April 14, 2024 • 40 mins
Will Biden and Trump debate? Trump trials: Opening punch to a Hail Mary. WI GOP U.S. Senate Candidate Eric Hovde. Sean Parnell on flipping PA.
Follow Clay & Buck on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
This is twenty four, a weekly highlight reel from the
Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show featuring all things election coverage.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Let's get started. Here are Clay and Bucks.
Speaker 3 (00:15):
As we start to think about the July Republican Convention
and the August Democrat Convention. And we will be in
Milwaukee for the full week of the Republican Convention, by
the way, which I'm looking forward to. I think that
Jesse Kelly has already booked us for a night out
at Red Lobster in Milwaukee, which feels like it has
a epic potential.
Speaker 4 (00:36):
I'm a little sad because that's going to be amazing,
but it won't be before the DNC convention, so I
can't sit there and lord it over you too, who
both believe that Biden still may be replaced, So at
that point I won't be able to make you buy
me the unlimited all you can eat Lobster Fest.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
It's gonna be fun. Okay, So you mentioned the debate.
Speaker 3 (00:59):
This is the front page of the New York Times
today and the headline is TV networks to urge Biden
and Trump to debate, wading into a fraud topic. Opening
paragraph and again this is the New York Times front page.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
In an unusual move.
Speaker 3 (01:18):
The five major broadcast in cable news networks have prepared
a joint open letter that urges President Biden and former
President Trump to participate in a tell in televised debates
ahead of election Day. According to two people with direct
knowledge of their plans, the letter, endorsed by ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC,
(01:42):
and Fox News, thrust into public view a question that
swirled whether there will be presidential debates. I read that today,
Buck and I thought, oh, this is interesting. This is
basically a public threat to Joe Biden that, because Trump
has said he'll debate anytime, any place, anywhere, and has
been very consistent about that as it pertains to the
(02:04):
presidential debates, if they are going to give this level
of attention to whether the debates happen, this to me
feels like a bully tactic designed to force Joe Biden
into the debates. And the fact that they put it
on the front page of the New York Times and
that all five major news outlets across the political spectrum
(02:27):
are all signing on. They said they're trying to get
other news organizations to do it as well. It says
the letters not final. The networks are also seeking endorsements
from other leading national news organizations, including newspapers New York Times,
Washington Post, Wall Street Journal. I would think are all
being asked as well, So.
Speaker 2 (02:45):
How do you read this?
Speaker 3 (02:46):
I thought it was very interesting that again on the
front page this morning, as I'm drinking my Crocket coffee,
this is what I'm reading.
Speaker 4 (02:52):
Yes, I would say that it's not surprising at all
that they would take this position because what is the
revenue associated with those debates work. I mean, there's there's
big money to be made for these in these presidential debates,
for those news networks. And it also I think I
think it goes a little bit to the anxiety quite
(03:14):
honestly that the cable news networks have that there uh
their relevant slash, their ability to set the political tone
and and be the go to place for political news,
well for news maybe in general, but for political news
more specifically, is you know, slipping away, slipping away faster
(03:34):
maybe than they had anticipated. In the era of digital
social media. I mean, I'm just gonna say, like I
think that X and truth social for example, are increasingly
places where people who are really going deep into the
news on a regular basis, are spending more and more
time just because it's so much faster, It's so much
more efficient than trying to watch long form cable cable
(03:56):
news commentary. And I think that the network have to
make this pitch because for money and also for relevance.
And I think that the worst fear that they have
is that you start to have what is the moment
that people feel very differently about cable news role or
the news networks role, right, ABC, NBCCBS. Then all of
(04:20):
a sudden, you have the presidential debates that are just
streamed on streaming platforms, and anyone can make money off
and off their platform based on.
Speaker 5 (04:28):
The viewership that they get.
Speaker 4 (04:30):
And isn't that kind of the way it should be? Actually,
the more you think about it, I think Republicans have
made huge mistakes for years by allowing these not so
stealthy commies to be the moderators from places like CNN
and ABC.
Speaker 5 (04:44):
Why why go doin with that?
Speaker 2 (04:46):
I agree?
Speaker 3 (04:47):
I mean, I think even didn't RNC give a debate
to the NBC for the Republican primary and then they
go fire Ron McDaniel as soon as she gets hired
which feels a little bit too frank, like a quid
pro quo, Oh, you give us a debate where we
can make tens of millions of dollars in theory, I
think the I don't know about you, Buck, but I
(05:09):
even think the idea that you should be able to
run commercials during debates feels a little bit dirty to me.
You ever, you ever get on and uh, but you
see what I'm saying that right, which is why we're
in the Internet era. Why not just have it streamed live?
I mean maybe they'll say the debate participants need like
a minute to catch their breath or something, but you know,
(05:29):
have it for an hour. I think these guys are
plenty happy to talk for an hour. I mean they've
been talking their whole lives, Biden and Trump. Why why
should it be Also the favoritism that goes into this
and the negotiations, why should some networks get it and
others don't?
Speaker 2 (05:43):
You know?
Speaker 4 (05:44):
And what it's really doling out. It's just money. I mean,
this is guaranteed eyeballs. It's just money to be able
to have a debate for your network. So and the
notion that there's some prestige that NBC News or that's
a joke, right, Look at NPR. It's a joke that
these places are journalistic entities that are honest brokers.
Speaker 3 (06:02):
I think it should be like State of the Union,
where everybody covers it on all of the networks. And
I would argue if I were doing it, I would say,
and this would actually be I think really interesting. What
if each candidate got to pick the moderator to ask
the questions of the other candidate.
Speaker 2 (06:22):
I think that would be super fair.
Speaker 3 (06:24):
Like Trump gets to pick a it has to be
somebody who's employed by a news network, right, But if
Trump wants Sean Hannity to ask every question of Joe Biden,
and then let's say Joe Biden wants I don't know,
Rachel Maddow to ask every question of Donald Trump, I
actually think that would be incredibly riveting television because obviously
(06:45):
then they can end up talking cross talking about different topics.
But you then are balancing out the bias by letting
basically each guy pick the person who's going to interrogate
the other side.
Speaker 4 (06:57):
I can I just be the wet blanket here for
a second on all this though, because I just think
I have to for a minute, which is I don't think,
even though we're in such a media obsessed era, I
don't think that debates absent a total catastrophe. And I'm
not even sure what that would look like, other than
someone having a stroke on stage. Absent a total catastrophe,
(07:18):
I'm not sure the debates really do very much. I'm
not sure the debates I don't think the data shows
that they move. It's more for spectacle and entertainment than
it is for actually helping to determine the election.
Speaker 5 (07:29):
I think that's the case for a while.
Speaker 3 (07:30):
I would say that is generally the case, and I
agree with you that catastrophe could be a moving aspect.
I think it's uniquely maybe different with the ages of
the candidates this year. I don't know that we've ever
had a situation where you could legitimately say I'm not
sure that at least one of the candidates, certainly Joe Biden,
(07:53):
is physically capable of finishing his term.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
Right.
Speaker 3 (07:56):
How old was Reagan in eighty four, like seventy one
or something, seventy four whatever. His age was nowhere close
to what Biden would be, And it was a huge
topic in eighty four and I think people wanted to
see Reagan how he did, but I think the Biden.
Now the challenge here is I think we saw it
with the State of the Union. They're gonna shoot him
up with every caffeine known demand, with every drug cocktail
(08:19):
known to man, and Biden's gonna come out and I
think he's going in that two hour period. Now, they
may have to sleep, he may have to sleep twenty
straight hours after he does it, but they will shoot
him up with every pill imaginable to make him look
energetic and not lost with lethargy. Now here's the challenge,
And this is what I would say to Trump if
(08:39):
these debates happen. Just get him off his talking points.
Biden falls apart when he doesn't have a teleprompter to
just be able to read off of. I think he
might fall apart in the debates.
Speaker 4 (08:52):
I mean, I'm just it's deja vu all over again,
which I know is a joke. Ever, people was like,
deja vu means I know it took French. It's a
jog quote, right, yes, But I remember that was the
theory back in twenty twenty, was that Biden when people
saw him on stage and then we didn't really have
(09:13):
a normal election, I know, because of COVID and that
changed things, but it didn't happen. Then I would be
very cautious about thinking it would happen this time around.
And I still think Biden says no because to your point, Clay,
it's different because of the age factor than it has
ever been before. Reagan was seventy three years old back
in eighty four. Okay, so yeah, it's different because we're
(09:34):
talking about a whole step up right seventies to eighties,
as anyone listening knows, is step up in terms of
age and energy and everything else makes a difference.
Speaker 5 (09:44):
And so that's one thing.
Speaker 4 (09:45):
But I also believe that because the Biden narrative is
that Trump is a threat to democracy, they're going to
make the deplatforming argument or that you can't platform a
threat to democracy like Donald Trump.
Speaker 5 (09:58):
I think you know that's.
Speaker 2 (09:59):
Yeah, I think you're right on that.
Speaker 3 (10:01):
I think when all the major news organizations are saying
they want a debate, that gets a harder argument to
make because they're not going to give it the same
That's what I would.
Speaker 5 (10:09):
Don't you think they have to say that publicly?
