Ep. 1484 - How Kamala’s Focus On Gender Ideology Cost Her The Election
01:03:31 Share

Today on The Matt Walsh Show, according to exit polling data, the issue that may have ultimately swung the election was not the economy or immigration, but the trans issue. According to exit polls, swing voters were most concerned about putting a stop to Kamala's radical trans agenda. Also, the FEMA official who was fired for telling her team to skip homes with Trump signs is now speaking out. She says FEMA is lying. This was not an isolated incident. And today in our daily cancellation, I'm tragically forced to cancel The Daily Wire's own Ben Shapiro. He has left me no choice. All of that and more today on The Matt Walsh Show.

It's official. Am I racist? The number one documentary of the decade is now submitted for an Academy Award. That's right. It's submitted. Academy Award submitted officially. You can only watch Am I Racist with a Daily Wire Plus membership. Don't have one? Go to dailywire.com slash subscribe and use code Trump for 47% off today.

You know, a question I get a lot from my audience, especially after they've seen one of my movies, is how can I get into the conservative fight? Well, for starters, you need to be strategic about where your money is going. Most credit cards are funneling millions to left-wing causes and candidates hoping you don't notice, but now you can align your spending with your values. Coin is America's first conservative credit card. That's C-O-I-G-N dot com.

A portion of every transaction is donated to conservative causes and charities at no cost to you. Coin empowers us to get woke out of our wallets, and it's a good-looking credit card too, bright red with we the people on the front. Coin works everywhere, Visa's accepted, and comes with 100% U.S.-based customer service.

and consumer protections. Thousands of patriots are earning cash back while fighting the liberal agenda. The demand for this card is so high that there's now a wait list. This is a movement. Be a part of it. Go to COIGN.com. To join the wait list, be sure to select Daily Wire in the How Did You Hear About Us section. Terms apply. Go to coin.com slash disclosures for full details.

Imagine being a strategist for the Democrat Party right now. You're tasked with conducting a post-mortem analysis of an election in which virtually every single demographic group in the country, in all 50 states, turn very sharply against you. Tens of millions of Americans ignored the endorsements of modern-day oracles like Taylor Swift and Queen Latifah and voted for the candidate that you've been calling a Hitler-loving threat to democracy. How do you even begin to catalog all of the various failures that led your party to this point?

Up until now, the prevailing excuse in the Democrat Party has been pretty clear. As I've outlined before, many Democrats are happy to dismiss the entire country as racist and sexist. In fact, Hispanics are apparently racist against themselves.

This is the kind of theory you come up with when you don't want to actually talk to Hispanic people or be anywhere near them for that matter. But you have to find some way to explain why they might want to build a wall and enforce the law so you conclude that they must hate themselves. That must be it. At the same time, there is at least one Democrat-aligned group that seems to be taking a different and more serious approach.

And I'm talking about something called Blueprint, which I hadn't heard of until a day ago. But Blueprint describes itself as a vital tool that can help Democrats win elections in the future. This is a left-wing group that basically tries to craft messaging for the DNC. Now, over the past week, Blueprint has employed pollsters and strategists to figure out how Democrats lost so badly on Election Day. They've been tasked with sifting through the wreckage to identify what caused the implosion. And

What they found is pretty remarkable.

Even given all the endless polls and analysis that we've been subjected to this month, this one stands out. And I hadn't seen these results until Charlie Kirk pointed them out the other day in a post on X. And he posted this chart of Blueprint's findings. It shows all the issues that voters cared about in this election, ranked by their level of relative importance. And they calculated this by asking voters to compare a bunch of issues in a kind of round-robin analysis. And as you can see,

