Should Heads Roll?

00:00:03 Speaker 1: My name is Charlie Kirk. 00:00:05 Speaker 2: I run the largest pro-American student organization in the country fighting for the future of our republic. My call is to fight evil and to proclaim truth. If the most important thing for you is just feeling good, you're going to end up miserable. But if the most important thing is doing good, you will end up purposeful. College is a scam, everybody. 00:00:26 Speaker 1: You got to stop sending your kids to college. You should get married as. 00:00:28 Speaker 2: Young as possible and have as many kids as possible. Go start a Turning Point USA college chapter. Go start a Turning Point USA high school chapter. Go find out how your church can get involved. Sign up and become an activist. I gave my life to the Lord in fifth grade. Most important decision I ever made in my life, and I encourage you to do the same. Here I am. 00:00:46 Speaker 3: Lord, use me. Buckle up, everybody. 00:00:49 Speaker 1: Here we go. 00:00:56 Speaker 2: Noble Gold Investments is the official gold sponsor of The Charlie Kirk Show. a company that specializes in gold IRAs and physical delivery of precious metals. Learn how you could protect your wealth with Noble Gold Investments at noblegoldinvestments.com. That is noblegoldinvestments.com. 00:01:17 Speaker 3: All right. Welcome, everybody. It is November 5th, 2026. We're here in Phoenix, Arizona, live from the YREFI studios. How are we doing, Blake? 00:01:25 Speaker 4: You know, I was going to say great, but one, things are not great. And also, I'm specifically annoyed that I haven't seen an announcement yet. I am specifically annoyed that I haven't heard of all the Republican senators racing back to D.C. to confirm all of President Trump's appointees, including the ones he should emergency make now. Apparently, breaking news from Fox, Harmeet Dhillon, one of our favorites over at the Office of Civil Rights, she is departing. You should have a replacement for that role. 00:01:52 Speaker 3: Next week. 00:01:53 Speaker 4: Yeah, next week, because very likely Democrats will do a total blockade of every Trump administration nominee. I think they'll think that's good politics. 00:02:01 Speaker 3: We've got a matter of weeks to jam through as much as humanly possible. By the way, the same challenge is now on in Texas. There is a huge movement in Texas to limit the emergency powers of the incoming Democrat candidates. governor there. I don't even know her name. Hinojosa. 00:02:18 Speaker 5: Hinojosa. 00:02:19 Speaker 4: Yeah. 00:02:21 Speaker 3: And by the way, I am monitoring. I want everybody to be aware we are monitoring some of the allegations coming out of Texas. It's it's a little tricky because somehow Democrats got more votes. But at the same time, it's a wave year where you're getting D plus 20, D plus 15 across the country. So we're looking at it. I know that this audience is going to be very curious about that, but it's very interesting. The point is you've got weeks to stem the bleeding, to staunch the bleeding and basically try and jam through as many appointments as you can. But that's not the only intrigue that is happening right now. Another story that is also ongoing is the stock market just got wiped out this morning and lo and behold democrats running anti-data center campaigns uh when the entirety of the tech market especially in all those capital markets are based on ai well now they realize that. 00:03:23 Speaker 4: The chickens are coming home i just love that it's like all of silicon valley which they donate left they vote left they are insanely left wing like don't let elon musk trick you it's a handful of billionaires on our side and the vast over 90% majority the other way. And they're like belatedly realizing, oh, wait, our faction wants to basically ban AI. And they just elected a bunch of people who, yeah, they're against data centers. That appears to be widely popular in politics. But they're kind of anti-building anything in general, anti-large companies. 00:03:54 Speaker 3: There is an interesting fact, though. There was some data analyst at the New York Times, who actually Charlie used to like to quote a lot, Mr. Shore over at the New York Times. He's been going through the data, and 40 out of 41% of the data center proposals that were on the budget across the country failed. I think there was one in Dakota. They all passed. 00:04:16 Speaker 4: They all passed. 00:04:16 Speaker 3: So restrictions on them passed. The restrictions passed. 00:04:20 Speaker 4: And then the only one that failed was Harwood, North Dakota. 00:04:22 Speaker 3: Yeah, so North Dakota won. 00:04:23 Speaker 4: Everyone's going to North Dakota. 00:04:24 Speaker 3: But what's interesting is that what the polling shows is when you spread the benefits of a data center widely across the community, whether that's reductions in property taxes or energy bills, things like that, then the polling actually swings from negative, way negative, like negative 40, all the way to plus 15. So there is a path forward, I think, for data centers. I think the polling also shows that people want them built in urban centers, not in rural America. The problem is data centers tend to go towards rural America, beautiful open spaces because the land's cheaper. Right. So there is a an issue there with data centers. Here's also what we're watching. There was a big new article from Maggie Haberman, Jonathan Swan and I think Shane Goldmacher as well from The New York Times. Now, this remember are some reporters that are very well sourced. Jonathan Swan and Charlie Kirk were friends. I know that for sure. A fact. I was around them when they were together. Jonathan Swan is very trusted by a lot of people in D.C. Very well sourced. Maggie Hamerman is very well sourced. And they have a new article out this morning that is making the rounds. I have seen the enemy and it is us inside Team Trump's historic collapse. How an unpopular president and an unpopular war provided an opening for Democrats to make sweeping gains in the midterms. Now, before you guys jump on my case. Quote in the New York Times, I will tell you again, these are very well-sourced reporters, and they came out with a book about the rise of Trump 2.0 that has never had any corrections to it or anything. 00:06:10 Speaker 4: The New York Times– They're a liberal bastion because they are biased in what they decide to talk about, how they frame things. They do not just generally make stuff up. 00:06:19 Speaker 3: No, right. 00:06:20 Speaker 4: And, yeah, they're very well-served. Maggie Haberman, infamously, Trump calls Maggie Haberman and loves to talk to her. You might think that's unwise, but the president, he's an old-fashioned guy. He grew up with the New York Times. I think he's always going to talk to the New York Times. And it's laying out what this article is essentially saying. when did Trump world know they were in trouble and did they accurately diagnose the reasons? And I think overall, it's kind of, it's good news in the sense they were not really delusional going into the election. So it's saying, first off, it's pointing out losing was not inevitable. We had a lot of money. We had good Supreme Court rulings. We had unpopular, Democrats are still unpopular, but what it looks like in their own internal polling, it was the Iran conflict and the direct impact it had on Gas prices and affordability just sent the numbers down. And so they're talking about a slideshow presentation that was done for a political strategy meeting. It says, one slide linked Republicans' polling numbers to an Iran war timeline. It showed the Democrat advantage ballooned during active hostilities. It shrank during that memorandum of understanding that Vice President Vance fought for. And then it spiked again when that memorandum of understanding collapsed. By the end of July, Democrats had a 10-point edge on the congressional ballot. And they have them say on one of these slides, it's highlighted in yellow, Republicans could conceivably win the House if Democrats had only a 4-point edge in the popular vote. 00:07:50 Speaker 3: Can I pause you right there? That point right there. They knew that they could hold on to even the House if it was a D-plus-4 electorate. That tells you a lot, because what we could not know going into this election was, were there going to be people that voted against the craziness of the Dems? Or were they going to just be all voting out of frustration with Iran and the gas prices? We didn't really know, actually. But that tells you a lot, that if it would have been D4, then the House is even in play. 00:08:21 Speaker 4: But as it happens, it was about D13. So 1 in 11 voters changed their mind. So if 1 in 11 voters changed their mind over that war, over gas prices. That's the difference between keep the Senate, expand the Senate even, keep the House, and what we just saw. And it says, and it points this out, the Memorandum of Understanding. It was favored by 41 percentage points. That's 70-30 basically in terms of popular support. 67% thought it would bring down gas prices. But the Iranians kept flexing their leverage, that's the New York Times, and the arrangement began to fray. 00:08:55 Speaker 3: The war dragged on. And I think So throw up 143. I think this is important to read verbatim. 00:09:03 Speaker 5: Mr. 00:09:04 Speaker 3: Fabrizio's poll, first poll of the proposal, found that voters aware of the deal, the MOU, that J.D. Vance was pushing in the summer, which we loudly cheerleaded for because we knew it was going to be popular. And I took a lot of incoming for this. A lot of people came right at me. I debated it on podcasts. And it said the deal favored it by 41 percentage points and 67% thought it would bring down gas prices. So if you're going to get 41 percentage points in the favorable category, to Blake's point, that's a 70-30 split. 