November 7, 2022 • 11 mins
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Well, why don't we start there with our good friend
political uh analyst Gary Dietrich, who has long been part
of the Armstrong and Getty show. Gary. Welcome, How are
you hey? Proud to be part of the long legacy
of angie people. Yeah, so, Gary, let's start with the
incredibly overheated rhetoric. Have you ever seen anything like it?
(00:22):
I'll tell you what, guys, I've been talking with people
about this for months as this has been building, and
and the numbers sort of proved the overheated rad quotem
aim by that, Uh Joe, it's that the people who
are saying I'm destinely going to vote you know, I'm
really paying attention to selection. Those numbers are off the charts.
They're like at se guy just evened up this week,
(00:44):
Democrats kind of pulled even with Republicans in the so
called passion quotients. So yeah, i'd say, yes, you have
seen And of course, guys, it goes without saying almost
that in the aftermath of the last election cycle, that's
heightened even further. Well, the reason I'm only want to
have you honest because I heard you're talking about how
California's got the two most expensive initiatives they've ever had.
(01:06):
But before we get to that, UM, I hit everybody
with this because I think it's the most amazing poll
number I've seen this entire cycle. It's an NBC poll
from a couple of weeks ago. Eighty percent of Republicans
eight percent of Democrats believe that if the other believe
the other part party is out to destroy America, of
each side believes the other side's out to destroy America,
(01:29):
how do you function with that number? Well, Jack, that
that is probably you know, that's the million dollar question
that gets buried a lot because of course, beneath that number, Jack,
is the fact that both sides, I think the other
side is prepared to quote unquote steal the election, right.
I mean, that's that's the problem. You know, it's well,
they're blocking poles, they got armed guys that they're not
(01:51):
voting machines. We're gonna be having, you know, poll watchers.
I mean, it is absolutely crazy. And of course that
narrative is already that narrative is already getting prepared for
the Well, the problem with that, you know, it's a
race to the bottom. It's Ah, I don't know what
what would be the right in metaphor or whatever. But
(02:12):
if if you believe the other side is going to
destroy the country, you probably should rig the election. Okay,
I want to make sure that was not me saying
you want if you're historian Michael bes bech Loss and
you believe children are going to be executed if the
(02:33):
other side wins, you probably should do whatever you can
to make sure you win. Well, yeah, there's that, But
I think I think the important thing, guys, is what's
going on, what's being put in jeopardy really from a
governance standpoint is we've always had a date certain and
president of politics in January, right, we have the inauguration,
(02:54):
We're done, we move on. Everybody's still screams. Everybody screams
and yells, we're all still upset. But you have a date.
When you don't have a date, and if you're going
to be continually throwing this into the courts at various
level from Scotus on down, that becomes exceptionally problematic, just
in terms of not only doing our own governance business
internally but externally when external countries, external forces. You want
(03:18):
to know, okay on January or at least gonna who's
geting you run in the place over there. You gotta
have that. You have to have that. Well, do you
think the lengthening of the the voting process. I feel
like that's hurting our belief in the vote. I people
with I'll take people at their best intentions and not
their worst intentions. That just wanted to more access for
(03:41):
more people. More voting is always good that idea. So
will lengthen the hours and the days and make mail
in battle, But I feel like it's leading to less
belief in the outcome. Well, I think the only thing
I like about the biggest I think plus to having
you know, longer voting times and can vote in person
or you can do it by mail at all, is
(04:02):
that people at least get to choose what they believe
to be the most authentic, most reliable means to cast
their vote, so, you know, and lest people have options,
and you know, apart from that, does it does it
increase people's confidence in the process. At this junct, you're
probably not well. Yeah, And honestly, Gary, I uh, you know,
(04:25):
I hate to quipal with you because you know, you're
terrific and everything, but you said, people choose the you know,
the best most trustworthy. No, people choose the most convenient
way to vote, the easiest way to vote. And to
my mind, the stretching out of the period of voting
and the many means of voting now have made it
has made it much much more difficult to watch the
(04:46):
Henhouse to ensure the fidelity of the ballot, and I'm
I'm for some compromises. It need not just be paper
ballots in person on election day. We can, we can
expand it a bit beyond that. But every step you
go making it long are and longer, and more and
more means of voting, the less you can assure people
the vote is one hundred percent valid. We're sure of it. Yeah,
(05:09):
I hear what you're saying. Hey, here's what. Here's what.
