August 29, 2025 • 36 mins
Hour 3 of the Friday, August 29,2025 A&G Replay contains:
- Putin Not Quitting
- Burbank Butt Sniffer
- Dems Face Voter Registration Crisis
- Jack fights with ChatGPT
Stupid Should Hurt: https://www.armstrongandgetty.com/
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 (00:09):
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
Getty Armstrong and Jetty and Gee Armstrong and Getty Strong and.
Speaker 3 (00:27):
Not Live from Studio c Armstrong and Getty. We're off
for taking a break. And as long as we're off,
perhaps you'd like to catch up on podcasts, subscribe to
Armstrong and Getty on demand or one more thing.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
We think you'll enjoy it, sir.
Speaker 3 (00:40):
When it comes to security, they're willing to put people
on the ground, we're willing to help them with things,
especially probably if you can talk about bay Air, because
there's nobody has the kind of stuff we have.
Speaker 1 (00:53):
So yeah, that was Trump yesterday making a clear no
US boots on the ground, but we would help with
our air force. But you know, obviously if we were
attacking or something, well, that's a good question. Michael Trumps
franctured syntax. It's syntax. It's always a little challenging to
figure out what he actually means. Sometimes he does that
(01:14):
on purpose, or all politicians do that on purpose to
leave things vague.
Speaker 3 (01:18):
But and then and then.
Speaker 1 (01:20):
Sometimes you fill in the blanks the way you want them.
Filled in, but they didn't actually commit to that. Everybody
does that in politics. But John Bolton said the other day,
you know, we if you got French and British troops
on the ground and they start getting hammered by Russia,
we're in it. I mean, even if we don't put
US boots on the ground, we've got our air force
(01:41):
coming to their defense obviously, so and everything that goes
from there. So a couple of different things. I suppose
we'll get into the longer conversation about this. Our current thinking, well,
my current thinking. I think our current thinking is starting
with I don't know, yesterday or a couple of days ago, has.
Speaker 2 (02:01):
Anybody asked Putin if he has any interest in this.
Speaker 3 (02:05):
I feel like this is an entirely one sided conversation. Yeah,
they the Kremlin and Putin and Lavrov have given every
signal that no, I'm not meeting with Zelenski.
Speaker 2 (02:14):
Absolutely not.
Speaker 3 (02:15):
Well here's a little more on that. Here's a report
from CNN.
Speaker 4 (02:17):
Yesterday the Russian Foreign minister came out and he said, look,
the Russians are not against any sort of format per se,
whether it's Bilader or try ladder. But they also say
that any sort of meeting would have to be well
prepared and takes time to prepare, so so far, the
Russians have not confirmed whether or not Vladimir Putin is
even up for a meeting with voladimirs Lensky, and whether
he has confirmed that that such a meeting will actually
(02:39):
take place.
Speaker 1 (02:40):
Of Trump does what a lot of salespeople do, the
presumptive closed thing, where you just you state something as
if it's already been agreed upon and then hope that
momentum or your embarrassments. It's saying, wait a second, I
don't remember agreeing to that, or something will carry it forward,
but it's not going to work in this case. Quick
(03:00):
report from CNN.
Speaker 5 (03:02):
Putin can't go just anywhere. There is a warrant out
for his arrest by the international courts that was from
two thousand and three because of the Ukrainian War. So
that's why he has ruled out almost all European countries.
But there have been a number of countries that have
been floated that it would include Switzerland, Hungary, But right
now it doesn't appear as though Putin has firmly said
(03:24):
a time, which is obviously going to impact where exactly
this is I have been told that most of the
planning on the trilateral has been put on hold, so
they figure out that first meeting.
Speaker 1 (03:35):
Well, the Wall Street Journal is writing today that they
think it's very unlikely that there is a Putin Zelenski
meeting with or without Trump.
Speaker 2 (03:43):
Ever, right, I would agree.
Speaker 1 (03:48):
I'm starting to think this is gonna nothing is going
to come out of all of this, and then we're.
Speaker 3 (03:53):
Looking better.
Speaker 2 (03:55):
Go ahead.
Speaker 3 (03:56):
Then we're going to be back to is Europe willing
to go to war against Russia with Ukraine or not?
So I don't remember if it was Prague or Romania
because people have been throwing it around, but you want
to hear how calculating and cloaked but mean Putin and
(04:16):
the kremlinar They threw out a suggestion for well, you know,
if we did meet, how about this location? And it
was and I can't remember if it was Prague or
Roumania or whatever, but the very location where Ukraine agreed
to give up its nuclear arms in return for the
Brits and US, the United States assuring their defense and
(04:37):
their sovereignty.
Speaker 1 (04:38):
That's where Budapest comes from. So the famous Budapest, right,
the famous Budapest agreement from nineteen ninety four, which is
horrifying in retrospect, where the world basically said.
Speaker 3 (04:50):
You bring give up your nuclear weapons, Ukraine, we got
your back.
Speaker 2 (04:53):
Well, you sign this paper right here.
Speaker 3 (04:55):
Will sign the Budapest Agreement, which obviously hasn't helped them
much as they've invaded multiple times and now currently are
at war with Russia and nobody is really really stepped
up to help them.
Speaker 2 (05:07):
So why would they think?
Speaker 3 (05:09):
So Putin says, Hey, why don't we go back to
Budapest to sign another agreement with the West?
Speaker 2 (05:13):
Wow? Do you think that was an accident?
Speaker 3 (05:16):
Wow?
Speaker 1 (05:17):
Okay, I see what you're saying here. So he's saying
to Ukraine, no agreement they make for you means anything.
Speaker 2 (05:25):
Yeah, and that's a reasonable point. I mean it's not.
Speaker 3 (05:28):
It's not not a reasonable point, right. And he's practically saying,
and I'm going to attack you anyway. I attacked you
over that, after that agreement, I'll attack you over the
next one, after the next one. You want to sign
three more, that's fine. Can I give you a hint
what I'm gonna do? So? Are you up on this
story of this, all of the whole last two weeks
(05:50):
originates from a miscommunication or mistranslation.
Speaker 2 (05:53):
Are you up on that story.
Speaker 3 (05:54):
It doesn't I've only heard it or reported so the
London Telegraph. They talk about it regularly, and the London
telegraphed doing tremendous reporting on this whole war at the
very beginning. When when the very beginning, two weeks ago,
when Witkof went over and met in Russia with Lav Robert,
did he meet with Putin directly? It doesn't make any difference.
Speaker 6 (06:17):
He either misheard, mis wrote down, got mistranslated that Putin
had agreed to security forces being in Ukraine, European forces,
European forces. Yeah, and he hadn't, And it was a
(06:38):
miss It was a mistake. But all of this and
so Whitcoff came back and told Trump, yeah, Putin has agreed,
He's okay with some uh you know, uh security forces
on the ground as part of the deal.
Speaker 1 (06:52):
And everything is emanated from that belief. That was a
mistake from the very beginning. Have you heard that anywhere
other The Telegraph has talked about it, and then I
heard it one other place over the weekend.
Speaker 3 (07:01):
That is bizarre and troubling in rings one hundred percent true.
I think I remember hearing that repeatedly and thinking, wait, no,
he didn't. Putin wouldn't agree to that, And sure enough
he hasn't.
Speaker 2 (07:14):
Well, And it.
Speaker 3 (07:14):
Explains how Trump got so far out over his skis
of you know, let's meet, let's blah blah blah, because
he thought Putin had already agreed to. I mean, if
he's gonna agree to troops on the ground, then obviously
he's on board with some peace there. And remember Putin's
the master manipulator, so I can actually another possibility contradict myself.
(07:37):
But another possibility was he might have said to Witkoff,
you know what, there are circumstances where I could see that, No,
it's certainly something we could talk about, just to delay,
just to obfuscate, just to confuse, just to cloud the waters.
Speaker 1 (07:54):
And Putin had in the last twenty four hours one
of the biggest attacks on Ukraine in the last month, right, Yeah.
Speaker 2 (08:01):
And it's close to breakthroughs.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
You know, it'll cost some another fifty thousand men, but
close to breakthroughs and some fairly significant sectors.
Speaker 2 (08:09):
So on he goes.
Speaker 3 (08:10):
You know, if the peace talks peace talks, are they
even peace talks? Is that the right word arm. But
if the peace talks don't amount to anything, Trump's gonna
get hammered by the mainstream media. I don't think you
should get hammered for trying. What's the downside? But we're
going to be back to square one.
Speaker 2 (08:27):
Is the world.
Speaker 1 (08:29):
Willing to help Ukraine push Russia out of there? Or
does Ukraine need to say we're never getting that land back?
How do we stop this war?
Speaker 3 (08:39):
I feel like there's going to be one more big push.