You know, there are a lot of issues on the list. Voters had many options to choose from. And according to Blueprint's findings, swing voters who ultimately voted for Trump, meaning the people who determine the outcome of the election, were very unhappy with Kamala Harris's focus on transgender issues. In fact, Kamala's views on topics like transgenderism at the expense of substantive issues

was the number one most important issue on these swing voters' minds. So just so we're clear on the terms, Blueprint defines a swing voter as, quote, those who are undecided in the presidential race, have changed their voting preferences since 2020, voting Democrat in one election, Republican in the other, or are independents who either indicate they split their votes between Democrat and Republican, or who hold either favorable or unfavorable views of both Trump and Harris. Now, if you go to Blueprint's crosstabs,

Here's what they found specifically about this group of voters. Among swing voters who ultimately voted for Trump, the top reason for voting for Trump over Kamala was, quote, Kamala Harris is focused more on cultural issues like transgender issues rather than helping the middle class. So that was the single most important issue for these swing voters relative to all the others. The next most important issue was inflation, followed closely by illegal immigration.

Now, this is a finding that if you had floated it as a possibility prior to the election, probably would have gotten you laughed out of the room. But now that Democrats realize that most voters think they're crazy, they're finally talking about it. Democrat-aligned pollsters are openly recognizing that transgenderism, including the associated government policies that have been championed by trans activists and the Biden-Harris administration, is a massive problem for the Democrat Party.

And yet this is a problem that certainly at least in a pre-what is a woman world, if you go back to 2021 and earlier, it's something that very few Republicans wanted to touch. In fact, plenty of Republicans still don't really want to talk about this issue. It's an issue that for years I was personally ridiculed for pursuing and talking about and focusing on, including by many people on the right.

Even among people who believe we're on the correct side of this whole debate, a lot of them still said that it was a waste of time to talk about it. It doesn't really matter. These people, they insisted for so long that so-called culture war issues are a sideshow, irrelevant distractions, supposedly. But they obviously aren't. As I've been arguing for years and years and years, they are not. These so-called culture war issues are the most important issues, including in elections.

This is what people vote based on, even more than the economy, more than anything they vote based on this. Because culture is everything, it is the stuff that a nation is made of. And that obviously matters politically, people vote for culture. People don't just vote based on candidates personalities or even on specific proposals and policies, they vote for the country they want to live in. And now a critical mass of those voters have decided that

They don't want to live in a country that can't even define the word woman. Now, to be clear, this result isn't saying that transgenderism was at the top of voters' minds all by itself. Instead, what this result reveals is that the trans issue is about much more than transgenderism. It's symptomatic of something larger and deeper, which again is something that those of us who have been fighting this fight for so long have been trying to say. This has been our point.

Voters see the trans agenda as an assault on truth and on basic common sense, which is exactly what it is. It's a destructive set of beliefs that serves only to derail human progress while harming a lot of people, including the country as a whole. Trans ideology requires that Americans affirm what is not true.

and reject objective reality on the theory that this is somehow the more humane and compassionate approach. But there's nothing humane or sustainable about lying, especially when the point of the lying is to obscure something as fundamental and unavoidable and immutable as human biology and human nature. If you tolerate lies about that, you will tolerate lies about anything.

If a white guy wants to identify as black, then you can't object. If a politician wants to claim that crime is down when it's really not, you can't complain about that either. If the government wants to claim that the economy is doing fine when no one can find a job or afford groceries, then you got to shut up and just take it. Because once reality is subjective, you can't communicate anymore in any kind of meaningful way, much less fix problems. All you could do is spiral further and further down into insanity.

Trans ideology is built on the premise that we all have our own truth, that there is no objective reality or universal truth that we are all a part of and expected to acknowledge. And if we accept trans ideology, then we have accepted that premise. And if we accept that premise, we have tacitly accepted every other left-wing premise because now we have no basis to deny any of it. We cannot call anything untrue.