Speaker 2 (10:11):
You know what I mean?
Speaker 4 (10:12):
They have to say that publicly. Do you really think
they're going to put a lot of pressure on him
If they think it's going to hurt Biden's numbers, that
to me would be the tell they have to put
this thing out of the New York Times. We want
him to debate behind closed doors. I'm sure they're like,
don't debate that, that lunatic, you know, I don't think.
Speaker 2 (10:25):
I think it's an interesting question.
Speaker 3 (10:26):
I think behind closed doors a lot of them may
be like, Biden's a disaster, We don't really care if
Trump wins.
Speaker 5 (10:34):
Just something to think that Clay is really throwing some
bobs today.
Speaker 2 (10:38):
Wow, No, I think that.
Speaker 3 (10:40):
To me, I read that as this is pressure on Biden,
letting him know front page New York Times, we're not
carrying your water. If you try to argue, oh, I
can't afford to platform him if every news organization signs
on otherwise.
Speaker 4 (10:54):
Don't don't ever underestimate the willingness of the media to
carry water for a Democrat. I mean, I don't know
they have no integrity to protect. But maybe maybe you're right,
maybe they are gonna pres because there's money involved too,
and there's prestige involved.
Speaker 2 (11:06):
That's the part of it that's a little.
Speaker 3 (11:08):
Bit just to put it on the front page of
the New York Times and have the story broken by
the New York Times, which they know Joe Biden's gonna read.
Speaker 4 (11:15):
Yeah, it's April, you know. I guess they have to
set the stuff up pretty far in advance. So yeah,
we'll have to see.
Speaker 1 (11:21):
If you're listening to twenty four the Year of Impact
with Clay and Buck.
Speaker 3 (11:29):
It seems to me that there is more and more
consensus that there is not going to be a way
to get two trials complete. Would you agree now that
the consensus buck is one trial is likely to be
complete this Alvin Bragg case over the bookkeeping air in
terms of before people vote on November fifth, that it's unlikely.
Speaker 4 (11:53):
They're gonna get They're gonna get one for sure, which
I mean that I've thought all along.
Speaker 5 (11:57):
I think they're gonna try to sneak.
Speaker 4 (11:59):
Another one under the under the radar, I really do.
I mean, I think they will try to fifty I
give it fifty to fifty. But I mean I think
that they're not given up on it at all. They
don't think that they're gonna they have to see it through.
Speaker 3 (12:11):
They're going to have the oral arguments of the Supreme
Court over presidential power. You said April twenty fifth, I
think right. I don't think they're going to come out
with a ruling on that until the end of June.
They're also still going to have a hearing on half
of the charges that have been brought about by Jack
Smith and whether or not they're even able to be
(12:32):
used on jan six related cases. So I think the
absolute earliest that they could start the back in nations
again in the Judge Chutkin courtroom would be sometime after
July fourth, and given how much time you're going to
have there, they may try to start a trial, but
(12:53):
I think voting is going to happen before there's I
think there's only going to be one case that's actually
a result.
Speaker 4 (13:00):
So that's interesting. Maybe they've started it, but they haven't
resolved it that I could see happening. But I could
still see them trying to get a second. Here's what
we know that I think has to be taken into
the analysis. Right, They have moved in the DC trial
at I mean warp speed, ludicrous speed for the spaceball
fans out there, over and over again, both the District
(13:22):
Court and the Circuit Court, right, I mean, I think
we can agree they're doing things in ten days that
would normally take six months in terms of process, procedure,
back and forth. They go nope, done, nope done. They're
moving as fast as they can. So we know that
they will accelerate it, and assuming the Supreme Court doesn't
shut that case down, they're going to have the ability
to go on whatever expedited schedule they want effectively, and
(13:46):
we know they've already said that. The position of the
DOJ is it's about when you bring the charges, not
when you bring the trial. We don't care when the
trial starts with regard to the election cycle. So that's
why I think they You know, would Jack Smith start
this case in the middle of September, no matter what
that looks. Guess I think he would. I don't think
he cares. I think he feels like at least then
(14:08):
Clay he can say I did everything I could. I
left it all on the field to destroy democracy.
Speaker 3 (14:13):
And that's where I think it becomes interesting to contemplate
what's going to happen in this New York City case.
So my general thought is that people are confused and overwhelmed.
They get Egene Carroll, the Letitia James trying to get
the business penalties put forward against Donald Trump. I think
(14:34):
they kind of roll all these things together, even though
some are civil and criminal. I don't think most people
are making distinctions between those. What I wonder though, is
whether there could be a panic start to set in
if they start to look at the calendar and say,
you know what this is it, and whether Alvin Bragg
might try as a result to actually put Trump in
(14:57):
prison over the stupid bookkeeping felonies.
Speaker 4 (15:03):
I want to say that that, you know, it's like
the Sunny Hawston thing yesterday when she said that the
eclipse maybe is related to climate change, and on X
I wrote, if you think there's anything that's too stupid
to be said on the View, you haven't watched the View.
Because there's nothing that is too stupid to be said
on the View. I want to say it is just
(15:24):
too outlandish for Alvin Bragg to try to lock Trump
up on the put.
Speaker 5 (15:28):
Aside the politicization just the weakest.
Speaker 4 (15:31):
If you try to lock up anyone on this, I
would think it was insane, insane, but I can't exclude
it I mean, can you exclude this entirely? I don't
think we can exclude anything.
Speaker 3 (15:41):
I think the more it becomes likely that they're not
going to get any other conviction, the crazier what they're
going to do with the New York City case becomes,
because it goes from kind of the opening punch to
a hell Mary.
Speaker 2 (15:55):
That's the direction that I see it going.
Speaker 1 (16:00):
We're listening to twenty four the most important tier in
politics with Clay Travis an bock Sexton.
Speaker 3 (16:08):
He's running for the Senate in Wisconsin. He could be
one of the seats that flips to give Republicans control
of the Senate. He is a fourth generation Wisconsin I
is that the right phrase.
Speaker 2 (16:20):
We'll find out. And he lives right now in Madison.
Speaker 3 (16:24):
By the way, I think I'm gonna try to get
up to watch the Alabama Wisconsin game in Madison in September.
It should be a pretty awesome scene. I bet you
will be there as part of the campaign. Eric Hoveny
joins us, Now, what is it going to be like?
Speaker 2 (16:41):
What do you think?
Speaker 3 (16:42):
And when Alabama rolls into to your hometown of Madison,
that's a pretty big game.
Speaker 6 (16:48):
It's gonna be Rocky Camp Randall is one of the
best spots to watch a college football game. And I'm
I'm seeming totally serious about that. I'm not just talking
my school. But it's in a community instead of surrounded
by a giant parking lot. You got Region Street, all
the bars, You've got people that's set up selling, broughtwursts
(17:11):
and beer. I've had season tickets there for geez, thirty
plus years, right on the forty five yard line. My
dad had them before me since the early sixties. It's
a ball and when Alabama comes running out, people will
be screaming and yelling. It's gonna be a hell of
a great.
Speaker 2 (17:29):
Game, all right, I agree with you.
Speaker 3 (17:30):
I'm actually curious though, So you had season tickets for
years and years, you're right there near midfield.
Speaker 2 (17:36):
You're going to be all in on the Badgers.
Speaker 3 (17:38):
How do you balance campaigning when you also really really
care about the game that's going on.
Speaker 6 (17:45):
That's gonna be tough, but there's no way I'm going
to miss Alabama running out on the Camp Randle Stadium
onto the field. So and there's gonna be some great
Packer games because I'm so hyped up about the Packers
this year. You know, we're the favorite right now in
Vegas odds to win the Super Bowl. So look, I'm
(18:06):
just going to have to schedule around it. Will I
be able to go to every game? No, but you
know there's a couple I just got a you know,
X out and you know I'll be shaking hands and
seeing people and all the rest and having a couple
of Bruskis along with it.
Speaker 2 (18:20):
No doubt sounds awesome already.
Speaker 5 (18:22):
Hey, Eric, it's it's Buck.
Speaker 4 (18:24):
Tell us why you're going to be able to beat
Tammy Baldwin, the incumbent Democrat this time around, and just
give us a sense as to how you'll represent the
great people of Wisconsin differently from what she has aligned
herself with.
Speaker 6 (18:41):
Look, Tammy Baldwin is a career politician, thirty eight years
in politics. He literally came out of school, ran for
not city council, county council, then went on to the Assembly,
then the Congress, and then the Senate. Everything she votes
for is wrong. You know, she voted for everything that
(19:03):
Joe Biden wanted. She in fact, she votes with him
ninety five point five percent of the time. Think of
how crazy that is. You know, I love my wife.
We've been together for over thirty years. We don't agree
on everything ninety five point five percent of the time,
and they're sure couldn't see how anybody would even agree
with Joe Biden ten percent at the time. So I'm
(19:23):
just going to point out the facts of you know,
she voted for you know, four point seven trillion dollars
of additional government spending that helped ignite inflation. You know,
she she has been wrong on the border. I have
an add up right now on the border, and our
state is really being affected now by what's happening over
the border on multiple different levels. She actually not only
(19:46):
supported Obama when he did his Iranian deal, but when
Joe Biden went to double down on a really bad thing,
because we know the negative consequences of that first deal,
how isis and all the terroism that exploded after gave
I ran all that cash, Biden goes doubles down on
that same thing, as Cammy Baldwin's there to support that.
