July 11, 2024 • 40 mins
In this episode, Tudor Dixon, Kyle Olson, and Sara Broadwater discuss political strategies, focusing on Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer and the impact of ballot initiatives on elections. They explore the consequences of marijuana legalization, highlighting social harms and political motivations. The conversation shifts to the use of abortion as a political tool and the role of media and intelligence agencies in shaping public perception. The crew criticize Whitmer's leadership and discuss the influence of charisma in politics. The Tudor Dixon Podcast is part of the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton Podcast Network. For more visit TudorDixonPodcast.com
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 (00:00):
Welcome to the Tutor Dixon Podcast. We are all here.
We've got Sarah Bradwater, Kyle Olsen, and me Tutor Dixon
today to chat about everything that's going on in the country,
which for us, it's kind of funny because we're watching
as Gretchen Whitmer is out on the media circuit hawking
her new book, because this would be the perfect timing
(00:22):
when you are currently campaign co chair of a campaign
that is rapidly failing because your candidate is rapidly failing
and failed miserably on the debate stage, and she decided
to launch her book. But it made me start thinking
about how did we get here with a Gretchen Whitmer
where people were like, well, she would be a great president,
even though in the state of Michigan is a disaster.
(00:45):
And so we started talking about, like, how did she
win these campaigns because it wasn't obviously on her record
or she would never win another campaign. So you go
back to twenty eighteen, and you know that the Democrats
were like shocked by twenty sixteen, so they brought up
in these ballot initiatives, and the ballot initiatives are incredibly powerful,
and so in Michigan, we passed the marijuana ballot initiative,
(01:08):
and then marijuana became legalized in the state of Michigan,
which is a complication because it's not federally legal, so
it's a cash business. And they're, you know, as interesting
as we were campaigning learning all of the pitfalls of
what happened after legislating or after legalizing marijuana. But I
found this article that I wanted to talk to you
(01:28):
guys about in the Dispatch because after weed was legalized here,
we actually had an employee who was like an amazing guy,
one of our best employees, and just like a super
hard work He was in his fifties, so he's really young,
and he was like he became like a daily user,
a daily weed user. And he would go to my
(01:50):
dad and be like, man, I've been so sick. I
don't know what is going on. I'm so sick. I
have to like I have to get in the shower.
It's the only time that I stopped feeling sick, and
I throw up all the time. And my dad was like, man,
this is a this is weird. You need to go
to the doctrine, Like the doctor can't figure this out. Well,
it turns out, and he ended up dying, and I
mean it was really really sad because eventually you can't
(02:12):
keep anything down. I mean, it's like you have no nutrition.
So he ended up dying, and they connected it back
to cannabis use, and they said that it was this
this syndrome that it's like repeated vomiting. It's like cannabis
hyper remesis syndrome. And apparently this is like a really popular,
(02:32):
are really common side effect of people. We're using it
every day. Before we started seeing legalization, we had like
a million users, like daily users, and now it's up
to somewhere between seventeen and nineteen million and then forty
six million people regularly using. But the interesting part about
this article to me is because all of the people,
(02:55):
and this is where I go back to Republicans have
not been historically good about countering some of the stuff.
All of the people who are like, it's safe, it's safe,
there's nothing wrong with it, they've now been proven wrong.
But once again, once the something's legal, you're never putting
that genie back in the bottle. So now you have
to deal with the fact that we have fourteen hundred
(03:17):
road desks every year connected to marijuana. But also it's
like you have the mental health issues when we talk
about mental health all the time. You have an increase, increase,
increase in depression, you have an increase in marijuana induce
psychosis and marijuana. Oh this other sickness with the throwing up,
(03:43):
but you've got these all these hospitalizations. Oh. I was
also schizophrenia. Young adults, particularly young adults, heavy marijuana use
is associated with severe mental health issues. Most persuad pervasively
is schizophrenaline, Schizophrennie. I look at this and I think
this is not because people wanted to make it easier.
(04:05):
They the argument was they keep people out of jail,
right if you okay, if you legalize marijuana, you won't
have all these people in jail for marijuana offenses. But
ultimately it was about getting people elected.
Speaker 2 (04:17):
I think they also the argument used to be, if
you legalize it, less people will do it because there's
no joy of like risking it to go do something.
I remember that being an argument frequently with a marijuana
And when you see that number, yeah, I mean not
that way, definitely not the case.
Speaker 3 (04:33):
Well, and the Midwesterner wrote or published story the other
day about Michigan is actually the largest consumer of marijuana
in the country, even more than California.
Speaker 1 (04:46):
Which is I think that's interesting that you say that,
because that was you were talking, I think last week
about Michigan being the second most violent state in the country.
And according to this article, it says there are also
social harms. One analysis of re creational dispensaries in Chicago
found that crime increased by roughly thirty percent in the
surrounding one third mile following the opening of a dispensary.
(05:08):
And we have dispensaries everywhere.
Speaker 3 (05:10):
Yeah, but and it's significant that Michigan is more because
Michigan is one quarter the size of California. So think
about that, Michigan has twenty five percent of the population
of California and yet there's more marijuana consumption. It's a
bad thing. But in terms of the ballot initiatives, what
(05:33):
this shows is that in states like Michigan, there will
be there will be public policy created in the name
of winning elections. And so it's not about is this
a good public policy for society, it's what can we
put on the ballot that's going to drive people out
to vote and improve our chances to win.
Speaker 1 (05:54):
Yeah, if you're out there listening, it's now become a
political game. I mean, it really has, because I think
both are like, Okay, what can we come up with
that will mess with the other side. How can we
drive people out to the polls with some sort of
a law that they think they need. And that's what
we saw on twenty two with abortion. And so that's
why I say Gretchen Wimmer, who is now being lauded
(06:17):
as this potential presidential candidate, has never run for office.
On her record, she was telling people that marijuana was
a Democrat thing. And that's the funny thing. The ballad
initiative is independent of the people running. And these were
constitutional amendments. The abortion was constitutional amendment so that people
(06:38):
could choose, and like we came out and said that, well,
I mean, I guess if you want abortion, you can
choose it, and you still don't have to vote for Wimmer.
But they play it as if you don't vote for us,
somehow the other candidate can change whatever this constitutional amendment.
Werek it is and it works, I mean, and it's
shockingly it works. And I think the other thing is
(06:58):
they lie about it, Like when marijuana was on the ballot.
It was like, this is not addictive, This is not
an addictive drug. You will not have a problem with this.
And now, according to this article it says marijuana, it
turns out, is an addictive, risky substance. Legalizing its commercial
sale causes more people to use it and increases the
levels of addiction. As a result, it also increases the
(07:19):
level of harm. And that to me, this is where
and it has generally been I don't know the Republicans
have effectively had you would be able to answer this, Kyle,
Have they have They effectively had a ballot initiative that
is driven people out in the numbers that we've seen
marijuana or abortion. And I would say both of those
(07:40):
had many, many lives attached to them.
Speaker 3 (07:42):
There was one, I think, well, I don't know how
it drove the two that I think of. There was
an eminent domain ballot initiative that was very popular that
would ban or restrict the government, you know, taking your property,
and it went it dealt with It had its roots
(08:04):
in New Jersey because there was a in New Jersey
they took a woman's property to build a casino. And
then they didn't build a casino and all of that,
So that was the roots of that. I'm not sure
that something like that would actually drive turnout. The Democrats
have been very effective at finding these issues because it
does two things. One it drives turnout, but two it
(08:26):
changes the subject. And so you look at twenty twenty two,
for example, they had this the Abortion Proposal three, the
Abortion Constitutional Amendment, which basically dropped any restrictions on abortion
and made any restrictions that were in state law unconstitutional.
And so as we speak, they Democrats, the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, etc.
(08:51):
Are in court arguing that, you know, whatever restrictions are
still on the books are unconstitutional. But basically what that
did is that what it gave Whitmer an opportunity to
change the subject from her record on COVID, which was
(09:11):
terrible and what she did to families and the economy
and all of that, and she was able to change
the subject to abortion.
Speaker 1 (09:18):
And I believe that. I mean, Sarah mentioned that she
doesn't even have our debate in her new book that
she just dropped. She has her debate with Shooty and
she doesn't have our debate because she had a record
and she couldn't defend it. And we actually brought up
what she had done in that debate, and she couldn't
defend it. I mean, she didn't even she didn't even try.
She just laughed and oh that's not true. Oh that's
(09:38):
not true, and had no statement, didn't use her time,
didn't defend it at all. And it was because she
didn't run on it. But she didn't have to run
on a record because she had this abortion on the ballot.