70% of Americans favored the MOU. But the Iranians kept flexing their leverage and the arrangement began to fray. And GOP Iran hawks, including Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, pressed Mr. Trump to keep the pressure on Tehran. The deal fell apart and the war dragged on. Well, I think this is, so important is because every time I mentioned push for peace, or every time I say, let's get the MOU done. Every time we have Will Chamberlain on the shows, who was very pro Iran war, and he came on yesterday and said, I was wrong. We should get out of Iran. Every time we do that, You have the same voices come in and tell us that we're wrong and that you don't understand foreign policy and this and that. I honestly am getting to the point where I think some of those voices, you just need to tune them out completely because they are completely tone deaf and out of touch. You now are the proud citizens of the gayest Congress in American history. 00:10:41 Speaker 4: That is an announcement from the Congressional Equality Caucus, which is, of course, a left wing one. 00:10:47 Speaker 3: And they are. 00:10:48 Speaker 4: Overtly bragging, yes, this is the gayest Congress in American history. 00:10:53 Speaker 3: God's judgment on us. Which is really saying something. 00:10:56 Speaker 4: It's really saying something because this last Congress was pretty gay. 00:10:59 Speaker 3: Yeah. It was pretty fake and gay. So here we are with the gayest Congress in American history. Thank you to everybody who stayed home. This is what you've delivered us. Just, I mean. It's got to be a troll. No, no, no. 00:11:17 Speaker 4: There's not a lot of irony on the left these days. 00:11:19 Speaker 3: So what's interesting is this looks like this market story is really going to be something. Bernie Sanders has now come up calling for a moratorium on AI and data centers, SOP 14. 00:11:35 Speaker 6: Democrats must enact a national moratorium on AI data centers, must pause advanced AI development and ban superintelligence. And, by the way, I might mention that yesterday in the election, in dozens of communities throughout our country, citizens voted for a moratorium on the construction of data centers. In other words, a moratorium on data centers is exactly what the American people want. 00:12:09 Speaker 4: He might be right, but at the same time, I would say, if you vote for that, you are voting for us to be a subservient country to China. 00:12:17 Speaker 3: To China. 00:12:17 Speaker 4: Forever. 00:12:18 Speaker 3: But look at what's happening to the market. It's not 12. 00:12:21 Speaker 4: Yeah, and we're down 3.5% on the S & P and 5.2% on the NASDAQ. 00:12:26 Speaker 2: To Carl's point earlier, worst day we've seen all year. 00:12:30 Speaker 3: Yeah, so that's a developing story, and, you know, like, I mean, Elon Musk's out here, 146. Congressman Yasmini Ansari says, top of the Democrat agenda on day one needs to be a pause on advanced AI development, regulation of this out-of-control industry, and a ban on artificial superintelligence. So, and Elon Musk responds, it's a brave new world. He also responded, hey, those data centers in space are looking awfully good right now, because that is one of the things that SpaceX is working on, being able to launch data centers powered by solar energy with permanent cooling systems. There is some latency in there, but the way this is going, that's that does seem to be a very appealing alternative. Now, back to this Maggie Haberman story, Jonathan Swan, Shane Goldmacher out of The New York Times. Why this is, I think, really interesting right now is because after a loss this big and let's just be blunt, this is the biggest loss in Republican politics since Watergate, maybe in the last hundred years. Genuinely. I mean, it was that deep. 00:13:32 Speaker 4: Now, I will note. Just because everyone wants to blackpill. Watergate was incredibly ugly. And then two years later, we lost the presidential race, but it was one of the closest in history. And if the race if the election had been a week later, Ford probably would have won because he only gained the entirety of the campaign. 00:13:46 Speaker 3: Yeah. So that's just like to throw that out there to know. And by the way, I do think when you have a purge like this, when you get rid of a bunch of mediocre people, we got rid of some some good ones, though, too. But when you get rid of a bunch of mediocre people, that gives way to a new crop of candidates that can be younger, more dynamic, ready to appeal to Gen Z, Gen Alpha is going to be a thing, and millennial men. And when you have an electorate where you see the Jewish vote swing four points to the left, you see Muslims vote in block like we told you they were going to do, massively left-wing, the nuns massively left-wing, and we lost ground with our two big groups. which is Catholics and Christians and whites. So those are our supporters. We need to reinvigorate our outreach and solidify that base, get them believing again that we're going to actually do what we say. So those are lessons that we need to really internalize. But when you have a loss this big, nevertheless, people want a head to roll. 00:14:48 Speaker 4: Yeah, so that's the big topic. We were discussing this before the show because a lot of people in the immediate aftermath were saying, Who should take the blame for this? And one obvious contender that's been thrown around, for example, is Pete Hegseth, because a lot of people, I mean, the vice president himself is saying this result was due to the Iran war. Even President Trump acknowledges it. Even President Trump acknowledges it. That New York Times article makes it clear they knew the war is their biggest drag. Well, then you can say, who's the architect of that war? And in all of the reporting, again, from the New York Times and other outlets, for example, when we decided to go into Iran... Vice President Vance warned he didn't think it was a good idea. It sounds like Secretary of State Rubio didn't think it was a great idea. Most of that reporting does say that Secretary of War Hegseth was a supporter of it, that he thought we could win it decisively. 00:15:40 Speaker 3: Yeah, I have a different take than Blake on this. I mean, part of it is inspired by the fact that Charlie himself fought so hard to get Pete Hegseth in his role. I would look at military recruitment as way up. He's re-inspired the troops. He's been good on the trans stuff, on DEI stuff, putting physical fitness back into. And I would say he's been a dutiful soldier. The role of the Secretary of War is, yes, to execute on the plans of the president, who is the commander of the military. And I think he has done his job. And I think it would be scapegoating To take Pete Hegseth down. Maybe, but... But I acknowledge that people feel that way. There's a lot of people talking about that right now. 00:16:25 Speaker 4: Well, let's use an example. In World War II, our first big battle in World War II, Battle of Kasserine Pass, we actually get shellacked by the Germans. So some generals get fired over that. In Korea, General MacArthur, he feuds with President Truman, but he also, he's defeated by the Chinese. He's driven back. We fired him. Abraham Lincoln, he fires... General McDowell, General McClellan, General Burnside, General Hooker. They all get fired because they lose battles. 00:16:55 Speaker 3: But we haven't lost the Iran war in a conventional sense. It's just dragged on. 00:17:00 Speaker 4: Well, we didn't lose the civil war either. But we clearly went in to Iran with people saying we can end this in three weeks, four weeks, maybe five weeks at the longest. That this would be a short conflict. We can get out. It'll be over with. And then we've dealt with Iran. Well, that didn't happen. 00:17:17 Speaker 3: OK. 00:17:17 Speaker 4: And I think there should be accountability for that. 00:17:19 Speaker 3: Let's ask the audience. So because the other name that's being floated is Susie Wiles, the president's chief of staff. And I guess the question is threefold. Who should have their head roll or should anyone? Yeah. Should should be fired after this loss. And who should it be? Do you think that Susie Wiles, Pete Hegseth, somebody else? Um, so those are the questions, please send us your emails. When I hear from the audience on this freedom at charliekirk.com freedom at charliekirk.com. But this is a big, a big open question. Um, you know, the, a lot of people angling for that job would be Jay Clayton, uh, Stephen Miller, Scavino. Those are some of the names being floated. Um, we'll see. Um, some people have even floated speaker Johnson taking over the chief of staff role. Um, So lots going on. So send us your emails. Freedom at Charlie Kirk dot com. Freedom at Charlie Kirk dot com. Should anybody's head roll for a loss this big? And who should it be? We want to hear your thoughts. I'm just going to I'm going to stick by Charlie's guy, Pete Hegseth, who is a friend of mine, too. I'll say that out loud. I've known Pete for a long time since his days at Fox, and I think he's done a lot of great things. What if today's mortgage market isn't an obstacle but an opportunity? Yes, mortgage rates are higher than we'd all like them to be. But while some buyers are sitting on the sidelines, others are discovering opportunities to negotiate, find the right home, and make a move on their own terms. Here's something to think about. If you buy when the opportunity is right, you may be able to refinance down the road if rates improve and you qualify. So don't let today's uncertainty steal tomorrow's possibilities. Andrew and Todd have decades of real-life experience helping people like you. They have access to programs and solutions that may open doors that you didn't know were available. Don't look back six months from now and wonder what you missed. Check in with Andrew and Todd today. All it takes is one phone call to find out what's possible for you. Call 888-888-1172. That's 888-888-1172. Or visit andrewandtodd.com. Don't let an obstacle become a missed opportunity for your future. Make the call today. 