The Rod and Greg Show: Do Utah Voters Agree Across Party Lines? Plus, Previewing the Presidential Debate

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
How are you? Everybody? Welcome to the Rod and Gregg
Show here on Utah's Dark Radio one oh five nine.
Canterrests and yes, it is the start of the NFL
College football. Last weekend the NFL, four straight nights of
the NFL.

Speaker 2 (00:15):
It was a dark time living true. You know, after
we lost football, for after the Super Bowl, there was
any college football. There was nothing. We were just we
were out of it. And now we're back. Baby.

Speaker 1 (00:26):
Yeah, yeah, you excited about your Steelers.

Speaker 2 (00:30):
Yes, m I'm I'm circumcised.

Speaker 1 (00:32):
I think Russell Wilson will just bomb.

Speaker 2 (00:34):
You know what, I don't care because I still maintain
he's better than last year's starter, Canny Pickett. We had
a lot of high expectations for him, but I don't
care what we traded up. So whatever I get by
way of product on the field, it's better than I
would have had had they not picked up Russell Wilson
and Justin Fields from the from the Bears. But they
get the worst schedule, and I'm telling you, because they

(00:55):
do that mid season hard Knocks show. They've got them
playing every week. We're playing every Vision opponent within like
seven six weeks.

Speaker 1 (01:02):
Yeah, ridiculously crazy, and to be honest, I'm not overly
excited about the Cowboys this year anyways. I mean I
agree with you for well, I am admitting and I
mean I'm a Cowboy fan. But sorry, folks, not excited.
It is the Rod and Gregg Show here on Utah's
Talk Radio one oh five nine. Can terres Rod Ourkuat
along with citizen Greg hughes Man. Have we got a
lot to get to today, will of course get you

(01:24):
all the latest new from the campaign trail. We'll talk,
We'll get you ready for the debate. Can you believe
the debate is coming up on Tuesday night?

Speaker 2 (01:32):
I'm on Tuesday night.

Speaker 1 (01:34):
This is this I for her, It's make her break.
I mean she she's got to perform or I think
you know, the poles are indicating she's lost some of momentum. Greg.
And if she doesn't perform, well she just has to
not make a mistake.

Speaker 2 (01:48):
Here's my fear. If if they hadn't got the memo,
it's time to turn on Biden. The entire analysis of
that debate Trump and Biden, which we all say was
such a disaster for Biden. They started out those that
didn't get the memo saying Trump lied six hundred and
forty eight times in that whole debate. Trump did a
Trump did that. I think she's going to have a

(02:09):
post debate assessment that is just glowing without regard to
her performance at all. And so it'll be up to
the people that watch it and then spread the word.

Speaker 1 (02:19):
Yeah, yeah, do not depend on most of the media. No,
most of the media, I sill tell her fair analysis
will tell you the truth. And I know Glenn and
Clay and Buck and Sean and Jesse will tell you
the truth on this radio station. But if you're looking
for a thorough analysis of how she performed next Tuesday,
don't depend on the legacy media. They're all behind her.

Speaker 2 (02:41):
You know why I have an easy time when I
do think that Trump has missed a moment or ruined
a moment, Like his first debate against Biden in twenty twenty.
I thought was that it was a terrible debate for him.
And I'm not afraid to say it. The reason is,
if you've ever met Donald Trump, He's never afraid to
tell you something. Okay, He's very very blunt, So I

(03:01):
feel like he appreciates the bluntness, and I can be
blunt when when needed. And so I don't I don't,
I don't, I don't. I don't watch him with rose
colored glasses on.

Speaker 1 (03:11):
Well, yeah, well he can be very blunt. Catson point.
The town hall meeting was Sean Handeddy last time. Now,
apparently apparently we learned something new about Donald Trump, which
I think most Americans would agree with. We all hate mosquitos. Yes, no,
so somehow last night on the set with Jean Hennity
they did the town hall. The place was backed. Apparently

(03:31):
a mosquito decided to interrupt the proceedings.

Speaker 2 (03:37):
He was down like eighteen or nineteen points after the debate.
I hate mosquitoes. I'm surprised I didn't think we had.

Speaker 3 (03:44):
We don't like those mosquitoes running around.

Speaker 2 (03:47):
We want nothing to do with them.

Speaker 3 (03:49):
But we want nothing to do with bad politicians that
hate our country too.

Speaker 2 (03:54):
You want to know that. What's brilliant about that is
if you could see it, if you could see it,
there was, it was flying around his head and he's
batting this mosquito way. He's in midsense and he's a mosquitoes.
We don't need these mosquitoes. We don't need bad politicians.
If he can do pull off some funny quips, you know,
like human he is, he is. I don't know what

(04:17):
Joe just said. I don't think he knows either, but
this is the fact. That's a great line, and I
hope he has those coming up in this debate.

Speaker 1 (04:24):
See the difference between him and who is his vice president,
Mike Pince. Remember during the VP debate here at the
University of Utah and the fly landed on pens head
and he didn't know what, he didn't know what.

Speaker 2 (04:37):
That's actually a good comparison. He just we just all
were distracted by this fly and no one that you know,
he didn't.

Speaker 1 (04:42):
He could have just kind of brushed it off the head.
But he has the perfect hair, and maybe he didn't,
you know. And Donald doesn't care. Donald just swatting this
fly away. This mosquito just awful. All right. Some other
campaign news today, and like I said, we've got a
lot to get to. Steve Moore will join us. The
president today gave a very the former president gave a

(05:04):
very important speech to the Economic Club of New York
today and he kind of laid out his economic plan,
including one that I think Greg and I really agree with.
One point that he made today, and we'll talk about
that a little bit later on in the show. We'll
talk about wording of this constitutional amendment that we'll all
be voted on in November. Is some people don't like it,

(05:25):
they think it's misleading. Well, we'll get into that. And actually,
there are some things in Utah, Greg that we all
agree on.

Speaker 2 (05:32):
Which is you know, actually I know this, I get
into this mode. But I'm telling you, most bills in
the legislature pass with bipartisan support. Most are blocking and tactling.
They're just simple adjustments to the legislation that's needed in
existing statute. And most bills pass with super majorities, very
few no votes because they do the work ahead of time.
They're not partisan. But the media really does pay attention

(05:55):
to those partisan moments where Republicans and Democrats in Utah
don't agree. Yeah, and that's what gets the most attention.
And it would be like being the weather person in
San Diego. It just gets a bit boring to say it's,
you know, seventy degrees and pleasant.

Speaker 1 (06:07):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (06:08):
So, but no, there are areas they agree. But we're
gonna drill down on what a few of those are.
And I think those are worth bringing up and highlighting.

Speaker 1 (06:15):
Yeah, and also a little bit later on we'll talk
about that. We'll talk about agreement. One thing we almost forgot.
We have another pair of tickets to give away today
to see Tucker Carlson and Glenn Beck together. They'll be
on stage at the Delta Center coming up this Saturday night.
And before that, we'll give you a chance to come
to dinner with Greg and I as we host you

(06:36):
at the Huckleberry Grill to be fun.

Speaker 2 (06:38):
These are very, very popular tickets.

Speaker 1 (06:41):
Did you see the crowd that Tucker drew last night
downe in Phoenix? The place was packed. Heard it was
a barn by Russell Brand was there with him. Glenn
will be with him this Saturday night at the Delta Center.
But he packed the joint. Yes, and I understand everyone
came away just they thought it was a great time.

Speaker 2 (07:00):
Yeah, everyone's excited.

Speaker 1 (07:03):
So we'll give we'll give some We'll give someone a chance.
We have two pair of tickets left, so we'll give
one pair away today and then one pair away tomorrow
when we're you know.

Speaker 2 (07:11):
Yep, you want to listen because I'm telling you there's
there is there is external pressures that people want these tickets,
and it is the call listeners. You gotta call in
and you got to be the You gotta win, Yeah,
the winners.

Speaker 1 (07:24):
Yeah, you gotta win. Don't don't call, don't don't.

Speaker 2 (07:28):
I'm just warming you up that you're gonna want to
know when we say go, You're gonna want to go.

Speaker 1 (07:36):
You'll want to go. Big news that we broke yesterday,
Big surprise, Liz Cheney is endorsing a Kamala Harris.

Speaker 2 (07:45):
I didn't move our numbers. I don't know. I thought
that'd be the big search, you know. I thought we'd
see we'd see comma just like just skyrockets.

Speaker 1 (07:52):
Now that behind well, you know the thing about social
media today, and you know what you said twenty years ago,
fifteen years ago, ten years ago, five years ago is
going to catch up to you. And it did with
Liz Cheney. Now, this is Liz Cheney shortly after Joe
Biden announced that Kamala Harris was going to be his
running mate back in what would it would have been

(08:14):
twenty twenty. This is her reaction to Joe Biden's choice
back then.

Speaker 4 (08:18):
In One fell swoop here he has put somebody on
the ticket whose voting record in the Senate is to
the left of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. So I
think that, you know, the American people are going to
look at the substance of this. They're going to look
at what she stood for in the past. They're going
to look at what she said during the primary election,
and it's very clear she is a radical liberal. She's

(08:39):
somebody that has said we ought to spend thirty two
trillion dollars on Medicare for all. If you look at
her record as well in California, she did, in fact,
essentially ban gun sales with executive action.

Speaker 1 (08:52):
It sounds like Liz Cheney. Oh, Liz really likes radicals
from San Francisco, because now she is endorsing Kamala Harris.

Speaker 2 (09:00):
I don't know how you walk back. I mean, it
was pretty absolute what you're saying there. I don't know
how you walk that back. It's just a bad look
for her.

Speaker 1 (09:06):
Well. Jd. Vance was asked about the endorsement of Kamala
Harros from Liz Cheney. This was his response, Last time.

Speaker 5 (09:12):
Kamala Harris and Liz Cheney make very very interesting partners.
They get rich when America's sons and daughters go off
to die. They get rich when America loses wars instead
of winning wars, and they get rich when America gets
weaker in the world. We want American strength, American security,
and most importantly peace. Let's bring peace back to the world.

(09:33):
And Donald Trump is the candidate to do it.

Speaker 1 (09:35):
Yeah, I'm with you, Greg. I mean, Liz Chaney, is
she just looking for attention or something? You know, nobody
cares Liz.

