-Fi stays strong enough for
the length of this show, becausewe have packed it with lots of
information.
But we're going to get right toit today, because I'm worried a
little bit about you, Mark,number one.
I can't see you from where I'mat.
Speaker 5 (00:40):
Right, that's probably for the best, quite
frankly, it probably is.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
I can hear you, though, so you know that's the
way it goes.
Speaker 5 (00:52):
Well, yeah, so what we're going to do?
So we, so this is a pollingshow.
We're going to talk aboutpolling and some very, very
recent polling that was, I don'twant to say leaked to us, but
leaked to us and so it's aboutthe mayor's race, a deep dive
into that.
So we're going to have a reallygood idea of how I think this
thing is going to play out and Ithink you're going to know
relatively quickly, as we headthrough the next few weeks, how
this is all going to go.
Honestly, in this mayor'spolling, we'll give you a
(01:14):
crystal clear idea of what'sgoing on.
That with that, we also havenew polling for the governor's
race on the democratic side,because you don't have very many
candidates on the Republicanside yet, but we've got some
interesting numbers there andit's some of what we've been
talking about, but it'sfascinating stuff as we dive
into that.
So that's going to be superinteresting.
Then Harry Enten talking aboutwhy this may be a very, very
(01:39):
predictable primary season onthe Democratic side.
So we'll get to that as well,and at the very end we're going
to tap into a little more ofwhat happened with Charlie Kirk.
Just a couple of quick, reallylate breaking developments on
Tuesday into Wednesday, and someof that has to do with the
person that is that has been incustody and arrested for this
(01:59):
killing, and so we'll go throughall of that as well.
But really we're talking aboutpolling here, and some very
important polling.
I think that's going to giveyou a good idea of what's going
on.
Speaker 2 (02:08):
Okay, so I've got to say I feel like my old news days
because hearing you in my ear,right, which is how, when I used
to toss you in the field orwhatever, whoever reporter,
whatever often I couldn't seethem.
I would just have to know thatthey were there and I could hear
them.
So, uh, we're going to be kindof winging this folks, so
hopefully it goes smooth and, um, I want to get to the polls
(02:30):
because I think that's superinteresting.
Speaker 5 (02:33):
Um, absolutely Okay.
Speaker 2 (02:34):
So this, this kind of threw me a little bit, so go
ahead yeah.
Speaker 5 (02:37):
Yeah, and so this poll.
So I want to explain a coupleof things first, uh, the whole
poll was leaked to us, so we gota look into the crosstabs and
everything on this.
So there's a ton of stuff.
I didn't dive deep into thecrosstabs for this particular
show, but I do want to show yousome of this.
So let's start, and the waywe're doing this Zoom is that
basically, christy's cam willturn into the camera that shows
(02:58):
us all the data, so she'll beable to see it.
So let's start number one withhow the poll breaks down, and
this tells you a lot about theAlbuquerque DMA and the
Albuquerque voter.
Okay, it was a 56% Democraticpoll, 30% Republicans.
Now you would say, oh my gosh,that's weighted way too heavily
(03:18):
for Democrats, 9% nonpartisanand 3% other.
That's not that crazy, becausethe Albuquerque market in
general and Albuquerque as acity as a whole is pretty far
left now.
So that's a poll.
That's probably not a horribleweighting as far as weighting it
out with different Republicansand Democrats and remember,
(03:39):
remember this a 26 pointadvantage for Democrats.
And then, once you see thesenumbers, it's going to show you
why this mayor's race is goingto be fascinating at the very
least.
So what do voters care aboutmore than anything else in this
poll?
Let me tell you and it makes alot of sense Voters care about,
at least at this point crimeCrime is the number one issue
(04:00):
that people are most concernedwith.
At this point it gets 42.8% ofthe vote and 18% on homelessness
, christy.
So if you take those twonumbers together, it's over 60%.
Speaker 2 (04:10):
Yeah, not surprising.
I mean that doesn't surprise mewhatsoever, but keep going.
We see house affordability,education coming in at 8%, taxes
and spending and the economydown there at 4.9%.
Speaker 5 (04:21):
Yeah, the economy.
I actually thought the economywould be a little bit higher,
but I think some of what you seethere with housing
affordability, that's kind of aleftward issue, that's, you know
, more of a left-leaning issue.
Education is as well, and so asyou look at those numbers and
you see, though, if you takethose two top numbers, I mean
that's, if you live inAlbuquerque, you know that, you
know that the crime is thebiggest issue, you know that
(04:43):
homelessness is rampanteverywhere.
So, as you look at those twoissues, that makes a great deal
of sense.
But remember again I just bringit up one more time it's a
Democratic poll weighted by plus26 points, so Democrats
understand the same thing thatRepublicans do.
These are the main issues inthe city of Albuquerque.
All right, so is also, by theway, we kind of skipped over
this in the city of Albuquerque.
Speaker 2 (05:03):
All right, so is also , by the way, we kind of skipped
over this, but just to mentionthe fact that this poll is 54%
female voters, 45% male.
Speaker 5 (05:17):
So I'm sorry, I jumped over.
Yeah, so it's a really goodpoint, but again, christy, I
think what's so valuable aboutwhat you say?
There is another thing here.
If you look at it this way andelse you can throw those numbers
up you can see it is much moreweighted toward women than men.
I don't think the electorate isgoing to come out this way, and
it is number two.
There you go.
It's not going to be 54% female, 45% male.
I think it's going to be closerthan that.
I think it's going to be morelike 52-48.
(05:38):
This shows you, though, withwith more females than males in
this, in this polling, by 10points.
That too, should benefit Kelleras we get further down into
these details.
But thanks for wrangling meback in.
So now, right direction.
You know wrong track.
Those numbers are a problem forthe mayor.
Speaker 2 (05:59):
Right, it looks like here.
So about 30, a little over 37percent of Democrats think that
the city is moving.
It's the poll as a whole, notjust Democrats, think that the
city is moving in the rightdirection.
Speaker 5 (06:05):
It's the poll as a whole, not just Democrats.
Speaker 2 (06:07):
Oh, okay, the poll as a whole Okay.
So 37% of people think thatwe're moving in the right
direction, 52% think the city ismoving in the wrong direction
and about 10% are unsure.
Speaker 5 (06:17):
Not sure how you could be unsure about that, but
anyway but usually if yeah, andwhen you look at these numbers
and when you're in the middle ofa campaign, you usually know
that as you're looking at theseright direction, wrong track
(06:38):
numbers, those are usually aproxy for how you end up doing
in the election.
Okay, so when you have thosenumbers at 37%, saying you're on
the right track, that's a huge,huge issue.
Okay, so that's not the onlything.
Then we go to the next thing.
Speaker 2 (06:45):
So you mean when, when Keller gets up and does
press conferences, this crimesdown, everything's going great.
People aren't buying it.
Is that what you're telling me?
Speaker 5 (06:53):
this.
It doesn't appear that they areright.
But, then you.
But then you look at it, themayor's ballot here, okay, so
here's the actual ballot whenyou put everybody in.
Okay, now, the one person who'snot in this is Alex Ubaez.
I don't know why he was notlisted on the information that
we got, but I will tell you thatas you add up all these numbers
(07:14):
, had he been listed, I thinkKeller's number comes down, not
up, okay, so.
So, assuming he wasn't in thepoll, I think he drags away from
Keller because he's trying torun to Keller's left, and so
here are the numbers here.
So what this really shows youis the mayor's race is a
two-person race.
There's no doubt the problemfor Luis Sanchez, mayling,
(07:40):
armijo and Eddie Varela andUbaez, even though he's not
listed here, no one knows whothey are.
Speaker 2 (07:43):
No one knows who they are, and they don't have the
money to educate people on whothey are, so that's a problem.
Darren White, okay, keep going,I don't want to interrupt you.
Speaker 5 (07:48):
No, no, no, go ahead, jump in, jump in.
Speaker 2 (07:49):
Well, I was just going to say the undecided seems
really high to me at 30%, Isthat?
Does that not seem high to you?
Speaker 5 (07:55):
That's pretty high.
It is pretty high, there's noquestion.
So obviously let's assume thatthe Ubiah's number's in there,
right?
So he's probably at five or 6%.
So that number is probably downto 25, but I think you're right
.
I think that's a pretty goodobservation that that number is
fairly election.
Speaker 2 (08:09):
You know, close to the election people's, you know
you got at least 25% maybe,maybe that don't really know who
they're going to vote for yet.
Speaker 5 (08:16):
Based on this, based on this survey, yeah, and you
would expect that number to behalf.
That I would say.
I think you're right and Ithink that this underlines the
point of our whole show, andthat is that this thing's going
to come down to something veryunusual here and we'll get to it
in a second.
But you're right, thatundecided number is really
pretty high.
Speaker 2 (08:36):
So let's dive.
Well, what are your thoughts onDarren White coming at 21%
versus Tim Keller's 34?
What are your just takeawaysfrom that when you see those
numbers?
Speaker 5 (08:44):
I think that what you've got with with Darren is
that all you care about ifyou're Darren White is just
getting into second place, andthat number is not a huge number
.
Obviously, I'm sure Darrenwishes it was 28, 29%, but I
also don't think it's it's thatbig a deal, and the reason why
is I've looked at all thecrosstabs and some of the other
numbers.
His overall image, which we'regoing to show you in a second,
(09:06):
is not horrible.
He's not way.
His image isn't at 21%, put itthat way right.
His image is higher than that.
So he's got room to grow and Ithink what you'll likely see is
voters for, say, mei Ling andEddie Varela, and maybe even
Luis Sanchez could well go toDarren.
Speaker 2 (09:25):
So that's what's interesting in all this in a
runoff.
Speaker 5 (09:28):
So then then it becomes the undecided voter
makes the choice which youcorrectly break down is pretty
dang high, right, and so that'sinteresting.
No, it's.
It's a good point, though, isthat Darren's number?
I'm sure he wishes it was alittle bit higher, but I also
don't think, by looking at thispoll, by any stretch he's he
doesn't have something to behappy about.
Speaker 2 (09:45):
Okay, let's talk about Tim Keller's image.
Uh, the next slide here.
It looks like his favorabilityis up at 42%, and then his
unfavorable, yeah.
I wouldn't call that underwater, yeah, okay, yeah, he's, he's
underwater, right he'sunfavorable is over 52%, and I
just remember that magic numberback in the.
You know, anything I ever sawwas you never wanted your
(10:07):
unfavorability to be higher than50%.
I mean like the worst casescenario, right?