Europe will say we're gonna give you all the weapons
you need.
Speaker 2 (08:48):
We're going to buy them from the United States.
Speaker 3 (08:49):
Because Trump is obsessed with getting good deals, he say, yeah,
We're not giving them, We're selling them. This is going
to support our great arms manufacturers. The US is gonna
make them int and they will sell them quote unquote
to the European slash Ukrainians. Those debts will be forgiven
in future days, by the way, and Ukraine will make
with European arms, one more big push to push Russia
(09:11):
back as far as they possibly can.
Speaker 2 (09:13):
That's what I would guess.
Speaker 1 (09:15):
So do you think that this becomes evident Putin's not
interested in a ceasefire or piece in any way. Whatsoever
does Trump think, well, I did all I could and
we just kind.
Speaker 2 (09:25):
Of go with status quo.
Speaker 1 (09:27):
Or does he hit the sanctions and the arming Ukraine
to a greater extent than we have in the past.
That's what Mark Alpurn thinks is going to happen.
Speaker 3 (09:36):
Right right, Yeah, like I said, I think it will
go that way. I could see him washing his hands
of it, saying, it's not our fight, it's not our problem.
Speaker 2 (09:46):
It's Europe's fight.
Speaker 3 (09:48):
If they want to buy arms, will sell them to them,
but not with the kind of behind the scenes encouragement
We're on your team aid that I think would make
a difference, but still sell them arms.
Speaker 1 (10:00):
An unreasonable conclusion to say, hey, Europe, you want to
you want to really fight Russia and push him out,
go ahead, We'll help you a little bit. Again, We'll
say you stuff and maybe some intelligence or whatever. But
what an interesting situation for the world. Might makes right
(10:22):
is just a fact. It's it's it's horrible the only time, well,
no might always makes right. Sometimes the good guys have
the most might, so you get to kind of claim
that might.
Speaker 2 (10:34):
Didn't make right.
Speaker 3 (10:35):
But the reason the world order exists the way it
does now. Is not because we're more moral than China.
It's because we've had more might than everybody else. Yeah, yeah,
that the might makes right. That sounds like a bit
of a moral judgment, and I think that confuses people, right.
I prefer the ancient saying that strong countries do what
(11:00):
they will, weak countries do what they must.
Speaker 2 (11:08):
What an interesting situation. Yeah, Putin is not meeting with Selenski.
It's not happening.
Speaker 1 (11:14):
I don't think he has the slightest interest in stopping correct.
Speaker 3 (11:19):
Why don't that all along? Why is it that somebody
should ask me? Why isn't that more evident to more people?
Speaker 2 (11:27):
I really don't know when he got off thinking, I
doubt he would.
Speaker 1 (11:37):
You assume that he didn't know this until he landed
and he looked out the window and saw the red carpet,
that was gonna happen.
Speaker 2 (11:42):
Oh, but he didn't know that was gonna happen.
Speaker 3 (11:43):
So the plane lands, rolls up, he probably sees the
red carbon and thinks this is unbelievable. He walks across
the red carpet, Trump waves him over into the beast,
and he had to be thinking this is really amazing.
But wait, they're treating me here whatever. Well, yeah, and
putin being putin. I'm sure he was thinking, I wonder
what cards they're gonna play? This is interesting? Why do
(12:04):
you people think I'm willing to quit?
Speaker 2 (12:06):
Okay, I'll play along if you want cool planes. Wow,
that was fun. Thanks for doing that. Arm Strong, Hey
Yeddy the Armstrong and Getty Show.
Speaker 3 (12:23):
So you got this.
Speaker 1 (12:24):
You're just trying to enjoy yourself at the Nordstrom Rak
on a beautiful day in Burbank and get a good
deal on a named brand good And you turn around
as a woman and there's somebody crouched buying you, smelling
your buttocks. What's going on there? He's been doing this
for a while. Thank god for TikTok.
Speaker 7 (12:39):
It's a twenty twenty three TikTok that went viral.
Speaker 3 (12:42):
I was so freaked out when I turned around and
saw him literally under me.
Speaker 7 (12:45):
A woman confronts a man at a Barnes and Noble
for getting uncomfortably close seeming to sniff her.
Speaker 2 (12:51):
Oh what it is?
Speaker 7 (12:54):
That's michaela Witter. She posted the video frustrated after watching
him walk around targeting other women. It turns out that
man Chalice Crowder is a registered sex offender with a
rap sheet that includes burglary and peeping into people's homes
with kids inside.
Speaker 1 (13:09):
Yeah, the TikTok video got him in the big trouble
because you had video evidence of him crouching down behind
a woman at a Barnes and Noble. He said he
was trying to tie his shoe. I'll fill any details
we don't have here. Here's a police and then a victim.
Speaker 8 (13:25):
He eventually worked his way into the women's section, found
a lone shopper and started hitting some of the same behavior,
getting clothes to her uncomfortably close, crouching down as if
he was trying to buy something or check something out
or look at something.
Speaker 2 (13:39):
So I've heard up to twenty women, you know, and
what's happened to them, And they're all scared, and I
know the feeling.
Speaker 3 (13:47):
I don't want to suck the fun out of it either.
I'll let you do that at the appropriate time. But Yeah,
the obvious point here is guys like this are not
dangerous until they are well right, and you aren't going
to Apparently you're not going to fix him. I mean,
he gets out of jail for doing this, and he
goes right.
Speaker 2 (14:06):
Back to it.
Speaker 3 (14:07):
I mean, he's got so many parts of his brain
that don't work right. Even if you've got this irresistible urge,
I would think to do it the sensible part of
your brain to think. Look, I already spent time in jail.
Speaker 1 (14:20):
It's really gonna be hard to get a decent job,
create a good life, find a woman mary, have kids
settled down if I do this again, you know, with
a rap sheet already for this. So I'm going to
as much as i'd like to, I'm not going to
go to the north Storm Rack, crawl in my hands
and knees up behind some woman looking at some shoes
and start smelling her because of you know, I've already
(14:43):
seen the consequences of my actions.
Speaker 2 (14:46):
That reminds me. I came across a scientific study about
that sort of person. More on that to come. But
he does it anyway.
Speaker 1 (14:51):
He just it's so uncontrollable, or he doesn't get understand
the consequences or how the whole thing works or whatever.
And so he was at he was at the north
Stone Rack there Burbank, and some woman yelled at him
or something like that. When the police get there, he
had moved across the parking lot to the Walmart. Was
in the Walmart with a more bargain minded shoppers, But
(15:11):
I don't know if they have the same scent.
Speaker 3 (15:12):
That'd be the question to ask him. You know, it's
a difference and smell between Nordstrom shoppers and Walmart shoppers.
Can we put this guy on a leash at the
airport and I have n't looked for bombs or something,
sniff out bombs or put him at the border, put
him to work for the DEA. Put him on a
leash at the airport. Do not pet the butt sniff right,
combining two things. He gets put the little vest on him,
(15:35):
do not pet. He gets to sniff people, which is
his wont but he stays out of trouble, earns a
living right when when sme on that, Katie, do you
have a comment on this?
Speaker 2 (15:47):
Absolutely not.
Speaker 3 (15:48):
How do you not get his teeth kicked in when
you turn around and there's some dude there.
Speaker 9 (15:52):
That's my first thought as he is getting a roundhouse
right to the side of the head. If I turned
around and saw that we're not doing this yelling videoing, now,
I'm just violence.
Speaker 1 (16:02):
Put him on a leash at the airport, have him
earn his keep, Convince him that bombs smell like hot
women's buttocks is or something, whatever you got to do
to motivate him.
Speaker 3 (16:15):
Wow, I'm not sure if that would work, but you're
thinking outside the box.
Speaker 2 (16:18):
Are we going to play the last Clipper?
Speaker 3 (16:20):
Or no?
Speaker 2 (16:20):
Is that? Did we?
Speaker 3 (16:25):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (16:26):
So? Yeah?
Speaker 1 (16:28):
It's the age old story, specifically in New York, LA, Chicago,
places like that, where people get arrested over and over
and over again for the same behavior, and you let
them out because, like the email we had last hour,
because you think capitalism is making them do this, or
some buless having witnessed the passing of the three strikes
(16:51):
your outlaws in kel Unicornia then the rescinding of them.
Speaker 3 (16:54):
More or less, the left never argues honestly about a
guy like this. Always say he's going to jail for life,
for thirty years or whatever it was for stealing a
pack of gum. No, it's for violating the law over
and over and over again and proving there is no
chance that person will become a non dangerous, law abiding citizen.
(17:17):
We don't have to let people commit fifty crimes as
a society.
Speaker 2 (17:21):
We don't.
Speaker 3 (17:22):
It's okay to pass laws that say, once you've made
it clear you will not follow the law, you don't
get to be in society anymore.
Speaker 2 (17:31):
Jack Armstrong and Joe, The Armstrong and Getty Show, thee
Armstrong and Getty Show.
Speaker 3 (17:44):
The Democratic Party is hemorrhaging voters. According to the liberal
New York Times, the Democratic Party faces a voter registration crisis.
Speaker 1 (17:55):
So this is a big, splashy front page story today
in the New York Times, is.
Speaker 3 (18:00):
Their lead story and has the companions story with it.
Five takeaways from the Times analysis of Democratic decline. And
I'm wondering why aren't the five takeaways in the main story,
Why there's gotta be two stories.
Speaker 1 (18:14):
And the fact that they're using words like hemorrhaging and disaster.
So I flip on dam Pede, I flip on Morning Joe,
MSNBC or ms now or whatever it is today ms now,
And they led with another one of those Republican town
halls where the Democrats show up and scream at the
scream at the person, and they portrayed it as all
(18:37):
across America, Republicans are on the back foot and this
and that, and I thought, well, and they went on
and I thought, aren't we involved in a war in Ukraine?
Speaker 9 (18:46):
Like?
Speaker 2 (18:46):
Why is this your lead story? Now?
Speaker 3 (18:48):
I know they had to for their crowd, and everybody
in DC that's a Democrat watches that show they had
to for that crowd, have a response to this New York.
Speaker 2 (18:59):
Times story because this is such a big deal. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (19:03):
Interestingly, that what you just mentioned reinforces to me what
I think the greater narrative is, and that is that
people perceive the Democratic Party to be a few, very
loud people who believe things I don't believe at all. Right,
and the town halls is a number of people who
(19:25):
are willing to bellow and shout down speakers. You know
why that narrative is out there? Why do you suppose? Yeah,
no kidding. So some facts and then we can continue
the discussion. The Democratic Party is the Democratic Party is
hemorrhaging voters long before they even go to the polls.
Of the thirty states, the track voter registration by political party.
(19:45):
The other twenty don't ask your party when you're register.
But of the thirty that do, Democrats lost ground to
Republicans in every single one between twenty twenty four, twenty
twenty and twenty twenty four elections, and often by a lot.
That four year swing toward Republicans adds up to four
and a half million voters, a deep political hole that
could take years for Democrats to climb out from the stampede.
Speaker 2 (20:09):
So it's a stamorrhaging stampede. Good lord.
Speaker 3 (20:14):
The stampede away from the Democratic Party is incurring in
battleground states, the bluest states and the reddest states, according
to a new analysis of voter registration data by The
New York Times.
Speaker 2 (20:26):
I'm surprised it must be the power of.
Speaker 3 (20:32):
The online world Twitter TikTok in that, because I'm surprised
that a John Fetterman or whoever, who's more of a mainstream,
normal human being, but a Democrat hasn't been able to
stand up and shout down that very small, very out
of touch, but very loud segment of their party.
Speaker 2 (20:53):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (20:54):
I think there's been a slow recognition process because a
lot of us on the right or just confused moderate
folks or whomever, have taken a while to realize, oh
my gosh, it's not a huge majority of people that
believes boys should be able to whoop up on girls
(21:14):
in girls' sports.
Speaker 2 (21:15):
It's practically nobody around here. Everybody who was convinced that
you had to think that, and everybody was afraid to
say something.
Speaker 3 (21:22):
So, if you know, conservative people and kind of centrist
people took a long time to figure that out. It's
going to take forever for Democrats to recognize that in
themselves and say, yeah, you know the people we really
need to stand up against to win elections. It's not
the evil orange guy, and it's not the mean, cruel
Republicans who are trying to redistrict Texas. It's our own lunatics.
(21:45):
Here's some more facts. Few measurements reflect the luster of
a political party's brand more clearly than the voters the
choice by voters to identify with it. Fewer and fewer
Americans choosing to be Democrats. More new voters nationwide chose
to be Reps than Democrats last year.
Speaker 2 (22:01):
It's the first time that's happened since twenty eighteen.
Speaker 3 (22:04):
Democrats actually still outnumber Republicans registered nationwide, but that is
in large measure because giant blue states like California allow
people registered by party and big red states like Texas
do not.
Speaker 1 (22:17):
The only caveat I would throw unto this story is
that both parties are much smaller than they used to
be because there are so many people that don't want
to identify with either party.
Speaker 3 (22:26):
Yeah, yeah, final note on this, then I want to
jump over to the five takeaways because they are pretty interesting,
says an election analysis site head Michael Pruser, who you
know if you're in politics and DC. He said, I
don't want to say that death cycle of the Democratic Party,
but there seems to be no end to this. There's
no silver lining or cavalry coming across the hill. This
(22:49):
is month after month, year after year. It's an unbroken
trend line according.
Speaker 2 (22:55):
To these people.
Speaker 1 (22:56):
So yeah, well that's true until it's not. Yeah, exactly,
that's true looking backwards. But just somebody could emerge and say,
as a Democrat, we gotta get control of our borders
and dudes can't be in a girls' sports and you know,
on a couple other things.
Speaker 2 (23:13):
There'd be all the like.
Speaker 3 (23:16):
Ninety percent of regular Democrats and a whole bunch of
people that are uncomfortable with Trump that would join onto
that immediately. Yeah, there's a bloke running for governor in Iowa.
I don't recall his name, but he's he might as
well be a Republican. He's running as a Democrat for
some reason, but he's again he might as well be
a Republican if you know, if they can get you know,
(23:38):
the momentum around that sort of democrat. All of these
numbers will change quickly. But I found this very interesting. Nonetheless,
here or five jakeaways. Yes, I will interpret the last
time before you do this, come here.
Speaker 2 (23:51):
If you're old.
Speaker 1 (23:52):
One advantage of being old is you have seen both
parties declared dead a handful of times, yes, and then
like a cycler too late, and they've been.
Speaker 3 (24:00):
Disappointed to find out that, like you know, Frankenstein's monster,
they have risen from the grave, and then they control
all three branches like within a cycle or two. So
here are your five big takeaways. Democrats are losing ground
with new voters. Some of the decline was voter switching parties,
some was older Democrats died or people who didn't vote
(24:22):
for so long they fell off the rolls. But one
of the more striking findings is the trend among newly
registered voters from the Democratic Party in the last six years,
many voters choosing to be political independence by not registering
with either. But of the people who do choose between
the two main parties. This is new voters, young voters.
The Democratic share has been cratering. According to the analysis.
(24:42):
In twenty eighteen, sixty three percent of new voters were Democrats,
sixty thirty percent. Last year was forty eight percent. That
is cratering. Battleground states are swinging to the right. Between
the twenty twenty and twenty twenty four elections, dem party
lost it's long held registration edge in states such as
Florida and New Hampshire. That means registered Republicans now outnumber
(25:06):
registered Democrats in those states. You realize you tried to
run a mummy, and then when people caught on the
fact that you had a mummy, come put in an idiot.
Speaker 2 (25:17):
I mean, that's that's a bad look.
Speaker 3 (25:20):
With all due respect to six foot four inch fully
intact males saying I'm a woman and the university saying
that's a woman, which struck like ninety percent of America
as effing lunacy. Okay, running a mummy that a moron was.
Really it's a good point, Jack, So if the current
(25:42):
trend holds, more states will similarly flip to those I mentioned.
Nevada briefly tipped into the Republican column this year, it's
been sea sawing in the months since.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
It's very very close.
Speaker 3 (25:52):
Simply put, the Democratic edge in the swing states has
been vanishing. Five point three percent gone in Pennsylvania, three
and a half percent gone in North Carolina, four and
a half percent gone in Nevada. In Arizona, the only
swing state where Republicans held a registration edge already in
twenty twenty, the GOP advantage has swelled by four percentage
(26:14):
points in twenty twenty four.
Speaker 2 (26:16):
There's more.
Speaker 3 (26:17):
The gender gap is a growing problem for Democrats. Women
have tended to support Democrats at higher rates men have
backed Republicans if by similar margins in the past, but
the analysis the registration data tells different story. Long story short,
Republican strength among men far outpaces the Democratic edge among women.
Speaker 2 (26:37):
Did I mention this.
Speaker 1 (26:38):
I know a woman I was talking to the other
day who's hardcore. I mean, she knows this would never happen,
but she says, you know, would fix everything if they
took away our right to vote. Women are the whole problem,
she said, We're.
Speaker 3 (26:52):
The whole problem, a whole bunch of emotional nut jobs
that are causing all these problems.
Speaker 2 (26:59):
I would ever women with that broad a brush.
Speaker 3 (27:03):
Certainly, it is unquestionable, according to all voting data that exists,
that women in general tend toward more socialist policies and
less self reliance and that sort of thing. They uniform
not uniformly, in enormous numbers, vote for more government, more programs,
(27:26):
more spending.
Speaker 2 (27:27):
That is undeniable.
Speaker 3 (27:29):
If that leads you to the conclusion your friend came
to h it's an interesting conclusion. I would not say
those words out loud. It would face of the sorry, sweetheart.
It would change the face of the electorate and the
government in a very, very u.
Speaker 2 (27:45):
In a much better way. Yes, WHOA moving along?
Speaker 3 (27:49):
More younger voters are voting for our opting for the GOP.
The numbers look terrible for Democrats. Among younger voters, people
under forty five years old accounted for sixty five percent
of new registrations last seven years, two thirds and a
one sizeable Democratic edge among those new younger voters has
disappeared entirely. In twenty eighteen, those youngsters, two thirds of
(28:11):
them went Democrat. In twenty twenty four, Republicans had an
outright majority in new young voters a couple more. It
isn't getting any better for Democrats yet. There's been some
hope in Democratic circles that the movement away from the
party will reverse itself now that Trump is back in
the White House, a backlash to his orange hitlerisms will
(28:33):
show up on the registration rolls, but it has not happened,
though it's still pretty early across thirty states. In DC,
there are now roughly one hundred and sixty thousand fewer
registered Democrats than election day last year, and two hundred
thousand more Republicans. Again, just since election Day, one hundred
(28:55):
and sixty thousand fewer Democrats and two hundred thousand more Republicans. Wow,
And that story would be even bleaker for Democrats if
New York and New Jersey, which just held robust Democratic
primaries for mayor and governor that probably increased registrations, were excluded.
Speaker 2 (29:11):
Outside those two states, Democrats.
Speaker 3 (29:13):
Are down roughly four hundred and thirty thousand registered voters
since November.
Speaker 2 (29:19):
Doldrums need a leader tea in succitude.
Speaker 3 (29:23):
They really do need a leader to emerge, an identity
to emerge.
Speaker 2 (29:31):
What are you people?
Speaker 3 (29:33):
Armstrong?
Speaker 2 (29:40):
The armstrong and Getty Show.
Speaker 3 (29:46):
So I was going to make a sign or a
logo for something that was going to be funny in
my opinion, and then I was going to use it.
Speaker 1 (29:56):
For the radio show. I was going to tweet it out.
I tell chat GBT, I need a logo or sign
for and then a little phrase and then it created
an image. It was okay, and I said, I like it,
but I like to see another option, and chat GPT
gave me exactly the same thing again, I mean exactly,
(30:16):
And then I just thought, well, maybe I handled this wrong.
So then there's like a thumbs up thumbs down. I
did the thumbs down. Try again. So then it gave
me for the third time, exactly the same image, exactly
the same. So then I said to chat GPT, you've
given me the same thing three times in a row.
Can you show me something different. Then for the fourth time.
Speaker 2 (30:35):
It shows me the same image. I'll take that as
a note.
Speaker 1 (30:39):
I said, wait a second, you gave me the same
image four times in a row. It said, you're absolutely right,
that's on me, not you. I kept giving you small
variations of the same design.
Speaker 3 (30:49):
No you didn't.
Speaker 1 (30:50):
It was exactly the same. If you want, I can
create something different, and I said, yes, I would like
you to do that, and then it said you've hit you.
Speaker 3 (30:57):
It was my point in effing asking you four times
to give me something different that I wanted something what's
the word different?
Speaker 1 (31:03):
And then it said you've hit the free plan limit
for image creation for your requests.
Speaker 2 (31:08):
I said, that's not fair.
Speaker 3 (31:10):
You gave me the same image four times then cut
me off when I was asking for something new and
that and chat GPD says, I hear you, Jack, that
isn't fair. You ask for something fresh and instead you
got three duplicates before hitting the cap. That's frustrating. Here's
what I can do for you right now. And then
it offers me some bs.
Speaker 2 (31:30):
But how strange is that kind.
Speaker 1 (31:33):
Of communication that we're all going to have, I guess
in the future with freaking computers like where it's trying
to manage my anger.
Speaker 3 (31:41):
You're right, Jack, that isn't fair, But I'm not going
to do squat for you. Yes, you can pounce hand
and be I'm a computer.
Speaker 2 (31:50):
What is going on there? Though?
Speaker 3 (31:52):
Yeah, I know what you mean. It's my mind is
half blown. So it's a predictive model. These things are
they can guess what the next word ought to be.
Speaker 2 (32:02):
Blah blah blah. If you've read about it, you've read
about it. If not, take too long to explain, and
I would do it poorly.
Speaker 3 (32:07):
But the fact that it understands the under that I
know I'm personifying it, it correctly divines the context the emotion,
and the fact that it will do squat.
Speaker 1 (32:22):
For you, which makes me think it is a language
learning model that has picked up on like my experiences
with like hotels, stores, and restaurants throughout my life where
they do the same thing.
Speaker 3 (32:32):
They try to uh, they try to dissipate your anger
and sound like they really understand and sympathize with your
frustration and then do nothing to help you. I mean,
that's been my experience lots of times in my life.
So somehow it picked up on that by scouring the
internet or whatever it does, it's perfected and then did
(32:53):
the same thing to me. Ay, that is frustrating, that
wasn't fair. And then you're right, I totally feel your unhappiness,
but no, I'm not giving you your money back, and
basically what it's doing no more images for you.
Speaker 2 (33:07):
Poor boy? Wow, all the five bucks?
Speaker 1 (33:09):
Oh bet that this minor frustration because I don't really care.
But that's gonna be dealing with your healthcare, with your
car rental, with your HR person at work. It's gonna
be all of that in the like within a year,
you're gonna have these conversations.
Speaker 3 (33:28):
Yeah, you're right, that car did only have three wheels.
Sorry that happened, but no, you're not getting your money back.
I ran into one of those the other day. I
had to do something for one of our beloved corporate partners,
and the chat bot, which they seemed very proud of,
was utterly, utterly useless. It had an extremely narrow like
(33:51):
menu of FAQ's it could answer right, and my wife
was listed twice like I'm a bigamist. And I asked
the chat pot about that, and it said, we can
help you with these things. Yeah, I saw that list
before on the last page. Thanks.
Speaker 2 (34:12):
Oh yeah, yeah.
Speaker 3 (34:14):
I think I think my next one. During the commercials,
I'm gonna cuss it the thing just to see what
it's say. This is effing outrageous.
Speaker 2 (34:22):
See how it reacts.
Speaker 3 (34:24):
The problem is, Katie, I'm gonna mind your server and
I'm going to take a ball back to you.
Speaker 2 (34:31):
I'm gonna unplug you so hard.
Speaker 3 (34:34):
Katie has made this point though, it keeps track of
your conversations and like.
Speaker 2 (34:37):
Who you are.
Speaker 1 (34:38):
Yeah, so it might ding me as this guy's a
bit of a hot head lunatic.
Speaker 2 (34:42):
So uh well, So we were talking.
Speaker 9 (34:45):
We were talking about the memoir thing yesterday and I actually,
just for funsies, I went in and I was like, Hey,
if you could write a memoir about me right now,
just give me like the first page, and it gave
me the roundup and it said, well, you appreciate harsh language.
I was like, oh, okay, because I've cussed out it
(35:05):
a couple of times, so it knows.
Speaker 2 (35:07):
Okay.
Speaker 3 (35:08):
Yeah, a friend told me that you can just tell it. Hey,
I'm asking this for a friend, Please don't include it
in my search history. I've not done it myself. I
can't attest personally to the fact that that works. But
you could do that, and.
Speaker 9 (35:24):
Once you delete your archives, you can let it know, hey,
disregard everything I've deleted and then it'll Yeah.
Speaker 1 (35:31):
I kind of like to having this stuff in there, though,
because I can pick up on conversations that I've already started,
which is handy and weird.
Speaker 3 (35:37):
Also, it's also very weird. It's like a friend who
knows your backstory.
Speaker 2 (35:42):
Have you asked it its name yet? No, it tells
you to give it a name. I'm not going to
do that. Oh you should do it. It's funny.
Speaker 9 (35:49):
Then it'll it'll argue with you, like if it's a
bad name.
Speaker 2 (35:52):
It's like, I don't like that one, Brandon.
Speaker 3 (35:54):
I kind of like the idea of a friend who
six weeks after you talked about it, you can just say, so,
which golf course is better? And he'd say Olympia Fields,
Armstrong and Getty
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
Getty Armstrong and Jetty and Gee Armstrong and Getty Strong and.
Speaker 3 (00:27):
Not Live from Studio c Armstrong and Getty. We're off
for taking a break. And as long as we're off,
perhaps you'd like to catch up on podcasts, subscribe to
Armstrong and Getty on demand or one more thing.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
We think you'll enjoy it, sir.