And this is why I contend that all these people
that come out and say, oh, Donald Trump overturned Row
(09:59):
think knew exactly what was happening, because the league is
very suspicious. They knew that they were going to have
a tough time in twenty two. There's all the talk
of the red wave. They could foresee it was going
to be a struggle for them, and they don't want
to give a power, so they choose Mississippi, where they
have one abortion clinic, one abortion clinic in the entire state.
(10:21):
They only perform abortions up to sixteen weeks, and the
Mississippi legislature or whatever they pass a bill it says
you can't perform abortions after fifteen weeks, but they do
have exceptions after fifteen weeks for medical emergency or fetal abnormality.
No change truly, that is no change in what was
(10:43):
actually going on in Mississippi because this abortion clinic was
never actually performing an abortion past sixteen weeks. And so
those people elevate this, they sue, they elevate this to
the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ultimately then has to
look at Roe, which we all knew was suspect. How
that was decided. They overturn Row, and the Democrats are
(11:05):
like ready with this little weird ready with this in
every single state.
Speaker 3 (11:11):
But think about the timing if if the normal process
would have been followed the because it's a controversial case,
they tend to announce those at the end of the session,
and which means that that would have been announced in June. Well,
June is too late to organize a ballot initiative and
(11:33):
get the signatures and get it approved and get it
on the ballot. And so what the leaker afforded them
was the opportunity to be able to do all of
that and actually get abortion on the ballot in states
like Michigan where it was critical to turn out their
supporters and win. And so you have to wonder was
(11:57):
that the intent was by leak looking it was giving
them the months that they needed to organize all of
this and be able to win in November.
Speaker 2 (12:06):
Well, and remember there was another leak from the Supreme Court,
which rarely happens this year, also on abortion. So it's
just suspects me that we've never found the original leaker.
There was another abortion ruling that came down this last month. Also,
it magically got added to the website early. I mean,
they know that this is their ticket, and so they
want to just give their people heads up on it
(12:28):
because it's all they have to run on. To your point, Whitmer,
at the debate, she had nothing else to talk about.
She openly says she uses comedy, humor and laughter as
her deflection while she's trying to say that tongue in
cheek deflection against Republicans that want to come after her
with absurdities. But those absurdities are actually real facts on
her record that she's never had to answer for because effectively,
(12:50):
she ran with abortion, she ran with marijuana more so
than she did with her actual running mate. I mean,
Garland Gilcrest through Lieutenant governor, brought nothing to that ticket.
Just use the issue that she needed of the day
as her running mate.
Speaker 1 (13:03):
What does she call herself at the beginning of the
book a smoke show.
Speaker 2 (13:07):
It's not in the beginning of the book, it's part
way through the group book she says that she's a
smoke show governor Midwestern governor, which I find very odd.
Speaker 1 (13:14):
But that makes sense with I mean, that may be
why she struggled in the debate, because I think she
is always kind of this is gonna sound bad, but
she's the one saying she uses laughter and joking. I
think she's flirted her way through hard discussions like that,
and I think that's what she did in that. I
think she thought she was cute with Shooty. Obviously she
(13:35):
thought she was cute, because she said that was her
reference to her debate with him, that she joked and
she made light of things. Well, she also didn't have
a record as governor then, so she could just bs
her way through that when she was and can't really
woman on woman, it's not as easy to be so adorable.
(13:56):
Well yeah, and I think that's just also what we're
seeing in a lot of the Democrat us, know though
they use that personality ploy to make you think what
they're saying is actually true. You see it with Gavin Newsom,
we were talking about Pete Buddha Judge earlier today that
we see the same thing with them. They use their charisma,
their charm, whatever it is, to just say look over here,
don't listen to what they're saying. What I'm saying has
(14:19):
to be sure, because it just sounds great coming out
of my mouth, even though the facts don't actually back
any of that up. Let's take a quick commercial break.
We'll continue next on the Tutor Dixon Podcast, and everything
now is a show. I mean, we talk about we
had a few police officers who were killed in the
line of duty here in the state of Michigan. And
(14:42):
one had a funeral on a Friday, and it was
the last Friday in June, and the next day was
the last day of Pride month. The Attorney General did
not show up to this man's funeral, but she was
dancing and singing and singing karaoke in a Pride parade
the next day there and then they of course put
it out. They put out all the videos and they're
(15:04):
bragging about how adorable they are, and you know, I'm
really just kind of tired of politicians being adorable. I
want to know that you're able to do something. I mean,
Jocelyn Benson is out there in a business dress on
a hot day in a parade, which is in and
of itself a bizarre choice because you why aren't you
dressed like the rest of the people at the parade
(15:25):
And she's singing and laughing and doing carry with me.
And I'm not saying that you can't do that stuff,
but when your state is in this state, give me
a break.
Speaker 2 (15:33):
It used to be the politician you wanted to have
a beer with, and I think they've taken that to
like the nth level that they possibly can.
Speaker 1 (15:40):
Remember when was it Dana Nessel giving on whiskey shines
or something at the same pet stage?
Speaker 3 (15:46):
Yeah, yeah it was, and she defended it it they're crazy.
Speaker 1 (15:52):
Oh, I think that they're But I think now they're
in a really desperate situation because they see that there
was no denying what happened with Joe Biden on the
debate stage. And it's funny to me because those of
us on our side of the aisle have been like, Okay, yes,
this confirmed that he is not cognitively there. He is
(16:14):
in severe cognitative decline. We've been saying this. In fact,
just the week before you were saying we were lying.
But now you all see and I've talked to people
who say, oh, my friends who are Democrats had no
idea because the media has been so involved in the
cover up and so involved in the lies. And just
like we saw with the media saying oh, Russia collusion
(16:37):
and I'm serious about this, we've seen the media come
up with these phony stories that were placed by the Democrats.
And now we fully know because the radio host came
out and said, well, I got the questions directly from
the Biden administration. We know the collusion when it was
silencing conservative voices. We know that there are these blogney
(16:59):
stories that they're putting out. But the scary thing to
me is the Democrat voters. And I mean, I do
think that Van Jones for some reason was blind to
what was really going on, and that potentially is because
he was close to Biden and didn't want to believe it.
But the voter who watches CNN and MSNBC was completely
(17:20):
miffed when they saw him on the debate stage. Well,
and I think again, if you see this, you know
what it is. There's no denying it.
Speaker 3 (17:28):
Here's an interesting story. This is from the Wall Street
Journal this week, and this is when I read this,
I thought to myself, here we go again, here's deadline.
Russia seeks to boost Trump in twenty twenty four election.
US intelligence officials say so. These unnamed US intelligence officials
(17:51):
who probably signed that letter saying that Hunter Biden's laptop
was what was it disinformation, they're now saying that the
Russian government has launched a quote whole of government effort
to influence the outcome of the US presidential election and
favors Republican candidate Donald Trump in the race. The officials
(18:15):
didn't name, didn't mention Trump by name, but said that
Russia's current activity, described as covert social media use and
other online propaganda efforts, mirrored the twenty twenty and twenty
sixteen election cycles, when Moscow favored Trump and sought to
undermine democratic candidates, according to US intelligence agencies. So here
(18:37):
we go again. Where now it's the Biden administration, the
Biden intelligence community. I don't like that word, but community
are now telling us, oh, Russia is pushing Donald Trump,
which is very strange because it was not until Joe
Biden was president that Russia tacked Ukraine. And so you
(19:02):
mean to tell me that Donald Trump, who kept Russia
and these other countries in line, you mean to tell
me that they want Trump in office again.
Speaker 1 (19:14):
It doesn't make sense at all.
Speaker 2 (19:15):
I mean, it's just it's more Russia, Russia, Russia all
over again.
Speaker 1 (19:21):
This is I mean, it is it is crazy because
they have there, this is the look away from here's
a bright shiny object to look away from what you're
actually seeing. And it's they don't trust your lying eyes
situation again. Because but it's so bizarre that they would
go back to Russia, like you go back to the
same well that you've already been at. That's the thing
(19:43):
that I don't understand. How can you possibly do this
when you have already talked about what what you see,
You have already said you think Russia is doing this. So,
I mean, I don't think that the American people are
going to buy this this time. I think they're in
a real pickle. I think that what they've done with
with Joe Biden is unforgivable. I think it's going to
(20:03):
be unforgivable for a lot of Democrats. And now I
think it's been interesting as we've watched this past week
where we've seen the back and forth between Democrats who
say we've got to get rid of Joe Biden and
protect the protect democracy, which is so funny because like
the oh, the irony of that We're going to get
rid of our nominee after the primary because we have
(20:26):
to protect the voter. Well, what about the voters who
voted for Joe Biden? So because if they take him
off the ballot, now there's no voters choosing who goes on.
Speaker 3 (20:38):
Well, I think though that they need to take the
lead the people who you know, their hair's on fire.