Speaker 5 (10:13):
That's right, I think that's exactly right.
And when and when yourunfavorability is it, it, it,
that number that is.
That is brutal, brutal,absolutely brutal.
So so that's not good, butactually I think the next number
you're about to bring up iseven worse.
Speaker 2 (10:27):
Yeah, this Keller reelect number.
I mean it says here that whenasked if, if Tim Keller should
be reelected, a whopping 60% sayno, say no, yeah, they're like
it's time for somebody new.
I mean that that's.
Speaker 5 (10:43):
I think that is a blinking red light, right?
I mean.
So you look at all of this andyou just start saying, oh my
goodness, if you're Tim Keller,you got to be looking at this
going.
This is not good, right?
This is.
This is something that is notgood, and so I that part of is
very, very difficult.
Now the question is what doDarren's numbers look like?
What you mentioned?
Speaker 2 (11:04):
Well, let's look at his image right, darren White's
image here.
It says his favorability is at32%, his unfavorable is at 28.9,
so about 29%.
And then you still have 25%that have never heard of him.
So almost a quarter of thesefolks have never heard of him.
So he still has some room thereto get his name and his image
(11:25):
and people to actually hearabout what he wants to do for
the city is the way I'm readingthat.
Speaker 5 (11:29):
If you're Darren White, what you're thinking is,
if I can get to the runoff and Ican raise a bunch of money,
what I can then do is rundirectly against Tim Keller and
and tap into that 60% of thepeople who say enough of this
guy We've had eight years.
Things in every measurablecategory are worse.
That's what you're going to sayif you're Darren White.
(11:51):
I mean, that's where you'regoing with this.
So if you can get into theone-on-one, that's key, and so
that's what he's going to try todo.
Speaker 2 (11:58):
Okay.
So this goes on now to reallytalk about Donald Trump, ian
Albuquerque, in particular.
Goes on now to really talkabout Donald Trump in
Albuquerque in particular andexplain a little bit about what
we see here and why is itimportant for voters, since, you
know, trump is not on thisballot.
Speaker 5 (12:12):
So, yes, why is this?
important information this isthe whole ball game.
Okay, this is the whole ballgame.
So first let me just show youTrump's numbers in Albuquerque
okay, favorable, 35.
Unfavorable, 62.
Okay, so this could come downto donald trump's 62 unfavorable
(12:33):
versus tim keller's 60.
We don't want this guy to bemayor anymore.
Like that's what this, this isgoing to come down to.
So I think what's going tohappen here is that voters are
going to make a choice betweensomebody who has been mayor for
eight years and they've seen theresults and they don't like
them, or a president who theywant to send another message to.
(12:53):
So the question is will they,in spite of their own best
interest, vote against Trump butfor Keller, right?
Or will they say you know what?
Donald Trump is not the mayorof Albuquerque.
The mayor of Albuquerque is adifferent job and we're going to
hold the mayor of Albuquerqueto account for the job he's done
.
But that's what this is comingdown to, and it is that's the
(13:15):
whole race, because when TimKeller starts running ads,
you're not going to see DarrenWhite in those ads, you're going
to see Donald Trump.
So that's who he's runningagainst.
Speaker 2 (13:24):
You are, you're going to think that Tim Keller is
running for president.
I always think that's sointeresting that basically the,
the Democrats basically just sayhey, we're going to just use
Donald Trump against whateverthe candidate is, so whether the
candidate is running forgovernor or probably a Senate
seat or whatever really theyjust want, because they know
that Donald Trump is not popularin these big metro areas in our
(13:45):
state, so they can use thatagainst any Republican Like,
even if that Republican isn'tanything like Trump or has
nothing to really do with Trumpin the way they would govern.
Speaker 5 (13:55):
It's happened nationwide.
We have seen thenationalization of our politics
since Donald Trump came on thescene 10 years ago.
Speaker 2 (14:03):
Right, that's the only one that they do this with?
I mean, or is this kind of a?
Historically, we just run,whatever the president is, as
that party's candidate.
That's what it is.
Speaker 5 (14:15):
The answer is sort of so.
In other words, when you wouldhave a presidential election,
you'd often have what you callcoattails.
Right Is the president who doesvery well, barack Obama had big
coattails, ronald Reagan hadmassive coattails.
Right, so there would be somenational coattails, but there
was a lot of ticket splitting aswell.
The special person who youwould just reelect because they
(14:37):
were somebody who you identifiedwith in your state, pete
Domenici benefited from that alot.
In other words, you know, therewere years when Bill Clinton
would win, you know, in NewMexico, and so would Pete, right
, so you would ticket split,right.
But now that happens less andless and less since the advent
of Trump.
I do think eventually it willcome back.
But just look at the state ofour politics now how nasty it is
(14:59):
, how tribal it is, how viciousit is.
So now you're part of yourtribe, and if your tribe says,
look, we don't vote for foranybody who would align
themselves with Trump, so that'sthe way it is.
Now, if you're Darren White andthere are many Republicans who
have their issues with DarrenWhite because Darren's not a
Trump guy Okay.
So, and I think, if you'reDarren, what you're going to do
(15:22):
if you get through and get tothe get to the runoff is you're
going to say I'm my own man,trust me, you know I mean, and
he'll make that point.
No question, it's a point wemade too, because we're very
different from the president aswell, although we share a lot of
some of the same policyprescriptions in certain cases.
But that's something we alwayssaid.
We're not a rubber stamp foranybody, I don't care who it is,
and I think that's the problemthat we have now is, you're
right, it is just a.
(15:43):
It is absolutely one of thesethings where you're part of your
tribe and that's it.
And this mayor's race is goingto be huge.
And one other thing, christy, Ithink on this, if you're a
Republican in the state of NewMexico right now thinking about
either running for governor orSenate, I think if I'm you and
this is the best piece of adviceI can give and nobody's asking
me other than if you're watchingthis show you get no choice.
But if you're asking me, I saywatch that mayor's race.
(16:05):
Darren White wins that mayor'srace.
That may be an opening.
People may be saying you knowwhat?
We got issues and we need toaddress them and they have
nothing to do with Donald Trump.
Speaker 2 (16:21):
Right, which is actually the truth.
I mean and that's what peoplecould actually see is that the
job of being the mayor or beingthe governor of New Mexico have
very different priorities andvery different.
I mean, yes, I think you cansay we like a lot of the
policies that this president'sdoing, or we don't like the
policies, or whatever, but atthe end of the day, they're
different jobs and I just hopethat voters are actually, you
know, wising up to say listen,it doesn't matter if you don't
(16:42):
like the president or not.
The current mayor is doing aterrible job and we've got to
switch gears, like I don't knowhow.
That's not just a known fact,but it still blows my mind that
you just correlate everything toa party, no matter who the
person is or what the positionis.
And I think that's yeah, I thinkthat's lazy voting.
Speaker 5 (17:03):
Well, and I think what it leads to is it leads to
cowardly politicians, and what Imean by that is if you had
voters who would sit down and belike look, we're going to hold
you to account for the job youdo, I don't care what party
you're in, we're going to holdyou to account for that.
What that would allow for ismore people from both parties to
buck the system and say I'mgoing to do what's right.
(17:23):
Right, but instead, because youhave to fall into line and it's
this strict structure, and ifyou go outside that structure,
your primary, like that, you'regone or you completely alienate,
you know, the your voters, orhalf your voters, who won't
possibly vote for you if you'refrom the wrong party.
Speaker 2 (17:39):
So okay, so let's move on to the governor's race
here.
What are we seeing with thispoll?
Tell us about this poll, and Iknow I want to start.
Speaker 5 (17:48):
Yeah, before we show you the numbers on this, I do
want to come clean and say, look, this poll was, I think, done
by, uh, deb Holland Okay.
But before you look at it andsay, look, this poll was, I
think, done by Deb Haaland, okay.
But before you look at it andsay, okay, well, it's done by
Deb Haaland, so it's completebogusness.
It's not Okay.
Polling is expensive.
Deb Haaland is not going to doa poll, you know, more than a
(18:09):
year out from an election.
That's bogus, right, that'sjust phony.
She's not doing that, okay.
What you do in these cases isyou go out, you put a poll
together because you want to geta good look at the race, okay.
Now if, if the poll numbers areterrible for Deb Holland, she
doesn't release the poll.
That's how it works.
(18:29):
You keep it a secret and youtake it to your grave.
Okay, we've done both right andwe.
We went through plenty of ofprimaries and general election
polls that we released.
We've done both Right and we.
We went through plenty of ofprimaries and general election
polls that we released.
We released a general electionpoll against Michelle in the
2022 race before the Dobbsdecision came out, because we
were up by three, and so we wewent and released that poll.
Now, once the Dobbs decisioncame out, we went down by 12, we
(18:51):
didn't release that poll, right, because that was, that was a
huge change, right.
And so what I would say on thispoll is I think it's legit and
I think it's about right, and sohere we go.
These are the numbers, and thisis just a general look Deb
Haaland at 55%, sam Bregman at19,.
Mayor Kahn at nine andUndecided at 16.
(19:14):
Okay, that is a drubbing, rightnow a drubbing, and obviously
then you start diving in tovoter blocks within the
democratic primary.
Speaker 2 (19:26):
Okay, so let's take a look at this.
It says here democratic primaryvote.
Explain this a little bit,cause I don't know what exactly
this is.
Speaker 5 (19:33):
People who say they're liberal.
So how?
Speaker 2 (19:36):
are they voting?
Speaker 5 (19:36):
Right, so they're voting for the most left-leaning
candidate, which is Deb Haaland.
65 to 11.
Right, so so in in.
This is the thing about thisand we're I'm going to have some
sound on this for you in asecond but that's who votes in
these primaries they, thedemocratic party, right now,
does not elect centrists orpeople who present themselves as
centrists, like Bregman istrying to do.
(19:57):
Now.
Bregman's going to say, oh well, wait a minute, we're going to
have other people, we're goingto have moderates in this race,
right, we're going to havemoderates voting and we're going
to have Republicans maybevoting for Sam Bregman, right.
It's crazy, but okay, so let'slook at the next voter block.
Speaker 2 (20:12):
Okay, so this is moderate Democrats, still at 45%
voting for Deb Haaland and 29%voting for Sam Bregman.
And then the other.
Speaker 5 (20:22):
So these are brutal numbers for Bregman and this is
what we've been saying from thevery beginning, that especially
you Republicans who are maybesitting down in southeastern New
Mexico and are trying to betalked into by the Bregman camp
or some of your friends insoutheastern New Mexico hey,
let's put together a fundraiserfor Sam Bregman, cause we think
he can win.