Speaker 2 (09:43):
I'm telling you, there's just these whether it's this Adam
Kissinger or her, they they're just so bitter. I mean,
they're these Republicans that were on a super majority of
Democrats all hating Trump when the Republican or Democrats, but
they just can't let it go. And I love how
the media makes them out to be these stars the
left did the Cheney family, any of them ripped them forever,

(10:04):
but they all of a sudden they're just brave. But
is RFK Junior brave? No? Is Tulsi Gabbard brave? If
it was just a concept of crossing party lines for America,
if that was the general concept, you'd see all getting
that kind of attention. But no, if it's RFK Junior
if it's Tulsi's they either don't talk about it or

(10:24):
they disparage him. If it's this cry baby Kinsinger or
bitter bitter Cheney family, than all it's the most important thing.
How brave? Or the relatives of Donald Trump who don't
like Donald Trump, Yeah, they get air time all day.
And then the Walls family you came out like a
big giant family reunion in Nebraska.

Speaker 1 (10:42):
No, they don't want to talk about Donald Trump. Junior
mentioned of that yesterday. Say hey, where's the media coverage
of the Walls family? Yeah, not taking any taking place
at all. Right, we have got a lot to get too.
Great to have you along for the ride on this
Thursday afternoon, Rod and Greg with you if you want
to be a part of our conversation eight eight eight
five seven eight zero one zero, or on your cell

(11:02):
phone to al pound two fifty and say hey Rod,
all right, let's talk about the latest polling out there
before we get into that. Kamala Harris was in New
Hampshire yesterday. Speaking right, you would think New Hampshire is
a pretty friendly state.

Speaker 2 (11:15):
Towards I said yesterday that that's why she was there.
It was a safe haven.

Speaker 1 (11:19):
Well, come to find out they had to bust supporters
in from Massachusetts just to get enough people at her
rally in New Hampshire yesterday. So and what I loved,
the local media actually picked up on that story. They go,
what are these busses from Massachusetts coming into New Hampshire for?
With all these people getting out for Kamala Harris? Hmm,

(11:41):
what's going on here? I? You know what, I I
don't even know that. It's that they don't have enough people.
It's that she doesn't trust the general public, just the
ever average voter, to not have people in the audience
that would ask her questions or be critical of her.
She wants to control yeah, everything. It's just like when
she cleaned out the Primanny Brothers diner in Pittsburgh. She

(12:04):
had no idea whether they were for her against her.
She just didn't even want to them around for fear
that they might not be and brought they brought all
those vans of of for ten patrons in. Well, apparently
today Greg she was in. She was in Pennsylvania and
I guess was at the airport Degreeter John Fetterman he

(12:25):
had this shirt on that looked like he just got
out of the laundry, I mean the thing right, and
he bent over a hugger and it was just odd
for her. She's she's not a very tall woman. She's
like five to four.

Speaker 2 (12:36):
Oh wow. And what is he about six eight six
nine something? And I used to watch the Adams Family.
I think Lurch was he was pretty tall. So that's
that's Fetterman, you know.

Speaker 1 (12:44):
But they leaned over and embraced and that was kind
of just odd looking today, really really weird. All right, poling,
let's talk about some of the Poland. We've had another
poster showing that Donald Trump gaining momentum against Kamala Harris
with a fifth fifty eight percent chance of winning the
twenty twenty four race. That's coming from Nate Silver. So

(13:05):
his chances are now, remember they it got a little
bit tighter now they're starting to.

Speaker 2 (13:09):
Stretch out even so, you know, it's bad for Kamala
Harris when the regime media's polls, which they hold back
and they wait till they get some kind of number
that that looks good, and the latest one that they
released they couldn't even go into the month of September.
So we have some polls. I have real time I
have as of September fifth today, what's going on? But
they had to wait. They did it. They ended it

(13:31):
like August twenty ninth, and in that one she was
either tied or ahead by only one percentage. And that's her,
that's her most friendly polster, Yeah, saying that. The other
pollsters are saying that not only did she not have
a bump after the convention, but her Labor Day was
not a good weekend for her, and it's been going
the wrong way ever since.

Speaker 1 (13:49):
Well, there's another polster out there, and this guy's getting
a lot of media attention today. I don't know if
you've ever heard this name before. He is a I
believe he's from no He's an American university professor, is
as Alan Lichtman. And apparently he has predicted the presidential
winner for what let's see, he goes back to he's
fashioned a winner since nineteen eighty four, all right, so

(14:10):
he's to have pretty good track record. Matter of fact,
he was the one of the few greg back in
twenty sixteen who predicted that Donald Trump would beat Hillary Clinton.
He was one of the few of that then. Well,
and he has some kind of model and he uses
like thirteen keys to win the White House. He is
now predicting Kamala Harris will win.

Speaker 2 (14:29):
And I'll tell you what. So I saw that and
I said, well, let's look at these keys. Yeah, he's
saying there's no third party candidate. That's not true. You
have third party candids, plus you have those that have
endorsed Trump, So that keys not right. He said that,
you know you have to have incumbency. Well, he's saying, well,
she's incumbent now because she's part of that. Although she's
trying to say I'm a new beginning, I'm not more

(14:50):
of the same.

Speaker 6 (14:51):
I don't know.

Speaker 2 (14:52):
I rod I looked at his keys that he was
putting in her column, and I don't know. Those keys
seem like they would reasonable ways to just objectively look
at a race, But his interpretation of those keys, I
don't know.

Speaker 1 (15:06):
Well, here are a few more of them. You mentioned incumbency,
you mentioned primary contest. There was no primary contest. How
does he give that?

Speaker 2 (15:13):
He says, that's a benefit if they don't have a
if they don't have a rough primary. But if you
did it by parachuting in without doing it at least
the way Biden did it, Yeah, the way Biden did
it would be Look, no one wanted there were no
one that, no one wanted to take him on. They
she doesn't even have that. She can't say that. So
that's one that doesn't make any sense with me.

Speaker 6 (15:32):
Go to the.

Speaker 2 (15:32):
Economic ones, the short term and long term economic process,
economic and long term economy.

Speaker 1 (15:37):
He says, those are pluses. Yes for Kamala Harris.

Speaker 2 (15:40):
Really, what I mean, I don't know what he's done.
I mean, his keys look good, his his how he's
judging these keys in which direction they're going.

Speaker 1 (15:51):
I don't know what he's talking about. Well, and then
he and then he gets into this. He talks about
policy change. There has been a policy change. We don't
know what her policy is to begin with. He talks
about social unrest. There certainly is some of that in
the country today. Yeah, a white house scandal. There hasn't
been a white house scandal. Really. He talks about charisma,

(16:12):
the charisma of the incumbent. Would she be considered the incumbent?
I guess she would be, right, Yeah.

Speaker 2 (16:18):
I guess again. Again his keys get a little gray here,
But yeah, that's what.

Speaker 1 (16:22):
He's calling challenger charisma. Apparently, Donald Trump doesn't have any charisma.
According to Donald Lickman, he goes into foreign policy failure. Hmm,
should we start with Afghanistan?

Speaker 2 (16:32):
I know where do you want to end? I mean,
it just keeps going, It keeps going and going. That's
why I think this is his storyk is about to
be broken.

Speaker 1 (16:41):
Yeah, yea. And he went on and he said foreign
policy successes. I can't find any foreign policy successes at all.
Can you know?

Speaker 2 (16:49):
No?

Speaker 1 (16:50):
I can't. But Alan Lickman, who has been right since
nineteen eighty four, is now predicting that Kamala Harris will win.

Speaker 2 (16:57):
But my polymarket, my betting lines, betting line fety three
percent likelihood that Trump will win, forty six percent that
Kamala Harris will and m PA you know where we
think it's all going to land. That's even moving more
Trump's way fifty four percent likely to win to forty
six percent Harris, that's Harris, that's moving Trump's way too.
From yesterday and the day before.

Speaker 1 (17:17):
Pay attention to the Betty Marcus all right Moore coming
up as the Rod and Greg Show rolls along on
this Thursday afternoon on Utah's Talk Radio one oh five
nine k n R s rod and Greg show Rodert
along with Citizen Hughes. Great to be with you on
this Thursday. A reminder, we're on the road tomorrow. We're
broadcast live from the Greek Festival tomorrow. That'll be fun.

Speaker 2 (17:38):
It will now that I'm kind of it. I know
that you've done this a number of times. I know
that's familiar territory for me, but for you, but not
for me. You know now that I'm the talent. You know,
now I'm the town. I get to go to the
Greek Festival and help open it up with our show
live there.

Speaker 1 (17:52):
When were you designated talent?

Speaker 2 (17:54):
Well, I designated that myself.

Speaker 1 (17:57):
I think we're still.

Speaker 2 (18:00):
That guy just says book. I just thought that's the title,
that's the job.

Speaker 1 (18:06):
You are talent. But if it makes you feel better, you're.

Speaker 2 (18:09):
Just bringing food and just so much. You just stack
it up there, just keeps on coming. So excited.

Speaker 1 (18:14):
George over there, who runs the show, he's he's a
big fan of the station. Yeah, and he just keeps
on bringing us goodies. Yeah, I can't wait, you can't stop.
I'm so excited. I know you're all right, let's get
back talk about more serious. So she was like the
upcoming run for the White House and the debate which
is coming up next Tuesday night. You'll here alive here
on talk radio one oh five nine can a US.

(18:35):
We thought we'd check in with a good friend of
the show, Carolyn Sippin. She's executive director of the Freedom
Front of Utah And did you tell me one time
she worked for you?

Speaker 2 (18:43):
She's center Mike Lee. She worked with me also when
I was the Speaker of the House. She was part
of our house staff when we fought Obamacare expansion against
the world. She was a critical policy and communications point
person which helped us prevail.

Speaker 1 (18:58):
Yeah, well, Carolyn's joining us. Carolyn, how are you welcome
to the Rod and Greg Show.

Speaker 7 (19:03):
Hey, I'm doing great, but I do have to interject
one thing. Well, I love an adore Greg. He did
tell me once Rod that he is there working with
you so that he can learn from somebody with talent.

Speaker 1 (19:20):
Thank you, Carolyn. That makes me feel better.

Speaker 2 (19:23):
Now, Cale, and that's between us, I don't know, are
we on the air?

Speaker 1 (19:29):
Yeah? Hear it. Carolyn. Great to have you with us.
You know you are constantly watching what's going on politically.
What's your take right now? In the state of the
rights between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris. What's your take
right now? Where do you think things stand?