00:19:31 Speaker 1: 888-888-1172. 00:19:36 Speaker 3: Without further ado we've got the great sean davis sean we haven't really i would say absorbed uh process together what happened but we're talking this morning about what needs to happen next and there is a lot of people that want to see some heads roll within the admin for some of the mistakes that were made. We just asked our audience. Blake's going to read some of their emails in just a second. What do they think? Do they think somebody's head needs to roll? And should it be Susie? Should it be Pete? I guess we had an email saying Stephen Miller. 00:20:10 Speaker 4: I strongly disagree with that one. If you like anything this administration has done. 00:20:14 Speaker 3: The one lone spot when it came to exit polling was immigration, but fine. Sean, what do you make of this kind of obviously finger pointing, people want to see accountability, your take? 00:20:26 Speaker 1: Yeah, so I think a couple things need to happen. Everyone who pushed this war to the president publicly and privately, everyone who told him that it was going to be quick, it was going to be easy, it was just going to be like Venezuela, gas prices wouldn't go up, everyone would love it, it would be over by April or then June or then August. those people need to be banned from ever setting foot in the White House ever again. So whether that's advisers in the White House or people outside the White House, they need to be gone. I'm reminded in 2006, which was a very similar election to this one, unpopular war, second term president down in the polls. You know, the war ends up dragging down the entire Republican Party. The next morning, the morning after the election, Donald Rumsfeld resigned, the defense secretary. He understood, you know, he had a job. It didn't get done. He took the fall. I think it was a very honorable thing for him to do. I will say I'm a bit surprised that we have not seen any resignations. I would have expected either Susie Wiles or Pete Hegseth. Look, they're both great people, but at some point there's got to be accountability. I would have expected to see at least one of two resignations there on Wednesday morning. It's surprising to me that we haven't seen that yet because, look, you got to have accountability. It was a horrific election. We all know why it happened. There needs to be accountability so that we can pick up the pieces and move on. 00:21:51 Speaker 6: All right. 00:21:51 Speaker 3: So your take, Sean Davis, is you would have expected resignations from both Susie and Pete Hegsa. Is that your at least one of them? 00:22:01 Speaker 1: At least one of them. And, you know, and on Stephen Miller, you look at the exit polls, the only bright spot for Republicans, the only area where they had an advantage over Democrats was on immigration. So if anything, Stephen Miller should be getting promoted and being given more authority within the White House because he was the one overseeing the one thing that everyone seemed to approve of, notwithstanding everything. 00:22:21 Speaker 5: Else that was going on. 00:22:22 Speaker 4: And that Democrats were afraid to even talk about. I loved this chart. Axios did it, that ICE was only even an issue in Democrat primaries. And once they got to the general, it was, I think, the 35th most common topic in Democrat ads. They were talking about gas prices, taxes, affordability, health care. That's what they honed in on. 00:22:41 Speaker 6: Yep. 00:22:42 Speaker 4: They didn't even talk about Trump as much as those things. 00:22:43 Speaker 3: Yeah. And so it is interesting. And they also got, by the way, just so we're clear what they did. Democrats spent a lot of money targeting three out of four and four out of four Republicans. And I mean, a lot of money. They read the tea leaves right. They saw that defections were going to happen and they drove up defections. For example, in Arizona, we were modeling a very conservative. Eighty nine percent of Republicans voting for Andy Biggs. I haven't seen the numbers yet, but across Texas, I've seen a bunch of the numbers come in. And we're talking like 15 percent defections, 20 percent defections across Texas. So a lot of Republicans basically they flipped and they voted Democrat because of namely the war. But it was not because of immigration. It was because of the economy. It was because of a sense of corruption within the admin. It was it was it was because of gas prices. And the war. All of those linked together. 00:23:39 Speaker 1: It's the most obvious thing ever. Trump ran no new wars. I'm going to make stuff affordable again. There are people out there who want to avoid accountability and responsibility for their war pimping, who are trying to blame it on tariffs. Trump ran on tariffs. It was a major part of his campaign. Everyone was all in on it. He won all the battleground states pushing for tariffs and onshoring jobs back to America and making things in America. this election was lost because of the war. And it was lost in a similar way to when George H.W. Bush got taken out after he said, read my lips, no new taxes. That was a major campaign pledge. Everyone was bought in on it. He didn't follow through with it and he got punished. And the silver lining here is that this is a midterm election. It's not a presidential election. And if Trump has shown us one thing, the man listens and he learns. He made mistakes in 2020 with Fauci and COVID. He learned from that and came back in 2024 like the Trump we saw in 2016. So the silver lining here is that Trump's a smart guy. He's a brilliant, canny politician who listens like no other politician I've seen, especially to criticism and negative feedback. And so thank goodness this was a midterm and not a presidential. But reading the tea leaves ain't hard. It was the war. 00:24:54 Speaker 3: So let me play devil's advocate again, and then I'm going to get some of these emails. So you will hear– an often used Democrat talking point that says, you know, the killing Americans in the streets, you know, Renee Good, Alex Preddy. And they did win that PR war for a time. So is there a difference? You know, some people that want to blame Stephen Miller say the shock and awe, the raids, the agents on the streets, this kind of thing was unpopular and that they want to blame him because they didn't go after the banking system, didn't cut the legals off of, you know, the financial system. Do you lend any credence to that, or do you think that's bluster, that's just a talking point? 00:25:37 Speaker 1: That could be a little thing with tactics. I think we probably saw those numbers change after Noem left and Mullen came in. He kind of had more of a focus on quiet enforcement, getting bigger numbers but not doing it as loudly. But when you look at the way that young men switched, when you look at the major defections, it was over the war. I mean, I saw an exit poll that said 74% of voters- said that the war was a crucial or major factor in their vote, and Democrats won 62%. You talk to any young men, and what they were excited about was, we're going to get rid of the Epstein nonsense, we're going to take down the corrupt powers that be, and then we're not going to have any new wars. And that didn't happen. The podcast bros were the canaries in the coal mine on that. When we saw them kind of starting to leave and bail in midsummer, that was the sign. So I don't think it was, oh, immigration enforcement is mean, It was he promised not to do new wars. He came in and he did. And people said, all right, well, you're going to pay now. 00:26:34 Speaker 4: Yeah, I just think it didn't necessarily pull as strongly as you'd expect. But I just think for so many people, it's it crystallized this idea. I fell for something in 2024 that I was promised a specific thing. And it was just such a clear break with what they felt they were promised, what they expected that they just said, oh, it's all it's all bogus. I'm checked out. So some of them flip to the Democrats and a lot of them. Just stay at home. And it's going to be, I'll be frank, it's going to be difficult to get those people back. And that's why we are getting a lot of emails that say, don't fire anyone. That's surrendering to the left. Don't give an inch. But I think you have to show that we have learned this lesson. And we had Will on yesterday who said we should bail on that war, even if it's costly to America. And I think part of that is you have to come out and say, people who argued for this war and failed to win it within a few weeks, they're gone. 00:27:28 Speaker 3: Yeah. So what are the emails saying? 00:27:30 Speaker 4: Oh, I mean, there's a lot of that. So let me get more of them here. Let's see. We've got whoever is in charge of managing expectations should get fired. It's not Hegseth's fault. The war could not be finished in that time period. Well, I would push back on that. Hegseth is the secretary of war. If President Trump believed he could win it in a month, that is because Secretary Hegseth told him that, I believe. 00:27:53 Speaker 3: I mean, there's probably a number of voices within that war council that would be informing those decisions. I mean, I tend to feel very sympathetic. I feel like Hegseth, yeah, I mean, some of the reporting said that he was involved in encouraging the president, right? I'm not sure that that's accurate reporting or not, but let's assume that he was a little bit more hawkish. Yeah, I mean, he's a dutiful soldier. He did his job. I still think The Department of War is being run a thousand times better than it was before. He deserves a lot of credit for those things. 