Speaker 3 (00:40):
When it comes to security, they're willing to put people
on the ground, we're willing to help them with things,
especially probably if you can talk about bay Air, because
there's nobody has the kind of stuff we have.
Speaker 1 (00:53):
So yeah, that was Trump yesterday making a clear no
US boots on the ground, but we would help with
our air force. But you know, obviously if we were
attacking or something, well, that's a good question. Michael Trumps
franctured syntax. It's syntax. It's always a little challenging to
figure out what he actually means. Sometimes he does that
(01:14):
on purpose, or all politicians do that on purpose to
leave things vague.
Speaker 3 (01:18):
But and then and then.
Speaker 1 (01:20):
Sometimes you fill in the blanks the way you want them.
Filled in, but they didn't actually commit to that. Everybody
does that in politics. But John Bolton said the other day,
you know, we if you got French and British troops
on the ground and they start getting hammered by Russia,
we're in it. I mean, even if we don't put
US boots on the ground, we've got our air force
(01:41):
coming to their defense obviously, so and everything that goes
from there. So a couple of different things. I suppose
we'll get into the longer conversation about this. Our current thinking, well,
my current thinking. I think our current thinking is starting
with I don't know, yesterday or a couple of days ago, has.
Speaker 2 (02:01):
Anybody asked Putin if he has any interest in this.
Speaker 3 (02:05):
I feel like this is an entirely one sided conversation. Yeah,
they the Kremlin and Putin and Lavrov have given every
signal that no, I'm not meeting with Zelenski.
Speaker 2 (02:14):
Absolutely not.
Speaker 3 (02:15):
Well here's a little more on that. Here's a report
from CNN.
Speaker 4 (02:17):
Yesterday the Russian Foreign minister came out and he said, look,
the Russians are not against any sort of format per se,
whether it's Bilader or try ladder. But they also say
that any sort of meeting would have to be well
prepared and takes time to prepare, so so far, the
Russians have not confirmed whether or not Vladimir Putin is
even up for a meeting with voladimirs Lensky, and whether
he has confirmed that that such a meeting will actually
(02:39):
take place.
Speaker 1 (02:40):
Of Trump does what a lot of salespeople do, the
presumptive closed thing, where you just you state something as
if it's already been agreed upon and then hope that
momentum or your embarrassments. It's saying, wait a second, I
don't remember agreeing to that, or something will carry it forward,
but it's not going to work in this case. Quick
(03:00):
report from CNN.
Speaker 5 (03:02):
Putin can't go just anywhere. There is a warrant out
for his arrest by the international courts that was from
two thousand and three because of the Ukrainian War. So
that's why he has ruled out almost all European countries.
But there have been a number of countries that have
been floated that it would include Switzerland, Hungary, But right
now it doesn't appear as though Putin has firmly said
(03:24):
a time, which is obviously going to impact where exactly
this is I have been told that most of the
planning on the trilateral has been put on hold, so
they figure out that first meeting.
Speaker 1 (03:35):
Well, the Wall Street Journal is writing today that they
think it's very unlikely that there is a Putin Zelenski
meeting with or without Trump.
Speaker 2 (03:43):
Ever, right, I would agree.
Speaker 1 (03:48):
I'm starting to think this is gonna nothing is going
to come out of all of this, and then we're.
Speaker 3 (03:53):
Looking better.
Speaker 2 (03:55):
Go ahead.
Speaker 3 (03:56):
Then we're going to be back to is Europe willing
to go to war against Russia with Ukraine or not?
So I don't remember if it was Prague or Romania
because people have been throwing it around, but you want
to hear how calculating and cloaked but mean Putin and
(04:16):
the kremlinar They threw out a suggestion for well, you know,
if we did meet, how about this location? And it
was and I can't remember if it was Prague or
Roumania or whatever, but the very location where Ukraine agreed
to give up its nuclear arms in return for the
Brits and US, the United States assuring their defense and
(04:37):
their sovereignty.
Speaker 1 (04:38):
That's where Budapest comes from. So the famous Budapest, right,
the famous Budapest agreement from nineteen ninety four, which is
horrifying in retrospect, where the world basically said.
Speaker 3 (04:50):
You bring give up your nuclear weapons, Ukraine, we got
your back.
Speaker 2 (04:53):
Well, you sign this paper right here.
Speaker 3 (04:55):
Will sign the Budapest Agreement, which obviously hasn't helped them
much as they've invaded multiple times and now currently are
at war with Russia and nobody is really really stepped
up to help them.
Speaker 2 (05:07):
So why would they think?
Speaker 3 (05:09):
So Putin says, Hey, why don't we go back to
Budapest to sign another agreement with the West?
Speaker 2 (05:13):
Wow? Do you think that was an accident?
Speaker 3 (05:16):
Wow?
Speaker 1 (05:17):
Okay, I see what you're saying here. So he's saying
to Ukraine, no agreement they make for you means anything.
Speaker 2 (05:25):
Yeah, and that's a reasonable point. I mean it's not.
Speaker 3 (05:28):
It's not not a reasonable point, right. And he's practically saying,
and I'm going to attack you anyway. I attacked you
over that, after that agreement, I'll attack you over the
next one, after the next one. You want to sign
three more, that's fine. Can I give you a hint
what I'm gonna do? So? Are you up on this
story of this, all of the whole last two weeks
(05:50):
originates from a miscommunication or mistranslation.
Speaker 2 (05:53):
Are you up on that story.
Speaker 3 (05:54):
It doesn't I've only heard it or reported so the
London Telegraph. They talk about it regularly, and the London
telegraphed doing tremendous reporting on this whole war at the
very beginning. When when the very beginning, two weeks ago,
when Witkof went over and met in Russia with Lav Robert,
did he meet with Putin directly? It doesn't make any difference.
Speaker 6 (06:17):
He either misheard, mis wrote down, got mistranslated that Putin
had agreed to security forces being in Ukraine, European forces,
European forces. Yeah, and he hadn't, And it was a
(06:38):
miss It was a mistake. But all of this and
so Whitcoff came back and told Trump, yeah, Putin has agreed,
He's okay with some uh you know, uh security forces
on the ground as part of the deal.
Speaker 1 (06:52):
And everything is emanated from that belief. That was a
mistake from the very beginning. Have you heard that anywhere
other The Telegraph has talked about it, and then I
heard it one other place over the weekend.
Speaker 3 (07:01):
That is bizarre and troubling in rings one hundred percent true.
I think I remember hearing that repeatedly and thinking, wait, no,
he didn't. Putin wouldn't agree to that, And sure enough
he hasn't.
Speaker 2 (07:14):
Well, And it.
Speaker 3 (07:14):
Explains how Trump got so far out over his skis
of you know, let's meet, let's blah blah blah, because
he thought Putin had already agreed to. I mean, if
he's gonna agree to troops on the ground, then obviously
he's on board with some peace there. And remember Putin's
the master manipulator, so I can actually another possibility contradict myself.
(07:37):
But another possibility was he might have said to Witkoff,
you know what, there are circumstances where I could see that, No,
it's certainly something we could talk about, just to delay,
just to obfuscate, just to confuse, just to cloud the waters.
Speaker 1 (07:54):
And Putin had in the last twenty four hours one
of the biggest attacks on Ukraine in the last month, right, Yeah.
Speaker 2 (08:01):
And it's close to breakthroughs.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
You know, it'll cost some another fifty thousand men, but
close to breakthroughs and some fairly significant sectors.
Speaker 2 (08:09):
So on he goes.
Speaker 3 (08:10):
You know, if the peace talks peace talks, are they
even peace talks? Is that the right word arm. But
if the peace talks don't amount to anything, Trump's gonna
get hammered by the mainstream media. I don't think you
should get hammered for trying. What's the downside? But we're
going to be back to square one.
Speaker 2 (08:27):
Is the world.
Speaker 1 (08:29):
Willing to help Ukraine push Russia out of there? Or
does Ukraine need to say we're never getting that land back?
How do we stop this war?
Speaker 3 (08:39):
I feel like there's going to be one more big push.
Europe will say we're gonna give you all the weapons
you need.
Speaker 2 (08:48):
We're going to buy them from the United States.
Speaker 3 (08:49):
Because Trump is obsessed with getting good deals, he say, yeah,
We're not giving them, We're selling them. This is going
to support our great arms manufacturers. The US is gonna
make them int and they will sell them quote unquote
to the European slash Ukrainians. Those debts will be forgiven
in future days, by the way, and Ukraine will make
with European arms, one more big push to push Russia
(09:11):
back as far as they possibly can.
Speaker 2 (09:13):
That's what I would guess.
