Loading summary
Transcript25 lines
- [00:00]
David Pakman
Something very strange happens psychologically at Trump rallies. And once you notice it, you'll use a different framework to think about what it is you see going on behind Trump. We're going to look at the people behind Trump during the speeches and why the rallies look like cult rituals. Also today, the infamous Democratic autopsy of the 2024 election has leaked. And. And it is a very weird political document. There's contradictions, blame, games. And they also are pointing the finger at Biden, but have also disavowed the report. It's wild. And we're going to look at it. Plus, the President Trump delivers one bizarre moment after another, falling asleep, of course, contradicting himself about Iran, talking about skipping his son's wedding. It's weird. And we will look at new polling data that, if you are an observer of elections in the United States, should make you very worried about the economic situation if you are trying to get reelected in November. And later, every time Trump goes overseas, somehow the United States ends up looking weaker, more performative, more easily manipulated. I will tell you why and what's happening all of that and more today. Have you ever noticed that when Donald Trump gives these speeches at rallies to maga, something is weird about the audience, especially the people that you see behind Donald Trump? Now, I know you might be saying it's all weird, like the whole wanting to be there is weird at all, and you're right. But I want to dig into something else about what happens at these rallies when Donald Trump speaks to what are really his most loyal followers. And I know some of you have noticed it because you've written to me about it. Trump rallies are more like what are known as cult reinforcement rituals. And to explain what I mean, I'm going to strip out a whole bunch of stuff that the rallies are not. The rally is not a policy event where the main purpose is to convince people that Trump's policy ideas are really good. They are also not speeches about Trump's fundamental political philosophy, libertarianism versus authoritarianism, and all in the. In their primary sense, that's not what these events are about. The average Trump rally is primarily a form of emotional immersion, and the content is essentially irrelevant. Now, I say essentially because it's not completely irrelevant and still serves an instrumental purpose. But what I mean by that is whether Trump talks about putting people in jail and locking them up, or about trans sports or beat up the protesters, treat them a little rough, or about Obama being bad, the content doesn't really make a difference to the average Trump supporter. Trump can sort of Skip and jump between sharks and water pressure and toilets and that sort of stuff. And it's all just kind of there for the crowd. They're not there for the information is the point that I'm making. They're there in a cult ritual to reinforce their identity. When you look at how cults and what we might call high control groups operate psychologically, this is a really big part of it. Sophistication of arguments is kind of pointless. You're just wasting effort if you're trying to deliver a sophisticated argument. What you need to deliver is repetition. And Trump does that. And you ideally would do it in a setting isolated from outside criticism, with enemies to scapegoat, to get everybody synchronized emotionally. Now, then you look at how the Trump rally is structured. The crowds wait for hours together, often longer than they even expect because Trump is hours late. That this is how little Trump respects his followers. He will often be hours late to his own rallies. And even if he's not late, people show up early. They often stand out there in direct sun, the horrible porta potties, the horrible food, music blasting, crappy merchandise, much of it made in China, for sale everywhere. Sometimes people will start chanting, sometimes they'll do the Pledge of Allegiance, apropos of nothing. And if you're an outsider or a protester or a nonbeliever in the movement or just a member of the media asking questions of people, you're mocked, you're intimidated. Sometimes you're even sort of like pushed out of the place. And the dear leader, who will eventually arrive on his own plane, often very late, making everybody wait, is presented as the solution to all of your problems. This is a cult. It's not politics in a strict, traditional sense. It is a cult. It has all of the features and dynamics of a cult. This is what explains why when Trump says bizarre or incoherent stuff, the crowd doesn't really care. Like, you might find one person who's like, looking around like, this guy seems to be off his mads or demented. But for the most part, the crowd goes on, goes along with whatever Donald Trump says. The crowd merges with Trump like cult members merge with their leader. So if you criticize Trump, you're criticizing the followers, and that is why they so fervently defend Donald Trump. If you compare this to a healthy political movement, the leader follows the audience. In a cult like movement, the audience just follows the emotional cues of the leader. And that's what you see at your average Trump rally. I encourage you check out videos of the people standing behind Trump at these rallies, and they sometimes look emotionally overwhelmed, they're sometimes brought to tears, sometimes they look kind of dazed, sometimes they look bored and they're struggling to stay awake. All of those kinds of reactions are constructed from the event, creating a collective emotional atmosphere where evaluating the substance of what Trump says on its merits is gone. And it's a tribal participation, fundamentally. Now, this doesn't mean every single attendee is a cult member. The structure of the rallies is increasingly resembling the social psychology that we see in cult dynamics. There's constant grievance, like, look at all the boxes, the cult boxes that the Trump rally checks. Constant grievance, Absolutely. Constant creation of scapegoats and enemies. Of course. Constant loyalty testing. Will you cheer for whatever Trump demands? An applause line for constant repetition, constant affirmation that this is the only group that has the truth and you have it because Trump is spoon feeding it to you? Absolutely. And this is why it is so difficult to get people out. So the point of this segment is not, look at the, look at these dumb people. A lot of the people, I actually aren't dumb, but they are predisposed, either for economic, situational or emotional reasons, to accept Trump as the leader and as the person who can solve all of their problems when Trump is gone. There is a real question about what happens. And on yesterday's show, we talked about Trump being presented from this thing that Gavin Newsom said, where Newsom said, I don't think J.D. vance has what it takes to do what Trump has done. And Trump was kind of unsure about how to even react to that because he recognized that Newsom is kind of placing him above Vance in a way, but there is a certain truth to it. I don't think J.D. vance has the charisma to inculcate people in what is effectively a cult the way Donald Trump has done so. Cult dynamics, major factor at play in the average Trump rally, but will play a big role and how it is dealt with will play a big role and what ultimately happens after Donald Trump is gone. The infamous and explosive DNC autopsy of the major losses of 2024 has leaked. It's leaking like a faucet