JIMMY, YOU MISSED IT, WHEN WE STARTED IN THE MORNING I SAID I
WENT THROUGH A ROLLER COASTER OF EMOTIONS, MAINLY ALL NEGATIVE --
NO, ALL NEGATIVE, NOT MAINLY -- WHEN I WAS TAKING ABOUT A TRUMP
PRESIDENCY, BUT I LANDED ON ANGER THAT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY
LET THIS HAPPEN.
LIKE, MAN, HOW DID THEY, IN THEIR SMUGNESS,
THEIR ARROGANCE, THEIR COMPLETE DISREGARD FOR FACTS, POLLING,
SCIENCE --
THE MISSION OF THEIR PARTY.
THEY JUST SAW WHAT THEY WANTED TO SEE. AND A LOT OF PEOPLE
MISUNDERSTAND THIS -- YOU THINK THEY MISCALCULATED, IF THEY HAD
REALIZED BERNIE HAD A BETTER CHANCE THEY WOULD HAVE PUT
BERNIE UP, BUT THEY SCREWED THAT CALCULUS AND UP.
NO, TO THEM
BERNIE WAS AS DANGEROUS, IF NOT MORE DANGEROUS, THAN DONALD
TRUMP.
TO BE FAIR I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE POINT MICHAEL WAS
MAKING, HE SANG INSIDE OF THE GENERAL ELECTION THEY DIDN'T
CAMPAIGN IN WISCONSIN, BLAH BLAH BLAH.
YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT MICHAEL, I
KNOW HIM AND WE'VE HAD 1000 CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THAT.
I'M
TALKING ABOUT THE GUYS YOU SEE ON TV AND THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY
OFFICIALS.
FOR THEM, THINK ABOUT IT THIS WAY -- YOU THINK, ARE
PEOPLE THIS SELFISH?
THEY DON'T SAY THAT TO THEMSELVES,
THEY'VE GOT TO BE ABLE TO SLEEP AT NIGHT, BUT WHAT THEY ACTUALLY
THINK IS THAT IF TRUMP WINS MOST OF THEM STILL HAVE A JOB IN THE
DEMOCRATIC PARTY.
IF BERNIE SANDERS WINS, THEY DON'T HAVE
THEIR JOBS BECAUSE BERNIE WILL BRING IN PROGRESSIVES AND NOT
LOBBYISTS AND PEOPLE WHO ARE PRO-CORPORATE,
PRO-ESTABLISHMENT, ETC.
SO FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE
DEMOCRATIC PARTY, NOT THE VOTERS, BUT THE ESTABLISHMENT,
BERNIE SANDERS WAS MORE DANGEROUS THAN DONALD TRUMP SO
THEY WOULD RATHER HAVE TRUMP, THE RISK THAT TRUMP MIGHT WIN
EVEN THOUGH BERNIE HAD MUCH BETTER NUMBERS, THAT'S THE RISK
THEY ARE TAKING, THAN LET BERNIE SANDERS REPRESENT THEM.
BECAUSE
FOR THEM IT'S THEIR MONEY THAT'S ON THE LINE, AND THEIR JOBS.
QUICK THOUGHT EXPERIMENT, JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND ALL SIDES,
WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT THE POLLING SHOWING BERNIE NOT JUST
AGAINST TROUBLE BUT BEATING ALL THE OTHER CANDIDATES, WAY BETTER
THAN HILLARY, WE FOUND THAT TO BE A GOOD REASON TO GO IN THAT
DIRECTION, HE'S MORE LIKELY TO WIN.
BUT HYPOTHETICALLY IF THE
POLLING HAD SHOWED THAT SHE WAS FAR MORE LIKELY, WOULD WE HAVE
FOUND THAT TO BE A PERSUASIVE REASON TO SWITCH OVER TO
SUPPORTING HILLARY CLINTON?
IF THEY REPRESENT VERY DIFFERENT
VISIONS OF THE FUTURE OF THE PARTY?