00:28:27 Speaker 4: I think that's great. I love that. And I go back to the Civil War. Every history of the Civil War will tell you General McClellan, great organizer, great trainer. The troops loved him, but he didn't win when he went into battle. I want to hear from the audience specifically on Hegseth. So let us know your thoughts on Hegseth. I don't put the blame at Hegseth's feet. I know that obviously his name has been bandied about a lot. Well, we're getting a lot. No firings. Absolutely no firings. It would be backing down like ice in Minneapolis. Someone says Thune should take the blame. Leave Hegseth alone. Thune is the traitor. A lot of that. There is a lot of. 00:29:03 Speaker 5: I'll take that. 00:29:04 Speaker 3: I'm good with that. I publicly called for Thune to step down. Throw him in the volcano. 00:29:09 Speaker 1: The volcano needs a sacrifice. Let's make it John Thune. 00:29:13 Speaker 3: Listen, DeSantis, I know there's a lot of passions on either side of the DeSantis thing, especially as 2028 comes around. comes along, but, you know, he's sounding a lot of the right notes. I mean, he plays blame squarely last night on Laura Ingram on both sides of Pennsylvania Avenue because, you know, when he was asked, should they blow up the filibuster, he's like, yeah, maybe if they were going to do something bold and generational, there was no appetite for that. And Thune deserves a lot of grief for that. get too far down the. 00:29:41 Speaker 4: Road here, we got even more emails coming in. I will note, and it's mostly don't fire, don't fire Hegseth. So you were, you were right on how the, how the listeners would feel, Andrew, that Hegseth is the best. Absolutely terrible to call for firing Hegseth. Someone says, civilians should have no opinion on this. Hegseth is great. Whoever kept giving Trump advice on how to handle Iran was probably somebody else. 00:30:04 Speaker 3: Well, I mean, there was– Raisin Cane was involved in some of the war planning and others. And that's their job. Trump says, hey, I want to invade Iran. I want to go to war in Iran. Give me a plan, right? So anyways, Sean, I just want to make sure that we talk about this. You made me lose my train of thought. Sean, you have a new show. A new show, Sean. 00:30:27 Speaker 7: Yes. 00:30:28 Speaker 5: I love it. 00:30:28 Speaker 1: It's amazing. 00:30:29 Speaker 3: Tell us about it. 00:30:30 Speaker 1: It's the Sean Davis News Explosion. 00:30:32 Speaker 3: That feels very awkward. 00:30:33 Speaker 1: It airs weekly Wednesday mornings. It's very fun. We're not going to take ourselves too seriously. We're going to make inappropriate jokes. We're going to mock neocons. We're going to call Democrats gay. 00:30:43 Speaker 3: It's going to be an absolute blast. I mean, if anything has come out, just such a clarifying moment, I hope, for the movement, is that neocons, the siren song of being able to invade the world, And everything's going to go swimmingly. Hopefully that has been put to rest once and for all finally. It won't be because they'll come back like a bad penny. They always turn up. But for the love, blood and treasure and death being just poured out throughout the Middle East, you'd think we would have learned that lesson after the Bush years. And somehow here we are again. Here we are again. 00:31:20 Speaker 1: You'd think we would have. And I don't want to sound extreme or hyperbolic here. We should probably just throw Mark Thiessen into a volcano. Like if you were out there saying it's just 10 to 14 more days to stop the spread of nukes and gas prices will be fine. Like you just shouldn't be allowed to talk in polite company anymore. Um, if you were the reason, if you're going to the white house every single day and saying, Hey, this war is going to be easy and people are going to love it. Like you just, you can't be taken seriously anymore. We've been dealing with this for 25 years now. I feel like a quarter of a century is enough. Let's just get back to making America awesome in the rest of the world can figure itself out. 00:32:01 Speaker 3: Yeah. The, uh, I think the headline and his Washington post op-ed that I've seen passed along around more than anything else in the aftermath. is there's no downside to invading Iran or striking Iran. No downside to striking Iran at that moment. Yeah, and Charlie would have been pulling his hair out at that, I can just tell you. So what we said before the break was that there's a lot of blame to go around on both sides of Pennsylvania Avenue. And it does feel like this was a rebuke of the inaction of the Senate and Congress as well, right, and the House. The Save America Act, by the way, those propositions passed in multiple places. Voter ID. And yet we couldn't get it done. A massively, massively popular bill. I want to play this clip from Ron DeSantis and get your reaction. Top five. 00:32:54 Speaker 7: No indication that the current group of Republican senators were interested in doing that type of bold conservative change. I mean, why haven't we done immigration? Shut off H-1B visas. Why haven't we codified Trump's immigration executive orders? There's so— why haven't we— stripped jurisdiction from the federal courts over deportation cases. There's so many things that could have been done. They didn't even attempt it, Laura. They would say, oh, if only we needed 50 votes, we would have done it. You've never shown that you'll do conservative things, even with 50 votes. I'd love to see all this great stuff being done. I just never saw an indication that they did it. And look, this midterm, no question, was a rebuke of the president and the Congress. But A lot of our voters who stayed home, they stayed home because they were frustrated with the lack of productivity from Republicans in the House and Senate. 00:33:51 Speaker 3: Sean Davis. 00:33:52 Speaker 1: I totally agree. I think there were three main reasons we got hurt. One was the war. Two is just history, midterms are bad for the incumbent party. But then the other one was Senate Republicans were worthless. If they had spent as much time trying to pass the Save America Act as they did making excuses for why they couldn't pass it, the thing would have been law a year ago. You can't have a midterm election where base turnout is everything and then have one of your major institutions in the Senate and have its leaders going around and crying and complaining that you're being mean to them by asking them to do the thing they promised to do, which is voter ID. A bunch of them deserved to get absolutely cooked, and what sucks is they lost, but now we're going to be the ones who pay the price. 00:34:34 Speaker 4: And it's not even just– the Save America Act is bad, but if you had– that determination to pass it, or yeah, if you throw out the filibuster, if you went in on, because people are asking, could they repeal the filibuster now and pass it now? And I have to tell them, no, because there is a political hit to repealing the filibuster. It is an aggressive move. It is something Democrats can exploit. If they'd gone in day one and said, we're getting rid of this, and because we're getting rid of this, that means we can fix our broken immigration system. We can actually do major reforms to the American economy. We Throughout it, we can even things out. We can offer new opportunities to people. Like they could have been had this been the big reformist Congress that people say they always want and, you know, pass a ban on congressional stock trading, actually drain the swamp. They could have done all of those things. And instead, we basically spent the entirety of this Congress with them making excuses about how sad it is that they don't have 60 votes and can't do things. 00:35:29 Speaker 3: Yeah. And Thune would say, I don't have the numbers to repeal the filibuster. Well, find them. That's your job. And if you can't get it done, give the give it give the job to somebody else. Let Mike Lee or Rick Scott do something bold. But this is this is I think we're going to look back at this and just with just tragedy. It was it was so much effort, so much work. Charlie gave his life for this, for real, bold, conservative legislation. And they had the opportunity. We got them the numbers. They just couldn't get it done. They couldn't get it done. They couldn't find a way, and they didn't want to find a way. Sean, one more time on your show, 10 seconds, where people can find you. 00:36:08 Speaker 1: It is the Sean Davis News Explosion. You can find it on Spotify, on YouTube, anywhere awesome people do podcasts. 