To me, the challenges is that there is absolutely, as
you know, zero maybe sub zero standard for what is
their reliable means. In other words, in the past, there's
a great deal of debate of all electronic voting water.
We can't have those kind of machines. You gotta go
with people, pencils, paper on election date. There's a lot
(05:30):
of questions about that now. So the problem is we
don't have any kind of an acceptable standard that any
you know, two parties can agree on that this is
the one we're gonna go with. Let's put the other
ones aside. Well, that's why we have to appoint a
bipartisan commission, give them two years and fifty million dollars,
and then have everybody completely ignore the results. That's our
(05:50):
only have we got. We gotta move on Gary, just
because I don't want to round a time, because I
really want to ask about this. I don't know if
everybody around the country knows California and some other states,
I guess you probably know how many have these initiative systems,
these ballot systems where you kind of in propositions propositions.
In theory, it was supposed to, you know, take the
big money out of it and just directly let the
(06:11):
people decide the big issues. Well, it didn't take the
money out of it. This time. In California. You've got
the two most expensive ballot propositions in state history. And
what are they? Yeah, well there, what a surprise there?
Over money have to sell a gambling, most notably sports gambling,
sports betting. Some states, people, what are you talking about
sports betting? We've been doing that for a long time
(06:31):
and too and to the back stories really quick. Two
thousand and eighteen, Scotus said, you could the states can
legalized sports betting. Thirty five of those, including and and
the District of Columbia have done that. But the biggest
prize of all California White because twelve percent of the
population lives there, so there's a lot of money reside
there does not currently have legalized sports betting. And yet
you know, that's what this battle is about. Really, it's
(06:54):
pitting two sides. In California. You have legal gaming on
Indian tribe lands or in casinos owned and operated by
Indian tribes. That's Prop twenty six. They want to now
legalize sports betting there. That would have to be in person.
Prop twenty seven the big competing measure or a lot
of the big boys, the MGMs, the draft Kings, the
(07:15):
fan duels, blah blah blah to have you know, I
would tronic sports betting on your Sino cell phone computer wherever.
That's what the battleground is. Four million dollars, Why would
people spend that much? Get this in one The total
handle for sports betting fifty seven billion with a B
dollars that's why this is going on right now the polls.
(07:35):
To see the most recent numbers, I pulled them up
to share them with you guys today. Just got these
this morning. They're both going down in flames. Yes, fifty
three for only twenty two. Yes, sixties, I mean yes,
that's right, sixty four note for Prop twenty seven. So
you know the ads have been mainly negative, knocking the
other guy down. But here's the deal end with this.
(07:58):
If both of these fail, will look like they're going
to this is not going to be the end of it.
They will come back that they're already our plans for
another round next cycle, and the next cycle this thing
knocked down, drag out to the end's gonna win this.
A couple of questions about this one. I'm kind of surprised,
so like California all of a sudden, is what fundamentalist
(08:18):
about gambling? They don't think it's it's just surprising to
me where they anything goes state? Um and but uh,
I don't understand it at all because I can gamble
on anything anywhere, anytime with my phone. What's what's allowing
it in the state? Even mean, well some I don't
(08:38):
know how all the mechanism happened, Jack, But you're not
supposed to be able to gamble on your phone within California.
And by the way, everybody's laughing here in the studio.
By the way, everybody's throwing back their head and laughter
at the idea that you can't gamble on your phone
in California. Jack. By the way, Hey, Jack, by the way,
(08:58):
here's the mechan is about what you kind of were wondering,
pondering why we don't have it yet here the legislature
and all exquisdom tried to arbitrate this fight in our legislature.