Now there is nothing that can be called untrue, which also means that there's nothing that can be called true. This is the fundamental reason why the fight against trans ideology matters and has always mattered. It's the case that some of us have been making for many years, even against the objections of our own side, which is easy to forget about that now. But again, if you go back, to me, it was just yesterday, it seems like, that talking about this is going to get, is going to

provoke a large number of people on your own side to tell you to shut up and stop talking about it because it doesn't matter. But now the voters see it and agree, and it's one of the main reasons why Democrats were just obliterated in the election. Now, the Trump campaign, to its credit, understood that this issue would resonate with the voters. That's why they released this ad, which we played during the campaign, but we'll play it again because it may have been

the single most effective ad in the entire campaign. In fact, it may be one of the best ads ever produced by a political campaign. Seriously, watch. - Amala supports taxpayer funded sex changes for prisoners. - Surgery. - For prisoners. - For prisoners. Every transgender.

inmate in the prison system would have access. It's hard to believe, but it's true. Even the liberal media was shocked Kamala supports taxpayer-funded sex changes for prisoners and illegal aliens. Every transgender inmate would have access. Kamala's for they, them. President Trump is for you. I'm Donald J. Trump, and I approve this message. And easily the most effective ad that Trump has ever run in his entire political career, and one of the most effective political ads of all time.

And all the numbers tell us that. That's not just my opinion. All the data tells us that. Now, when she spoke to Fox News in the only hostile interview she participated in during the entire campaign, Kamala was asked directly about this ad. She had the opportunity to disavow all this nonsense. She could have admitted that it was a terrible idea to use taxpayer money to fund sex changes for illegals or for anyone else.

She could have acknowledged that people can't change their gender or pick their pronouns. She also could have laid out a clear definition of the word woman, which is a pretty important word to define, especially when you're running to be the first woman president. She could have done any of that. And it would have upset some people on her own side. But it would have, to a large extent, mitigated the most effective attack against her. If she had just been willing to admit that she understands human biology,

In other words, Kamala had the opportunity to do what the African tribesmen did when I spoke to them in What is a Woman? She could have laughed in the face of this absurdity, as anybody with common sense would do. She could have demonstrated to Americans that she's not going to surrender the federal government to a small number of radical anti-truth activists. Kamala couldn't do any of that. She didn't do it. Instead, just so we remember, here's how she addressed this ad when Bret Baier brought it up.

Would you still advocate for using taxpayer dollars for gender reassignment searches? I will follow the law, just as I think Donald Trump would say he did. You would have a say as president. Like I said, I think he spent $20 million on those ads, trying to create a sense of fear in the voters because he actually has no plan in this election that is about focusing on the needs of the American people. Whereas, $20 million on that ad.

on an issue that as it relates to the biggest issues that affect the American people, it's really quite remote. How many people total in the entire country, total, are actually in favor of giving taxpayers funded sex change operations for convicted criminals? How many total people in the country are actually in favor of that? Could you scrounge together 5,000 people in the entire country?

who actually support that, I think that'd be difficult. And so it is the far, far fringiest fringe of her radical base that she allowed herself to be held hostage to, and she lost. She mocks the Trump campaign in that clip for spending so much money on the ad. This is the candidate whose campaign raised a billion dollars and ended up in debt by tens of millions of dollars.

Because they hired a bunch of celebrity influencers who it turns out have no influence. Yet she's lecturing the Trump campaign on how they should have spent their money. She's upset at that. She's claiming that arguably the most effective political ad of all time was a waste of money. Maybe the Trump campaign should have gone out and gone bankrupt in order to get Megan Thee Stallion to twerk on stage. That strategy obviously worked out so well for Kamala.

And then Kamala goes on in the clip to dismiss the whole issue as unimportant. She claims that Americans don't really care about all this stuff, but they do. They care about it because they care about the truth. And they care about the truth because if you don't have that, literally nothing else matters. Already there are some signs that left-wing media is coming around ever so begrudgingly to this reality, maybe. This was Joe Scarborough, for example.

That's what I heard. And I didn't hear it from Republicans. I didn't hear it from Trumpers. I heard it from Democrats over the past three or four years. Their kids were afraid to talk in class and say something unpopular because they would be canceled. And it's an epidemic. Willie will tell you it happens in New York City schools. It happens in colleges. And all of this adds up to people going, come on, come on. This is crazy.