and it is wild. The document is completely self contradictory. It is chaotic. There are editorial notes saying there's actually no evidence for this. There's no evidence for that. There's sections marked pending. But if we kind of read between the lines and look through this entire autopsy document which we're linking to in the description to this YouTube video, you see A lot of brutal admissions that Democrats don't like to make publicly. We're going to look at them. If you appreciate and like insight into what Dems are doing and what they are doing wrong, make sure to like this video. Make sure to subscribe. On the Watch page. We see the data and we see what stories people are interested in. And if this sort of analysis is interesting to you, make sure you've subscribed and like and we will know that and we will do more of it. The major takeaways from the autopsy, which, remember the autopsy was not done by the dnc and the DNC is disputing that they agree with some of these takeaways, but this is what is in the autopsy. Number one, Democrats acknowledge or the autopsy acknowledges that Trump is bad wasn't a compelling enough message to win. And the report says Kamala Harris failed to make an affirmative case for herself. Agree completely. The campaign relied too heavily on voters rejecting Trump. Agree completely. Trump is dangerous was not enough of a motivator to get people out to vote for Kamala Harris. Agree completely. And the report calls it a major failure to assume that Trump's negatives were already baked in. I agree with all of section one here. No doubt about it. It was not enough to do the Trump bad stuff. And we talked about that during the campaign, which means this was knowable beforehand. Basically the admission that fear alone is not enough of a strategy to get people to come out and vote for somebody else. Number two, the report does blame Joe Biden and it does it sort of subtly in some of the ways. It says, you know, Harris didn't separate herself enough from Biden. That's only a problem if being aligned with Biden is bad. So it is implicitly a criticism of Joe Biden. And I think that that is accurate. It finds that voters associated Kamala Harris with the affordability problems of the status quo. 100% talked about it as the campaign was going on. Number three, the report says the Biden White House failed to properly position Kamala Harris for leadership. I agree, although I don't think that was. That was the major problem. And fourth, under this section, the report criticizes Kamala Harris for. It criticizes Biden really for having made Kamala Harris the face of immigration, which was a weak issue for Democrats and in a sense unfair, I would argue, because she really wasn't the face of immigration. Okay, so that is. This is the closest that anything has come to just blaming Biden and saying Biden damaged the ticket. Third big section, Democrats admit that the culture war attacks of the MAGA right worked accurate. The report says the whole Kamala is for they them that add was very effective and it was Pollsters believe the campaign was essentially trapped because she couldn't effectively respond to the video because it used her own words. She either would have had to disagree with something she said or try to restructure it all in a way that could seem flip floppy. It was a big problem for Kamala Harris that that is section three on culture war stuff. Section four Democrats have been losing men and the report highlights the collapse among male voters. We've studied that extensively at this point young men, non college educated men 100% it says down ballot Democrats who focused on jobs and affordability and safety did better and that that is a sign that this was a problem. And it argues that Democrats can't survive in if you lose working class men 100%. This really connects to the economic of the missing economic components of the campaign. And finally the document the autopsy argues that the party seems kind of lost. The report blames Biden, Harris, messaging consultants, organizing identity politics, abandoning rural voters, the anti Trump strategy not being enough. That is that's a laundry list of problems. That's that's that if you believe that then you have a party that is lost. That is how they could be wrong or failing to connect on so many issues. But even the report is filled with contradictions and fact check notes like the report says a whole bunch of stuff. And then there are notes from the DNC that are like this isn't quite right and this isn't quite right. This is this is asserted but not founded. So when I look at the report, on the one hand it makes a bunch of admissions that Democrats haven't really made publicly. But number two, the report is also a mess. It is simultaneously true that the report is damning because of what it accurately describes about Democratic failures. And the report is also damning because it is a contradictory mess that I see why the DNC didn't want to immediately release this thing. So I am I came away sort of flabbergasted from the report in that it doesn't read like a party that knows how to recover at this point in time. And to be perfectly frank, you all have emailed me about that after every interview I have with major Democrat, most major Democratic figures. This doesn't happen when I interview Gavin Newsom. It doesn't happen when I interview like Jake Auchincloss. When I interviewed Jimmy Gomez I didn't get this. But with A lot of the Democrats I interview, what I immediately get from you all is, David, they don't seem to even have diagnosed the problem correctly yet. They certainly don't sound like they are going in the right direction. So fascinating, fascinating report. It leaked. We have it, we saw it. I want to hear from you. Do you think it is accurately identifying the problems for the Democratic Party? Is Donald Trump a worse father or a worse president? His behavior at his recent Oval Office press event is raising serious questions and left reporters visibly stunned. Donald Trump, moments apart, says, we have total control of the Strait of Hormuz. Two, we want the Strait of Hormuz open. But if you have total control, why don't you open it? This is the same reason. We are almost in week 13 of a three week war. They don't know what the hell is going on.
- [15:44]
Donald Trump
We have total control of the Strait of Hormuz. As you know, with our blockade, the blockade has been 100% effective. Nobody's been able to get.
- [15:52]
David Pakman
How do you want things to end
- [15:53]
Donald Trump
up with the Strait of Hormuz?
- [15:55]
David Pakman
Would you like them to?
- [15:55]
Donald Trump
Oh, we want it open. We want it free. We don't want tolls. It's international. It's an international waterway.
- [16:02]
David Pakman
And that we won the war on day one and we are almost in week 13 of the war. We have complete and total control of the Strait of Hormuz. Yeah, but what do you want? We would like it to be open. But don't you completely control it? Well, yes, but we want it closed. They closed it and we closed it on top of them, as Trump said. But they opened it and we want it open. And then we demanded after they opened it that they reopen it and open it again. It is the combination of a brain filled with mayonnaise and, and a war that he probably can't win. That's the reality of what's going on here. Donald Trump asked, are you going to your own son's wedding? And Trump goes, I'm pretty busy and I've known him a long time. Hmm. Trump might skip his son's wedding. Interesting.