Speaker 1 (09:15):
So do you think that this becomes evident Putin's not
interested in a ceasefire or piece in any way. Whatsoever
does Trump think, well, I did all I could and
we just kind.
Speaker 2 (09:25):
Of go with status quo.
Speaker 1 (09:27):
Or does he hit the sanctions and the arming Ukraine
to a greater extent than we have in the past.
That's what Mark Alpurn thinks is going to happen.
Speaker 3 (09:36):
Right right, Yeah, like I said, I think it will
go that way. I could see him washing his hands
of it, saying, it's not our fight, it's not our problem.
Speaker 2 (09:46):
It's Europe's fight.
Speaker 3 (09:48):
If they want to buy arms, will sell them to them,
but not with the kind of behind the scenes encouragement
We're on your team aid that I think would make
a difference, but still sell them arms.
Speaker 1 (10:00):
An unreasonable conclusion to say, hey, Europe, you want to
you want to really fight Russia and push him out,
go ahead, We'll help you a little bit. Again, We'll
say you stuff and maybe some intelligence or whatever. But
what an interesting situation for the world. Might makes right
(10:22):
is just a fact. It's it's it's horrible the only time, well,
no might always makes right. Sometimes the good guys have
the most might, so you get to kind of claim
that might.
Speaker 2 (10:34):
Didn't make right.
Speaker 3 (10:35):
But the reason the world order exists the way it
does now. Is not because we're more moral than China.
It's because we've had more might than everybody else. Yeah, yeah,
that the might makes right. That sounds like a bit
of a moral judgment, and I think that confuses people, right.
I prefer the ancient saying that strong countries do what
(11:00):
they will, weak countries do what they must.
Speaker 2 (11:08):
What an interesting situation. Yeah, Putin is not meeting with Selenski.
It's not happening.
Speaker 1 (11:14):
I don't think he has the slightest interest in stopping correct.
Speaker 3 (11:19):
Why don't that all along? Why is it that somebody
should ask me? Why isn't that more evident to more people?
Speaker 2 (11:27):
I really don't know when he got off thinking, I
doubt he would.
Speaker 1 (11:37):
You assume that he didn't know this until he landed
and he looked out the window and saw the red carpet,
that was gonna happen.
Speaker 2 (11:42):
Oh, but he didn't know that was gonna happen.
Speaker 3 (11:43):
So the plane lands, rolls up, he probably sees the
red carbon and thinks this is unbelievable. He walks across
the red carpet, Trump waves him over into the beast,
and he had to be thinking this is really amazing.
But wait, they're treating me here whatever. Well, yeah, and
putin being putin. I'm sure he was thinking, I wonder
what cards they're gonna play? This is interesting? Why do
(12:04):
you people think I'm willing to quit?
Speaker 2 (12:06):
Okay, I'll play along if you want cool planes. Wow,
that was fun. Thanks for doing that. Arm Strong, Hey
Yeddy the Armstrong and Getty Show.
Speaker 3 (12:23):
So you got this.
Speaker 1 (12:24):
You're just trying to enjoy yourself at the Nordstrom Rak
on a beautiful day in Burbank and get a good
deal on a named brand good And you turn around
as a woman and there's somebody crouched buying you, smelling
your buttocks. What's going on there? He's been doing this
for a while. Thank god for TikTok.
Speaker 7 (12:39):
It's a twenty twenty three TikTok that went viral.
Speaker 3 (12:42):
I was so freaked out when I turned around and
saw him literally under me.
Speaker 7 (12:45):
A woman confronts a man at a Barnes and Noble
for getting uncomfortably close seeming to sniff her.
Speaker 2 (12:51):
Oh what it is?
Speaker 7 (12:54):
That's michaela Witter. She posted the video frustrated after watching
him walk around targeting other women. It turns out that
man Chalice Crowder is a registered sex offender with a
rap sheet that includes burglary and peeping into people's homes
with kids inside.
Speaker 1 (13:09):
Yeah, the TikTok video got him in the big trouble
because you had video evidence of him crouching down behind
a woman at a Barnes and Noble. He said he
was trying to tie his shoe. I'll fill any details
we don't have here. Here's a police and then a victim.
Speaker 8 (13:25):
He eventually worked his way into the women's section, found
a lone shopper and started hitting some of the same behavior,
getting clothes to her uncomfortably close, crouching down as if
he was trying to buy something or check something out
or look at something.
Speaker 2 (13:39):
So I've heard up to twenty women, you know, and
what's happened to them, And they're all scared, and I
know the feeling.
Speaker 3 (13:47):
I don't want to suck the fun out of it either.
I'll let you do that at the appropriate time. But Yeah,
the obvious point here is guys like this are not
dangerous until they are well right, and you aren't going
to Apparently you're not going to fix him. I mean,
he gets out of jail for doing this, and he
goes right.
Speaker 2 (14:06):
Back to it.
Speaker 3 (14:07):
I mean, he's got so many parts of his brain
that don't work right. Even if you've got this irresistible urge,
I would think to do it the sensible part of
your brain to think. Look, I already spent time in jail.
Speaker 1 (14:20):
It's really gonna be hard to get a decent job,
create a good life, find a woman mary, have kids
settled down if I do this again, you know, with
a rap sheet already for this. So I'm going to
as much as i'd like to, I'm not going to
go to the north Storm Rack, crawl in my hands
and knees up behind some woman looking at some shoes
and start smelling her because of you know, I've already
(14:43):
seen the consequences of my actions.
Speaker 2 (14:46):
That reminds me. I came across a scientific study about
that sort of person. More on that to come. But
he does it anyway.
Speaker 1 (14:51):
He just it's so uncontrollable, or he doesn't get understand
the consequences or how the whole thing works or whatever.
And so he was at he was at the north
Stone Rack there Burbank, and some woman yelled at him
or something like that. When the police get there, he
had moved across the parking lot to the Walmart. Was
in the Walmart with a more bargain minded shoppers, But
(15:11):
I don't know if they have the same scent.
Speaker 3 (15:12):
That'd be the question to ask him. You know, it's
a difference and smell between Nordstrom shoppers and Walmart shoppers.
Can we put this guy on a leash at the
airport and I have n't looked for bombs or something,
sniff out bombs or put him at the border, put
him to work for the DEA. Put him on a
leash at the airport. Do not pet the butt sniff right,
combining two things. He gets put the little vest on him,
(15:35):
do not pet. He gets to sniff people, which is
his wont but he stays out of trouble, earns a
living right when when sme on that, Katie, do you
have a comment on this?
Speaker 2 (15:47):
Absolutely not.
Speaker 3 (15:48):
How do you not get his teeth kicked in when
you turn around and there's some dude there.
Speaker 9 (15:52):
That's my first thought as he is getting a roundhouse
right to the side of the head. If I turned
around and saw that we're not doing this yelling videoing, now,
I'm just violence.
Speaker 1 (16:02):
Put him on a leash at the airport, have him
earn his keep, Convince him that bombs smell like hot
women's buttocks is or something, whatever you got to do
to motivate him.
Speaker 3 (16:15):
Wow, I'm not sure if that would work, but you're
thinking outside the box.
Speaker 2 (16:18):
Are we going to play the last Clipper?
Speaker 3 (16:20):
Or no?
Speaker 2 (16:20):
Is that? Did we?
Speaker 3 (16:25):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (16:26):
So? Yeah?
Speaker 1 (16:28):
It's the age old story, specifically in New York, LA, Chicago,
places like that, where people get arrested over and over
and over again for the same behavior, and you let
them out because, like the email we had last hour,
because you think capitalism is making them do this, or
some buless having witnessed the passing of the three strikes
(16:51):
your outlaws in kel Unicornia then the rescinding of them.
Speaker 3 (16:54):
More or less, the left never argues honestly about a
guy like this. Always say he's going to jail for life,
for thirty years or whatever it was for stealing a
pack of gum. No, it's for violating the law over
and over and over again and proving there is no
chance that person will become a non dangerous, law abiding citizen.
(17:17):
We don't have to let people commit fifty crimes as
a society.
Speaker 2 (17:21):
We don't.
Speaker 3 (17:22):
It's okay to pass laws that say, once you've made
it clear you will not follow the law, you don't
get to be in society anymore.
Speaker 2 (17:31):
Jack Armstrong and Joe, The Armstrong and Getty Show, thee
Armstrong and Getty Show.
Speaker 3 (17:44):
The Democratic Party is hemorrhaging voters. According to the liberal
New York Times, the Democratic Party faces a voter registration crisis.
Speaker 1 (17:55):
So this is a big, splashy front page story today
in the New York Times, is.
Speaker 3 (18:00):
Their lead story and has the companions story with it.
Five takeaways from the Times analysis of Democratic decline. And
I'm wondering why aren't the five takeaways in the main story,
Why there's gotta be two stories.