00:36:16 Speaker 3: Sean Davis, the News Explosion. I love it, man. All right. Thanks for that, Sean. Picture this. You go to pay for groceries, and your card is declined. You check the app, zero. The IRS just levied your account overnight and nobody called to tell you about it. That's not a horror story. That's a Tuesday for the IRS. Liens, levies, wage garnishments, bank seizures. They take what you've earned and they do not hesitate. If you owe back taxes or haven't filed, do not wait. Call America Tax Group, the nation's leading tax firm, now at 888-381-3816. Here's what's happening while you put it off. Failure to file penalties of up to 25% of your unpaid tax. The interest compounding daily. The number on that letter is already out of date. It's bigger now. Every day you wait, the IRS gets stronger and you get weaker. The IRS is not going to forget about you. It's not a matter of if they act, it's when. And when they do, it will not be gentle. Going up against them alone is extremely risky. So don't do it. Protect your financial security with guidance from America Tax Group. Call 888-381-3816 or visit americataxgroup.com slash charliekirk. I want to give you an alarming stat here. America now has 11 Muslim mayors, 98 Muslims on city council, 14 Muslims in the state senate, 6 Muslims in the U.S. House of Representatives, And according to CareZone website, a record 255 Muslim elected officials across 26 states. And now Texas, one of the, I would say, ground zero states when it comes to Muslims proliferating and building mosques, has now swung 20% to the left. And so we can only expect more of that. Here to help us unpack what this means and how we got here is Ridvan Idemir. also known as the apostate prophet, and a friend of ours, friend of Charlie's. You're in town, and it's great to have you here. You just got married, too, so congratulations, my friend. Thank you. Go make lots of babies, lots of Christian babies. Will do. So I put out a tweet that was basically, you know, hey, look it. We lost the Jewish vote by four points, despite everything that's going on. We saw that Muslims, as we predicted, voted in bloc. for the left the nuns voted almost in block for the left and we lost ground with christians and to me that is a wake-up call that we're not doing something right okay obviously it's a wave year there was a lot of dynamics going in around around war that sort of thing but you're here as almost a cautionary tale or a warning about what's coming It does seem that Muslims have a very, very distinct political agenda. They wouldn't vote in the numbers they vote if they didn't, and they wouldn't vote far left if they didn't. So what is going on here? 00:39:26 Speaker 8: Well, you know, there's something very interesting going on, first of things. having me here. It's always a great pleasure. Um, but the, the issue with, with the Muslim voters, um, there are statistics out now, I think it's like over 80% of Muslims voted Democrat or something like that. Um, there, there's always something interesting to watch with Muslims in the West. Um, There was research by Pew Research several years ago from the Netherlands and from Germany and all that. In the Netherlands, for example, 90% of people, of Turkish Muslims who live in the Netherlands, who voted for the conservative Islamist party of Erdogan, voted for leftist parties, for socialist parties. 00:40:06 Speaker 3: Which doesn't make a whole lot of sense unless there's a scheme afoot. 00:40:10 Speaker 1: Yeah. 00:40:11 Speaker 8: For those Muslims who generally vote for liberal, leftist, progressivist parties, if you ask them about their politics when it comes to their home countries, their countries of origin, they will usually advocate for very conservative political parties, very conservative politics. They will not advocate for progressivist, leftist ideas, socialist ideas, or anything like that in the Muslim world. It is always a very... a very strategic move on their behalf because they don't like the culture and the values and the standards of the country that they live in, the Western country. In this case, they don't like the values of America, of the United States. They don't like our conservative, our Christian values. So they have to challenge it somehow. And the best way to challenge it is, of course, not to create a Muslim party that wouldn't do anything. It is to go onto the platform of the Democratic Party and tackle the values that we have established from within in that way. And it works, because that party opens itself up to the Muslim vote, to the Muslim ideas. They make compromises to advance their goals. They involve all kinds of minorities, whether they are good minorities or bad minorities, whether those minorities have good ideas or bad ideas, because it's just a generic categorical thing. Minority, good. So whatever the minority advances is in favor of the ideas of the party. And so they invite the Muslim vote in, and... help the Muslims advance their goals in the United States. And I would say the strategic idea that they have is simply to use the alliance with the left, with the progressives, with the leftists, in order to advance their goals further of tearing down the values that we have established in this country. And then to, let's say, tear it down and to pave the way for their own ideas to slowly and slowly and slowly be established. I mean, their pride right now, I think Ilhan Omar posted about it, how she's very, very proud of it, that people said they couldn't do anything, but now we have so many Muslims in politics. And she finished this with the Islamic expression, Alhamdulillah, praise to Allah. So that is basically their expression. It is not an advancement of good things in America for Americans. It is an advancement of Muslims in America. And I think an advancement of Muslim ideas in America is something that people who are Americans should be very, very worried about. 00:42:38 Speaker 4: We talked a lot, of course, about Abdul Al-Sayed getting in the Senate, and we talked about those mayors, but one of the creepiest ones, we have Adam Hamawi in Congress now in New York, former associate of the Blind Sheik involved in the bombing of the World Trade Center. And the creepiest thing with him is it's like a darker version of the... you know, remember Obama's pastor and he'd give those wild homilies, God damn America, God damn America. So this, uh, Abdul Rahman, the blind sheep, he would give sermons about jihad and make it very clear what he meant that you were in America. We were going to conquer the land of the infidels. Longtime associate of this guy testified, I believe on his behalf in his trial in nineties. Now they're going to pitch him as a, this just normal Democrat in Congress. 00:43:24 Speaker 3: Well, and by the way, I didn't even mention, Now we have our first Muslim senator. Abdul El-Sayed is now a senator, and this was his election night. I mean, listen to this crowd. I mean, knowing all the things that you just told me, and then listen to this reception on his election night. It's not 16. 00:43:43 Speaker 9: My name is Abdul Rahman Muhammad Al-Sayed. Up until right about now, you might have noticed I always say, inshallah, or God willing. 00:43:56 Speaker 4: Whenever the outcome. 00:43:57 Speaker 5: Of this race was mentioned. 00:43:59 Speaker 9: But today, tonight, we can turn that inshallah into alhamdulillah. 00:44:10 Speaker 3: Yowzer. 00:44:11 Speaker 4: What was he even saying? What was he changing it to? I guess we have to get used to that now. 00:44:15 Speaker 8: So it's from inshallah, which is Allah willing, into alhamdulillah, which is praise be to Allah. All Americans should know this now because this is now our language. It will now be the language that Americans speak at home, apparently. So everybody should, every American, you guys all have to be aware of what these things mean. 00:44:32 Speaker 3: Yeah. Right. Maybe dissect his race a little bit and what you perceived, what he was doing, because it did feel like, I mean, a common thing we talk about is Takiyah, right? 00:44:45 Speaker 8: Yeah. 00:44:46 Speaker 3: This concept that you get to lie to infidels if it's advancing Muslim priorities, if you will. Is that the right interpretation of what Taqiyya is? And did you see any of that in his race? Or was it something else? 00:45:01 Speaker 8: So Taqiyya is a very ambiguous thing. It is basically, it comes from Muslim history where it was mostly advanced by Shia Muslims, but also kept by Sunni Muslims in different contexts, which is basically that this was because of the historical persecution of Shia Muslims by Sunni Muslims or vice versa, where the idea was basically established that in order to protect yourself, to protect your community, you may lie to those who question you. So you may say, oh, I'm actually not a Sunni Muslim. I'm actually not a Shia Muslim. I'm actually something else. So it is okay to lie in order to advance your goals, to protect yourself, or to protect your community, or to advance the goals of your community. So there might certainly be an aspect of that. I think the other aspect is simply just, you know, in the West, we trust that people mean what they say. We trust that people are actually nice when they smile. We trust that people are good when they seem good and all that. We shake hands. We smile in each other's faces. Muslim culture doesn't really have the same concept of being very outwardly honest and direct. It has more of a culture of being subversive, more of an attitude of smiling in your face while hating you within, which is also how I was brought up. I grew up in Germany and was raised by religious Sunni Muslims, and we basically learned that we're supposed to be nice and supposed to be good and supposed to listen to those German Christians around us, But we should always remember who we are. We should always remember our own goals and our own values and advance them and pursue them. Be nice to the Christians while also believing that they are evil, that they are filthy, and that our place and our time will come. And, you know, Islam has this whole issue of sticking together, playing the call to prayer with each other, being together in one community. and sticking and being loyal to that Muslim spirit, which is fundamentally against the non-Islamic way of life and the non-Islamic way of running a society. 00:46:58 Speaker 3: All right. Did you know that only two U.S. states have declared the Muslim Brotherhood to be a terrorist organization? Texas and Florida. I have a feeling Texas is going to try and roll that back now in the next four years. But only two states. But look at all the countries that have declared the Muslim Brotherhood terrorist. a terrorist organization. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Russia, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Jordan, Kenya, Libya, Syria, Paraguay. 00:47:31 Speaker 4: Jordan is the best one there just because that's out of the direct experience of a lot of relatively, I don't even want to say Jordan's a great country, but it's been a relatively stable one, and their biggest problem has been radical Islam. in Muslim countries is a gigantic problem because they will say our monarchy, our relatively restrained moderate government is not Islamist enough. 00:47:55 Speaker 3: Well, and so President Trump designated specific foreign chapters in 2026 as terrorist organizations, the Egyptian, Jordanian, Sudanese, and they specifically designated global terrorists. Now, what's interesting about that is Abdul El-Sayed is Egyptian. He famously bragged about spending his summers in Egypt, and his parents, or at least his mother and some other family members, have ties directly to the Muslim Brotherhood, the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, I would suspect. How serious is that, or did we make too much of that in the campaign, these ties to the Muslim Brotherhood? The fact that he couldn't disavow without 68 words was a very, very big question mark for me. 00:48:46 Speaker 8: Well, I think it's a very important issue, and it's an issue that we need to have answers on. It's like, it is a very, very serious problem. It's not something to be taken lightly. The Muslim Brotherhood was always, from the very beginning, meant to be an organization that was formed to basically say the West has had too much cultural influence on the Western world. Sorry, on the Muslim world. The Muslim world went too extreme in their abandoning of Islam and in their adoption of modern ideas of secularism and all that. So what we need to do is to turn back to Islam and advance Islamic goals. That was basically the idea. And part of how to advance that was to infiltrate roles in society, in government, in Muslim country governments, but also in Western countries and in other countries, to slowly advance and advance and advance and take over and make sure that you bring Islam completely back into society and into government. When it comes to those Muslim countries, as you can see, there is a huge signal, a huge difference here, a huge difference how Muslim countries handle such problems and how Western countries handle such problems. Most of the countries that banned the Muslim Brotherhood or designated them as terrorist organizations are Muslim countries. These are countries like Jordan or Egypt or others that have direct experience with this, and they say, We have a system in place. We have a monarchy, or we have a secular system in place. We don't want it to be overthrown by a subversive Islamist force. 00:50:15 Speaker 3: Yeah, so they just ban them. 00:50:16 Speaker 8: Yeah, so just ban it. Make it a terrorist organization. 00:50:19 Speaker 3: We elect them to Senate. 00:50:21 Speaker 4: In every, like, friendly Muslim country that we have a good relationship with, like, their biggest concern is actually just the growth of Islamism. 00:50:29 Speaker 3: Yeah. 00:50:30 Speaker 4: You go to Central Asia, Uzbekistan. What's their biggest fear? Oh, we have a relatively moderate country. All these kids are watching radical imams. And the craziest thing is often those radical imams live in Britain, live in France, live in the United States. 00:50:42 Speaker 3: Germany. 00:50:43 Speaker 4: I think it was the United Arab Emirates or Saudi Arabia, one of those two. They're worried about their students going to the West because that is where they get radicalized. 00:50:49 Speaker 3: Specifically to England. You know, there's. 00:50:51 Speaker 8: Something very, very interesting. On my way here, I was watching some videos. I was thinking about the Muslim immigration to Europe. You know, I grew up in Germany. I watched a lot of the conversation about Islam and Muslim immigrants in Germany as I was growing up. So I went back and watched videos from, I don't know, like 30 years ago or so or older where Germans were dealing with the problem of suddenly, you know, a bunch of immigrants from Turkey and other places coming into the country. And lots of people had anxieties about what to do with this. The conversation at that point was mostly from the Muslim side. Hey, guys, don't be prejudiced against us. Don't be afraid of us. Not all of us are bad. We are actually not so bad. We will integrate and all that. When you compare that to the conversation today, today the conversation goes, or from their side usually goes, as this is our country. 00:51:43 Speaker 5: Shut up. 00:51:43 Speaker 8: You can't tell us what to do. We will do whatever we want. You are Islamophobic. You are racist. You are this and this and that if you have any questions about Muslims. You know, it turned from, hey, guys, we are actually not so bad to shut up. We are here to stay. This is our country, too. And you can tell us anything. It already happened within just a few decades. The attitude changed completely. 00:52:04 Speaker 3: Of course. 00:52:04 Speaker 8: It went into the direction of what we say it is. It is a subversion. It is a form of takeover. And I'm not going to say that they are coming to completely and fully take over every single country, but that is certainly part of the ideal. That's also how I was raised. I mean, the way I was taught in Muslim society within Germany was that the time might come when we take over. We should work toward always asserting ourselves. And the time will come, might come, maybe in our lifetime, maybe later, that these lands will become Islamic and we might help do that. and we should prepare for the times that were prophesied to us. 00:52:44 Speaker 3: So they're doing that here in America. 00:52:46 Speaker 4: I mean, remember when they were planning one of those Muslim communities, and they were talking about the streets they would name about it, and it's just some Muslim podcast, but they were saying, oh, we'll name these streets after great Islamic conquerors. They wanted to name one after Tariq ibn Siad, I think was his name, the guy who conquered Spain for the Muslims, which, God willing, we'll do again. They have a very strong historical sense of, Islam as a conquest religion, as a religion that they hope will encompass the entire world. The early years of Islam were built on military conquest. Muhammad was a war leader. That just changes your entire attitude towards the world. It matters a lot that Christianity was founded by Jesus, not a violent man, not a man who waged war on his enemies, a man who said you should forgive your enemies. And that's not to say Christians can't fight wars, but... it just totally changes your outlook towards the world and how you spread your faith. And Islam, they believe in a providential history of their faith that is prophesied. They'll talk about the prophecies that they would take the city of the Romans, Constantinople, became Istanbul, now an Islamic city. The greatest church in Christendom, the Hagia Sophia, is a mosque now. And they would love to turn your local church into a mosque. They would love to turn St. Peter's Basilica into a mosque, St. Paul's Cathedral into a mosque. They dream of those things. 00:54:11 Speaker 3: Ridvan, it's been great having you in studio. I wish we could have more time, but thank you for participating in our local events and getting out there and mixing it up. Hopefully it was a good experience. 00:54:21 Speaker 8: It was very, very good. 00:54:22 Speaker 3: Good. 00:54:22 Speaker 1: Very good. 00:54:23 Speaker 3: Yeah, awesome. 00:54:24 Speaker 8: One thing that I like about being here is that we get to be active. During this election, there has been a very, very low turnout among conservatives, Republicans. a lack of enthusiasm. And the other side that wants change, which they think is always good, which is not always good, has been very high. And we need to tackle that. This is a beautiful country. We need to protect it. 00:54:44 Speaker 3: Yeah, well, it's also a Christian country. It still is, by the way. And the Christian share, the Protestant share of the electorate was down to 17%. And that was because of turnout, not because we don't have numbers. So the Muslims, they vote in block. They got out. And there's a reason for that because it's central to what they believe and how they look at the world and the future. Ridvan Idemir, apostate prophet on YouTube. Check him out. He's a good man, good friend. God bless you, my friend. 00:55:14 Speaker 8: Thank you. 00:55:14 Speaker 3: See you soon. An important message from Noble Gold Investments. November 3rd, control of Congress is on the line. And whatever happens, your savings are going to feel it. If Democrats take power, we could be looking at years of gridlock, followed by the same policies that fueled inflation before. More spending, bigger deficits, and a weaker dollar. We lived through this already. In June 2022, inflation was out of control and unchecked. Now, the national debt is over $ 40 trillion, and Washington isn't slowing down. What has gold done since 2022? Doubled. Up over 100%. That's right. You can't control what happens on election day. You can control how prepared you are. That's why so many Americans are turning to physical gold and silver. Visit noblegoldinvestments.com slash kirk. That's noblegoldinvestments.com slash kirk. And download your free wealth protection kit. Noblegoldinvestments.com slash kirk. Is your wealth protected? If not, now is the time to act. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Oren McIntyre joins us now. 00:56:18 Speaker 6: Oren. 00:56:18 Speaker 3: Oren. I want your brutal, blunt, honest take. How do we absorb what happened on Tuesday? 