Maybe they need to take the lead of Joe Biden.
When he was asked about this, his response was, well,
if Donald Trump wins, I'll just know that I did
my best.
Speaker 1 (20:56):
Yeah, right, And that really fired a lot of those
msnbcpople because you know, Rachel Maddow was like, I'm going
to jail now. I watch that's a little bit of
you have a feminine voice.
Speaker 2 (21:06):
Take him up on his offer. Joe Biden also said, fine,
challenge me at the convention. So if all these guys
that are the vulture circling that actually want to take
him on and don't feel like he's fit. Okay, you
claim that you have donors all whispering in your ear
behind the scenes, take him on them.
Speaker 1 (21:24):
They know that they can't. I mean, but I honestly
believe that's why Gretchen Witber released the book because she
thought it would be okay to do this in this moment.
And like I said, she's never run before. She's had
she's had marijuana, she's had abortion, She's never had to
actually run for office. I mean, you know, during our campage,
she was never out there. She never had an open
event like you talk about Newsom. Newsom came to Michigan
(21:46):
last week, and he had these open events people could
walk right up to and talk to him. When we
were campaigning in our own state, her events were close
to the public. They had to know everybody in advance.
You couldn't go up and talk to her. She was
heavily guarded. And you can say all of the bs
about kidnapping you on, but she has the state police
protecting her, and she still didn't trust the public to
(22:09):
get near her. So the truth about her is that
she does not campaign. And this is where she saw
an opportunity. She's like, he's gonna be too cognitively impaired
to run. I will slip in in the last three
months and no one won't have to litigate my record
because they won't have time. And I think that there
are Democrats that are thinking this is the best case scenario.
(22:32):
He won't have time. Donald Trump won't have time to
figure out who his opponent is. Once we get them in,
they will come off as like this fresh new face,
and people will come out and droves and vote. The
problem is, you can't do this. If Republicans tried to
do this and say, oh, man, man, we looked at
the polls, they're really bad. Turns out we're gonna have
(22:53):
to change out our nominee. Can you imagine that? I mean,
this story about oh Russia's boosting Trump wouldn't even be close.
They would be like, this is against democracy. You can't
you've finished your primary, you can't choose another nominique. What
if at the what if in October when it was
obvious that she was hammering me on abortion and we
(23:15):
were probably going to be in trouble against her on
this issue, they said, oh, we got to get a
new candidate. You think Whitmer would have gone with that. No,
like you can't change your candidate out at the last minute.
Speaker 3 (23:26):
No, And they have a lot of legal, serious legal
issues too. It's because deadlines are either coming up very
quickly in various states or they've already passed. And so
because you know, what they're all sort of conveniently ignoring
is that there's a party issue. But then there is
a legal state issue when it comes to elections, and
(23:50):
states have deadlines of when names have to be submitted
and ballots go to the candidates. I mean, you probably
remember this, all the proofs that we had to approach.
Speaker 1 (24:00):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (24:00):
Yeah, there's a whole process to an election. It's not
just a matter of oh, let's wake up in October
and decide we're going to have a different candidate. Ballots
are out at that point, so it's it's not just
a matter of them fighting this out in the middle
of August.
Speaker 2 (24:16):
Think about what r FK Junior is going through right
now just to get on the ballot in all these places.
So are they saying that as a Democrat, those rules
don't apply to them whatsoever? I mean, if I'm RFK Junior,
I'd be fighting this tooth and nail too. Think he's
going state by state with ballot access. Are they going
to I mean, how would they possibly do that. It's
not to your point. It's not as simple as just saying, actually,
(24:36):
we're going.
Speaker 1 (24:37):
To swap a name. No. I heard one Democrat who
was like, you know, the Republicans would fight this, and
they would come out with a legal battle. And the
problem is that they would probably win. And if they
win in a couple of key states and our candidate
can't be on the ballot and a couple of key states,
then we can't get the electoral votes that we need. Well, yes,
(24:57):
they would win. I mean states were the primary. He
is done in those states, and they already know how
the ballad is set up. I mean probably some states
have their ballots already printed, or at least they've paid
for it all. It's all done. It just is outrageous
to think that we are even entertaining the possibility of
who could the nominee be. No, we know the nominee.
(25:19):
Everybody's just like yeah, yeah, yeah, No, I don't know
what we say on it. We know, and I think
Gavin Newsom's playing it the smartest because well, you mentioned
something about what you thought Gavin Newsom was thinking he
wants it to be Joe Biden, because.
Speaker 3 (25:33):
Well, yeah, I think, yes, he wants it to be
Joe Biden, because then Biden would be term limited. And
then and then you know, he gets a shot at
twenty twenty eight. If he's replaced and Kamala becomes the candidate,
she theoretically would have eight years, which you know then
really sort of does not line up with what Newsom wants.
(25:56):
But what's interesting, I think there's a very interesting sort
of subplot that's going on. You look at Newsome, He's
going around the country. He came to Michigan, he was
in Pennsylvania. He's going around and he's talking basically exclusively
about Joe Biden, why he is the best candidate, you know,
(26:16):
all of that stuff. Gretchen Whitmer right now is running
around of the country talking about herself, talking about her
book and all of these you know, silly stories that
she's got and why she should be relatable. She's out
and I just saw again this week she said, we
(26:37):
need to help Joe Biden and Kamala Harris give to
my back. She includes the link to her pack. So
she is out promoting herself and Newsom is out promoting
their candidate.
Speaker 2 (26:50):
Well, and think when she's even if you watch her
on this media tour, when she's even asked a question
about Joe Biden or current events. I mean, you're going
on national TV. Are you not expecting them? I know
you're promoting your book, but are you not expecting them
to ask about maybe what's going on in the country
right now? While literally every day.
Speaker 1 (27:07):
Oh, I know, I always love how she's like, oh,
how could you ask me that? Oh, we're not going there?
And she doesn't even have a plan for it. I mean,
that is the funny thing to me. Her comms team
has done a lot of smoke and mirrors. They do
a lot of stuff that is scripted. If you watch
anything that she does, she's reading everything. So all these
videos that look like a selfie video, you can watch
her eyes. She's reading and she's not doing a good
(27:29):
a convincing job of it. So when she goes out
and she sits with people and they ask her these questions.
They asked her, well, would you be vice president to
Kamal Harris, and she said, you know, I'm I'm not
even going to go there. I'm not to your point earlier, Kyle.
The answer is, why would I think about that? Joe Biden.
(27:50):
I've made it clear Joe Biden is the nominee. He
is going to be president. But instead she gets swirled
around and finally she finally admits, I'll never say never.
Speaker 3 (28:02):
She didn't. Yes, you would think somebody like that. If
you're the co chair of the Biden campaign, you would
think that you're smart enough and experienced enough that if
you're asked a question, a hypothetical, you would just immediately
shut it down and say, Joe Biden is our candidate,
He's the best one. Blah blah blah. Even if you
don't believe it, that's what you say. But her response
(28:25):
was never say never. I'm not angling for that.
Speaker 1 (28:28):
Well, I remember Kamala doing the same thing when they
asked her, And to me, she and Kamala are very similar.
They're terrible public speakers. They suffer from not being able
to get their thoughts together. She gets caught up in
weird stories anecdotes. Her book is not a book of
stories of being governor. Her book is a book of
(28:50):
look at me, how cute I am? If you look
at her book. I mean she talks about throwing up
on her principal shoes at sixteen years old because she
was dead drunk in high school. And we're supposed to
be like, what an awesome role model for our kids.
But she's a talk about girl power. You know. She
also reveals she.
Speaker 2 (29:07):
Has tattoos too, in case you wanted to know.
Speaker 1 (29:09):
That also awesome. That's fantastic, So glad I know. Does
she reveal how much botox she's gotten? Just curious about that.
Let's take a quick commercial break. We'll continue next on
the Tutor Dixon Podcast. It's just everything about it is
just creating an identity that has nothing to do with governing.
(29:31):
And that's what makes me mad. If you're not going
to talk about what governing is to you, well, then
why are you going out and promoting this as saying
that you want to be president? Because I see the
fights that I had, This is what I had to
do as a woman, This is how tough it was
for me. But it has nothing to do with successes.
We were able to fix the roads. No, we're going
(29:54):
to guess what. We're six years in, folks, and we're
still saying we're going to fix the roads. The funny
thing to me is that everybody promotes this is this
is the governor's tagline is We're going to fix the
damn roads. Six years in people the roads are we
are what the.
Speaker 3 (30:11):
Worst in the nation or where we have some of
the worst, And according to the data from her own administration,
we are certifiably worse. We have more roads in poor
condition than when she started.