I got a better idea.
Why don't you go into yourbackyard, start up your fire pit
(20:43):
and just start flipping ahundred dollar bills in there,
if that's what you want to doit's just no, it keeps you
warmer than this is going tokeep you.
I'm telling you, the people thatvote in in the democratic
primary and I don't care if youopen it up to Republicans you're
not going to get enough of them, you're not going to get enough
independence, it's not going towork.
And so this whole thing of manthis could be Bregman that's not
(21:04):
who wins these races.
Go look at New York city'smayor's race.
I mean, just go look at it.
You had you, had you.
Cuomo is what Cuomo is, buthe's more of a centrist than
Mondami.
And what happens?
Bang, he's out, done.
You're going to have Mondami.
So that's what the party isright now and I think that's,
(21:25):
you know, worth noting.
Speaker 2 (21:27):
Okay, so let's go into this last one, this, this
next one, before we get toHarry's poll.
Um, right, you know, it'stalking about how many people
actually know who these peopleare.
Right, the name ID.
That's what this one is, whichthis is always important for
people to understand that, ifpeople don't know who you are,
how much money do you have tospend to make sure people know
who?
Speaker 5 (21:45):
you are, and so name.
Speaker 2 (21:46):
ID is huge, especially in the statewide race
.
It definitely is an advantagewhen people know who you are to
start with.
So Deb Holland comes in at 54%,which I actually thought that'd
be higher.
I thought that'd be higher.
Speaker 5 (21:58):
I thought the delta between Haaland and Bregman.
Looking at the numbers on theballot, here's what should
concern Bregman.
It's a 20-point spread betweentheir voter ID, the voters being
able to ID them right.
And there's a 40-point spread intheir numbers.
So this is not just oh, peopleknow Deb, they don't know Sam,
(22:19):
and as soon as they know Sam,they're going to vote for him.
That's not true.
That's not what the numbers say, and so that's why this is one
of those things where I justthink and again, could this
change?
Yes, but this is what we'vesaid from the very beginning.
If you're Deb Haaland, you aregoing to run a race where you
put a lot of ads on the air, youput a lot of digital ads out
there, and then you stay out ofthe way.
(22:39):
You do not tangle with SamBregman, you don't do it.
It is not her lane to do that.
There are candidates that couldtangle with Sam Bregman and hit
him at a point that couldreally cause problems for
Bregman, right, there are thosepeople out there, no question.
She's just not one of them,right, and so don't do it.
(23:01):
And so she stays out of the way, runs effective image spots and
then paints Sam Bregman as aman of all seasons, meaning he's
whoever you want him to be,whenever you want him to be,
wherever you want him to be.
Oh, it's just there, we go right.
And if she sticks to those twothings image spots and Sam the
flip flopper she will cruise tovictory.
Speaker 2 (23:23):
OK, well, and this is interesting because we're
pulling some national pollingnumbers now that really do kind
of show, like kind of what we'vebeen saying is, if Bregman just
keeps playing this like central, middle, moderate, you know,
democrat, he doesn't have a shot.
Like that's a poor play by himto try to get through his
primary.
So let's take a look.
Speaker 5 (23:44):
Yes, I want to say something more about this.
No, no, no, just that.
This is Harry Enten talkingabout where the Democratic Party
is with socialism, and justlisten to what he says about
this.
Speaker 4 (23:55):
Socialism is not a four letter word in Democratic
primaries, not among Democraticvoters.
It's a five letter word in theminds of a lot of Democrats,
that five letter word beinggreat.
Look at this net popularity ofsocialism among Democrats.
You go back to 2010.
It was plus seven points.
Look how high it is now, uplike a rocket up to plus 36
points.
That's a jump of nearly 30points on the net popularity
(24:18):
scale among Democrats in just 15years.
And I was looking at thepolling from New York City and
what you see is the clearplurality of New York Democrat.
New York City Democrats thinkthe idea of having a socialist
mayor is a good idea, matchingwhat we see nationally.
The bottom line is socialismisn't a dirty word among
Democrats at this particularpoint.
It's actually a word that, whenattached, democrats seem to
(24:39):
like it.
That's a huge jump.
Speaker 2 (24:42):
Okay, so that's why we say what we say about all
this?
Yeah, because the DemocraticParty is continuing to move much
more to the left.
Speaker 5 (24:51):
Is that the takeaway Sort of?
Or do we get to a point in NewMexico where you see enough
people?
And I do think we're getting tothat point?
Remember when we ran in 2022,it was about a 15-point state
right, a 15-point Democraticvoting advantage.
It's down to 10 now.
I do think we have a largenumber of people who've been
Democrats their whole lives wholook at all this and start going
(25:13):
wait a minute and start goingwait a minute.
So I do think it's possiblethat we could slide out.
But I think, as far as votingin a primary goes, not a general
, I think you'll start to seethat move, christy, toward the
center for a lot of Democratswho are like enough, we're not
doing this right, it's too muchfor us.
I think you'll see it.
But I think you'll see it in ageneral election.
I don't think you see it in aprimary.
The energy that runs primariescomes from the farther edges of
(25:37):
the party.
Speaker 2 (25:39):
Right, absolutely, we talked about that.
Okay, so some good news for theeconomy.
I guess, when we have mortgagerates dropping to a three-year
low right Against right beforethis Fed meeting, that it was
really praying that all theinterest rates are going to drop
and all that.
So explain this a little bit.
Speaker 5 (25:53):
Yeah, this was just something.
Now, this is ahead of the cut,so could this be the benefit of
the cut ahead of time?
It absolutely could be right,but we are seeing rates go down
to 6.13% lowest they've been ina couple of years, and I think
what you're hoping for, nomatter what business you're in,
is that these numbers keepcoming down and that overall
interest rates keep coming downto make it easier to get a home
(26:14):
loan, to make it easier to get abusiness loan.
These numbers that we haveright now have been so high for
so long that I think people arestarting to realize that, with
the Fed likely to cut some more,we're seeing those numbers go
down.
We've said from the verybeginning that for the Trump
administration, this is critical.
They've got to have thesenumbers come down Again.
Remember, your debt is financedas well and it's financed off
(26:34):
those interest rates, right, andso the higher those interest
rates stay, the tougher it isfor the government to get back
in better footing as well.
So we'll see what happens, butat least a piece of good news
there.
Speaker 2 (26:44):
Okay, well, let's move on.
Go back a little bit to theCharlie Kirk story, because
there's been some more movementin this case with Tyler Robinson
, the alleged shooter.
He, you know, now he's incustody.
We said a couple of days agothat he was cooperating with
police.
Now that has changed again.
Apparently he's no longercooperating.
(27:06):
However, his partner androommate, apparently, is now
cooperating with authorities,and what was interesting is they
released this text exchangebetween Tyler and his roommate
and it's kind of come out nowand so I'm just going to read a
little bit of this so you cankind of see this exchange,
because I think what they'retrying to build a case on, I'm
(27:28):
guessing, is that something likethis shows that the roommate
really did not know in advancethat this was going to happen
and that he was taken bysurprise as well.
So it starts with Robinson, whosays Tyler Robinson says I am
still okay, my love, but I'mstuck in Orem for a little while
longer yet Shouldn't be longuntil I can come home, but I
gotta grab my rifle still.
(27:48):
To be honest, I had hoped tokeep this secret till I died of
old age.
I am sorry to have involved you.
Roommate says you weren't theone that did this right?
And then Robinson says I am.
I'm sorry, roommate, I thoughtthey caught the person.
Robinson says no, they grabbedsome crazy old dude then
interrogated someone in similarclothing.
I had planned to grab my riflefrom my drop point shortly after
(28:11):
, but most of that side of towngot locked down.
It's quiet almost enough to getout, but there's one vehicle
lingering.
Roommate says why, robinson?
Why did I do it?
Roommate says yeah.
Robinson says I had enough ofhis hatred.
Some hate can't be negotiatedout.
If I'm able to grab my rifleunseen, I will have left no
(28:32):
evidence Going to attempt toretrieve it again.
Hopefully they will have movedon.
I haven't seen anything aboutthem finding it.
Roommate, how long have youbeen planning this, robinson?
A bit over a week, I believe Ican get close to it.
Oh, he says a week a bit over aweek, I believe I can get close
to it.
But there is a squad car parkedright by it.
I think they already swept thespot but I don't want to chance
(28:53):
it Again.
He's going back to talkingabout this rifle retrieval.
Robinson adds I'm wishing I hadcircled back and grabbed it as
soon as I got to my vehicle.
I'm worried what my old manwould do if I didn't bring back
his grandpa's rifle.
I don't know if it had a serialnumber, but it wouldn't trace
to me.
I worry about prints.
I had to leave it in a bushwhere I changed outfits.
I didn't have the ability ortime to bring it with.
(29:14):
I might have to abandon it andhope they don't find the prints.
How the F will I explain losingthis to my old man?
Only thing I left was the riflewrapped in a towel.
Remember how I was engravingbullets?
These blank messages are mostlya big meme.
If I see notice bulge UWU onFox News, I might have a stroke.
(29:35):
All right, I'm gonna have toleave it.
That really effing sucks.
Now, what's interesting aboutthis is this, this Robinson, who
has I mean, by all stretch ofimagination, we still have to
say alleged that's what we'retrying to do until he's actually
found guilty in a court of law.
But it seems pretty obviousthat not only is he confessing
(29:56):
to this, like he has we've heardthat he's done with his dad,
but he's also telling hisroommate hey, really, his big
priority here is let me go backand get the gun.
Of course I did this.
Of course I'm the one.
I'm sorry I involved you, buthis focus is just completely on
this rifle, which seems it showsa little bit of you know into
this guy that really he, heseriously doesn't feel like
(30:17):
number one.
He's guilty of anything otherthan leaving the rifle behind,
and so it's.
It's interesting to see.
Speaker 5 (30:24):
Based on this, I think the cops are trying to say
hey, the roommate wasn't a partof this situation Right, which
seems legit, I mean from fromlooking at that and I the
callousness of this guy and itis weird.
You brought up something kindof interesting when we were
talking, and that is when youtalk to some people about some
sort of emotional conversationand then they sort of go off on
(30:45):
a rabbit trail.
Can you kind of explain that?
Speaker 2 (30:49):
The roommate says why , why did I do it?
Or he says you know, youweren't the one who did it right
?
And then Robinson says I am,I'm sorry.