Speaker 7 (19:44):
Yeah, I got to tell you, I don't know any
of us actually nowhere things stand because everything in politics,
I think this is always been somewhat the case, but
increasingly is the case. Everything is narrative, right, and we
have a media that is so one one hundred percent
on the side of whatever is put out from this
White House that I don't think we can even really

(20:07):
know what's real. We have somebody running as the Democrat
nominee who was not elected by the Democrat delegates, and
this person was somebody who dropped out of the presidential
race because she did so absolutely poorly.

Speaker 6 (20:23):
So can we even really.

Speaker 7 (20:25):
Know how it stands? I talk to people, and the
Democrats I know are, I will say, are excited about
her based on what the media has been telling them.
But I know, you know. I did a video on this,
I think a week or so ago, talking about some
polling that was done of Democrats, and it is upwards

(20:46):
in many cases of eighty percent of Democrats who have
no idea about Kamala's actual policy positions. This basement strategy
is working for the Democrats.

Speaker 2 (20:56):
So that's what I was going to ask count is
are they good with that or are they are they
hoping to one day learn or they are just happy
as a clam that they don't know a thing about her?
Is that going to catch up with her? It doesn't
sound like you think it will.

Speaker 7 (21:07):
No, I actually don't think it will. I think we
are in a post policy world, like we have too
many people who are so caught up in their day
to day lives.

Speaker 8 (21:17):
I mean, think about this.

Speaker 7 (21:19):
You have a federal government that has been cooking the
books when it comes to employment, when it comes to inflation.
They do these corrections. They issue these corrections like they
always do, but they're more extreme than they've been in
the past. People know that they're working longer hours and
affording less. That's a reality. But yet you have a

(21:40):
subset of the population that refuses to even acknowledge that.
So I don't know, you're asking me to use logic
with people who I don't think are capable of it.

Speaker 1 (21:48):
At this point, Carolyn does she have two things going
for her right now. First of all, she's not Joe Biden,
and second, secondarily, she is not Donald Trump. Is that's
what's going for her right now.

Speaker 7 (21:59):
Yes, and she's a woman, and she's a black woman,
and right so you can just list all of her
intersectional and her intersectional qualities and people on her side
will vote according to that. But you know, I do
think too there is a oh, thank goodness, we don't

(22:20):
have to worry about Biden. I literally had a friend
who voted for Biden and said to me six months
after the last presidential you know, I think we need
to outlaw anybody running for president who's above, you know, whatever,
seventy two or whatever. And I looked at her and
I said, no, I think we just need people with
judgment to make decisions about who they vote for, Like

(22:41):
you want a lot to keep you from doing the
dumb thing.

Speaker 9 (22:43):
You just did.

Speaker 2 (22:45):
That's funny, you know.

Speaker 7 (22:47):
So I think people come up with all kinds of reasons.
But yeah, I think a lot are caught up in me.
It's not Donald Trump, it's not Biden, but they're not
asking critical questions, and too many are being swept along
and swept up in the excitement over a woman maybe
who's not Hillary Clinton. Maybe there's another not so I.

Speaker 2 (23:06):
Would ask you about this upcoming de Bay. I want
your opinion. You've been on you've been on the debate
stages and even as of recently in the state Senate race,
US Senate race, and it was it was a crowded
field and it was a very tough race. So you've
you've had experience recently even preparing and getting ready for
a debate and all that. But before I do, I
also think, Okaylan, that some of these issues are kitchen

(23:27):
table issues where they're not exploring or reading about them,
they're living through them. And if there can be a
way to touch the voter in terms of these issues
that you're living through, are the issues we're talking about,
not the issues you're going to research. I'm hoping that
those are the issues that resonate in this campaign going forward.
But let's talk about that. We got this debate. I
think that I've said, I think the media will will

(23:48):
praise her regard without regard to her performance in the debate.
What do you think will happen in that debate? You
have someone who's made a skill of not being able
to divulge any information of what she'll tell you what
she's no longer against or something like that. But she
stays vague. She doesn't want to be pinned down on
any issues. She doesn't want to alienate a single voter.
What do you expect to hear from her in this

(24:10):
debate with Donald Trump next week?

Speaker 7 (24:13):
Yeah, I think this will be. First of all, we
all know that when we watch these debates and when
we listen to politicians, that there are a lot of
people in politics who are really good at memorizing talking points.
And I think that's all we're going to get. Everything
will be very superficial. And I think that it's necessary
from her perspective to come at things from an emotional place.

Speaker 8 (24:37):
Right.

Speaker 7 (24:37):
You want to move people emotionally, because if you try
using any facts, data logic coming out and explaining her
past policy positions, which are probably her current policy positions,
you're going to lose a whole lot of people. So
I think it has to be emotional, and so I
think it will be vague, as you said, very kind

(25:02):
of a morphous language, emotional, and an appeal to all
of those things that we already mentioned. A woman, a
black woman, I'm not Donald Trump. You know, you look
just at the way that her team kind of put
out some things about this debate, and one of the
things that they said after they reagreed to the rules

(25:24):
of the debate, Right, they had already agreed a month
ago and tried to get things changed and couldn't, so
they reagreed, and she and her team actually came out
and said that they wanted they didn't like the micing
Mike's being silent when somebody yeah, yeah, the muted mics
because she said that it would advantage Trump because they

(25:48):
wouldn't be able to have kind of a back and
forth in the off time. Well, it was CNN and
Biden's people who put that in place, but unfortunately for them,
Trump did very well with it last time. Right, So
everything is just trying to twist whatever they can to
make it look like they are the victim, and they

(26:09):
will appeal to you as the victim. But we have
someone too who's coming out and saying she's going to
fix all of these things on day one. Things that
some of them, like the illegal immigration problem that she's
been in charge of, thinks that she and this administration
have created and now.

Speaker 6 (26:25):
They're going to fix them.

Speaker 7 (26:26):
I think there probably will be an appeal to that.

Speaker 1 (26:28):
As well, and we'll have to see what happens, Carolyn.
Enjoy your insight. Thank you very much. I know we'll
be talking more down the road as we lead up
to November fifth. Thanks for joining us since.

Speaker 2 (26:36):
Afternoon, Carolyn, Thank you so much.

Speaker 1 (26:39):
All right, on our newsmaker line. That's Carolyn fifthin interesting insight.
I you know, she touched on something. I think, you know,
we want everybody to talk about policy, policy, policy. She's
going to try and go at the heart and speak
to the American people in their heart, and that's how
she's going to address things that I think Carolyn's take
on that was pretty solid.

Speaker 2 (27:00):
Really accurate. I just think that there's a there's a
heartfelt mess retort. I would say, yeah, that will be
just as it will be felt, just as much as
she tries to glaze over it, because it can almost
come off as callous if you just want to keep
glazing over it and saying that it's just all about joy.

Speaker 1 (27:15):
Yeah, yeah, that's it, all right. Mary coming up here
on the rod In Greg Show and Utah's Talk Radio
one oh five nine K and are asked.

Speaker 2 (27:22):
Look, we just finished this discussion. We're gonna carry it
on obviously today and going forward. But I just don't
think this is a policy debate, per se. I think
it's what James Carvill called in nineteen ninety two when
when Bill Clinton beat Herbert Walker Bush and in his
reelection attempt, he said, it's the economy stupid. And I

(27:42):
the only I'm telling you I think people are living
through why they don't want to vote for Biden or
Harris again. And I just think it's the job of
the Trump campaign to in an emotional, empathetic way connect
those dots. They already are living the story. You don't
have to tell them a story, they're living it. You
just have to tell them that you understand, you know it,

(28:04):
and you're not going to let it continue.

Speaker 1 (28:05):
Well, and what I don't understand, Greg is how does
she convince the American people that she's going to do
something different. Yeah, she's been part of this for the
last three and a half four years. The American people go, oh, well,
she's going to do something different.

Speaker 2 (28:20):
Matter, she's claimed ownership of everything that's happened till now.
You're going to get everything you've gotten before. And you
know that because when she says I'm going to be different,
you're like, well, how different? That's it? She cannot explain,
I'm not for even mandates, Well, what are you for?

Speaker 1 (28:35):
No comment?

Speaker 2 (28:36):
Literally, her campaign said no comment to any specificity on
what she meant by she no longer supports electric vehicle
mandates by twenty thirty. She didn't have a single detail
of what that actually meant. Well, that's not going to
I don't think that's going to fly for people to
have someone that's promising they're going forward. They don't want
to look back, they don't want to own anything they did,

(28:58):
But they can't tell you a single thing of what
they're going to do differently.

Speaker 1 (29:02):
Didn't she say in that one debate that she has
done with CNN that her values haven't changed. Well, that
should scared the daylight Seudie. Her policies could change to
win votes, but she gets in the White House if
her values haven't changed. Her values are radical, they're leftists,
they're socialists, and how does she change those She just said,

(29:23):
my values haven't changed. Well, folks, that should be a
big warning. Now that's the wink in the nod to
the left and to the Libs.

Speaker 2 (29:30):
I'm with you. Still don't buy what I'm saying. I'm
still with you. A wink nod, and what she hopes
that the Independence think is her values of you know,
I making a good life for yourself.

Speaker 1 (29:41):
That big announcement by President Trump today. Steve Moore will
join us next we'll talk to you about it coming
up on the Rotten Great Show favor us. There's no
doubt the economy, I think, and you and I talked
about this before the break, Greg is the break. The break,
Greg is really the key issue I think in this campaign.
I mean, immigration is there, crime is there. But there's

(30:03):
no doubt the American people are just you know, a
Trump today called it, They're sick and tired of four
years of economic calamity. That's what he called it today
in this speech. Of course, he outlined a whole lot
of economic proposals in his speech in New York today,
including and introducing a government efficiency Commission that he says
will be headed by Elon Mussels.

Speaker 3 (30:25):
I will create a Government Efficiency Commission, task with conducting
a complete financial and performance audit of the entire federal
government and making recommendations for drastic reforms.

Speaker 5 (30:37):
Need to do.

Speaker 3 (30:37):
It can't go on the way we are now. And
Elon because he's not very busy has agreed to head
that task force.

Speaker 1 (30:52):
Did he say Elon is not very busy.

Speaker 2 (30:54):
Yeah, he said, you know, he doesn't have anything else
going and he's saving people from space, he's building cars.
But he said, look, he said, I mean, he tweeted
out after that speech, he said, I look forward to
serving America. It's the opportunity arise.

Speaker 1 (31:06):
Well, joining us on our pay no title, no pay
no title. That's right on our newsmaker line. Steve Moore
Economists with Freedom Works. Of course at one time economic
advisor to former President Trump than Trump and is still
helping him out today. Steve, what's your take and what
the president announced today?

