← The Charlie Kirk Show
Loading summary
Transcript35 lines
- [00:00]
A
Hey everybody. Richard Barris is on the Charlie Kirk show today. He is the best pollster. He's called the people's pundit daily. He's terrific. He got so much right while everyone else got so much wrong. We have a lot to learn from him about the death of polling, the Georgia Senate runoff, and also the state of election fraud in our country. Email us your questions. Freedomarliekirk.com please consider supporting us@charliekirk.com support and if you want to get involved with Turning Point USA, go to tpusa.com, tpusa.com and do me a favor, if you want to win a signed copy of the MAGA doctrine, all you have to do is show us you're subscribed to the Charlie Kirk Show. To get in the running, type in Charlie Kirk show to your podcast provider, hit subscribe, give us a five star review and email it to us at freedom charliekirk.com freedom charliekirk.com Richard Barris is here. Buckle up everybody. Here we go. Charlie, what you've done is incredible here. Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus.
- [00:55]
B
I want you to know we are
- [00:56]
A
lucky to have Charlie Kirk. Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks. I want to thank Charlie. He's an incredible guy. His spirit, his love of this country. He's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, Turning Point usa. We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives. And we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country. That's why we are here. Black Friday Cyber Monday 1 day only sale Wouldn't you just rather work with a company who puts you on a pedestal every day? That's what you get with peertalk, a veteran run wireless company who understands what it means to serve Verizon at&t& T Mobile. If you're with them, you're overpaying, pure and simple. Pure talk can easily save you over $400 a year. Listen, this is all you need. Unlimited Talk, text and 2 gigs of data for just 20 bucks a month. I wouldn't be putting my name behind this if I didn't know that these were veterans that love their country, unlike other people that are in the corporate space. I can tell you if you go over on data usage, they don't charge you for it. What a novelty. A company that actually puts their customers first. Switching to PeerTalk is the easiest decision you'll make today. You can keep your phone and your number or get great deals on the latest iPhones and androids. Grab your mobile phone, dial £250 and say Charlie Kirk. When you do, you'll save 50% off your first month. Dial £250 and just say Charlie Kirk. It's the password. Secret word. Charlie Kirk. Peertalk. Simply smarter Wireless. Hey, everybody. Welcome to this episode of the Charlie Kirk Show. Super thrilled to be joined today by someone that I really, really enjoyed. His tweets until they disappeared. Richard Barris is from the People's Pundit Daily, and I'll walk the audience through kind of how I became aware of him. But first, welcome to the Charlie Kirk Show.
- [02:48]
B
Hey, thanks, Charlie. Thanks for having me. It's good to be here.
- [02:50]
A
So I started to see your tweets as I was crisscrossing the country. We did 100 speeches at Turning Point Action in, like, 90 days in support of the president. And I started to realize that the public polling that was being published by all of these, you know, pseudo con men like Nate Silver and the Cook Political Report were so completely inconsistent with what I was seeing on the ground with even just some of the early voting numbers that were coming in, specifically in Florida. And so, as you well know, the early voting numbers in Florida were very favorable for Republicans, but almost none of that was being reflected in a lot of the mass news coverage. But you were one of the few people, alongside Larry Schweikart and others that really caught my attention. I was like, wow, there's this really cool kind of disaggregate, like, disaggregated, decentralized, grassrootsy data community that's actually doing the work that Nate Silver says he's doing. Introduce yourself to our audience. I want to walk through just all of this. We got lots of time, so please introduce yourself to our audience.
- [03:54]
B
Yeah, sure. I am the editor of People's Pundit Daily, but I'm the director of Big Data Poll. And People's Pundit Daily does have an election projection model. We put it to the side this year because we did the public polling project, which did, like you were saying, found very different results than what other people were finding. This happened to us in 2016 as well. And now I'm just at this point, Charlie, you know, 2016, you have a mess up. Okay, fine, you know, you could fix it. You can evolve. I had a different philosophy about polling than others. We're in a new era. We're in a different time. So you have to evolve with that time. So, you know, 2016, you can take it as a. As a hit and move on. As long as you try to grow. But. But in 2018 they missed again and a lot of people ignored it because the Democrats took the control of the House of Representatives, but they missed that the state level polling was horrible. So we went into 2020 again and thought we should do something different, more transparent. Unlike, you know, the work you'll see on those other websites. Very transparent people can get whatever they want. And we outperformed them again. And it's at the point now where there's just so much evidence they know what they're doing wrong. There's so much evidence. So you really have to be a cynic at this point.