Yeah. And Mike, it's having an impact from, again, the trans ad to the athletics. And by the way, by the way, as we've said on the show a thousand times, Democrats should be smarter on the women's athletics thing. Eighty five percent of Americans oppose men transitioning after puberty and competing against women.

And I'm not just saying this the day after the election. I've been saying this for years. This is not a hard call. You can show compassion and you can show grace. And as the Republican governor of Utah said, let's figure out a way to do this. But one way we don't do this is by allowing men who transition after puberty competing against young girls who have been

working their entire lives to be as good as they can be, and then they get destroyed in the pool, on the track, etc., etc., etc. Now, you can imagine how well this monologue went over among the various LGBTQ alphabet activist groups and publications. The Advocate, for example, wrote an entire article attacking Scarborough for this. They stated that, quote,

If you voted for Donald Trump and against Kamala Harris because you had something against the trans community, you were beyond an outlier. You were not even a blip on the radar. So why are people like Joe and Mika callously targeting the trans community for Harris's loss? And why are they doing it so brazenly? Instead of discussing the real reasons why Harris lost to Trump, they trash innocent human beings, the most vulnerable in society. So again, they assume that this is a fringe issue when it obviously is not. And they don't think it is either, by the way.

I mean, they say that now as a cope, but these are the same. The Advocate is an LGBT news public. This is all they talk about. Like literally, these issues are the only thing. Their whole publication is dedicated to it. And here they are saying it's a fringe issue. So you're admitting that you're fringe? No, they don't think it's fringe. They don't want it to be fringe. They have made sure that it's not fringe. They are the ones, left-wing activists and these kinds of, they have taken these issues and put them in the center of the culture.

Now they say that voters who are tired of the trans nonsense are a blip on the radar. But truth is, as this blueprint poll demonstrates, it's not a blip. Americans don't want to affirm lies anymore. They are tired of having their culture held hostage by these people. Doesn't matter how much you try to berate these voters for quote, trashing innocent human beings or whatever. Something is either true or it's not.

Affirming the truth is not trashing anyone. It's the bare minimum necessary to ensure that society can continue to function. But on CNN, they still haven't come around to this realization. Instead, they just hosted a live on-air struggle session after a guest pointed out that Americans don't like the idea of boys competing in women's sports. Watch.

I think there are a lot of families out there who don't believe boys should play girls sports. They're not boys. I'm not going to listen to transphobia at this table. I am not going to listen to them call a trans girl a boy. Are you going to allow me to finish my explanation? When you use a word to slur, I'm going to interrupt. That's not how it is. They're not boys. They're not boys. They're not playing girls softball. I'm not going to sit there and listen to that.

"Look, this is a really heated issue," right? And, Sher Michael, I know you. I know that you understand that people have different views on this.

I think out of respect for Jay, like, let's try to talk about this in a way that is respectful. Okay, so let me rephrase this since I'm being targeted here. I don't think you're not. No, no, no, it's okay. Just to be clear, you are not being targeted. But I am, but it's okay. I'm specifically saying that I know that you are not intending to be transphobic. He should know that I'm not. But I want you to know. I want to give you an opportunity to recognize.

Regular people interpret it. That's not regular people. There's no consensus that these are actually boys. This whole thing about trans girls is a canard. We're talking about a tiny, tiny sliver of the population. So those people, the guy, the pro-trans guy, the white guy, Jay Michelson is his name. The other one is Shermichael. I forget the other guy's name. Shermichael Singleton.

They both sound like made-up names, don't they? They sound like the names you would put on a fake ID when you're 17 years old. But anyway, Jay Michelson, that guy, this is the guy. This guy, if you're a Democrat and you're wondering who to blame, him. And not just him, but him and his people and everything they represent. Your party allowed itself to be taken hostage by those people sometime 10 to 15 years ago.

You had a chance 10 to 15 years ago, right? When the LGBT extremists and the trans extremists came along and said everything's about us now. You have to surrender reality to us. You have to pretend you don't understand basic reality that you've always actually understood and that all humans have understood since the beginning of time. You have to surrender all of that to us because it makes us feel bad.

When those people came along and said that 10 to 15 years ago, you had a chance to say, no, okay, no, we got other things we're doing over here and we're not gonna surrender it all to you. Who the hell are you? Sorry, I'm not gonna tolerate having someone call a boy a boy. I don't give a what you tolerate. I don't care how you feel. What do I care? You can feel whatever you want. Go cry in a corner. Go cry in a corner. Go ahead, doesn't matter. I'll laugh at you. I'll laugh at your tears. That's what I'll do. So you had the chance, if you're a Democrat,

To say that 10 to 15 years ago, if you had done that, who knows what world you're living in now? Who knows? But you didn't. You let that guy take over and he's holding all of you hostage. And he is the reason him and everything he represents is the reason why your party is in shambles right now. And you deserve it. You deserve all of it.

This guy who now says it's a slur to refer to a boy as a boy. A slur. It's a slur to say of a boy, he's a boy. If a 12-year-old boy says he feels like a girl, you don't get to substitute your bigoted opinions for the well-informed judgment of a preteen, is what he says. Who do you think you are? All you can do is just nod your head and ask a doctor to pump his body full of sterilizing hormones. This is the position of CNN, really.

It's also the position of not just Jay Michelson, but also the woman hosting the show. But it's the position of a vanishingly small amount of the electorate. Now that clip goes on for a while, by the way. The first guy says something that's obviously true, that boys are competing in women's sports and they shouldn't be. And then he gets relentlessly heckled for it. He's eventually told that the American Medical Association says that children can change their gender. So therefore, you don't get to have an opinion on the topic.

You have to accept their judgment or else you'll be banned from CNN, just like the last guest who tried to speak his mind on the same panel. This is the divide that Democrats are experiencing right now as a party. This is the choice they have. They can either choose to acknowledge reality or they can double down on this, on these absurdities and falsehoods. And if they go with the absurdities and falsehoods,

Then they're going to keep haranguing Americans, calling for censorship and screaming at an audience that rapidly is becoming non-existent. Whatever they decide, it's now clear that voters have made up their minds. On Tuesday, swing voters decided that affirming reality is the single most important issue in this country. Nothing is more important than the truth. Nothing can be. This is the political victory that we've been seeking from the moment we began fighting the deranged excesses of gender ideology several years ago, and now it's here.

But as long as the left keeps pushing it, the fight will continue. Now let's get to our five headlines.

Let me tell you about a looming threat to our constitutional republic that the mainstream media won't cover. The radical left is plotting a Supreme Court coup and they're not even trying to hide it anymore, folks. These progressive ideologues want to eliminate the court's conservative majority by packing it with their own handpicked justices. It's not court reform, it's a blatant power grab to get the outcomes they want. We've already seen their playbook, made up ethical attacks on justices, illegal protests at their homes, and open threats from so-called representatives.

It's Venezuela-style court packing. It would spell the end of judicial independence and the rule of law as we know it. But hey, who needs checks and balances when you can have a rubber stamp for your radical agenda? But there's hope. First Liberty is leading the charge to protect the Supreme Court from this radical plan. They're fighting to preserve the legitimacy of the court and the separation of powers that safeguards our freedoms.

Here's what you need to do. Go to SupremeCoup.com slash Walsh. That's SupremeCoup.com slash Walsh to learn how you can help stop the left's takeover of the Supreme Court. The future of our country is quite literally in your hands. Go to SupremeCoup.com slash Walsh today. So this just popped up as we started recording. I haven't even listened to the clip yet, but this...

This is Marnie Washington, the FEMA official who was fired for telling her team of aid workers to avoid homes with Trump signs. The big story that Daily Wire broke, we talked about yesterday in the opening monologue. She just did an interview where she claimed that actually this is not an isolated incident, as FEMA has alleged. She says that this was apparently standard operating procedure for

And that FEMA did the same thing in North Carolina. She did this, told her team to avoid Trump supporting homes in Florida. She's saying that, no, this actually happened in North Carolina. Let's listen to the clip. Stating that I was fired. They all alleged that these activists

actions were made on my own recognizances and that it was for my own political advances. However, if you look at the record, there is what we call a community trend. And unfortunately, it just so happened that the political hostility that was encountered

by my team, and I was on two different teams during this deployment. They just so happened to have the Trump campaign signage. FEMA always preaches avoidance first and then de-escalation.

So this is not isolated. This is a colossal event of avoidance, not just in the state of Florida, but you will find avoidance in the Carolinas. Senior leadership will lie to you and tell you that they do not know. But if you ask the DSA crew leads and specialists what they are experiencing in the field, they will tell you. Demand for FEMA to give you those incident reports. Wow. Wow. Wow.

Not a surprise, not a surprise. I mean, I said yesterday when we talked about this that I obviously don't believe that this was an isolated event. I don't believe that this woman took it upon herself to do this on her own, on her own recognizance, as she would put it. I don't think, no, that doesn't mean that she should be fired and she should be prosecuted, but not just her.

Trump needs to get in there and clean out the entire agency and fire everybody in leadership and prosecute them. That's what needs to happen. But I totally believe what she's saying here because it's the only thing that makes sense. It's the only thing that makes sense. And she's saying she has evidence of it. I'm sure she does. This would be an easy thing to prove. And I think it will be proven, but it never made any sense. I mean, the fact that this was put, like I said yesterday, it's put so casually in writing that

In a list of just standard, most of its standard tips like drink a lot of water, wear a jacket if it's cold or whatever. And then thrown in there in the middle of it, not even like at the top of the list or the bottom, but just in the middle. And avoid Trump homes with Trump signs. It very much reads like, it reads as though it was not the first time that had ever been written down or that instruction had ever been given.

It reads like this is just a standard thing that they say all the time. And that's what she's saying. And that tracks, I would say. It tracks that this is what they were doing. And so this is a massive, massive scandal. I mean, this is a massive scandal, obviously. And FEMA has put itself in a position where now...

you know, they can't really offer any other excuse. They kind of missed their opportunity to come up with some other excuse. Not that there could be an excuse, clearly. Like, there could not possibly be a valid excuse for denying disaster aid to homes with Trump signs. Clearly, that's a constitutional violation. And there could not possibly be any

It's like the most basic constitutional violation. Everyone is supposed to be equal under the law, and this is a denial of that basic human right. So there couldn't be a good excuse, but they missed their only chance to come up with some kind of excuse because they've just denied that it's happening. They said this is the only time.

And then when it comes out, they know this has happened all over the place. It happened in North Carolina. It's been happening in Trump's entire term. What are they going to say now? They can't circle back around and say, oh, yeah, well, but here's the reason. You already lied. And I expected the excuse that she kind of offers there is what I expected the excuse to be. And it's bull crap. It's bogus.

But she talks about, she says that we avoid them. And I think she gets into this more in the interview beyond just that clip. But she says that she claims that sometimes the homes that have Trump flags or Trump signs would be hostile to FEMA workers. And so they just avoid them altogether. That's the claim. And I figured that that would be the excuse. It'd be something like that.

Like I said, FEMA's already, if that was going to be their excuse, too late because you claimed it wasn't happening. In fact, you acknowledged already that it's a major violation. It's a horrible thing. You acknowledge that in your statement and said that this is the only time it's ever happened. So this is the excuse that she's giving. And as I said, it's completely bogus, obviously. You can't just assume that based on someone's political affiliations that they're going to

your aid, and even if they do reject it, okay, well, give them the option to reject it. Was there an epidemic of Trump supporters physically assaulting FEMA workers? No, there wasn't, because if that was happening, we would have heard about it, okay? We would have heard about it, we'd see the videos, it'd be all over the place. We didn't hear about one case of that happening, not one, because of course that didn't happen. Now, Trump supporters may be skeptical of FEMA workers, I am too. Doesn't mean you're gonna assault them or accost them.

And the other thing also is that if that's what you're worried about, if you're worried that Trump supporters are very skeptical of FEMA and have a certain hostility to FEMA. Okay, well, this isn't gonna help that situation. So you think there's a certain segment of the population that's hostile to FEMA workers and your way of solving that is to deny them disaster relief? Well, turns out they had every reason. Okay, if there was hostility to FEMA officials and FEMA workers, turns out there was every reason for them to be hostile to them.

I think it's fascinating that she talks about community trends. That's an interesting one, isn't it? She says, well, sometimes there are community trends that mean that a certain community is unsafe. Oh, so we can start talking about community trends now, can we?

We can start denying people critical aid or we can stop sending people into communities to help them if there's a trend of that community being maybe having hostility, being dangerous. I don't know. I don't know if that's logic that Marnie Washington wants to pursue very far. I don't know about that one.

Here's some good news. It's now official. The Hill reports, Republicans are projected to keep control of the House of Representatives, handing the party total control of Washington with President-elect Trump back in the White House in January. Decision desk HQ projected the GOP would hold the House by winning its 218th seat on Monday, the number needed for a majority in the lower chamber. The results of a major win for Speaker Mike Johnson have skyrocketed up from obscurity to lead the House GOP. And

And yeah, so they've won the House. So that's it. Republicans will control everything, the House, the Senate, the presidency. Great news, cause for celebration. Let us rejoice and be glad. This also means that we need to hold these people accountable. And that's very important. We need to be absolutely ruthless and uncompromising as conservatives. We need to make it clear to Republicans, Republicans in Congress and Trump himself,

that failure is not an option. You have two years to accomplish everything that you said you would accomplish. This is the window. And there probably won't be another two years. And you talk about trends, like the trend for several presidential terms in a row now is that very often the party that controls the White House ends up losing power

in the midterms, ends up losing seats in the midterms. And there's every reason to think that will happen again. I mean, we don't know, but you certainly can't, we can't assume that there will be another two years after this too. You can't assume that. So just operate as though, operate under the assumption that these are the only two years you're going to have to move forward your agenda without really any way for the Democrats to obstruct it. I mean, they'll try, they'll try to obstruct it, but

Now's the time to do it. And you have to do it. You have to exploit this window. Failure is not an option. Let's not forget that this exact thing happened in 2016. And Trump did not win by such a significant margin in 2016, but he did win and Republicans took control of Congress. And what was achieved in that two-year window?

Not a whole lot. I mean, there were some tax cuts, but not much else. It was not a very productive time. It would be hard for anyone to argue that they effectively or efficiently or sufficiently used the power that they had been given. And the same thing cannot happen again. It just cannot. So we can celebrate and be happy, and we should, but then you've got to hit the ground running. And there's not going to be any—I don't want to hear from any conservatives that, hey, just give them time. Let's be patient and give them time. Nope, not going to be patient.

Not giving you time, not going to be patient. You got to start stacking the wins right away, right away. Because there isn't time. We have no time. We have only the smallest blip of time and you've got to use it. So that has to be our attitude. And this is the burden that comes with winning. Winning is great. I, in fact, am not tired of winning. I don't think I could ever get tired of it. I much prefer winning to losing. But winning comes with obligation.

Losing doesn't. That's why Republicans were so comfortable losing for so long. And in the pre-Trump world, Republicans were perfectly happy to lose. And they lost all the time and they were happy to lose. And because it meant that they didn't have to do anything. To be the minority party in DC, to be a Republican in a government controlled by Democrats, kind of a sweet gig, really. At least that's how many of them seem to view it for so long before Trump.