And as you guys know, almost all these statewide propertitions
or at least a big dollwins come about because you
can't get a resolution in the legislature. They tried a
couple of years ago, couldn't for obvious reasons. Even though
(09:19):
they banged heads together, couldn't get people to agree. And
that's why they're on the ballot. The two most expensive
props in California history are this interesting. Yeah, very strange
and still a little mystifying to me. And I know
the tribes right, big giant checks too. They do some
aggressive lobbying to keep gambling on their side. But again,
(09:40):
I can bet on every single NFL game, next Major
League Baseball season, the upcoming golf tournament, and probably two
kids in a foot race and an elementary school on
my smartphone right now if I want to. So you're
not supposed to, Joe, Well, thank you, Gearty. I don't
know if you've seen this breaking news. There are reports
(10:02):
people inside Trump circles say he's going to announce tonight
j d Vance's event that he's running for president. Oh yeah,
she's not even wait till the till the poles are
closed down. Well, well, no surprise. I pretty much expected it. Guys.
Right after the mid term he's jumping in and that
will be a discussion for nodcase. That's going to raise
all kinds of new uh shall we say question? Many
(10:24):
yes or no? Audio? Biden on the ticket for an
absolute decided I intend to, But of course it's just
an intention. Okay does that name? Does that sound for me?
That's what Biden's official, Lindes, But guys, all the indicators
are inside the White House. He's going for it. Oh
my god, stop, it's gonna be Trump again. I will
(10:47):
wager any figure anybody can come to California. If Elon
Musk texts and said Joe I got a billion dollars,
says Biden runs, I would take that action. Well if
if Joe, if Joe makes that gamble in California, I
will call the police. So so, if you want some good,
nonpartisan political analysis, to follow Gary on Twitter at Gary Dietrich. Gary,
(11:10):
It's always great to talk. Thanks. Okay, yes, Art stro
Well, why don't we start there with our good friend
political uh analyst Gary Dietrich, who has long been part
of the Armstrong and Getty show. Gary. Welcome, How are
you hey? Proud to be part of the long legacy
of angie people. Yeah, so, Gary, let's start with the
incredibly overheated rhetoric. Have you ever seen anything like it?
(00:22):
I'll tell you what, guys, I've been talking with people
about this for months as this has been building, and
and the numbers sort of proved the overheated rad quotem
aim by that, Uh Joe, it's that the people who
are saying I'm destinely going to vote you know, I'm
really paying attention to selection. Those numbers are off the charts.
They're like at se guy just evened up this week,
(00:44):
Democrats kind of pulled even with Republicans in the so
called passion quotients. So yeah, i'd say, yes, you have
seen And of course, guys, it goes without saying almost
that in the aftermath of the last election cycle, that's
heightened even further. Well, the reason I'm only want to
have you honest because I heard you're talking about how
California's got the two most expensive initiatives they've ever had.
(01:06):
But before we get to that, UM, I hit everybody
with this because I think it's the most amazing poll
number I've seen this entire cycle. It's an NBC poll
from a couple of weeks ago. Eighty percent of Republicans
eight percent of Democrats believe that if the other believe
the other part party is out to destroy America, of
each side believes the other side's out to destroy America,
(01:29):
how do you function with that number? Well, Jack, that
that is probably you know, that's the million dollar question
that gets buried a lot because of course, beneath that number, Jack,
is the fact that both sides, I think the other
side is prepared to quote unquote steal the election, right.
I mean, that's that's the problem. You know, it's well,
they're blocking poles, they got armed guys that they're not
(01:51):
voting machines. We're gonna be having, you know, poll watchers.
I mean, it is absolutely crazy. And of course that
narrative is already that narrative is already getting prepared for
the Well, the problem with that, you know, it's a
race to the bottom. It's Ah, I don't know what
what would be the right in metaphor or whatever. But
(02:12):
if if you believe the other side is going to
destroy the country, you probably should rig the election. Okay,
I want to make sure that was not me saying
you want if you're historian Michael bes bech Loss and
you believe children are going to be executed if the
(02:33):
other side wins, you probably should do whatever you can
to make sure you win. Well, yeah, there's that, But
I think I think the important thing, guys, is what's
going on, what's being put in jeopardy really from a
governance standpoint is we've always had a date certain and
president of politics in January, right, we have the inauguration,
(02:54):
We're done, we move on. Everybody's still screams. Everybody screams
and yells, we're all still upset. But you have a date.
When you don't have a date, and if you're going
to be continually throwing this into the courts at various
level from Scotus on down, that becomes exceptionally problematic, just
in terms of not only doing our own governance business
internally but externally when external countries, external forces. You want
(03:18):
to know, okay on January or at least gonna who's
geting you run in the place over there. You gotta
have that. You have to have that. Well, do you
think the lengthening of the the voting process. I feel
like that's hurting our belief in the vote. I people
with I'll take people at their best intentions and not
their worst intentions. That just wanted to more access for
(03:41):
more people. More voting is always good that idea. So
will lengthen the hours and the days and make mail
in battle, But I feel like it's leading to less
belief in the outcome. Well, I think the only thing
I like about the biggest I think plus to having
you know, longer voting times and can vote in person
or you can do it by mail at all, is
(04:02):
that people at least get to choose what they believe
to be the most authentic, most reliable means to cast
their vote, so, you know, and lest people have options,
and you know, apart from that, does it does it
increase people's confidence in the process. At this junct, you're
probably not well. Yeah, And honestly, Gary, I uh, you know,
(04:25):
I hate to quipal with you because you know, you're
terrific and everything, but you said, people choose the you know,
the best most trustworthy. No, people choose the most convenient
way to vote, the easiest way to vote. And to
my mind, the stretching out of the period of voting
and the many means of voting now have made it
has made it much much more difficult to watch the
(04:46):
Henhouse to ensure the fidelity of the ballot, and I'm
I'm for some compromises. It need not just be paper
ballots in person on election day. We can, we can
expand it a bit beyond that. But every step you
go making it long are and longer, and more and
more means of voting, the less you can assure people
the vote is one hundred percent valid. We're sure of it. Yeah,
(05:09):
I hear what you're saying. Hey, here's what. Here's what.
To me, the challenges is that there is absolutely, as
you know, zero maybe sub zero standard for what is
their reliable means. In other words, in the past, there's
a great deal of debate of all electronic voting water.
We can't have those kind of machines. You gotta go
with people, pencils, paper on election date. There's a lot
(05:30):
of questions about that now. So the problem is we
don't have any kind of an acceptable standard that any
you know, two parties can agree on that this is
the one we're gonna go with. Let's put the other
ones aside. Well, that's why we have to appoint a
bipartisan commission, give them two years and fifty million dollars,
and then have everybody completely ignore the results. That's our
(05:50):
only have we got. We gotta move on Gary, just
because I don't want to round a time, because I
really want to ask about this. I don't know if
everybody around the country knows California and some other states,
I guess you probably know how many have these initiative systems,
these ballot systems where you kind of in propositions propositions.
In theory, it was supposed to, you know, take the
big money out of it and just directly let the
(06:11):
people decide the big issues. Well, it didn't take the
money out of it. This time. In California. You've got
the two most expensive ballot propositions in state history. And
what are they? Yeah, well there, what a surprise there?
Over money have to sell a gambling, most notably sports gambling,
sports betting. Some states, people, what are you talking about
sports betting? We've been doing that for a long time
(06:31):
and too and to the back stories really quick. Two
thousand and eighteen, Scotus said, you could the states can
legalized sports betting. Thirty five of those, including and and
the District of Columbia have done that. But the biggest
prize of all California White because twelve percent of the
population lives there, so there's a lot of money reside
there does not currently have legalized sports betting. And yet
you know, that's what this battle is about. Really, it's
(06:54):
pitting two sides. In California. You have legal gaming on
Indian tribe lands or in casinos owned and operated by
Indian tribes. That's Prop twenty six. They want to now
legalize sports betting there. That would have to be in person.