Speaker 6 (31:21):
Well, I, first of all, I love this idea of
this efficiency commission. Back in the nineteen eighties, when Reagan
was president forty years ago, we had something called the
Peter J. Grace Commission, which was a gang of about
one hundred major CEOs from around the country who volunteered
their time and went through the entire catalog of federal agencies,

(31:43):
went into every bureaucracy, every building, and found ways that
we could save money. And back then did they say
they found four hundred billion dollars of saving and that
was hundred billion dollars was a lot of money, So
think about how much exactly. So today, I really believe
they could easily buyd a trillion and a half dollars
that we could we could save taxpayers and that would

(32:06):
not you know, reduce government services that people depend on,
their medicare you know, coverage, or their Social Security check
or you know, the National defense. I mean even by
the way, the Pentagon, he's huge amounts of waste. You know,
we spend you know, seven hundred eight hundred billion dollars
on that agency. We all want a strong defense, but
we want to make sure that the money is being
spent well. And so this is a great idea. I

(32:28):
think that, I mean Elon Musk, who's one of the
greatest business minds of all time, heading that up is
a fantastic idea. And I think what Trump should say
when he debates Kamala Harris is just say something like
you know what I would do is wave my finger
in and say, how dare you talk about five trillion
dollars of new taxes before we've cut even one penny

(32:49):
of this massive waste in government. First we do the
Waste Commission, We clean up these agencies. Everyone knows agencies,
you know, waste about twenty five to thirty to forty
cents out of every dollar. And then maybe we could
talk about raising taxes. So I love the idea.

Speaker 2 (33:04):
So Steve, I have a question. You know, there's extending
the Trump tax cuts and make sure they don't expire.
President former president also said that he's looking to see
even more tax cuts delivered to the American people. Meanwhile,
Kamala Harris is saying he wants to raise taxes on
the middle class and he wants to give it to it.
He wants to give tax cuts to the cronies. Help

(33:25):
help our listeners understand what is the bottom line in
terms of President Trump's economic vision. Is he coming to
tax cut, taxes, relief, relieve the burden for everyday Americans,
including the rich and working class everyone, or is this
just an inside job for the for the richie rich.

Speaker 6 (33:44):
All right, So you know, first the first thing we
would do is extend the tax cuts that you know
we did in twenty seventeen that you know, Laffer and
Larry Cobbo and I and others helped put together for
Trump and it was just spectacular success in every way.
You know, we brought you know, hundreds and hundreds of
thousands of jobs back to the United States. We gave
the average family about a two thousand dollars tax cut.

(34:05):
We eliminated the death tax for a lot of families,
limited the a m T for a lot of families.
So it was a great, great plan. And meanwhile, you know,
you've got Kamala Harris talking about, as you just said,
about a five trillion dollar tax increase. I mean, it is,
it is audacious. It would be an absolute poison pill

(34:26):
for the economy. There would be no investment. I love this.
This is so typical Kama Harris. You know, first she
calls for like a five trillion dollar tax increase, raising
the capital gains tax, taxing unrealized capital games, well that stuff.
And then she said, oh, but I'm going to have
a program to help small businesses, Like what do you
how could small business get off the ground if they
can't raise the startup capital because you're going to tax

(34:46):
it at fifty sixty seventy eighty percent. So you know,
this is a I think this is really you know,
Trump is on Venus, and you know Kamala Harris on
Mars when it comes to economy, could we get two
people more a power in terms of the way they
look at the world, And it's it's obvious one reason
they look at the world so differently. What did Trump

(35:07):
do for a living? Oh, yeah, he was a He
was a businessman, a very successful billion businessman who became
a billionaire, building great businesses and building half of New
York City. What is Kamala Harris ever done? Well, she was,
She's a lawyer. You know, she was the she was
the attorney general in California, but she didn't do much
to bring down prime and then she was the border's
hour and she did nothing to control the border. So

(35:30):
I think it's a pretty easy choice for people. But
I really want people to look at the pocketbook issues
and see what a difference there is between what Kamala
Harris is talking about and what Donald Trump is talking about.

Speaker 1 (35:42):
Steve, speaking of experience, you were quoted in an article
the other day. Apparently someone took a look at the
business experience that members of the administration and her team have.
It's like zero. Why your opinion is, why is it
so important to have some people with business experience on
a team like this?

Speaker 8 (36:01):
Yeah?

Speaker 6 (36:02):
So I'm actually a co author of that study. I
did that with my friend Jonathan Decker, and we looked
at the all of the topix, you right, all the
top sixty people in the Biden administration, including Kamala Harris,
who have oversight over either the economy or over business
or commerce or you know, issues related to money. And
what we found is you just said, is that the

(36:22):
average years of experience for these sixty people, many of
them cabinet secretaries, head of regulatory agencies, was three years
of business experience. The mean number of years was I said,
the median number of years was zero. That is to say,
more than half of them have never worked for a
private business in their lives. And I'm not saying they

(36:42):
never started a business. I'm saying they've never even worked
for a profit making company in their whole careers. And
these are the people who are trying to, you know,
run our economy. I mean, as I said on Fox
News the other day, this would be like getting on
an airplane and you walk by the cockpit, pilot's say,
I don't not adify this thing to you. I think
I've run off that plane as fast as I could.

Speaker 2 (37:04):
So I just love talking to you. You you're just
like the oracle. You know what, you got all the answers,
So I'm going to go back.

Speaker 6 (37:12):
I mean, thank you for saying about that. But this
stuff really is not complicated. We got to get our
keep our tax rates low, We've got to have a
sound currency. We have to put America first. We have
trade deals that work for America. I mean, it really is.

Speaker 8 (37:25):
You don't have to be a.

Speaker 6 (37:26):
You know, a genius to understand this stuff. But I
got to tell you everything Kamala is talking about is
negative for the economy, not positive.

Speaker 2 (37:34):
So so I maybe you maybe won't be able to
answer this question. But I could not ask this to
anyone else. I remember, and this is going back in
my memory, just when Speaker Johnson, when Mike Johnson became
Speaker and they were looking for a Ukraine deal, he
and a number of House members who were also military veterans, said,
you got about six billion buckshifts to the center over there.
Can we see where that went exactly? And it seemed

(37:55):
to be crickets. I don't know if there was ever
a real good accounting of how much it.

Speaker 6 (38:02):
H It's a really great point. You're making a really
great point, which is, you know, we spend this these
dollars and then okay, we've appropriated and nobody pays attention
to where the money went. Where did all the green
They have a three hundred billion dollar green energy program.
Do you do you have any idea where that money went.
I know where it went into the lobbyists and they,
you know, the crony It was total cronyism. It's such

(38:24):
a corrupt process. And that's why you know, you're making
such a good point because nobody, I guarantee you, nobody
in Washington wants anybody else to start investigating where the
money went. There's no auditing, there's no oversight. Same on
Congress for not providing the oversight that they should because
this is a seven trillion dollar enterprise. It's the biggest

(38:47):
enterprise in the world, and they just spend money like.

Speaker 1 (38:50):
It's M and m's final question for you, Steve, we
won't be able to talk to you before Tuesday and
the big debate. What do you hope the president the
former president does on Tuesday in his debate with Harris.

Speaker 6 (39:03):
Well. I think he really has to, you know, make
it about kitchen table issues and do the compare and
contrast between what happened when Trump was president and the
boom we had in the economy and the dismal results
of the of the Biden Harris economy. And you know,
Susan Rice is one of the top rated officials in
the Biden administration, said the other day that Kamala Harris

(39:24):
was quote integral, integral in every decision we made. Well, okay,
you know, how do you like that, America? Do you
think it's worked out well? And so I would just
make it very simple to people. Are you better off
than you were four years ago? Do you guys remember
who said that in nineteen eighty that was Ronald Reagan.

Speaker 1 (39:40):
Steve Moore joining us on our newsmaker line. Steve some
insight into what's going on and this idea of a
efficiency commission. Absolutely love it too. I mean, have we
ever tried anything like that in.

Speaker 2 (39:51):
The State of Utah versions of it? I mean, our
legislate boggers go through a deep dive everything every single interim.
They there's a lot that that we have. We're a
unique state where you have these sub appropriation committees. So
it's not just the Ways and Means committee that size
the whole budget by itself. Every lawmakers participates in one
of these sub appropriation committees, and there their staff legislative

(40:15):
fiscal analysts, not afthors, but the fiscal analysts really dive
into those numbers. So there's there's a lot more eyes
and and looking at efficiencies in the state.

Speaker 1 (40:23):
But isn't it true, great the government here in the
state of Utah has grown over the last several years.

Speaker 2 (40:28):
No, you're right, it's it's grown. Population has grown quite
a bit too. But but I would it's but it
has grown, it's grown faster than the rate of population.
But it's but it's again, it's still a refiner's fire
what they go through. You know, it used to be
better when the when the economy is a little more cyclical,
you'd have a recession like an O three. When I
came in the legislature, there's like this tech bubble that bursts.

(40:49):
So there was a recession and that's when you start
to see people really get resilient. And then we saw
the Big boom and then you had the Great Recession. Well,
those cycles usually help clean out the you know, the mess. Okay,
we haven't had one of those for a long time.
But they're getting it's getting a little bit drier out there.
Last year was probably the skinniest budget they've had in
a long time.

Speaker 1 (41:09):
All Right, More coming up, Rod and Greg here on
Utah's Talk Radio one oh five nine K and r
Ass Live everywhere on the iHeartRadio app I'd love And
we were just talking with Steve More about this Greg,
this idea of a government efficiency commission, whatever you want
to call it. Boy, it is long, long overdue. Matter
of fact, I think Congress should pass the law that

(41:31):
this has to be done every two years or something.
You know, why can't we do that?

Speaker 2 (41:35):
So I think Jason Chafitz committee when he was in Congress,
the Oversight Committee, I think they did a little bit
of this where they found all these empty federal buildings
and they found a ton of waste, and he brought
that out. It brought daylight to it. I do think
the Grace Commission has been legendary. I've heard candidates for
governor in Utah mer and say, if elected governor, I

(41:56):
would create like Reagan did, the Grace Commission. This is
a it's it and they were these were top executive,
real business people. They did find so much even back then,
as Steve Moore pointed out, I can't imagine how much
stake they lose. They'll lose four hundred billion dollars not
to know where it is. And that's just like a
that's just.