(20:07):
So she's a career politician. She knows nothing about the economy,
how the economy works. She's totally bought off by special interests.
Her Senate office as a revolving door of lobbyists, and
she takes all the special interest money. She actually earmarked
in the last budget four hundred thousand dollars for a
(20:30):
transgender affirming clinic that doesn't even tell parents that they're
doing that with their own kids. Now think of that.
I mean, this is how far out there she is.
Now she runs in our state is you know, I'm moderate,
and tries to position herself that way. But she's one
of the three most progressive senators. And if I can
(20:50):
win this seat, not only will that assure that, you know,
the Senate will flip for the next two years, but
it's really the next four to six years because the
next couple elections cycles are more difficult for Republicans. So
this is such a critical seat to pull back for
common sense approach to government.
Speaker 3 (21:09):
What do you your race is not the same as
Donald Trump's race, but you are going to be connected
to a certain extent. Ron Johnson won in twenty twenty two,
six years more as a senator, so certainly people are
receptive to what he argues. How do you see a
presidential election year, Certainly turnout is going to be up,
impacting the overall pathway for you to take back the
(21:33):
Senate through this win.
Speaker 6 (21:36):
Yeah right, now, well let's back up. In twenty twenty,
Donald Trump lost the election by twenty thousand votes out
if we'll call it, three million voters that will show
off them vote. So it was a hair by a hair.
But we have six of our eight congressional sees of
Republican our state senates. The supermajority Republican our state Assembly
(21:57):
is almost a super majority. So there is about sixty
thousand voters that would vote for a Republican state senator
or congressional officer assemblyman that didn't vote for Donald Trump.
Two thirds of more women, a third of mar college
educated men. So you know, look, I'm going to be
talking to everybody in our state because I believe in
(22:19):
Ronald Reagan's broad end strategy. But I will also be
messaging to those people and you know, talking about the
issues that hopefully matter to them to get them to
vote for me like they did for other Republican congressional
and state Senate races. The other thing I'm doing is
(22:40):
a lot of times Republicans just go about, you know,
turning out their own base. I believe we got to
push the map, like Reagan did. I've been in the
minority communities, both the black community and the Hispanic community,
talking to them. I'm telling you there's a major shift
going on there because these people had than hammered by
(23:01):
the inflation and the open borders and immigration and what's
happening there. I'm taught. I'm fighting in Madison. You know,
I was born there, raised there, had a business there
for twenty five years. You know, that is my home.
That's where I live, and I've given to more charities
(23:21):
than all but a handful of people in the Madison market.
So I'm going to compete there, but I'm going to
talk to everybody across the state because our country is
in trouble. Look, we're losing the American dream for far
too many people, and it's scary how much damage the
Left has done to our country in such a short
(23:41):
amount of time, and we have to take back this country.
Speaker 4 (23:46):
We're speaking to Eric Hovedy. He's running for the US
Senate seat that is currently held by Tammy Baldwin and Wisconsin.
Speaker 5 (23:53):
It's going to be a very important race. Just one
more for you.
Speaker 2 (23:56):
Eric.
Speaker 4 (23:57):
My understanding is, you know, when you think of Wisconsin
as a border state. Most people would think, well, yeah,
I guess you know Canada, But you are a border
state in more ways too, because there are people that
are being these illegal immigrants that are coming into the
country are being moved by the federal government into your state,
including into some small towns. Can you tell us what's
(24:18):
going on with that.
Speaker 6 (24:20):
It's happening in small towns all over. I'll give you
an example. Whitewater, Wisconsin's a town of about thirteen thousand citizens.
They dropped a thousand illegal immigrants overnight there. So what's happened.
Where do you house these people? They don't have the
housing for them, so they're putting them all over the place.
Access to healthcare, This is a real crisis in our country.
(24:40):
People are struggling to get access to healthcare even before
this immigration wave, and now it's made it really acute.
It's blown up the Whitewater's budget, I mean almost immediately.
How does the city that now has to take care
of another thousand people that isn't generating revenue for them
(25:00):
any taxes. It's just a big got so their budgets
upside down literally immediately, where before their budget was in
a good position. But this is happening in small towns
all over. I was just talking to somebody who said
this was happening in another even smaller town in northern
Wisconsin where all these Nicaraguans came in. Nobody knows how
(25:22):
to speak to them. They don't where to put housing,
where do you get them into schools? You don't even
have the teachers to the school of them. So we've
got a crisis.
Speaker 7 (25:32):
On our hand.
Speaker 6 (25:33):
And you know the other thing, Wisconsin has been very impacted,
like all over our country about the fentanyl and opiate crisis.
You know, we lost to what is it, one hundred
and twelve thousand Americans last year to this crisis. Most
of them are young. It's the leading cause of death
for Americans between the ages of eighteen and forty five.
(25:55):
And all those drugs pour over our southern border. So
on every single level, this has been negative to our country,
to the people of Wisconsin, and it needs to be
shut down and stopped.
Speaker 5 (26:09):
Eric Hovedy everybody, Eric, what's your website?
Speaker 4 (26:11):
Because you're gonna need some help to beat Tammy Tammy Baldwin.
Speaker 7 (26:17):
Eric E. R. C.
Speaker 6 (26:19):
Hubbd ho V is in Victory. D isn't David E.
Is an Edward Ericovde dot Com. I appreciate anybody and
everybody's involvement, because look, we got to take back our country.
We got to save America. So thank you both of
you guys. It's great being on your show.
Speaker 5 (26:39):
Thanks Eric, appreciate it you. We're gonna be rooting for
you and talking to you more as it gets closer.
Speaker 1 (26:45):
If you're listening to twenty four the Year of Impact
with Clay and Buck, because.
Speaker 3 (26:52):
I bet Sean Parnell I saw him share this, I
bet he's pretty fired up about it too.
Speaker 2 (26:57):
Sean.
Speaker 3 (26:57):
You've got a bunch of kids, and we're going to
talk about situation on the ground in Pennsylvania and what
needs to happen in order for Pennsylvania to go back
or red in twenty twenty four. But when you hear
Dawn Staley says she's fine with men identifying as women
playing women's basketball, do you find this as crazy as
I do? That it's almost impossible to believe that. You know,
(27:20):
we made a movie called Juwanna man like the whole
era of mocking this. South Park has obviously been on
the front edge of this, and now it's basically Democrat
Party orthodoxy that if you're a dude pretending to be
a woman, you should be able to be in women's sports.
Speaker 7 (27:34):
Yeah yeah, I mean I was kind of blown away
by it. And I say this to somebody who has
three daughters who work their butt off every single day
committing themselves to a sport or whatever it is really
that they want to do, and when you let men
play women's sports, I mean, it's just I guess I
was to say, Clay, the Party of Science doesn't really
(27:56):
care about science because it's basic science that men are bigger, stronger,
faster than women. And ultimately, I look, it's a safety issue.
It's a safety issue, especially especially with how physical sports
can be. You sti't want to see anything happen to
a young girl that dedicated her life having her dreams
(28:17):
stolen by a man and then get hurt in the
process as well. It's it's just terrible all around.
Speaker 4 (28:22):
Hey, Sean, I'm sure you saw the Wall Street Journal
piece now they're voting. Read a Pennsylvania fracking boom weighs
in on Biden's re election chances. It gets into some
of the data. Look, the biggest swing state by population
is Pennsylvania, so it's critical for twenty twenty four. I
can't foresee a future in which Trump wins Pennsylvania and
(28:46):
does not win the election, right, I mean, I feel
like it's if he wins Pennsylvania, chances are he's gonna
win everywhere else he needs to. But this, this piece
goes into how the Democrats anti fracking position has changed
some of the dynamics such that now, especially out of
the Pittsburgh area, Democrats are the party of like software
(29:06):
designers who live in the city, and the Republicans are
the guys who are working in the natural gas industry
and guys that are doing more sort of trade and
and you know, outside jobs.
Speaker 5 (29:17):
What are you seeing.
Speaker 7 (29:19):
Yeah, it's such a great point, and I think your
assessment is spot on. I mean, there is a take
a tectonic shift, paradigm shift happening politically in Pennsylvania. And
I say, this is somebody who comes from, you know,
a family of blue dog Union Democrats, pro life, pro
gun Democrats who in many cases now are more pro
(29:41):
Trump than some of my Republican family members. And here's
the deal, buck, Like, you can drive anywhere from my
house in western Pennsylvania forty five minutes in any direction,
and you will drive through two or three towns that
have been are completely direct old school coal or oil
(30:01):
manufacturing towns that have buttoned themselves up. And the truth
is is that Republicans and Democrats both betrayed the people
who lived in those towns for a very very very
long time. And so Trump comes along and all of
a sudden, all of these people have a voice again.
And ultimately, I think that this paradigm shift has brought
(30:23):
forth this incredible opportunity for Republicans where now we're the
party of the working class. Now we're the party of
the middle class, right, and you have the Democrats who
have now strangely become in my lifetime, the party of
you know, big tech oligarch's, Hollywood celebrities, Ivory Tower academics.