- [17:02]
Donald Trump
He'd like me to go, but it's going to be just a small little private affair and I'm going to try and make it. I'm in the midst. I said, you know, this is not good timing for me. I have a thing called Iran and other things. That's one I can't win on. If I do attend, I get killed. If I don't attend, I get killed by the fake news. Of course, I'M talking about?
- [17:24]
David Pakman
No, but, you know, I don't think if Trump just went to his son's wedding, it would be the same thing as if he's golfing through a war economic crisis. I just don't really think it would be that big of a deal. Of course, who wouldn't expect him to go to his son's wedding?
- [17:37]
Donald Trump
He's got a very person I've known for a long time and hopefully they're going to have a great marriage.
- [17:45]
David Pakman
Is he saying that he's known his son a long time or is he saying that his son has got a person, meaning his soon to be wife, who he has known a long time? I don't know. Now, in Trump's defense, he may already have reason to suspect that this, this marriage is not going to last very long. He's like, this is good. I'll go to the next one. Not this one, I don't really need to go to. But seriously, who talks about their kid like this or their kid's wedding like this? Now, as is par for the course, for lack of a better term, not a golf joke at this point in time, Donald Trump did appear to fall asleep during this event. I don't know at what point Trump, being president, becomes elder abuse who wanted to be able to fix their equipment and they were instead being required to buy far more costly, obviously new equipment.
- [18:38]
Donald Trump
And that just doesn't make any sense.
- [18:40]
David Pakman
After waking up, Donald Trump, I believe, admitted what the ballroom is really about. Trump sounds like he's describing a bunker. A bunker that I don't know if you build, if you think you're not going to get personal use out of it. But that's another story, including, as an
- [18:59]
Donald Trump
example, a drone port, on top of which was top secret until litigation made it less than top secret. But we have a drone port. We had, we have also, we have the glass that's 4 inches thick, bulletproof glass. We have bulletproof walls. We have. You need a place like this. But this is being made as a gift from me and other people that are great patriots, that spend a lot of money. We're building what will be the finest ballroom anywhere in the world.
- [19:27]
David Pakman
You know, I saw some, I'm embarrassed to say this, I saw someone I personally know on my Facebook today post that he thinks the country really needs the ballroom. And you all know my policy, I don't get involved in the Facebook bullshit. So I didn't respond, but I was inclined to say, why? Why does the United States need a ballroom? But of what purpose? Whatsoever would that be? And finally, Donald Trump asked, you know, affordability is a problem. Are you worried about this with the midterms? Because there is a lot of backlash happening. And Trump goes, I don't really know, Mr. President.
- [20:10]
Donald Trump
With many Americans concerned about affordability ahead of the midterms, there is some backlash among Senate Republicans to some of the other priorities, the ballroom and anti weaponization fund. You clearly still have a stronghold in the Republican Party. You candidates did very well this week during the primaries.
- [20:27]
David Pakman
But are you using control?
- [20:28]
Donald Trump
My Senate said, well, not all candidates, but are you losing control of the Senate, sir? Are you losing control of the Senate, Senate Republican? I don't know.
- [20:37]
David Pakman
I really don't know.
- [20:38]
Donald Trump
I can tell you I only do what's right. I don't need money for the ball. You know, I'm making a gift of
- [20:44]
David Pakman
the he's so principled. He will always do what is right, won't he? He? If you believe that, I've got a bridge to sell you. A lot of men's clothing forces the same bad tradeoff. If the material feels good and the fit is decent, the price is ridiculous. If the price is reasonable, the quality is usually not there. Our sponsor Quince has that solved. Quince makes high quality wardrobe staples. They use premium materials. They don't mark them up like the luxury brands. Already a good start. They've got lightweight European linen shirts and shorts, soft 100% Pima cotton tees. They've got comfortable pants. The whole concept is simple, versatile clothing you can wear every day. I got a bunch of their basic Pima cotton tees. They're phenomenal. I can layer them. I can wear them by themselves. They look good. They don't degrade when you wash them. Plus, Quince works directly with ethical factories. They cut out the middlemen. This lets them offer the same materials you'd find with expensive brands, but for 50 to 80% less. So refresh your everyday wardrobe with luxury you will use. Go to quince.com/pacman for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns now available in Canada. Also, that's Q U I n c e.com/pacman for free shipping and 365 day returns. The link is in the description. Some people assume focus is just about willpower. But if you've sat down to work and you're checking your phone, switching tabs in your browser, getting pulled into distraction, you you know it's not that simple. I want to tell you about our sponsor, Brain fm. Brain FM is a music app designed to support focus. It's not the random playlists or ambient videos that people often will put on. It's music built from the ground up for cognitive performance. Brain.fm works with musicians and neuroscientists to create music that will interact with your brain's natural rhythms. Their patented audio technology is designed to influence brain activity related to attention. This is why Brain FM is the only music app funded by the National Science Foundation. The app includes a number of modes depending on what you're doing. Deep work, creative motivation. There's a dedicated ADHD mode for people whose brains may benefit from extra support. There's also been peer reviewed research published showing that their music increased activity in attentional networks and also improved performance on attention based tasks. Try it yourself with 30 days free at Brain FM. Pacman the link is in the description thank you, thank you, thank you to everyone. 