October 16, 2025 • 40 mins
Voting Rights Act Section 2 takes center stage as the Supreme Court hears Louisiana v. Callais, a case that could reshape how majority-Black districts are drawn and how far race can be used in mapmaking. Todd walks through what Section 2 actually says, why lower courts demanded two majority-Black districts in Louisiana, and how equal protection concerns collide with vote-dilution claims. Then we zoom out to 2026: redistricting pushes in states like Texas and California, shifting prediction-market odds, and why a modest Democratic edge on the generic ballot may not be enough. Todd also reacts to CNN’s Harry Enten on the changing House outlook, explains why both parties suddenly care about “gerrymandering truces,” and frames what it all means for Trump’s agenda and the fight for the House.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Attention. You're listening to the Todd Huff Show, America's Home Poor, Conservative,
not Bitter Talk and education. Be advised. The content of
this program has been talking about it too, prevents and
even cure liberalism, and listening may cause you to lean
to the right. And now coming to you from the
(00:29):
full suite Wealth Studios, here is your Conservative but not
Bitter host, Todd Huff.
Speaker 2 (00:36):
My friends, the left, the Democrat Party, the media, they
are beginning to get into a bit of a panic mode.
The panic mode because of the scenario we find ourselves
in as we head into head into the midterms, which,
believe it or not, are just a little over one
(00:57):
year away. There's a lot of things that left and
the Democrat Party and the media are highly concerned about,
and I want to get into those things today. There's
Supreme Court cases that are being heard. There are all
sorts of things along those lines pertaining to redistricting. We'll
(01:18):
get into those, my friends, as the program comes together.
Here Before I do that, my friends, you know, one
of the biggest challenges that you face, that we face
as conservatives is finding ways to ensure our values align
with everything we do, including how we invest That's why
I love what the team at four to eight Financial
(01:39):
is doing. They specialize in biblically responsible investing. That means
they screen out companies that don't align with your faith,
your value, so you're not funding things that go completely
against what you believe in. Plus, they do the heavy
lifting for you, helping you align your investments with your
purpose and your goals. The best part is that they're
going to help you find out if your current investments
(02:02):
reflect your values, or to what degree they do or
what degree they don't reflect your values. All you have
to do is visit for eight financial dot com slash todd.
You can take a short assessment there that'll give you
an indication of where your current investments to what degree
they're aligned with your values. For eight financial dot com
(02:24):
slash todd that's where that assessment is. I've taken it.
It's quick, it's easy, it's painless. You can do the
same thing there at FO eight financial dot com slash
todd four eight Financial because your money should work, my friends,
for your values, all right. The US Supreme Court heard
(02:45):
arguments yesterday in a case. We've talked about this case
a little bit on this program in the past. It's
Louisiana versus KLA and that's C A. L. L Ais
And this is a case that could significantly reshape, redefine
(03:05):
section two of the Voting Rights Act. Again, we've talked
about this in the past, but the case was heard
by the justices yesterday. So let me give you a
quick rundown, a quick summary here as to what that is.
The state of Louisiana has six congressional districts. They have
(03:26):
six districts. Only one of those districts is currently what
they label or call a majority black district. So basically
what that means is, if you look at all six districts,
there's only one of them that has fifty percent or more.
(03:47):
It's comprised of fifty percent or more black constituents. And
so the population of the state of Louisiana is approximately
thirty three black. And so a lower court determined, now
this is how these just the impact of liberal thinking
(04:10):
on society. Dare i even say leftist thinking? But a
lower court ruled that this is basically that under Section
two of the Voting Rights Act, which I'll get to
here in a minute, required the state to have two
(04:30):
majority black districts So the thinking is. The thinking is
that because the Voting Rights Act says what it does,
especially in Section two, which again we'll get to here
in a moment, the state, since it's a third black,
needs to have a third of its districts that are
(04:53):
also voted for by a majority of black constituents. Now,
I know that a lot of people hear the race
black and immediately it people. Some people don't want to
touch this with the you know, a ten foot poll.
They don't want to get close to it. They don't
want to be called racist. I'm just giving those are
all facts. Those are all facts. You can insert whatever
(05:15):
other race or ethnicity into that if it makes it
easier to see this objectively. But the court ruled that
since a third of these states residents are black, then
a third of the districts need to be chosen by
people who are black. Now let me pause, and I've
said this before in a program I don't know, maybe
(05:38):
a couple of months ago, we talked about this. But
now it's after the oral arguments have been presented before
the court, which this ties into, I think to even
a bigger discussion of where we are politically heading into
the midterms. Which are again just a little over a
year away, the first Tuesday in November, and here we
(06:01):
are mid October, so we got a year and a
couple of weeks to get there. But it's obviously not
good to try to silence the political voice of any person.
Number one, right, I remember Rush used to say, the
smallest minority is the minority of one, and so any
(06:25):
attempt to silence someone's vote or their voice politically is unacceptable.
That is a blanket statement that applies to people with
whom I agree. That applies to people with whom I disagree.
That applies to people with whom I disagree vehemently. You
hear me on this program every day dismantling the viewpoints
(06:49):
and the radical worldview, the godless radical worldview of the
radical left. But they should have a political voice. I'm
not here to take away the voice. I'm here to persuade.
I'm here to properly frame these issues. I'm here to
tear down the bad ideas, not the people. I'm here
to promote the truth. Hear each and every day we
(07:10):
try to help people here and receive truth. Now, I've
said on this program, while I understand, I understand why
you might think that we have all that figured out.
I certainly don't. I don't have everything figured out. We
don't have all the answers. But I will tell you this,
we do have truth. We do have truth that we
have had revealed to us, that we've discovered however you
(07:30):
want to frame that, but we've had this. We have truth.
Not everything, you know, something's our opinion, Not everything's black
and white. But there are things that are absolutely true.
There are things that are absolutely good. Our founders built
this nation on things that were absolutely good and true.
Not everything. We've been through this. We've been through this
(07:51):
as well. Obviously, chattel slavery was an absolutely absolute, just
terrible thing, reprehensible evil that this nation had in her founding.
So I'm not talking about that, But I'm talking about
the things that our founders learned and implemented into our society.
Things like you're no longer a subject to a king,
(08:13):
You're a citizen. Things like your rights don't come from
the people in the nation's capital, those who are making
the laws and the rules. Your rights come from Almighty God,
your creator. That's where your rights come from, not from
some politician who can change them on a whim. The
right to free speech, the right to peaceably assemble, the
(08:35):
right to have a free press, the right to keep
in bare arms, the right to be protected against warrantless
searches and seizures from our government, all sorts of things
like that. These founders are founding fathers built these into
our system of government, and they were profoundly impactful. The
free society that we had created, the capitalistic free markets
(08:59):
that this nation embraced and was built upon, has unleashed
a lot of good on this planet. The world would
be a much, much, much darker place without the United
States of America here in existence. That is undeniable. I
go back to the days of the Cold War. You
had the United States of America, and you had the
(09:19):
Soviet evil Empire. You had true darkness that was embraced.
And listen, I'm not saying I am under no illusion
here that the United States of America is perfect. But again,
I go back to something William F. Buckley said, The
problem with socialism is socialism the problem with capitalism or
individual capitalists, meaning the problem with socialism. The problem with
(09:42):
communism is that their ideas are faulty at their core.