- [05:06]
A
Yeah. So let's walk through that. Your projections were correct and at least you were covering data on the People's Pundit Daily and the Big Data Poll. That would at least add a little bit of nuance to the predominant narrative. And I have a screenshot of Nate Silver's website two weeks before the election. And it made me so angry cuz I knew it wasn't true. And he had one of these tweets that he retweeted where he's. I said, I'm so sick and tired of hearing people that say what it's like on the ground. I said, hold on a second. Have you left your five square radius of wherever you live in D.C. or New York, where you have to wear a mask from your knees to your forehead? Like, have you ever left there and talked to a regular human being in a place called Iowa, a far distant land? Or maybe even have you visited Florida recently? And the answer is probably no. And so again, I'm not a data guy. I can understand it, you know, well enough where I could look and cross tabs. I could see nonsense when I see it. Like the Quinnipiac poll where they just make stuff up, it's a complete act of fiction. They might as well be the modern day C.S. lewis in politics. They're just making stuff up. And I mean, they had something like Donald Trump down 19 points or 14 points in Michigan. And so can you walk through actually how wrong these people were? Larry Sabineau, the Cook Political Report, Nate Silver, and by the way, I let them with a free Pass in 2016. I was like, you know what, that's fine. A lot of people got it wrong. This time I'm going all in because I called them out on their nonsense a month before the election and they dug in, they doubled down. They're like, you're wrong, we're right. Gonna be a blue mirage. Senate's Already in the Democrats, they're polishing the brass on the Titanic and the Republicans tell us how wrong they actually were.
- [06:51]
B
Yeah. So it really is multiple levels of how incorrect they are. Right. So it's not just the headline numbers and you're talking about cross tabs before these guys at Cook, at even Larry Sabato and Nate, Nate Silver. These are glorified poll readers. That is what they are. They're just very, they're very good IT people. They have very good website design people and they have a very good PR team. Right. So they get very favorable media coverage. They have very cool looking websites, but they don't know what they're doing or what they're talking about. They are completely out of touch with the country and they're never going to get any better until the polls get better because they just read the polls and how wrong these polls were. It's really so much deeper than, you know, Biden plus here, Biden plus there. They didn't tell us that Biden was going to win because he was going to win huge unheard of vote. He was going to win vote totals in urban and metro areas that were unheard of before. Even in the era of Barack Obama. They said that Obama was going to win because Trump was losing parts of his base. Right. That was the narrative. There are 200 countries, 200 counties, a little bit more in this country that flip from Barack Obama to Donald Trump. What the polls were saying, the Nate Cohen's, the New York Times, they were saying those counties were going to flip back. But in 2020, that's not what happened. Juneau county did not flip back. Vigo County, Indiana, did not flip back. Woods County, Ohio, did not flip back back. All of the counties that Donald Trump flipped in this, in the eastern part and the northern part of Iowa, they went for Barack Obama twice and he flipped all of them in 2016. He held every single one in 2020. Macomb County, Michigan, did not flip. Greene County, Pennsylvania. I mean, I could go on and on. This is what their polling was telling us was going to happen. And it did not. It did not. So. So it's more than just they were wrong on the top line, Charlie. They were wrong all the way around.
- [08:49]
A
The Cook Political Report, which should be disbanded. I just saw them on television the other day and I thought to myself, it is incomprehensible to me that these people still get television time. And they're on, talking about the Georgia Senate runoff and I say, I feel like I'm living in the Twilight Zone or some form of the Bizarro world. There's no consequence whatsoever for these people being wrong. They get more airtime, they get more web traffic. The Cook Political Report, which really bothered me because they have such a smug way about them. And they go on certain television networks that I watch more than not. And I'll never forget, I wrote it down and they ended up saying this was their prediction. They had 27 what they called competitive House races. Republicans won all of them. All of them. I mean, and they said that. And then the Economist, which again is another far left wing hack job, said that Nancy Pelosi would get 244 seats in the House. I think that she'll get around 221 to 225. That's probably where she's gonna land. We don't know because we're still counting votes as we've entered the third world in our voting tabulation processes in our country. But so can you answer, is it the methodology of how they're doing polling or is it how they're analyzing the polling? That's where I'm, I can't unders, I can't quite square that.
- [10:13]
B
Yeah. So I'm pretty sure, you know, I think it's safe to say that I think they've always been overrated.
- [10:19]
A
Right.
- [10:19]
B
And they, it's not a coincidence that they have gotten less accurate the more inaccurate polling has become. And that is really what, what I, I, I have to stress to everybody, if any, if nothing else, if you try to get in the weeds with these guys and you know, I have to say, Larry at the Crystal Ball, he's at least, you know, been, been all right, but some of them are just not. If you're an outsider, though, I mean, you are not welcome in this game. And if you try to engage them with, hey, what about this? What about. And you try to go into the weeds, the minutia, they don't know what you're talking about. I'm, I'm thoroughly convinced at this point. I tried to explain to Nate Cohen why he would be wrong in Florida and why, you know, the, David Dave Washerman was touting that polling as why Joe Biden was going to win the state of Florida. And it was ludicrous. So we try to get into the minutiae. I tried to engage with him. Listen, this is what you did wrong in 16. You repeated that mistake in 18. They're just smug, they're arrogant. But I think they use that arrogance, Charlie, because they don't know what I'm saying so when I tried to explain to him about Republican subgroups, he had no idea what I was talking about. He tried to pivot to something about the census which is irrelevant to what is on a vote. The census is the entire population. But it dawned on me right then and there that it really, it's arrogance driven by ignorance. They don't know. So as long as the polls are wrong, they'll always be wrong. And that's, that's just the way it is.
- [11:45]
A
That's perfectly said. And it's refreshing to actually have someone that views this stuff, you know, scientifically and mathematically. And again, coming as a non data expert, I just knew what they were talking about was just full of nonsense. And yet they still get web traffic. And do they not realize how much weight there is behind these public polls? These are not predictions. This is something that they get wrong. These are actually contributions to voting patterns. These are contributions to people's behavior. This is not some person behind, you know, a curtain with some sort of crystal ball. That's what really bothers me about Larry Sabato. You call yourself the crystal ball. And he gets like everything wrong. He got the Senate wrong, he got Florida wrong, he got North Carolina wrong, he got Ohio wrong. And I believe that some of these states were stolen. And we'll talk about that too. But I mean, Larry, the Quinnipiac poll had Trump tied in Texas. It's just incomprehensible. So can you just add some light? Do they allow their own political ideology to seep into what should be a kind of politically agnostic exercise? Or is it that they want it, or they want it to be more competitive and so it's a nicer news story, so it's more click baity or they just didn't wanna give Trump the appearance that he was becoming a winner. What do you make of all that?
- [13:06]
B
Yeah, Quinnipiac too. Just before I roll into that, Quinnipiac is one of the most egregious examples and they're a repeat offender every year. They're among the worst. Biden plus four in Ohio. Charlie, you can't make that kind of mistake. We took Ohio off the table in September because it was Trump pl. It was over and it was a waste of money. So people don't change their opinions like that. So that's either incompetence or it's intentional. Right? There's no way to be this bad at your job, guys. If you're any other industry, if anyone else in what, what you think about what you do for a living, folks, if you were this bad at your job, would your boss can let you continue to work there? Of course not. Unless, of course, that's your job, right? So the Nate Silvers of the world, they bleed millions of dollars every year. He's not even profitable. So why is he around? Who wants him around? And this is the. These are the. We're going to have to start asking ourselves, because at this point, when you're any kind of data research, you cannot let group think just completely seep in and control everything. And that's what happened. Believe me, we tried to engage these people. When you do, you get smeared, you get attacked, and it's vicious. So there's no, there's no other explanation for that. If you're a true social scientist of any kind, you welcome dissent, you welcome people from the. They like the word consensus, right? When it comes to polling, you welcome people who don't see it the way the consensus is, because you're supposed to be like any other science. You're supposed to be challenging your own position, you're supposed to be challenging your own thoughts, and they have no room for that. So, you know, over the years, I've gotten more and more of, to be more and more of a cynic, and I really think it's. Now, it's probably all the above of what you listed, but there's no doubt that a lot of this comes down, it just comes down to ideology. They want it to be true, they're hoping for it to be true, they're trying to help it to become true.