Speaker 1 (30:24):
So do we let the media do this with another candidate?
And it could be very easily done with a whitmer
who is not in cognitive decline but is not capable
of governing in any way, but the media will cover it.
I saw what's her name, Rachel Maddow the other day
who was like, Oh, she's going to be something great.
We're going to see her again, And I think, how
(30:47):
dare you come to this state before you say that?
And I look back on the journalistic malpractice of our campaign,
and I honestly do blame the media for what happened
in the state because they do not report on the
fact that we've lost our fortune five hundred companies. They
do not report on the fact that she crushed three
thousand restaurants they do not report on the fact that
(31:09):
we lost a massive amount of jobs. She came out
during our campaign and she said, I've brought thirty thousand
automotive jobs, and I'm announcing thirty thousand automotive jobs in
the state of Michigan. People believed that we had thirty
thousand new jobs. We'd actually lost twenty five thousand jobs.
And she had projected, based on the money she was
giving them, that she was going to get these jobs
(31:29):
and wasn't one of these Several of these projects just canceled.
Speaker 3 (31:33):
Yeah, so there's three that she's really sort of touted.
Goshen which is the Chinese battery plant, Cattle which is
the Chinese battery plant, and then a paper mill in
the Upper Peninsula, which is a Swedish company. And Goshen
(31:56):
is sort of on the rocks. Cattle, they have severely
restricted or sort of you know, withdrawn what they are
planning to do. They it's you know, decreasing in size
and which then means they have pulled back basically over
two thirds of the taxpayer dollars that we're going to
(32:18):
go to that project. And then it was reported this
week that this paper mill that she was touting during
the campaign. They've now canceled that expansion and the state
took the money back. So her whole economic strategy is
just a total disaster. But you know, she's in New York,
(32:40):
she's going to Seattle, she's going to Martha's vineyard, she's
going to San Francisco to talk about you know, to
try to claim to try to act like I should
say that she has a personality. But you know, we
I know, we talk about her a lot, and for
good reason. I just am very skeptical. I mean, let
(33:00):
me preface this by saying, if John Fetterman can win, yeah,
especially in the condition that he was in in twenty twenty.
Speaker 2 (33:08):
Two and also had a horrible debate.
Speaker 3 (33:10):
They can elect anybody. So let me just say that.
But if you take her at face value, if the
media is honest, which I know they're not, but if
they do their job, she should not have a prayer
because she has no personality. I don't believe she has
any principles. I don't think she has any sort of vision,
(33:30):
which is why you see the type of book that
she put out. It's not about you know, this is
where America should go. It's just you know, recipes and silly, yeah,
silly kind of stuff. And so I just I just
don't think she's really going anywhere because once she is
actually scrutinized, and look what happened when that with that
(33:51):
the story in Politico and in the damage control that
she you know, she had to scramble to say no,
I really believe that Joe Biden can win Michigan. Which
is interesting because then the reporting on Tuesday was that
three US senators acknowledged and one said it publicly, no,
(34:11):
I don't think Joe Biden can win. And so I
mean she was maybe we should give her credit that
she was sort of you know, ahead of the curve,
but the fact that she was not willing to own
that and instead attempted to do damage control shows that,
you know, she's she just doesn't have any principles or visions.
Speaker 1 (34:29):
See, the senators are not a threat to him, because
the senators can come out and say, okay, yes I
said this because I'm concerned. I'm concerned about the I'm
concerned about the two branches of Congress. Like I'm concerned
that we're going to have we're going to lose the House,
We're going to lose the Senate. The difference with her
is everybody knew she was trying to take the job.
Speaker 2 (34:51):
She did it for selfish reason. The rest of them
are concerned about a ticket. And we talked about this
in the opposite I think the other day it was
it was Bennett from Colorado that came out in public
said hey, you know, I got caught, and then privately
I said this, but I guess I'll say it publicly now,
you know what. I respect him for that he at
least had the cojones to go out and own what
he said. Whitmer never does. She says these things behind
(35:11):
closed doors and she won't actually own it. When you
talk about who's handling it the best, I mean, Gavin
Newsom is handling it the best. He's probably lying through
his teeth about everything. He's probably yeah, not probably actually see,
I'm swooned by him as well.
Speaker 1 (35:26):
I know, I'm like, stop fangirling. Gosh, she can get
voted off the island. I mean, it's in Whitmer's best
interest though, to do what Newsom's doing, because if he
doesn't win, if Biden doesn't win, what's she gonna do.
She's gonna have to stay in Michigan and actually live
out her record. Where is she? I mean, she could
take over for transportation secretary? She had some win well yeah,
(35:51):
oh yeah Biden does they win? Yeah? What does she do?
Speaker 4 (35:54):
She?
Speaker 1 (35:54):
What does she do? It was in runs Blue Cross
Blue Shield, like, Yeah, that's the rumor, I mean, And
that's the That's the thing about her. Whole story is
such a phony, baloney story. She never built anything. She
hasn't in that, And I think she's just always I
really do think that she's always gotten by on this cutesy,
(36:17):
funny thing which she is coming from her You know,
this is not me saying this.
Speaker 2 (36:22):
This, this is coming from her books. She said this
in her book about herself.
Speaker 1 (36:26):
Yes, she believes that that has gotten her to this point.
And the problem with that is that it only gets
you so far. And you make a great point, Kyle,
is that she if you test her, she has no convictions.
There is nothing that is she feels strongly about, which
is why she can't talk about Palestine or Israel because
she doesn't know where she stands on that. She doesn't
(36:47):
know where she stands on climate change. She doesn't None
of these are her feelings. She toes the party line.
She is just a walking talking point. That is what
you get when you get Kretchen Whitmer. But when you
try to dig deep, I mean, when people say I'm
not a politician, it's because they're talking about people like
that who genuinely have lost so much connection with the
(37:09):
people because they've got I think it's like the Peter principle.
You get promoted even though you're not meant to be promoted,
and then you get to the point where you don't
know who you are anymore. And it's hard to know
who Gretchen Wimmer is because I don't think Gretchen Witmer
knows who she is.
Speaker 4 (37:23):
We also agree, well, obviously it'll be interesting to watch
as we see what goes on in the next in
the coming days, obviously we're going to hear next week
about the vice presidential pick.
Speaker 1 (37:37):
On our side of the aisle, we'll see what Donald
Trump says and does. I thought it was interesting when
I saw him at the Durrau rally and he's kind
of teasing Marco Rubio, which I think that anybody that
he has on the list right now is going to
be a good pick for him. The vice president doesn't
ultimately determine what's going to happen in the race. Everybody's like,
(38:00):
who's it going to be? We all know that Donald
Trump is the person everybody's watching. So I think he
feels confident. And I think it's like so Donald Trump
to be like, you know what, I don't need to
talk about this right now, because I'm just gonna let
you keep talking about Biden. Let you let this media
narrative continue and watch them implode. Because I feel like
debate night was very much like Election Night at twenty sixteen.
(38:25):
The people were like, although a little bit different from
the standpoint of they knew they were busted. They knew
that they had hidden this. In twenty sixteen, I think
they genuinely thought they controlled the people, Like the media
felt so powerful. They were like, we told you who
to vote for. How could you have gone against us?
We told you to vote for Hillary and you went
against what we said. It's impossible. They were appalled that
(38:49):
they had been like overthrown in a way on debate night,
I think that they were appalled that they were caught.
They were humiliated. Yes, yes, yes, And those who say
they were defending democracy, what a joke. What a joke.
I mean, honestly, who is running the country. It is
unelected bureaucrats. And that to me is the real That
(39:12):
is the most disgusting part of hearing democracy come out
of their mouths. And I'm like, I don't ever want
that word in your mouth again. Just stop it. Stop
ever saying that you care about democracy when you know
this man has not been running our country. Unelected bureaucrats.
No one knows, no one knows what incentives they're getting.
(39:32):
They don't have any oversight. You can't have oversight over
these people. I mean, that's the beauty of our elected officials.
Not only do they get chosen by the people, but
there's oversight. You know who it is. You get to watch.
There are people who if they get step out of line,
can do something about it. Who is running the country
they robusted that night. Now we go into this next
(39:52):
week seeing what the Republicans are going to talk about.
We've seen the platform, we know that there have been
complaints about the platform. We'll have to get in to
you and next week we'll get into that. As we
see how things play out. We find out that the
vice presidential nominee, we will talk about how the convention's going,
what is happening with that platform, and how people on
(40:14):
the Second Amendment side feel about it because I know
they feel left out, and how people on the Life
side feel about it because I know they feel left out,
and what does that mean for Republicans and their identity
going forward. But we'll get into that stuff next week.
We appreciate you guys sticking around with us for this
group podcast with Kyle Olsen, Sarah Broadwater, and Tutor Dixon.