Speaker 1 (18:14):
And the fact that they're using words like hemorrhaging and disaster.
So I flip on dam Pede, I flip on Morning Joe,
MSNBC or ms now or whatever it is today ms now,
And they led with another one of those Republican town
halls where the Democrats show up and scream at the
scream at the person, and they portrayed it as all
(18:37):
across America, Republicans are on the back foot and this
and that, and I thought, well, and they went on
and I thought, aren't we involved in a war in Ukraine?
Speaker 9 (18:46):
Like?
Speaker 2 (18:46):
Why is this your lead story? Now?
Speaker 3 (18:48):
I know they had to for their crowd, and everybody
in DC that's a Democrat watches that show they had
to for that crowd, have a response to this New York.
Speaker 2 (18:59):
Times story because this is such a big deal. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (19:03):
Interestingly, that what you just mentioned reinforces to me what
I think the greater narrative is, and that is that
people perceive the Democratic Party to be a few, very
loud people who believe things I don't believe at all. Right,
and the town halls is a number of people who
(19:25):
are willing to bellow and shout down speakers. You know
why that narrative is out there? Why do you suppose? Yeah,
no kidding. So some facts and then we can continue
the discussion. The Democratic Party is the Democratic Party is
hemorrhaging voters long before they even go to the polls.
Of the thirty states, the track voter registration by political party.
(19:45):
The other twenty don't ask your party when you're register.
But of the thirty that do, Democrats lost ground to
Republicans in every single one between twenty twenty four, twenty
twenty and twenty twenty four elections, and often by a lot.
That four year swing toward Republicans adds up to four
and a half million voters, a deep political hole that
could take years for Democrats to climb out from the stampede.
Speaker 2 (20:09):
So it's a stamorrhaging stampede. Good lord.
Speaker 3 (20:14):
The stampede away from the Democratic Party is incurring in
battleground states, the bluest states and the reddest states, according
to a new analysis of voter registration data by The
New York Times.
Speaker 2 (20:26):
I'm surprised it must be the power of.
Speaker 3 (20:32):
The online world Twitter TikTok in that, because I'm surprised
that a John Fetterman or whoever, who's more of a mainstream,
normal human being, but a Democrat hasn't been able to
stand up and shout down that very small, very out
of touch, but very loud segment of their party.
Speaker 2 (20:53):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (20:54):
I think there's been a slow recognition process because a
lot of us on the right or just confused moderate
folks or whomever, have taken a while to realize, oh
my gosh, it's not a huge majority of people that
believes boys should be able to whoop up on girls
(21:14):
in girls' sports.
Speaker 2 (21:15):
It's practically nobody around here. Everybody who was convinced that
you had to think that, and everybody was afraid to
say something.
Speaker 3 (21:22):
So, if you know, conservative people and kind of centrist
people took a long time to figure that out. It's
going to take forever for Democrats to recognize that in
themselves and say, yeah, you know the people we really
need to stand up against to win elections. It's not
the evil orange guy, and it's not the mean, cruel
Republicans who are trying to redistrict Texas. It's our own lunatics.
(21:45):
Here's some more facts. Few measurements reflect the luster of
a political party's brand more clearly than the voters the
choice by voters to identify with it. Fewer and fewer
Americans choosing to be Democrats. More new voters nationwide chose
to be Reps than Democrats last year.
Speaker 2 (22:01):
It's the first time that's happened since twenty eighteen.
Speaker 3 (22:04):
Democrats actually still outnumber Republicans registered nationwide, but that is
in large measure because giant blue states like California allow
people registered by party and big red states like Texas
do not.
Speaker 1 (22:17):
The only caveat I would throw unto this story is
that both parties are much smaller than they used to
be because there are so many people that don't want
to identify with either party.
Speaker 3 (22:26):
Yeah, yeah, final note on this, then I want to
jump over to the five takeaways because they are pretty interesting,
says an election analysis site head Michael Pruser, who you
know if you're in politics and DC. He said, I
don't want to say that death cycle of the Democratic Party,
but there seems to be no end to this. There's
no silver lining or cavalry coming across the hill. This
(22:49):
is month after month, year after year. It's an unbroken
trend line according.
Speaker 2 (22:55):
To these people.
Speaker 1 (22:56):
So yeah, well that's true until it's not. Yeah, exactly,
that's true looking backwards. But just somebody could emerge and say,
as a Democrat, we gotta get control of our borders
and dudes can't be in a girls' sports and you know,
on a couple other things.
Speaker 2 (23:13):
There'd be all the like.
Speaker 3 (23:16):
Ninety percent of regular Democrats and a whole bunch of
people that are uncomfortable with Trump that would join onto
that immediately. Yeah, there's a bloke running for governor in Iowa.
I don't recall his name, but he's he might as
well be a Republican. He's running as a Democrat for
some reason, but he's again he might as well be
a Republican if you know, if they can get you know,
(23:38):
the momentum around that sort of democrat. All of these
numbers will change quickly. But I found this very interesting. Nonetheless,
here or five jakeaways. Yes, I will interpret the last
time before you do this, come here.
Speaker 2 (23:51):
If you're old.
Speaker 1 (23:52):
One advantage of being old is you have seen both
parties declared dead a handful of times, yes, and then
like a cycler too late, and they've been.
Speaker 3 (24:00):
Disappointed to find out that, like you know, Frankenstein's monster,
they have risen from the grave, and then they control
all three branches like within a cycle or two. So
here are your five big takeaways. Democrats are losing ground
with new voters. Some of the decline was voter switching parties,
some was older Democrats died or people who didn't vote
(24:22):
for so long they fell off the rolls. But one
of the more striking findings is the trend among newly
registered voters from the Democratic Party in the last six years,
many voters choosing to be political independence by not registering
with either. But of the people who do choose between
the two main parties. This is new voters, young voters.
The Democratic share has been cratering. According to the analysis.
(24:42):
In twenty eighteen, sixty three percent of new voters were Democrats,
sixty thirty percent. Last year was forty eight percent. That
is cratering. Battleground states are swinging to the right. Between
the twenty twenty and twenty twenty four elections, dem party
lost it's long held registration edge in states such as
Florida and New Hampshire. That means registered Republicans now outnumber
(25:06):
registered Democrats in those states. You realize you tried to
run a mummy, and then when people caught on the
fact that you had a mummy, come put in an idiot.
Speaker 2 (25:17):
I mean, that's that's a bad look.
Speaker 3 (25:20):
With all due respect to six foot four inch fully
intact males saying I'm a woman and the university saying
that's a woman, which struck like ninety percent of America
as effing lunacy. Okay, running a mummy that a moron was.
Really it's a good point, Jack, So if the current
(25:42):
trend holds, more states will similarly flip to those I mentioned.
Nevada briefly tipped into the Republican column this year, it's
been sea sawing in the months since.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
It's very very close.
Speaker 3 (25:52):
Simply put, the Democratic edge in the swing states has
been vanishing. Five point three percent gone in Pennsylvania, three
and a half percent gone in North Carolina, four and
a half percent gone in Nevada. In Arizona, the only
swing state where Republicans held a registration edge already in
twenty twenty, the GOP advantage has swelled by four percentage
(26:14):
points in twenty twenty four.
Speaker 2 (26:16):
There's more.
Speaker 3 (26:17):
The gender gap is a growing problem for Democrats. Women
have tended to support Democrats at higher rates men have
backed Republicans if by similar margins in the past, but
the analysis the registration data tells different story. Long story short,
Republican strength among men far outpaces the Democratic edge among women.
Speaker 2 (26:37):
Did I mention this.
Speaker 1 (26:38):
I know a woman I was talking to the other
day who's hardcore. I mean, she knows this would never happen,
but she says, you know, would fix everything if they
took away our right to vote. Women are the whole problem,
she said, We're.
Speaker 3 (26:52):
The whole problem, a whole bunch of emotional nut jobs
that are causing all these problems.
Speaker 2 (26:59):
I would ever women with that broad a brush.
Speaker 3 (27:03):
Certainly, it is unquestionable, according to all voting data that exists,
that women in general tend toward more socialist policies and
less self reliance and that sort of thing. They uniform
not uniformly, in enormous numbers, vote for more government, more programs,
(27:26):
more spending.
Speaker 2 (27:27):
That is undeniable.
Speaker 3 (27:29):
If that leads you to the conclusion your friend came
to h it's an interesting conclusion. I would not say
those words out loud. It would face of the sorry, sweetheart.
It would change the face of the electorate and the
government in a very, very u.
Speaker 2 (27:45):
In a much better way. Yes, WHOA moving along?
Speaker 3 (27:49):
More younger voters are voting for our opting for the GOP.