I DON'T KNOW THAT I WOULD'VE SWITCHED DURING THE PRIMARY.
I HEAR YOU ON THAT, AND IT'S A TERRIFIC POINT, JOHN, BUT IT
DEPENDS ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
FOR EXAMPLE IF YOU SAID TO ME
BERNIE SANDERS, IT LOOKS LIKE HE'S GOING TO LOSE BY 10 POINTS
TO DONALD TRUMP, AND HILLARY CLINTON IS GOING TO WIN BY 10
POINTS AGAINST DONALD TRUMP -- IF YOU GO FOR BERNIE SANDERS,
WHO IS MORE IDEOLOGICALLY CLOSE TO YOU, SIGNIFICANTLY SO, OKAY
BUT YOU WILL RISK LOSING TO DONALD TRUMP AND HAVING THIS
HAPPEN, I WOULD PAUSE.
I WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY PAUSE.
THEY HAD NO PAUSE AT ALL.
THAT'S FAIR.
THEY ARE LIKE, WHO CARES?
MY JOB IS ON THE LINE.
I FEEL LIKE THE QUESTION IS FLAWED, NO OFFENSE.
IT IS FLAWED
BECAUSE I DON'T CARE IF SOMEONE WHO GENUINELY LIKES HILLARY
CLINTON AS A CANDIDATE AND BELIEVES IN HER CONTINUES TO
VOTE FOR HER EVEN THOUGH SHE'S UNLIKELY TO WIN AGAINST TRUMP.
WHAT I CARE ABOUT IS WHAT THE DNC AND THE ESTABLISHMENT DOES
TO CHOOSE AND FAVOR AND PUSH FOR ONE CANDIDATE OVER THE OTHER.
THE WAY THEY MANIPULATED THE PRIMARIES WAS THE BIGGEST
PROBLEM TO ME.
LOOK, IF I WERE DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ AND I
SAW THOSE POLL NUMBERS I WOULD BE LIKE, YOU KNOW WHAT?
MAYBE WE
SHOULD STOP BEING DICKS AND ALLOW BERNIE SANDERS'S MESSAGE
TO GET OUT THERE BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE NUMBERS OF OUR PARTY
FAVOR HIM OVER THE PERSON I PERSONALLY LIKE.
SEE WHAT I'M
SAYING?
THEY DIDN'T GIVE HIM A FAIR HEARING.
THEY DIDN'T, THAT'S THE PROBLEM.
IS BERNIE SANDERS GOING TO PICK DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ AS
HEAD OF THE DNC?
NO, AND SHE KNOWS IT. IS HILLARY CLINTON
GOING TO PROTECT HER?
A), SHE WAS THE CHAIR OF HER CAMPAIGN
BACK IN 2008, YOU KNOW HILLARY QUENTIN WOULD HIRE HER, OBAMA
HIRED HER TO HELP HILLARY CLINTON, AND AFTER SHE WAS LET
GO BY THE DNC, WHO HIRED HER?
HILLARY CLINTON.
SHE KNOWS WHERE
HER BREAD IS BUTTERED, AND TO HER THAT CONTEST WAS SO MUCH
MORE IMPORTANT THAN TRUMP.
SO THE COUNTENANCED A LOSS, AND A
LOSS WE GOT.
COMEY, RUSSIA, WEATHER, ALL THOSE COULD BE
RELEVANT, BUT IT'S 100% ON THEIR HEAD BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO
TAKE THAT CHANCE AND THAT LED TO THIS.
AND LET ME BE CLEAR, I THINK IS A PRIVATE VOTER YOU SHOULD
VOTE FOR THE PERSON YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE VOTING FOR
REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE POLLS SAY.
FOR ME THAT'S LESS
IMPORTANT THAN WHAT THE ESTABLISHMENT DID AS A WHOLE TO
WORK AGAINST SOMEONE LIKE BERNIE.