00:56:28 Speaker 10: I mean, this was the most predictable outcome in human history. We had every warning sign that this was coming. Everybody who told, you know, told us that the war was going to be a disaster, that it was going to be a political liability. that it was going to cost us momentum, cost us political credibility, cost us political capital. 00:56:50 Speaker 5: They were right. There's simply no other way to parse this. Like they were absolutely correct. 00:56:55 Speaker 10: And so now we have a scenario where those chickens came home to roost. Not only did we engage in this war, we then messaged in a disastrous fashion. 00:57:05 Speaker 5: We had people. 00:57:06 Speaker 10: Mocking people who couldn't afford food, couldn't afford gas. We had people running out Yeah, burritos. We had people insulting young white men saying they were welfare queens when they're the least likely people in the United States to use welfare. I mean, literally, we hit every single branch on the way down. And here's the really dangerous thing. This is what people need to understand. This was manufactured. OK, we built a media silo to keep out what was happening here. after watching the Biden administration, or watching the Democrats, first with Biden and then with Kamala Harris, lie themselves into this position where the emperor had clothes on and everything was fine and we were going to win and Joe Biden's just this spry guy, Kamala Harris is brats, she likes coconuts and spicy Doritos, and she's going to be this huge social media sensation. After watching the left do this and put themselves in exactly this situation, The conservative movement did the same thing. We saw the polls. We saw the unrest. We saw people turning away. But we had Fox News walking around saying, oh, don't worry, 95% of MAGA voters support Trump, which is like saying 95% of Christians believe in Jesus Christ. 00:58:21 Speaker 5: Yes, of course. 00:58:22 Speaker 10: But you didn't just win with those people. You won with the moderates, the independents, those podcast bros that we all learned to hate and found out were the real problem. They were the people who brought you what you needed. We got every single indication that this was going to be a disaster, but we built a fortress and we said, just trust the pan. 00:58:40 Speaker 5: Shut up. 00:58:41 Speaker 10: Don't be a panic. And ultimately, it's all going to be fine. And it wasn't fine. And now the consequences are here. I take no pleasure in being right about this, but I was far from the only one. 00:58:53 Speaker 5: People heard endlessly about what was going to happen. And then it happened. 00:58:56 Speaker 10: And now we all have to sit around and backpedal. Everyone has to pretend either it wasn't the war or they never supported the war or they didn't run around silencing everybody who's warning them what was coming. But that's not what happened. And we have to learn this. lesson because we don't get to learn it another time so. 00:59:13 Speaker 4: Accepting we've got to learn that lesson we were just debating for example uh with sean davis and really debating with the listeners on this show should any heads roll over this result should anyone be fired we proposed maybe Pete Hegseth, for example, and our listeners say, no, keep him around. But what do you make, either personnel-wise or policy-wise? The goal, of course, is don't lose the country in 2028. Keep the White House, keep us from careening off a cliff. What actions do we need to be taking right now, in your opinion, to make that reality happen? 00:59:46 Speaker 10: The biggest problem is we don't know what was happening inside the administration. We have a bunch of reports from places like the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times, but How real are those? We're hearing things like Susie Wilde was telling Donald Trump to walk away from from immigration enforcement, to walk away from deportations. We're hearing that ultimately Trump was the one who pushed the war through. And it was people like Marco Rubio and J.D. Fance and even, you know, members of the Joint Chiefs that ultimately told him don't do this. 01:00:14 Speaker 5: And he did it anyway. 01:00:16 Speaker 10: So if Donald Trump made the decision all by himself to go to war with everyone else telling him don't do it, Well, the only person that ultimately could be held responsible is Donald Trump. And it's very clear that Trump has no intention of walking away from the war now. He said he would enter it again, even if it lost him the midterms. He's been talking about his ballroom and ramping back up the conflict instead of. changing you know in any way shape or form if we don't walk away from the war if we don't find some way to extract ourselves from this then everything else doesn't matter it's going to be hung around the neck of every republican for the next two to three election cycles at minimum so the first thing is donald trump has to figure out that this was political poison and he has to care enough about the future of the country and the party to make changes After that, if we have people like Susie Wiles who are counseling bad decisions when it comes to things like domestic policy, when it comes to things like deportations, we have to change it. And here's the most important thing. I need the administration to be honest about what's going on here, OK? We just saw Eric Prince talking about the need to debank illegals and debank their employers. Everybody knows this was the solution from the very beginning. The mass deportations, the physical removals, some of those are necessary. But ultimately, you create self-deportations, mass self-deportations by making it impossible for illegals to live here. And let's just be frank, the administration has not done that. They absolutely have not done that. And there's got to be a reason. Now, I would take an answer from them that said we can't do it because Chamber of Commerce is blocking it. They're here are the specific Republicans. Here are the lobbies. Here are the different businesses that are making it impossible. 01:01:56 Speaker 5: Name the names. 01:01:57 Speaker 10: Gain credibility with your base by going out there and being honest with them. Either you can't do this because there are specific actors or specific parts of the system that are blocking you intentionally, or you can do this and you're choosing not to because the whole deportation. 01:02:12 Speaker 5: Thing is ultimately fake. 01:02:14 Speaker 10: You have to make a choice and you have to win back the loyalty of your voters by demonstrating real honesty and real accountability. And right now I'm seeing very little accountability from anybody but J.D. 01:02:27 Speaker 5: Vance. 01:02:27 Speaker 4: J.D. 01:02:28 Speaker 5: Vance is the guy who ran out there and said it was the war. We do need to do better. 01:02:32 Speaker 10: We do need to take affordability seriously. We do have to change our relationship with Israel. And of course, he's being attacked all over the place by the usual suspects for doing so. But that's the way forward. We need accountability and we need transparency. If you want the support of your people, you're going to have to earn it again. That's all there is to it. 01:02:50 Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean, I am a big fan of what J.D. came out and said. I thought it was the I thought it was. admirable that he owned it. And he said, yeah, to all of you who came to me and said, I told you so, you did. And we know from reporting that he was against the war. And I think that is, that is buried. You know, I would say that has been evident from the way that he's handled the MOU process, something that I came out in support of, took a bunch of flack. I'm still taking flack. I said on social media yesterday, it's time to end the Iran war. And It's not a ratio tweet, but it's darn close because everybody's like, the MOU is stupid. We have to finish Iran. I'm like, did you guys not learn anything? Did you not learn anything? And here's the Trumpian way, in my opinion, to get out of the Iran situation. Declare victory. Iran's nuclear capabilities and conventional military have been decimated. That is true. That was the entire point that we were told at the beginning. We're stopping the nuclear program. Okay, well, there you go. If you have to do a surgical strike in the future... We can talk about that. Just get out. And basically, you know, the other thing that's interesting is thanks to the Abraham Accords, the Gulf allies are pretty aligned. There's an opportunity to continue empowering them and they can take more responsibility for their own region. And so there are messaging platforms here, planks that you could credibly say, hey, now's the time to get out. Declare victory. That's the way you do it. The other thing that's interesting here, by the way, is the United States imports virtually zero crude oil directly from the Strait of Hormuz. So with the conflict ending, the Gulf states are in a great position to take more responsibility there. So I think we can get out and save face. And, you know, we had Will Chamberlain yesterday, who was a proponent of the war, basically say mea culpa, and it's time to get out, even if there are negative consequences to getting out. Ultimately, we cannot be run by commies if, you know, in exchange for Iran not having a That's the trade we made. That's the political calculus that we did. And what's frustrating, Oren, is that they knew it in the polls for a long time. They saw the divergence for a long time. They knew what we were staring at, and it still happened. 01:05:09 Speaker 10: Well, the polls have been wrong over and over again, and people wanted to believe that they were going to be wrong again. 01:05:14 Speaker 3: I get that. 01:05:15 Speaker 5: I understand at this point not trusting polls. 