(40:35):
This is the Tutor Dixon Podcast and you can find
it at Tutor dixonpodcast dot com or at the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts, and make
sure you join us next time on the Tutor Dixon Podcast.
Thank you so much. Have a blessed day.
Welcome to the Tutor Dixon Podcast. We are all here.
We've got Sarah Bradwater, Kyle Olsen, and me Tutor Dixon
today to chat about everything that's going on in the country,
which for us, it's kind of funny because we're watching
as Gretchen Whitmer is out on the media circuit hawking
her new book, because this would be the perfect timing
(00:22):
when you are currently campaign co chair of a campaign
that is rapidly failing because your candidate is rapidly failing
and failed miserably on the debate stage, and she decided
to launch her book. But it made me start thinking
about how did we get here with a Gretchen Whitmer
where people were like, well, she would be a great president,
even though in the state of Michigan is a disaster.
(00:45):
And so we started talking about, like, how did she
win these campaigns because it wasn't obviously on her record
or she would never win another campaign. So you go
back to twenty eighteen, and you know that the Democrats
were like shocked by twenty sixteen, so they brought up
in these ballot initiatives, and the ballot initiatives are incredibly powerful,
and so in Michigan, we passed the marijuana ballot initiative,
(01:08):
and then marijuana became legalized in the state of Michigan,
which is a complication because it's not federally legal, so
it's a cash business. And they're, you know, as interesting
as we were campaigning learning all of the pitfalls of
what happened after legislating or after legalizing marijuana. But I
found this article that I wanted to talk to you
(01:28):
guys about in the Dispatch because after weed was legalized here,
we actually had an employee who was like an amazing guy,
one of our best employees, and just like a super
hard work He was in his fifties, so he's really young,
and he was like he became like a daily user,
a daily weed user. And he would go to my
(01:50):
dad and be like, man, I've been so sick. I
don't know what is going on. I'm so sick. I
have to like I have to get in the shower.
It's the only time that I stopped feeling sick, and
I throw up all the time. And my dad was like, man,
this is a this is weird. You need to go
to the doctrine, Like the doctor can't figure this out. Well,
it turns out, and he ended up dying, and I
mean it was really really sad because eventually you can't
(02:12):
keep anything down. I mean, it's like you have no nutrition.
So he ended up dying, and they connected it back
to cannabis use, and they said that it was this
this syndrome that it's like repeated vomiting. It's like cannabis
hyper remesis syndrome. And apparently this is like a really popular,
(02:32):
are really common side effect of people. We're using it
every day. Before we started seeing legalization, we had like
a million users, like daily users, and now it's up
to somewhere between seventeen and nineteen million and then forty
six million people regularly using. But the interesting part about
this article to me is because all of the people,
(02:55):
and this is where I go back to Republicans have
not been historically good about countering some of the stuff.
All of the people who are like, it's safe, it's safe,
there's nothing wrong with it, they've now been proven wrong.
But once again, once the something's legal, you're never putting
that genie back in the bottle. So now you have
to deal with the fact that we have fourteen hundred
(03:17):
road desks every year connected to marijuana. But also it's
like you have the mental health issues when we talk
about mental health all the time. You have an increase, increase,
increase in depression, you have an increase in marijuana induce
psychosis and marijuana. Oh this other sickness with the throwing up,
(03:43):
but you've got these all these hospitalizations. Oh. I was
also schizophrenia. Young adults, particularly young adults, heavy marijuana use
is associated with severe mental health issues. Most persuad pervasively
is schizophrenaline, Schizophrennie. I look at this and I think
this is not because people wanted to make it easier.
(04:05):
They the argument was they keep people out of jail,
right if you okay, if you legalize marijuana, you won't
have all these people in jail for marijuana offenses. But
ultimately it was about getting people elected.
Speaker 2 (04:17):
I think they also the argument used to be, if
you legalize it, less people will do it because there's
no joy of like risking it to go do something.
I remember that being an argument frequently with a marijuana
And when you see that number, yeah, I mean not
that way, definitely not the case.
Speaker 3 (04:33):
Well, and the Midwesterner wrote or published story the other
day about Michigan is actually the largest consumer of marijuana
in the country, even more than California.
Speaker 1 (04:46):
Which is I think that's interesting that you say that,
because that was you were talking, I think last week
about Michigan being the second most violent state in the country.
And according to this article, it says there are also
social harms. One analysis of re creational dispensaries in Chicago
found that crime increased by roughly thirty percent in the
surrounding one third mile following the opening of a dispensary.
(05:08):
And we have dispensaries everywhere.
Speaker 3 (05:10):
Yeah, but and it's significant that Michigan is more because
Michigan is one quarter the size of California. So think
about that, Michigan has twenty five percent of the population
of California and yet there's more marijuana consumption. It's a
bad thing. But in terms of the ballot initiatives, what
(05:33):
this shows is that in states like Michigan, there will
be there will be public policy created in the name
of winning elections. And so it's not about is this
a good public policy for society, it's what can we
put on the ballot that's going to drive people out
to vote and improve our chances to win.
Speaker 1 (05:54):
Yeah, if you're out there listening, it's now become a
political game. I mean, it really has, because I think
both are like, Okay, what can we come up with
that will mess with the other side. How can we
drive people out to the polls with some sort of
a law that they think they need. And that's what
we saw on twenty two with abortion. And so that's
why I say Gretchen Wimmer, who is now being lauded
(06:17):
as this potential presidential candidate, has never run for office.
On her record, she was telling people that marijuana was
a Democrat thing. And that's the funny thing. The ballad
initiative is independent of the people running. And these were
constitutional amendments. The abortion was constitutional amendment so that people
(06:38):
could choose, and like we came out and said that, well,
I mean, I guess if you want abortion, you can
choose it, and you still don't have to vote for Wimmer.
But they play it as if you don't vote for us,
somehow the other candidate can change whatever this constitutional amendment.
Werek it is and it works, I mean, and it's
shockingly it works. And I think the other thing is
(06:58):
they lie about it, Like when marijuana was on the ballot.
It was like, this is not addictive, This is not
an addictive drug. You will not have a problem with this.
And now, according to this article it says marijuana, it
turns out, is an addictive, risky substance. Legalizing its commercial
sale causes more people to use it and increases the
levels of addiction. As a result, it also increases the
(07:19):
level of harm. And that to me, this is where
and it has generally been I don't know the Republicans
have effectively had you would be able to answer this, Kyle,
Have they have They effectively had a ballot initiative that
is driven people out in the numbers that we've seen
marijuana or abortion. And I would say both of those
(07:40):
had many, many lives attached to them.
Speaker 3 (07:42):
There was one, I think, well, I don't know how
it drove the two that I think of. There was
an eminent domain ballot initiative that was very popular that
would ban or restrict the government, you know, taking your property,
and it went it dealt with It had its roots
(08:04):
in New Jersey because there was a in New Jersey
they took a woman's property to build a casino. And
then they didn't build a casino and all of that,
So that was the roots of that. I'm not sure
that something like that would actually drive turnout. The Democrats
have been very effective at finding these issues because it
does two things. One it drives turnout, but two it
(08:26):
changes the subject. And so you look at twenty twenty two,
for example, they had this the Abortion Proposal three, the
Abortion Constitutional Amendment, which basically dropped any restrictions on abortion
and made any restrictions that were in state law unconstitutional.
And so as we speak, they Democrats, the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, etc.
(08:51):
Are in court arguing that, you know, whatever restrictions are
still on the books are unconstitutional. But basically what that
did is that what it gave Whitmer an opportunity to
change the subject from her record on COVID, which was
(09:11):
terrible and what she did to families and the economy
and all of that, and she was able to change
the subject to abortion.
Speaker 1 (09:18):
And I believe that. I mean, Sarah mentioned that she
doesn't even have our debate in her new book that
she just dropped. She has her debate with Shooty and
she doesn't have our debate because she had a record
and she couldn't defend it. And we actually brought up
what she had done in that debate, and she couldn't
defend it. I mean, she didn't even she didn't even try.
She just laughed and oh that's not true. Oh that's
(09:38):
not true, and had no statement, didn't use her time,
didn't defend it at all. And it was because she
didn't run on it. But she didn't have to run
on a record because she had this abortion on the ballot.
And this is why I contend that all these people
that come out and say, oh, Donald Trump overturned Row
(09:59):
think knew exactly what was happening, because the league is
very suspicious. They knew that they were going to have
a tough time in twenty two. There's all the talk
of the red wave. They could foresee it was going
to be a struggle for them, and they don't want
to give a power, so they choose Mississippi, where they
have one abortion clinic, one abortion clinic in the entire state.