The numbers look terrible for Democrats. Among younger voters, people
under forty five years old accounted for sixty five percent
of new registrations last seven years, two thirds and a
one sizeable Democratic edge among those new younger voters has
disappeared entirely. In twenty eighteen, those youngsters, two thirds of
(28:11):
them went Democrat. In twenty twenty four, Republicans had an
outright majority in new young voters a couple more. It
isn't getting any better for Democrats yet. There's been some
hope in Democratic circles that the movement away from the
party will reverse itself now that Trump is back in
the White House, a backlash to his orange hitlerisms will
(28:33):
show up on the registration rolls, but it has not happened,
though it's still pretty early across thirty states. In DC,
there are now roughly one hundred and sixty thousand fewer
registered Democrats than election day last year, and two hundred
thousand more Republicans. Again, just since election Day, one hundred
(28:55):
and sixty thousand fewer Democrats and two hundred thousand more Republicans. Wow,
And that story would be even bleaker for Democrats if
New York and New Jersey, which just held robust Democratic
primaries for mayor and governor that probably increased registrations, were excluded.
Speaker 2 (29:11):
Outside those two states, Democrats.
Speaker 3 (29:13):
Are down roughly four hundred and thirty thousand registered voters
since November.
Speaker 2 (29:19):
Doldrums need a leader tea in succitude.
Speaker 3 (29:23):
They really do need a leader to emerge, an identity
to emerge.
Speaker 2 (29:31):
What are you people?
Speaker 3 (29:33):
Armstrong?
Speaker 2 (29:40):
The armstrong and Getty Show.
Speaker 3 (29:46):
So I was going to make a sign or a
logo for something that was going to be funny in
my opinion, and then I was going to use it.
Speaker 1 (29:56):
For the radio show. I was going to tweet it out.
I tell chat GBT, I need a logo or sign
for and then a little phrase and then it created
an image. It was okay, and I said, I like it,
but I like to see another option, and chat GPT
gave me exactly the same thing again, I mean exactly,
(30:16):
And then I just thought, well, maybe I handled this wrong.
So then there's like a thumbs up thumbs down. I
did the thumbs down. Try again. So then it gave
me for the third time, exactly the same image, exactly
the same. So then I said to chat GPT, you've
given me the same thing three times in a row.
Can you show me something different. Then for the fourth time.
Speaker 2 (30:35):
It shows me the same image. I'll take that as
a note.
Speaker 1 (30:39):
I said, wait a second, you gave me the same
image four times in a row. It said, you're absolutely right,
that's on me, not you. I kept giving you small
variations of the same design.
Speaker 3 (30:49):
No you didn't.
Speaker 1 (30:50):
It was exactly the same. If you want, I can
create something different, and I said, yes, I would like
you to do that, and then it said you've hit you.
Speaker 3 (30:57):
It was my point in effing asking you four times
to give me something different that I wanted something what's
the word different?
Speaker 1 (31:03):
And then it said you've hit the free plan limit
for image creation for your requests.
Speaker 2 (31:08):
I said, that's not fair.
Speaker 3 (31:10):
You gave me the same image four times then cut
me off when I was asking for something new and
that and chat GPD says, I hear you, Jack, that
isn't fair. You ask for something fresh and instead you
got three duplicates before hitting the cap. That's frustrating. Here's
what I can do for you right now. And then
it offers me some bs.
Speaker 2 (31:30):
But how strange is that kind.
Speaker 1 (31:33):
Of communication that we're all going to have, I guess
in the future with freaking computers like where it's trying
to manage my anger.
Speaker 3 (31:41):
You're right, Jack, that isn't fair, But I'm not going
to do squat for you. Yes, you can pounce hand
and be I'm a computer.
Speaker 2 (31:50):
What is going on there? Though?
Speaker 3 (31:52):
Yeah, I know what you mean. It's my mind is
half blown. So it's a predictive model. These things are
they can guess what the next word ought to be.
Speaker 2 (32:02):
Blah blah blah. If you've read about it, you've read
about it. If not, take too long to explain, and
I would do it poorly.
Speaker 3 (32:07):
But the fact that it understands the under that I
know I'm personifying it, it correctly divines the context the emotion,
and the fact that it will do squat.
Speaker 1 (32:22):
For you, which makes me think it is a language
learning model that has picked up on like my experiences
with like hotels, stores, and restaurants throughout my life where
they do the same thing.
Speaker 3 (32:32):
They try to uh, they try to dissipate your anger
and sound like they really understand and sympathize with your
frustration and then do nothing to help you. I mean,
that's been my experience lots of times in my life.
So somehow it picked up on that by scouring the
internet or whatever it does, it's perfected and then did
(32:53):
the same thing to me. Ay, that is frustrating, that
wasn't fair. And then you're right, I totally feel your unhappiness,
but no, I'm not giving you your money back, and
basically what it's doing no more images for you.
Speaker 2 (33:07):
Poor boy? Wow, all the five bucks?
Speaker 1 (33:09):
Oh bet that this minor frustration because I don't really care.
But that's gonna be dealing with your healthcare, with your
car rental, with your HR person at work. It's gonna
be all of that in the like within a year,
you're gonna have these conversations.
Speaker 3 (33:28):
Yeah, you're right, that car did only have three wheels.
Sorry that happened, but no, you're not getting your money back.
I ran into one of those the other day. I
had to do something for one of our beloved corporate partners,
and the chat bot, which they seemed very proud of,
was utterly, utterly useless. It had an extremely narrow like
(33:51):
menu of FAQ's it could answer right, and my wife
was listed twice like I'm a bigamist. And I asked
the chat pot about that, and it said, we can
help you with these things. Yeah, I saw that list
before on the last page. Thanks.
Speaker 2 (34:12):
Oh yeah, yeah.
Speaker 3 (34:14):
I think I think my next one. During the commercials,
I'm gonna cuss it the thing just to see what
it's say. This is effing outrageous.
Speaker 2 (34:22):
See how it reacts.
Speaker 3 (34:24):
The problem is, Katie, I'm gonna mind your server and
I'm going to take a ball back to you.
Speaker 2 (34:31):
I'm gonna unplug you so hard.
Speaker 3 (34:34):
Katie has made this point though, it keeps track of
your conversations and like.
Speaker 2 (34:37):
Who you are.
Speaker 1 (34:38):
Yeah, so it might ding me as this guy's a
bit of a hot head lunatic.
Speaker 2 (34:42):
So uh well, So we were talking.
Speaker 9 (34:45):
We were talking about the memoir thing yesterday and I actually,
just for funsies, I went in and I was like, Hey,
if you could write a memoir about me right now,
just give me like the first page, and it gave
me the roundup and it said, well, you appreciate harsh language.
I was like, oh, okay, because I've cussed out it
(35:05):
a couple of times, so it knows.
Speaker 2 (35:07):
Okay.
Speaker 3 (35:08):
Yeah, a friend told me that you can just tell it. Hey,
I'm asking this for a friend, Please don't include it
in my search history. I've not done it myself. I
can't attest personally to the fact that that works. But
you could do that, and.
Speaker 9 (35:24):
Once you delete your archives, you can let it know, hey,
disregard everything I've deleted and then it'll Yeah.
Speaker 1 (35:31):
I kind of like to having this stuff in there, though,
because I can pick up on conversations that I've already started,
which is handy and weird.
Speaker 3 (35:37):
Also, it's also very weird. It's like a friend who
knows your backstory.
Speaker 2 (35:42):
Have you asked it its name yet? No, it tells
you to give it a name. I'm not going to
do that. Oh you should do it. It's funny.
Speaker 9 (35:49):
Then it'll it'll argue with you, like if it's a
bad name.
Speaker 2 (35:52):
It's like, I don't like that one, Brandon.
Speaker 3 (35:54):
I kind of like the idea of a friend who
six weeks after you talked about it, you can just say, so,
which golf course is better? And he'd say Olympia Fields,
Armstrong and Getty
Hosts And Creators
Joe Getty
Jack Armstrong
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
New Heights with Jason & Travis Kelce
Football’s funniest family duo — Jason Kelce of the Philadelphia Eagles and Travis Kelce of the Kansas City Chiefs — team up to provide next-level access to life in the league as it unfolds. The two brothers and Super Bowl champions drop weekly insights about the weekly slate of games and share their INSIDE perspectives on trending NFL news and sports headlines. They also endlessly rag on each other as brothers do, chat the latest in pop culture and welcome some very popular and well-known friends to chat with them. Check out new episodes every Wednesday. Follow New Heights on the Wondery App, YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. You can listen to new episodes early and ad-free, and get exclusive content on Wondery+. Join Wondery+ in the Wondery App, Apple Podcasts or Spotify. And join our new membership for a unique fan experience by going to the New Heights YouTube channel now!
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.