And then Robinson just goes offabout this gun.
So like, really, I mean,obviously the key point of this
(31:09):
text exchange is hey, I'm theone that did this, I'm sorry,
but let's get back to the rifle,and I need to sort out how I'm
going to find this rifle.
I should be there soon, I'msorry.
It's like they just go on this.
He just goes on this wholetangent about this being his
grandfather's rifle, his prince.
He doesn't know if the princeare on it.
I just think there's somethingabout when you can
(31:30):
compartmentalize to a dangerousdegree of hey, I just did this
heinous crime where I murderedsomebody, but my focus is over
here and I'm just going to talkabout this rifle.
Speaker 5 (31:41):
I'm not getting away with it.
Speaker 2 (31:42):
Yeah, it's just a weird disconnect and I think
when most people are havingconversations and they ask you a
heavy-hitting question, notnecessarily about murder, but
anything that's serious they askyou a heavy hitting question,
not necessarily about murder,but anything that's serious the
person usually responds withmore than just one or two
answers of saying yes or no, andthen they will talk about that
(32:02):
issue.
This guy Robinson says yes, Idid do it, but let's move on to
the more important thing, whichis I got to get that rifle back
and I, you know.
It just seems like a disconnect.
That's the, that's what I'venoticed in this.
Speaker 5 (32:14):
So, yeah, well, speaking of disconnect, I think
I want to just play one piece ofsound.
So all this happened on Tuesday, the police came out with all
this information to show whatwas going on and a lot of their
evidence and things like that.
Well, matt Gutman from ABC wasthere and he had a report on
(32:34):
this, was there and he had areport on this, and I, I have to
tell you, when I listened tohis breakdown of this, this gave
crystal clear information to meabout why we're so frustrated
with the media.
And just listen to how MattGutman you just heard what he
heard, right, all right, and sothis is how Matt Gutman
(32:55):
characterized what he heard.
Speaker 1 (32:59):
We have seen an alleged murder with such
specific text messages about thealleged murder weapon, where it
was hidden, how it was placed,what was on it.
But also it was very touchingin a way that I think many of us
didn't expect A very intimateportrait into this relationship
between the suspect's roommateand the suspect himself, with
(33:20):
him repeatedly calling hisroommate who was transitioning,
calling him my love, and I wantto protect you, my love.
So it was this duality ofsomeone who the attorney said
not only jeopardized the life ofCharlie Kirk and the crowd but
was doing it in front ofchildren, which is one of the
aggravating circumstances ofthis case and on the other hand,
he was, you know, speaking solovingly about his partner.
(33:42):
So a very interesting and, asPierre said, riveting press
conference.
David, it was tough.
Speaker 2 (33:47):
Yeah, who cares?
Speaker 5 (33:49):
Honestly, honestly, I really.
I mean what ridiculous Touchingor whatever.
What did he say?
You know, talked lovingly ofhis part.
I mean, are you kidding?
Speaker 2 (34:02):
He's trying to make this kid human.
Speaker 5 (34:04):
He's trying to humanize him.
Speaker 2 (34:05):
And if you actually read the text exchange, the
whole point that stands outglaringly to me is he's so
compartmentalized.
He's not having a normal humanreaction Like somebody who did a
heinous crime like this wouldhave guilt or would feel badly
when doing the first place right.
But you know people that makemistakes and feel bad about it
(34:26):
express things incrediblydifferently than this
compartmentalized way of himtalking to his roommate.
I don't care if he said my love, that's the last thing.
I'd be picking up on this.
Speaker 5 (34:37):
Well, no, exactly, it's meaningless, and in the
part that is meaningful isexactly what you say.
I think it's a really smartobservation and that is that
that truly, he, he did not, hedidn't under you know, he did
not fully appreciate thesituation.
And and Matt Gutman is touchedby all of this, are you kidding?
I mean, it just is, it'sclueless, it really is, and it's
(35:01):
the whole reason that peopleget so frustrated with the media
and trying to say how can weand I don't know if he's
deliberately trying to humanizethe guy, but the reality is he
just misread it Like he found areason to be touched by this,
okay, but you know who wasn'ttouched by anything?
Is Tyler Robinson?
This, okay, but but you knowwho?
Who wasn't touched by anythingis Tyler Robinson, that's who
wasn't touched by anything.
That's who was a cold bloodedkiller who was more concerned
about getting that gun.
If you're a normal human being,you hear what he says about
(35:22):
getting the gun.
That's what you take away.
You don't take away my love.
So he says something to hisboyfriend or or girlfriend or
whatever.
Whatever the situation is, it'sludicrous and it's and it just
is such a it's so pathetic thatyou see this stuff and it's
incredibly frustrating to watch.
But there is frustration on theother side and I do want to run
(35:43):
that one by you as well.
Speaker 2 (35:45):
This next clip.
Is that what you're talkingabout?
Okay, yeah, I mean.
So you and I are going to.
I mean, I don't know if we'regoing to disagree on this, but I
think there, why don't we goahead?
You go ahead and lead this up,and then we'll have a
conversation after it.
Speaker 5 (35:57):
So, so, yeah.
So Pam Bondi, the attorneygeneral, was in an interview and
she talked about the necessityto eliminate hate speech.
Take a listen to this.
Speaker 2 (36:09):
Speech, and then there's hate speech and there is
no place, especially now,especially after what happened
to Charlie, in our society.
Do you see more law enforcementgoing after these groups who
are using hate speech andputting cuffs on people so we
show them that some action isbetter than no action?
Speaker 4 (36:28):
We will absolutely target.
Speaker 2 (36:31):
You, go after you if you are targeting anyone with
hate speech, anything and that'sacross the aisle.
Speaker 5 (36:40):
Okay, if we're going to go after you.
If you target someone with hatespeech.
That's protected in theconstitution.
It is.
And for her to say that and forthe attorney general to say
that I think is completelymisguided.
Look, nobody loves, likes hatespeech.
At least nobody with a with anormal functioning brain.
Right, we all know we'd love tothink that you don't say those
(37:03):
things and and and.
I think hate speech can haveconsequences on your life.
There's no question about that.
But the government coming afteryou?
No, that's protected.
It is protected speech and Idon't like to hear our basically
number one law enforcementagent in the country go out and
say things like this.
Speaker 2 (37:21):
I think it's loose and obviously I've been
listening to other sources oninformation on Tyler Robinson.
Right, they believe that he wasbragging about this.
He was lining this up inadvance on some of the video
(37:43):
game chat rooms under falsenames and things of that nature.
Now, obviously, we're not goingto put those out yet because we
don't have any proof thatthat's actually the same person.
It looks like it is, but untilthings are more clear we don't
want to add to the you know fanthat fire yet.
However, that being said, Ithink what happens is Pam Bondi
is basically saying listen, weknow they know a lot more than
(38:05):
we know at this point, and Ithink what she's saying is
there's a lot of hate groupsgoing on.
There's a lot of because theBecause the chatter that I've
read about is filled with hate,right, and it was very targeted
and the date was laid out, theperson was laid out.
It was very clear thatsomething was going to happen
that would be a negativeconsequence to Charlie Kirk.
Now, I think what she meantthere and I think she'll clarify
(38:29):
, is, if you have a group thatis going after somebody, is
targeting somebody with theirhate speech, meaning more than
just saying I don't like the guybut you can target people with
hate speech.
Speaker 5 (38:42):
It's terrible.
Speaker 2 (38:44):
No, I get that, but I'm saying I think what she's
actually trying to and I'mhoping that she's going to
clarify this, but based on theother things, the other pieces
that I've listened to, thatwe're again, we're not putting
in this show I think that whatshe's saying is listen, if you
are saying that you're going toattack somebody physically, to
harm somebody, do something likethat, then they're going to put
the full government support andmake sure they get you before
(39:07):
something like that happens, butthat's physical violence.
Speaker 5 (39:09):
But I'm just saying you know, and again we've seen
how hate speech, the word hatespeech or the verbiage hate
speech, has been applied to somany things that aren't even
hate speech Right, or they'reall over the place.
Speaker 2 (39:22):
I see that we have to be careful because of what's
happening in the UK Right.
The UK has lost their minds onwho they're arresting.
Speaker 5 (39:29):
That's what makes this country yeah.
Speaker 2 (39:32):
I understand that she can't just say listen, if you
have hate speech, we're comingafter you.
I think the word that she'swhat she said, and then she just
needs to clarify it more, andI'm hoping that she does is
saying if you're targetingpeople, meaning if you're going
to go harm people with more thanjust your words, that's
incendiary.
Speaker 5 (39:50):
That's different, right, that's different, and
then there's a distinction.
There, though All I'm saying isthat the word hate speech there
is either misused, or or she'sgoing into areas that I think I
don't care what party is is inthe White House.
We need, look, you need to beable to be dumb enough to say
stupid stuff, and what makesthis country great is that we
allow you to do that.
(40:11):
Now, it doesn't mean it'swithout consequence, but the
government itself coming afteryou for saying something that
they don't like you saying isreally scary, and I just don't
want us doing it on any side.
Speaker 2 (40:21):
Right, I mean I understand.
I do think that she's going to.
I think that's going to comeback up and I I mean I could be
wrong, but I think she's goingto have to clarify that a bit
more.
Speaker 5 (40:29):
So okay, we made it through and you did disconnect,
so that's a miracle right.
Yes, take us home doctor.
Speaker 2 (40:36):
Okay, so thanks you guys so much for joining us.
Please make sure that you likeand subscribe on our YouTube
channel If you wanna make acomment.
That's how we're able to readthose If you like and subscribe.
Also, if you wanna get ouremail, get on our email list.
Just go tonotedoutaboutitpodcastcom and
sign up for our email and wepromise we won't spam you.
You just sign up and all we dois send out the emails to let
(40:57):
you know when our latest show iscoming out.
And if you want to support ourshow or support us, you can also
do that on the website as well.
We appreciate you guys so much.
Thanks for spending a littletime with us.
Have a great rest of your weekand we'll see you back here, I
think, on Sunday or Monday.
We're just going to roll withit so soon.
We'll see you soon.
Speaker 3 (41:15):
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.
No doubt about it.
(41:36):
The no Doubt About it podcastis a choose adventure media
production.
See you next time on no doubtabout it there is no doubt about
it.
Okay, a little unusual day for us.
We've got Mark in the mountains, me in Albuquerque, ella
joining us today with her.
We actually got a camera forElla.
Yeah, I've never had a camerabefore, so this is very exciting
.