(30:44):
And in western Pennsylvania, I mean, this is this is
a heavily you know, it's a heavily Republican area. It's
the place where Republicans can do very, very very well.
But there are a lot of blue dog Democrats here again,
pro life price gun Democrats who are gonna vote for Trump.
And I just think there's an unbelievable opportunity for Republicans
(31:07):
in Pennsylvania, especially with Trump at the top of the ticket.
I mean, Pennsylvania is more than in play this time around.
There's there's no question.
Speaker 3 (31:15):
About it that could play out, Sean Parnell with us
now not only in the national race. So I'm gonna
talk about here in a second, but also with Dave
McCormick trying to win back a Senate seat. I'm curious
how you would assess that Senate race and also what
the world's happened with with John Fetterman, who has has
(31:38):
really I mean it's like he went in for treatment
at at Walter Reed and came out in many respects
sounding like a Republican. Like what has happened there? Did
people miss attribute his political leanings? I mean, he regularly
says he's not woke, he's not a progressive, he's very
pro Israel. He's come out in favor of racking to
a certain degree. Also, I believe now believes the border
(32:01):
should be shut down.
Speaker 2 (32:02):
What is going on there?
Speaker 3 (32:03):
How would you assess the Senate in general, the race,
but also Fetterman.
Speaker 7 (32:08):
Well, first of all, we'll talk Dave McCormick first. I
think he's the only person you know that Bob Casey
has run against that can and I think likely will
beat Bob Casey. I mean, Dave McCormick is a fundraising machine.
And whether or not you like money in politics or not,
the guy you need money to run effective races. I
(32:30):
always liken money and political races to bullets in your
gun and combat. Right, politics is just like war, just
without the bullets. And so you run out of bullets
on the battleground like you're done. You run out of
fundraising dollars when you're running a race, you're done. But
Dave McCormick has an ability to raise historic sums of money.
(32:50):
And if you look at Pennsylvania as it is today,
just by the numbers, just by voter registration numbers. Trump
won Pennsylvania in sixteen and by the way, he was
the first Republican to do it running for president since
Ronald Reagan. He won by a razor sin margin with
a voter registration Republican voter registration deficit the Democrats of
(33:12):
six hundred thousand plus. Now the Democrats only have a
three hundred and eighty plus thousand voter registration advantage, so
it's nearly cut in half. So the state is more
favorable than it's ever been and it's going to continue
to trend read every day that goes on. As far
as Spetterman is concerned, I have I have a theory
(33:32):
about this, and it's basically, for a long time in
Pennsylvania there has been one Republican and one Democrat at
the top of the ticket for Senate. The state has
always had a sense of moderation there. There's a phrase
of Pennsylvania tolerate neither neither too much virsue or too
(33:52):
much vice. And so from a political standpoint, the people
here in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania have always had kind
of like an even keel temperament in the Senate. Well,
this is the first time two Democrats have been at
the top of the ticket in the Senate in Pennsylvania
in over one hundred years. And so I see Fetterman's
(34:13):
moderation right as it pertains to Israel, fracking and everything else,
as a political strategy to draw fire away from Bob
Casey and give Pennsylvanians the state of the sort of
political homeostasis that they've always had at the top of
the ticket. And what you see is people were writing
all these stories about Fetterman, like, WHOA, what happened to
(34:34):
this guy? Look at him? He's so conservative now, but
nobody's really writing about Bob Casey. And I mean, and
I look at it like this, Clay. You know, John
Fetterman waves around in Israeli flag. But the fact is,
look at how he votes in the Senate. He voted
against a standalone a package for Israel in the Senate.
So if you were really so pro Israel, you would
(34:57):
certainly vote for that. I've known John Fetterman long time,
since he was mayor of Braddock. He has been a
free Palestine guy for as long as I've known him.
So it goes back to an old adage that I have, like,
don't listen to what democrats say, watch how they vote.
Speaker 4 (35:15):
Yeah, I think that makes a lot of sense. Actually, Sean,
thank you for putting that into context for us. By
the way, if you want to hear more of Sean Parnell,
he has the Sean Parnell Show podcast on the Clay
and Buck Network. Another reason for our wonderful radio listeners
to subscribe on the iHeartRadio app to the Clay and
Buck Network and Seawan Show will be there along with
Tudor Dixon. Carol Markowitz Sean, how does Trump win? You
(35:36):
know the Pennsylvania terrain politically as well as anybody. How
does Trump win in twenty twenty four?
Speaker 7 (35:45):
Well, his path is going to be well, first of all,
again a state, it's more favorable than it's ever been.
But Trump has this ability and this is perhaps more
prominent in Pennsylvania than almost anywhere else, maybe Michigan as well.
But Trump has this ability to bring out this crazy
cross section of voters from everywhere, even first time people
(36:07):
that have really never voted before. A perfect example of
this is Erie County. It's largely it's a swing county
here in Pennsylvania in the northwest, but it's a Democrat county. Essentially,
they're more registered Democrats than Republicans. Trump won it in
twenty and sixteen with Trump off the ballot. In the
off cycle race in eighteen, the congressman who represents Erie
(36:30):
County lost it by almost twenty thousand votes. In twenty twenty,
Trump locked Erie County again by probably fifteen hundred votes.
So you get a sense of the turnout machine that
he is. And so when you add his ability to
turn out voters plus somebody like Dave McCormick on a ticket,
(36:51):
you kind of have a Trump Toomey vibe going there.
And by the way, those guys couldn't be more different.
I mean toom he voted to convict Trump and the Senate,
as we all remember. But you have this kind of
unbelievable synergy where Dave McCormick is going to play very,
very very well in the suburbs, and then you've got
Trump who's bringing out all these first time voters in
blue collar Democrats. Dave McCormick is going to benefit from that,
(37:13):
and my hope is that Trump benefits from some of
the suburban vote with McCormick as well. Add to that
that it is it's going to be what seems to
me a great Republican year with a terribly weak Democrat
candidate both at president and vice president. Somehow Kamala Harris
is less popular than Joe Biden. But look, there's a
ton of opportunity in Pennsylvania with a lot of synergy
(37:35):
on the ticket. And then you add to that a
mail in program that Republicans have never had before in
Pennsylvania that is at this point, very very very effective.
I like our chances.
Speaker 3 (37:46):
That's where I wanted to hit for the last question
for you. The number one thing we hear when we
talk about Pennsylvania is they're going to steal it, because
I think a lot of people saw the way the
votes kept rolling in the changes that were made in
twenty twenty, the fact that Feederman and happened to Sean.
Speaker 4 (38:01):
By the way, Sean was ahead going to bed and
then all of a sudden all the extra ballots came in.
Speaker 5 (38:06):
Sean was what was the gap?
Speaker 7 (38:10):
Oh, there was a thirteen thousand, But I mean, any
way you cut it, That's why every news outlet in
the country called the race for me, including MSNBC. Any
way you cut it mathematically, there's going to be a
thirteen thousand vote margin of victory. The race took over
a week, and the main issue was, even though like
I said, it took over a week to actually finish
the counting, was that you had a bunch of ballots
that were not signed, with no identification for first time
(38:33):
mail and voters, and unsupervised drop boxes. So that sort
of wittered away people's confidence in how we conduct elections here.
So things have gotten a little bit better in Pennsylvania.
But the truth is Republicans, especially in this state over
the last three cycles, have not done a good job
at voting an election infrastructure here in this state that
(38:55):
is required to win. Democrats, by contrast, have done well.
And just be clear for your audience people who are listening,
I don't like mail in ballots. I don't like our
system here. But the rules of the rules of engagement
are what they are until we win. You can't fix
things until we win. And so that has to be
the first priority. And what comes part and parcel with
(39:17):
that is building a system that will allow us to
do that, and so that that that operation is two.
It has to have two phases. Right, You have to
put a ton of dollars into registering low perpend You
have to register Republican voters. So you got to close
that registration gap and then focus on all the people
that Trump brings out, these low propensity voters that maybe
(39:39):
even vote for the first time in their life for
Trump and twenty or maybe even in sixteen, get them
on the permanent mail in vote so that in off
cycle races you can have that presidential level turnout. This
is why Republicans are be getting killed in Pennsylvania and
off cycle and off cycle or mid mid term elections
is because the Democrats basically set the bar really high
in twenty twenty. They got all these people on the
(40:00):
permanent mail in voting list, and Republicans are just like,
well I don't like mail in voting. Well, that ain't
gonna win elections. And so this time around we have
a program with millions and millions of dollars behind it.
This is some sort of quiet behemoth working in the
background of Pennsylvania to do just what I told you.
And so not only do we have all these great
(40:21):
things doing sener giella ticket, a great year, great environment,
we can come and president, we also have this program
where we're working to register voters and get them on
the permanent mail in list so that we can bolster
our chances in November. And like I said, I like
our chances.
Speaker 4 (40:38):
Sean Parnell, everybody check out the Sean Parnell Show, which
is in the Clay and Buck podcast network.
Speaker 5 (40:43):
Please subscribe. Sean.