LET ME JUST -- ON AGGRESSIVE PROGRESSIVE I MADE A SIMILAR
POINT THAT THE CORPORATE DEMOCRATS RIGHT NOW, THE HEDGE
FUND MANAGERS, THE SILICON VALLEY GUYS, THE WALL STREET
DEMOCRATS, PEOPLE WHO WERE CLASSICALLY REPUBLICANS WHO BILL
CLINTON BROUGHT INTO THE PARTY, THOSE PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY MORE
COMFORTABLE WITH -- NOT THAT THEY ARE HAPPY -- BUT THEY ARE
MORE COMFORTABLE WITH A TRUMP PRESIDENCY THAN A BERNIE SANDERS
PRESIDENCY, BECAUSE A BERNIE SANDERS PRESIDENCY MAYBE WOULD
HAVE BROKEN UP THE BANKS, WOULD HAVE PUT REGULATIONS ON WHAT
THEY HAD TO DO, WHO KNOWS WHAT THEY WOULD'VE DONE?
SO YES, I
REALLY DO BELIEVE THAT.
NOT THAT THEY ARE HAPPY WITH DONALD
TRUMP, BUT THEY ARE MORE COMFORTABLE FINANCIALLY WITH
DONALD TRUMP BEING PRESIDENT THAN BERNIE SANDERS BECAUSE
LESSER MEMBER, THE DNC'S FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS, BECAUSE THEY
ARE IN BED WITH WALL STREET AND WALL STREET'S AGENDA IS
DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED TO WORKERS, THEIR FIRST ORDER OF
BUSINESS WAS TO DEFEAT THE AGENDA OF THE WORKERS,
MEANING BERNIE SANDERS, AND THAT'S WHAT THEY DID.
THEY PROPPED UP DONALD TRUMP.
LASTLY TO BACK UP JIMMY'S POINT, IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT,
DONALD TRUMP DIDN'T BRING YOU ANY CHANGE.
HILLARY CLINTON
WOULD HAVE PUT GOLDMAN SACHS PEOPLE IN HER CABINET, DONALD
TRUMP DID TOO.
THE STOCK MARKET WOULD HAVE BEEN HAPPY WITH
HILLARY, THEY ARE HAPPY WITH TRUMP.
YOU HAVE CHANGE ON THE OUTSIDE, CONTINUITY ON THE INSIDE.
THERE WILL BE SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN THE WRONG DIRECTION
WHEN IT COMES TO LOTS OF THINGS.
ON SOCIAL ISSUES THERE WILL BE SIGNIFICANT CHANGE.
BUT AS FAR
AS PEOPLE WITH MONEY AND POWER, WHO WITH A RATHER HAVE?
BERNIE
SANDERS, WHO WILL GIVE THEM REAL CHANGE -- THEY DON'T WANT THAT
CHANGE -- OR DONALD TRUMP, WHO DOESN'T LIKE LATINOS OR BLACK
PEOPLE, OR PRETENDS NOT TO TO GET VOTES, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT
IS, BUT IN REALITY HE DIDN'T TOUCH THE POWERFUL, ALL HE
DID WAS HELP THEM.
BUT YOU ARE DISCOUNTING THINGS OUTSIDE OF SOCIAL ISSUES AND
ECONOMIC ISSUES, YOU ARE DISCOUNTING THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE
WHO WILL SUFFER UNDER PRIVATIZING EDUCATION, THE
NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO WILL SUFFER -- AND BY THE WAY, HILLARY
CLINTON WAS FAR FROM PERFECT WHEN IT CAME TO THE ISSUE OF
CLIMATE CHANGE, BUT I WOULD ARGUE THAT DONALD TRUMP IS
WAY WORSE WHEN IT COMES TO THE ISSUE OF CLIMATE CHANGE.
ANA, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THAT.
I WANT TO BE CLEAR, I'M
NOT TALKING ABOUT THE EFFECT ON HUMAN BEINGS, OF COURSE TRUMP IS
1000 TIMES WORSE.
I'M TALKING ABOUT THE POWERFUL.
