Welcome to Raging Moderates. I'm Scott Galloway.
And I'm Jessica Tarlov. Welcome to our live stream. We're live every Monday on YouTube and Substack. We'll take your questions at the end of the show, so please drop them in the chat as we go. Tomorrow we're doing a live stream with Democratic candidate for Texas Governor, Gina Hinojosa. She's in a virtual tie with incumbent Republican Greg Abbott right now in the state of Texas, as our listeners are likely aware, is a huge bellwether for whether or not we're really going to see a blue tsunami. Please subscribe to PropG Plus and Propia.com. And you can join us live with Gina tomorrow, Tuesday, October 20th, at 10:30 a.m. Eastern Standard Time.
All right, let's bust into it. We're officially 15 days out from election day, and early voting starts today in Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, South Carolina, and Texas. Here are three numbers we're watching. A new Ipsos poll puts Democrats up eight points on the congressional ballot. The same poll has Trump's disapproval rating sitting at 66%. There's also a new Wall Street Journal poll that finds Democrats aren't sold on a leftward shift. In Ohio, Sherrod Brown is up. Kalshi gives him a 66% chance of taking back the seat, and in Michigan, Kalshi gives Abdul El-Sayed a 68% chance of winning. Take us around the map here. Thoughts on these recent poll numbers, Jess.
Like where in the world is Carmen Sandiego for elections? Jessica Tarlov edition. There were so many new polls that came out this weekend. It was overwhelming. The overarching message was that this was really good stuff for Democrats. I'm going to spend some time in the Washington Post poll. Trump's disapproval, like in Ipsos, at 66%, which is very, very high, especially going into an election. You don't want to see that. But probably the most important finding, and they did one of those big charts going through every issue that someone might be thinking about when they go in to vote. So healthcare, education, cost of living, inflation, Iran, they polled transgender issues, which I want to talk about, the economy, corruption, taxes, immigration and crime. Only one issue where Republicans up, and that was on crime. And I have said this on the pod numerous times. I talk about it at Fox regularly. It is important. How crime is one of the most important issues to people. It's how you feel, right? When you walk outside and you think, "Is something going to happen to me? Is something going to happen to my kids? I live in a big city. So do you." The idea that there's still toothpaste locked up at drugstores that has it weighs on you, right? Where you think like you can't just walk in and go about your business as normal. I don't think it swings the election, but I also don't think it's something to poo-poo, and you have to pay attention to it. But the fact that Democrats are up on everything else is enormously important. You know, double on health care, huge margins on inflation, anything having to do with the economy, which is a very big deal.
But this transgender issues thing stuck out to me because they obsessively talk about it, right? Like trying to relive the "Kamala is for they/them, you know, I'm for you" ad from Trump at the end, and Democrats with a nine-point edge when it comes to handling transgender issues. And I think that speaks to two things. One, the economy is so bad that people don't have time to be distracted by what they see as kind of ancillary social issues. Second piece of it, yeah, but the second piece of it is I think that Democrats have actually finally figured out how to talk about this issue, which should not have been minimized as a nothing, right? Just saying like, I'm not even going to waste my time on this. It was something that you actually had to have an opinion on. You had to come out there and say, I understand there might be a biological fairness question in competitive sports, but I will not let you trample on civil rights because of your bigotry. And I feel like we've nailed it, like landed the plane there. And that was exciting for me to see, at least as someone who talks to Republicans on the regular who are bringing up transgender issues.
So, corruption, which will probably be the number one issue, if not the number two issue in this election. It got to number one in the new Fox News poll, which has never happened before. And this is a bipartisan problem. And I was looking at the readouts from GOP focus groups, and for the first time they were hearing that when you, because of the rising gas prices that everyone's having a tough time economically, the voters were pointing to, quote, "corrupt politicians and billionaires," which you expect to hear out of a Democratic focus group. The focus on the billionaire class, the elites, the Epstein class, as John Heilemann puts it. So you're seeing an across-the-board revulsion at the level of corruption in our political ranks. 72% of independents think Donald Trump is using the presidency to enrich himself, and even one-third of Republican voters feel that way. So you have to land the plane with this because they do also think that Democratic politicians are corrupt. But they are seeing the grift out of Donald Trump and his close associates, and they're repulsed by it. I'm just curious. So Sherrod Brown, not a surprise.
