First, Ralph welcomes economist James Henry to discuss the Trump administration's latest attempts to disable our corporate watchdogs and dismantle the IRS.
What were these Trump voters doing during the election; napping?! Trump SAID he wanted to take Greenland. Trump SAID he was going to impose tariffs. Trump SAID he wanted to make Canada the 51st state. He SAID he wanted to take Panama. He SAID he was going to do mass deportations. And now they’re whining that they didn’t vote for all that, and more?!! The only thing I find remarkable about that letter, read aloud towards the end of this show, is the surprise and shock of the writer, that Trump is doing exactly what he SAID he was going to do!!! And NOW they’re surprised?
During Trump’s first term in office, he fired federal employees like there was no tomorrow, and they’re surprised to see him do that again?! REALLY? Aye-yai-yai, beam me up scotty. USians are the dumbest voters on the planet.
What is truly stupid is the cluelessness of the Dem party elite. In the late '70s the D neolibs (a term meaning support for the current trickle up econopathy) dumped the New Deal and abandoned the majority working class. After the 2008 crash, the Ds bailed out Wall St. For the working people who lost jobs, pensions, homes? NOTHING!
Americans don't have education in anything pertaining government. The only thing they do is to memorize the pledge of allegiance. They also don't know they can vote third party. I know, it is hard to get a third party candidate elected but if enough people just stopped thinking duopoly, a type of revolution would take place in the ballots. Then ore people would, maybe, wake up to their right and duty to participate
Another factor: all the trump voters complaining now are probably being affected or can see how their pockets will suffer. So now they complain and try to avoid responsibility. Individualism and capitalism coming back to bite
Where to begin with the party for the wealthy with its attendant tax cuts, destruction of federal agencies, and corporatism? I need only to look outside my window to see how the tax system has given those with silver spoons bigger silver spoons. I’m literally surrounded by second homes where the enhancement of the self is the highest objective and value. It’s little wonder that the idea of a fair shake for the other has sunk faster than a symbolic Titanic. I write about this subject in an article that appears in CounterPunch this week: “A Liberal Veneer.” The article is also on Substack in both written and audio formats.
I liked the Congressman from Texas. I’ll have to go back and listen to his talk on regulation of some of the maniacal policies of Trump/Musk. I’m uncertain about a grassroots rebellion that Jim Hightower discusses on the Radio Hour, but I’m going to subscribe to his Substack posts.
Getting back to your first guest, I disagree with him about Ukraine, a preemptive war that could have been avoided decades ago, specifically at the time of the fall of the former Soviet Union.
As a Texan, I very much appreciate the part of this episode which highlights Texas progressive movements and the history of often colorful characters who have promoted progressive causes here in Texas. In addition to Jim Hightower and Molly Ivins, there were local consumer advocates here in Texas with great flair and charisma such as Marvin Zindler here in Houston (the inspiration behind ‘The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas’, though there’s certainly more to Zindler’s story than just that) and the Dallas radio consumer advocate Benjamin Dover. Steve and David could probably find a lot of comedic and progressive inspiration by studying these Texans!
While I was quite pleased with the extended time given to Jim Hightower, I’m left quite despondent about the Ralph Nader Neoliberalism Hour segment with James Henry. While some fellow listeners might be put off by Henry’s history not only with McKinsey and also Jack Welch-era GE, that itself isn’t the problem in my view. About the only thing I can really agree with Henry on is his warning about privatization. Mr. Nader’s definition of ‘corporatism’ works, and so does the technical term for it, ‘neoliberalism’.
Sadly, Henry himself was promoting neoliberalism with his monetarist messaging about the deficit and the purposes for taxation. Henry kept bringing up warnings about the deficit, but then never explained why the growing deficit is a problem. And, of course, he can’t explain it because expansion of the deficit is itself not a problem. Henry brings up going back to the 1930s, and it seems Henry is stuck in that period as he keeps using narratives which are more fitting for a gold standard than what the US Dollar really is, a fiat currency. Henry mentioned the horrors of Andrew Jackson. Well, the last time the US was debt free was during the Jackson administration and the US has only had yearly balanced budgets a handful of times, the last being the Clinton-Gingrich budget which not only led to the early 2000s recession and the global financial crisis later in the decade, it stifled economic conditions for the working class and that led to the rise of Trump post-GFC and the rise of Trump yet again now. ‘Fiscal responsibility’ is responsible for President Trump, but yet Henry and the Democrats want to be the party of such ‘responsibility’ just the same as Marjorie Taylor Greene is as illustrated by her statement in that clip with Rep. Casar.