Speaker 7 (40:45):
Great to talk to you man, Thank you, Thanks Gleay,
Thanks Buck,
This is twenty four, a weekly highlight reel from the
Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show featuring all things election coverage.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Let's get started. Here are Clay and Bucks.
Speaker 3 (00:15):
As we start to think about the July Republican Convention
and the August Democrat Convention. And we will be in
Milwaukee for the full week of the Republican Convention, by
the way, which I'm looking forward to. I think that
Jesse Kelly has already booked us for a night out
at Red Lobster in Milwaukee, which feels like it has
a epic potential.
Speaker 4 (00:36):
I'm a little sad because that's going to be amazing,
but it won't be before the DNC convention, so I
can't sit there and lord it over you too, who
both believe that Biden still may be replaced, So at
that point I won't be able to make you buy
me the unlimited all you can eat Lobster Fest.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
It's gonna be fun. Okay, So you mentioned the debate.
Speaker 3 (00:59):
This is the front page of the New York Times
today and the headline is TV networks to urge Biden
and Trump to debate, wading into a fraud topic. Opening
paragraph and again this is the New York Times front page.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
In an unusual move.
Speaker 3 (01:18):
The five major broadcast in cable news networks have prepared
a joint open letter that urges President Biden and former
President Trump to participate in a tell in televised debates
ahead of election Day. According to two people with direct
knowledge of their plans, the letter, endorsed by ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC,
(01:42):
and Fox News, thrust into public view a question that
swirled whether there will be presidential debates. I read that today,
Buck and I thought, oh, this is interesting. This is
basically a public threat to Joe Biden that, because Trump
has said he'll debate anytime, any place, anywhere, and has
been very consistent about that as it pertains to the
(02:04):
presidential debates, if they are going to give this level
of attention to whether the debates happen, this to me
feels like a bully tactic designed to force Joe Biden
into the debates. And the fact that they put it
on the front page of the New York Times and
that all five major news outlets across the political spectrum
(02:27):
are all signing on. They said they're trying to get
other news organizations to do it as well. It says
the letters not final. The networks are also seeking endorsements
from other leading national news organizations, including newspapers New York Times,
Washington Post, Wall Street Journal. I would think are all
being asked as well, So.
Speaker 2 (02:45):
How do you read this?
Speaker 3 (02:46):
I thought it was very interesting that again on the
front page this morning, as I'm drinking my Crocket coffee,
this is what I'm reading.
Speaker 4 (02:52):
Yes, I would say that it's not surprising at all
that they would take this position because what is the
revenue associated with those debates work. I mean, there's there's
big money to be made for these in these presidential debates,
for those news networks. And it also I think I
think it goes a little bit to the anxiety quite
(03:14):
honestly that the cable news networks have that there uh
their relevant slash, their ability to set the political tone
and and be the go to place for political news,
well for news maybe in general, but for political news
more specifically, is you know, slipping away, slipping away faster
(03:34):
maybe than they had anticipated. In the era of digital
social media. I mean, I'm just gonna say, like I
think that X and truth social for example, are increasingly
places where people who are really going deep into the
news on a regular basis, are spending more and more
time just because it's so much faster, It's so much
more efficient than trying to watch long form cable cable
(03:56):
news commentary. And I think that the network have to
make this pitch because for money and also for relevance.
And I think that the worst fear that they have
is that you start to have what is the moment
that people feel very differently about cable news role or
the news networks role, right, ABC, NBCCBS. Then all of
(04:20):
a sudden, you have the presidential debates that are just
streamed on streaming platforms, and anyone can make money off
and off their platform based on.
Speaker 5 (04:28):
The viewership that they get.
Speaker 4 (04:30):
And isn't that kind of the way it should be? Actually,
the more you think about it, I think Republicans have
made huge mistakes for years by allowing these not so
stealthy commies to be the moderators from places like CNN
and ABC.
Speaker 5 (04:44):
Why why go doin with that?
Speaker 2 (04:46):
I agree?
Speaker 3 (04:47):
I mean, I think even didn't RNC give a debate
to the NBC for the Republican primary and then they
go fire Ron McDaniel as soon as she gets hired
which feels a little bit too frank, like a quid
pro quo, Oh, you give us a debate where we
can make tens of millions of dollars in theory, I
think the I don't know about you, Buck, but I
(05:09):
even think the idea that you should be able to
run commercials during debates feels a little bit dirty to me.
You ever, you ever get on and uh, but you
see what I'm saying that right, which is why we're
in the Internet era. Why not just have it streamed live?
I mean maybe they'll say the debate participants need like
a minute to catch their breath or something, but you know,
(05:29):
have it for an hour. I think these guys are
plenty happy to talk for an hour. I mean they've
been talking their whole lives, Biden and Trump. Why why
should it be Also the favoritism that goes into this
and the negotiations, why should some networks get it and
others don't?
Speaker 2 (05:43):
You know?
Speaker 4 (05:44):
And what it's really doling out. It's just money. I mean,
this is guaranteed eyeballs. It's just money to be able
to have a debate for your network. So and the
notion that there's some prestige that NBC News or that's
a joke, right, Look at NPR. It's a joke that
these places are journalistic entities that are honest brokers.
Speaker 3 (06:02):
I think it should be like State of the Union,
where everybody covers it on all of the networks. And
I would argue if I were doing it, I would say,
and this would actually be I think really interesting. What
if each candidate got to pick the moderator to ask
the questions of the other candidate.
Speaker 2 (06:22):
I think that would be super fair.
Speaker 3 (06:24):
Like Trump gets to pick a it has to be
somebody who's employed by a news network, right, But if
Trump wants Sean Hannity to ask every question of Joe Biden,
and then let's say Joe Biden wants I don't know,
Rachel Maddow to ask every question of Donald Trump, I
actually think that would be incredibly riveting television because obviously
(06:45):
then they can end up talking cross talking about different topics.
But you then are balancing out the bias by letting
basically each guy pick the person who's going to interrogate
the other side.
Speaker 4 (06:57):
I can I just be the wet blanket here for
a second on all this though, because I just think
I have to for a minute, which is I don't think,
even though we're in such a media obsessed era, I
don't think that debates absent a total catastrophe. And I'm
not even sure what that would look like, other than
someone having a stroke on stage. Absent a total catastrophe,
(07:18):
I'm not sure the debates really do very much. I'm
not sure the debates I don't think the data shows
that they move. It's more for spectacle and entertainment than
it is for actually helping to determine the election.
Speaker 5 (07:29):
I think that's the case for a while.
Speaker 3 (07:30):
I would say that is generally the case, and I
agree with you that catastrophe could be a moving aspect.
I think it's uniquely maybe different with the ages of
the candidates this year. I don't know that we've ever
had a situation where you could legitimately say I'm not
sure that at least one of the candidates, certainly Joe Biden,
(07:53):
is physically capable of finishing his term.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
Right.
Speaker 3 (07:56):
How old was Reagan in eighty four, like seventy one
or something, seventy four whatever. His age was nowhere close
to what Biden would be, And it was a huge
topic in eighty four and I think people wanted to
see Reagan how he did, but I think the Biden.
Now the challenge here is I think we saw it
with the State of the Union. They're gonna shoot him
up with every caffeine known demand, with every drug cocktail
(08:19):
known to man, and Biden's gonna come out and I
think he's going in that two hour period. Now, they
may have to sleep, he may have to sleep twenty
straight hours after he does it, but they will shoot
him up with every pill imaginable to make him look
energetic and not lost with lethargy. Now here's the challenge,
And this is what I would say to Trump if
(08:39):
these debates happen. Just get him off his talking points.
Biden falls apart when he doesn't have a teleprompter to
just be able to read off of. I think he
might fall apart in the debates.
Speaker 4 (08:52):
I mean, I'm just it's deja vu all over again,
which I know is a joke. Ever, people was like,
deja vu means I know it took French. It's a
jog quote, right, yes, But I remember that was the
theory back in twenty twenty, was that Biden when people
saw him on stage and then we didn't really have
(09:13):
a normal election, I know, because of COVID and that
changed things, but it didn't happen. Then I would be
very cautious about thinking it would happen this time around.
And I still think Biden says no because to your point, Clay,
it's different because of the age factor than it has
ever been before. Reagan was seventy three years old back
in eighty four. Okay, so yeah, it's different because we're
(09:34):
talking about a whole step up right seventies to eighties,
as anyone listening knows, is step up in terms of
age and energy and everything else makes a difference.
Speaker 5 (09:44):
And so that's one thing.
Speaker 4 (09:45):
But I also believe that because the Biden narrative is
that Trump is a threat to democracy, they're going to
make the deplatforming argument or that you can't platform a
threat to democracy like Donald Trump.
Speaker 5 (09:58):
I think you know that's.
Speaker 2 (09:59):
Yeah, I think you're right on that.
Speaker 3 (10:01):
I think when all the major news organizations are saying
they want a debate, that gets a harder argument to
make because they're not going to give it the same
That's what I would.
Speaker 5 (10:09):
Don't you think they have to say that publicly?
Speaker 2 (10:11):
You know what I mean?