(10:21):
They only perform abortions up to sixteen weeks, and the
Mississippi legislature or whatever they pass a bill it says
you can't perform abortions after fifteen weeks, but they do
have exceptions after fifteen weeks for medical emergency or fetal abnormality.
No change truly, that is no change in what was
(10:43):
actually going on in Mississippi because this abortion clinic was
never actually performing an abortion past sixteen weeks. And so
those people elevate this, they sue, they elevate this to
the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ultimately then has to
look at Roe, which we all knew was suspect. How
that was decided. They overturn Row, and the Democrats are
(11:05):
like ready with this little weird ready with this in
every single state.
Speaker 3 (11:11):
But think about the timing if if the normal process
would have been followed the because it's a controversial case,
they tend to announce those at the end of the session,
and which means that that would have been announced in June. Well,
June is too late to organize a ballot initiative and
(11:33):
get the signatures and get it approved and get it
on the ballot. And so what the leaker afforded them
was the opportunity to be able to do all of
that and actually get abortion on the ballot in states
like Michigan where it was critical to turn out their
supporters and win. And so you have to wonder was
(11:57):
that the intent was by leak looking it was giving
them the months that they needed to organize all of
this and be able to win in November.
Speaker 2 (12:06):
Well, and remember there was another leak from the Supreme Court,
which rarely happens this year, also on abortion. So it's
just suspects me that we've never found the original leaker.
There was another abortion ruling that came down this last month. Also,
it magically got added to the website early. I mean,
they know that this is their ticket, and so they
want to just give their people heads up on it
(12:28):
because it's all they have to run on. To your point, Whitmer,
at the debate, she had nothing else to talk about.
She openly says she uses comedy, humor and laughter as
her deflection while she's trying to say that tongue in
cheek deflection against Republicans that want to come after her
with absurdities. But those absurdities are actually real facts on
her record that she's never had to answer for because effectively,
(12:50):
she ran with abortion, she ran with marijuana more so
than she did with her actual running mate. I mean,
Garland Gilcrest through Lieutenant governor, brought nothing to that ticket.
Just use the issue that she needed of the day
as her running mate.
Speaker 1 (13:03):
What does she call herself at the beginning of the
book a smoke show.
Speaker 2 (13:07):
It's not in the beginning of the book, it's part
way through the group book she says that she's a
smoke show governor Midwestern governor, which I find very odd.
Speaker 1 (13:14):
But that makes sense with I mean, that may be
why she struggled in the debate, because I think she
is always kind of this is gonna sound bad, but
she's the one saying she uses laughter and joking. I
think she's flirted her way through hard discussions like that,
and I think that's what she did in that. I
think she thought she was cute with Shooty. Obviously she
(13:35):
thought she was cute, because she said that was her
reference to her debate with him, that she joked and
she made light of things. Well, she also didn't have
a record as governor then, so she could just bs
her way through that when she was and can't really
woman on woman, it's not as easy to be so adorable.
(13:56):
Well yeah, and I think that's just also what we're
seeing in a lot of the Democrat us, know though
they use that personality ploy to make you think what
they're saying is actually true. You see it with Gavin Newsom,
we were talking about Pete Buddha Judge earlier today that
we see the same thing with them. They use their charisma,
their charm, whatever it is, to just say look over here,
don't listen to what they're saying. What I'm saying has
(14:19):
to be sure, because it just sounds great coming out
of my mouth, even though the facts don't actually back
any of that up. Let's take a quick commercial break.
We'll continue next on the Tutor Dixon Podcast, and everything
now is a show. I mean, we talk about we
had a few police officers who were killed in the
line of duty here in the state of Michigan. And
(14:42):
one had a funeral on a Friday, and it was
the last Friday in June, and the next day was
the last day of Pride month. The Attorney General did
not show up to this man's funeral, but she was
dancing and singing and singing karaoke in a Pride parade
the next day there and then they of course put
it out. They put out all the videos and they're
(15:04):
bragging about how adorable they are, and you know, I'm
really just kind of tired of politicians being adorable. I
want to know that you're able to do something. I mean,
Jocelyn Benson is out there in a business dress on
a hot day in a parade, which is in and
of itself a bizarre choice because you why aren't you
dressed like the rest of the people at the parade
(15:25):
And she's singing and laughing and doing carry with me.
And I'm not saying that you can't do that stuff,
but when your state is in this state, give me
a break.
Speaker 2 (15:33):
It used to be the politician you wanted to have
a beer with, and I think they've taken that to
like the nth level that they possibly can.
Speaker 1 (15:40):
Remember when was it Dana Nessel giving on whiskey shines
or something at the same pet stage?
Speaker 3 (15:46):
Yeah, yeah it was, and she defended it it they're crazy.
Speaker 1 (15:52):
Oh, I think that they're But I think now they're
in a really desperate situation because they see that there
was no denying what happened with Joe Biden on the
debate stage. And it's funny to me because those of
us on our side of the aisle have been like, Okay, yes,
this confirmed that he is not cognitively there. He is
(16:14):
in severe cognitative decline. We've been saying this. In fact,
just the week before you were saying we were lying.
But now you all see and I've talked to people
who say, oh, my friends who are Democrats had no
idea because the media has been so involved in the
cover up and so involved in the lies. And just
like we saw with the media saying oh, Russia collusion
(16:37):
and I'm serious about this, we've seen the media come
up with these phony stories that were placed by the Democrats.
And now we fully know because the radio host came
out and said, well, I got the questions directly from
the Biden administration. We know the collusion when it was
silencing conservative voices. We know that there are these blogney
(16:59):
stories that they're putting out. But the scary thing to
me is the Democrat voters. And I mean, I do
think that Van Jones for some reason was blind to
what was really going on, and that potentially is because
he was close to Biden and didn't want to believe it.
But the voter who watches CNN and MSNBC was completely
(17:20):
miffed when they saw him on the debate stage. Well,
and I think again, if you see this, you know
what it is. There's no denying it.
Speaker 3 (17:28):
Here's an interesting story. This is from the Wall Street
Journal this week, and this is when I read this,
I thought to myself, here we go again, here's deadline.
Russia seeks to boost Trump in twenty twenty four election.
US intelligence officials say so. These unnamed US intelligence officials
(17:51):
who probably signed that letter saying that Hunter Biden's laptop
was what was it disinformation, they're now saying that the
Russian government has launched a quote whole of government effort
to influence the outcome of the US presidential election and
favors Republican candidate Donald Trump in the race. The officials
(18:15):
didn't name, didn't mention Trump by name, but said that
Russia's current activity, described as covert social media use and
other online propaganda efforts, mirrored the twenty twenty and twenty
sixteen election cycles, when Moscow favored Trump and sought to
undermine democratic candidates, according to US intelligence agencies. So here
(18:37):
we go again. Where now it's the Biden administration, the
Biden intelligence community. I don't like that word, but community
are now telling us, oh, Russia is pushing Donald Trump,
which is very strange because it was not until Joe
Biden was president that Russia tacked Ukraine. And so you
(19:02):
mean to tell me that Donald Trump, who kept Russia
and these other countries in line, you mean to tell
me that they want Trump in office again.
Speaker 1 (19:14):
It doesn't make sense at all.
Speaker 2 (19:15):
I mean, it's just it's more Russia, Russia, Russia all
over again.
Speaker 1 (19:21):
This is I mean, it is it is crazy because
they have there, this is the look away from here's
a bright shiny object to look away from what you're
actually seeing. And it's they don't trust your lying eyes
situation again. Because but it's so bizarre that they would
go back to Russia, like you go back to the
same well that you've already been at. That's the thing
(19:43):
that I don't understand. How can you possibly do this
when you have already talked about what what you see,
You have already said you think Russia is doing this. So,
I mean, I don't think that the American people are
going to buy this this time. I think they're in
a real pickle. I think that what they've done with
with Joe Biden is unforgivable. I think it's going to
(20:03):
be unforgivable for a lot of Democrats. And now I
think it's been interesting as we've watched this past week
where we've seen the back and forth between Democrats who
say we've got to get rid of Joe Biden and
protect the protect democracy, which is so funny because like
the oh, the irony of that We're going to get
rid of our nominee after the primary because we have
(20:26):
to protect the voter. Well, what about the voters who
voted for Joe Biden? So because if they take him
off the ballot, now there's no voters choosing who goes on.
Speaker 3 (20:38):
Well, I think though that they need to take the
lead the people who you know, their hair's on fire.
Maybe they need to take the lead of Joe Biden.
When he was asked about this, his response was, well,
if Donald Trump wins, I'll just know that I did
my best.
Speaker 1 (20:56):
Yeah, right, And that really fired a lot of those
msnbcpople because you know, Rachel Maddow was like, I'm going
to jail now. I watch that's a little bit of
you have a feminine voice.