Speaker 1 (42:16):
Just uh, it's not fair. Yeah, it's nothing. There is
a report this today, the Government Accountability Office. You're ready
for this, Greg estimates the federal government loses between two
hundred and thirty three billion to five hundred and twenty
one billion dollars annually to fraud. I mean two hundred
and thirty three billion to five hundred twenty one billion

(42:39):
annually to fraud based on data. This is from twenty
eighteen to twenty twenty two.

Speaker 2 (42:44):
Can you imagine just on COVID alone, how much fraud
there is? Oh, I mean just on that scam. I
mean and by the way, Minnesota being one of the
biggest scam states of all. Yeah, Governor Wall State, and
how much people abuse that system over there.

Speaker 1 (42:57):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (42:57):
Yeah, I think it's a brilliant idea. And I love
that he he that Elon Must tweeted out. I mean,
this guy, he's a billionaire, but he's like the only
guy I swear that isn't in on it against us.
I swear he's the only billionaire that's not part of
that billionaire's boys club that just is just messing with us.
He says, I look for it. I said this before
the break, but I look forward to serving America if

(43:17):
the opportunity arises. No pay, no title, no recognition is needed.
I mean, he he'll just do it on the sly.
Just bring give him a key to the back door.
He'll come in, he'll he'll do all the work. You'll
get out. You won't even know he was there.

Speaker 1 (43:31):
Does he need the money or the recognition.

Speaker 2 (43:33):
It does not.

Speaker 1 (43:34):
That's that's that's the.

Speaker 2 (43:35):
Way you were that independent. That's why. That's why even
on X, I've got I clipped this story about how
the advertisers are have all agreed they're going to move
out of X, are going to stop advertising on X.
And it's it's pressure. It's the big corporation crony pressure
to make him, uh, you know, start censoring things like
things they don't like, like Republicans or whatever it is.

(43:56):
You can't get to him. His response I think was like, well,
I think are the people are next will like it.
They'll be less ads, they'll like it even more. I mean, honestly,
it is the largest social media platform on planet Earth.
And you have major advertisers saying nay, we're not.

Speaker 1 (44:09):
Going to go there. And who's the guy down in
Brazil who now wants to kick X out of the country. Yeah,
the new leader down there, the weirdo or whoever it is.

Speaker 2 (44:17):
It looks like he's straight out of a horror move.

Speaker 1 (44:21):
All right, maare coming up here on the Rodden Greg
Show in Utah's Talk radio one oh five nine knrs.
This whole ballot initiative issue is going to take centered stage.
I think this fall because you'll be asked to vote
on it, what lawmakers would like to do with this.
And there are some people out there who are claiming
that the language in this ballot can be quote deceptive

(44:42):
or misleading, and we'll find out about that, right.

Speaker 2 (44:46):
That's right. Joining us on the program, Representative Marcia Judkins
from Utah County joining us on this. There's been a
lot of talk about this issue, and the question is representive.
First off, Representative, welcome to the sh show.

Speaker 9 (45:01):
Thank you, thank you for having me so representative.

Speaker 2 (45:05):
I've expressed on the show and I think I don't
know if you were. I was at the capital the
day of the special session discussing initiatives, and are just
some institutional memory that I had from this. But our
state Supreme Court has recently made a ruling that says
that initiatives that relate to government reform are not really
subject to any legislative amendments. I worry about that. I

(45:28):
worry about the definitions or the lack of definitions that
the judiciary may see or not see in that ruling.
But you're comfortable with this, and we want to get
you on the program maybe to share your perspective as
a lawmaker about why you're not particularly for the amendment
that would maybe keep it the initiatives being done the
way they've been done prior to this recent Supreme Court ruling.

Speaker 9 (45:52):
Yeah, thank you so much. I really appreciate the opportunity
to kind of tell my point of view. So I
think that there has been some of mis understandings, maybe not,
but some of this understanding on what the Supreme Court
ruling actually does. And you know that I seem to
hear a lot that it makes it so that there's
going to be these super laws that the legislature want

(46:13):
wouldn't be able to touch these, you know, any citizen
initiated valid amountent that passed. But what the Supreme Court
actually said, it's pretty narrowly tailored, and it's only for
those initiatives that alter or reform government. And that is
a right that is guaranteed in our Constitution that citizens have.

(46:36):
And also, even if there is an initiative that passes
the alters of reforms government, it says that the legislatures
still can amend that as long as we show that
it's narrowly tailored to advance a compelling interest, a compelling
government interest. And so it just kind of raises the

(46:57):
bar just on those particular initiative that we would have
to show a compelling government interest before we we amended it.

Speaker 1 (47:06):
Representative you mentioned it's narrowly tailored. I mean, it deals
with government reform. But there are some very smart attorneys
out there who could work almost any issue into government reform,
couldn't they. I mean, is there a way to do it?

Speaker 9 (47:20):
You bring up a really good point, and that remains
to be seen.

Speaker 2 (47:24):
Right.

Speaker 9 (47:24):
So that's that's one of the issues that I have
with this whole thing, is that we're jumping to some
conclusions pretty quickly, and before we take the you know,
this this inherent power of the people away, we need
to take a little more time to look and see
what actually, what actually could happen or would happen right

(47:47):
to just I don't know. I just think that we
haven't taken the time to really look at it. It's
all gone way too fast, and so that also makes
me nervous.

Speaker 2 (47:57):
Representative, do you is there any concerns so states where
you see the initiative law and maybe even where legislatures
are not able to review that law, even sometimes in
some states right away, but they have a shelf life.
They can't be amended. You see those states where a
lot of statewide initiatives come on the ballot and there's
more than a few to choose from. Are you worried

(48:20):
that we would just see more highly funded initiatives that
might not carry muster in a legislative body that's elected
by the people, but are pretty well financed statewide. Do
you think there's a trend there that might come our
way with this new ruling from the Supreme Court.

Speaker 9 (48:38):
You know, there's always that possibility, And I'll just state
very clearly that I think it is important that the
legislature is able to amend initiatives. I think that's really
important because you know, they come to as when they
pass a lot of times there's language in there that
doesn't fit with what we already have in statue, or

(49:00):
maybe the funding isn't there. You know, there's different different issues,
and so we do need to retain that ability. I
maybe I'm too optimistic that I tend to trust the
people of Utah. And you know, it's pretty hard to
get an initiative on the ballot in the first place.
Here in Utah. It's very difficult if you compare it

(49:22):
to many of these other states that seem to have,
you know, initiative after initiative show up on the ballot.
Here in Utah, we've only had seven. It's pretty difficult,
high bar to achieve. And then it also has to
pass the majority of voters. And I just I guess
I just tend to trust the voters and in the

(49:43):
citizens of Utah. And then I also would like to
trust that the legislature isn't going to take advantage of
any powers that we have, but adding in the power
to repeal these just carte blanche. Though the citizens have
voted them and I don't know. I'm just there are
things about this, this amendment to the Constitution that make

(50:06):
me very nervous representative.

Speaker 1 (50:08):
I've mentioned this to Greg. I think lawmakers face a
big hill decline to convince voters to go along with
what they're trying to do, because the perception out there
could be, well, you're just trying to take my vote away.
My vote doesn't count, and I don't like that idea.
We don't like being told what to do. How big
of a hill do lawmakers have do you think representative
in getting this initiative passed?

Speaker 9 (50:31):
These are such great questions, and I think this I
think you hit the nail on the head. This is
an uphill battle. So far in my district, and I
represent a fairly conservative district. I have not had one
email or text or phone call seeing they wish I
had voted different. It's in support from all across the
political spectrum. I don't think this is electing left wing

(50:55):
right wing issue. I think it's voters who say, wait
a minute, you know where the final check on our legislature,
and we don't want to have our voices taken away.

Speaker 2 (51:07):
I guess I guess final question. And again it's just
these are just weigh on my I you know I,
you know, Marshall, I was a lawmaker. So I look
at this and I look at how this works. So
there's again I the the abiding worry that I have.
Where again, I don't know that the legislature is trying
to take away anything. I think there's a new interpretation
of what these initiatives are or how they how they

(51:29):
stand without being amended. But I worry in a very
well funded state initiative, how much detail when we try
I trust the people. In fact, I would never want
to be a lawmaker that if the people voted for
something I would I would cavalierly repeal it because I
think that would have a dire consequence. But what is
the inherent other side? Every issue has two sides to

(51:51):
a coin. Every issue has what is the inherent other
side of an issue? If you have a well funded
initiative that's presented to the people, where does the money
come from for the for the other campaign to maybe
explain the other side of whatever issue that may be
through an election statewide election versus in the legislative branch.
Any idea of how we get down to the details

(52:13):
of some of these maybe larger government reform initiatives that
could come our way.

Speaker 9 (52:18):
Yeah, and I know that you have looked through some
of this for sure. Can have a lot of really
you know, lived experience when there is a really well
funded campaign for a citizen initiative that gets a lot
of information out there, and it's not always correct information,
as as we well know. I think it is incumbent
upon the legislature to also put in some time and

(52:42):
effort to to educate you know, our voters. And and
I think that the you know, when I look at
the initiatives that have passed, that they've been born from
frustration and and citizens not something listened to in the
first place. And so I think the legislate needs to
do a better job of that to begin with. And

(53:04):
we've been able to work with I mean, you know,
you worked with with the people who did the marijuana
initiative and different things. And when we sit down and
talk with people, we do have common goals, right, and
I think we can get there if we talk and

(53:25):
listen and really you know, are doing our best to
educate our voters. And and so I just feel like
this is a really rushed way. And it feels to
my voters, to my constituents, and it feels to me
like we're so worried that the voters are going to
do something wrong that we have to cut them off

(53:46):
at the path before they even have that opportunity, right,
And we just need to take a minute and I
think work on this a little bit more until we
can all come to an agreement of what would be
the right way to address this.

Speaker 1 (54:00):
You Representative, it's been great having you on the show
and getting your insight. Thanks for joining us on the
Rod and Greg show. You're on Utah's talk radio one
oh five nine can arrest. Thank you, Thank you so much.
All Right, that is stay Representative of Marshall. Judgekins very
good thinking. I mean, her insight is valuable to hear.

Speaker 2 (54:17):
It is and I and I do think that if
if you could read the way it is written, they
there is an argument that it's narrow. I just I
got to tell you, Rod, I've watched judges and I've
watched issues that have come to the legislature, and I've
seen two sides of an issue. Say I'm going to
pursue the courts, not the legislative and because they're so
convinced that judges and the law really speak to something

(54:39):
in a certain way, only to find out they were wrong,
only because and I think the judge, the judiciary is
not as dependable or as predictable as you might think.
And so the worry there is you with this new
interpretation of initiatives where they can't be amended. If if
it's for government reform, that's new, and I don't think

(54:59):
that the seven that have been passed, there's been work
done before. If something qualified for the ballot, we've come
together because you don't want to overturn the will of
the people, and so you want to see if you
can come together. But I also think it's had a
chilling effect on cavalier initiatives arriving in our state. With
the ability to amend if it's too aggressive, if it's
if the fine details have not been articulated, they know

(55:20):
that that won't go very far because there are eyes
watching that process. That's the way it has been for
one hundred and thirty years, and I think that's the
only thing that the legislature would like to preserve.

Speaker 1 (55:29):
All Right, We've got more thoughts on this coming up
here on the Rod and Greg Show, we begin in
Caville with Dave. Dave, how are you welcome to Rod
and Greg.

Speaker 6 (55:38):
Here? Rod and Greg, Well, I think we're forgetting about
a constitution. It specifically states that the legislature is supposed
to determine the time manner in place of the congressional elections.
The manor would be the districts, not some bipartisan commission
that was voted upon by fifty percent of the voters.

(55:59):
And what a what a fifty percent of the voters,
you know, voted to make it so women couldn't vote
or something like that. That's unconstitutional. And the third thing
is why is it that that, I mean, we're not
a democracy. Why is it that fifty point one percent
of voters can decide something when the legislature has to
have like sixty votes, you know, you know, and stuff

(56:21):
like that. I think it's just it's just unconstitutional. The
State Supreme Court didn't even consider that at all.

Speaker 2 (56:27):
You spot on day they had millions of dollars, millions
of dollars on better boundaries, and it passed by a
sliver even without any opposite organized opposition. In terms of
being able to match dollar for dollar. And it's still
barely passed by by way of each county or district,
probably by the majority of those districts didn't pass. Ye,
but you got you got a lot of votes in
sult Lake County.

Speaker 1 (56:47):
How can the Supreme Court look around the constitution just
bypass the constitution?

Speaker 2 (56:51):
They redefined it. It's I try, it's not about abortion.
But you know, when the Supreme Court in nineteen seventy
three found some constitutional right to privacy, this was brand new.
And this is what's happened now with the state Supreme Court.
They have found a constitutional protection that for one hundred
and thirty years didn't didn't exist exist. You always you
want your legacy of branch to look at laws. That's

(57:11):
just the bottom.

Speaker 3 (57:12):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (57:12):
Yeah, and by the way, look at the constitution. Yes,
that would probably help out. Yeah, that would help out
a little bit as well. All right, another hour to
come here on the Rod and Greg Show in Utah's
talk radio one oh five die KNNRS stay with us

(57:36):
breaking news tonight. Abby just mentioned and their newscast the
father of the Georgia shooting suspect at the high school
there yesterday. He has now been arrested tonight, charged with numerous.

Speaker 2 (57:47):
Charges, voluntary man slaughter and volunteer second degree murder. Yeah,
so it's I don't I'm I'm guessing, But what it
sounds like is that this was this young, this fourteen
year old was a known and the parents or the
father at least, did not take necessary precautions to keep
firearms away from their child who had been Really they

(58:09):
had been known that he was dangerous.

Speaker 1 (58:11):
And they've known, haven't They known it for about a year.

Speaker 2 (58:13):
So the FBI got involved. I don't even know how
this kid was still going to a normal public school
if you have someone If the FBI gets involved and
they know that he had a desire to shoot students,
which is what I'm told was determined, why he wouldn't
be in a different setting from that point on and
not at the something like that. I think that would
happen in you I don't think in Utah if it
got to that level, I don't think that student would

(58:35):
be in a normal lot of.

Speaker 1 (58:36):
School, you know. And you know what's interesting about this, Greg,
Every parent out there is saying to the school officials
and school district officials, what are you doing to protect
my child? And it really you know, I mean, what
more can be done? I mean, you know, whatever we do,
Mom and Dad, get ready, it's going to cost a
lot of money.

Speaker 2 (58:56):
This stuff is not sure to watch your kids. Man. Yeah,
it's just, my goodness.

Speaker 1 (59:00):
Not cheap, not cheap at all. Well, you know, you
always talk about the divide here in the state of
Utah over issues, but apparently, Greg, there are some things
that we agree on.

Speaker 2 (59:10):
I've known this. Oh geez, this is not news to me.

Speaker 1 (59:13):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (59:13):
Yeah, I am telling you. I've realized that there's a
lot that is just good legislation that comes through, that
comes across the pike, in the legislative branch, and just
generally people looking around, there's a lot we agree on.
I think that mostly the media and even us we
look at the things that are stark differences. But I
was happy to say it's still worth highlighting what those
issues are. When someone does a good poll and they

(59:35):
figure out that there are some things we can call
us around.

Speaker 1 (59:38):
Yeah, well that poll was conducted by the Utah Foundation.
Joining us on our Newsmaker line right now is Sean Tigan.
He is president of the Utah Foundation. Sean, always great
to have you back. On the show. Are you surprised
actually that there are some issues out there that both
Democrats are Republicans and independents and you name it here
in the state of Utah actually agree on.

Speaker 8 (59:57):
You know, I would like to say that I wasn't surprised,
but maybe a little bit. It is good to hear
that on a few of the issues when you're looking
across the political spectrum, there's some pretty strong alignment. And
that doesn't make me feel good, you know, like as
a parent, you think that that you know, everybody cares

(01:00:19):
about education, and it turns out, you know, everybody's concerned
about it, and everybody wants to do things about it.
They don't always agree on exactly what should be done,
but I think it is good good to know that
people are concerned and really care about several issues and
aligned with that concern.

Speaker 2 (01:00:36):
You know, sean a lot. When I was a lawmaker,
these looked familiar to me, and there was bipartisan priority
and dealing issues dealing with our schools, even with with
with cost of living or roads, transportation, water. Here's my question, though,
and I've been saying this for a while. We we

(01:00:56):
have seventy five at least seventy five percent of Utah's
entire popular living in four counties out of twenty nine
in a valley. When are we going to hear more
people talk about the other counties that if you brought
some infrastructure and you could see some jobs, they're irony
for most the outlier counties that they lose their young people.
They lose them because there aren't jobs there. They're migrating

(01:01:17):
out while we're grappling with so much, so much population growth,
which is really what some of these issues. When you
talk about water k through twelve, or you talk about congestion,
that quality of life, housing, affordability, that's what that's about.
When do we get to the broader argument of let's
bring some infrastructure into the rest of these counties so
that we can see industry grow, we can see people

(01:01:39):
stay and even have some of our young people who
can't fit any longer and the lots that's front maybe
stay in Utah and live inside the state in some
of these other counties. Does that conversation will that ever
come up?

Speaker 8 (01:01:51):
You know that, So this product is our priorities project,
that product that we really focus on those issues. Greg
it's related to a quality of life, and you see
a lot of differences across the state, particularly when you're
looking at rural communities versus more urban and suburban communities.
You see those differences there, and in that case, you know,

(01:02:13):
more rural communities are a lot more concerned about things
like jobs, having enough jobs, and that kind of economic
growth and that sort of thing. Unfortunately, like you say,
when you know, we get five or six hundred people
answering some questions about things, most of those people are
from those four counties, and a lot of the people

(01:02:34):
in those poor counties, frankly kind of forget about that
those smaller communities because it's like, well, we've got problems here,
let's work on the problems we've got here. The other
thing is, though you know, people coming into the state
from other places, they typically probably also want to live
in those poor counties. And a lot of times it
might be because of the amenities we've got, but it's

(01:02:56):
also because you're closer to the ski resorts than that
sort of thing. So I think that that is a
tricky balance, and I think it is very important for
lawmakers and for utahon's across the states to not forget
about those populations in our more rural counties.

Speaker 1 (01:03:11):
We're talking right now with Shawn Tag and Shawn of
course as president of the Utah Foundation, Sean I found
it interesting when you listed and you put in various
categories most important, high importance, important. At the bottom is
what I found interesting. Least important the Great Salt Lake
and transgender rights and access. We're spending a lot of
money on saving the Great Salt Lake, which I think

(01:03:32):
we're all concerned about, and the media provides an awful
lot of coverage of transgender rights and access. Were you
surprised that those appear to be the least important year
to the people you surveyed?

Speaker 8 (01:03:45):
So on the first one on the Great Salt Lake. Absolutely.
In fact, when we revealed these these that list of
priorities to the public, I had somebody come and talk
about the Great Salt Lake specifically because I.

Speaker 6 (01:03:58):
Figure it would be like a top five issue.

Speaker 8 (01:04:01):
So they surprised that one. I was a little bit
less surprised out on the transgender rights on access, and
you see it actually in the survey. There's a big
difference between Republicans and Democrats, and between conservative voters and
liberal voters kind of on that issue. So I was
less surprised about that. But I think with the Great
Salt Lake, and this is something that Representative Todd Weiler

(01:04:22):
had mentioned to me yesterday, and he kind of suggests
it's possible that you know, if uton's are paying attention
to the news and paying attention to what lawmakers are
doing on Capitol Hill, they know that that there's been
a big focus on the Great Salt Lake over the
last few years and people and we've been really doing
a lot. In fact, I think there was just some

(01:04:42):
some pretty exciting news this week about getting more water
into the Great Salt Lake. And the other thing is
that you know, we have had some pretty good snowpack
over the past couple of years, and so maybe it's
a little bit less of a high concern, though generally
people are concerned about water, and that's still made it
up a little bit higher on the.

Speaker 2 (01:05:01):
Lift Sean you mentioned speaking with Senator Wiler, I would
hope that as you're putting your the smart decision makers
together and you're going through the data here, that going
back to my original question that the housing affordability earning
enough to pay for non housing needs air quality, you
can actually they can actually address these issues by seeing

(01:05:22):
in those rural areas, not for the purpose of only
the rural citizens concern, but for the concerns of us
that live here in the Long Waistatch Front, to see
this state grow proportionately and into those other areas. To
address housing affordability, I think that the legislature, if it
wants to get into the housing the building of houses,
that's not going to end well. I don't know that
that's a great place for the legislature to be, but

(01:05:44):
I do think there are ways to find a lower
cost of living with a higher quality of life in
the state of Utah. And so I would hope I'm
just asking you to please when you're when you put
these roundtables together, profer that I think that's a that's
an idea that time has come.