It's a red state, though. I mean, he's running a perfect campaign, though. I just wanted to read the... He's so good. Also, I thought it was hilarious how many people in Ohio still thought that he was the senator. So people should pay more attention to their politics. But there are these quotes from GOP consultants on Jon Husted, who's the sitting senator. Jon Husted looks like a quarterback, he talks like a quarterback, but he acts like a water boy. And another one said, "When the story is written on this campaign cycle, Sherrod Brown will have run the best race in the country. Jon Husted may have run the worst campaign in the country."
I don't know. I would pick Ted Cruz and Paxton for best and worst. So, Ipsos with Democrats plus eight, with Trump at 66 disapproval. That's not a headwind. It's a hurricane warning. And this, I mean, this is such an anxious time for us as Democrats because it feels like nothing less than a bloodbath is going to be disappointing, right? It's now the expectation. Literally up until two months, six weeks ago, the narrative was we're going to take the House, we're just going to try and get back a couple, flip a couple Senate seats. Now, Kalshi is saying the House 40 to 50 seats and a two-thirds likelihood that we retake the Senate. And I look at the map and I think, okay, I'm more nervous about Maine and Michigan than I think most people are. What states are in play as of today that weren't just a week or two weeks ago? Has anything all of a sudden gone to toss-up that was leaning Republican?
Probably Kansas is the one to really focus on for that. Reverend Hamilton is running an incredible campaign, and Roger Marshall is stepping in it. He's having to feign interest in, you know, pulling back ICE, for instance. He has not landed the plane on economic messaging, though. In his defense, I don't know how you would be able to do this considering the fact that the administration is causing a lot of this economic strife, and Roger Marshall is a vote yes on all of that. So I would put Kansas as the surprise. Though, I mean, maybe I'm just, you know, Democratic bed-wetter type, which I definitely am. I'm not even thinking about 40 to 50 seats. Like, I would like something, you know, too big to rig, but I basically think the Senate, you're in toss-up territory, which as Democrats, that's a good place to be if you're talking about states like Texas and Iowa and Alaska, which are supposed to be so red that you think you can't even get close.
And now we have some early voting trends, which I think are really interesting to highlight. So, there was this big panic because Michigan started, and people were saying, "Oh, this is not looking good. Like, we're not seeing the Gen Z turnout that we would expect. We're not seeing patterns in past elections when Democrats in Michigan have performed well." And Zachary Denino, who I think is a fantastic elections analyst and modeler, made the point, which I think is important to keep in mind, that, and he was drawing on specifically from Nevada for this, that the early voting trend suggests that concerns about the USPS handling of mail ballots are changing how some Democrats vote. So, they're going and dropping it off, voting in person. The comparisons to 2024 might get a bit fuzzy based on that. My anxiety about Michigan remains. To your point on Maine and Michigan, early voting in North Carolina looks really good. Day one of early voting in 2024 was D plus 1.7. Day one of early voting 2026 was D plus 27.4.
Also, they're looking at where these low-propensity voters are going if they're coming out and voting. It is looking good in North Carolina and in Maine, racial and geographic trends suggesting a similar pattern to Georgia, which doesn't do it by voter registration actually. So they look at demographics. And so Georgia early voting in 2024, day one, 30% Black. 2026, 36.6% Black. And the exception to all of the good news is what's going on in Florida, where it looks like it could be even more heavily Republican than in 2024.
Yeah. So, one of the keys when we talk about early voting, the election isn't November the 3rd anymore. It's a two-week window. And the window opened today. The polls are open today, so to speak. My son, I got so excited the other night. I just recognized, I'm like, "Oh my gosh, my son can vote." If you're like me and you think, "I haven't really given a lot, or I've benefited more, I've taken more than I've given," I think this is a really nice time to try and get everyone in your family at least registered and to start talking about voting and reminding people that voting has started. I was very interested in the Wall Street Journal article, and I'm curious to get your thoughts on Democrats not sold on a leftward shift. My sense is, and I think the Democrats, I'm often very critical of our own party, I think the Democrats have done a good job recognizing that Americans aren't asking them to go left or right. It's asking them to go forward on affordability, competence, and try and stay away as much as you can from the lectures. And it's almost like absolutely go out there with our messaging, but everyone keeps talking about a blue wave. I've said this is not a blue wave. This is a red riptide. I just think Trump and gas prices are doing our work for us. And you have to show up, be thoughtful, not sound too indignant or elite or get too caught in social issues, but just to talk about the economy, affordability, and kind of hit it straight down the middle.
Let's move on and start with the Russia-Ukraine war, which I think is going to go down as one of the biggest stains in American history, specifically our abandonment of a country that is fighting for the West right now with absolutely no help from the US or little help. Trump says he's waiving sanctions on Russia because he's negotiating peace and doesn't want Moscow to walk away. That's after he signed an executive order waiving new sanctions and tariffs required under the law he previously signed just two days before they were set to take effect. Meanwhile, Putin has proposed a meeting with Trump and Xi Jinping next month to discuss Ukraine in a bid to negotiate an end to the four-year war on terms favorable to Moscow. Trump has also criticized Zelensky for striking Russian oil refineries, blaming the attacks for driving up diesel prices. Over the weekend, Ukraine launched its biggest drone attacks against Russia this year, hitting an oil export terminal in St. Petersburg. Jess, do we buy any of this justification from Trump on going back on Russian sanctions that he agreed to previously?
No, absolutely not. And we're not big "Trump is a Russian asset" group. You know, that's, I don't want to revisit 2016 in that sense. But he is doing absolutely everything that Vladimir Putin wants. I am sure that he's sitting there in Moscow thinking like, "I didn't realize I could get this lucky at this point." And the narrative around the oil issues being about Ukraine and just ignoring what's going on in the Middle East. Like, the Strait of Hormuz is the problem. Zelensky is not at this point, and they have admitted as much, and just horrified by all of this. The idea that Trump might consider, I mean, it's Putin's proposal. We'll see if he says yes, but that he should stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Putin and Xi to talk about Ukraine, and you don't invite Zelensky to come or even a representative of Zelensky's government. Like, if you hate the guy, and Zelensky has shown himself to be someone with an enormous amount of flexibility about this, call elections. When we can guarantee that people can get to the polls, that's fine. He's not attached to being president in the same way that someone like Donald Trump is, or certainly Putin, Xi, Netanyahu, who we also have to talk about. Like, this feels like really getting to criminal stuff in the level of betrayal.
Big op-ed, the Wall Street Journal editorial board, "To Russia with Love, signed Donald." And they write, "When the election is over, there needs to be a bipartisan reckoning for Mr. Trump's budding alliance with the Kremlin against Ukraine, Europe, and American interests." Andy McCarthy with similar sentiment in the National Review. I get it that these are like normie Republicans and not whatever this MAGA wing actually represents, but this is harrowing stuff, what we're doing to Ukraine right now.
Yeah, as Democrats, we like to think of ourselves as being more thoughtful and empathetic to the other side. I think Donald Trump, the president, and Elon Musk are traitors to the West. And I really do hope there's a reckoning here. When we think about how many people have risked or given their lives trying to ensure the safety of Europe, or how many Americans have died at the hands of people who've been armed by Russia. If you think about the majority of cyber attacks come from one place, Russia. If you look at the fact that Tucker Carlson's engagement declined 72% the day after the Yandex server farms were bombed in Russia, we are now allies with arguably our biggest threat to democracy globally. We've decided to ally with them. And it's also, it's not actually, that's the wrong word. President Trump has decided to ally with Russia. The American people are still very much on the side of Ukraine, and we have minority rule right now where our president, under the cover of darkness, is coordinating or conspiring with Elon Musk to turn off battlefield technology that results in the deaths of Ukrainian citizens. If they can't stay on the offensive here, they go on the defense, and Russia is going to continue to take out civilian infrastructure and bomb civilian targets.
This is what the Ukrainian army here has done is basically they are NATO. They are the ones protecting the West right now. And for Trump and Musk to ally with Russia and not give Ukraine any warning that they're turning off Star Shield and Starlink, and then them pointing at each other like the cowards they are. "Oh, it's the government. It's President Trump. Look at him. Talk to him. Oh, I have no idea what happened." I do see the Republicans beginning to find their backbone around this issue. I can't even imagine. I want Senator Rubio, excuse me, Secretary Rubio to run for president just so that we can play all the clips of him talking a big game about Russia being our enemy for the last 20 years. This was his signature foreign policy. Russia is not our adversary, is our enemy. And now he's Secretary of State and has decided to ally with our enemy.
This is in 2025. By 2025, the US had over 6,400 sanctions on Russian entities and individuals. In the first 10 days after the invasion, Russia drew more designations than Iran had accumulated in a decade. And Trump just waived the new ones two days before they took effect on a law signed. The entire West spent a decade building a fence around Russia, and Trump is sneaking out to the fence in the middle of the night and taking it off its hinges.
In addition, it's just so incredibly ridiculous that these imports are going to have any effect other than to try and just say, "Hey, we're supporting Russia and we want Zelensky to come to the table," which means surrender. There's no negotiating here. When you have a quote-unquote, you know, Yalta-like convocation and you don't invite Ukraine to the table, what you're saying is, okay, Ukraine's on the menu. I just love the notion they think they're going to negotiate something without Ukraine at the table. In addition, you don't negotiate peace by removing your leverage before the meeting. Any peace here has to involve one thing: Putin withdrawing or significantly scaling back. And Trump is so stupid. He thinks by emboldening the aggressor, that's going to result in leverage leading to peace. Right now, the Trump administration is not trying to negotiate a peace. It's trying to schedule the next war with a pause for Russia to rearm and then decide who they're going after next, Poland or Finland. The Putin-Xi summit is just two autocrats and a guy who admires them deciding the fate of the West and democracy, whereas the real warrior at the table hasn't been invited to the table. It's not a peace summit. It's a closing. It's absolutely insane. Any thoughts on this or the notion that he's blaming Ukraine for diesel prices?
Support for the show comes from Upside. You work hard for your money, so why not make your money work a little harder for you, especially when it comes to the things you might spend money on every week? Gas, groceries, and eating out. Those everyday purchases can add up fast. But with Upside, you can earn cash back on things you're already buying, helping you get a little more out of every dollar. Upside is a free app that gives you cash back on gas, groceries, and dining expenses that can take a big bite out of your budget. And it's easy to use. Just open the app, claim an offer, pay with your card like you normally would, and earn cash back. That's it. And we're talking real money here, not points you have to figure out how to redeem or credits that expire, just actual cash that you can transfer straight to your bank account. Upside has given back $1 billion to its users. To find out how much you could earn, download the free Upside app and use promo code Moderates to get an extra 25 cents back for every gallon on your first tank of gas. That's an extra 25 cents back for every gallon on your first tank of gas using promo code Moderates.
Well, I'm glad that you brought up Marco Rubio because I feel like that interview that he gave where he said nobody ordered the Starlink speed to slow down, it sort of happened, is just sort of... And it's interesting because I was thinking, you know, looking ahead to 2028 and who might be getting in on the Republican side. I know a lot of people more moderate, even, you know, left-leaning moderates, but who felt like Marco Rubio was an acceptable answer to all of that. Like that JD Vance, not only rubber-stamping Trump when he used to think he was America's Hitler, but that he just didn't have the gravitas and he didn't have the smarts to do this, right? And one of the biggest plus points for Rubio has always been his foreign policy expertise and that he showed a tremendous amount of backbone when it came to knowing who our friends are and who our enemies are. And I think that that statement, "it sort of happened," about something that did result in deaths, that is what happened in Kyiv. Civilians died because Star Shield speed was shut down or slowed down, I should say. And I think that it is going to dog him if he does end up wanting to run in 2028, which I imagine is the case.
I'm curious what you think of Zelensky's PR strategy now because there's a market shift. So, he is doing interviews with everybody, right? He's, "Call me, I'll sit down and I will talk to you." And not only that, I'm not sugarcoating any of this anymore. You know, he's saying straight up that if the US is going to be on the side of Russia, which is what we're seeing here. I mean, they're talking about not only cutting our own aid, which was only manifesting, by the way, in allowing them to be able to buy weapons. We act like, or our administration, the government acts like we're gifting them these things. We're not at all at this point. And Europe is the one that's actually paying for Ukraine's defense. And I'm glad that European leaders are speaking out about that. But I mean, we're talking about halting the procurement system that provides Ukraine with weapons so that they'll stop striking Russian energy infrastructure. I mean, we're stripping them of all of this.
And I saw that Lindsey Graham, to his credit, actually said that, you know, he wasn't supportive of the president undoing the Lindsey Graham sanctions, which was, you know, a marquee accomplishment for him after decades of being very clear about who Russia is and the threats that they pose, not only to their immediate neighbors, but all of Western democracy. And Trump is going to go to South Carolina to campaign for Lindsey Graham. And I'm curious as to see if there's any back and forth about this. But do you think it's smart of Zelensky to be going this hard this publicly, or is that going to inflame Trump further and you're going to end up in, you know, him screaming at Zelensky about his outfit again, à la that Oval Office meeting?
But what's changed is that I remember when, so WPP acquired my last firm, L2, and I had three different bosses. One was MeToo. The second one had an emotional breakdown and left the firm. And the third one was fired shortly after I left. But I used to call them once a week. And my last boss after I sold, or after I sold, I was, this is going to come as a real shocker, but I wasn't great in a big company. And I left after 14 months. And he would keep calling me and telling me what to do or not to do with my next business. And finally I said, "Boss, I no longer work for you. Like, when you're in town, call me for dinner. I'd love to get together, but I don't really care what you think about what I should be doing or not doing professionally right now." And here's the advantage for Zelensky. When we've essentially abandoned them, honey badger don't give a... He can go on media and say, "Yeah, they've abandoned us." Yeah. When we have people in the field and all of a sudden our targeting systems or our defense systems don't work because Starlink is quote-unquote, it just happened to slow down, right? It just... Whoops. It just... right at that moment. Yeah. It just happened to slow down. He's like, "Bitch, I don't care that the..." The nice thing, the advantage to Zelensky of America no longer providing money is that, and they are still providing intelligence, is that quite frankly he can stick up the middle finger and be very honest and say directly to Americans and the West, we are doing our best, and not only that, with the support of Europe who has stepped up, and if America were to continue to provide intelligence.
We're on the right side. And I'm not talking about morally or ethically or defending the West or democracy. I'm just talking about backing the winner. The kill rate, if you will, or the casualty rate has gone from 1:2, the number of Ukrainians taken off the field versus Russians. The ratio was 1:2. They were disabling or killing twice as many Russians. It's gone to 1:8. The Ukrainians are kicking ass. They are a model for what a motivated... They literally embody what Lincoln said, you know, 150 years ago. You can't win a war without public support. You can't lose one with public support. The Ukrainian people and the technology and their sophistication and their bravery and the existential threat they feel with people invading their home and bombing their maternity wards in their apartment buildings. They are absolutely motivated and they are winning this war. And to not back the winner and send a message to Xi, think twice before you think about Taiwan, to send a message to Putin and the next leader after Putin is kicked out, which I believe he will be. I don't think he'll survive this, says think twice before you invade the West.
So this is, I think him going on the offense, he's sort of unchained right now. I think Trump always thinks he's negotiating in a vacuum. If you withdraw your support for Ukraine, they have less to lose by coming out and just blatantly saying, without US support, you may have the invasion of Europe may happen here. This is probably going to happen. We are doing our best. He is the Churchill of our generation, Zelensky. Absolutely no doubt about it. And I think they're being very savvy in terms of the Western outlets they're going to. He's a good spokesperson. He comes across as very sincere, very truthful, very likable. And I've got to be honest, my favorite streaming video is seeing Russian refineries on fire. And the St. Petersburg strike last night or two days ago was the gift of the weekend. And Ukraine just reminded everyone it doesn't need permission to defend itself. The best negotiating leverage on...
Earth is a drone over your oil terminals, and I hope that they continue to register the same success. And the fact that we are abandoning this is literally no different than if we, in the middle of, if in 1942, if FDR said, you know what, Hitler's not that bad. He's not that bad. We're going to start providing, we're going to start buying machinery and equipment and technology from Berlin.
How is that different? How is an autocrat who does not believe in democracy and is so anti-West invading Europe? We have been to this movie before. So I'm glad some Republicans are finally, you know, reaching down and feeling these two spherical objects between their legs. And you can tell that Republicans have had it because all of a sudden, you know, Trump, it appears Trump is backing down on this and he's saying, 'Oh no, Musk throttled it back.' And Rubio with this had just happened. Anyway, I'm hopeful here that this, that this in fact is something that Trump is going to have to turn back. He's going to have to check back on his support or his new alliance with Russia.
Also, the diesel, just the notion that this is anything other than symbolism. It's seven or eight days of US usage, one day of global usage. And your point was exactly the right one. The reason diesel prices are at six, seven, eight bucks a share or eight bucks a gallon in some regions is because of Trump's war in Iran. It has nothing to do with whether or not we're able to get diesel out of Russia.
Russia to blame for Iran, too. I mean, on every front, Russia is the problem. So, like, why are we playing this game? I'm just happy to see that at least the voters seemingly are seeing through this. And it's curious where Pete Hegseth is. I mean, I guess he's in the corner because he doesn't get to live stream his execution of a paraplegic, but we have not heard anything from the Secretary of Defense in quite some time when it comes to what's going on in the war in Iran. But let's do the JD town hall, because this was hot, contentious.
There we go. Here is VP JD Vance responding to a question at a CBS News Town Hall in Michigan. This one from a veteran whose wife was a soldier killed in March in Iran. Though the Iranian drone was the weapon that killed my wife, there were a lot of mistakes and a lot of fundamental failures that led up to that. There was a failure in the leadership, and I want to know how this administration is going to start holding those leaders accountable.
So Joey, first of all, look, I owe and the whole country owes your family a debt of gratitude that is quite literally impossible to repay. When you talk about failures that we were implicated in — the administration, the Department of War, whoever you want to say was implicated in — I want to know about that stuff because if there were failures, and I don't doubt there were, this is literally the first time I've heard of this is this conversation, and I want to fix that stuff.
Did you see the kid in the back row right behind him who was like, 'It's the first time you're hearing about this'? We also know that it is not the first time. If he's just opened up any newspaper or gone on any website, he knows exactly what attack this guy is talking about, where his wife died, and the abject failure to protect them from drone warfare, which we knew is how the Iranians were going to be carrying out a number of these attacks. You know, I thought that JD did his best, like I actually give him credit, but then ended on the completely unacceptable position, which is actually the buck doesn't really stop with us. And I didn't even do the necessary prep or will not be honest with you in such a way that you can walk away from this exchange thinking that I care at all.
And historically speaking, this is one of the more difficult conversations that a politician is ever going to have with a constituent, right? When someone's loved one has died as a result of a leadership failure, leadership failure or even just something that happened. You know, people sign up, they know if they go to war that there is a chance that they're going to die. But I thought that it was really poorly handled and sent a message to the public with a couple weeks to go before election day that the administration is not taking this seriously enough. And they got us into a war that is going to go, it feels like, past a year at this, you know, we're well into October.
No signs of it slowing down, and the Iranians know how much they're benefiting from continuing to keep this going, and that they have no answers for any of it. I thought it was really disappointing and just sad to see someone ask you, you know, a question for some real answer to their heartbreak, and that you say it's the first time I've heard of this. Like you have a million briefers. Look, nothing exposes a talking point, you know, like a widower in the front row. And that is policy and wars are in the abstract until they have a name.
And one of the, I do think one of the problems that plagues US foreign policy right now is that we're totally sequestered from the ramifications of it. The homeland was attacked 25 years ago, but most of us didn't know someone hurt. No one was drafted. We've convinced the American public that, oh, we can max out your credit card by going to war and cutting taxes. I mean, if we at a minimum should have some sort of additional wartime tax or something that helps everyday Americans recognize that wars come at a cost. And even if we outsource most of that cost to military families, we have to do a better job of giving people a vested interest or feeling the pain of war, if you will.
I actually thought the vice president handled this about as well as he could have. And that is, I mean, keep in mind his predecessor was chased down by an angry mob at the direction of his new boss with a noose. And he, and also supposedly in the Situation Room he was the one who said this is a bad idea going into Iran, and yet he has to just toe the company line right now. I do think he came across as somewhat empathetic here, but the reality this will go down is the greatest geopolitical mistake since the Iraq War, which may have bested the decision to go into Southeast Asia in the '60s, which I think at the time some people would say you could justify.
This has been an enormous failure, not of intelligence, because supposedly the Trump administration had the intelligence and there was an idea that we'd go in limited strikes and see if we could topple the regime quick and easy, and if not, at least somewhat diminish their navy and their missile launch capacity. Kind of, I don't want to call it in out, but here we are seven months later. No one anticipated or seemed to anticipate, or Trump didn't anticipate, the problems in the Strait of Hormuz, did not secure it, did not coordinate with our Gulf allies, we've alienated them, did not get anyone in the EU on board. I mean, people forget when we expelled Saddam from Kuwait, George Herbert Walker Bush got something like 47 or 60 countries to back him. The last time when we had the JCPOA, the agreement with Iran under Obama, Iran and Russia were signatories. I mean, they signed up for it, too.
We are isolated. We are doing things unilaterally that make no mistake. We don't think about what's actually going to happen here. And then Vance is kind of left there to just, I feel like right now he's the circus clown scooping up behind the elephant. Like there's not a lot he can say. What he could have said, and I think at some point he will, at some point, and I'm curious just politically if Vance wants to be president, especially if the midterms are as bad for Republicans as I think they are, at some point Vance would be politically well served to say something along the lines of, look, there's certain issues I disagree with the president on, as vice president I will always support him, but as has been reported in the Wall Street Journal, he and I had a robust discussion over the decision to bomb Iran. At some point he's going to have to distance himself, and I don't, and quite frankly I think politically it would be smart because I mean this is how Vice President Harris, one of the many reasons she lost the election, was her inability on The View to say, is there anything you disagree with Biden on? She's like, well, I can't think of anything.
I wonder, and I'll put the question back to you, at some point does Vance or Rubio read the tea leaves and start to distance themselves from Trump? Because at this point I don't think Trump can fire either of them.
I don't think anytime soon. I imagine as we head into the lamest of ducks situation in the last two years of this administration, perhaps as you get closer to 2028. I would say like if JD Vance doesn't want to be reviled about the concerns that he has on these big issues that are beyond what happened to that man losing his wife, but that everybody in that audience knows that cost of living is going through the roof because of decisions that the Trump administration is taking, whether it's tariffs or the war in Iran, like why do the town hall then? I don't think that it helped the Republicans going into the midterms. It just fed the left-wing outrage machine and the feeling of being let down amongst traditional Republican voters. I mean, that's their big battle right now with the couch, that they can't turn out the base, and that a lot of right-leaning independents as well have responded to surveys just saying like, 'Yeah, oh, I think I'm going to give it a miss this time.' I don't think that anything that JD Vance did sitting down on CBS for a town hall, besides making Bari Weiss happy, I guess, you know, promoted his side or made him seem any more presidential if that's what he's going to be thinking about for 2028, in my view. But maybe I'm being too harsh about it, but I just thought for someone who is so clearly linked to a number of leaks to The Atlantic, to the Wall Street Journal, to the New York Times...
That is the leak. I love that he's the leaker in the White House.