Prop twenty seven the big competing measure or a lot
of the big boys, the MGMs, the draft Kings, the
(07:15):
fan duels, blah blah blah to have you know, I
would tronic sports betting on your Sino cell phone computer wherever.
That's what the battleground is. Four million dollars, Why would
people spend that much? Get this in one The total
handle for sports betting fifty seven billion with a B
dollars that's why this is going on right now the polls.
(07:35):
To see the most recent numbers, I pulled them up
to share them with you guys today. Just got these
this morning. They're both going down in flames. Yes, fifty
three for only twenty two. Yes, sixties, I mean yes,
that's right, sixty four note for Prop twenty seven. So
you know the ads have been mainly negative, knocking the
other guy down. But here's the deal end with this.
(07:58):
If both of these fail, will look like they're going
to this is not going to be the end of it.
They will come back that they're already our plans for
another round next cycle, and the next cycle this thing
knocked down, drag out to the end's gonna win this.
A couple of questions about this one. I'm kind of surprised,
so like California all of a sudden, is what fundamentalist
(08:18):
about gambling? They don't think it's it's just surprising to
me where they anything goes state? Um and but uh,
I don't understand it at all because I can gamble
on anything anywhere, anytime with my phone. What's what's allowing
it in the state? Even mean, well some I don't
(08:38):
know how all the mechanism happened, Jack, But you're not
supposed to be able to gamble on your phone within California.
And by the way, everybody's laughing here in the studio.
By the way, everybody's throwing back their head and laughter
at the idea that you can't gamble on your phone
in California. Jack. By the way, Hey, Jack, by the way,
(08:58):
here's the mechan is about what you kind of were wondering,
pondering why we don't have it yet here the legislature
and all exquisdom tried to arbitrate this fight in our legislature.
And as you guys know, almost all these statewide propertitions
or at least a big dollwins come about because you
can't get a resolution in the legislature. They tried a
couple of years ago, couldn't for obvious reasons. Even though
(09:19):
they banged heads together, couldn't get people to agree. And
that's why they're on the ballot. The two most expensive
props in California history are this interesting. Yeah, very strange
and still a little mystifying to me. And I know
the tribes right, big giant checks too. They do some
aggressive lobbying to keep gambling on their side. But again,
(09:40):
I can bet on every single NFL game, next Major
League Baseball season, the upcoming golf tournament, and probably two
kids in a foot race and an elementary school on
my smartphone right now if I want to. So you're
not supposed to, Joe, Well, thank you, Gearty. I don't
know if you've seen this breaking news. There are reports
(10:02):
people inside Trump circles say he's going to announce tonight
j d Vance's event that he's running for president. Oh yeah,
she's not even wait till the till the poles are
closed down. Well, well, no surprise. I pretty much expected it. Guys.
Right after the mid term he's jumping in and that
will be a discussion for nodcase. That's going to raise
all kinds of new uh shall we say question? Many
(10:24):
yes or no? Audio? Biden on the ticket for an
absolute decided I intend to, But of course it's just
an intention. Okay does that name? Does that sound for me?
That's what Biden's official, Lindes, But guys, all the indicators
are inside the White House. He's going for it. Oh
my god, stop, it's gonna be Trump again. I will
(10:47):
wager any figure anybody can come to California. If Elon
Musk texts and said Joe I got a billion dollars,
says Biden runs, I would take that action. Well if
if Joe, if Joe makes that gamble in California, I
will call the police. So so, if you want some good,
nonpartisan political analysis, to follow Gary on Twitter at Gary Dietrich. Gary,
(11:10):
It's always great to talk. Thanks. Okay, yes, Art stro
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations.
The Nikki Glaser Podcast
Every week comedian and infamous roaster Nikki Glaser provides a fun, fast-paced, and brutally honest look into current pop-culture and her own personal life.
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.