- [14:54]
A
That's exactly right. And I also believe that these pollsters were also cowards because I don't think they actually wanted to publish any good news for Trump. And I am of the belief that if the President had at least some sequence of positive polling, it would have been a half point boost, especially in early voting. There were people that believed in October that Trump stood no chance whatsoever. And they didn't do that extra lift of activism. They didn't do that extra, you know, get out the vote effort. And I also believe that the polls were supposed to condition the landscape for the voter fraud that they were gonna then engage in. They wanted the polls to give them the COVID fire so that when, if they had to steal it over and above the top on the margins, all of a sudden there was previous social conditioning that would then show it. I mean, Ohio's a great example. While you were saying, I was curious how things ended up in Ohio. Trump won Ohio by About eight points. I mean that's a blowout. Ohio used to be a competitive state. Obama won Ohio twice. And I can never pronounce it correctly, nor do they actually deserve a correct pronunciation because they're all con artists. So quinnipiac or whatever, plus four, that's a 12 point error. How can you be that wrong? Like what is the tabulation that they're using? Are they just, are they just going to Democrat meetings and asking people who they're voting for?
- [16:18]
B
Yeah, I think, I suspect with that Quinnipiac poll and I can get into why they are always slanting to the left because it's their data collection mode that they favor in polling. But with that specific Quinnipiac poll the other day, I accused them of this and I, I'm telling you I want to see their data sets. I stand by it. Three days before they released a poll that was about 1100 likely voters. So they said their final poll was about 1400. I strongly suspect since the result was almost exactly the same. I strongly suspect Charlie, they just took the first D data set, collected a few hundred more responses, threw it on top of the initial data set and called it a different poll because the likelihood, the statistical likelihood of them coming up with the same margins basically all but one. The only difference was Biden was one one point less. The, the likelihood of that is basically nil is because you were that wrong. And the reason why they are is a big. They favor live caller in, in, in media and the university polls they fight favor live caller pol which to cell phones, to landlines. It doesn't really matter. Is going to skew more metro. I would say not just urban but metro. So when you're playing a Republican, you're gonna get the Bill Kristol kind of Republican, the Mitt Romney kind of Republican. And they don't represent the Republican Party. Working class, not just conservative, but working class people, more conservative people. Basically anybody outside of a metro area are far less likely to participate in those polls. That's why we are big believers in mixed mode. And there are every, every group of or different groups of people respond to different modes at different rates. And if you want to reach a representative sample, you've got to use different tools in your, in your box to reach different people. And they refuse to do that. Some of that's money, some of that status quo. It's the most extensive, expensive mode there is. But then also some of it is, it's a boys club and they've been doing it like that for years. They don't want to change. And they call it the gold standard. It is not. It's not even close.
- [18:22]
A
It's never too easy to start gift shopping for the holidays, especially because today you can save big on a gift they'll use every day. Raycon wireless earbuds with seamless Bluetooth pairing and a comfortable noise isolating fit. You can start listening right away and keep listening for hours. So this Christmas season, get them something that they can use for calls or music for work or play at home or on the go or pick up a pair yourself. Trust me, you're going to use them every day. Go to buyraycon.comkirk today to unlock exclusive deals up to 20% off your first Raycon order. But hurry, this offer is only available for a limited time today and you don't want to miss it. That's buyraycon.com Kirk buyraycon.com Kirk they're amazing wireless earbuds. Buyraycon.com Kirk so, Richard, I want you to walk through now the irregularities. And so you've been unafraid to talk about this. That's probably why you were banned from Twitter. And also we have a board here. Republicans won 27 out of 27 toss up races. Republicans flipped three state legislatures, flipped the governor's mansion, won Senate races that they thought were, you know, over with Thom Tillis being one of them and Susan Collins, which was one of the worst polling errors throughout this entire, you know, sequence of events. Can you talk about some of the mathematical anomalies that you saw in some of the key states?