Speaker 2 (21:06):
Take him up on his offer. Joe Biden also said, fine,
challenge me at the convention. So if all these guys
that are the vulture circling that actually want to take
him on and don't feel like he's fit. Okay, you
claim that you have donors all whispering in your ear
behind the scenes, take him on them.
Speaker 1 (21:24):
They know that they can't. I mean, but I honestly
believe that's why Gretchen Witber released the book because she
thought it would be okay to do this in this moment.
And like I said, she's never run before. She's had
she's had marijuana, she's had abortion, She's never had to
actually run for office. I mean, you know, during our campage,
she was never out there. She never had an open
event like you talk about Newsom. Newsom came to Michigan
(21:46):
last week, and he had these open events people could
walk right up to and talk to him. When we
were campaigning in our own state, her events were close
to the public. They had to know everybody in advance.
You couldn't go up and talk to her. She was
heavily guarded. And you can say all of the bs
about kidnapping you on, but she has the state police
protecting her, and she still didn't trust the public to
(22:09):
get near her. So the truth about her is that
she does not campaign. And this is where she saw
an opportunity. She's like, he's gonna be too cognitively impaired
to run. I will slip in in the last three
months and no one won't have to litigate my record
because they won't have time. And I think that there
are Democrats that are thinking this is the best case scenario.
(22:32):
He won't have time. Donald Trump won't have time to
figure out who his opponent is. Once we get them in,
they will come off as like this fresh new face,
and people will come out and droves and vote. The
problem is, you can't do this. If Republicans tried to
do this and say, oh, man, man, we looked at
the polls, they're really bad. Turns out we're gonna have
(22:53):
to change out our nominee. Can you imagine that? I mean,
this story about oh Russia's boosting Trump wouldn't even be close.
They would be like, this is against democracy. You can't
you've finished your primary, you can't choose another nominique. What
if at the what if in October when it was
obvious that she was hammering me on abortion and we
(23:15):
were probably going to be in trouble against her on
this issue, they said, oh, we got to get a
new candidate. You think Whitmer would have gone with that. No,
like you can't change your candidate out at the last minute.
Speaker 3 (23:26):
No, And they have a lot of legal, serious legal
issues too. It's because deadlines are either coming up very
quickly in various states or they've already passed. And so
because you know, what they're all sort of conveniently ignoring
is that there's a party issue. But then there is
a legal state issue when it comes to elections, and
(23:50):
states have deadlines of when names have to be submitted
and ballots go to the candidates. I mean, you probably
remember this, all the proofs that we had to approach.
Speaker 1 (24:00):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (24:00):
Yeah, there's a whole process to an election. It's not
just a matter of oh, let's wake up in October
and decide we're going to have a different candidate. Ballots
are out at that point, so it's it's not just
a matter of them fighting this out in the middle
of August.
Speaker 2 (24:16):
Think about what r FK Junior is going through right
now just to get on the ballot in all these places.
So are they saying that as a Democrat, those rules
don't apply to them whatsoever? I mean, if I'm RFK Junior,
I'd be fighting this tooth and nail too. Think he's
going state by state with ballot access. Are they going
to I mean, how would they possibly do that. It's
not to your point. It's not as simple as just saying, actually,
(24:36):
we're going.
Speaker 1 (24:37):
To swap a name. No. I heard one Democrat who
was like, you know, the Republicans would fight this, and
they would come out with a legal battle. And the
problem is that they would probably win. And if they
win in a couple of key states and our candidate
can't be on the ballot and a couple of key states,
then we can't get the electoral votes that we need. Well, yes,
(24:57):
they would win. I mean states were the primary. He
is done in those states, and they already know how
the ballad is set up. I mean probably some states
have their ballots already printed, or at least they've paid
for it all. It's all done. It just is outrageous
to think that we are even entertaining the possibility of
who could the nominee be. No, we know the nominee.
(25:19):
Everybody's just like yeah, yeah, yeah, No, I don't know
what we say on it. We know, and I think
Gavin Newsom's playing it the smartest because well, you mentioned
something about what you thought Gavin Newsom was thinking he
wants it to be Joe Biden, because.
Speaker 3 (25:33):
Well, yeah, I think, yes, he wants it to be
Joe Biden, because then Biden would be term limited. And
then and then you know, he gets a shot at
twenty twenty eight. If he's replaced and Kamala becomes the candidate,
she theoretically would have eight years, which you know then
really sort of does not line up with what Newsom wants.
(25:56):
But what's interesting, I think there's a very interesting sort
of subplot that's going on. You look at Newsome, He's
going around the country. He came to Michigan, he was
in Pennsylvania. He's going around and he's talking basically exclusively
about Joe Biden, why he is the best candidate, you know,
(26:16):
all of that stuff. Gretchen Whitmer right now is running
around of the country talking about herself, talking about her
book and all of these you know, silly stories that
she's got and why she should be relatable. She's out
and I just saw again this week she said, we
(26:37):
need to help Joe Biden and Kamala Harris give to
my back. She includes the link to her pack. So
she is out promoting herself and Newsom is out promoting
their candidate.
Speaker 2 (26:50):
Well, and think when she's even if you watch her
on this media tour, when she's even asked a question
about Joe Biden or current events. I mean, you're going
on national TV. Are you not expecting them? I know
you're promoting your book, but are you not expecting them
to ask about maybe what's going on in the country
right now? While literally every day.
Speaker 1 (27:07):
Oh, I know, I always love how she's like, oh,
how could you ask me that? Oh, we're not going there?
And she doesn't even have a plan for it. I mean,
that is the funny thing to me. Her comms team
has done a lot of smoke and mirrors. They do
a lot of stuff that is scripted. If you watch
anything that she does, she's reading everything. So all these
videos that look like a selfie video, you can watch
her eyes. She's reading and she's not doing a good
(27:29):
a convincing job of it. So when she goes out
and she sits with people and they ask her these questions.
They asked her, well, would you be vice president to
Kamal Harris, and she said, you know, I'm I'm not
even going to go there. I'm not to your point earlier, Kyle.
The answer is, why would I think about that? Joe Biden.
(27:50):
I've made it clear Joe Biden is the nominee. He
is going to be president. But instead she gets swirled
around and finally she finally admits, I'll never say never.
Speaker 3 (28:02):
She didn't. Yes, you would think somebody like that. If
you're the co chair of the Biden campaign, you would
think that you're smart enough and experienced enough that if
you're asked a question, a hypothetical, you would just immediately
shut it down and say, Joe Biden is our candidate,
He's the best one. Blah blah blah. Even if you
don't believe it, that's what you say. But her response
(28:25):
was never say never. I'm not angling for that.
Speaker 1 (28:28):
Well, I remember Kamala doing the same thing when they
asked her, And to me, she and Kamala are very similar.
They're terrible public speakers. They suffer from not being able
to get their thoughts together. She gets caught up in
weird stories anecdotes. Her book is not a book of
stories of being governor. Her book is a book of
(28:50):
look at me, how cute I am? If you look
at her book. I mean she talks about throwing up
on her principal shoes at sixteen years old because she
was dead drunk in high school. And we're supposed to
be like, what an awesome role model for our kids.
But she's a talk about girl power. You know. She
also reveals she.
Speaker 2 (29:07):
Has tattoos too, in case you wanted to know.
Speaker 1 (29:09):
That also awesome. That's fantastic, So glad I know. Does
she reveal how much botox she's gotten? Just curious about that.
Let's take a quick commercial break. We'll continue next on
the Tutor Dixon Podcast. It's just everything about it is
just creating an identity that has nothing to do with governing.
(29:31):
And that's what makes me mad. If you're not going
to talk about what governing is to you, well, then
why are you going out and promoting this as saying
that you want to be president? Because I see the
fights that I had, This is what I had to
do as a woman, This is how tough it was
for me. But it has nothing to do with successes.
We were able to fix the roads. No, we're going
(29:54):
to guess what. We're six years in, folks, and we're
still saying we're going to fix the roads. The funny
thing to me is that everybody promotes this is this
is the governor's tagline is We're going to fix the
damn roads. Six years in people the roads are we
are what the.
Speaker 3 (30:11):
Worst in the nation or where we have some of
the worst, And according to the data from her own administration,
we are certifiably worse. We have more roads in poor
condition than when she started.
Speaker 1 (30:24):
So do we let the media do this with another candidate?
And it could be very easily done with a whitmer
who is not in cognitive decline but is not capable
of governing in any way, but the media will cover it.
I saw what's her name, Rachel Maddow the other day
who was like, Oh, she's going to be something great.