They can't be made to work no matter what. The
problem with capitalism isn't the idea or the system. The
problem with capitalism is that you're always going to have
individual people who do things that are not good, taking
advantage of peace, people defraud people. But that's not the
system's fault. That's the fault of the individual and the
(10:05):
choices that they have made. Our founders built our nation
upon these things, embraced these things, and it was it
was a good thing. And so when we did this,
we have this wonderful nation that has made corrections over
the course of time, including the evolution we've had. And
(10:27):
I mean that in a good sense, not in some
godless Darwinian sense, but the changes that have happened in
this country since our founding that have given voices, political
voices to people that were not considered even fully human
originally when we founded this nation. So we've come a
(10:48):
long way, and no voice should be silenced. You shouldn't
go out and try to silence again any group black,
white men, women, None of that should be happening. But
at the same time, at the same time, is this
what our founders envisioned, Where you look at the makeup
(11:09):
of a state based upon its race. Is this what
makes sense? Forget even to the point of what the
Founders would have necessarily envisioned. Let's think about what is
the good and right and best way to proceed here.
The Founders gave the state legislatures the power and authority
(11:29):
to draw up their congressional districts. It's the job of
the state legislatures to do that. And so if the
voters in a state don't like a way that a
district has been drawn, or their districts collectively have been drawn,
then they can hold their elective representative representatives accountable and
they can vote them out of office. The problem is
(11:50):
that I've been through this a lot as well. There's
not a handbook that says this is the shape that
you should draw your districts. It just doesn't work that way.
Now understand that while it's true on the one end
of the continuum of the spectrum to say that there's
not a uniform shape that all districts should be, that
can be true and that they might have to take
(12:11):
in irregular shape because you have to fit into those
districts roughly the same number of people, so that you're
having each congressional district. Each congress person that represents that
district representing approximately the same number of people. Can never
be precise and you know, perfect breakdown percentages, but you
(12:34):
want it to be generally the same, and so sometimes
the shapes have to be different. Some of the districts
are going to be larger, some of them are going
to be smaller. Sometimes they might have to take an
odd shape. So you can understand that on one side
of the of the of the argument, but on the
other side, you can also understand that some of these districts,
especially many blue districts, which I'll get to in the
program as this thing unfolds today, But many of these
(12:57):
districts are clearly drawn with the intent to make sure
that they have a outcome, a political outcome, or at
least a statistically likelihood that they're going to vote for
a particular party. This has been done. This is called jerrymandering,
where it's extremely creative the way that these districts are
(13:20):
drawn to connect areas of a state that are either
Republican or Democrat to ensure that that district that there's
another member in the House of Representatives, that is, whichever
party has drawing the districts that's representing them. So that
of course is at the other end of the spectrum,
(13:40):
and we understand that that's not necessarily what we want either,
but it's there's no standard formula here. Some states have
commissions that tell you that they're going through and trying
to draw districts that are a political this is a
bipartisan commission and all that sort of stuff. There's no
such thing. There has to be a level of just
(14:04):
discretion that's that's implemented, that's used when drawing these districts
and so and so. That's just part of it. And
if it gets too extreme, you can hold your state
legislature accountable individual legislators for the way that they drew
the maps. But the courts intervened here because there is
a law that was passed, Voting Rights Act. And in
(14:29):
this Act, I'm going to read section two, sub Section B,
because this is the one that's really in question, and
that's before the courts. It says this a violation of
Subsection A is established if, based on the totality of circumstances,
it has shown that the political process is leading to
(14:50):
nomination or election in the state, or political subdivision are
not equally open. This is the key part here to
participation by members of a class of citizens protected by
sub Section A, in that its members have less opportunity
than other members of the electorate to participate, to participate
(15:11):
in the political process, and to elect representatives of their choice.
So that's really what's at question here. So the lower
court said, well, in the way that we're interpreting this,
since there's thirty three percent black residents in the state
(15:31):
of Louisiana, they should be able to choose thirty three
percent of the representatives of the state. So there's six districts,
thirty three percent of six is two, and so instead
of having one majority black district, the court says, you
now have to have two majority black districts. So now
(15:51):
it's no longer a political process. Now it's become a
legal process where the court has interpreted and applied what
it says that the district should be according to their
interpretation of the law. Now the state fires back and says, look,
you're basically telling us to draw districts based upon race,
and that's not the way that we should be doing this.
(16:15):
By the way, the state legislature gets to decide how
we draw these districts anyway. So, just as I said
off the top or earlier in this monologue that it
would be wrong to try to silence individuals or groups
of people from exercising their political voices, there's also problems
(16:35):
by doing this. This is how the left loves to
think about these things. They like they think. First of all,
they think that the black vote is just one thing,
which to me is absolutely reprehensible. It's absolutely reprehensible to
think that all black voters all white voters vote the
(16:57):
same way. Look, I understand, I understand demographics. I understand
that there are things that appeal to different groups of voters.
But to just to look at a class of people
based upon solely the color of their skin and saying
they should that that needs to be a group that
(17:20):
is kept together for political purposes so that they can represent,
so they can elect somebody who represents them, is just
a backwards way of thinking about it. Now, it works
in today's society because the Democrats have called Republicans racist
and a whole lot worse for so long that a
lot of people think that that's absolutely the logical thing
(17:41):
to do. Because if if there are not enough representatives
that are representing quote unquote the black population in this country,
then there's going to be all sorts of untold horrors
upon the black population. See, this is just not the way.
I don't like to think about people in classes of people.
(18:02):
We are individuals. I understand as someone with the background
in marketing, I would say someone who's I don't know,
got to say a background in marketing. I understand that
there are differences in the types of people, and that
there are things that appeal to certain groups. Again, some
(18:24):
people want to just base these on the most superficial
things as possible, on race and so forth. But it's
really more about the mindset or maybe the subculture of
a particular group of people, and certain things are more
appealing to them, certain concerns are bigger to them, they
fear certain things, and so But to think that there's
(18:47):
just kind of a monolithic thought process by an entire
group of people based upon race, I just I reject that.
It's one of the things I love about conservatism, and
it's one of the reasons I find it to be
root in a lot of a lot of truth is
that is that it applies, it appeals to all people.
It appeals to all people, more so, more so even
(19:09):
than conservatism. The gospel of Jesus Christ appeals to all
people because because we have a shared human condition. We
have a shared human condition, we all have long ease,
we all have again, the founders here of this nation
understood that we all have a desire to live free,
(19:30):
to make choices for ourselves, to set our own priorities,
not to be looked at as an individual who's just
simply one cog in the wheel, but rather we're individuals
who are living our own lives, who, by the invisible
hand described by Adam Smith, can work together without force
(19:51):
and interference by our government and so forth. The invisible
hand causes us to work together, push generally in one
direction by cooperation. We understand that our self interests can
be attained if we help other people achieve their self interest.
But see when government gets involved, all that stuff stops
(20:12):
and it says we're going to tell you what to
do by force. This is not a good thing. So
the lower court basically said, now you've got to have
two districts that are majority black, which means plus one.
Split that into two districts so that you're not diluting
the voice of the black vote, which I don't even
(20:34):
like to say. I don't even like to say that.
But anyway, so the Supreme Court had this hearing yesterday
and they've basically, again, we don't know what they think specifically,
but you can you can get a glimpse if you've
been to or watched or well, I can't watch, you
can listen to recordings of the Supreme Court. You can
(20:58):
hear some of the questions and you can begin to
understand maybe what is going through the mind of a
particular justice. There's only nine justices, you have an inclination
as to understand these three might are probably going to
vote this way. There's a couple that you don't know about.
But you listen to their questions and maybe some of
the things they say during the oral arguments, and you
(21:21):
begin to get a picture, and it appears it appears
that they are The Court is willing to take a
look at changing this because this is based upon their
questioning probably not the best way, not the best interpretation
of the Voting Rights Act, which could have tremendous repercussions
(21:42):
on limiting how states can draw their districts, which again
if this as it's currently standing, benefits Democrats the way
that they wield this authority and power through this interpretation
of the Voting Act Section number two. More on that,
my friends, as we get into the next segment of
(22:06):
the program, I want to tell you though, My Pillow
is excited to announce that they are having their biggest
three to one sale ever. They've got a limited edition product,
a back in stock special, and a closeout deal including
the MyPillow bedsheets only twenty nine ninety eight, any color,
any size, any size, even King My towels are back
(22:29):
in stock. You can get a six piece towel set
for only thirty nine ninety eight. By the way, the
quality of these products are really good. We use them
here in the huff Household. And for the first and
only time, you can get a limited edition premium My
Pillow made with Giza cotton and a designer Gussett Queens
or seventeen ninety eight Kings nineteen ninety eight. Find out
more by going to my pillow dot com. MyPillow dot
(22:52):
Com promo code Tod will get you these special prices.
MyPillow dot Com promo code Todd Quick time out. My friends,
back here in just a minute. Welcome back, my friends.
So just to kind of tie up what we were
talking about last segments, last segment with the hearing yesterday
(23:14):
in Louisiana versus Klay, the issues that are under review
currently by the court after hearing the oral arguments yesterday
are whether the Voting Rights Act section to be, whether
that's effects, whether those effects the effects based test has
(23:36):
gone too far letting courts impose race based maps without
proving intent to discriminate, because there is a difference, right.
So that's what we were kind of where we wrapped up.
It's one thing to say we're going to intentionally keep
you from voting. It's another thing to say that state
legislatures have the right to draw these districts where they
(23:57):
want to draw the district. If they're not seeking out
to silence a political group, which you'd have to seem
to me to demonstrably prove in the affirmative, then why
can't they draw the district that way? It seems like
a potentially you can make the argument that this is done.
(24:18):
This is done and being argued to protect seats that
democrats think that they can rely upon. So another issue
here is whether or not race can remain a predominant
factor in map making without violating equal protection. I just again,
to me, this is a huge problem in this country,
(24:38):
this idea that race is basically everything. And I understand,
I understand that there have been tremendous racial problems in
this country's history. I understand there are racists today. By
the way, there are people that are racist on both
sides of the people that are racist against all types
of people. I condemn all of that, but I also
(25:03):
understand that again, there are processes and there are laws
that well, there's constitutional authority given it's the state legislators
to draw their districts, and it you know, when all
the court cases and all the rulings seem to favor
one group protecting its you know, its political interests, that's
(25:26):
a problem as well. And the last question here that
they're basically reviewing is whether the court should narrow the
rule or limit its duration. So we'll see, we'll see
what happens, but it looks like that could be that
could be the case. Progressives say that Section two remains
necessary to counteract vote dilution and secure minority representation. Again,
(25:50):
they see the world constantly through the lens of race.
And I'll say this, if you believe in liberty, if
you believe that the message of truth and freedom applies
equally to all people, then you begin to see the
world less and less through the view of the lens
of race. But the left is focused on this, and
(26:14):
you know, I think there are some. I do think
that there are some who genuinely believe that that's the
best way that it's necessary to continue to to fix,
to address the mistakes, the evils in our nation's history
pertaining to race. I think that there are some that
(26:34):
use this as a political weapon, a political tool to
try to protect their political interest and to win seats.
Conservatives say, look, this, this is not supposed to be
Section two of the Voting Rights Acts and not supposed
to be a race based quota system because that's inconsistent
with equal protection. So we'll see how the how the
(26:59):
core rule on this. But what I want to get
to specifically is how the impact of this, combined with
other things that I want to talk about as we
get into the program deeper here today, is how these
things affect the twenty twenty six excuse me, twenty twenty
(27:20):
six midterms, which are just a little bit over a
year away. So this is CNN. I'm gonna play a
clip for you. CNN. There's a guy on there. His
name is it's a Harry, Yeah, Harry Inton. He's kind
of their data guy. He'll come on from time to
time to go through the numbers, to talk about some
(27:42):
of these things behind the scenes and so forth. And
I want to play at least part of this clip.
They've brought him on. I think this was I think
this was yesterday. They bring him on to talk about
the state of the twenty twenty six midterm election. So
what we just talked about is a factor in this,
the Voting Rights Act, how districts can be drawn, what
(28:05):
Louisiana specifically has to do. You also know that if
you followed politics listen to this program for any length
of time, you will have known. You will know I
should say that the people in Republicans in some states
have voted to readist Well, in the state of Texas,
they voted to redistrict, believing that that should yield more
(28:27):
Republican districts in the upcoming election. Again, there are no
guarantees here, There are no guarantees that that is going
to happen, but based upon statistical probabilities and turnout and
all that sort of stuff, it looks like they could
have flip several districts to make them read in the
state of Texas. California, led by Gavin Newsom, now is
(28:48):
trying to do the same basically to redistrict themselves. They
think that they might be able to squeeze five more
blue districts out as well. Missouri's been a part of this.
There has been discussions for the state here I live
in of Indiana. A lot of states are talking about redistricting,
and exactly what I told you on this program Originally
it turns out to be true, exactly what I told
(29:08):
you on here, because I told you the reason there
is such opposition to this, and you're going to hear
this in this SoundBite when Harrieton starts talking about this.
The reason there is so much opposition today about redistricting
is because Democrats have effectively gotten everything redistricted in their
(29:30):
favor and now they want to call for a gerrymandering truce.
Now they want to call for a jerrymandering truth. It
would be like saying, you know, I go back to
the day I am a fan of the NBA, especially
because of my daughter. There was probably ten or fifteen
years I didn't watch any of it, but you know,
we followed the Pacers. That was a wonderful run by
(29:51):
the Pacers last season. We were able to do some
cool things around the sport and got to do some
interesting things with the you know, the team and stuff.
But anyway, the point is that I'm a fan of basketball,
and I remember, I remember reading and learning about the
dominance of Wilt Chamberlain, and Wilt Chamberlain is one of
(30:13):
the there's a couple of players that were so dominant
that the rules were rewritten so that it would not
give them an advantage. And that's basically what's what's happened
here is that the in a manner of speaking, the Democrats,
the Democrats had gotten let's say that they had Wilt
(30:35):
Chamberlain on their team and they didn't want the rules
rewritten for him because they wanted to get every bit
of advantage. And let's say he gets traded to another team.
That's when they say, okay, let's now let's now make
sure he can't do what he was doing. That's effectively
what they've They're doing with redistricting because they've squeezed as
much juice out of that limit in their states as
(30:56):
they can. And now Republican states are starting to do
this and or at least talk about it, and they're
acting like it's the end of the world. Normally, these
things are all done behind closed doors and they're quietly done.
But Trump's out there talking about it publicly, just calling
up Governor Abbott and saying, hey, redistrict your state, or
probably having phone calls here in my state with Mike Braun.
(31:16):
You got to get this done, Mike, right. And people
get appalled by that. But what's interesting to me is
those conversations have always happened, they just don't happen in
the limelight. And they say that Trump is the one
that's changing the whole system and turning it's on its head.
In reality, it's the first time these things have been
transparently discussed in real time before the voters. Anyway, all
(31:37):
that being said, this is having a negative potential impact
on Democrats in a massive, massive way. And Harry Itton
kind of paints the picture here, and I want you
to listen to his description of just how bad things
could be for Democrats heading in to the twenty twenty
six midwas.
Speaker 3 (31:53):
You this morning? The race to control the House in
the twenty twenty six midterms has taken a turn and
possibly brings with it a new war signed for Democrats.
Harry Enton running the numbers on this one and sneaking
in at the last.
Speaker 4 (32:04):
Time, I've learned that way around.
Speaker 3 (32:06):
It was a good maneuverse. I wish people could see it.
Speaker 1 (32:09):
I have.
Speaker 2 (32:10):
I'm fantastic he was.
Speaker 4 (32:11):
It's the new shoes as we spoke about yesterday.
Speaker 3 (32:12):
Okay, moving on, and you're okay, you're tracking the odds.
What is the change that you're seeing?
Speaker 4 (32:16):
Yeah, okay, so you know if you go back six
months ago, you go back to April K Paul, when
what were we looking at. Well, we were looking at
the Democrats with a very clear shot of taking control
of the US House of Representatives. According to the Calshi
prediction market odds, we saw him in an eighty three
percent chance. But those odds have gone plummeting down. Now
we're talking about just a sixty three percent chance, while
the gopiece chances up like a rocket, up like gold,
(32:39):
up from seventeen percent to now a thirty seven percent chance,
so we'll look like a pretty clear Democrat likely Democratic
winning the House come next year. Has become much closer
to toss up at this point, although still slightly leading Democratic.
Speaker 3 (32:52):
What's changed?
Speaker 2 (32:53):
Okay, I want to pause there because I'm at the
end of this segment. I want to play a little
bit more of this in the next segment. She's asking
him what's changed, my friends? Before we wrap up for
this segment, My friends, you ever notice how some families
seem to have a plan that lasts for generations. It's
not by accident, my friends. Full Sweet Wealth works with
people who want their wealth to make a difference for
(33:14):
years to come. Their team brings together high level investment
strategies like private equity, private credit, and option strategies, combined
with expert legal guidance as well. If you're looking, my friends,
to do more than dismanage your money, if it's more
to you than just making sure you're well, than dismanaging
(33:35):
the money. If it's more about making sure your vision
becomes a reality, a reality for the people you love,
both today and in the future. If you want to
leave your mark, if you want to build something lasting,
take a look at Full Sweet Wealth. Jason and his
team there are a great resource. They'll take good care
of you. Fullsweet wealth dot com is where you can go,
build your legacy, secure your future. Quick time out for me,
(33:57):
my friends. Back in just a minute. Welcome back, my friends.
I want to get you to the rest of this
SoundBite with Harry Inton talking about what's changed regarding the odds.
In fact, in April, the Democrats had an eighty three
(34:18):
percent chance, according to the Calshi prediction market, an eighty
three percent chance of winning the House in the midterm
elections in twenty twenty six. Now those odds, so that
was in April, so we got May, June, July, August, September, October.
Six months later, those odds have cut from eighty three
(34:39):
percent chance for the Democrats winning to sixty three percent chance.
So it was eighty three seventeen in April, seventeen percent
for the Republicans. Now it's sixty three to thir thirty seven.
So it basically went from a five in a six
chance of Democrats winning to a two in three chan
two out of three chance for Democrats winning. A big flip,
(35:01):
and we're getting close, we're inching towards fifty to fifty
and if some of these other redistricting efforts happen. If
you know this, this case with the Voting Rights Act
could affect the way that districts are drawn. There's a
lot of potential seats here that could be impacted, my friends,
So so really quickly here, I want to take a
(35:26):
moment to tell you about one of our newest advertising partners.
And you might be curious, my friends, you might be
curious about kratom where you just want honest answers before
you try something new. So you're invited to the Weekly
Tea Talk with from Christopher's Organic Botanicals. It happens every
(35:48):
Thursday night, seven pm that's Eastern time. You can join
the Weekly Tea Talk, no pressure, no sales pitch, just
real conversations with real people who want to help you
understand create them, what it is, how it's used, how
to stay safe, and what to avoid. Christopher's Organic Botanicals
(36:08):
believe education should come first. That's what sets them apart.
If you've got questions about relief, about dosage safety sourcing,
this is the place to ask those questions. In this form,
they build a community that's focused on truth, not join
the Conversation Thursdays, by the way, that would be today Thursday,
(36:29):
seven pm Eastern. For more information, visit Christopher's Organic Botanicals
dot com. That's Christopher's Organic Botanicals dot com. Truth, Tradition, Transparency. Okay, friends,
I'm want to pick up here in the time we
have remaining and play a little bit more, give you
a little bit more context about what's going on as
(36:51):
we head into the midterms here. And as I said,
this is not good news, not good news for the
Democrat Party, for the left, for the media. Let's pick
up where we left off last segment. Change.
Speaker 3 (37:03):
What do you think?
Speaker 2 (37:04):
Okay, what has changed?
Speaker 4 (37:05):
Well, why don't we just take a look at the
national picture first, take a look at voters and how
they're feeling about things. And we can take a look
at the generic congressional ballot. And I want to take
a look and compare it to twenty seventeen, twenty eighteen, right,
because that's sort of the baseline. That was, of course
the first Trump term, that was where Democrats were sort
of keeping pace. You go back to April, look at
the generic congressional ballot. What you see, you see plus
(37:25):
three Democrats in twenty twenty five. In April, you see
plus three Democrats back in April of twenty seventeen. Now
jump over to this side of the screen. What happens, Well,
the Democrats are no longer keeping pace with the pace
that they were setting back in twenty seventeen, twenty eighteen.
You look back in twenty seventeen, you saw that the
Democrats had leaped up to an eight point advantage. I
remember covering this. I remember a lot of folks, including myself, saying,
(37:48):
you know what, Republicans look pretty decent right now in
terms of the fact that they had the House, they
had the Senate, they had the presidency, but things were
likely going to flip. And I was looking for the
same science this year. The bottom line is it hasn't happened.
When it hasn't happened, Democrats have stayed, basically studied, they
have fallen off the pace.
Speaker 2 (38:05):
Democrats were way out ahead.
Speaker 4 (38:07):
Back in twenty seventeen on the generic congressional ballot, and
now we're basically looking at Democrats ahead. But again they
are so far in back of the pace that they
set back there. And so I think what a lot
of folks are seeing. Folks like myself are saying, wait
a minute, given what we might be seeing and redistricting,
is this plus three going to be enough capable?
Speaker 2 (38:27):
So that's the question right now. You couldn't see the video. Basically,
what he was doing was showing showing a chart that
said in April of twenty to twenty five earlier this year,
on a generic ballot, meaning when people were surveyed and
said are you going to vote for congressional Democrats or
(38:49):
congressional Republicans in the midterm elections, they're saying Democrat with
the plus three advantage right now in twenty seven seventeen.
If you can follow this without looking at this, I
know it can be the numbers and the times can
be a little difficult to follow over podcasts and radio.
But in twenty seventeen, when we got to the month
(39:11):
of October, Democrats had a plus eight advantage in the
general ballot, which means that they had momentum as they
headed into that final year leading up to the mid terms.
The first time Trump was elected, that's not the case
this time. They still hold a plus three advantage according
to polls in October, but they didn't make up any
(39:34):
more ground. That's why you got to look at the lens, Well,
look at the shutdown. I should say through this lens,
Democrats are looking to move those numbers anyway that they can,
and they think, or they hope that they can get
some of that traction by blaming Republicans for the shutdown,
which of course is silly and ridiculous. But this is
(39:54):
the way that the politics are headed as we move
into the midterms, and I'm telling they're terrified. And if
you factor in there's other things I have in the
stack here that you can go to and see on
the website. I don't have time to get into them today,
but just go to the stack and just go to
today's episode, and you will find other articles that say
(40:16):
that Democrats, at least in one particular study, stand to
lose as many as nineteen seats, my friends, nineteen seats
from some of these impacts, which again I can't get into.
They are terrified, they are desperate, they are grasping for straws,
and this midterm election is very, very important. It's going
(40:39):
to determine whether or not Trump's agenda is going to
continue to move forward, or whether or not we're gonna
have nothing but investigations, throwing a wrench in his gears.
But I've got to go, SDG
Attention. You're listening to the Todd Huff Show, America's Home Poor, Conservative,
not Bitter Talk and education. Be advised. The content of
this program has been talking about it too, prevents and
even cure liberalism, and listening may cause you to lean
to the right. And now coming to you from the
(00:29):
full suite Wealth Studios, here is your Conservative but not
Bitter host, Todd Huff.
Speaker 2 (00:36):
My friends, the left, the Democrat Party, the media, they
are beginning to get into a bit of a panic mode.
The panic mode because of the scenario we find ourselves
in as we head into head into the midterms, which,
believe it or not, are just a little over one
(00:57):
year away. There's a lot of things that left and
the Democrat Party and the media are highly concerned about,
and I want to get into those things today. There's
Supreme Court cases that are being heard. There are all
sorts of things along those lines pertaining to redistricting. We'll
(01:18):
get into those, my friends, as the program comes together.
Here Before I do that, my friends, you know, one
of the biggest challenges that you face, that we face
as conservatives is finding ways to ensure our values align
with everything we do, including how we invest That's why
I love what the team at four to eight Financial
(01:39):
is doing. They specialize in biblically responsible investing. That means
they screen out companies that don't align with your faith,
your value, so you're not funding things that go completely
against what you believe in. Plus, they do the heavy
lifting for you, helping you align your investments with your
purpose and your goals. The best part is that they're
going to help you find out if your current investments
(02:02):
reflect your values, or to what degree they do or
what degree they don't reflect your values. All you have
to do is visit for eight financial dot com slash todd.
You can take a short assessment there that'll give you
an indication of where your current investments to what degree
they're aligned with your values. For eight financial dot com
(02:24):
slash todd that's where that assessment is. I've taken it.
It's quick, it's easy, it's painless. You can do the
same thing there at FO eight financial dot com slash
todd four eight Financial because your money should work, my friends,
for your values, all right. The US Supreme Court heard
(02:45):
arguments yesterday in a case. We've talked about this case
a little bit on this program in the past. It's
Louisiana versus KLA and that's C A. L. L Ais
And this is a case that could significantly reshape, redefine
(03:05):
section two of the Voting Rights Act. Again, we've talked
about this in the past, but the case was heard
by the justices yesterday. So let me give you a
quick rundown, a quick summary here as to what that is.
The state of Louisiana has six congressional districts. They have
(03:26):
six districts. Only one of those districts is currently what
they label or call a majority black district. So basically
what that means is, if you look at all six districts,
there's only one of them that has fifty percent or more.
(03:47):
It's comprised of fifty percent or more black constituents. And
so the population of the state of Louisiana is approximately
thirty three black. And so a lower court determined, now
this is how these just the impact of liberal thinking
(04:10):
on society. Dare i even say leftist thinking? But a
lower court ruled that this is basically that under Section
two of the Voting Rights Act, which I'll get to
here in a minute, required the state to have two
(04:30):
majority black districts So the thinking is. The thinking is
that because the Voting Rights Act says what it does,
especially in Section two, which again we'll get to here
in a moment, the state, since it's a third black,
needs to have a third of its districts that are
(04:53):
also voted for by a majority of black constituents. Now,
I know that a lot of people hear the race
black and immediately it people. Some people don't want to
touch this with the you know, a ten foot poll.
They don't want to get close to it. They don't
want to be called racist. I'm just giving those are
all facts. Those are all facts. You can insert whatever
(05:15):
other race or ethnicity into that if it makes it
easier to see this objectively. But the court ruled that
since a third of these states residents are black, then
a third of the districts need to be chosen by
people who are black. Now let me pause, and I've
said this before in a program I don't know, maybe
(05:38):
a couple of months ago, we talked about this. But
now it's after the oral arguments have been presented before
the court, which this ties into, I think to even
a bigger discussion of where we are politically heading into
the midterms. Which are again just a little over a
year away, the first Tuesday in November, and here we
(06:01):
are mid October, so we got a year and a
couple of weeks to get there. But it's obviously not
good to try to silence the political voice of any person.
Number one, right, I remember Rush used to say, the
smallest minority is the minority of one, and so any
(06:25):
attempt to silence someone's vote or their voice politically is unacceptable.
That is a blanket statement that applies to people with
whom I agree. That applies to people with whom I disagree.
That applies to people with whom I disagree vehemently. You
hear me on this program every day dismantling the viewpoints
(06:49):
and the radical worldview, the godless radical worldview of the
radical left. But they should have a political voice. I'm
not here to take away the voice. I'm here to persuade.
I'm here to properly frame these issues. I'm here to
tear down the bad ideas, not the people. I'm here
to promote the truth. Hear each and every day we
(07:10):
try to help people here and receive truth. Now, I've
said on this program, while I understand, I understand why
you might think that we have all that figured out.
I certainly don't. I don't have everything figured out. We
don't have all the answers. But I will tell you this,
we do have truth. We do have truth that we
have had revealed to us, that we've discovered however you
(07:30):
want to frame that, but we've had this. We have truth.
Not everything, you know, something's our opinion, Not everything's black
and white. But there are things that are absolutely true.
There are things that are absolutely good. Our founders built
this nation on things that were absolutely good and true.
Not everything. We've been through this. We've been through this
(07:51):
as well. Obviously, chattel slavery was an absolutely absolute, just
terrible thing, reprehensible evil that this nation had in her founding.
So I'm not talking about that, But I'm talking about
the things that our founders learned and implemented into our society.
Things like you're no longer a subject to a king,
(08:13):
You're a citizen. Things like your rights don't come from
the people in the nation's capital, those who are making
the laws and the rules. Your rights come from Almighty God,
your creator. That's where your rights come from, not from
some politician who can change them on a whim. The
right to free speech, the right to peaceably assemble, the
(08:35):
right to have a free press, the right to keep
in bare arms, the right to be protected against warrantless
searches and seizures from our government, all sorts of things
like that. These founders are founding fathers built these into
our system of government, and they were profoundly impactful. The
free society that we had created, the capitalistic free markets
(08:59):
that this nation embraced and was built upon, has unleashed
a lot of good on this planet. The world would
be a much, much, much darker place without the United
States of America here in existence. That is undeniable. I
go back to the days of the Cold War. You
had the United States of America, and you had the
(09:19):
Soviet evil Empire. You had true darkness that was embraced.
And listen, I'm not saying I am under no illusion
here that the United States of America is perfect. But again,
I go back to something William F. Buckley said, The
problem with socialism is socialism the problem with capitalism or
individual capitalists, meaning the problem with socialism. The problem with
(09:42):
communism is that their ideas are faulty at their core.
They can't be made to work no matter what. The
problem with capitalism isn't the idea or the system. The
problem with capitalism is that you're always going to have
individual people who do things that are not good, taking
advantage of peace, people defraud people. But that's not the
system's fault. That's the fault of the individual and the
(10:05):
choices that they have made. Our founders built our nation
upon these things, embraced these things, and it was it
was a good thing. And so when we did this,
we have this wonderful nation that has made corrections over
the course of time, including the evolution we've had. And
(10:27):
I mean that in a good sense, not in some
godless Darwinian sense, but the changes that have happened in
this country since our founding that have given voices, political
voices to people that were not considered even fully human
originally when we founded this nation. So we've come a
(10:48):
long way, and no voice should be silenced. You shouldn't
go out and try to silence again any group black,
white men, women, None of that should be happening. But
at the same time, at the same time, is this
what our founders envisioned, Where you look at the makeup
(11:09):
of a state based upon its race. Is this what
makes sense? Forget even to the point of what the
Founders would have necessarily envisioned. Let's think about what is
the good and right and best way to proceed here.