Speaker 4 (10:12):
They have to say that publicly. Do you really think
they're going to put a lot of pressure on him
If they think it's going to hurt Biden's numbers, that
to me would be the tell they have to put
this thing out of the New York Times. We want
him to debate behind closed doors. I'm sure they're like,
don't debate that, that lunatic, you know, I don't think.
Speaker 2 (10:25):
I think it's an interesting question.
Speaker 3 (10:26):
I think behind closed doors a lot of them may
be like, Biden's a disaster, We don't really care if
Trump wins.
Speaker 5 (10:34):
Just something to think that Clay is really throwing some
bobs today.
Speaker 2 (10:38):
Wow, No, I think that.
Speaker 3 (10:40):
To me, I read that as this is pressure on Biden,
letting him know front page New York Times, we're not
carrying your water. If you try to argue, oh, I
can't afford to platform him if every news organization signs
on otherwise.
Speaker 4 (10:54):
Don't don't ever underestimate the willingness of the media to
carry water for a Democrat. I mean, I don't know
they have no integrity to protect. But maybe maybe you're right,
maybe they are gonna pres because there's money involved too,
and there's prestige involved.
Speaker 2 (11:06):
That's the part of it that's a little.
Speaker 3 (11:08):
Bit just to put it on the front page of
the New York Times and have the story broken by
the New York Times, which they know Joe Biden's gonna read.
Speaker 4 (11:15):
Yeah, it's April, you know. I guess they have to
set the stuff up pretty far in advance. So yeah,
we'll have to see.
Speaker 1 (11:21):
If you're listening to twenty four the Year of Impact
with Clay and Buck.
Speaker 3 (11:29):
It seems to me that there is more and more
consensus that there is not going to be a way
to get two trials complete. Would you agree now that
the consensus buck is one trial is likely to be
complete this Alvin Bragg case over the bookkeeping air in
terms of before people vote on November fifth, that it's unlikely.
Speaker 4 (11:53):
They're gonna get They're gonna get one for sure, which
I mean that I've thought all along.
Speaker 5 (11:57):
I think they're gonna try to sneak.
Speaker 4 (11:59):
Another one under the under the radar, I really do.
I mean, I think they will try to fifty I
give it fifty to fifty. But I mean I think
that they're not given up on it at all. They
don't think that they're gonna they have to see it through.
Speaker 3 (12:11):
They're going to have the oral arguments of the Supreme
Court over presidential power. You said April twenty fifth, I
think right. I don't think they're going to come out
with a ruling on that until the end of June.
They're also still going to have a hearing on half
of the charges that have been brought about by Jack
Smith and whether or not they're even able to be
(12:32):
used on jan six related cases. So I think the
absolute earliest that they could start the back in nations
again in the Judge Chutkin courtroom would be sometime after
July fourth, and given how much time you're going to
have there, they may try to start a trial, but
(12:53):
I think voting is going to happen before there's I
think there's only going to be one case that's actually
a result.
Speaker 4 (13:00):
So that's interesting. Maybe they've started it, but they haven't
resolved it that I could see happening. But I could
still see them trying to get a second. Here's what
we know that I think has to be taken into
the analysis. Right, They have moved in the DC trial
at I mean warp speed, ludicrous speed for the spaceball
fans out there, over and over again, both the District
(13:22):
Court and the Circuit Court, right, I mean, I think
we can agree they're doing things in ten days that
would normally take six months in terms of process, procedure,
back and forth. They go nope, done, nope done. They're
moving as fast as they can. So we know that
they will accelerate it, and assuming the Supreme Court doesn't
shut that case down, they're going to have the ability
to go on whatever expedited schedule they want effectively, and
(13:46):
we know they've already said that. The position of the
DOJ is it's about when you bring the charges, not
when you bring the trial. We don't care when the
trial starts with regard to the election cycle. So that's
why I think they You know, would Jack Smith start
this case in the middle of September, no matter what
that looks. Guess I think he would. I don't think
he cares. I think he feels like at least then
(14:08):
Clay he can say I did everything I could. I
left it all on the field to destroy democracy.
Speaker 3 (14:13):
And that's where I think it becomes interesting to contemplate
what's going to happen in this New York City case.
So my general thought is that people are confused and overwhelmed.
They get Egene Carroll, the Letitia James trying to get
the business penalties put forward against Donald Trump. I think
(14:34):
they kind of roll all these things together, even though
some are civil and criminal. I don't think most people
are making distinctions between those. What I wonder though, is
whether there could be a panic start to set in
if they start to look at the calendar and say,
you know what this is it, and whether Alvin Bragg
might try as a result to actually put Trump in
(14:57):
prison over the stupid bookkeeping felonies.
Speaker 4 (15:03):
I want to say that that, you know, it's like
the Sunny Hawston thing yesterday when she said that the
eclipse maybe is related to climate change, and on X
I wrote, if you think there's anything that's too stupid
to be said on the View, you haven't watched the View.
Because there's nothing that is too stupid to be said
on the View. I want to say it is just
(15:24):
too outlandish for Alvin Bragg to try to lock Trump
up on the put.
Speaker 5 (15:28):
Aside the politicization just the weakest.
Speaker 4 (15:31):
If you try to lock up anyone on this, I
would think it was insane, insane, but I can't exclude
it I mean, can you exclude this entirely? I don't
think we can exclude anything.
Speaker 3 (15:41):
I think the more it becomes likely that they're not
going to get any other conviction, the crazier what they're
going to do with the New York City case becomes,
because it goes from kind of the opening punch to
a hell Mary.
Speaker 2 (15:55):
That's the direction that I see it going.
Speaker 1 (16:00):
We're listening to twenty four the most important tier in
politics with Clay Travis an bock Sexton.
Speaker 3 (16:08):
He's running for the Senate in Wisconsin. He could be
one of the seats that flips to give Republicans control
of the Senate. He is a fourth generation Wisconsin I
is that the right phrase.
Speaker 2 (16:20):
We'll find out. And he lives right now in Madison.
Speaker 3 (16:24):
By the way, I think I'm gonna try to get
up to watch the Alabama Wisconsin game in Madison in September.
It should be a pretty awesome scene. I bet you
will be there as part of the campaign. Eric Hoveny
joins us, Now, what is it going to be like?
Speaker 2 (16:41):
What do you think?
Speaker 3 (16:42):
And when Alabama rolls into to your hometown of Madison,
that's a pretty big game.
Speaker 6 (16:48):
It's gonna be Rocky Camp Randall is one of the
best spots to watch a college football game. And I'm
I'm seeming totally serious about that. I'm not just talking
my school. But it's in a community instead of surrounded
by a giant parking lot. You got Region Street, all
the bars, You've got people that's set up selling, broughtwursts
(17:11):
and beer. I've had season tickets there for geez, thirty
plus years, right on the forty five yard line. My
dad had them before me since the early sixties. It's
a ball and when Alabama comes running out, people will
be screaming and yelling. It's gonna be a hell of
a great.
Speaker 2 (17:29):
Game, all right, I agree with you.
Speaker 3 (17:30):
I'm actually curious though, So you had season tickets for
years and years, you're right there near midfield.
Speaker 2 (17:36):
You're going to be all in on the Badgers.
Speaker 3 (17:38):
How do you balance campaigning when you also really really
care about the game that's going on.
Speaker 6 (17:45):
That's gonna be tough, but there's no way I'm going
to miss Alabama running out on the Camp Randle Stadium
onto the field. So and there's gonna be some great
Packer games because I'm so hyped up about the Packers
this year. You know, we're the favorite right now in
Vegas odds to win the Super Bowl. So look, I'm
(18:06):
just going to have to schedule around it. Will I
be able to go to every game? No, but you
know there's a couple I just got a you know,
X out and you know I'll be shaking hands and
seeing people and all the rest and having a couple
of Bruskis along with it.
Speaker 2 (18:20):
No doubt sounds awesome already.
Speaker 5 (18:22):
Hey, Eric, it's it's Buck.
Speaker 4 (18:24):
Tell us why you're going to be able to beat
Tammy Baldwin, the incumbent Democrat this time around, and just
give us a sense as to how you'll represent the
great people of Wisconsin differently from what she has aligned
herself with.
Speaker 6 (18:41):
Look, Tammy Baldwin is a career politician, thirty eight years
in politics. He literally came out of school, ran for
not city council, county council, then went on to the Assembly,
then the Congress, and then the Senate. Everything she votes
for is wrong. You know, she voted for everything that
(19:03):
Joe Biden wanted. She in fact, she votes with him
ninety five point five percent of the time. Think of
how crazy that is. You know, I love my wife.
We've been together for over thirty years. We don't agree
on everything ninety five point five percent of the time,
and they're sure couldn't see how anybody would even agree
with Joe Biden ten percent at the time. So I'm
(19:23):
just going to point out the facts of you know,
she voted for you know, four point seven trillion dollars
of additional government spending that helped ignite inflation. You know,
she she has been wrong on the border. I have
an add up right now on the border, and our
state is really being affected now by what's happening over
the border on multiple different levels. She actually not only
(19:46):
supported Obama when he did his Iranian deal, but when
Joe Biden went to double down on a really bad thing,
because we know the negative consequences of that first deal,
how isis and all the terroism that exploded after gave
I ran all that cash, Biden goes doubles down on
that same thing, as Cammy Baldwin's there to support that.