We're going to see her again, And I think, how
(30:47):
dare you come to this state before you say that?
And I look back on the journalistic malpractice of our campaign,
and I honestly do blame the media for what happened
in the state because they do not report on the
fact that we've lost our fortune five hundred companies. They
do not report on the fact that she crushed three
thousand restaurants they do not report on the fact that
(31:09):
we lost a massive amount of jobs. She came out
during our campaign and she said, I've brought thirty thousand
automotive jobs, and I'm announcing thirty thousand automotive jobs in
the state of Michigan. People believed that we had thirty
thousand new jobs. We'd actually lost twenty five thousand jobs.
And she had projected, based on the money she was
giving them, that she was going to get these jobs
(31:29):
and wasn't one of these Several of these projects just canceled.
Speaker 3 (31:33):
Yeah, so there's three that she's really sort of touted.
Goshen which is the Chinese battery plant, Cattle which is
the Chinese battery plant, and then a paper mill in
the Upper Peninsula, which is a Swedish company. And Goshen
(31:56):
is sort of on the rocks. Cattle, they have severely
restricted or sort of you know, withdrawn what they are
planning to do. They it's you know, decreasing in size
and which then means they have pulled back basically over
two thirds of the taxpayer dollars that we're going to
(32:18):
go to that project. And then it was reported this
week that this paper mill that she was touting during
the campaign. They've now canceled that expansion and the state
took the money back. So her whole economic strategy is
just a total disaster. But you know, she's in New York,
(32:40):
she's going to Seattle, she's going to Martha's vineyard, she's
going to San Francisco to talk about you know, to
try to claim to try to act like I should
say that she has a personality. But you know, we
I know, we talk about her a lot, and for
good reason. I just am very skeptical. I mean, let
(33:00):
me preface this by saying, if John Fetterman can win, yeah,
especially in the condition that he was in in twenty twenty.
Speaker 2 (33:08):
Two and also had a horrible debate.
Speaker 3 (33:10):
They can elect anybody. So let me just say that.
But if you take her at face value, if the
media is honest, which I know they're not, but if
they do their job, she should not have a prayer
because she has no personality. I don't believe she has
any principles. I don't think she has any sort of vision,
(33:30):
which is why you see the type of book that
she put out. It's not about you know, this is
where America should go. It's just you know, recipes and silly, yeah,
silly kind of stuff. And so I just I just
don't think she's really going anywhere because once she is
actually scrutinized, and look what happened when that with that
(33:51):
the story in Politico and in the damage control that
she you know, she had to scramble to say no,
I really believe that Joe Biden can win Michigan. Which
is interesting because then the reporting on Tuesday was that
three US senators acknowledged and one said it publicly, no,
(34:11):
I don't think Joe Biden can win. And so I
mean she was maybe we should give her credit that
she was sort of you know, ahead of the curve,
but the fact that she was not willing to own
that and instead attempted to do damage control shows that,
you know, she's she just doesn't have any principles or visions.
Speaker 1 (34:29):
See, the senators are not a threat to him, because
the senators can come out and say, okay, yes I
said this because I'm concerned. I'm concerned about the I'm
concerned about the two branches of Congress. Like I'm concerned
that we're going to have we're going to lose the House,
We're going to lose the Senate. The difference with her
is everybody knew she was trying to take the job.
Speaker 2 (34:51):
She did it for selfish reason. The rest of them
are concerned about a ticket. And we talked about this
in the opposite I think the other day it was
it was Bennett from Colorado that came out in public
said hey, you know, I got caught, and then privately
I said this, but I guess I'll say it publicly now,
you know what. I respect him for that he at
least had the cojones to go out and own what
he said. Whitmer never does. She says these things behind
(35:11):
closed doors and she won't actually own it. When you
talk about who's handling it the best, I mean, Gavin
Newsom is handling it the best. He's probably lying through
his teeth about everything. He's probably yeah, not probably actually see,
I'm swooned by him as well.
Speaker 1 (35:26):
I know, I'm like, stop fangirling. Gosh, she can get
voted off the island. I mean, it's in Whitmer's best
interest though, to do what Newsom's doing, because if he
doesn't win, if Biden doesn't win, what's she gonna do.
She's gonna have to stay in Michigan and actually live
out her record. Where is she? I mean, she could
take over for transportation secretary? She had some win well yeah,
(35:51):
oh yeah Biden does they win? Yeah? What does she do?
Speaker 4 (35:54):
She?
Speaker 1 (35:54):
What does she do? It was in runs Blue Cross
Blue Shield, like, Yeah, that's the rumor, I mean, And
that's the That's the thing about her. Whole story is
such a phony, baloney story. She never built anything. She
hasn't in that, And I think she's just always I
really do think that she's always gotten by on this cutesy,
(36:17):
funny thing which she is coming from her You know,
this is not me saying this.
Speaker 2 (36:22):
This, this is coming from her books. She said this
in her book about herself.
Speaker 1 (36:26):
Yes, she believes that that has gotten her to this point.
And the problem with that is that it only gets
you so far. And you make a great point, Kyle,
is that she if you test her, she has no convictions.
There is nothing that is she feels strongly about, which
is why she can't talk about Palestine or Israel because
she doesn't know where she stands on that. She doesn't
(36:47):
know where she stands on climate change. She doesn't None
of these are her feelings. She toes the party line.
She is just a walking talking point. That is what
you get when you get Kretchen Whitmer. But when you
try to dig deep, I mean, when people say I'm
not a politician, it's because they're talking about people like
that who genuinely have lost so much connection with the
(37:09):
people because they've got I think it's like the Peter principle.
You get promoted even though you're not meant to be promoted,
and then you get to the point where you don't
know who you are anymore. And it's hard to know
who Gretchen Wimmer is because I don't think Gretchen Witmer
knows who she is.
Speaker 4 (37:23):
We also agree, well, obviously it'll be interesting to watch
as we see what goes on in the next in
the coming days, obviously we're going to hear next week
about the vice presidential pick.
Speaker 1 (37:37):
On our side of the aisle, we'll see what Donald
Trump says and does. I thought it was interesting when
I saw him at the Durrau rally and he's kind
of teasing Marco Rubio, which I think that anybody that
he has on the list right now is going to
be a good pick for him. The vice president doesn't
ultimately determine what's going to happen in the race. Everybody's like,
(38:00):
who's it going to be? We all know that Donald
Trump is the person everybody's watching. So I think he
feels confident. And I think it's like so Donald Trump
to be like, you know what, I don't need to
talk about this right now, because I'm just gonna let
you keep talking about Biden. Let you let this media
narrative continue and watch them implode. Because I feel like
debate night was very much like Election Night at twenty sixteen.
(38:25):
The people were like, although a little bit different from
the standpoint of they knew they were busted. They knew
that they had hidden this. In twenty sixteen, I think
they genuinely thought they controlled the people, Like the media
felt so powerful. They were like, we told you who
to vote for. How could you have gone against us?
We told you to vote for Hillary and you went
against what we said. It's impossible. They were appalled that
(38:49):
they had been like overthrown in a way on debate night,
I think that they were appalled that they were caught.
They were humiliated. Yes, yes, yes, And those who say
they were defending democracy, what a joke. What a joke.
I mean, honestly, who is running the country. It is
unelected bureaucrats. And that to me is the real That
(39:12):
is the most disgusting part of hearing democracy come out
of their mouths. And I'm like, I don't ever want
that word in your mouth again. Just stop it. Stop
ever saying that you care about democracy when you know
this man has not been running our country. Unelected bureaucrats.
No one knows, no one knows what incentives they're getting.
(39:32):
They don't have any oversight. You can't have oversight over
these people. I mean, that's the beauty of our elected officials.
Not only do they get chosen by the people, but
there's oversight. You know who it is. You get to watch.
There are people who if they get step out of line,
can do something about it. Who is running the country
they robusted that night. Now we go into this next
(39:52):
week seeing what the Republicans are going to talk about.
We've seen the platform, we know that there have been
complaints about the platform. We'll have to get in to
you and next week we'll get into that. As we
see how things play out. We find out that the
vice presidential nominee, we will talk about how the convention's going,
what is happening with that platform, and how people on
(40:14):
the Second Amendment side feel about it because I know
they feel left out, and how people on the Life
side feel about it because I know they feel left out,
and what does that mean for Republicans and their identity
going forward. But we'll get into that stuff next week.
We appreciate you guys sticking around with us for this
group podcast with Kyle Olsen, Sarah Broadwater, and Tutor Dixon.
(40:35):
This is the Tutor Dixon Podcast and you can find
it at Tutor dixonpodcast dot com or at the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts, and make
sure you join us next time on the Tutor Dixon Podcast.
Thank you so much. Have a blessed day.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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.