- [19:50]
B
Right. And we are actually, and this is, this is what led to the suspension, I have no doubt on Twitter. But we saw like other people saw, you know, people going on Twitter and saying, hey, look, I have a dead voter here in the state of Michigan. And the reason why we decided to take this up, Charlie, is because like I said before, the polls didn't say Joe Biden was going to win because Milwaukee was going to have record turnout that is now approaching mandatory voting nation turnout levels. All right. Or Philadelphia. If you look around the country, there are certain areas where Joe Biden outperformed Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton among same demographics. In other areas, though non competitive areas. He did not. I know what their excuse will be for that. But the fact of the matter is this turnout is it's high. It's high to the point where more than historically high. And it's not something you could just easily attribute to population growth. Now, it may or may not be legitimate, but it's worth investigating. And we pulled because we have the resources, we started to pull voter files on. When you do, usually by default you'll exclude dead people, you'll exclude change of address flags. But that's actually the low hanging fruit when you're looking at whether or not there was election fraud. Right. So we pulled them instead and lo and behold, they're there. And I mean they're there by if you look at the Secretary of States in various battleground states and you look at some of these records, we can see these people submitted absentee ballots. And the point we're at now is them, them saying, well it doesn't necessarily mean they voted. The number is very large. And the, and looking at the rejection rate for absentee ballots, you know, well, by the time we're done, there's no doubt we're going to find records, lots of them that they simply cannot explain. And PolitiFact called, asked me if I could, they could see it. I said no. I said you'll see it when I'm done with it. Just like everybody else will see it when you're done. You know, it's an investigation we're conducting. You're going to wait just like everybody else. You're not special. Soon as I did that, about an hour later I was gone. And that. So they wanted to get that to run. What I think honestly is that they were going to take those records and run to the Secretary of State's and try to help them clean it up.
- [21:53]
A
And so can you talk about some of the other mathematical impossibilities that we've seen? The data dumps, the votes that have been switched, how there was a red wave in all but four cities. You view data, I mean, what are we looking at here? I've said that there is no way that they could come to some of these numbers without cheating. A great one that we have here is Dane County, Wisconsin. You know, Dane County University of Wisconsin Madison is mostly closed right now. It's one of the biggest voting centers. Typically if it's a usual fall, they'll have 45 to 50,000 students on campus. They are in a much reduced fashion. They're about 5 or 6,000 at most. And most of them are kind of commuter students. And yet Joe Biden got 260,000 votes in Dane County. Hillary got 217,000, Obama got 215,000. That county I think is a very interesting one to study because Biden overperformed even Obama and Hillary's numbers. With UW Madison being closed I'm from the Midwest. UW Madison is one of the most liberal, one of the most easy gotv, low hanging fruit for Democrats. How would something like that be possible?
- [23:05]
B
Yeah, so they're, they're gonna say, and this, I'm just giving you the devil's advocate version, but they're gonna say, well, we made it so easy for them to vote. And if you, you know, because of the work you do, I don't have to tell you, and I spent a lot of years and at UF and other places, you have to hold their hand and walk them to go vote. I mean this is an operation that takes time. And the idea that they got, you know, mailed out to them and they, it just doesn't make any sense. And then they're not presently there. But also it's a matter for me. I look at this from like a population growth standpoint. Philadelphia is another one. These are depressed areas right now. They're not, they're not booming. Atlanta is the one exception, no doubt. But if you look at Texas, which actually is not only comparable to Atlanta in growth, but exceeding it in their two largest metro areas, Trump still handily carried the state and the growth rate, the increase in the share of votes was substantial. But you could explain it. We're not talking about growth in places like this, folks. So they just expect that. What they want us all to believe is that Joe Biden got people to take time out of their day to vote for him. And it breaks basically, you know, every law that we have seen over the last maybe five or six decades of public polling, which is that if you have a candidate who is trailing with enthusiasm, then the other candidate is going to have a turnout advantage. All right, may not be enough, but in the end there is a turnout advantage, meaning they'll make up a larger share of the electorate than their party should as because of their actual base number. And then also whether you're voting for or against another candidate, you know, it's saying in 2016, love Trump's hate. But in politics it's really true. Mitt Romney could not use hatred of Barack Obama to get out enough people. Same thing goes for John Kerry. He could not use enough, he couldn't use hatred to get enough people to come out to beat George W. Bush. There are all of these historical anomalies. And going into this thing, polling was really the only so called predictive indicator that didn't point to a Trump reelection. Is very difficult to defeat an incumbent president, number one. Number two, the base always comes out in higher numbers to defend their president. And that happened again. And it just doesn't. Again, it doesn't make a lot of sense to me, which is why I thought it was worthwhile to look into some of this stuff, because Joe Biden is not an exciting candidate. There's. There was. And some of the things that we were told Friday going into Philadelphia, we got their total numbers for absentee ballots. On Tuesday morning, they gave us their updated number in total folks, Philadelphia told us they were going to have about 650,000 votes. That is what it pointed to. And that, you know, we looked at it and we said, yep, that's about the same as we saw with Hillary, about the same that we saw with Barack Obama. Not that big of an increase, which is what you should expect because there is no growth in population. And in the end, these ballots just kept trickling in.