The Founders gave the state legislatures the power and authority
(11:29):
to draw up their congressional districts. It's the job of
the state legislatures to do that. And so if the
voters in a state don't like a way that a
district has been drawn, or their districts collectively have been drawn,
then they can hold their elective representative representatives accountable and
they can vote them out of office. The problem is
(11:50):
that I've been through this a lot as well. There's
not a handbook that says this is the shape that
you should draw your districts. It just doesn't work that way.
Now understand that while it's true on the one end
of the continuum of the spectrum to say that there's
not a uniform shape that all districts should be, that
can be true and that they might have to take
(12:11):
in irregular shape because you have to fit into those
districts roughly the same number of people, so that you're
having each congressional district. Each congress person that represents that
district representing approximately the same number of people. Can never
be precise and you know, perfect breakdown percentages, but you
(12:34):
want it to be generally the same, and so sometimes
the shapes have to be different. Some of the districts
are going to be larger, some of them are going
to be smaller. Sometimes they might have to take an
odd shape. So you can understand that on one side
of the of the of the argument, but on the
other side, you can also understand that some of these districts,
especially many blue districts, which I'll get to in the
program as this thing unfolds today, But many of these
(12:57):
districts are clearly drawn with the intent to make sure
that they have a outcome, a political outcome, or at
least a statistically likelihood that they're going to vote for
a particular party. This has been done. This is called jerrymandering,
where it's extremely creative the way that these districts are
(13:20):
drawn to connect areas of a state that are either
Republican or Democrat to ensure that that district that there's
another member in the House of Representatives, that is, whichever
party has drawing the districts that's representing them. So that
of course is at the other end of the spectrum,
(13:40):
and we understand that that's not necessarily what we want either,
but it's there's no standard formula here. Some states have
commissions that tell you that they're going through and trying
to draw districts that are a political this is a
bipartisan commission and all that sort of stuff. There's no
such thing. There has to be a level of just
(14:04):
discretion that's that's implemented, that's used when drawing these districts
and so and so. That's just part of it. And
if it gets too extreme, you can hold your state
legislature accountable individual legislators for the way that they drew
the maps. But the courts intervened here because there is
a law that was passed, Voting Rights Act. And in
(14:29):
this Act, I'm going to read section two, sub Section B,
because this is the one that's really in question, and
that's before the courts. It says this a violation of
Subsection A is established if, based on the totality of circumstances,
it has shown that the political process is leading to
(14:50):
nomination or election in the state, or political subdivision are
not equally open. This is the key part here to
participation by members of a class of citizens protected by
sub Section A, in that its members have less opportunity
than other members of the electorate to participate, to participate
(15:11):
in the political process, and to elect representatives of their choice.
So that's really what's at question here. So the lower
court said, well, in the way that we're interpreting this,
since there's thirty three percent black residents in the state
(15:31):
of Louisiana, they should be able to choose thirty three
percent of the representatives of the state. So there's six districts,
thirty three percent of six is two, and so instead
of having one majority black district, the court says, you
now have to have two majority black districts. So now
(15:51):
it's no longer a political process. Now it's become a
legal process where the court has interpreted and applied what
it says that the district should be according to their
interpretation of the law. Now the state fires back and says, look,
you're basically telling us to draw districts based upon race,
and that's not the way that we should be doing this.
(16:15):
By the way, the state legislature gets to decide how
we draw these districts anyway. So, just as I said
off the top or earlier in this monologue that it
would be wrong to try to silence individuals or groups
of people from exercising their political voices, there's also problems
(16:35):
by doing this. This is how the left loves to
think about these things. They like they think. First of all,
they think that the black vote is just one thing,
which to me is absolutely reprehensible. It's absolutely reprehensible to
think that all black voters all white voters vote the
(16:57):
same way. Look, I understand, I understand demographics. I understand
that there are things that appeal to different groups of voters.
But to just to look at a class of people
based upon solely the color of their skin and saying
they should that that needs to be a group that
(17:20):
is kept together for political purposes so that they can represent,
so they can elect somebody who represents them, is just
a backwards way of thinking about it. Now, it works
in today's society because the Democrats have called Republicans racist
and a whole lot worse for so long that a
lot of people think that that's absolutely the logical thing
(17:41):
to do. Because if if there are not enough representatives
that are representing quote unquote the black population in this country,
then there's going to be all sorts of untold horrors
upon the black population. See, this is just not the way.
I don't like to think about people in classes of people.
(18:02):
We are individuals. I understand as someone with the background
in marketing, I would say someone who's I don't know,
got to say a background in marketing. I understand that
there are differences in the types of people, and that
there are things that appeal to certain groups. Again, some
(18:24):
people want to just base these on the most superficial
things as possible, on race and so forth. But it's
really more about the mindset or maybe the subculture of
a particular group of people, and certain things are more
appealing to them, certain concerns are bigger to them, they
fear certain things, and so But to think that there's
(18:47):
just kind of a monolithic thought process by an entire
group of people based upon race, I just I reject that.
It's one of the things I love about conservatism, and
it's one of the reasons I find it to be
root in a lot of a lot of truth is
that is that it applies, it appeals to all people.
It appeals to all people, more so, more so even
(19:09):
than conservatism. The gospel of Jesus Christ appeals to all
people because because we have a shared human condition. We
have a shared human condition, we all have long ease,
we all have again, the founders here of this nation
understood that we all have a desire to live free,
(19:30):
to make choices for ourselves, to set our own priorities,
not to be looked at as an individual who's just
simply one cog in the wheel, but rather we're individuals
who are living our own lives, who, by the invisible
hand described by Adam Smith, can work together without force
(19:51):
and interference by our government and so forth. The invisible
hand causes us to work together, push generally in one
direction by cooperation. We understand that our self interests can
be attained if we help other people achieve their self interest.
But see when government gets involved, all that stuff stops
(20:12):
and it says we're going to tell you what to
do by force. This is not a good thing. So
the lower court basically said, now you've got to have
two districts that are majority black, which means plus one.
Split that into two districts so that you're not diluting
the voice of the black vote, which I don't even
(20:34):
like to say. I don't even like to say that.
But anyway, so the Supreme Court had this hearing yesterday
and they've basically, again, we don't know what they think specifically,
but you can you can get a glimpse if you've
been to or watched or well, I can't watch, you
can listen to recordings of the Supreme Court. You can
(20:58):
hear some of the questions and you can begin to
understand maybe what is going through the mind of a
particular justice. There's only nine justices, you have an inclination
as to understand these three might are probably going to
vote this way. There's a couple that you don't know about.
But you listen to their questions and maybe some of
the things they say during the oral arguments, and you
(21:21):
begin to get a picture, and it appears it appears
that they are The Court is willing to take a
look at changing this because this is based upon their
questioning probably not the best way, not the best interpretation
of the Voting Rights Act, which could have tremendous repercussions
(21:42):
on limiting how states can draw their districts, which again
if this as it's currently standing, benefits Democrats the way
that they wield this authority and power through this interpretation
of the Voting Act Section number two. More on that,
my friends, as we get into the next segment of
(22:06):
the program, I want to tell you though, My Pillow
is excited to announce that they are having their biggest
three to one sale ever. They've got a limited edition product,
a back in stock special, and a closeout deal including
the MyPillow bedsheets only twenty nine ninety eight, any color,
any size, any size, even King My towels are back
(22:29):
in stock. You can get a six piece towel set
for only thirty nine ninety eight. By the way, the
quality of these products are really good. We use them
here in the huff Household. And for the first and
only time, you can get a limited edition premium My
Pillow made with Giza cotton and a designer Gussett Queens
or seventeen ninety eight Kings nineteen ninety eight. Find out
more by going to my pillow dot com. MyPillow dot
(22:52):
Com promo code Tod will get you these special prices.