3 days ago I said hey listen, this is what's happening on YouTube. Left media on YouTube is being deprioritized algorithmically and 13,000 of you over the last three days, maybe 14,000 showed up and subscribed on my YouTube channel and I have incredible news. It's incredible. It's not confirmed yet, but our YouTube rep reached out and said hey, our product team would like to meet with you and talk about what's going on. And I said I would love to do that and I will let you know if that happens. But for now let's keep it going. Make sure you're subscribed on YouTube. We're pushing towards 4 million subscribers and I have only all of you to thank. I want to take a look at a devastating piece of news. If you want status quo of Republican control maintained after November, if you want a change, then it's a good piece of news. But if you want to have more of the same, it's a bad piece of news. There is a brutal new poll from Quinnipiac. We're linking to it in the description to this YouTube video and I believe that there are a lot of scary pieces of news here. For Republicans the top line is scary. That's 33% approval. For Donald Trump, that's very bad. Historically you don't get good election outcomes when the head of the party and the president is at 33% approval, 64% disapproval. And what is incredible is that that is the approval and disapproval of Trump on the economy. This is normally the best issue for Republicans and this is the worst economic approval number that Trump has ever received. Both presidencies, the economy was the issue, the superpower of Trump to fix the economy and fix trade. Even if you don't like the way I post to Truth Social, he would say, I'm good on the economy. The supporters said he's good on the economy. You got to give him credit. And he is now 30 plus points underwater on his best issue. That is a devastation politically. When you lose the economy, it's very hard to get anything back. And you can see it throughout the poll. Overall, 34 approve, 58 disapprove. Foreign policy. 35 approved, 60 disapprove. Iran. 3,361. Trade. 3,659. Immigration, supposedly the big strong issue for Trump. 40 approve, 57 disapprove. These are horrid numbers for Donald Trump. But I believe that we put everything aside for now and we just look at the economic issues, and these are devastating. The poll is basically a picture of a financially exhausted country. 54% of Americans say we're dining out less because of the economic situation. Almost 50% say we're spending less on entertainment. Almost 50% say we've cut vacations. 43% have cut groceries. Food. This is not, oh, I'm doing fewer private jet flights. I'm not buying as many expensive ATVs and mopeds and motorcycles, Vespas. This is groceries, folks. And the gas numbers are brutal. A majority of Americans blame Trump for rising gas prices. It's sort of like an IQ test, right? It should be 100%. The reason we're paying more is Trump's war in Iran. It's not Biden or Obama or global markets. It's Trump's optional war with Iran. Meanwhile, half the country says that they can now easily afford gas. Major change from just a few months ago. So I believe this is the key political problem for Trump and Republicans heading into the election. And we learned from the Biden era that people experience the economy emotionally. You can put a big sign that says GDP is X, Y, Z in front of people and they'll go, I was just at the supermarket. I know what it felt like to be there. And it doesn't matter how many times you say it's the best economy ever, people don't know that it's not. You go to buy groceries, you get anxious. You fill up your tank, you get anxious. And that is damaging politically in a way that is exacerbated during typically lower turnout midterms, because the most angry voters about what's going on, the most disappointed voters have a disproportionately larger impact when the turnout overall is lower. And that's what Republicans are up against in November. A couple other data points, 68% of Americans believe Trump is not focused enough on the problems the average person is facing. Yes, that should be 100% of Americans, but it's 68. But if you're an incumbent president, it's still a very, very bad number. Now the, I don't know if this is the terrifying part for Republicans or for Democrats. Democrats are polling terribly. Congressional Democrats have some of the worst approval ratings also that they've ever had. But despite that, Democrats are expected to take control of the House over Republicans by 11 points right now. That is not proof that people love Democrats. And in fact, to the extent my audience is sort of representative of the people in the Democratic Party electorate, you don't seem to like most of the Democrats I'm interviewing on the show. And yet on a congressional generic congressional ballot, it's Democrats plus 11 over Republicans. It is pure, unrestrained, unfettered, anti Trump sentiment. And what we have right now is a country that is saying we are stressed to the limit financially, we're charging more and more to our credit cards and falling behind. Everything feels expensive. We go to the grocery store and spend more than we think we were going to. We get a flat tire, we spend more, we are cutting back. Cutting back means demand side stimulus goes down, which self perpetuates into an even worse economic situation. If over the next few months those feelings harden and, and fossilize, calcify, we could be seeing an utter disaster for Republicans in November. But as I like to say, only if we go out and actually vote. And so I plan to vote. I hope that you plan to vote because I, you know, what's that term, German word for taking pleasure at the misfortune of others? Ah, schadenfreude. I sometimes feel guilty taking pleasure at the misfortune of others. And then I catch myself and I go, david, you're better than that. And then I pat myself on the back for just how much better than it I am. But when it comes to imagining on my vision board, on my voodoo doll, a, an abject failure and decimation of Republicans in November, I feel good about feeling good about that and you should too, because these are terrible people. It's to a degree becoming a little bit embarrassing to be an American right now. And I don't take pleasure in saying that every time Trump goes abroad, every time there's a big diplomatic opportunity, a meeting, an event, the administration humiliates itself and earlier this week, we talked specifically about Donald Trump's humiliation in China and just how unbelievably pathetic the entire thing actually was. Trump came back with nothing other than his tail between his legs, thanks to President Xi. He had the ceremonies. You know, there were dinners, there were Chinese kids clapping and singing for Donald Trump. They had the pomp and they had the circumstance, but Trump got nothing but humiliation. And that's the theme of all of these international trips. Russia, North Korea, meetings with. I'm talking about here, meeting with Putin, meeting with Kim Jong Un, the Iran negotiations, which Donald Trump is not personally involved in, but his designees are. You don't get any breakthroughs, you don't get any agreements. They, the US doesn't appear to have any leverage. Certainly no resolutions, no problems are fixed. And that is becoming the defining pattern of Trump's foreign policy, which is, is it cuckoldry? Many of you wrote to me and said that it's an appropriate term right now. Trump makes this big show of how he's going to show up and win big because everyone's so scared of him and respects him so much. Authoritarians and dictators flatter Trump and Trump thinks that that means they respect him, but they don't respect him in reality. They're manipulating him. Trump gets nothing and thinks he won. Trump is a type. He wants to be liked. He's desperate to be liked. He wants to be revered, or at least appear to be revered. So what authoritarians have done, and it's pretty slick, they have figured out, how do we deal with a guy like Trump, specifically a guy who needs to be liked. They flatter him. They do the ceremonies, they do the red carpet, dramatic visuals and praise and meetings that look very reverential to Donald Trump. But Trump then comes out thinking he transformed the global order. And remember after the first North Korea