Speaker 8 (01:06:00):
You know, it's an idea. The time has come. And
also I brought up people wanting to live near a
ski resort. There are some really great ski resorts outside
of those poor counties, and there are you know, some
of the you know are mighty five natural parks National
parks are off of the Latsache Front, and I mean
there's this is a beautiful state no matter where you

(01:06:21):
go no matter which corner of the state you go into.
And I think that that that's a very good point.
Like if you're going to try to build some housing
that's supportable, if you're a developer out there doing some
of that housing, you're going to find property, the costs
of property in some more rural counties, even if you
know there are ways from from Salt Lake City and
Provo and Ogden, but but they're going to be a

(01:06:42):
lot less expensive. And if you can if you can
make sure that the education opportunities are out there and
that the jobs are out there, people are going to
want to be in those areas in part because it
is you're going to be dealing with less traffic, and
you're going to be dealing with less air pollution and
some of these other issues that you deal with along
the Lostatche front.

Speaker 1 (01:07:01):
Sean Tugan from the Utah Foundation talking about things that
here in Utah the Democrats and Republicans actually agree upon.

Speaker 2 (01:07:08):
So look, I've been waiting to talk about this. This
broke yesterday, this Department of Justice, and oh, the Russians
are taking over, the Russians are coming, The Russians are coming,
And here we go again. Folks, I'm going to tell
you right now. First off, let's just say none of
us are putin fans, none of us want Russia paying for,
you know, any kind of disinformation or anything like that.
But doesn't this all sound so eerily familiar about Russia?

(01:07:33):
The Hunter Biden laptop couldn't possibly make news, even though
the FBI and we found out in hindsight knew for
well over a year that it was actually valid and
that the things said on there were true. They just
didn't want that to help President Trump in that campaign,
and it had relevant information about Joe Biden that should
have been reported. It was tried to be a report
on but was censored. So here we go. Now, Rod,

(01:07:55):
you spent a lifetime maybe one hundred and fifty I
guess maybe since when radio was invented. Thank you for
you are. You have been in probably every seat or
have worn every hat by way of media. So you
know the numbers, you know the budgets, you know all
of it. The ten million dollars that the doj IS uncovered,
that was from November of twenty twenty three till September

(01:08:17):
of twenty four, ten million dollars. This Russian government funneled
into a content company out of Tennessee. It was ten
million dollars for these different so they had different podcasters,
people that had YouTube channels. What is ten million dollars
in a calendar year or in nine months, ten months

(01:08:38):
for the industry in general, in the communications industry as
a whole, how much would ten million dollars amount to?

Speaker 1 (01:08:44):
It doesn't even amount to a drop in the bucket, Okay,
I mean it's you know, there's a lot of money
in media today.

Speaker 2 (01:08:50):
So let's let's just be honest. We can talk. I
want to talk about this, but when and then, by
the way, the DJ has made it clear that Tim Poole,
a very popular guyn with his podcast, was this was
he was an unwitting person receiving information or payment uh
from this from a group he thought were Americans, and
it was it was laundered money from Russia. Uh So,

(01:09:12):
David Rubens another one, and even the guy that was
his popular podcast that was near us at the at
the National Convention, Bennie Johnson. For some time he was
receiving had a contract with this American organization that was
getting its money from from Russia. But here is where
I get disturbed about all that. None of None of
that is a good scenario. And I and if you

(01:09:33):
and I had a podcast and we thought we were
making all this great money and all of a sudden
they said, hey, all that money came from Russia. I
would be so sad because it was these these numbers
they are thrown around. They're paying these guys hundreds of
thousands a month, you know, and they were they were
driving a lot of views, you know, respectively. But here's
where I get worried, Rod. They're they are attaching the
motive of the the of the Russian government, okay, is

(01:09:56):
to is to what they call, uh, amplify domestic divisions
in the United States. That's a very general term, amplified
domestic divisions. Well what would that mean? Well, in I'm
reading straight from the Department of Justices press release. Okay.
Many of the videos posted by US company one and
this is the one that was receiving the money from

(01:10:17):
the Ruskies, contain commentary on events and issues in the
US such as immigration, oh, inflation apparently you can't talk
about that, and other topics related to domestic and foreign policy.
This is while the views expressed in the videos are
not uniform, meaning they're different views, different topics, different things.

(01:10:38):
Most are directed to the to the publicly stated goals
of the Russian government to amplify domestic divisions. Now here's
my question. Is it now going to be the case
that if we talk about illegal immigration and its impact
on this country that we are causing, we're amplifying domestic division.

Speaker 1 (01:10:54):
Or we're being paid for by the Russians?

Speaker 2 (01:10:57):
Well yeah, well, if you are even repeating Russian disinformation,
is it? Is it Russia? Are we are we cooperating
with the Russian government if we talk about inflation. It's
in their memo here that these are the topics that
they are. They are appointing to the Russian government as
wanting to be spoken about. How about the rest of
us that want to speak about it, that have no

(01:11:18):
ties whatsoever to a foreign government. And I'm telling you
this is what worries me. I am worried that they're
going to take any issue that is embarrassing or condemns
the left and as it should, and say, well, you
know what you're doing, right, push And then you take
on top of that the absolute irony that Russia Gate. Okay,

(01:11:39):
Russia Gate was where you had, you had Hillary Clinton's
op you know, her oppo research, and their their key
source for all of it was a Russian. Okay, his
name was Igor or something Dravinsky or something like that. Anyway,
it was known by the FBI that he was in
complete contact with the Russian intelligence and and they this

(01:12:00):
was so when they went after Russiagate, when they did
all of this, they were amplifying domestic divisions throughout the
president's time. I want you to listen real quick to
how Joe Scarborough jumps on this story from yesterday and
resurrects Russia Gate all over again.

Speaker 10 (01:12:21):
Propaganda that comes straight from the Kremlin, people whose TV
shows have been pushed by the Kremlin to go on
RT because they are spouting Russian propaganda points. There have
been people that we've seen on Twitter for years, well
known people with big followings.

Speaker 2 (01:12:40):
Who are clearly clearly.

Speaker 10 (01:12:43):
Pushing Russian propaganda points.

Speaker 1 (01:12:45):
Of course, one of the.

Speaker 10 (01:12:46):
Great ironies about this is not really an irony. It's
just cynicism, and it's just unfortunately Unamerican. These are the
same people that get out a lot of them that
get out and talk about the Russian hoax. Oh there's
a Russian. Oh there's no come.

Speaker 1 (01:13:05):
On, what are you talking about.

Speaker 10 (01:13:07):
There's no connection between you know this and Russian. Russia
is not trying to do all.

Speaker 5 (01:13:14):
You know.

Speaker 2 (01:13:14):
They were saying there was no Russia Gate, that there
was no callude, there was no coordinate effort between Russia
and Trump when he won in twenty sixteen. And here
they go. They're trying to draw that line back that
Russian propaganda. They're saying it's things like talking about immigration
and inflation. That's that cannot become the standard or else

(01:13:34):
you and I are getting thrown in the clink.

Speaker 1 (01:13:36):
Yep.

Speaker 2 (01:13:36):
So you know I'm going to tell you that that
this is a way to try and again censor. This
is a censorship move here. This is going to be
just like it was with the fifty one former intelligence
agents that said that the Hunter Biden laptop had all
the hallmarks of Russian disinformation, when it did not. When
we speak of inflation, when we talk about illegal immigration,

(01:13:57):
when we talk about things that may very well amplify
domestic discord, Okay, as it should in a campaign where
you want to get get it right with who you're
voting for president, we're going to be furthering the pursuits
of a foreign government by doing so.

Speaker 1 (01:14:12):
Well, and I see it as another excuse Greg, if
Kamala loses, you'll hear the Democrats say, well, it's the
Russian's fault.

Speaker 2 (01:14:18):
That's yeah, it might be the reason why the House
doesn't want to certify the election. And that won't be insurrection,
that will be well, you're your agents of Russia that
you would even talk about inflation and immigration.

Speaker 1 (01:14:29):
Yeah, Russia, Russia, Russia. All right, more to come on
the Rod and Greg Show here on Utah's Talk Radio
one oh five nine K and our answer.

Speaker 2 (01:14:37):
I'll tell you what I know. This show is going
to be so good with Tucker and Glenn. When we
hit the go butt and we say it's on those lines,
just go, it becomes.

Speaker 1 (01:14:46):
And they kept on. They kept on filling up even after,
you know, never say die. Well, we have one more
pair of tickets tomorrow that we will give away as
we broadcast live from the Greek Festival.

Speaker 2 (01:14:58):
That'll be fun too, Yeah, that'll be a.

Speaker 1 (01:14:59):
Lot of fun, good food tomorrow coming. Oh wait, you
never get fed around here, so we have to go
out to get someone.

Speaker 2 (01:15:05):
Choice foraging too. I always come to the station. I
haven't really eaten, so then I'm starving.

Speaker 1 (01:15:09):
Yeah, yeah, this is going to be interesting to see
what happens. House Speaker Mike Johnson greg says he will
be attaching a special amendment to the funding bill that
must pass Congress by September thirtieth to avoid a government shutdown. Now,
what is the amendment. It is the Safeguard American Vote
Act that would require proof of US citizenship to register

(01:15:34):
to vote in federal elections. And the Democrats are opposed
to it. Surprise, surprise.

Speaker 2 (01:15:39):
It's genius. And if anyone has the nerve to say, now,
Mike Johnson, why are you politicizing the appropriations bill this way?
It's not politicizing it. There's no one with a straight
face who should say they want foreign nationals to vote
illegally in our races. It's the easiest bill to attach
to a spending bill. There should ever be right before
an election. They should be falling over themselves to support

(01:16:01):
that and message that. But they're not, are they.

Speaker 1 (01:16:03):
Yeah, No, they're not. And Mike Lee has been really
pushing behind this. I heard Chip Roy today on with
Glenn Beck, and Chip Roy is of the opinion says, hey,
if we have shoved the shut the government down this time,
we'll do it. This is a simple, it is very
simple thing.

Speaker 2 (01:16:18):
We can't we can't fund a government further with Democrats
who want who will not want to protect the integrity
of these elections that are coming right now in real time.
I think it's the easiest UH framed issue you could have,
and it really does out the Democrats say, look, you
gotta you had to end COVID. The Democrats wanted you
not only to have a state issued ID, but you
need to have your vaccination, You had to have your host,

(01:16:40):
you have your medical ID that showed it with you,
uh to even go to a supermarket. They want ID
for everything except for voting. What's why. There's only one
reason why? You know what it is? Cheat?