01:05:17 Speaker 10: But when you have people like Rich Barris who did get it right when everybody else got it wrong, and he's saying you're in trouble again, Now you need to start listening. We have guys like Christian Hines who's doing data modeling and he's telling you, hey, I'm a super pro-Trump guy. I fight for it. I'm a plant truster through and through. But I'm looking at the map and it looks bad and nobody listens or people start insulting him for telling the truth. You have a bad environment. You have cultivated an environment in which you cannot hear reality. You cannot see reality. And that is incredibly dangerous. You cannot have your political pundit class or your political strategist ignoring reality. 01:05:52 Speaker 5: That's dangerous. 01:05:53 Speaker 6: Yeah. 01:05:53 Speaker 3: I mean, Rufo, Rufo just made a similar point, uh, online just minutes ago saying, you know, one of the issues is that disconnect between the, the new right intelligentsia and the levers of power that there seems to be a disconnect. So Oren, it just keeps getting, it's like, it's just the gift that keeps on giving Tuesday night. Um, Democrat Lakeisha Womack has just defeated incumbent Republican Tim Moore in North Carolina's 14th district. You can look this up. Throw up her picture. This is Lakeisha. She was charged with stealing a car during the election. 01:06:33 Speaker 4: Grand Theft Auto strategy. GTA. If you win an election, you get rid of your wanted stars. 01:06:37 Speaker 3: And she is now a member of Congress. A car thief. That's great. And it's the gayest Congress in history. 01:06:45 Speaker 4: The gayest Congress, the most car thief. Did you see we elected like a kind of white rapper type dude in New York? 01:06:53 Speaker 3: Oh yeah, but he's a patriot. Oh, is he? 01:06:55 Speaker 4: Oh, is that, is that guy on our side? 01:06:56 Speaker 3: He's a patriot. Okay. 01:06:57 Speaker 4: I guess I'll, I'll take it. I'll take it. 01:06:58 Speaker 3: Maybe there's something to it. Like a kid rock. Yeah. He's like, yeah, exactly. 01:07:01 Speaker 5: All right. Okay, great. 01:07:03 Speaker 6: Yeah. 01:07:03 Speaker 3: He definitely, somebody tweeted, it's like, I've never looked at somebody and known that they bought the Marshalls Mathers, you know, Yeah, LP. Day one. So I want to go over some exit poll stuff here with you, Oren. 153, this is Republican House vote by religion. So white evangelicals, we lost four points with white evangelicals, 88 to 84. White Catholics, massive drop-off, Blake, 67 to 58, your people. Catholics in general, still a majority but barely, 58 to 51. Check this out. Jewish, 36 to 32. And no religion, 29 to 21. So the nuns and then the Muslims were like it was like 86 percent, 87 percent voted for them. We have another exit poll here from NBC 152. It's a little bit different. These are exit polls. So the data is kind of all over the place. You look for directions. So it was pretty spot on with the Catholics. Protestants, it was way lower according to this exit poll. But then again, Muslims, 85 to 12. Jewish, two-thirds of Jews voted Democrat, despite El-Sayed running, despite the anti-Semitism that is rank and rampant in that party. I posted this stuff and I said, we have to get our Christians out. I'm told that the protestant share of the electorate oran was 17 percent down from about 25 percent in. 01:08:38 Speaker 4: 2024 that's a lot of people staying that's. 01:08:41 Speaker 3: A lot of people staying home what lessons do you glean from these stats it's. 01:08:45 Speaker 10: The same lessons we get every year and one day maybe the republicans will even learn them over and over again republicans are always chasing voters that are never going to care about them they always want some new ethnic or religious minority to join in because if they heart, ultimately, conservatives are actually just progressives. They actually believe everything that progressives believe about DEI. They think that minority votes are somehow holier than spare bait. 01:09:10 Speaker 3: Speak for yourself, Oren. 01:09:12 Speaker 4: Yeah, no, I'm pushing back on this. 01:09:15 Speaker 3: He's right within certain. 01:09:17 Speaker 4: There's a lot of people who do this or getting better overall, but it's a tick. It's a tick that is harmful on the right. 01:09:24 Speaker 3: Because you know what it is? We've deeply internalized being called racist for like 40, 50, 60 years. And there's a certain subset that has not learned the lesson that that's a psyop and you need to stop caring if you get called a racist. Go ahead, Oren. I know I know what you're saying. 01:09:40 Speaker 10: I mean, the very people who complained about Candace Owens and said she's responsible for losing this election literally elevated her because she was a black woman. 01:09:48 Speaker 4: Right? 01:09:48 Speaker 10: Like, that's the reason she became such an incredible career. 01:09:52 Speaker 3: So, like, we have to understand... Yeah, mea culpa. Mea culpa. All right? Mea culpa. 01:09:57 Speaker 10: Like, this is deeply baked into what's going on here. And so we have to understand that it's okay to appeal to your actual voters. It's okay to recognize that Christians and, very honestly... White evangelical Christians are your base. They are your core. Of course, you wanted a message that appeals to everyone. If you're running the country properly, if you're offering the correct policies, it's going to benefit everyone in the United States, not just those people. But you have to recognize that that is your core demographic. 01:10:26 Speaker 5: You just turned out. 01:10:28 Speaker 3: Go ahead. Yeah, please finish your sentence. 01:10:30 Speaker 10: I was going to say, if you just turned out if you just turned out four or five percent more white people, if you just focus on getting more evangelical Christians to the polls, you're going to make way more gains than you're ever going to get by, you know, according to Hindu Indian community or, you know, the the Jewish community, the black community like these are not your voters. They do not show up over and over again for you actually court voters that matter. 01:10:55 Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean, that's what I posted on social as well. I completely agree with you. You have to shore up your base, and that is Protestants, that's Catholics, that's white voters, that's white working class voters. But let me just play devil's advocate here. So the white share of the population is going down, and more and more, just getting out white voters is not going to work. Are you suggesting we shouldn't do outreach to urban communities? Are you suggesting we shouldn't do outreach to Indians. By the way, Indians are one of the most secure voting blocks for Democrats, to all you tech bro H-1B proponents. Square that circle for me. 01:11:36 Speaker 10: Well, first, you have to stop the immigration. You have to stop the H-1Bs. You have to stop bringing in populations that will not vote for you. When you see Republicans fighting for the continued entrance of people from India into the country, they are courting their own demise by intentionally importing a group of people who were not going to vote for them. Now, I don't think that you don't appeal to those people. I think you appeal to them as Americans who are going to ultimately, hopefully assimilate with the majority population of the United States who does have those interests at heart. If you have policies that are good for Americans in general, then you should also be attracting people from other demographics who see themselves as Americans and see themselves benefiting from those policies. I don't think there's anything wrong with ultimately appealing to an urban vote or a minority vote at some level as part of a wider strategy, but But when we spend so much of our time, we expend so much of our effort towards those groups, when we denigrate the groups that are more likely to vote for us, as we saw again, repeatedly over and over again, hey, dumb young white man, why won't you go vote for Vivek Ramaswamy? Don't you understand if you don't do that, you're a communist. 01:12:50 Speaker 5: This is disastrous. That's a disastrous mess. 01:12:52 Speaker 3: Yeah, I think people like. And I think one of the lessons here is that the tokenism on the right has to stop. I completely agree. I've concluded the same. You know, there's been different eras of this. There's been different iterations of this. But at the end of the day, our base are Christians. They're traditionalists. They are white working class voters. And I think you see this, your point being expressed really well when it comes to Latino men, black men especially. That resonate with the economic populism. 01:13:23 Speaker 4: Well done. Running your people doesn't actually alienate these groups. 01:13:28 Speaker 3: Yeah. 01:13:28 Speaker 4: Like, that's the funniest thing. Remember, Donald Trump did better with Hispanics than any of those candidates who are running on, oh, immigration is an act of love. We need amnesty. We need tokenism. Actually, if you just have a good message and a good candidate, it doesn't matter if it's the whitest dude imaginable from New York. 01:13:45 Speaker 3: And results. You need results. And that's what we were deeply lacking from... On both sides of Pennsylvania Avenue, I think that's fair to say. Well, Oren, we're jealous. You get to log off in the free state of Florida and the one state that blunted the wave, at least some. So congratulations. You get to be free still, Oren. The rest of us will be waving from afar. Oren McIntyre, host of the Oren McIntyre Show. Smart guy. We'll see you guys tomorrow. 01:14:19 Speaker 1: For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to CharlieKirk.com.