MyPillow dot Com promo code Todd Quick time out. My friends,
back here in just a minute. Welcome back, my friends.
So just to kind of tie up what we were
talking about last segments, last segment with the hearing yesterday
(23:14):
in Louisiana versus Klay, the issues that are under review
currently by the court after hearing the oral arguments yesterday
are whether the Voting Rights Act section to be, whether
that's effects, whether those effects the effects based test has
(23:36):
gone too far letting courts impose race based maps without
proving intent to discriminate, because there is a difference, right.
So that's what we were kind of where we wrapped up.
It's one thing to say we're going to intentionally keep
you from voting. It's another thing to say that state
legislatures have the right to draw these districts where they
(23:57):
want to draw the district. If they're not seeking out
to silence a political group, which you'd have to seem
to me to demonstrably prove in the affirmative, then why
can't they draw the district that way? It seems like
a potentially you can make the argument that this is done.
(24:18):
This is done and being argued to protect seats that
democrats think that they can rely upon. So another issue
here is whether or not race can remain a predominant
factor in map making without violating equal protection. I just again,
to me, this is a huge problem in this country,
(24:38):
this idea that race is basically everything. And I understand,
I understand that there have been tremendous racial problems in
this country's history. I understand there are racists today. By
the way, there are people that are racist on both
sides of the people that are racist against all types
of people. I condemn all of that, but I also
(25:03):
understand that again, there are processes and there are laws
that well, there's constitutional authority given it's the state legislators
to draw their districts, and it you know, when all
the court cases and all the rulings seem to favor
one group protecting its you know, its political interests, that's
(25:26):
a problem as well. And the last question here that
they're basically reviewing is whether the court should narrow the
rule or limit its duration. So we'll see, we'll see
what happens, but it looks like that could be that
could be the case. Progressives say that Section two remains
necessary to counteract vote dilution and secure minority representation. Again,
(25:50):
they see the world constantly through the lens of race.
And I'll say this, if you believe in liberty, if
you believe that the message of truth and freedom applies
equally to all people, then you begin to see the
world less and less through the view of the lens
of race. But the left is focused on this, and
(26:14):
you know, I think there are some. I do think
that there are some who genuinely believe that that's the
best way that it's necessary to continue to to fix,
to address the mistakes, the evils in our nation's history
pertaining to race. I think that there are some that
(26:34):
use this as a political weapon, a political tool to
try to protect their political interest and to win seats.
Conservatives say, look, this, this is not supposed to be
Section two of the Voting Rights Acts and not supposed
to be a race based quota system because that's inconsistent
with equal protection. So we'll see how the how the
(26:59):
core rule on this. But what I want to get
to specifically is how the impact of this, combined with
other things that I want to talk about as we
get into the program deeper here today, is how these
things affect the twenty twenty six excuse me, twenty twenty
(27:20):
six midterms, which are just a little bit over a
year away. So this is CNN. I'm gonna play a
clip for you. CNN. There's a guy on there. His
name is it's a Harry, Yeah, Harry Inton. He's kind
of their data guy. He'll come on from time to
time to go through the numbers, to talk about some
(27:42):
of these things behind the scenes and so forth. And
I want to play at least part of this clip.
They've brought him on. I think this was I think
this was yesterday. They bring him on to talk about
the state of the twenty twenty six midterm election. So
what we just talked about is a factor in this,
the Voting Rights Act, how districts can be drawn, what
(28:05):
Louisiana specifically has to do. You also know that if
you followed politics listen to this program for any length
of time, you will have known. You will know I
should say that the people in Republicans in some states
have voted to readist Well, in the state of Texas,
they voted to redistrict, believing that that should yield more
(28:27):
Republican districts in the upcoming election. Again, there are no
guarantees here, There are no guarantees that that is going
to happen, but based upon statistical probabilities and turnout and
all that sort of stuff, it looks like they could
have flip several districts to make them read in the
state of Texas. California, led by Gavin Newsom, now is
(28:48):
trying to do the same basically to redistrict themselves. They
think that they might be able to squeeze five more
blue districts out as well. Missouri's been a part of this.
There has been discussions for the state here I live
in of Indiana. A lot of states are talking about redistricting,
and exactly what I told you on this program Originally
it turns out to be true, exactly what I told
(29:08):
you on here, because I told you the reason there
is such opposition to this, and you're going to hear
this in this SoundBite when Harrieton starts talking about this.
The reason there is so much opposition today about redistricting
is because Democrats have effectively gotten everything redistricted in their
(29:30):
favor and now they want to call for a gerrymandering truce.
Now they want to call for a jerrymandering truth. It
would be like saying, you know, I go back to
the day I am a fan of the NBA, especially
because of my daughter. There was probably ten or fifteen
years I didn't watch any of it, but you know,
we followed the Pacers. That was a wonderful run by
(29:51):
the Pacers last season. We were able to do some
cool things around the sport and got to do some
interesting things with the you know, the team and stuff.
But anyway, the point is that I'm a fan of basketball,
and I remember, I remember reading and learning about the
dominance of Wilt Chamberlain, and Wilt Chamberlain is one of
(30:13):
the there's a couple of players that were so dominant
that the rules were rewritten so that it would not
give them an advantage. And that's basically what's what's happened
here is that the in a manner of speaking, the Democrats,
the Democrats had gotten let's say that they had Wilt
(30:35):
Chamberlain on their team and they didn't want the rules
rewritten for him because they wanted to get every bit
of advantage. And let's say he gets traded to another team.
That's when they say, okay, let's now let's now make
sure he can't do what he was doing. That's effectively
what they've They're doing with redistricting because they've squeezed as
much juice out of that limit in their states as
(30:56):
they can. And now Republican states are starting to do
this and or at least talk about it, and they're
acting like it's the end of the world. Normally, these
things are all done behind closed doors and they're quietly done.
But Trump's out there talking about it publicly, just calling
up Governor Abbott and saying, hey, redistrict your state, or
probably having phone calls here in my state with Mike Braun.
(31:16):
You got to get this done, Mike, right. And people
get appalled by that. But what's interesting to me is
those conversations have always happened, they just don't happen in
the limelight. And they say that Trump is the one
that's changing the whole system and turning it's on its head.
In reality, it's the first time these things have been
transparently discussed in real time before the voters. Anyway, all
(31:37):
that being said, this is having a negative potential impact
on Democrats in a massive, massive way. And Harry Itton
kind of paints the picture here, and I want you
to listen to his description of just how bad things
could be for Democrats heading in to the twenty twenty
six midwas.
Speaker 3 (31:53):
You this morning? The race to control the House in
the twenty twenty six midterms has taken a turn and
possibly brings with it a new war signed for Democrats.
Harry Enton running the numbers on this one and sneaking
in at the last.
Speaker 4 (32:04):
Time, I've learned that way around.
Speaker 3 (32:06):
It was a good maneuverse. I wish people could see it.
Speaker 1 (32:09):
I have.
Speaker 2 (32:10):
I'm fantastic he was.
Speaker 4 (32:11):
It's the new shoes as we spoke about yesterday.
Speaker 3 (32:12):
Okay, moving on, and you're okay, you're tracking the odds.
What is the change that you're seeing?