Speaker 3 (00:20):
Yeah, it's very exciting, did you?
Speaker 2 (00:20):
wave to the people, wave to the people.
Wave to the people, okay, waveto the people, okay.
So we're hoping that Mark'sWi-Fi stays strong enough for
the length of this show, becausewe have packed it with lots of
information.
But we're going to get right toit today, because I'm worried a
little bit about you, Mark,number one.
I can't see you from where I'mat.
Speaker 5 (00:40):
Right, that's probably for the best, quite
frankly, it probably is.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
I can hear you, though, so you know that's the
way it goes.
Speaker 5 (00:52):
Well, yeah, so what we're going to do?
So we, so this is a pollingshow.
We're going to talk aboutpolling and some very, very
recent polling that was, I don'twant to say leaked to us, but
leaked to us and so it's aboutthe mayor's race, a deep dive
into that.
So we're going to have a reallygood idea of how I think this
thing is going to play out and Ithink you're going to know
relatively quickly, as we headthrough the next few weeks, how
this is all going to go.
Honestly, in this mayor'spolling, we'll give you a
(01:14):
crystal clear idea of what'sgoing on.
That with that, we also havenew polling for the governor's
race on the democratic side,because you don't have very many
candidates on the Republicanside yet, but we've got some
interesting numbers there andit's some of what we've been
talking about, but it'sfascinating stuff as we dive
into that.
So that's going to be superinteresting.
Then Harry Enten talking aboutwhy this may be a very, very
(01:39):
predictable primary season onthe Democratic side.
So we'll get to that as well,and at the very end we're going
to tap into a little more ofwhat happened with Charlie Kirk.
Just a couple of quick, reallylate breaking developments on
Tuesday into Wednesday, and someof that has to do with the
person that is that has been incustody and arrested for this
(01:59):
killing, and so we'll go throughall of that as well.
But really we're talking aboutpolling here, and some very
important polling.
I think that's going to giveyou a good idea of what's going
on.
Speaker 2 (02:08):
Okay, so I've got to say I feel like my old news days
because hearing you in my ear,right, which is how, when I used
to toss you in the field orwhatever, whoever reporter,
whatever often I couldn't seethem.
I would just have to know thatthey were there and I could hear
them.
So, uh, we're going to be kindof winging this folks, so
hopefully it goes smooth and, um, I want to get to the polls
(02:30):
because I think that's superinteresting.
Speaker 5 (02:33):
Um, absolutely Okay.
Speaker 2 (02:34):
So this, this kind of threw me a little bit, so go
ahead yeah.
Speaker 5 (02:37):
Yeah, and so this poll.
So I want to explain a coupleof things first, uh, the whole
poll was leaked to us, so we gota look into the crosstabs and
everything on this.
So there's a ton of stuff.
I didn't dive deep into thecrosstabs for this particular
show, but I do want to show yousome of this.
So let's start, and the waywe're doing this Zoom is that
basically, christy's cam willturn into the camera that shows
(02:58):
us all the data, so she'll beable to see it.
So let's start number one withhow the poll breaks down, and
this tells you a lot about theAlbuquerque DMA and the
Albuquerque voter.
Okay, it was a 56% Democraticpoll, 30% Republicans.
Now you would say, oh my gosh,that's weighted way too heavily
(03:18):
for Democrats, 9% nonpartisanand 3% other.
That's not that crazy, becausethe Albuquerque market in
general and Albuquerque as acity as a whole is pretty far
left now.
So that's a poll.
That's probably not a horribleweighting as far as weighting it
out with different Republicansand Democrats and remember,
(03:39):
remember this a 26 pointadvantage for Democrats.
And then, once you see thesenumbers, it's going to show you
why this mayor's race is goingto be fascinating at the very
least.
So what do voters care aboutmore than anything else in this
poll?
Let me tell you and it makes alot of sense Voters care about,
at least at this point crimeCrime is the number one issue
(04:00):
that people are most concernedwith.
At this point it gets 42.8% ofthe vote and 18% on homelessness
, christy.
So if you take those twonumbers together, it's over 60%.
Speaker 2 (04:10):
Yeah, not surprising.
I mean that doesn't surprise mewhatsoever, but keep going.
We see house affordability,education coming in at 8%, taxes
and spending and the economydown there at 4.9%.
Speaker 5 (04:21):
Yeah, the economy.
I actually thought the economywould be a little bit higher,
but I think some of what you seethere with housing
affordability, that's kind of aleftward issue, that's, you know
, more of a left-leaning issue.
Education is as well, and so asyou look at those numbers and
you see, though, if you takethose two top numbers, I mean
that's, if you live inAlbuquerque, you know that, you
know that the crime is thebiggest issue, you know that
(04:43):
homelessness is rampanteverywhere.
So, as you look at those twoissues, that makes a great deal
of sense.
But remember again I just bringit up one more time it's a
Democratic poll weighted by plus26 points, so Democrats
understand the same thing thatRepublicans do.
These are the main issues inthe city of Albuquerque.
All right, so is also, by theway, we kind of skipped over
this in the city of Albuquerque.
Speaker 2 (05:03):
All right, so is also , by the way, we kind of skipped
over this, but just to mentionthe fact that this poll is 54%
female voters, 45% male.
Speaker 5 (05:17):
So I'm sorry, I jumped over.
Yeah, so it's a really goodpoint, but again, christy, I
think what's so valuable aboutwhat you say?
There is another thing here.
If you look at it this way andelse you can throw those numbers
up you can see it is much moreweighted toward women than men.
I don't think the electorate isgoing to come out this way, and
it is number two.
There you go.
It's not going to be 54% female, 45% male.
I think it's going to be closerthan that.
I think it's going to be morelike 52-48.
(05:38):
This shows you, though, withwith more females than males in
this, in this polling, by 10points.
That too, should benefit Kelleras we get further down into
these details.
But thanks for wrangling meback in.
So now, right direction.
You know wrong track.
Those numbers are a problem forthe mayor.
Speaker 2 (05:59):
Right, it looks like here.
So about 30, a little over 37percent of Democrats think that
the city is moving.
It's the poll as a whole, notjust Democrats, think that the
city is moving in the rightdirection.
Speaker 5 (06:05):
It's the poll as a whole, not just Democrats.
Speaker 2 (06:07):
Oh, okay, the poll as a whole Okay.
So 37% of people think thatwe're moving in the right
direction, 52% think the city ismoving in the wrong direction
and about 10% are unsure.
Speaker 5 (06:17):
Not sure how you could be unsure about that, but
anyway but usually if yeah, andwhen you look at these numbers
and when you're in the middle ofa campaign, you usually know
that as you're looking at theseright direction, wrong track
(06:38):
numbers, those are usually aproxy for how you end up doing
in the election.
Okay, so when you have thosenumbers at 37%, saying you're on
the right track, that's a huge,huge issue.
Okay, so that's not the onlything.
Then we go to the next thing.
Speaker 2 (06:45):
So you mean when, when Keller gets up and does
press conferences, this crimesdown, everything's going great.
People aren't buying it.
Is that what you're telling me?
Speaker 5 (06:53):
this.
It doesn't appear that they areright.
But, then you.
But then you look at it, themayor's ballot here, okay, so
here's the actual ballot whenyou put everybody in.
Okay, now, the one person who'snot in this is Alex Ubaez.
I don't know why he was notlisted on the information that
we got, but I will tell you thatas you add up all these numbers
(07:14):
, had he been listed, I thinkKeller's number comes down, not
up, okay, so.
So, assuming he wasn't in thepoll, I think he drags away from
Keller because he's trying torun to Keller's left, and so
here are the numbers here.
So what this really shows youis the mayor's race is a
two-person race.
There's no doubt the problemfor Luis Sanchez, mayling,
(07:40):
armijo and Eddie Varela andUbaez, even though he's not
listed here, no one knows whothey are.
Speaker 2 (07:43):
No one knows who they are, and they don't have the
money to educate people on whothey are, so that's a problem.
Darren White, okay, keep going,I don't want to interrupt you.
Speaker 5 (07:48):
No, no, no, go ahead, jump in, jump in.
Speaker 2 (07:49):
Well, I was just going to say the undecided seems
really high to me at 30%, Isthat?
Does that not seem high to you?
Speaker 5 (07:55):
That's pretty high.
It is pretty high, there's noquestion.
So obviously let's assume thatthe Ubiah's number's in there,
right?
So he's probably at five or 6%.
So that number is probably downto 25, but I think you're right
.
I think that's a pretty goodobservation that that number is
fairly election.
Speaker 2 (08:09):
You know, close to the election people's, you know
you got at least 25% maybe,maybe that don't really know who
they're going to vote for yet.
Speaker 5 (08:16):
Based on this, based on this survey, yeah, and you
would expect that number to behalf.
That I would say.
I think you're right and Ithink that this underlines the
point of our whole show, andthat is that this thing's going
to come down to something veryunusual here and we'll get to it
in a second.
But you're right, thatundecided number is really
pretty high.
Speaker 2 (08:36):
So let's dive.
Well, what are your thoughts onDarren White coming at 21%
versus Tim Keller's 34?
What are your just takeawaysfrom that when you see those
numbers?
Speaker 5 (08:44):
I think that what you've got with with Darren is
that all you care about ifyou're Darren White is just
getting into second place, andthat number is not a huge number
.
Obviously, I'm sure Darrenwishes it was 28, 29%, but I
also don't think it's it's thatbig a deal, and the reason why
is I've looked at all thecrosstabs and some of the other
numbers.
His overall image, which we'regoing to show you in a second,
(09:06):
is not horrible.
He's not way.
His image isn't at 21%, put itthat way right.
His image is higher than that.
So he's got room to grow and Ithink what you'll likely see is
voters for, say, mei Ling andEddie Varela, and maybe even
Luis Sanchez could well go toDarren.
Speaker 2 (09:25):
So that's what's interesting in all this in a
runoff.
Speaker 5 (09:28):
So then then it becomes the undecided voter
makes the choice which youcorrectly break down is pretty
dang high, right, and so that'sinteresting.
No, it's.
It's a good point, though, isthat Darren's number?
I'm sure he wishes it was alittle bit higher, but I also
don't think, by looking at thispoll, by any stretch he's he
doesn't have something to behappy about.
Speaker 2 (09:45):
Okay, let's talk about Tim Keller's image.
Uh, the next slide here.
It looks like his favorabilityis up at 42%, and then his
unfavorable, yeah.