summit where he was convinced that he got so much out of Kim Jong Un because nobody said to him, sir, they've been making these promises for decades. They don't do it. It's not special. You're not special. Because they promise this stuff. It's the same crap they've. Other people would know. They promised this stuff all the time. You didn't. But nobody says that to him. And meanwhile, you look at the post China situation, post post China meeting situation. They keep expanding their influence economically, they keep expanding their influence militarily, technologically, diplomatically. And Trump comes home posting victory laps that don't exist to truth social every single time. It happens the same way. Now Putin does the same thing, but he does it a little bit differently. Putin gives Trump just enough attention and kind of vague optimism to keep Trump emotionally invested while Putin continues doing the exact same thing he was already doing. He makes Trump think, oh, you're convincing me. I might modify my behavior. And that's how Putin manages Trump. A little bit of flattery, little bit of distraction, feed the ego, feed it some well done steaks with ketchup. And then Trump kind of looks the other way and Putin keeps doing what he wants to do. And that way they buy themselves time, they avoid consequences and just get away with it. One of the best ways to deal with bullies is to make them believe that they have won or make them think they convinced you. You know the, the famous book by Dale Carnegie, how to Win Friends and Influence People. One of the principles in it, I think, although maybe this is like from 7 Habits of Highly Effective People by Stephen Covey, or maybe it's the Robert Cialdini book about influence. It's been decades since I read any of these books, but one of them I think it was Dale Carnegie would talk about. One of the best ways to get people to do what you want is make them think it was their idea. And they, that is something that these authoritarians have marked Trump as. This works. Make Trump. Make Trump think he convinced you to do what you already want to do. And Trump is not able to distinguish between they respect me and they figured out a way to manipulate me. And that's why it is so effective. Serious world leaders who are self assured and confident and competent, even if I disagree with their politics. They're not impressed because of a fancy dinner. They're not impressed because someone did a parade for them or they got a nice compliment from Xi Jinping. They care about. What leverage do I have? What are the outcomes? What change can I achieve that's good for my country? Trump cares about optics, where the tanks really big. Did I look big and strong next to Xi and I talked earlier this week about the United States increasingly being a performative superpower. I'm going to delve into that more deeply in the next segment. We still have this huge military. We have that. That's real. We've got the aircraft carriers, we've got the threats, we've got the slogans, we've got, I guess, dramatic speeches, although they're increasingly incoherent when it's Trump delivering them. But it feels just kind of performative. We're getting played because Trump is getting played day after day after day. And so where we're going to pick it up after the break is, yes, the United States is nominally still a superpower, of course, but is it optically a superpower or really a superpower? And I think increasingly under Trump, it is merely optics. Let me know what you think. Leave a Comment Send an email info@david pakman.com and we're going to do a much deeper debrief of this concept on my Substack newsletter. It's free. I've got nothing to sell you but a good time. Go to David pakman.com/substack and get my deeper dives in writing. It's tap tap. You know, we sit at the computer tapping. It's written rather than audio visual deeper dives on a lot of the show's topics. David pakman.com/substack Identity theft and targeted scams often start long before the breach, when bits of your personal life addresses, emails, relatives, your work history are scattered around the Internet on these data broker sites and that information is sold or reused. Our sponsor, Incogni, will get that stuff removed for you. Not from just a single type of website. They will work to take down your personal information wherever it shows up online, shrinking the pool of info that bad actors rely on. Incogni automatically handles removals from hundreds of known sites, but their unlimited plan goes even further with custom removals where, if you find your info anywhere, paste the link to Incogni and they will get to work removing that for you. This matters because a single overlooked listing can be enough for a scammer to impersonate you or even open accounts in your name. Incogni's data removal process is independently verified by Deloitte, which adds a layer of trust. You can get 60% off when you go to incogni.com pacman and use the code Pacman. The link is in the description. Most sweet snacks are either satisfying or sensible. Our sponsor, Magic Spoon, is both. Magic Spoon treats are crispy, airy snack bars with 12 grams of protein, 7 grams of fiber, 0 grams of added sugar and 2 to 3 grams of net carbs. They come in great flavors like marshmallow, chocolate, peach, peanut butter and double chocolate. My favorite. A perfect sweet, light snack I can throw in the bag and take on the go. They remind me of cereal bars. Same texture and flavor, but without the carbs and without the sugar. Magic Spoon is easy to find. Just look for Magic Spoon at your local grocery store. They also rolled out treats nationwide at 7:11. And if you haven't tried them yet. Check out Magic Spoons new protein pastries. High protein, low sugar takes on the classic toaster pastries I grew up with. You can get $5 off your next order, including the protein pastries@magic spoon.com/pacman. The link is in the description. I want to suggest to you today that the United States might be increasingly a fake superpower or a performative superpower, and that there is a decline going on in the real power of the United States. Now, let me kind of frame it, and then I'll give you my conclusions, and then I want to hear from you as to whether maybe I'm on to something, maybe I'm crazy and I'm wrong. Trump goes overseas to China on this recent trip. The whole point is we got to project strength, American strength. We dominate. We have leverage. We are the superpower. Everybody's afraid, everybody's going to fall in line. So he gets to China. First of all, there's no breakthrough that's good for the United States. That's for sure. We get zero concessions from Chinese President Xi, don't gain any leverage, don't have any strategic victories. There are ceremonies, there's praise. There's some of this, you know, staged symbolism. But Trump comes away with nothing and just looking enamored with authoritarian leaders who know how to flatter him but offer him nothing. And in fact, she said we would go to, in his words, we would go to war if you do the wrong thing when it comes to Taiwan. So Trump goes and he embarrasses himself and he doesn't project strength. But there's a bigger story here, and the bigger story is that the United States looks more like our power as a superpower is increasingly performative and much less real. Now, Trump