Rather than inane organized religion-like narratives about the deficit which nobody can explain because they can’t be explained, the focus should be on bottom-up ‘efficiency’ of government which is expansionary in social spending. Investment in public education and healthcare leads to more productive citizens and a more productive , stable country. Full employment using an employment buffer-stock model leads to price stability and greater economic productivity. This contrasts with the neoliberal trickle-down approach of faulty economic (and, thus, government) stability and efficiency built on corporate welfare, including privatization, along with unemployment and subsequent wage suppression.
On the taxation front, tax receipts do not fund national government expenditure. However, a very progressive view of taxation is that excess wealth should be taxed not because we need those tax receipts to fund anything, but rather that taxing excess wealth impairs the ability for the wealthy to have an over-sized influence on the democratic process due to their excess wealth. In an era where western oligarchy is being openly paraded by Trump and the Democratic Party, to the dismay of the public, this framing of taxation could well win over the working class.
Furthermore, Henry’s claims of the benefits of the Yellen-OECD corporate tax reforms are laughable, and makes Henry look like a propagandist for the corporate Democrats. The OECD reforms, by design, did nothing to change the tax haven situation. Bumping up corporate taxes in tax havens such as the Netherlands, Ireland, and Luxembourg from 12-13% to 15%, which is still below the Trump I tax cut levels in the US, and leaving in loopholes the size of oil tankers for industry is hardly any kind of reform.
Regarding tariffs, Mr. Nader and Henry discussed tariffs using very neoliberal narratives. It is appealing to hear narratives on the RNRH which sound like they are from the World Trade Organization! The idea of tariffs themselves are not inherently good or bad. They can benefit labor, the environment, and the public generally, though there certainly can be downsides to tariffs. The circumstances around specific proposed tariffs must be studied for validity. I didn’t hear any of that in this discussion and rather tariffs were dismissed entirely. Furthermore, tariffs are not inherently inflationary. They lead to one-time price increases (though importers, wholesalers, and retailers may increase prices slowly to avoid a price shock), and one-time price increases are not the definition of inflation. Over time, tariffs may reduce demand, which could then be deflationary in nature. In fact, Henry’s example of Canadians boycotting travel to the US might well be viewed favorably by the US public given the very high demand for things such as hotel rooms at US tourist destinations right now during high season and, thus, very high prices for hotel rooms which are pricing American families out of family vacations and visits to out-of-town friends and family.
Anyway, the focus should not be on vilifying tariffs themselves. The focus should be on investigating each tariff proposed by Trump and the circumstances around them. From that, the public will be able to evaluate the costs and benefits on both economic and non-economic grounds. After all, tariffs are hardly a new idea being implemented by Trump II. Biden enacted tariffs and expanded Trump I’s tariffs at times, such as on Canadian lumber, so this is clearly a bipartisan issue.
RNRH listeners, and Mr. Nader himself, deserve empirical economic analysis and I’m sorry to say that Henry’s analysis falls well short of this standard. Randy Wray and Warren Mosler are two economists who can give Mr. Nader and the listeners easy-to-digest analysis rather than self-defeating propaganda.
Friedman and monetarism is based on little more than a deep hatred for Keynesian and New Deal economics. It's supported almost entirely by assertions; very little is empirical evidence. But since it justifies trickle up and plutocracy, it is dominant. Yet the Ds, because they, too, are sponsored by 1%ers and corporations, say nothing. Check out MMT (modern monetary theory); Stephanie Kelton's book is a great intro. More technical info is in //Modern Monetary Theory and Its Critics// by Fullbrook and Morgan.
I was one of the 300,000 U S.Army that were drafted in the summer 66 on our way to Vietnam, a lot of my buddies never made it back ,, as 11 brovos we were dropped into combat on day one and lot of us never saw the light of day , ( I got a lot of stories you don't want the hear )
Today the war is not in Nam its here in our own backyard.. I'd like to take this time to thank Jane Fonda for protesting that war ,,Jane took a lot of heat ,, trying to stop it ,,,I bet there would be a lot less of my 58,000+ buddies on that wall in Washington if Jane had gotten her way ,,where are the Janes today ? Where are all those big shot Hollywood stars , producers, directors , the money people that back the deals today ? The government C in C's are back = Coward's In Congress ,, need I say more ? And how about those Represtantives ,, we're they elected to represent the will of the people ?, not as old Bernie says ,,,_____.
Any one that knows European history knows Adolf's playbook is a live and well in America . It's time to stop the talking heads intellectual bullshit,, Congress and people of America in 4 years you won't have a country to represent, I made it thru one war last time ,,, lock and load... incoming,,, maybe not the next time
Two Democrats walk into a bar and order a drink. The bartender says "Sorry I can't serve you- you're already drunk on big money."
Jim Hightower clearly recognizes the problem that the Dems are controlled by big money and touches on the solution that we need to challenge the big money corporate controlled Dems in the primaries. But when Ralph asks him what we should demand he answers that we should demand candidates that promise progressive policies.
The Dems have been promising progressive policies for decades but never deliver because they are controlled by big money. They tell us before the election that the progressive policies are just empty promises when they take the big money to run their campaigns. Believing the empty promises is what got us where we are today.
What we need to demand is that all candidates (Dems, Republicans, third party and independents) run small donor campaigns and enforce that demand with our votes as it increases the chance that they will work to implement progressive policies.
This would be a significant increase over the zero chance that the big money politicians will work to implement progressive policies.
You quoted power concedes nothing without a demand and you have said politicians want our votes more than big money.
Demanding small donor candidates and enforcing that demand with our votes is what is supposed to make democracy work.
Please organize citizens with the help of Jim Hightower and others to make this demand and enforce this demand with our votes or explain why democracy will not work.
It’s getting harder to follow this show, as much as I admire Ralph. When talking about Musk’s motivations, you didn’t once mention the Censorship Industrial Complex and the astonishment of Jim Hightower at the non-responsive Democrats is itself astonishing. Where have you been since the Clinton Administration? The Genocide Joe Administration and the Obama administration could have righted a lot of the reasons people voted for Trump, but you continue to just throw out the same tropes about Trump. Stop thinking Red/Blue, that’s over. Stop expecting anything from the Democrats, they’re over. Case in point - they rejected RFKjr, and proceeded to use tons of dirty tricks to keep him out. PLEASE recalibrate. And by the way, USAID is a CIA front. They harm, not help.
Ralph, I renewed my subscription but the upper R in blue says 'renew subscription. Why??? It used to say 'gift a subscription' Don't mean to get so personal in a public comment area. Again a fine, important subject to the program. What happened to Franchesko (spel) ?? All the best to you and you crew and guests! Bob
The usual upper middle class D voter complaint "those people are stupid" is not an effective way to win votes for a party that once was theirs. It wasn't smart to ditch the New Deal and abandon the majority, as happened when neolibs usurped the D party in the late '70s. Neolib is an econ term meaning support for this trickle-up econopathy that defines away devastation of human communities and entire environments as 'externalities," as irrelevant. That's stupid.
The D elite did FOR the suffering unemployed of the Rust Belt/Appalachia as they did TO the Wall Sr. vultures who caused the '08 debacle--NOTHING! New Deal regulations passed because of the 1929 Crash were repealed under Clinton. The result? The 2018 Great Recession. The admin and professional class that the D party represents might not have suffered much. But the already hurting working class sure did; losing jobs, pensions, homes. Obama bailed out Wall St. For the working class majority? NOTHING! Stupid.
The attitude and subsequent strategy of the D party elite is shown by a 2016 remark by Sen. Chuck Schumer. "For every blue collar Democrat we lose in western Pennsylvania, we will pick up two in the suburbs of Philadelphia and you can repeat this in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin." Well, that was a winner, wasn't it?!
Let the Ds take responsibility for their own gross errors. Like trying to win while ignoring the U.S. majority for forty years. By settling for being a mediocre corporate lite party. Now that's stupid.
What were these Trump voters doing during the election; napping?! Trump SAID he wanted to take Greenland. Trump SAID he was going to impose tariffs. Trump SAID he wanted to make Canada the 51st state. He SAID he wanted to take Panama. He SAID he was going to do mass deportations. And now they’re whining that they didn’t vote for all that, and more?!! The only thing I find remarkable about that letter, read aloud towards the end of this show, is the surprise and shock of the writer, that Trump is doing exactly what he SAID he was going to do!!! And NOW they’re surprised?
During Trump’s first term in office, he fired federal employees like there was no tomorrow, and they’re surprised to see him do that again?! REALLY? Aye-yai-yai, beam me up scotty. USians are the dumbest voters on the planet.
What is truly stupid is the cluelessness of the Dem party elite. In the late '70s the D neolibs (a term meaning support for the current trickle up econopathy) dumped the New Deal and abandoned the majority working class. After the 2008 crash, the Ds bailed out Wall St. For the working people who lost jobs, pensions, homes? NOTHING!
For more evidence, see my main comment below.
Americans don't have education in anything pertaining government. The only thing they do is to memorize the pledge of allegiance. They also don't know they can vote third party. I know, it is hard to get a third party candidate elected but if enough people just stopped thinking duopoly, a type of revolution would take place in the ballots. Then ore people would, maybe, wake up to their right and duty to participate
Another factor: all the trump voters complaining now are probably being affected or can see how their pockets will suffer. So now they complain and try to avoid responsibility. Individualism and capitalism coming back to bite
Isnt it a bit early for a sure damage report, apart from those fired by Trump?
When Jim Hightower said, "Some people say we need a third party. I wish we had a second one," I could have cheered out loud. Precisely.
Where to begin with the party for the wealthy with its attendant tax cuts, destruction of federal agencies, and corporatism? I need only to look outside my window to see how the tax system has given those with silver spoons bigger silver spoons. I’m literally surrounded by second homes where the enhancement of the self is the highest objective and value. It’s little wonder that the idea of a fair shake for the other has sunk faster than a symbolic Titanic. I write about this subject in an article that appears in CounterPunch this week: “A Liberal Veneer.” The article is also on Substack in both written and audio formats.
I liked the Congressman from Texas. I’ll have to go back and listen to his talk on regulation of some of the maniacal policies of Trump/Musk. I’m uncertain about a grassroots rebellion that Jim Hightower discusses on the Radio Hour, but I’m going to subscribe to his Substack posts.
Getting back to your first guest, I disagree with him about Ukraine, a preemptive war that could have been avoided decades ago, specifically at the time of the fall of the former Soviet Union.
Another stellar program!
As a Texan, I very much appreciate the part of this episode which highlights Texas progressive movements and the history of often colorful characters who have promoted progressive causes here in Texas. In addition to Jim Hightower and Molly Ivins, there were local consumer advocates here in Texas with great flair and charisma such as Marvin Zindler here in Houston (the inspiration behind ‘The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas’, though there’s certainly more to Zindler’s story than just that) and the Dallas radio consumer advocate Benjamin Dover. Steve and David could probably find a lot of comedic and progressive inspiration by studying these Texans!
While I was quite pleased with the extended time given to Jim Hightower, I’m left quite despondent about the Ralph Nader Neoliberalism Hour segment with James Henry. While some fellow listeners might be put off by Henry’s history not only with McKinsey and also Jack Welch-era GE, that itself isn’t the problem in my view. About the only thing I can really agree with Henry on is his warning about privatization. Mr. Nader’s definition of ‘corporatism’ works, and so does the technical term for it, ‘neoliberalism’.
Sadly, Henry himself was promoting neoliberalism with his monetarist messaging about the deficit and the purposes for taxation. Henry kept bringing up warnings about the deficit, but then never explained why the growing deficit is a problem. And, of course, he can’t explain it because expansion of the deficit is itself not a problem. Henry brings up going back to the 1930s, and it seems Henry is stuck in that period as he keeps using narratives which are more fitting for a gold standard than what the US Dollar really is, a fiat currency. Henry mentioned the horrors of Andrew Jackson. Well, the last time the US was debt free was during the Jackson administration and the US has only had yearly balanced budgets a handful of times, the last being the Clinton-Gingrich budget which not only led to the early 2000s recession and the global financial crisis later in the decade, it stifled economic conditions for the working class and that led to the rise of Trump post-GFC and the rise of Trump yet again now. ‘Fiscal responsibility’ is responsible for President Trump, but yet Henry and the Democrats want to be the party of such ‘responsibility’ just the same as Marjorie Taylor Greene is as illustrated by her statement in that clip with Rep. Casar.
Rather than inane organized religion-like narratives about the deficit which nobody can explain because they can’t be explained, the focus should be on bottom-up ‘efficiency’ of government which is expansionary in social spending. Investment in public education and healthcare leads to more productive citizens and a more productive , stable country. Full employment using an employment buffer-stock model leads to price stability and greater economic productivity. This contrasts with the neoliberal trickle-down approach of faulty economic (and, thus, government) stability and efficiency built on corporate welfare, including privatization, along with unemployment and subsequent wage suppression.
On the taxation front, tax receipts do not fund national government expenditure. However, a very progressive view of taxation is that excess wealth should be taxed not because we need those tax receipts to fund anything, but rather that taxing excess wealth impairs the ability for the wealthy to have an over-sized influence on the democratic process due to their excess wealth. In an era where western oligarchy is being openly paraded by Trump and the Democratic Party, to the dismay of the public, this framing of taxation could well win over the working class.
Furthermore, Henry’s claims of the benefits of the Yellen-OECD corporate tax reforms are laughable, and makes Henry look like a propagandist for the corporate Democrats. The OECD reforms, by design, did nothing to change the tax haven situation. Bumping up corporate taxes in tax havens such as the Netherlands, Ireland, and Luxembourg from 12-13% to 15%, which is still below the Trump I tax cut levels in the US, and leaving in loopholes the size of oil tankers for industry is hardly any kind of reform.
Regarding tariffs, Mr. Nader and Henry discussed tariffs using very neoliberal narratives. It is appealing to hear narratives on the RNRH which sound like they are from the World Trade Organization! The idea of tariffs themselves are not inherently good or bad. They can benefit labor, the environment, and the public generally, though there certainly can be downsides to tariffs. The circumstances around specific proposed tariffs must be studied for validity. I didn’t hear any of that in this discussion and rather tariffs were dismissed entirely. Furthermore, tariffs are not inherently inflationary. They lead to one-time price increases (though importers, wholesalers, and retailers may increase prices slowly to avoid a price shock), and one-time price increases are not the definition of inflation. Over time, tariffs may reduce demand, which could then be deflationary in nature. In fact, Henry’s example of Canadians boycotting travel to the US might well be viewed favorably by the US public given the very high demand for things such as hotel rooms at US tourist destinations right now during high season and, thus, very high prices for hotel rooms which are pricing American families out of family vacations and visits to out-of-town friends and family.
Anyway, the focus should not be on vilifying tariffs themselves. The focus should be on investigating each tariff proposed by Trump and the circumstances around them. From that, the public will be able to evaluate the costs and benefits on both economic and non-economic grounds. After all, tariffs are hardly a new idea being implemented by Trump II. Biden enacted tariffs and expanded Trump I’s tariffs at times, such as on Canadian lumber, so this is clearly a bipartisan issue.
RNRH listeners, and Mr. Nader himself, deserve empirical economic analysis and I’m sorry to say that Henry’s analysis falls well short of this standard. Randy Wray and Warren Mosler are two economists who can give Mr. Nader and the listeners easy-to-digest analysis rather than self-defeating propaganda.
Friedman and monetarism is based on little more than a deep hatred for Keynesian and New Deal economics. It's supported almost entirely by assertions; very little is empirical evidence. But since it justifies trickle up and plutocracy, it is dominant. Yet the Ds, because they, too, are sponsored by 1%ers and corporations, say nothing. Check out MMT (modern monetary theory); Stephanie Kelton's book is a great intro. More technical info is in //Modern Monetary Theory and Its Critics// by Fullbrook and Morgan.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w08CY_E2O3M
I was one of the 300,000 U S.Army that were drafted in the summer 66 on our way to Vietnam, a lot of my buddies never made it back ,, as 11 brovos we were dropped into combat on day one and lot of us never saw the light of day , ( I got a lot of stories you don't want the hear )
Today the war is not in Nam its here in our own backyard.. I'd like to take this time to thank Jane Fonda for protesting that war ,,Jane took a lot of heat ,, trying to stop it ,,,I bet there would be a lot less of my 58,000+ buddies on that wall in Washington if Jane had gotten her way ,,where are the Janes today ? Where are all those big shot Hollywood stars , producers, directors , the money people that back the deals today ? The government C in C's are back = Coward's In Congress ,, need I say more ? And how about those Represtantives ,, we're they elected to represent the will of the people ?, not as old Bernie says ,,,_____.
Any one that knows European history knows Adolf's playbook is a live and well in America . It's time to stop the talking heads intellectual bullshit,, Congress and people of America in 4 years you won't have a country to represent, I made it thru one war last time ,,, lock and load... incoming,,, maybe not the next time
Good luck America have a great day my friends
Susan Sarandon has been a great activist.
I greatly fear that your prediction is correct.
W.T.F. is the point of engaging with these vermine... none.
So humor can be used to make a point. Hmmmm.
Two Democrats walk into a bar and order a drink. The bartender says "Sorry I can't serve you- you're already drunk on big money."
Jim Hightower clearly recognizes the problem that the Dems are controlled by big money and touches on the solution that we need to challenge the big money corporate controlled Dems in the primaries. But when Ralph asks him what we should demand he answers that we should demand candidates that promise progressive policies.
The Dems have been promising progressive policies for decades but never deliver because they are controlled by big money. They tell us before the election that the progressive policies are just empty promises when they take the big money to run their campaigns. Believing the empty promises is what got us where we are today.
What we need to demand is that all candidates (Dems, Republicans, third party and independents) run small donor campaigns and enforce that demand with our votes as it increases the chance that they will work to implement progressive policies.
This would be a significant increase over the zero chance that the big money politicians will work to implement progressive policies.
You quoted power concedes nothing without a demand and you have said politicians want our votes more than big money.
Demanding small donor candidates and enforcing that demand with our votes is what is supposed to make democracy work.
Please organize citizens with the help of Jim Hightower and others to make this demand and enforce this demand with our votes or explain why democracy will not work.
FYI, here’s why USAID is a CIA front. Look at Haiti .
https://open.substack.com/pub/kitklarenberg/p/usaid-exported-cia-balkan-terror?r=nrpb&utm_medium=ios
It’s getting harder to follow this show, as much as I admire Ralph. When talking about Musk’s motivations, you didn’t once mention the Censorship Industrial Complex and the astonishment of Jim Hightower at the non-responsive Democrats is itself astonishing. Where have you been since the Clinton Administration? The Genocide Joe Administration and the Obama administration could have righted a lot of the reasons people voted for Trump, but you continue to just throw out the same tropes about Trump. Stop thinking Red/Blue, that’s over. Stop expecting anything from the Democrats, they’re over. Case in point - they rejected RFKjr, and proceeded to use tons of dirty tricks to keep him out. PLEASE recalibrate. And by the way, USAID is a CIA front. They harm, not help.
What happened to "In Case You Haven't Heard" newscast with Franchesco DeSantis? Please bring this feature back.
Francesco has been under the weather, lately. Just waiting for him to get healthy.
Francesco, we miss you! The episode without you was like waiting for the other shoe to drop. Take care, get well and come back!!
Ralph, I renewed my subscription but the upper R in blue says 'renew subscription. Why??? It used to say 'gift a subscription' Don't mean to get so personal in a public comment area. Again a fine, important subject to the program. What happened to Franchesko (spel) ?? All the best to you and you crew and guests! Bob
The usual upper middle class D voter complaint "those people are stupid" is not an effective way to win votes for a party that once was theirs. It wasn't smart to ditch the New Deal and abandon the majority, as happened when neolibs usurped the D party in the late '70s. Neolib is an econ term meaning support for this trickle-up econopathy that defines away devastation of human communities and entire environments as 'externalities," as irrelevant. That's stupid.
The D elite did FOR the suffering unemployed of the Rust Belt/Appalachia as they did TO the Wall Sr. vultures who caused the '08 debacle--NOTHING! New Deal regulations passed because of the 1929 Crash were repealed under Clinton. The result? The 2018 Great Recession. The admin and professional class that the D party represents might not have suffered much. But the already hurting working class sure did; losing jobs, pensions, homes. Obama bailed out Wall St. For the working class majority? NOTHING! Stupid.
The attitude and subsequent strategy of the D party elite is shown by a 2016 remark by Sen. Chuck Schumer. "For every blue collar Democrat we lose in western Pennsylvania, we will pick up two in the suburbs of Philadelphia and you can repeat this in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin." Well, that was a winner, wasn't it?!
Let the Ds take responsibility for their own gross errors. Like trying to win while ignoring the U.S. majority for forty years. By settling for being a mediocre corporate lite party. Now that's stupid.
Can we call Musk's minions, "Musk-Rats", no offense to muskrats!
The "like" button doesn't work!!
Episode number is missing from the MP3 title again... :-(
Good 👍 God bless you ❤️
I was thinking the same thing - that letter from a Trump supporter sure sounded AI generated.