- [26:05]
A
How many came in from Philadelphia in the end?
- [26:07]
B
Yeah, we're not done yet, Charlie. I mean, we're not done yet. I wish I could answer that question, but right now we're looking at, we're really, I mean, again, we're approaching mandatory voting turnout levels. If you look at just the people who are actually eligible to vote, which is what we do. And I would tell people that to understand. Just because you see how many people are registered to vote in an area does not mean that you could even expect that many people to come out because the state is always behind being. Being on the voter rolls is not the same thing as being eligible to vote. So if you look at a place and there's 8 million registered voters, there are going to be change of address flags on there. There are going to be deceased voters on there. So you never expect 1.1 or a million to come out in an area where there's 1.1 million registered voters. Now we're in the level in places like Philadelphia and Milwaukee, where it's just, it's a bit, it's unbelievable. I mean, they're just, you have to. That's the word. There's no other word for it, but unbelievable.
- [27:05]
A
Yeah. And you're not allowed to ask any questions. And if you do, you get, you know, you get called a terrible person. And even in Australia, we had an Australian pastor on our livestream, he said that 10% of people will say, like, screw you, I'll get fined. Even if there's mandatory voting. Even with mandatory voting, they can't get these numbers.
- [27:24]
B
That's exactly right. And we were actually using Australia to compare some of these precincts. It's a good baseline because you have a part of the, a sector of the population that's still, like your guest said, they'll just say, you know what? I don't care. Fine me. So that's a pretty good baseline considering how Americans are. Some Americans are just never gonna vote. That's sad. But that's just the way it is. And the idea that some of these precincts could be comparable to places like Australia, it's just nuts, guys. I mean, strange credulity. Come on, you're Joe Biden. Juice these voters and got them out when, when Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton could not. At least Hillary was the first woman, you know, first female presidential candidate. But it's more than that. He didn't have a get out the vote operation. I can't explain how important that is. Hillary Clinton had decades of relationships with these communities in places like Philadelphia, with the African American community. She had decades. She nurtured these relationships. She was a senator from a neighboring state. I mean it really, they're really asking us to swallow a whole lot of historical firsts. And it's, it's not going down with me. It's just not going down.
- [28:37]
A
This holiday season more people will be mailing stuff than ever before. That means the post office is going to be busy. You don't have time for that. Stamps.com brings the post office and now UPS shipping right to your computer. Mail and ship anything from the convenience of your home or office. With stamps.com anything you can do at the post office you can do in just a few clicks. Plus stamps.com saves you money with deep discounts that you can't even get at the post office. Stamps.com brings you the service of the US Postal Service and UPS right to your computer. Stamps.com is a must have for any business. Whether you're a small business office sending out invoices, an online seller fulfilling orders during this record setting holiday season, or even a giant warehouse sending thousands of packages a day. Stamps.com can handle it all with ease. With Stamps.com you get 5 cents off every first class stamp and 40% off priority mail and 62% off UPS shipping rates. Stamps.com is a no brainer, saving you time and money. It's no Wonder why over 900,000 small businesses already use stamps.com. we use stamps.com and you should too. Stamps.com is terrific. So don't spend a minute of your Christmas season at the post office this year. Sign up for stamps.com instead. There's no Risk with my promo code, Kirk, you get a special offer that includes a four week trial plus free postage and a digital scale. No long term commitments or contracts. Just go to stamps.com, click on the microphone at the top of the homepage and type in Kirk K I R K. That's stamps.com. enter Kirk stamps.com. never go to the post office again. The idea of the absentee ballot rejection rate, can you talk about that? In Georgia, typically 4% of all ballots get rejected in Georgia signature verification. I mean there's almost no ballots that got rejected. This time with more ballots than ever before.