(20:07):
So she's a career politician. She knows nothing about the economy,
how the economy works. She's totally bought off by special interests.
Her Senate office as a revolving door of lobbyists, and
she takes all the special interest money. She actually earmarked
in the last budget four hundred thousand dollars for a
(20:30):
transgender affirming clinic that doesn't even tell parents that they're
doing that with their own kids. Now think of that.
I mean, this is how far out there she is.
Now she runs in our state is you know, I'm moderate,
and tries to position herself that way. But she's one
of the three most progressive senators. And if I can
(20:50):
win this seat, not only will that assure that, you know,
the Senate will flip for the next two years, but
it's really the next four to six years because the
next couple elections cycles are more difficult for Republicans. So
this is such a critical seat to pull back for
common sense approach to government.
Speaker 3 (21:09):
What do you your race is not the same as
Donald Trump's race, but you are going to be connected
to a certain extent. Ron Johnson won in twenty twenty two,
six years more as a senator, so certainly people are
receptive to what he argues. How do you see a
presidential election year, Certainly turnout is going to be up,
impacting the overall pathway for you to take back the
(21:33):
Senate through this win.
Speaker 6 (21:36):
Yeah right, now, well let's back up. In twenty twenty,
Donald Trump lost the election by twenty thousand votes out
if we'll call it, three million voters that will show
off them vote. So it was a hair by a hair.
But we have six of our eight congressional sees of
Republican our state senates. The supermajority Republican our state Assembly
(21:57):
is almost a super majority. So there is about sixty
thousand voters that would vote for a Republican state senator
or congressional officer assemblyman that didn't vote for Donald Trump.
Two thirds of more women, a third of mar college
educated men. So you know, look, I'm going to be
talking to everybody in our state because I believe in
(22:19):
Ronald Reagan's broad end strategy. But I will also be
messaging to those people and you know, talking about the
issues that hopefully matter to them to get them to
vote for me like they did for other Republican congressional
and state Senate races. The other thing I'm doing is
(22:40):
a lot of times Republicans just go about, you know,
turning out their own base. I believe we got to
push the map, like Reagan did. I've been in the
minority communities, both the black community and the Hispanic community,
talking to them. I'm telling you there's a major shift
going on there because these people had than hammered by
(23:01):
the inflation and the open borders and immigration and what's
happening there. I'm taught. I'm fighting in Madison. You know,
I was born there, raised there, had a business there
for twenty five years. You know, that is my home.
That's where I live, and I've given to more charities
(23:21):
than all but a handful of people in the Madison market.
So I'm going to compete there, but I'm going to
talk to everybody across the state because our country is
in trouble. Look, we're losing the American dream for far
too many people, and it's scary how much damage the
Left has done to our country in such a short
(23:41):
amount of time, and we have to take back this country.
Speaker 4 (23:46):
We're speaking to Eric Hovedy. He's running for the US
Senate seat that is currently held by Tammy Baldwin and Wisconsin.
Speaker 5 (23:53):
It's going to be a very important race. Just one
more for you.
Speaker 2 (23:56):
Eric.
Speaker 4 (23:57):
My understanding is, you know, when you think of Wisconsin
as a border state. Most people would think, well, yeah,
I guess you know Canada, But you are a border
state in more ways too, because there are people that
are being these illegal immigrants that are coming into the
country are being moved by the federal government into your state,
including into some small towns. Can you tell us what's
(24:18):
going on with that.
Speaker 6 (24:20):
It's happening in small towns all over. I'll give you
an example. Whitewater, Wisconsin's a town of about thirteen thousand citizens.
They dropped a thousand illegal immigrants overnight there. So what's happened.
Where do you house these people? They don't have the
housing for them, so they're putting them all over the place.
Access to healthcare, This is a real crisis in our country.
(24:40):
People are struggling to get access to healthcare even before
this immigration wave, and now it's made it really acute.
It's blown up the Whitewater's budget, I mean almost immediately.
How does the city that now has to take care
of another thousand people that isn't generating revenue for them
(25:00):
any taxes. It's just a big got so their budgets
upside down literally immediately, where before their budget was in
a good position. But this is happening in small towns
all over. I was just talking to somebody who said
this was happening in another even smaller town in northern
Wisconsin where all these Nicaraguans came in. Nobody knows how
(25:22):
to speak to them. They don't where to put housing,
where do you get them into schools? You don't even
have the teachers to the school of them. So we've
got a crisis.
Speaker 7 (25:32):
On our hand.
Speaker 6 (25:33):
And you know the other thing, Wisconsin has been very impacted,
like all over our country about the fentanyl and opiate crisis.
You know, we lost to what is it, one hundred
and twelve thousand Americans last year to this crisis. Most
of them are young. It's the leading cause of death
for Americans between the ages of eighteen and forty five.
(25:55):
And all those drugs pour over our southern border. So
on every single level, this has been negative to our country,
to the people of Wisconsin, and it needs to be
shut down and stopped.
Speaker 5 (26:09):
Eric Hovedy everybody, Eric, what's your website?
Speaker 4 (26:11):
Because you're gonna need some help to beat Tammy Tammy Baldwin.
Speaker 7 (26:17):
Eric E. R. C.
Speaker 6 (26:19):
Hubbd ho V is in Victory. D isn't David E.
Is an Edward Ericovde dot Com. I appreciate anybody and
everybody's involvement, because look, we got to take back our country.
We got to save America. So thank you both of
you guys. It's great being on your show.
Speaker 5 (26:39):
Thanks Eric, appreciate it you. We're gonna be rooting for
you and talking to you more as it gets closer.
Speaker 1 (26:45):
If you're listening to twenty four the Year of Impact
with Clay and Buck, because.
Speaker 3 (26:52):
I bet Sean Parnell I saw him share this, I
bet he's pretty fired up about it too.
Speaker 2 (26:57):
Sean.
Speaker 3 (26:57):
You've got a bunch of kids, and we're going to
talk about situation on the ground in Pennsylvania and what
needs to happen in order for Pennsylvania to go back
or red in twenty twenty four. But when you hear
Dawn Staley says she's fine with men identifying as women
playing women's basketball, do you find this as crazy as
I do? That it's almost impossible to believe that. You know,
(27:20):
we made a movie called Juwanna man like the whole
era of mocking this. South Park has obviously been on
the front edge of this, and now it's basically Democrat
Party orthodoxy that if you're a dude pretending to be
a woman, you should be able to be in women's sports.
Speaker 7 (27:34):
Yeah yeah, I mean I was kind of blown away
by it. And I say this to somebody who has
three daughters who work their butt off every single day
committing themselves to a sport or whatever it is really
that they want to do, and when you let men
play women's sports, I mean, it's just I guess I
was to say, Clay, the Party of Science doesn't really
(27:56):
care about science because it's basic science that men are bigger, stronger,
faster than women. And ultimately, I look, it's a safety issue.
It's a safety issue, especially especially with how physical sports
can be. You sti't want to see anything happen to
a young girl that dedicated her life having her dreams
(28:17):
stolen by a man and then get hurt in the
process as well. It's it's just terrible all around.
Speaker 4 (28:22):
Hey, Sean, I'm sure you saw the Wall Street Journal
piece now they're voting. Read a Pennsylvania fracking boom weighs
in on Biden's re election chances. It gets into some
of the data. Look, the biggest swing state by population
is Pennsylvania, so it's critical for twenty twenty four. I
can't foresee a future in which Trump wins Pennsylvania and
(28:46):
does not win the election, right, I mean, I feel
like it's if he wins Pennsylvania, chances are he's gonna
win everywhere else he needs to. But this, this piece
goes into how the Democrats anti fracking position has changed
some of the dynamics such that now, especially out of
the Pittsburgh area, Democrats are the party of like software
(29:06):
designers who live in the city, and the Republicans are
the guys who are working in the natural gas industry
and guys that are doing more sort of trade and
and you know, outside jobs.
Speaker 5 (29:17):
What are you seeing.
Speaker 7 (29:19):
Yeah, it's such a great point, and I think your
assessment is spot on. I mean, there is a take
a tectonic shift, paradigm shift happening politically in Pennsylvania. And
I say, this is somebody who comes from, you know,
a family of blue dog Union Democrats, pro life, pro
gun Democrats who in many cases now are more pro
(29:41):
Trump than some of my Republican family members. And here's
the deal, buck, Like, you can drive anywhere from my
house in western Pennsylvania forty five minutes in any direction,
and you will drive through two or three towns that
have been are completely direct old school coal or oil
(30:01):
manufacturing towns that have buttoned themselves up. And the truth
is is that Republicans and Democrats both betrayed the people
who lived in those towns for a very very very
long time. And so Trump comes along and all of
a sudden, all of these people have a voice again.
And ultimately, I think that this paradigm shift has brought
(30:23):
forth this incredible opportunity for Republicans where now we're the
party of the working class. Now we're the party of
the middle class, right, and you have the Democrats who
have now strangely become in my lifetime, the party of
you know, big tech oligarch's, Hollywood celebrities, Ivory Tower academics.
(30:44):
And in western Pennsylvania, I mean, this is this is
a heavily you know, it's a heavily Republican area. It's
the place where Republicans can do very, very very well.