Speaker 1 (01:16:51):
Cheat, That's what I said. Well, apparently, Greg, all over
the country there is concerned and justified I think on
the part of election officials, they're turning a blind to
non citizen voting. How do you turn a blind eye
to something like that? Eight states North Carolina, Wisconsin, Idaho, Iowa, Kentucky, Missouri, Oklahoma,
and South Carolina. They will be voting this November on

(01:17:13):
a citizen voting only amendment to their constitution, as if
we have to do that to do that really really
yeah yeah yeah. After a citizen only voting amendment past
the Texas Senate twenty nine to one earlier this year,
Democrats blocked it in the Texas House.

Speaker 2 (01:17:32):
Yeah, well, how pathetic.

Speaker 1 (01:17:33):
I mean, geez votes, Come on.

Speaker 2 (01:17:35):
You know, here's the thing, the numbers. The New York
Times is covering this, and they're saying that this is
a this is a ruse, this is something that is
not statistically impacting any race, and this is just you know,
Republicans trying to glob onto something and create racism or
whatever their excuses are. When you see that within a
number of states, four different states, swing states in the

(01:17:57):
last twenty twenty election, numbers I've heard as low as
forty thousand, as high as seventy thousand decided the outcome,
the numbers of people that are on these roles that
shouldn't be are in excess of all those numbers, they're
in the hundreds of thousands. For those that are cleaning
their roles and finding people that shouldn't be on there
still on there.

Speaker 1 (01:18:16):
Yeah. Well, and what are they estimating great ten million
people have come into this country illegally since Joe Biden
became President of the United States. Are we going to
have all ten million of those people registered to vote
and they aren't even citizens. They shouldn't even be in
this country legally to begin with.

Speaker 2 (01:18:32):
And by the way, if do you think that that's
somehow turning the Hispanic vote the Latin vote against against Trump, No,
it isn't. I just saw a report. This is one
that was trying to put the bright the biggest, brightest
spin on Kamala Harris. They could. They admitted that he
is plus six with Latino voters in this election over
Kamala Harris. So legal people identify as Latino support Trump

(01:18:57):
over Kamala Harris. So what he's doing to try irons,
secure our borders and keep people that are illegally drug trafficking,
human trafficking maybe getting into these involved in these elections,
they're not for it. They support President Trump and the
Democrats don't. And that is where we have to really
out them.

Speaker 1 (01:19:13):
Well, you know that Mike Lee is not going to
give up this fight because he is really pushing this
such an idea, it's a good idea and it's such
a simple idea. You have to be a citizen to vote.

Speaker 2 (01:19:24):
Do you think they'll let less than eighty percent? I'm
just I'm just going to assume maybe there's twenty percent
of crazy people, but eighty percent would poll. I think
you should have ID to vote. I just absolutely believe
that is not a part of an issue that you
should have idea to vote. I think everyone would say,
I don't care where you go. Go to the heart
of New York City, ask them if they need ID
they already do for everything else they're doing, so yes,

(01:19:46):
I think everybody. It's intuitive to everyone except Democrats in
Congress and probably this ticket of Harris Walls.

Speaker 1 (01:19:53):
The power brokers in America today. All right, mare, coming
up here on the rod On Greg Show in Utah's
Talk radio one oh five nine, and let's go to
the phones here on the Rotten Gregg Show. Nancy is
calling in tonight from Caneville. Nancy, how are you welcome
to the Rotten Gregg Show.

Speaker 7 (01:20:09):
I'm awesome and amazing, same as you guys.

Speaker 1 (01:20:13):
Go ahead.

Speaker 7 (01:20:15):
If I lived in a state that did not require identification,
if I lived next to a state that did not
require identification, to vote. Could me and like mass Republicans
cross the border and vote in that other state.

Speaker 2 (01:20:31):
I don't see why not I do. I'm serious. If
you don't have to show show, show id, why wouldn't
Why would you? I think you just declare.

Speaker 7 (01:20:40):
I mean, we ought to ask all the Republicans to say,
if you don't need idea in that state, go vote
in that state.

Speaker 1 (01:20:47):
There you go. That's not indeed.

Speaker 2 (01:20:48):
You know, I actually like that because the New York
Times used to hate absentee ballots because the military and
everyone would help the Republicans wins. They used to cry
about that not being a secure way to vote until
they this way to do it. Now they love insecure
ways of voting.

Speaker 1 (01:21:03):
Can you believe you can start voting in North Carolina tomorrow?

Speaker 2 (01:21:07):
That's too early, it's really yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:21:10):
I mean you can start early voting in North Carolina.

Speaker 2 (01:21:14):
Tomorrow, Bait, you can start voting.

Speaker 1 (01:21:16):
Yeah, it's the it's the goofiest thing out there.

Speaker 2 (01:21:19):
Vote early and often.

Speaker 1 (01:21:20):
Yeah, vote early and often. All Right, we have a
new controversy surrounding trans athletes. Greg. I know you'd like
to keep up to speed on all of this. This
is a this is a major one. Tonight, the multiple
top ranked female darts players have refused to compete against
and alongside transgender dart players. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:21:45):
I don't even know where. I don't know where the
testosterone kicks in on the dart throwing. But yeah, so
they're they're mad, they're not gonna they're not gonna compete
against well.

Speaker 1 (01:21:54):
According to the story today, the World Dart Federation didn't
know there was such a thing issued a formal warning
to players, saying they could face disciplinary action if they
withdraw from a tournament after it has started and they
are to compete against a transgender dark player. So if
you complain, you get kicked out.

Speaker 2 (01:22:15):
Get this, this is gonna be very controversial. Top two
hundred chess players in the world without regard to gender,
you don't get to the top female chess player to
you're like love number eighty nine. Really, yeah, it's a
true story.

Speaker 8 (01:22:30):
Wow.

Speaker 2 (01:22:31):
Yeah, So I don't think there's a lot of so
in chess. Maybe I don't think they separate that contest
by gender, but the women guys would rule if they
did that, because the women chess players are not Yeah,
the top two hundred chess players in the world, and
you get to the top female and it's way low.

Speaker 1 (01:22:53):
Well, I'm trying to remember. There is a movie, a
really strange movie out there about a young woman comes this,
uh the advertising, Yeah, this this phenomenal chess player. I'm
trying to remember the name of the movie. It's like
Gambit or something like that. Yeah, is that what it was?
Called Queen's Gambit? And she was she was absolutely amazing.
Uh and uh, she just rose to the top and

(01:23:14):
became one of the Now I'm not sure if it's
a true story or what it is, but it was.
It was a she was weird.

Speaker 2 (01:23:20):
I mean, did you watch that movie?

Speaker 1 (01:23:22):
Yeah? I did.

Speaker 2 (01:23:22):
Yeah, I didn't watch it. Well, I like chess too, Yeah,
I can't.

Speaker 1 (01:23:28):
I can't play chess. I'm horrible at chess.

Speaker 6 (01:23:30):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:23:31):
I don't have a strategic mind the way you do.

Speaker 2 (01:23:33):
Yeah, I like to play chess. I can't even play
check grandson beats me at check Checkers. I love Checkers too. Yeah,
actually has strategy. Everybody asks chest Taut checkers, guess what
check checkers has has strategy?

Speaker 1 (01:23:45):
What kind of checkers? What kind of strategy?

Speaker 2 (01:23:48):
There's tons of strategy and Checkers. I'll show you. I'll
play I'll show you all the strategy and checkers, I'm
telling you. In politics it's more like checkers and chess chess.
You don't if you think six moves ahead in politics
or in policy, the world's changed. There has been flipped
upside down before you get to that fifth move, and
checkers is a much better and more fair analogy.

Speaker 1 (01:24:05):
All right, Now, are you good at games? Do you
like playing? Like board games or card games?

Speaker 2 (01:24:09):
You know what? I I have some card games I like,
and I have some but I and I used to
play more board games when I was younger. But I'm
so I don't know. I like them, but I'm not.

Speaker 1 (01:24:18):
Super super into it. Yeah, I don't mind them during
the holidays, family together. You want to do something differently.

Speaker 2 (01:24:24):
There's a game I like that has dollar money involved.

Speaker 1 (01:24:27):
I like that game Rice. What what game is that?
Pray tell?

Speaker 2 (01:24:31):
It's like called left right and center and you roll
dice and you have to take your my path to
the left right or you keep it and anyway, it's
it's a fun game.

Speaker 1 (01:24:41):
Are you competitive? Oh?

Speaker 2 (01:24:42):
Yeah, that game? Our whole family or on any on
any game, you'd think we were poor as poppers. These
are we just playing with quarters? Or with dollars, and
I'll tell you what, we go crazy on that really vicious,
not vicious, just super excited when we win.

Speaker 1 (01:24:57):
Now, my wife is going to hate me for saying this. Yeah,
her father was notorious at cheating in card games, okay,
and I think she's picked up a little bit on that.

Speaker 2 (01:25:08):
That's funny.

Speaker 1 (01:25:08):
You have to watch her because she'll yeah, yeah, she'll
do We'll go uh huh. And you know, and she's
as competitive as gonna be.

Speaker 2 (01:25:16):
Queen Bee's grandfather when he was alive, he loved to
play chess. And when I was dating christ we were
playing and he was really hard to beat. But when
he'd beat me, when i'd beat him, I'd be like,
I don't want to play anymore. You're no competition. And
it would make him so madd He accused me of
having an illegal chess board, accuse me of cheating when
I didn't cheat my board. My chess board was not illegal,
but he said I had an illegal chessboard.

Speaker 1 (01:25:37):
All right. That does it for us Tonight, head up,
shoulders back, May God bless you and your family and
this great country of ours. Thanks for joining us, Rod
and Greg on the road tomorrow at the Greek Festival
in downtown Salt Lake City. We'll be there starting it
for Enjoy your Thursday

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Rod Arquette Show News

Popular Podcasts

1. Stuff You Should Know

2. Dateline NBC

3. Crime Junkie

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

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}The Rod and Greg Show: Do Utah Voters Agree Across Party Lines? Plus, Previewing the Presidential Debate

Episode Transcript

Rod Arquette Show News .css-1q01m3q{margin:0 0 -2px 0;}

Popular Podcasts

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

2. Dateline NBC

3. Crime Junkie

All Episodes