is, and many Americans act as though the United States is the sort of undisputed global empire, except, especially under Trump, we're losing our ability to produce concrete outcomes that actually match that rhetoric. Trump is increasingly outmatched by foreign leaders, and in a lot of ways, we really are failing. Now, I know we've got all the nukes and we could destroy everybody. I get that. But in practical terms that affect people day to day. I mean, just look at something simple like our trains. Why do our trains suck? And I've been on the next gen Acela, which can go 160 miles an hour for like, five minutes. It why are our trains so terrible? And why are other countries so far beyond where we are in terms of trains and the power that that confirms? Now, I know there are A lot of reasons for that, and it's not the subject of this segment, but the point here is, in terms of a lot of the concrete things, infrastructure, cities, transportation, respect, the United States is diminishing under Donald Trump. We still perform the dominance. We've got the aircraft carriers and the threats and America first and the warnings and all that. Look at our motorcades, they're awesome. And flyovers of the military and the declaration that everybody's so afraid of us that they come to Trump with their, with their MAGA hat in their hands and they go, please, sir, but look at what actually happened. China didn't cave, China didn't move an inch. Iran, we're in week 12 of a three week war. Iran didn't fold. The trade wars of Trump didn't rebuild. American manufacturing, American manufacturing is weaker than it's been in a long time. And so what you end up kind of realizing is that the threats and the performative power haven't lowered prices. Americans are struggling to pay bills and buy groceries. They haven't grown respect of the United States around the world. They haven't made authoritarian leaders fall in line. And when you look at history, empires often become most theatrical when they are declining, not during periods where everybody agrees they are dominant and they are stable. They do the performance theatrics. When there is a concern about power and you've got this compensation by leaders to create spectacle and imagery of nationalism, military imagery, this sort of thing, because you're trying to perform to convince that you're strong. And, and the more that power becomes symbolic and emotional, the more we suspect that actual power is diminishing. Now look at Xi, who I, I'm not an authoritarian. I am not at all in the Xi camp. I think that those authoritarian regimes are terrible. But I'm trying to analyze it objectively. Xi and China have patience, something that Donald Trump doesn't have. They have sort of calmness, calmness and long term thinking for achieving their goals. When it's whether it's Taiwan or global dominance, economic, etc. And whether you like China doesn't matter. I don't like Chinese leadership. China increasingly presents itself internationally as disciplined and stable. And the United States under Trump is very far from disciplined and stable. And that's a, that's a change to the global order. And Russia's part of this as well. And we've talked about that. So the image of the US is a country that proclaims itself to be the superpower, but we've got inequality, political extremism, distrust of institutions, debt, economic fragility. And Trump just amplifies all of this stuff. He even gives speeches where he declares we are now respected again. And we go, no, we're not. You look at polling, we were far more respected under Joe Biden than we are under Donald Trump. Even the Iran escalation feels designed more for political consumption. You know, I spoke earlier this week about how elected officials are increasingly functioning like content creators and influencers. And you look at gas prices and they're super high. Ground beef is higher than ever. Housing costs are brutal. Credit card delinquencies are up, auto loan delinquencies are up, student loan delinquencies are up. People are getting later on mortgages as well, and consumers are getting squeezed. And Trump just goes, we're the best. We're the best at everything and we're the strongest at everything. When you look at history, and this is where we've really, we've got to turn it around going forward. Countries that still believe they are at peak power start to make irrational decisions. And we see Trump doing that already. You get emotional leadership, theatrical leadership, aggressive leadership, but not thinking leadership because they go, what will generate loyalty? What symbols and displays of strength can I put together? So I hope this is not the case. We may be watching a country trying to reconcile this image it had of itself before Trump's first term with the reality of what the United States is becoming. So my question to you, is there any truth to the notion of that the United States is increasingly a performative superpower and not an actual superpower? Leave a comment Send me an email info@david pakman.com all right, I hate to admit this, but Democrats have a serious problem. It's not a polling problem or like a fundraising problem, per say. I'm talking about a misunderstanding about what it's going to take to win in 2026 and maybe more importantly in 2028. And here's what I keep seeing Democrats operating like it's 2008, and I see this in a lot of ways. But I'll talk about what I see personally. We are still getting requests from the staff of elected Democrats to submit our questions to them ahead of time. Think about that for a second. We, as I've long told people in the audience, we don't provide interview questions ahead of time. We of course agree on topics generally, hey, we're going to talk about these five things and then I might focus in on one or two. I'll ask whatever follow ups I want. But we are still getting Requests for the questions ahead of time. And then we are still getting complaints from staffers when the interview doesn't go the way that they want. Now, I am not going to name anybody because I don't want to embarrass anybody. And I don't think I gain anything from naming names. But we have had situations over the last year. So this is 25 into 26 where we are hearing from staffers who go, I'm disappointed in the interview that David did. What? Now, I want to remind you, Republicans aren't doing this stuff. I spent time during White House correspondence weekend in D.C. talking to producers and staffers from Democrats and Republicans. I spoke to dozens and dozens of people. And what I was told was Republicans are not pre negotiating their way through interviews. They're not asking for the questions. Sometimes they're not even asking for the topics. They're not going back and going, I didn't like the way that interview went. Now, let me remind everybody that In December of 2024, Kamala Harris had lost, but was still the VP. Biden was still the president. For a few more weeks, I was invited to go to the White House and I met with Biden's communications staffers. And we also met. A group of us met with President Biden himself. And I explained in very simple terms, listen, you got to release this obsession with controlling every word. Part of what got us here is that the Democratic staffer industrial complex is generating interviews that are too short, they're