But there are a lot of blue dog Democrats here again,
pro life price gun Democrats who are gonna vote for Trump.
And I just think there's an unbelievable opportunity for Republicans
(31:07):
in Pennsylvania, especially with Trump at the top of the ticket.
I mean, Pennsylvania is more than in play this time around.
There's there's no question.
Speaker 3 (31:15):
About it that could play out, Sean Parnell with us
now not only in the national race. So I'm gonna
talk about here in a second, but also with Dave
McCormick trying to win back a Senate seat. I'm curious
how you would assess that Senate race and also what
the world's happened with with John Fetterman, who has has
(31:38):
really I mean it's like he went in for treatment
at at Walter Reed and came out in many respects
sounding like a Republican. Like what has happened there? Did
people miss attribute his political leanings? I mean, he regularly
says he's not woke, he's not a progressive, he's very
pro Israel. He's come out in favor of racking to
a certain degree. Also, I believe now believes the border
(32:01):
should be shut down.
Speaker 2 (32:02):
What is going on there?
Speaker 3 (32:03):
How would you assess the Senate in general, the race,
but also Fetterman.
Speaker 7 (32:08):
Well, first of all, we'll talk Dave McCormick first. I
think he's the only person you know that Bob Casey
has run against that can and I think likely will
beat Bob Casey. I mean, Dave McCormick is a fundraising machine.
And whether or not you like money in politics or not,
the guy you need money to run effective races. I
(32:30):
always liken money and political races to bullets in your
gun and combat. Right, politics is just like war, just
without the bullets. And so you run out of bullets
on the battleground like you're done. You run out of
fundraising dollars when you're running a race, you're done. But
Dave McCormick has an ability to raise historic sums of money.
(32:50):
And if you look at Pennsylvania as it is today,
just by the numbers, just by voter registration numbers. Trump
won Pennsylvania in sixteen and by the way, he was
the first Republican to do it running for president since
Ronald Reagan. He won by a razor sin margin with
a voter registration Republican voter registration deficit the Democrats of
(33:12):
six hundred thousand plus. Now the Democrats only have a
three hundred and eighty plus thousand voter registration advantage, so
it's nearly cut in half. So the state is more
favorable than it's ever been and it's going to continue
to trend read every day that goes on. As far
as Spetterman is concerned, I have I have a theory
(33:32):
about this, and it's basically, for a long time in
Pennsylvania there has been one Republican and one Democrat at
the top of the ticket for Senate. The state has
always had a sense of moderation there. There's a phrase
of Pennsylvania tolerate neither neither too much virsue or too
(33:52):
much vice. And so from a political standpoint, the people
here in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania have always had kind
of like an even keel temperament in the Senate. Well,
this is the first time two Democrats have been at
the top of the ticket in the Senate in Pennsylvania
in over one hundred years. And so I see Fetterman's
(34:13):
moderation right as it pertains to Israel, fracking and everything else,
as a political strategy to draw fire away from Bob
Casey and give Pennsylvanians the state of the sort of
political homeostasis that they've always had at the top of
the ticket. And what you see is people were writing
all these stories about Fetterman, like, WHOA, what happened to
(34:34):
this guy? Look at him? He's so conservative now, but
nobody's really writing about Bob Casey. And I mean, and
I look at it like this, Clay. You know, John
Fetterman waves around in Israeli flag. But the fact is,
look at how he votes in the Senate. He voted
against a standalone a package for Israel in the Senate.
So if you were really so pro Israel, you would
(34:57):
certainly vote for that. I've known John Fetterman long time,
since he was mayor of Braddock. He has been a
free Palestine guy for as long as I've known him.
So it goes back to an old adage that I have, like,
don't listen to what democrats say, watch how they vote.
Speaker 4 (35:15):
Yeah, I think that makes a lot of sense. Actually, Sean,
thank you for putting that into context for us. By
the way, if you want to hear more of Sean Parnell,
he has the Sean Parnell Show podcast on the Clay
and Buck Network. Another reason for our wonderful radio listeners
to subscribe on the iHeartRadio app to the Clay and
Buck Network and Seawan Show will be there along with
Tudor Dixon. Carol Markowitz Sean, how does Trump win? You
(35:36):
know the Pennsylvania terrain politically as well as anybody. How
does Trump win in twenty twenty four?
Speaker 7 (35:45):
Well, his path is going to be well, first of all,
again a state, it's more favorable than it's ever been.
But Trump has this ability and this is perhaps more
prominent in Pennsylvania than almost anywhere else, maybe Michigan as well.
But Trump has this ability to bring out this crazy
cross section of voters from everywhere, even first time people
(36:07):
that have really never voted before. A perfect example of
this is Erie County. It's largely it's a swing county
here in Pennsylvania in the northwest, but it's a Democrat county. Essentially,
they're more registered Democrats than Republicans. Trump won it in
twenty and sixteen with Trump off the ballot. In the
off cycle race in eighteen, the congressman who represents Erie
(36:30):
County lost it by almost twenty thousand votes. In twenty twenty,
Trump locked Erie County again by probably fifteen hundred votes.
So you get a sense of the turnout machine that
he is. And so when you add his ability to
turn out voters plus somebody like Dave McCormick on a ticket,
(36:51):
you kind of have a Trump Toomey vibe going there.
And by the way, those guys couldn't be more different.
I mean toom he voted to convict Trump and the Senate,
as we all remember. But you have this kind of
unbelievable synergy where Dave McCormick is going to play very,
very very well in the suburbs, and then you've got
Trump who's bringing out all these first time voters in
blue collar Democrats. Dave McCormick is going to benefit from that,
(37:13):
and my hope is that Trump benefits from some of
the suburban vote with McCormick as well. Add to that
that it is it's going to be what seems to
me a great Republican year with a terribly weak Democrat
candidate both at president and vice president. Somehow Kamala Harris
is less popular than Joe Biden. But look, there's a
ton of opportunity in Pennsylvania with a lot of synergy
(37:35):
on the ticket. And then you add to that a
mail in program that Republicans have never had before in
Pennsylvania that is at this point, very very very effective.
I like our chances.
Speaker 3 (37:46):
That's where I wanted to hit for the last question
for you. The number one thing we hear when we
talk about Pennsylvania is they're going to steal it, because
I think a lot of people saw the way the
votes kept rolling in the changes that were made in
twenty twenty, the fact that Feederman and happened to Sean.
Speaker 4 (38:01):
By the way, Sean was ahead going to bed and
then all of a sudden all the extra ballots came in.
Speaker 5 (38:06):
Sean was what was the gap?
Speaker 7 (38:10):
Oh, there was a thirteen thousand, But I mean, any
way you cut it, That's why every news outlet in
the country called the race for me, including MSNBC. Any
way you cut it mathematically, there's going to be a
thirteen thousand vote margin of victory. The race took over
a week, and the main issue was, even though like
I said, it took over a week to actually finish
the counting, was that you had a bunch of ballots
that were not signed, with no identification for first time
(38:33):
mail and voters, and unsupervised drop boxes. So that sort
of wittered away people's confidence in how we conduct elections here.
So things have gotten a little bit better in Pennsylvania.
But the truth is Republicans, especially in this state over
the last three cycles, have not done a good job
at voting an election infrastructure here in this state that
(38:55):
is required to win. Democrats, by contrast, have done well.
And just be clear for your audience people who are listening,
I don't like mail in ballots. I don't like our
system here. But the rules of the rules of engagement
are what they are until we win. You can't fix
things until we win. And so that has to be
the first priority. And what comes part and parcel with
(39:17):
that is building a system that will allow us to
do that, and so that that that operation is two.
It has to have two phases. Right, You have to
put a ton of dollars into registering low perpend You
have to register Republican voters. So you got to close
that registration gap and then focus on all the people
that Trump brings out, these low propensity voters that maybe
(39:39):
even vote for the first time in their life for
Trump and twenty or maybe even in sixteen, get them
on the permanent mail in vote so that in off
cycle races you can have that presidential level turnout. This
is why Republicans are be getting killed in Pennsylvania and
off cycle and off cycle or mid mid term elections
is because the Democrats basically set the bar really high
in twenty twenty. They got all these people on the
(40:00):
permanent mail in voting list, and Republicans are just like,
well I don't like mail in voting. Well, that ain't
gonna win elections. And so this time around we have
a program with millions and millions of dollars behind it.
This is some sort of quiet behemoth working in the
background of Pennsylvania to do just what I told you.
And so not only do we have all these great
(40:21):
things doing sener giella ticket, a great year, great environment,
we can come and president, we also have this program
where we're working to register voters and get them on
the permanent mail in list so that we can bolster
our chances in November. And like I said, I like
our chances.
Speaker 4 (40:38):
Sean Parnell, everybody check out the Sean Parnell Show, which
is in the Clay and Buck podcast network.
Speaker 5 (40:43):
Please subscribe. Sean.
Speaker 7 (40:45):
Great to talk to you man, Thank you, Thanks Gleay,
Thanks Buck,
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Nikki Glaser Podcast
Every week comedian and infamous roaster Nikki Glaser provides a fun, fast-paced, and brutally honest look into current pop-culture and her own personal life.