THE OIL
COMPANIES DON'T CARE ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE, THEY WANT TO
KEEP DRILLING, SO THEY ARE HAPPY WITH TRUMP, THEY WOULD HAVE
DESPISED BERNIE SANDERS.
I'M TALKING ABOUT THE POWERFUL, THE
RICH, THE ESTABLISHMENT.
SO WHEN YOU BREAK IT DOWN, YOUR KIDS
AREN'T GOING TO GET AN EDUCATION -- RATE, I GET TO KEEP MORE OF
MY MONEY AND PAY LESS IN TAXES.
I DON'T EVEN WANT YOUR KIDS
GETTING AN EDUCATION.
I WAS JUST IN SOUTH CAROLINA AND I VISITED
A SLAVE PLANTATION, IT WAS AMAZING.
WHAT IS THE FIRST THING
THE SLAVEOWNERS DID?
MAKE SURE THE SLAVES DID NOT GET AN
EDUCATION, DON'T TEACH THEM READING AND WRITING BECAUSE THEY
MIGHT RISE UP.
I NEED THEM TO BE WORKING ON THAT FARM FOR ME AND
NOT MAKING ANY MONEY.
SO THE POWERFUL, THEY WOULD HAVE GOTTEN
CLINTON, THEY GOT TRUMP, THE ONE GUY THEY DIDN'T WANT WAS BERNIE
SANDERS.
AND LOOK AT THAT, THE DNC, THE RNC, EVERYBODY, THE
MEDIA, WORKED TO KILL BERNIE SANDERS'S CAMPAIGN.
NOW THEY
KNOW HE IS POPULAR, AND ALL OF A SUDDEN, JIMMY, YOU POINTED THIS
OUT BEFORE, ALL OF A SUDDEN HE'S THE BELLE OF THE BALL.
CAN'T KEEP HIM OFF TV NOW.
IN 2015, ALL OF PRIME TIME NEWS I THINK GAVE HIM 11 MINUTES
OF COVERAGE AND GAVE JOE BIDEN'S NOT RUNNING 56 MINUTES OF
COVERAGE.
NOW THAT HE DIDN'T WIN, THEY ARE LIKE, GIVE US THE
RATINGS.
I'LL GIVE YOU TOWNHALL AFTER TOWNHALL.
BEFORE I
WOULDN'T EVEN LOOK AT YOU, BECAUSE GOD FOR BID YOU WIN.
NOW
WE HAVE TRUMP, THAT'S ON THE MEDIA, THE ESTABLISHMENT, THE
DEMOCRATIC PARTY.
I'M TIRED OF CORPORATE DEMOCRATS, AND ON
MONDAY I HAVE AN IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT COMING UP, DON'T
MISS MONDAY'S SHOW.
6 O'CLOCK EASTERN ON MONDAY I WILL TELL
YOU ABOUT A NEW DIRECTION WE WILL TAKE THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.
I'M DONE WITH CORPORATE DEMOCRATS, YOU ARE DONE WITH
THEM.
I LOVE KEITH ELLISON AND HE'S RUNNING FOR THE HEAD OF THE
DNC AND ALL THAT, BUT THEY ARE HAVING A DEBATE, THEY SAY YES WE
SHOULD TAKE BILLIONAIRE MONEY, CORPORATE MONEY, SHOULD WE TAKE
LOBBYIST MONEY?
THAT'S A TINY FRACTION OF IT, THEY SNEAK IT IN
THROUGH CORPORATE MONEY, REALLY -- BUT EVEN THAT, THEY CAN'T
SAY, THAT EVEN GOT KEITH TO COME BACK AND SAY MAYBE WE SHOULD
TAKE LOBBYIST MONEY.
THAN WHAT'S THE POINT?
YOU ARE A USELESS
PARTY FOR THE RICH AND POWERFUL.
WE HAVE TO CHANGE THE PARTY,
THAT'S NOT THEIR PARTY, THAT OUR PARTY.
TIME TO BOARD THE SHIP
AND TAKE
IT OVER.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét