Loading summary
Transcript72 lines
- [00:00]
A
This is an iHeart podcast.
- [00:02]
B
Guaranteed Human.
- [00:04]
A
Olivia Culpo here to tell you all about the launch of the new Abercrombie spring denim collection Made the way denim should feel. Their denim has always been a staple in my wardrobe and has a wide range of fits, styles and washes. Every jean is available in both their classic fit and viral Curve Love Shop in the app, online and in stores.
- [00:35]
C
In America. We don't cancel ideas, we put them to the test.
- [00:39]
B
Ice involves shooting out of Minneapolis.
- [00:41]
C
The left sees the world one way.
- [00:43]
B
What we saw today is a murder.
- [00:44]
C
The right sees it another.
- [00:46]
B
It was an act of domestic terrorism.
- [00:48]
C
And when those views collide, things get real. From real America's voice and real clear politics comes a show that pushes bias aside in the search for truth. Two sides, one stage, one question. At the center of it all, where is the truth? This is Get Real with your host, David derozers, and it starts right now.
- [01:15]
B
Welcome to get real. I'm David Derozer, the publisher of RealClaire Media Group. Why am I doing this? Because I don't think we the people are doing well. I find when we look at the American mind, we're hopelessly divided between right and left and we're not getting better. So the hope of Get Real is to move us in this position. What was the opportunity that created this show for me? I wrote a piece called Prove Charlie Right. You know, that caught Mr. Sig's attention and then we went in and we had a couple of conversations and then out of this came the show. But, you know, I didn't really get a true sense of Charlie until he was dead. And we looked at, he was the connective tissue for everybody who really mattered in our politics. He was the waterfront connector between the folks that were running our country and he ennobled them. I would describe Charlie as the unum that connected the kind of pluribus of American politics, the maga, the America first and the boomer Republicanism. He was the unum that connected the pluribus. But also Charlie's death. Before he died, I got a sense of his importance very upfront and personal. When I was sitting with my 18 year old nephew who was headed off to college over the summer. He had a principle death depth, civic knowledge and judgment. That was a pleasant surprise. And I asked, what happened to you? I said, I really like this man before me. And he just responded quite naturally. I follow Charlie Kirk. I watch his show on rav. I take in all, you know, I watch him on Instagram and so doesn't my dad and we talk about it. I walk into Rave with a good opinion of the place. After a couple of conversations with Mr. Sig, he asked what type of show I'd like to do and I said a show built on viewpoint diversity, which is real clear as both sides method. He was keen on the idea and the idea of Get Real was born. What's the soul of the show? I said at the outset that I don't think the American mind is well. Our 250th birthday is fast approaching and we're not doing well. The American mind is dangerously divided. In a healthy politics, the differences between the partisans are of degree and not kind. In an unhealthy politics, the differences of kind. I don't know about you, but I think we're living in healthy times with Get Real. What do I want to accomplish? I want to actually have a show where the differences are of degree. And I think that if we have such conversations, we'll actually bridge the divide that's before us. I think it's a lost and needed art, but also a path to survival. So now let's get real. Joining me now are some of the great journalists and thinkers on my left. Joel Kotkin is America's premier demographer. Right. If you want to get a sense of ideas and their democratic consequences, Joel is the best. He's the author of the coming Neo Feudalism, a must read book. Will Marshall is president of the Progressive Policy Institute and he's one of. In my modest opinion, he's one of liberalism's best policy wonks. Will was the architect of Clinton's Democratic centrism. What I like about Will is that he's a liberal that does not get on the wrong side of 2080, 20 issues. I'm sorry. RealClear star reporter and author of Fool's Go, Susan Crabtree is here today. Susan's work on the Secret Service in the fubar that happened at Butler, Pennsylvania is deserving of a Pulitzer. However, Susan didn't get a Pulitzer, but she did get the Dow Prize for her standout work. I should note that Fool's gold has afforded by Peter Schweitzer, who's also out there pushing a very important book, the Invisible Coup. I think there should be a bundle because both are installments of good sense that make us think outside of our paradigms. Ingrid Dracquez is a weekly columnist at USA Today and a staple in Real Clear's Roundup and the best from both sides. Welcome all.
- [05:40]
A
Thanks for having us.
- [05:41]
B
I'd like to kick off our conversation with reading the first line of a recent Vogue article where Governor in Nepal got a kneepad reception. Here it is. I'll try to accentuate it. Let's get this out of the way. He's embarrassingly handsome. His hair is seasoned with silver, at ease with his own eminence as he delivers his final State of the State address. That's a lot. The golden boy of the Golden State got a Ken doll President makeover. Susan, you wrote a book on California fool's gold. Does this accounting of Governor Newsom as this technocratic details German guy fit with your own understanding of the man?
- [06:32]
A
Absolutely not. I don't think you'll be surprised by my, my commentary. The line that I we the line that I was focused in on was that this author says he was raised by a single mom who'd hold down two or three jobs and he had to be the man of the house in a way. And people assume Newsom comes from money and he doesn't. Access, yes. Privilege, yes. Money, no. Nothing could be further from the truth from my the year I spent researching this book with Peter Schweitzer's top research director as well, there is this story about that he was raised by a single mom. Now that is true. That part of the sentence is true. But he, his dad was fired from a tech company, but he was put on that tech company by the Gettys and the Gettys, of course. J. Paul Getty was one of the richest men in the world in his time and we're talking big oil money. So it's very ironic too because you know, all of this cap and trade, all of these limits on emissions in California fly in the face of where Gavin Newsom got his start and all of his money in his wine business. So his dad was appointed by a judge to a judgeship by, by Jerry Brown Sr. The governor. There's two, of course. Jerry Brown's the senior and the junior. He was appointed by the senior who was friends with his father. And so was he not making child support payments or did his mother have to choose to live in a very expensive house in San Francisco that she couldn't afford with the child care payments and that's why they had to take in the Fost foster kids. But I have a recent story out that shows that he had both. He had a Rolodex and he was running around in a Porsche at Santa Clara on in a very interesting way that he got into that school on a so called baseball scholarship. It's all in my book. So I would, you know, I would love for you to check it out. Fool's Gold. But you know, this story has so many holes in it and they just bought it hook, line and sinker.
- [08:52]
D
This author.
- [08:54]
B
Joel, you're too a resident of California. Who is Gavin to you? Is Gavin a neo feudalist governor? And what should we expect if he actually runs and wins?
- [09:06]
E
Well, I think he's the epitome of neo feudalism in many ways. I mean, during his time in office, he basically has presided and accelerated a tremendous class divide in California. Basically, California has become increasingly unequal, dominated by a very few number of mostly tech, some other executives. He basically, he has created an economy which basically created one of the fewest percentage wise, fewest jobs for that are upwardly mobile. California has bifurcated under Newsom between a extraordinarily wealthy group at the top and a very large group of people at the bottom who aren't doing well. And of course, under Newsom, California has had massive out migration, which, you know, anyone who's familiar with California should know this. You know, it's as good a place as there is anywhere in the world, weather wise in terms of scenery. But conditions are so tough, particularly for working class and middle class younger people who are the very group that I'm sure he's going to try to appeal to with affordability, which actually should just bring some laughs. But you know, you don't expect progressive journalists in New York to bother with the facts.
- [10:36]
B
Ingrid, what do you see as seeing Newsom in the lane that he's taken? What I mean specifically is he's taken this stance where he's like, I'm going to take on Trump Persona, but he's not going to be running against Trump. How do you think that Newsom will do against the two front runners, either J.D. vance or Marco?
- [11:00]
D
I think that's a great question. And Susan and Joel laid out some really interesting facts about what's going on. And I would just say Vogue might think that Newsom is embarrassingly handsome, but I think it's more embarrassing the policies that he's presided over in his state. And no matter who he ends up running against in 2028, they're going to be bringing up the record of California. How many people are leaving the state, how many businesses are leaving the state. The Tax foundation just came out with its list of the worst states for taxes. And of course, California's one of the worst of the worst. So I think that his record speaks for itself. From High taxation, raising the minimum wage, leading to the closure of a lot of fast food businesses. I mean, it's all there. So he may be handsome, but he doesn't have a lot else going for him.
- [11:57]
B
Will, it's your turn. The one good policy stance reported in the Vogue puff piece was Newsom's opposition to the 5% billionaire wealth tax. It appears that the Golden State's overpaid unions and its gig economy serfs want to kill the golden goose of the Golden State. What policy advice platform would you give this empty vessel of ambition?
- [12:23]
F
Thank you for that question, David.
- [12:25]
B
Feel free to take your time to answer.
- [12:29]
F
I'm a continent away, so I don't have bio bits about Gavin to tell you about, but I will probably surprise you. You called me a centrist. I usually don't answer to that, but I get it. Why, you know, but I like Gavin. I met him when he was newly elected mayor of San Francisco and he regaled me with hilarious stories of loony leftism in his city, which he had to combat day in and day out. But he did it with a lot of wit, style and grace managed to get through. And I think what Gavin did after that was to move with this state, California. California in this, you know, in this century has been like a microcosm of a Democratic party with young millennials basically, who are much more liberal than the previous generations of Democrats, pushing the politics leftwards everywhere, but probably California more than any place else. Having said that, and I, you know, I could criticize and have criticized California's energy policies and high tax polic. I think there's there's a, you know, there's a lot to answer for in the blue state model that's as it as existed there. But just to assess Gavin as a political player, which I think is what you're asking, I think he is, first of all, he's, he is a wonk. He may surprise you to know he does think about the substance of issues. I know because I've had debates and in depth conversations with him. He's got, reminds me of Bill Clinton in that way where he likes to try to penetrate to the essence of something before rushing to judgment. And it's sort of showed that in the, being against the, in being against the billionaires tax. I think because he's just dumb policy and, and, and I don't, but I don't think it's ideologue. You know, he has accommodated him, accommodated himself to the changing political culture of California in a way that lots of politicians do when they run and win high office in the in states. But I think he has in the, the article, this article I don't think you all like very much did make the point that he has lots of room for maneuver and I think that's true nationally. He's well known in California, not particularly well known elsewhere. And he has a lot of political skill. He is the foremost troller of Trump and MAGA world. He is. And so he delights Democrats with that. And he's just, yeah, he's, he's combative when he needs to be, stands up, doesn't get pushed around, fights back when he and his state are in the crosshairs of this president. And so I think people, I think he, he rightly enjoys the reputation of probably the front runner in this race. Now, there really isn't a race yet and it's way too early to speculate about speculate about 28. But he's certainly going to have a lot of assets that other Democrats don't yet show. But a big one is his personality. He's, he is charismatic. He's good with people. He's smart. And I think, as they say, we're drawn to him.
- [15:45]
B
So I think it'll be personality goes a long way. We'll see.
- [15:48]
F
Yeah.
- [15:48]
B
Yeah. Guys, stand by. Get Real. We'll be right back.
- [15:54]
C
Don't go anywhere. We'll be right back with more. Welcome back to get real, brought to you by Real Clear Politics and Real America's Voice.
- [16:12]
B
Welcome Back to Get Real. I'm David Derozier, publisher of RealClear Media Group and the host of Get Real. We're talking the state of the state about California and Gavin Newsom effect. Joining me is Joel Cotton, demographer of the Stars and author of the Coming Neo Feudalism. Will Marshall, president of the Progressive Policy Institute. Thanks for hanging through the break. I'd also like to welcome back Susan Crabtree, my favorite person at RealClear Politics and the favorite of Real Clear Politics editor Ingrid Jacques. Thank you all for coming back. I'd like to pick up where we were with Will. I get that he has the quintessential talents to be a modern politician, but I mean, I think you're away doing a tour right now where you're talking to all the folks out there about what is the winning formula for the up and coming midterms in the election. Could you actually speak to what you think to be kind of, you know, the pathway for, you know, Democratic victory in the midterms, but also for Gavin as president or any president that would actually come forward.
- [17:32]
F
Yeah, well, it's a big question, but let me offer a few thoughts about it. First. We, you know, we've studied the polling, we've studied the election results. We think that it's very clear, and there's no longer much debate about it, that the fundamental problem for the Democratic Party is the estrangement of non college educated voters. That is working class voters used to be the mainstay of the old fdr, New Deal coalition. And getting those voters back is absolutely essential. Which means we need to have a party that adopts a kind of a more moderate position on the cultural issues, immigration, crime, the whole complex of identitarian race, gender, ethnicity questions. I think we need a smarter approach on energy and climate than the party's been pursuing in recent years. And we need a different economic offer to working class Americans who feel like the party has been catering to well educated elites and not them when they feel that with a lot of justice. So we're making the arguments to Democrats that we need to come up with new ideas. Highlight leaders around the country like Gretchen Whitmer in Michigan and Elisa Slotkin and others here who are winning working class voters and governing successfully and winning elections and governing successfully in a state that Trump won twice.
- [19:07]
B
Joel, what do you think the prospects of the, of really the Democrats to pull, you know, up from like the, you know, the crash and the trajectory towards like to failure that. I think that the progressive folks that determined who wins the primaries, who actually gets to be president. Is what Will's proposing possible under the current structure, or are we going to see another progressive candidate who will have to fail in order to even run?
- [19:40]
E
Well, I think that Newsom is, he is very nimble, I'll give him that. I think he has a real problem which is the party is moving to a very far left position, particularly on things like redistribution of income, which may have some appeal. Newsom is uncomfortable with that because A, he has always been backed by the wealthy people in the Bay Area. That's his base, always has been his base. And his policies have been terrible for middle and working class people in California. But he's going to, so he's going to have to try to figure out some way to distinguish himself not just from Trump, but also from the left wing of his own party. I think it's going to be very difficult. One of the things is if you ever did any research on Newsom, but you'll find this, he's been on in anything that was the popular thing at the time, whether it was like Black Lives Matter, you know, he's anti racism, then he was anti sexism then. No. And of course now he'll go after dei. So I think, and obviously over ice, he continually follows things. And one thing I'll say, and I agree with Will on this from people I know who work with him, he is much smarter than many people would suggest. He's much more flexible. The problem he's going to have is if he faces a Bernie Sanders kind of candidate or a real moderate candidate, he's going to have a hard time. If those come in, if it's just a race against a AOC type, I think he, he wins. And I think he also wins in 28 because the Republicans are the best friends the Democrats ever had.
- [21:33]
B
Well, I'd like to, you know, put it to, to Susan and Ingrid is that, you know, one of the questions that I had at last Blanc, is that he's going to have to be running. He's not going to be running against Donald Trump. He's going to be running, you know, against probably JD Vance or Marco Rubio. And when I look at him, I just think he's a younger, you know, kind of handsome centrist without a center where you could put in and pour in, just like they did with Joe Biden. But I really, I really don't think that we're plugging in the fact that, you know, his whole narrative is running against Trump. But when he runs for president, or anybody's going to be running for President Trump, they're going to be running against, like, two very articulate candidates who, I don't know if this handsome man with silver hair and a possessed gait can really kind of stand up to the people that he's going to have to go against. What say you, Susan?
- [22:30]
D
This.
- [22:30]
A
This idea that he is. Sorry, this idea that he is in any way, shape or form a moderate centrist is absolutely false. Kamala Harris and he have a lot in common. They have the same mentor in Willie Brown. He owes his career to Willie Brown and actually had a fundraiser for him at the Balboa Cafe, which he owned. That's how he basically, with his dad's connections and the Gettys connections, got to where he. The appointment that led to him being mayor of San Francisco. He has the same exact issues that Kamala Harris. There was a big problem with her when she, when it came out that she had sex change operations. She was the proponent, the leading proponent of that in the prisons, in California prisons. Oh, he supported that the entire time. And he has. It was his education department that was responsible for this idea that your teachers could have a gender transition, could be having your, your children at school be gender transitioning without parents knowledge. And it was illegal. And they put out, the department of education put out the guidance and he backed them in this to say the administrators and teachers can't tell the parents that their kid is gender transitioning at school. His wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom and made documentaries that were fueled by PG&E which started many deadly fires in California. They financed it and her documentary films. One of them was the mask you live in. And it's about, you know, masculinity, toxic masculinity basically was what the film's about. And he also has another one where she has about trans issues and LGBT issues where there's a gender bred man person basically curriculum. So this idea that he's moving to the center that he wants to talk to Charlie Kirk and Ben Shapiro, that is all performative. What can Gavin Newsom cite as his major accomplishment for California during his tenures? You have these terrible, deadly wildfires that were basically because of mismanagement and the utilities that he takes donations from. You've had the worst insurance rates in the country, the highest energy rates, the highest taxes, the worst standing in education, highest poverty rates in the country. I mean this is not a record that is going to boost him. It's all performative with Gavin. It's all about his style, no substance. And I guess that's what the Democrats are embracing right now because he's leading in the polls. So you know he's going to have a really hard time in the general coming from a failed state of California, having nothing to cite as a success, even his signature homelessness program care course. He's all turned in the last two years. He keeps, he keeps trying to modify his positions. He's finally got away from this housing first position that he's had since mayor of San Francisco. But he has his care courts where he's dealing with addiction and mental health finally in the last year. But it has had a terrible record. They spent $6 billion on that and like 22 people have been helped. You have this terrible fraud issue in California. And now J.D. vance, who's obviously going to probably be head to head with him at some point is going to lead up the fraud. The fraud in California is estimated to be 250 billion and it's coming out every day more and more in California. I just, you know, I'm living Proof that my parents were upper middle class in California. My dad was Air Force. My mom was a teacher. And they did very well in the 80s in California in the Reagan era. And you know, now it's very, very difficult to buy a house. Houses just have gone up astronomically in the last since COVID I just, I just don't see what he runs on other than performance.
- [27:03]
B
Well, guys, stand by. Get Real. We'll be right back. And Ingrid, you'll be at the top. Thank you.
- [27:11]
C
Don't go anywhere. We'll be right back with more. Welcome back to GET real brought to you by Real Clear Politics and Real America's Voice.
- [27:28]
B
And you know, we're a believer in choice, choice. The other folks don't believe in choice. And choice is a great civil rights issue and maybe the great one of our times. President Trump made that promise five years ago and is now becoming a reality. Welcome back to get real. I'm David derozier. Let's talk education. My read on American's educational system is that it's a mess from Pre K to PhD. Once upon a time when it worked, when I worked at the Manhattan Institute, we added experts from prisons in. And he was asked by someone during the question and answer, how do you determine how many prison beds to build? The guy, without missing a beat, looked at the audience and said, we look at the number of kids that flunked the third grade reading exam and then we build off of that. By the time a child is 8 or 9 years old, its bed is built with him in mind or her in mind, mostly him. Instead of teaching Johnny and Sally, you know, the three Rs, so they have the tools to think for themselves. Too many appear to be singularly concerned with what children under their care have, you know, what they think, you know, are they expressing sanctioned opinions. I think we're creating a generation of woke boneless wonders who are ill prepared for the world that they're graduating into. Ingrid, in your piece this week at USA Today, you wrote about some positive educational developments coming out of the Trump administration's big beautiful bill. What is Trump and the McMahon regime up to and that deserves our attention?
- [29:08]
D
Well, I think that Trump has really delivered on his promises to promote school choice even more this time around. And he came out immediately with several executive orders directing the Education Department to find ways they can help states expand school choice. And that's only furthered this momentum that we've seen in recent years, really since the pandemic when parents around the country really got a close up look at what was going on in their public schools. And I think that really opened up a desire for choices, whether that was charter schools, private school choice. So what Trump supported was this federal tax credit so people around the country could donate to these scholarship granting organizations, which then in turn could grant these scholarships to families. But the catch is that states have to sign on and it's pretty simple. The governor just has to say, yes, we're interested, we want to participate. And so far, almost 30 states, I think that it's up to 28 have, have signed on and said, yes, they want to do this. And even some states with Democratic governors who have been very anti choice at the state level. And I think this is a very interesting way to introduce those options to families in states that might have been resistant to it otherwise. And that's including Colorado, which has some of the most progressive policies in the country. Not quite as bad as California, but it's right up there. So, so I hope that encourages other blue states to maybe really actually think about what's best for kids.
- [30:57]
B
Will, it's your turn. Is there a win win deal that unions will sign onto that can save the promise of public education? What is the progressive prescription to the progressive education?
- [31:09]
F
Well, I can't speak for unions, but look, I mean, let me start with the obvious point. Our schools are in trouble. They are not performing well, warming badly. And it's to me another one of those nation at risk moments, or Sputnik moments, where we need national leadership in both parties to move to demand higher performance from our public school system. Ppi, I should say, has been pushing for choice. I'm not going to go back and tell you when we started, we introduced Bill Clinton to charter schools and the rest was history. He embraced that and led the whole public school choice movement. Barack Obama also reinforced it. And then Joe Biden very unwisely abandoned it and did outsource his education policy to the teachers unions in his four years. That was a tragic mistake. And so we have a vacuum of national leadership for school reform. Frankly, I don't trust Donald Trump to fill that gap, that vacuum. And I don't think that's what he's intending to do. And we're, we don't think that, you know, large scale private school choice is the answer here. We got to fix our public schools or 80 or 85% of American kids are going to go to school. So, you know, we have, you know, we've been pointing out the successes. We've got a new documentary out called Turnaround On New Orleans, which after Katrina went to 100% charter schools and its students performance leapt up there into respectable territory. After being the worst school district in the nation. We know it works and we'd love to have more Republican support to get it done.
- [32:51]
B
Well, I think that's how we find out where kind of school choice and charter schools happen is because I think Republicans are always there to kind of join Democrats that want this, that want choice and the benefits of the choice, which is educational excellence. Getting back to an unfun fact of my lead in is that the number of kids that are actually flunking the third grade reading exam is profound, particularly after Covid. I mean, when you look at the fact that Almost up to 40% of kids are failing this exam, I mean it's, it's worse than a Sputnik moment. I think we're really looking at the death of the promise of public education and kind of making kids that are ill prepared for the world that they're going into. Susan, I want to move to you. It's that you live in California. You're also a mother of a daughter. You've opted out of the public schools. I think you're, you're in a charter now. What is the pedagogical difference between the schools that people are fleeing and the ones that they're going to?
- [34:06]
A
Well, I think you see in the district that I'm slated to, our children are slated to go to. You see an emptying out of those schools in the last two years just because of the things that I just discussed. The wokification of, of the California schools are, is extreme. We had a national news story come out of our district, our elementary school district, where a family wanted to opt out of future issues having to do with LGTBTQ because a teacher coupled a fifth grader, fifth grade class with a kindergarten class and made them read my shadow is pink. And eventually the story is about a son and a father. The son's shadow is pink, the father's shadow is blue. At the end of the story, the father is accompanying the little boy to school in a tutu. And then they made the kids buddy up and go outside and draw their shadow, lie down on the ground, the pavement and draw their shadow. And then think about what color is each kid's shadow. And when a Catholic, when a Catholic family decided, you know, I'm comfortable with that, the PTA president and the principal got together and they decided to have a pink out the hate day and to intimidate the family. Well, the family went on to Tiff Sioux, the school district and they won in California. And that is now the the child spoke at the Museum of the Bible with Donald Trump in a high school just one district over from us. There was and I wrote about this for Real Clear Politics, a student led group, LGBTQ LGBTQ group had a invited a BDSM expert who from a trans clinic to a pride week at the school cafeteria. And they did get the conservative families, Christian and Catholic families and Muslim families did get together and had that that person was no longer invited. But they had a trans specialist from the Navy come to and offer his cell phone to kids and teach them them how what phrases to use to get a gender dysphoria diagnosis. This is what's going on in our public schools in California. And it's interesting that it's corresponding with the fact that now California is behind Mississippi and Louisiana with National Assessment of Education Progress Report, the nation's report card. That was not the case when I was growing up in California in the 80s and 90s. So I think there is a direct link there and there's all kinds of charter schools and private schools cropping up.
- [37:15]
B
Thank you guys. Stand by. We have more on the other side of the break.
- [37:21]
C
Don't go anywhere. We'll be right back with more. Welcome back to get real, brought to you by Real Clear Politics and Real American America's Voice.
- [37:38]
B
Welcome back to get real. I'm David derozier, publisher of the Real Clear Media Group and your host joining me, Susan Crabtree, national political correspondent for RealClear Politics Ingrid Jacques, columnist for USA Today Joel Kotkin, global economic and political social trends expert and Will Marshall, president of the Progressive Policy Institute. Welcome back, everyone. Guys, let's dig into some polling. Joel sent us some interesting polls this week. Take a look at this regarding supporting ICE and deportation supported by voters, 73% say entering the US without legal permission is breaking the law. Americans support deporting those here illegally by a margin of 2 to 1. 54% want ICE, enforcing federal immigration laws in removing illegal immigrants and 58% opposed defunding ICE, including majorities of independents and swing voters. The source of this is signal. It's come out in the past three days. I mean, Joel, you know, you sent this. What do you think of this? This seems to be, you know, shows that there's a consistency in the voter's mind about immigration and the border.
- [38:52]
E
Well, I think there is certainly in terms of what the ideas are. Obviously closing the border was something widely promoted and was very successful politically, but as usual, Trump overdoes it. I don't think when you read the other polls, what you find is that a lot of people support this in principle, but if it's going and removing a respectable family that has never done anything wrong, that their only crime was to come here illegally or overstay their visa, they don't support that. So what we're seeing is, although people agree basically with the idea of controlling the border, I think there's not that much support for going and rooting out, you know, the guys hanging out in front of the Home Depot. There's a lot of support for getting rid of the criminals. I think this way he's done it has just been a disaster. And politically, what we see. And we're going to reveal new numbers at an event in Texas.
- [40:05]
B
No, no.
- [40:06]
E
He's alienated the Latino vote, which was critical to his winning before. And, you know, you got to remember the next generation of Americans is going to be much more heavily Hispanic, Asian, and they, they may not like the idea that somebody they know is being. Is about to be deported. I, you know, I have a person who I work with, her husband, even though they're married, and he's never done anything wrong except overstaying a visa, and now they're worrying about having to move back to Mexico. This is not a good way of doing this. And I think that Trump has handed the Democrats a victory they shouldn't have. Now, the problem for the Democrats, I'm sure Will would probably back me up on this. The problem for the Democrats is then you go into the ban ice, the sort of whole idea that there's no difference between a legal immigrant and an illegal immigrant. I mean, you have the mayor of Boston basically saying anybody has a right to come into the country and stay. I don't even think that we'll get 20% of the vote. But Trump has been so basically just crude in how he's handled this issue, that an issue that should be working for him is now working against him.
- [41:26]
B
Ingrid, what say you want me? Yeah.
- [41:29]
D
Okay. So I think Democrats really, I think, are on the verge of taking this to the other extreme. Sure. I think if you look at some polls, that Americans are concerned with what's been happening in Minneapolis, where we've seen two American citizens get killed when they were caught up in protesting ICE operations. But overall, I don't think that the sentiment regarding illegal immigration has changed. People are still saying that immigration is a very important issue for them. I really think Democrats risk going too far in the other direction when they kind of see this as, oh, Trump overstepped. So we're just really going to push back hard, say we want to abolish ice, get rid of it altogether, totally say everyone's welcome. Sort of what Joe Biden did for four years and got us into this current situation. So I think voters are saying very clearly they don't want to do that. And Trump seems to be getting the message. He's drawing back in Minneapolis, seems to be coming at things with a bit more of a moderate approach. So we'll see how that plays out in the coming weeks.
- [42:43]
F
But.
- [42:45]
D
I think Democrats are doing what they do best and just pushing it too far to the other extreme.
- [42:51]
B
Yeah. Before I go to you, Will, one of the things that I really kind of get a sense with this poll that there is this kind of, you know, consistency through it, and I just wonder is the Hispanics that have, you know, voted for Trump, you know, are they, are they holding steady or more steady than they might be actually telling opinion polls, you know, for the one thing you would think that, you know, taking out, like, illegal immigration is good for, you know, Hispanic families that are here illegally and citizens. But, you know, that's just my own observation. What do you see in this poll?
- [43:30]
F
Well, I'm sorry. Yeah, well, look, I mean, I look at a lot of polls on this, and there's no question that there's been a precipitous plunge in public support for President Trump's immigration policies in general. Now, that's not to say the public is against deportation. They're not there for deportation, but they're sure not for this paramilitary, violent kind of harassing of American citizens, citizens that's happened in American cities. This occupation of Minnesota has gone down terribly for Trump, and that's why he's pulling back. Even he's seen it, and it's pulling back, you know, and where you see it as ice, I mean, ICE is just, you know, nobody has any approval for it. It's down 27 points. And, and Trump is down 16 points in the latest New York Times poll on handling immigration as a result of it. He still wins. If it's a question of do you favor, you know, you know, are you, are you. If you, you know, Democrats obviously can't say we support illegal immigration and they shouldn't say we're against deportation of people that really need to go back. But this has been an own goal for Donald Trump, and he's, he's, you know, he's obviously reacting furiously to try to stop the bleeding.
- [44:50]
B
No, I think you're right. But it's like we've also seen that instead of the Insurrection act being dusted off, I mean, Tom Holman went to Minnesota, right, brought calm, changing the policies and procedures. So there's been, we've seen an adaptability to how they're doing and we've also seen in Minnesota how the left doesn't want to take a win and they're kind of just standing up and creating roadblocks and stuff. So, you know, I do get, I do get a sense that I don't think this was good political theater. I think they had a very good sense in the administration that they were losing it.
- [45:29]
F
Right.
- [45:30]
B
And I think there is regrouping of it and but, you know, you know, thanks for that poll, Joel, because I do think it shows that there's consistency on issues of immigration, but how you do it matters in politics. And I do think, I think, you know, hopefully there'll be a tightening up of behavior on both sides where, you know, the Democrats are, you know, working closer with, you know, ICE so they can get these people peacefully and in the very least, you know, in doing so, you know, maybe even when they do show up for protests that they're, you know, canavans and biting of fingers and inserting oneself into law if it's isn't done. Guys. You know, when we come back, predictions for the week ahead. Right back.
- [46:20]
C
Don't go anywhere. We'll be right back with more. Welcome back to get real, brought to you by real clear politics and real america's voice.
- [46:38]
B
Welcome back to GET real. Okay, team, time now for predictions. Joel, last week you were the best, right? I was the worst. I predicted it was going to get warmer and it's been terrible down in Palm Beach. Lizards are falling from the sky here. You mentioned that Iran was going to be in the news. You were right. Also, feel free to make a Super bowl prediction, but we have four minutes. We have four people. Joel, let's start with you because you're a wise man.
- [47:09]
E
Okay, two quick things. One, I think there's going to be increased pressure on Kamala Harris to get out of the race. Right now, actually, in many polls she still is ahead of Newsom, but since they have the same base, I think she's going to have a lot of pressure. The other big story I think is going to be the movement of some of the oligarchs and big money people away from the Republicans where they were comfortably for a very short period of time and now looking for a moderate candidate. A moderate Democrat may, you know, it may end up being Newsom. But like in California, with Matt Mahan running the mayor of San Jose, there is really going to be pressure to disengage from Trump. I think Ken Griffin's comments on that were pretty powerful. So I think that the real issue, what we're going to start seeing is more and more business people beginning to look back at the Democratic Party, but trying to find a moderate voice.
- [48:10]
B
Well, Crick.
- [48:13]
F
Well, I think just to pick up on our last conversation, that Democrats are absolutely united across our ideological differences about ICE and the need to decontaminate and depoliticize it. So I think with this, this the shutdown threat that they will hold out and I think we'll see an end to mask paramilitaries roaming our streets and marauding in them and hopefully body cams and warrants coming. My second prediction is that Christina will not be long for this administration and will be put out to pasture or be taken off this beat, at least on overseeing mass deportation.
- [48:52]
B
Susan?
- [48:54]
A
Yeah, we wrote a great piece that and RealClear, if you want to check it out, about who might be her successors, sort of even hands with Glenn Youngkin, Lee Zeldin and Jason Chaffetz actually in in the running or trying to be at least positioning themselves. But I think next week, because I do agree with the strategically putting Tom Homan in and I think he was showing a steady hand this week, I don't think it was a good idea to capitulate in terms of reducing the number of ICE agents by 700 in Minnesota. I think because of that, you're going to just embolden these paid groups, protest groups to go out and clash with ICE even more because they won this round. And so I predict there will be even more clashes, even more funding of these groups next week. And in terms of the Super Bowl, I'll give my Patriots a good the win by at least one touchdown.
- [49:54]
B
All right, Ingrid, close it.
- [49:57]
D
Okay, so a little off topic, but something that's been on my mind a lot this week. I wrote a column about it. Just my heart's been really going out to Savannah Guthrie and with everything that's going on with her mom who seems to have been kidnapped, and it's been quite a few days now. And I just really hope that there's some resolution there for that family. Second, quick prediction. Since Kamala Harris relaunched her headquarters social media feed, she's already changed name once. I'm guessing she'll probably change it again and go Seahawks.
- [50:32]
B
Joel, Will, Susan, Ingrid, thank you all. And I can't speak to my family if I didn't say the Patriots will win as well. So thank you all for coming. And really, thanks for showing that, you know, a conversation where, you know, there isn't a difference of kind, it's of a difference of degree. And, I mean, this was, quite frankly, more light than heat, and I think that's what we need. Thank you all for coming. Look forward to seeing you soon.
- [51:02]
F
Thank you, David.
- [51:05]
B
See you all next week.
- [51:08]
C
Don't go anywhere. We'll be right back with more.
- [51:16]
A
This is an iHeart podcast.
- [51:19]
B
Guaranteed Human.