- [30:25]
B
Right. So when we expand it the way we expanded it, you would think the rejection rates would go even higher. Of course. I mean, I don't know anybody who understands basic math who would disagree with that. Yet it's less than a quarter. Not just in Georgia, in a lot of these areas, less than a quarter. It just doesn't make sense. And if they didn't want people to ask these questions, then they should not have done what they did on election or the day after election day. They told us, they told everybody, we're done for the night, we're not counting anymore because the counting stopped in about six states, in about six metro areas. And we were calling like everybody else was calling, what is going on? What are you guys doing? And they told us, you know what, it's a skeleton crew over here shutting the lights off. We're going home. I knew that was not true though. I just knew it. I felt it, my bones. I knew there was something afoot, I really did. And about 4am they must have just drove around the block a couple of times, Charlie. I don't think they went home. They just drove around the block hoping the watchers went home and you know, some of the press would go home. And then they, they just rolled right back in at about 4am if you don't want scrutiny on you, if you don't want allegations, then you don't count votes. In the dead of the night, early morning hours, look the way they did. You just don't do it. That's not how first world nations operate.
- [31:42]
A
Just not so they say they're going home. And no one's ever asked this question, if you said you were going home, then how'd you drop all the votes at 3 o' clock in the morning? I thought you went home. It's a very simple question. I thought you called it a night and a skeleton crew. It is election night. You know, that's sort of like the Whole reason you exist.
- [32:02]
B
They said that to us too though, on, during the 2020 Democratic primary. They did the same thing. I just, we were talking about this the other day over here. They did this, it was interesting in the Rashida Tlaib race with the race out in Bucks county. They had, it was, you know, could be coincidence, but I don't believe in many coincidences, you know. And then basically they were, they told us that they were going to go home. Don't worry. It's a skeleton crew, but don't worry, still be able to count them in the morning really quick because we have these super fast tabulating machines. They're brand new. That is what we were. I'm not even kidding. That's what we were told by Wayne county. And we was 12am 1am and Wayne county almost had no votes for us. Very few votes. And the rest of Michigan was reporting the results timely. So it was, it was an issue then we tried to say something then, but, you know, hindsight's 20 20, I guess.
- [32:55]
A
Well, and Bernie Sanders probably had a lot of his state stolen from him under this sort of methodology because the power structure did not want Bernie Sanders to become the nominee. Instead it was. They were trying to usher in Joe Biden and all that. He. I don't know what he wants to do. So walk us through further. You got banned from Twitter for talking about something they didn't like. Did they give you an explanation?
- [33:17]
B
They did not. And they banned my Twitter account. They banned my wife's, who, I mean, really what she does is handle production for the show. And she, I mean she's, she's the back end technical side of People's Pundit Daily. They banned Big Data Poll, the firm. They banned PPD's Twitter account and myself. They gave no email, no explanation. The only one they did respond to, Charlie, was me after I went on Tucker because he had heard about what happened. They brought me on Tucker. About an hour later, I had an email and I was back. Big Data Poll just magically reappeared because probably because that's what we spoke about on the show and there was a backlash to it. But the rest of them, still off, no explanation, still suspended. They won't even respond at this point. So I mean, there was with mine, the one they did say was, well, you may be operating multiple Twitter accounts, but anybody who has a business knows you have your personal Twitter account, you have a business account and then you have a tweet deck or you know, a team and that's a Twitter's own feature. So everybody from the business that has, you know, officer status or access has access to social media's account for that business. So that was ridiculous. I mean they really are arbitrary in how they apply these rules. What happened, what really happened was that I decided to investigate election fraud and the minute I didn't give it up to have it discredited, they shot me. That's it.
- [34:45]
A
Yeah. And that's what they do. They will come after anyone that they dare seem to be some form of a threat and will digitally assassinate you. So we have hopefully a moment here where people can not trust the pollsters again and actually go and seek factual reason based kind of analysis and hopefully information your website is doing that tell us about some of your ambitions to actually fill the void. Cuz there's 73 million people out there minimum and probably a lot of Democrats too that will never trust the pollsters again.
- [35:24]
B
Yes, I really think, and this is speaking as somebody who has polled for media outlets before, I polled for the Epoch Times, you know. But that was a very different relationship. I'm really coming to the point now where this has to be kind of consumer driven, I think Charlie, I really do. When I, when we ran the public polling project on Big Data poll, it was viewers of the podcast, they told me what states they wanted polled. We would basically poll them. Hey, which one you want next? The winner would, would, would get polled and then we'd go down the list. It really has to be something totally different. And what we were trying to show people was not just better results or more accurate results. We were trying to show them how much they hide from them. Right. So it shouldn't be good anymore to see a headline candidate A plus three because we said so that really has to be over. We have to demand more from pollsters because there's so much that they do keep from you guys. And we wanted to show everybody that that was the whole point of that. Look at what I can show you that you're not getting from CNN's poll. Look at what I could show you that you're not getting from, you know, pollster A, pollster B. Those are I guess our aspirations moving forward. There is a better way to do this. And it takes out the pressure. Takes it. I'm sure they do feel pressure. I'm sure they do. But that's not their job to cave to pressure because their media outlet and their client wants some form of result. Their job is to. It's basically a public service job. You know, in Europe they don't have the same issues we have. And I'm trying to figure out a way forward where, you know, we could make this, we can return this to being a public service. And that's the way to do it. So the consumer has to demand more and there has to be options out there where, where they can get that transparency. And that's what we're trying to do.
- [37:11]
A
So we have about a minute and a half remaining, you know, polling, you know, data, you know, this tell us what's going on in the Georgia Senate runoffs.
- [37:19]
B
So this is going to be close and we are probably going to release publicly a poll in Georgia. Loeffler is not as strong as Purdue. There's no doubt about it. Talking about, naturally, Purdue has a good name. He's looked on pretty favorably. But in the end, it's not just who votes, but who counts these votes, folks. And I would tell everybody who's mad at what they're seeing right now, you know, I told them everybody before, get involved, be a poll watcher. But in the mid, even short to long term, you need to get more involved as on an official level, because there are a lot of these ballots already being sent out. Again, Stacey Abrams essentially hijacked the process over there and they're allowing it. So the governor of Georgia, the secretary of state, two Republicans, they're allowing this. And in Georgia, voters are treated differently as far as verification procedures. When you have a person who votes on election day in person or if you have somebody who votes by mail, the process is very, you're asking for fraud in the mail in process. And then it's. So I would tell, you know, Republicans, they better take this very seriously because you could lose one or both seats if you sleep on this thing. It's January 5th and people are not going. It's going to be right after the holidays. That is already not a favorable time for conservatives to have a big turnout. You got to keep your eye on the ball here because they, they, they have their template. They know how to move forward and they're pressing forward.
- [38:44]
A
Yeah, the message has to be avenge the steal. And then they would win both those races. We'll see if they embrace that or some consultant gets in the way. All right, thank you so much, my friend. We'll have you back on your terrific big data poll. Peoplespundantdaily.com, you actually tell the truth, which is so rare. You have a big career. By the next election cycle, I expect you to be bigger than Nate Silver. I'm gonna hold you to that, and I'm going to help any way I can so these con men can get off the airways. Thanks so much my friend. See you soon. Thanks so much for listening, everybody. If you want to email us your questions, you can always do that@freedomcharlicirk.com if you want to get involved with Turning Point USA, it's tpusa.com and please consider supporting us@charliekirk.com support big updates coming this week, so make sure you're subscribed to the Charlie Kirk Show. Type in Charlie Kirk show to your podcast provider and hit subscribe. Thanks so much everybody. God bless.