I wouldn't call that underwater, yeah, okay, yeah, he's, he's
underwater, right he'sunfavorable is over 52%, and I
just remember that magic numberback in the.
You know, anything I ever sawwas you never wanted your
(10:07):
unfavorability to be higher than50%.
I mean like the worst casescenario, right?
Speaker 5 (10:13):
That's right, I think that's exactly right.
And when and when yourunfavorability is it, it, it,
that number that is.
That is brutal, brutal,absolutely brutal.
So so that's not good, butactually I think the next number
you're about to bring up iseven worse.
Speaker 2 (10:27):
Yeah, this Keller reelect number.
I mean it says here that whenasked if, if Tim Keller should
be reelected, a whopping 60% sayno, say no, yeah, they're like
it's time for somebody new.
I mean that that's.
Speaker 5 (10:43):
I think that is a blinking red light, right?
I mean.
So you look at all of this andyou just start saying, oh my
goodness, if you're Tim Keller,you got to be looking at this
going.
This is not good, right?
This is.
This is something that is notgood, and so I that part of is
very, very difficult.
Now the question is what doDarren's numbers look like?
What you mentioned?
Speaker 2 (11:04):
Well, let's look at his image right, darren White's
image here.
It says his favorability is at32%, his unfavorable is at 28.9,
so about 29%.
And then you still have 25%that have never heard of him.
So almost a quarter of thesefolks have never heard of him.
So he still has some room thereto get his name and his image
(11:25):
and people to actually hearabout what he wants to do for
the city is the way I'm readingthat.
Speaker 5 (11:29):
If you're Darren White, what you're thinking is,
if I can get to the runoff and Ican raise a bunch of money,
what I can then do is rundirectly against Tim Keller and
and tap into that 60% of thepeople who say enough of this
guy We've had eight years.
Things in every measurablecategory are worse.
That's what you're going to sayif you're Darren White.
(11:51):
I mean, that's where you'regoing with this.
So if you can get into theone-on-one, that's key, and so
that's what he's going to try todo.
Speaker 2 (11:58):
Okay.
So this goes on now to reallytalk about Donald Trump, ian
Albuquerque, in particular.
Goes on now to really talkabout Donald Trump in
Albuquerque in particular andexplain a little bit about what
we see here and why is itimportant for voters, since, you
know, trump is not on thisballot.
Speaker 5 (12:12):
So, yes, why is this?
important information this isthe whole ball game.
Okay, this is the whole ballgame.
So first let me just show youTrump's numbers in Albuquerque
okay, favorable, 35.
Unfavorable, 62.
Okay, so this could come downto donald trump's 62 unfavorable
(12:33):
versus tim keller's 60.
We don't want this guy to bemayor anymore.
Like that's what this, this isgoing to come down to.
So I think what's going tohappen here is that voters are
going to make a choice betweensomebody who has been mayor for
eight years and they've seen theresults and they don't like
them, or a president who theywant to send another message to.
(12:53):
So the question is will they,in spite of their own best
interest, vote against Trump butfor Keller, right?
Or will they say you know what?
Donald Trump is not the mayorof Albuquerque.
The mayor of Albuquerque is adifferent job and we're going to
hold the mayor of Albuquerqueto account for the job he's done
.
But that's what this is comingdown to, and it is that's the
(13:15):
whole race, because when TimKeller starts running ads,
you're not going to see DarrenWhite in those ads, you're going
to see Donald Trump.
So that's who he's runningagainst.
Speaker 2 (13:24):
You are, you're going to think that Tim Keller is
running for president.
I always think that's sointeresting that basically the,
the Democrats basically just sayhey, we're going to just use
Donald Trump against whateverthe candidate is, so whether the
candidate is running forgovernor or probably a Senate
seat or whatever really theyjust want, because they know
that Donald Trump is not popularin these big metro areas in our
(13:45):
state, so they can use thatagainst any Republican Like,
even if that Republican isn'tanything like Trump or has
nothing to really do with Trumpin the way they would govern.
Speaker 5 (13:55):
It's happened nationwide.
We have seen thenationalization of our politics
since Donald Trump came on thescene 10 years ago.
Speaker 2 (14:03):
Right, that's the only one that they do this with?
I mean, or is this kind of a?
Historically, we just run,whatever the president is, as
that party's candidate.
That's what it is.
Speaker 5 (14:15):
The answer is sort of so.
In other words, when you wouldhave a presidential election,
you'd often have what you callcoattails.
Right Is the president who doesvery well, barack Obama had big
coattails, ronald Reagan hadmassive coattails.
Right, so there would be somenational coattails, but there
was a lot of ticket splitting aswell.
The special person who youwould just reelect because they
(14:37):
were somebody who you identifiedwith in your state, pete
Domenici benefited from that alot.
In other words, you know, therewere years when Bill Clinton
would win, you know, in NewMexico, and so would Pete, right
, so you would ticket split,right.
But now that happens less andless and less since the advent
of Trump.
I do think eventually it willcome back.
But just look at the state ofour politics now how nasty it is
(14:59):
, how tribal it is, how viciousit is.
So now you're part of yourtribe, and if your tribe says,
look, we don't vote for foranybody who would align
themselves with Trump, so that'sthe way it is.
Now, if you're Darren White andthere are many Republicans who
have their issues with DarrenWhite because Darren's not a
Trump guy Okay.
So, and I think, if you'reDarren, what you're going to do
(15:22):
if you get through and get tothe get to the runoff is you're
going to say I'm my own man,trust me, you know I mean, and
he'll make that point.
No question, it's a point wemade too, because we're very
different from the president aswell, although we share a lot of
some of the same policyprescriptions in certain cases.
But that's something we alwayssaid.
We're not a rubber stamp foranybody, I don't care who it is,
and I think that's the problemthat we have now is, you're
right, it is just a.
(15:43):
It is absolutely one of thesethings where you're part of your
tribe and that's it.
And this mayor's race is goingto be huge.
And one other thing, christy, Ithink on this, if you're a
Republican in the state of NewMexico right now thinking about
either running for governor orSenate, I think if I'm you and
this is the best piece of adviceI can give and nobody's asking
me other than if you're watchingthis show you get no choice.
But if you're asking me, I saywatch that mayor's race.
(16:05):
Darren White wins that mayor'srace.
That may be an opening.
People may be saying you knowwhat?
We got issues and we need toaddress them and they have
nothing to do with Donald Trump.
Speaker 2 (16:21):
Right, which is actually the truth.
I mean and that's what peoplecould actually see is that the
job of being the mayor or beingthe governor of New Mexico have
very different priorities andvery different.
I mean, yes, I think you cansay we like a lot of the
policies that this president'sdoing, or we don't like the
policies, or whatever, but atthe end of the day, they're
different jobs and I just hopethat voters are actually, you
know, wising up to say listen,it doesn't matter if you don't
(16:42):
like the president or not.
The current mayor is doing aterrible job and we've got to
switch gears, like I don't knowhow.
That's not just a known fact,but it still blows my mind that
you just correlate everything toa party, no matter who the
person is or what the positionis.
And I think that's yeah, I thinkthat's lazy voting.
Speaker 5 (17:03):
Well, and I think what it leads to is it leads to
cowardly politicians, and what Imean by that is if you had
voters who would sit down and belike look, we're going to hold
you to account for the job youdo, I don't care what party
you're in, we're going to holdyou to account for that.
What that would allow for ismore people from both parties to
buck the system and say I'mgoing to do what's right.
(17:23):
Right, but instead, because youhave to fall into line and it's
this strict structure, and ifyou go outside that structure,
your primary, like that, you'regone or you completely alienate,
you know, the your voters, orhalf your voters, who won't
possibly vote for you if you'refrom the wrong party.
Speaker 2 (17:39):
So okay, so let's move on to the governor's race
here.
What are we seeing with thispoll?
Tell us about this poll, and Iknow I want to start.
Speaker 5 (17:48):
Yeah, before we show you the numbers on this, I do
want to come clean and say, look, this poll was, I think, done
by, uh, deb Holland Okay.
But before you look at it andsay, look, this poll was, I
think, done by Deb Haaland, okay.
But before you look at it andsay, okay, well, it's done by
Deb Haaland, so it's completebogusness.
It's not Okay.
Polling is expensive.
Deb Haaland is not going to doa poll, you know, more than a
(18:09):
year out from an election.
That's bogus, right, that'sjust phony.
She's not doing that, okay.
What you do in these cases isyou go out, you put a poll
together because you want to geta good look at the race, okay.
Now if, if the poll numbers areterrible for Deb Holland, she
doesn't release the poll.
That's how it works.
(18:29):
You keep it a secret and youtake it to your grave.
Okay, we've done both right andwe.
We went through plenty of ofprimaries and general election
polls that we released.
We've done both Right and we.
We went through plenty of ofprimaries and general election
polls that we released.
We released a general electionpoll against Michelle in the
2022 race before the Dobbsdecision came out, because we
were up by three, and so we wewent and released that poll.
Now, once the Dobbs decisioncame out, we went down by 12, we
(18:51):
didn't release that poll, right, because that was, that was a
huge change, right.
And so what I would say on thispoll is I think it's legit and
I think it's about right, and sohere we go.
These are the numbers, and thisis just a general look Deb
Haaland at 55%, sam Bregman at19,.
Mayor Kahn at nine andUndecided at 16.
(19:14):
Okay, that is a drubbing, rightnow a drubbing, and obviously
then you start diving in tovoter blocks within the
democratic primary.
Speaker 2 (19:26):
Okay, so let's take a look at this.
It says here democratic primaryvote.
Explain this a little bit,cause I don't know what exactly
this is.
Speaker 5 (19:33):
People who say they're liberal.
So how?
Speaker 2 (19:36):
are they voting?
Speaker 5 (19:36):
Right, so they're voting for the most left-leaning
candidate, which is Deb Haaland.
65 to 11.
Right, so so in in.
This is the thing about thisand we're I'm going to have some
sound on this for you in asecond but that's who votes in
these primaries they, thedemocratic party, right now,
does not elect centrists orpeople who present themselves as
centrists, like Bregman istrying to do.
(19:57):
Now.
Bregman's going to say, oh well, wait a minute, we're going to
have other people, we're goingto have moderates in this race,
right, we're going to havemoderates voting and we're going
to have Republicans maybevoting for Sam Bregman, right.
It's crazy, but okay, so let'slook at the next voter block.
Speaker 2 (20:12):
Okay, so this is moderate Democrats, still at 45%
voting for Deb Haaland and 29%voting for Sam Bregman.
And then the other.
Speaker 5 (20:22):
So these are brutal numbers for Bregman and this is
what we've been saying from thevery beginning, that especially
you Republicans who are maybesitting down in southeastern New
Mexico and are trying to betalked into by the Bregman camp
or some of your friends insoutheastern New Mexico hey,
let's put together a fundraiserfor Sam Bregman, cause we think
he can win.
I got a better idea.
Why don't you go into yourbackyard, start up your fire pit
(20:43):
and just start flipping ahundred dollar bills in there,
if that's what you want to doit's just no, it keeps you
warmer than this is going tokeep you.
I'm telling you, the people thatvote in in the democratic
primary and I don't care if youopen it up to Republicans you're
not going to get enough of them, you're not going to get enough
independence, it's not going towork.
And so this whole thing of manthis could be Bregman that's not
(21:04):
who wins these races.
Go look at New York city'smayor's race.
I mean, just go look at it.
You had you, had you.
Cuomo is what Cuomo is, buthe's more of a centrist than
Mondami.
And what happens?
Bang, he's out, done.
You're going to have Mondami.
So that's what the party isright now and I think that's,
(21:25):
you know, worth noting.
Speaker 2 (21:27):
Okay, so let's go into this last one, this, this
next one, before we get toHarry's poll.
Um, right, you know, it'stalking about how many people
actually know who these peopleare.
Right, the name ID.
That's what this one is, whichthis is always important for
people to understand that, ifpeople don't know who you are,
how much money do you have tospend to make sure people know
who?
Speaker 5 (21:45):
you are, and so name.
Speaker 2 (21:46):
ID is huge, especially in the statewide race
.
It definitely is an advantagewhen people know who you are to
start with.
So Deb Holland comes in at 54%,which I actually thought that'd
be higher.
I thought that'd be higher.
Speaker 5 (21:58):
I thought the delta between Haaland and Bregman.
Looking at the numbers on theballot, here's what should
concern Bregman.
It's a 20-point spread betweentheir voter ID, the voters being
able to ID them right.
And there's a 40-point spread intheir numbers.
So this is not just oh, peopleknow Deb, they don't know Sam,
(22:19):
and as soon as they know Sam,they're going to vote for him.
That's not true.
That's not what the numbers say, and so that's why this is one
of those things where I justthink and again, could this
change?
Yes, but this is what we'vesaid from the very beginning.
If you're Deb Haaland, you aregoing to run a race where you
put a lot of ads on the air, youput a lot of digital ads out
there, and then you stay out ofthe way.
(22:39):
You do not tangle with SamBregman, you don't do it.
It is not her lane to do that.
There are candidates that couldtangle with Sam Bregman and hit
him at a point that couldreally cause problems for
Bregman, right, there are thosepeople out there, no question.
She's just not one of them,right, and so don't do it.
(23:01):
And so she stays out of the way, runs effective image spots and
then paints Sam Bregman as aman of all seasons, meaning he's
whoever you want him to be,whenever you want him to be,
wherever you want him to be.
Oh, it's just there, we go right.
And if she sticks to those twothings image spots and Sam the
flip flopper she will cruise tovictory.
Speaker 2 (23:23):
OK, well, and this is interesting because we're
pulling some national pollingnumbers now that really do kind
of show, like kind of what we'vebeen saying is, if Bregman just
keeps playing this like central, middle, moderate, you know,
democrat, he doesn't have a shot.
Like that's a poor play by himto try to get through his
primary.
So let's take a look.
Speaker 5 (23:44):
Yes, I want to say something more about this.
No, no, no, just that.
This is Harry Enten talkingabout where the Democratic Party
is with socialism, and justlisten to what he says about
this.
Speaker 4 (23:55):
Socialism is not a four letter word in Democratic
primaries, not among Democraticvoters.
It's a five letter word in theminds of a lot of Democrats,
that five letter word beinggreat.
Look at this net popularity ofsocialism among Democrats.
You go back to 2010.
It was plus seven points.
Look how high it is now, uplike a rocket up to plus 36
points.
That's a jump of nearly 30points on the net popularity
(24:18):
scale among Democrats in just 15years.
And I was looking at thepolling from New York City and
what you see is the clearplurality of New York Democrat.
New York City Democrats thinkthe idea of having a socialist
mayor is a good idea, matchingwhat we see nationally.
The bottom line is socialismisn't a dirty word among
Democrats at this particularpoint.
It's actually a word that, whenattached, democrats seem to
(24:39):
like it.
That's a huge jump.
Speaker 2 (24:42):
Okay, so that's why we say what we say about all
this?
Yeah, because the DemocraticParty is continuing to move much
more to the left.
Speaker 5 (24:51):
Is that the takeaway Sort of?
Or do we get to a point in NewMexico where you see enough
people?
And I do think we're getting tothat point?
Remember when we ran in 2022,it was about a 15-point state
right, a 15-point Democraticvoting advantage.
It's down to 10 now.
I do think we have a largenumber of people who've been
Democrats their whole lives wholook at all this and start going
(25:13):
wait a minute and start goingwait a minute.
So I do think it's possiblethat we could slide out.
But I think, as far as votingin a primary goes, not a general
, I think you'll start to seethat move, christy, toward the
center for a lot of Democratswho are like enough, we're not
doing this right, it's too muchfor us.
I think you'll see it.
But I think you'll see it in ageneral election.
I don't think you see it in aprimary.
The energy that runs primariescomes from the farther edges of
(25:37):
the party.
Speaker 2 (25:39):
Right, absolutely, we talked about that.
Okay, so some good news for theeconomy.
I guess, when we have mortgagerates dropping to a three-year
low right Against right beforethis Fed meeting, that it was
really praying that all theinterest rates are going to drop
and all that.
So explain this a little bit.
Speaker 5 (25:53):
Yeah, this was just something.
Now, this is ahead of the cut,so could this be the benefit of
the cut ahead of time?
It absolutely could be right,but we are seeing rates go down
to 6.13% lowest they've been ina couple of years, and I think
what you're hoping for, nomatter what business you're in,
is that these numbers keepcoming down and that overall
interest rates keep coming downto make it easier to get a home
(26:14):
loan, to make it easier to get abusiness loan.
These numbers that we haveright now have been so high for
so long that I think people arestarting to realize that, with
the Fed likely to cut some more,we're seeing those numbers go
down.
We've said from the verybeginning that for the Trump
administration, this is critical.
They've got to have thesenumbers come down Again.
Remember, your debt is financedas well and it's financed off
(26:34):
those interest rates, right, andso the higher those interest
rates stay, the tougher it isfor the government to get back
in better footing as well.
So we'll see what happens, butat least a piece of good news
there.
Speaker 2 (26:44):
Okay, well, let's move on.
Go back a little bit to theCharlie Kirk story, because
there's been some more movementin this case with Tyler Robinson
, the alleged shooter.
He, you know, now he's incustody.
We said a couple of days agothat he was cooperating with
police.
Now that has changed again.
Apparently he's no longercooperating.
(27:06):
However, his partner androommate, apparently, is now
cooperating with authorities,and what was interesting is they
released this text exchangebetween Tyler and his roommate
and it's kind of come out nowand so I'm just going to read a
little bit of this so you cankind of see this exchange,
because I think what they'retrying to build a case on, I'm
(27:28):
guessing, is that something likethis shows that the roommate
really did not know in advancethat this was going to happen
and that he was taken bysurprise as well.
So it starts with Robinson, whosays Tyler Robinson says I am
still okay, my love, but I'mstuck in Orem for a little while
longer yet Shouldn't be longuntil I can come home, but I
gotta grab my rifle still.
(27:48):
To be honest, I had hoped tokeep this secret till I died of
old age.
I am sorry to have involved you.
Roommate says you weren't theone that did this right?
And then Robinson says I am.
I'm sorry, roommate, I thoughtthey caught the person.
Robinson says no, they grabbedsome crazy old dude then
interrogated someone in similarclothing.
I had planned to grab my riflefrom my drop point shortly after
(28:11):
, but most of that side of towngot locked down.
It's quiet almost enough to getout, but there's one vehicle
lingering.
Roommate says why, robinson?
Why did I do it?
Roommate says yeah.
Robinson says I had enough ofhis hatred.
Some hate can't be negotiatedout.
If I'm able to grab my rifleunseen, I will have left no
(28:32):
evidence Going to attempt toretrieve it again.
Hopefully they will have movedon.
I haven't seen anything aboutthem finding it.
Roommate, how long have youbeen planning this, robinson?
A bit over a week, I believe Ican get close to it.
Oh, he says a week a bit over aweek, I believe I can get close
to it.
But there is a squad car parkedright by it.
I think they already swept thespot but I don't want to chance
(28:53):
it Again.
He's going back to talkingabout this rifle retrieval.
Robinson adds I'm wishing I hadcircled back and grabbed it as
soon as I got to my vehicle.
I'm worried what my old manwould do if I didn't bring back
his grandpa's rifle.
I don't know if it had a serialnumber, but it wouldn't trace
to me.
I worry about prints.
I had to leave it in a bushwhere I changed outfits.
I didn't have the ability ortime to bring it with.
(29:14):
I might have to abandon it andhope they don't find the prints.
How the F will I explain losingthis to my old man?
Only thing I left was the riflewrapped in a towel.
Remember how I was engravingbullets?
These blank messages are mostlya big meme.
If I see notice bulge UWU onFox News, I might have a stroke.
(29:35):
All right, I'm gonna have toleave it.
That really effing sucks.
Now, what's interesting aboutthis is this, this Robinson, who
has I mean, by all stretch ofimagination, we still have to
say alleged that's what we'retrying to do until he's actually
found guilty in a court of law.
But it seems pretty obviousthat not only is he confessing
(29:56):
to this, like he has we've heardthat he's done with his dad,
but he's also telling hisroommate hey, really, his big
priority here is let me go backand get the gun.
Of course I did this.
Of course I'm the one.
I'm sorry I involved you, buthis focus is just completely on
this rifle, which seems it showsa little bit of you know into
this guy that really he, heseriously doesn't feel like
(30:17):
number one.
He's guilty of anything otherthan leaving the rifle behind,
and so it's.
It's interesting to see.
Speaker 5 (30:24):
Based on this, I think the cops are trying to say
hey, the roommate wasn't a partof this situation Right, which
seems legit, I mean from fromlooking at that and I the
callousness of this guy and itis weird.
You brought up something kindof interesting when we were
talking, and that is when youtalk to some people about some
sort of emotional conversationand then they sort of go off on
(30:45):
a rabbit trail.
Can you kind of explain that?
Speaker 2 (30:49):
The roommate says why , why did I do it?
Or he says you know, youweren't the one who did it right
?
And then Robinson says I am,I'm sorry.
And then Robinson just goes offabout this gun.
So like, really, I mean,obviously the key point of this
(31:09):
text exchange is hey, I'm theone that did this, I'm sorry,
but let's get back to the rifle,and I need to sort out how I'm
going to find this rifle.
I should be there soon, I'msorry.
It's like they just go on this.
He just goes on this wholetangent about this being his
grandfather's rifle, his prince.
He doesn't know if the princeare on it.
I just think there's somethingabout when you can
(31:30):
compartmentalize to a dangerousdegree of hey, I just did this
heinous crime where I murderedsomebody, but my focus is over
here and I'm just going to talkabout this rifle.
Speaker 5 (31:41):
I'm not getting away with it.
Speaker 2 (31:42):
Yeah, it's just a weird disconnect and I think
when most people are havingconversations and they ask you a
heavy-hitting question, notnecessarily about murder, but
anything that's serious they askyou a heavy hitting question,
not necessarily about murder,but anything that's serious the
person usually responds withmore than just one or two
answers of saying yes or no, andthen they will talk about that
(32:02):
issue.
This guy Robinson says yes, Idid do it, but let's move on to
the more important thing, whichis I got to get that rifle back
and I, you know.
It just seems like a disconnect.
That's the, that's what I'venoticed in this.
Speaker 5 (32:14):
So, yeah, well, speaking of disconnect, I think
I want to just play one piece ofsound.
So all this happened on Tuesday, the police came out with all
this information to show whatwas going on and a lot of their
evidence and things like that.
Well, matt Gutman from ABC wasthere and he had a report on
(32:34):
this, was there and he had areport on this, and I, I have to
tell you, when I listened tohis breakdown of this, this gave
crystal clear information to meabout why we're so frustrated
with the media.
And just listen to how MattGutman you just heard what he
heard, right, all right, and sothis is how Matt Gutman
(32:55):
characterized what he heard.
Speaker 1 (32:59):
We have seen an alleged murder with such
specific text messages about thealleged murder weapon, where it
was hidden, how it was placed,what was on it.
But also it was very touchingin a way that I think many of us
didn't expect A very intimateportrait into this relationship
between the suspect's roommateand the suspect himself, with
(33:20):
him repeatedly calling hisroommate who was transitioning,
calling him my love, and I wantto protect you, my love.
So it was this duality ofsomeone who the attorney said
not only jeopardized the life ofCharlie Kirk and the crowd but
was doing it in front ofchildren, which is one of the
aggravating circumstances ofthis case and on the other hand,
he was, you know, speaking solovingly about his partner.
(33:42):
So a very interesting and, asPierre said, riveting press
conference.
David, it was tough.
Speaker 2 (33:47):
Yeah, who cares?
Speaker 5 (33:49):
Honestly, honestly, I really.
I mean what ridiculous Touchingor whatever.
What did he say?
You know, talked lovingly ofhis part.
I mean, are you kidding?
Speaker 2 (34:02):
He's trying to make this kid human.
Speaker 5 (34:04):
He's trying to humanize him.
Speaker 2 (34:05):
And if you actually read the text exchange, the
whole point that stands outglaringly to me is he's so
compartmentalized.
He's not having a normal humanreaction Like somebody who did a
heinous crime like this wouldhave guilt or would feel badly
when doing the first place right.
But you know people that makemistakes and feel bad about it
(34:26):
express things incrediblydifferently than this
compartmentalized way of himtalking to his roommate.
I don't care if he said my love, that's the last thing.
I'd be picking up on this.
Speaker 5 (34:37):
Well, no, exactly, it's meaningless, and in the
part that is meaningful isexactly what you say.
I think it's a really smartobservation and that is that
that truly, he, he did not, hedidn't under you know, he did
not fully appreciate thesituation.
And and Matt Gutman is touchedby all of this, are you kidding?
I mean, it just is, it'sclueless, it really is, and it's
(35:01):
the whole reason that peopleget so frustrated with the media
and trying to say how can weand I don't know if he's
deliberately trying to humanizethe guy, but the reality is he
just misread it Like he found areason to be touched by this,
okay, but you know who wasn'ttouched by anything?
Is Tyler Robinson?
This, okay, but but you knowwho?
Who wasn't touched by anythingis Tyler Robinson, that's who
wasn't touched by anything.
That's who was a cold bloodedkiller who was more concerned
about getting that gun.
If you're a normal human being,you hear what he says about
(35:22):
getting the gun.
That's what you take away.
You don't take away my love.
So he says something to hisboyfriend or or girlfriend or
whatever.
Whatever the situation is, it'sludicrous and it's and it just
is such a it's so pathetic thatyou see this stuff and it's
incredibly frustrating to watch.
But there is frustration on theother side and I do want to run
(35:43):
that one by you as well.
Speaker 2 (35:45):
This next clip.
Is that what you're talkingabout?
Okay, yeah, I mean.
So you and I are going to.
I mean, I don't know if we'regoing to disagree on this, but I
think there, why don't we goahead?
You go ahead and lead this up,and then we'll have a
conversation after it.
Speaker 5 (35:57):
So, so, yeah.
So Pam Bondi, the attorneygeneral, was in an interview and
she talked about the necessityto eliminate hate speech.
Take a listen to this.
Speaker 2 (36:09):
Speech, and then there's hate speech and there is
no place, especially now,especially after what happened
to Charlie, in our society.
Do you see more law enforcementgoing after these groups who
are using hate speech andputting cuffs on people so we
show them that some action isbetter than no action?
Speaker 4 (36:28):
We will absolutely target.
Speaker 2 (36:31):
You, go after you if you are targeting anyone with
hate speech, anything and that'sacross the aisle.
Speaker 5 (36:40):
Okay, if we're going to go after you.
If you target someone with hatespeech.
That's protected in theconstitution.
It is.
And for her to say that and forthe attorney general to say
that I think is completelymisguided.
Look, nobody loves, likes hatespeech.
At least nobody with a with anormal functioning brain.
Right, we all know we'd love tothink that you don't say those
(37:03):
things and and and.
I think hate speech can haveconsequences on your life.
There's no question about that.
But the government coming afteryou?
No, that's protected.
It is protected speech and Idon't like to hear our basically
number one law enforcementagent in the country go out and
say things like this.
Speaker 2 (37:21):
I think it's loose and obviously I've been
listening to other sources oninformation on Tyler Robinson.
Right, they believe that he wasbragging about this.
He was lining this up inadvance on some of the video
(37:43):
game chat rooms under falsenames and things of that nature.
Now, obviously, we're not goingto put those out yet because we
don't have any proof thatthat's actually the same person.
It looks like it is, but untilthings are more clear we don't
want to add to the you know fanthat fire yet.
However, that being said, Ithink what happens is Pam Bondi
is basically saying listen, weknow they know a lot more than
(38:05):
we know at this point, and Ithink what she's saying is
there's a lot of hate groupsgoing on.
There's a lot of because theBecause the chatter that I've
read about is filled with hate,right, and it was very targeted
and the date was laid out, theperson was laid out.
It was very clear thatsomething was going to happen
that would be a negativeconsequence to Charlie Kirk.
Now, I think what she meantthere and I think she'll clarify
(38:29):
, is, if you have a group thatis going after somebody, is
targeting somebody with theirhate speech, meaning more than
just saying I don't like the guybut you can target people with
hate speech.
Speaker 5 (38:42):
It's terrible.
Speaker 2 (38:44):
No, I get that, but I'm saying I think what she's
actually trying to and I'mhoping that she's going to
clarify this, but based on theother things, the other pieces
that I've listened to, thatwe're again, we're not putting
in this show I think that whatshe's saying is listen, if you
are saying that you're going toattack somebody physically, to
harm somebody, do something likethat, then they're going to put
the full government support andmake sure they get you before
(39:07):
something like that happens, butthat's physical violence.
Speaker 5 (39:09):
But I'm just saying you know, and again we've seen
how hate speech, the word hatespeech or the verbiage hate
speech, has been applied to somany things that aren't even
hate speech Right, or they'reall over the place.
Speaker 2 (39:22):
I see that we have to be careful because of what's
happening in the UK Right.
The UK has lost their minds onwho they're arresting.
Speaker 5 (39:29):
That's what makes this country yeah.
Speaker 2 (39:32):
I understand that she can't just say listen, if you
have hate speech, we're comingafter you.
I think the word that she'swhat she said, and then she just
needs to clarify it more, andI'm hoping that she does is
saying if you're targetingpeople, meaning if you're going
to go harm people with more thanjust your words, that's
incendiary.
Speaker 5 (39:50):
That's different, right, that's different, and
then there's a distinction.
There, though All I'm saying isthat the word hate speech there
is either misused, or or she'sgoing into areas that I think I
don't care what party is is inthe White House.
We need, look, you need to beable to be dumb enough to say
stupid stuff, and what makesthis country great is that we
allow you to do that.
(40:11):
Now, it doesn't mean it'swithout consequence, but the
government itself coming afteryou for saying something that
they don't like you saying isreally scary, and I just don't
want us doing it on any side.
Speaker 2 (40:21):
Right, I mean I understand.
I do think that she's going to.
I think that's going to comeback up and I I mean I could be
wrong, but I think she's goingto have to clarify that a bit
more.
Speaker 5 (40:29):
So okay, we made it through and you did disconnect,
so that's a miracle right.
Yes, take us home doctor.
Speaker 2 (40:36):
Okay, so thanks you guys so much for joining us.
Please make sure that you likeand subscribe on our YouTube
channel If you wanna make acomment.
That's how we're able to readthose If you like and subscribe.
Also, if you wanna get ouremail, get on our email list.
Just go tonotedoutaboutitpodcastcom and
sign up for our email and wepromise we won't spam you.
You just sign up and all we dois send out the emails to let
(40:57):
you know when our latest show iscoming out.
And if you want to support ourshow or support us, you can also
do that on the website as well.
We appreciate you guys so much.
Thanks for spending a littletime with us.
Have a great rest of your weekand we'll see you back here, I
think, on Sunday or Monday.
We're just going to roll withit so soon.
We'll see you soon.
Speaker 3 (41:15):
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.
No doubt about it.
(41:36):
The no Doubt About it podcastis a choose adventure media
production.
See you next time on no doubtabout it there is no doubt about
it.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.