Speaker 4 (32:16):
Yeah, okay, so you know if you go back six
months ago, you go back to April K Paul, when
what were we looking at. Well, we were looking at
the Democrats with a very clear shot of taking control
of the US House of Representatives. According to the Calshi
prediction market odds, we saw him in an eighty three
percent chance. But those odds have gone plummeting down. Now
we're talking about just a sixty three percent chance, while
the gopiece chances up like a rocket, up like gold,
(32:39):
up from seventeen percent to now a thirty seven percent chance,
so we'll look like a pretty clear Democrat likely Democratic
winning the House come next year. Has become much closer
to toss up at this point, although still slightly leading Democratic.
Speaker 3 (32:52):
What's changed?
Speaker 2 (32:53):
Okay, I want to pause there because I'm at the
end of this segment. I want to play a little
bit more of this in the next segment. She's asking
him what's changed, my friends? Before we wrap up for
this segment, My friends, you ever notice how some families
seem to have a plan that lasts for generations. It's
not by accident, my friends. Full Sweet Wealth works with
people who want their wealth to make a difference for
(33:14):
years to come. Their team brings together high level investment
strategies like private equity, private credit, and option strategies, combined
with expert legal guidance as well. If you're looking, my friends,
to do more than dismanage your money, if it's more
to you than just making sure you're well, than dismanaging
(33:35):
the money. If it's more about making sure your vision
becomes a reality, a reality for the people you love,
both today and in the future. If you want to
leave your mark, if you want to build something lasting,
take a look at Full Sweet Wealth. Jason and his
team there are a great resource. They'll take good care
of you. Fullsweet wealth dot com is where you can go,
build your legacy, secure your future. Quick time out for me,
(33:57):
my friends. Back in just a minute. Welcome back, my friends.
I want to get you to the rest of this
SoundBite with Harry Inton talking about what's changed regarding the odds.
In fact, in April, the Democrats had an eighty three
(34:18):
percent chance, according to the Calshi prediction market, an eighty
three percent chance of winning the House in the midterm
elections in twenty twenty six. Now those odds, so that
was in April, so we got May, June, July, August, September, October.
Six months later, those odds have cut from eighty three
(34:39):
percent chance for the Democrats winning to sixty three percent chance.
So it was eighty three seventeen in April, seventeen percent
for the Republicans. Now it's sixty three to thir thirty seven.
So it basically went from a five in a six
chance of Democrats winning to a two in three chan
two out of three chance for Democrats winning. A big flip,
(35:01):
and we're getting close, we're inching towards fifty to fifty
and if some of these other redistricting efforts happen. If
you know this, this case with the Voting Rights Act
could affect the way that districts are drawn. There's a
lot of potential seats here that could be impacted, my friends,
So so really quickly here, I want to take a
(35:26):
moment to tell you about one of our newest advertising partners.
And you might be curious, my friends, you might be
curious about kratom where you just want honest answers before
you try something new. So you're invited to the Weekly
Tea Talk with from Christopher's Organic Botanicals. It happens every
(35:48):
Thursday night, seven pm that's Eastern time. You can join
the Weekly Tea Talk, no pressure, no sales pitch, just
real conversations with real people who want to help you
understand create them, what it is, how it's used, how
to stay safe, and what to avoid. Christopher's Organic Botanicals
(36:08):
believe education should come first. That's what sets them apart.
If you've got questions about relief, about dosage safety sourcing,
this is the place to ask those questions. In this form,
they build a community that's focused on truth, not join
the Conversation Thursdays, by the way, that would be today Thursday,
(36:29):
seven pm Eastern. For more information, visit Christopher's Organic Botanicals
dot com. That's Christopher's Organic Botanicals dot com. Truth, Tradition, Transparency. Okay, friends,
I'm want to pick up here in the time we
have remaining and play a little bit more, give you
a little bit more context about what's going on as
(36:51):
we head into the midterms here. And as I said,
this is not good news, not good news for the
Democrat Party, for the left, for the media. Let's pick
up where we left off last segment. Change.
Speaker 3 (37:03):
What do you think?
Speaker 2 (37:04):
Okay, what has changed?
Speaker 4 (37:05):
Well, why don't we just take a look at the
national picture first, take a look at voters and how
they're feeling about things. And we can take a look
at the generic congressional ballot. And I want to take
a look and compare it to twenty seventeen, twenty eighteen, right,
because that's sort of the baseline. That was, of course
the first Trump term, that was where Democrats were sort
of keeping pace. You go back to April, look at
the generic congressional ballot. What you see, you see plus
(37:25):
three Democrats in twenty twenty five. In April, you see
plus three Democrats back in April of twenty seventeen. Now
jump over to this side of the screen. What happens, Well,
the Democrats are no longer keeping pace with the pace
that they were setting back in twenty seventeen, twenty eighteen.
You look back in twenty seventeen, you saw that the
Democrats had leaped up to an eight point advantage. I
remember covering this. I remember a lot of folks, including myself, saying,
(37:48):
you know what, Republicans look pretty decent right now in
terms of the fact that they had the House, they
had the Senate, they had the presidency, but things were
likely going to flip. And I was looking for the
same science this year. The bottom line is it hasn't happened.
When it hasn't happened, Democrats have stayed, basically studied, they
have fallen off the pace.
Speaker 2 (38:05):
Democrats were way out ahead.
Speaker 4 (38:07):
Back in twenty seventeen on the generic congressional ballot, and
now we're basically looking at Democrats ahead. But again they
are so far in back of the pace that they
set back there. And so I think what a lot
of folks are seeing. Folks like myself are saying, wait
a minute, given what we might be seeing and redistricting,
is this plus three going to be enough capable?
Speaker 2 (38:27):
So that's the question right now. You couldn't see the video. Basically,
what he was doing was showing showing a chart that
said in April of twenty to twenty five earlier this year,
on a generic ballot, meaning when people were surveyed and
said are you going to vote for congressional Democrats or
(38:49):
congressional Republicans in the midterm elections, they're saying Democrat with
the plus three advantage right now in twenty seven seventeen.
If you can follow this without looking at this, I
know it can be the numbers and the times can
be a little difficult to follow over podcasts and radio.
But in twenty seventeen, when we got to the month
(39:11):
of October, Democrats had a plus eight advantage in the
general ballot, which means that they had momentum as they
headed into that final year leading up to the mid terms.
The first time Trump was elected, that's not the case
this time. They still hold a plus three advantage according
to polls in October, but they didn't make up any
(39:34):
more ground. That's why you got to look at the lens, Well,
look at the shutdown. I should say through this lens,
Democrats are looking to move those numbers anyway that they can,
and they think, or they hope that they can get
some of that traction by blaming Republicans for the shutdown,
which of course is silly and ridiculous. But this is
(39:54):
the way that the politics are headed as we move
into the midterms, and I'm telling they're terrified. And if
you factor in there's other things I have in the
stack here that you can go to and see on
the website. I don't have time to get into them today,
but just go to the stack and just go to
today's episode, and you will find other articles that say
(40:16):
that Democrats, at least in one particular study, stand to
lose as many as nineteen seats, my friends, nineteen seats
from some of these impacts, which again I can't get into.
They are terrified, they are desperate, they are grasping for straws,
and this midterm election is very, very important. It's going
(40:39):
to determine whether or not Trump's agenda is going to
continue to move forward, or whether or not we're gonna
have nothing but investigations, throwing a wrench in his gears.
But I've got to go, SDG
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.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist
It’s 1996 in rural North Carolina, and an oddball crew makes history when they pull off America’s third largest cash heist. But it’s all downhill from there. Join host Johnny Knoxville as he unspools a wild and woolly tale about a group of regular ‘ol folks who risked it all for a chance at a better life. CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist answers the question: what would you do with 17.3 million dollars? The answer includes diamond rings, mansions, velvet Elvis paintings, plus a run for the border, murder-for-hire-plots, and FBI busts.