stiff, they seem formulaic, and everybody's tense and they are terrible. And meanwhile, Trump shows up and he talks to Theo Vaughan and Joe Rogan and the Nelk boys and whoever else. He tells a million lies. Yes, but they're not imposing limits or asking for questions. And it seems as though it's just Trump hanging out and that's good for them. And what you Democrats are doing is not good. And it looked like they were starting to get it. It looked like they were starting to break the cycle. And there was this moment where they said, we're, we're dealing with independent media wrongly and we've got to do something different. But all of a sudden, now I am seeing more and more offices of elected officials doing the exact same thing. And so we have this whole ecosystem of communications shops, party infrastructure. They want to control the message instead of just trusting people to deliver it. And when your presence ends up feeling sanitized and cautious and focus group to death, it comes off as inauthentic. Now, in this forthcoming election, structurally, I think it'll be good for Democrats in the House no matter what. The Senate is sort of a question mark. When we start thinking about 2028, though, Democrats have to get it together. Now, I'm not saying this is the solution to every problem. We've got structural problems. We have issues of like, what are the Democratic policies that are going to be uniting and interesting to people on crime and on immigration and economics. That all has to be done. But the going back again to we'd like the questions. Talk about this, don't talk about that. Here are four tweets that we want you talking about. Let us produce the shows now. Not everybody is doing this. Just as one example, the office of Gavin Newsom seems to kind of get it. They've identified when they say, we are going to talk to someone, we are trusting that someone. Whether it's David Pakman or Midas Touch or a California creator or whoever, we're going to just let them do their thing. And case in point, when I had my sit down with Gavin Newsom not long ago after one of his book events, they weren't hounding me, but what are you going to talk about? In what order? Hey, you've got 20 minutes. The governor is looking forward to talking to you. Cool. That's it. And it was one of the more engaging interviews. The end product actually feels relaxed and dynamic. Rather than give us seven topics for seven minutes now, we got. We had a situation where producer Pat. After we had an interview where producer Pat was asked for the questions, basically. They didn't come out and say it, but they implied they would love the questions. Producer Pat didn't do it. He said, here's like five to seven things we'll probably talk about. We ended up talking about a couple of those. And then producer Pat had to deal with the wrath of a staffer going, I didn't like that. I didn't know that's the way it was going to go. And hold on a second. Just let David do his thing. Let David do the conversation. He doesn't control the questions. He helps with generating the topic ideas. We agree on the. Here's the five to seven things we'll roughly focus on. And then I just talk to the person. We got to stop this stuff, okay? You don't fix this problem with a new media consultant or opposition research. You've got to say, hey, there's something broken here and we've got to rethink it from the ground up. So this is just one issue. It's one I interface with on an almost daily basis, which is why I'm talking about it. There are many other issues to solve, but this is an issue I thought we. I went to the White House in 2024 and they said that they understood it and now we're back in the same thing. I don't know, guys. The David Pakman show is an audience supported program and the best, most direct way to support the show is by becoming a member. @join pacman.com you'll get the daily bonus show, the daily commercial free show, and plenty of other great membership perks. Get the full experience by signing up@join pacman.com I got a YouTube comment from Gen X Mish that says absolutely was not shot in the ear, period. Hmm. You know, the number of people in my audience who just don't believe either or at least one, but many, either of the Trump shooting stories is sort of surprising even to me. Now, I've talked before about how the right has kind of built a monster that they've lost control of. We talked about that a number of times. And when you sow distrust of institutions as your reason for even running and then you win, that distrust of institution corrodes and ferments and breaks down and it leads to unintended consequences where people now don't trust you. This is interesting because it's also the left, not only the right. Now do let's go piece by piece. Do I believe that the Butler shooting was staged in the sense that it was a planned event that Donald Trump was a part of? Or maybe it was planned by people around him without telling him? No, I don't. Do I believe it's possible that the blood wasn't from Trump's ear, but it was from some cut or someone else or who. Listen, I'm open to that. The one thing for me that doesn't totally square is Trump's ear healing the way it did. But that would be more an opportunistic attempt to use it in his favor. Not that the entire thing was staged. And I don't think the entire thing was staged because there's no evidence that it was staged. And it seems staging it would be very risky and could potentially go very wrong in a number of different ways. White House correspondents dinner shooting. I just have no reason to suspect that that was staged. And the thing most people are coming up with is, you know, they immediately used it to try to get the ballroom bill. Yeah, I think that was opportunism. Ashley St. Clair, last week or the week before told us how you know, these messages go out in these signal chats and other chat groups and they go, hey, here's what we need to be focusing on. Let's do this, let's do this, say this. And I think it's total opportunism. And by the way, notice how now it's been weeks since that shooting and literally nothing has happened that would accelerate the process of getting the ballroom built. I said at the time it's not going to help get the ballroom built and it's not helping get the ballroom built. So that's where I am on that point. But a lot of people in my audience think either or both were staged. Swimming Panic wrote on the subreddit Time to pack the Supreme Court if the Republicans are using the Supreme Court to pack the lower chamber of our legislature, then I think it's only fair that Democrats use the legislature to pack the court. We either take control of the court or they take control of government forever. Democrats need to wake up. Is it more important that we be the only party competing for a moral high ground voters don't care about or is it more important we be in control of the damn government? I'd rather be in control. That's the way we know we will be safe. Listen, I don't have any moral problem packing the court next time a Democrats president go, hey, we're going from nine to 17 Supreme Court justices and I get to pick the additional eight. But that would only mean the next time Republicans are in power that they do it. Now maybe some of you in the audience believe if Democrats pack the court once that'll do it. Republicans will never win again. I've not been convinced of that whatsoever. You would have to convince me that that is the case if that is the argument that you were making. So sure, pack the court. But what do you do about the fact that it's a race to the bottom and then they'll go we're going to put 23 people on the court and it's going to be 27, then it's 31. So what is the actual long term plan? And this is one of my big critiques. In politics there is not long term thinking, there's short term thinking. And what we really need is some long term strategy here. Nak4 wrote on Reddit right wing but armies also prevent echo chamber piercing arguing that bot armies serve three purposes for right wing channels. One fake engagement to boost the channel to fake popularity to add credibility. But I realized the third reason they write the endless stream of brainless one line comments prevent opposing messages from reaching the audience. It makes it impossible to make and boost a comment that pierces the echo chamber with contradictory information. Just something I was thinking about today. Completely agree. If you There is a group think approach to the bot armies and they're not even really bots. It's just like swarm videos and leave comments. Which is if everybody comes in in a segment about Trump's health and you've got hundreds or thousands of commenters going, they covered up Biden's health. They covered up Biden's health. What about Biden Sleepy Joe? Sleepy Joe? It pushes out what might be comments from Trump supporters who acknowledge something is wrong with Trump or thoughtful commentaries about what's going on with Trump or whatever. You push that out to the side. It's a good observation. It is absolutely one of the points of those bot armies. Natalie Catalos on Spotify wrote in and said, david, I would love to have children with my fiancee, but living in Idaho and the threats women face to our reproductive health, it pains me to say I would rather contribute to the declining birth rate than risk having to flee the state to seek medical help if things went south during a pregnancy. I admire those who have done it during this time, but I would rather remain childless and rescue cats. I'm at 20 rescues than risk my life to continue a bloodline. Also, put Grandpa to bed for for good. All right, listen, here's what I said before about all of this stuff. A lot of what I say on this show is about the societal level. It's macro, not micro. At the societal level, we need people in Idaho fighting for women's and reproductive rights. We need people to stay in Mississippi even if it is a situation that looks dire when it comes to trans rights, etc. Cool. That's the macro. That's the wholesale. At the individual level, when people say, hey, I live in Idaho, I'm terrified. What do I do? I say, you do what's best for your family. Who am I at a I am making a societal level analysis, but who am I to say to someone like Natalie, no, you must have children. You got to make the call that's best for you. Maybe Natalie would consider going somewhere other than Idaho if having a child is important. But I think that there is not necessarily a contradiction between talking about what we need as a society, but realizing that that doesn't mean you force every member of that society to do any one thing or take any particular action. People do need to do what is best for them. They need to Consider their own safety, their own health. Of course. Alison Laredo wrote on Spotify. Love your podcast on Spotify, David. Well, thank you, Alison. We are seeing the Spotify news and politics charts taken over, with few exceptions, by right wing insanity. Utter right wing insanity. And we need to do everything we can to stop that. And fortunately it's very easy. You know, when I got into writing books, I didn't realize that 2500 nonfiction book sales in your first week can put you at the bottom of the New York times bestseller list. 2500 books. And similarly, moving the needle on the podcast charts doesn't take that much. If you've got Spotify, just follow my podcast on there and leave me a rating that it's 15 seconds, it costs nothing. And we will fight all of these hyper funded right wing podcasts and I know many of you have been doing it and I really appreciate it. All right. Also from Spotify, a user whose name is an airplane emoji, a palm tree emoji and a pizza emoji. I have to agree with David in segment one. I have to disagree with David in segment one. There is nothing wrong with being a fan of a leader. We are emotional beings. We are human. We should see ourselves in our leaders and like them. This managerial, boring, steady the ship modern politician excites nobody and has switched everyone off from politics because of Trump and Zuck. We live in a post truth world. They deal in crap and we play nice. It's dumb. We need power and should use simple good versus evil and conspiracy to gain power. I don't, I what they're commenting on is that I said that the right sees their leaders as cult leaders and we see our leaders as the best option who we are going to vote for and hope that they put in places in place policies that are good and the context was the right loves to say there's no way anybody could have supported Joe Biden because they didn't have Biden flags on their boats, they didn't have their cars wrapped in insane Biden paraphernalia the way Trump supporters have done. And I said that's because they see their leaders as cult leaders and we see them as instruments of the will of the people and government functionaries. Now what this person is saying is we should like and be fans of our leaders. I'm not saying we shouldn't like them. I'm not saying we shouldn't be fans of them. But the cult like adulation where you can see no wrong that the leader does because you're so obsessed with them. That's what's a problem. And I don't think it's smart to advise the left to do more of that. Joel commented, I might subscribe if we get more Obama drops. Well, that's an easy request for me to do.
- [64:25]
Donald Trump
Obama.
- [64:26]
David Pakman
Exactly. Exactly. Joel, I eagerly await your new subscription. R. Johnston wrote on Instagram. I'm surprised these people haven't tried to indict Obama for wearing a tan suit.
- [64:43]
Donald Trump
Obama?
- [64:45]
David Pakman
Yeah, listen, I have talked about how there is a desire overt to just go after political enemies legally in Trump world. I think that they worry about going after Obama because even Trump realizes people like Obama. Obama's very likable, very gracious and articulate and engaging and charismatic. All the things that Trump really isn't. And I think even Trump deep down realizes his if I go after Obama, people aren't going to like it. It's different than when I attack, attack Kamala or whatever. So I don't think that they're going to go after Obama for that reason. I also don't think it would work because Obama really hasn't done any I call me crazy. Do we have evidence of any kind of crime? I don't think there's any evidence that Obama committed crimes. And so that is a little. It's. It's not a major problem for them, but it is a little problem for them. But yeah, that tan suit. Terrible. Absolutely terrible stuff. We've got a great bonus show for you today. Make sure you're getting my free daily substack@davidpakman.com substack.