Because they had all the prestige of being elected officials, but they weren't expected to really do anything. They could play the role of the opposition, make fiery statements on cable news and all of that, but not actually do anything because they weren't able to. So they had an excuse. Nobody could blame them for failing to advance their agenda because they couldn't advance it. They had no power. But now that's changed. And having power means having expectations. Power means

makes victory possible, it also makes failure possible. Because now you're out on that tightrope. You're over the precipice, and if you fall, it's going to be ugly. That's why responsibility is a scary thing. Because now we expect something from you. And we do expect something. We expect a lot. It's like when you're the backup quarterback sitting on the sidelines. Kind of nice, because you're not playing, but

That means you can't screw up. The fans can't be mad at you. You can't be embarrassed or blamed for a loss. Nothing is your fault. You get to sit there kind of like telling yourself that if you were on the field, the team would be doing so much better, but you never have to prove it. You can just sit there. But what happens when the starter goes down with an injury and the coach puts you in?

I mean, now you have the opportunity to be the hero. You know, you could throw a game-winning touchdown and achieve football immortality, but you could also fail badly. And now it's real. You know, now you've got the linebackers chasing you down and you got to make the throws into the tight windows. And now, I mean, to use Tim Walz's phrase, if somebody runs a pick six, quote unquote, it'll be your fault. And that's the burden of being on the field.

of being in the game and now Republicans are you know, they're in They're in the game now, you know, you're you're on the field You're the man now and you got a you got to come through you just have to all right Trump Had a big announcement a couple of days ago as he starts unveiling what he is saying his first few weeks in office will be and So far it all sounds great to me. So here's uh, here's one plan that he's Says he's going to put in place

And one other thing I'll be doing very early in the administration is closing up the Department of Education in Washington, D.C., and sending all education and education work and needs back to the states. We want them to run the education of our children because they'll do a much better job of it. You can't do worse. We spend more money per pupil by three times than any other nation.

And yet we're absolutely at the bottom. We're one of the worst. So you can't do worse. We're going to end education coming out of Washington, D.C. We're going to close it up, all those buildings all over the place. And you have people that in many cases hate our children. We're going to send it all back to the states.

All right, here we go. I mean, this is how you start exploiting the opportunity and stacking wins. And this would be a massive win. Absolutely earth shattering, really, truly. And I'll tell you why shutting down the Department of Education would be so hugely significant. I mean, you know how I feel about the Department of Education itself. I've made that very clear. The department has been a disaster for the education system. It's been a disaster for our children. It's just, it is a statistical fact that

That kids became less educated, less equipped to succeed in the world, less intelligent, less competent after the department was established. That's a fact. There is no evidence, there's no evidence at all that the department has succeeded in enhancing education for anyone. There is no marker you can point to to say, well, they've succeeded there. There's lots and lots of evidence going the other way.

Because this thing is a monstrosity that needs to be annihilated. And I really, really hope that Trump actually does it. But there's another great advantage to doing this, which is that I think it will help Americans to start thinking differently about the federal government. This would be a kind of tip of the iceberg moment for the American people. Because look, there's no question that if Trump actually does this, there will be

panic at first in the public. I mean, that panic will obviously be intentionally drummed up by Democrats and by the media, but it will be drummed up successfully. And some people, probably a lot of people, will fall for it at first, and you've gotta be ready for that. Think about how the left reacted to Republicans saying that they don't want gay porn books in schools, and they called that a book ban, right?

And they had some success with that narrative, some success. Well, take that times a million, okay, when you abolish the Department of Education. The way the left and the media is going to tell that story and explain what's happening. Obviously, we know what they are going to say is that abolishing the Department of Education means that you're abolishing education. That education itself has been abolished.

Donald Trump. That's what they're going to say. And some people will fall for that. They just will. And so there's going to be an outcry at first. And I would assume that I'm not saying anything that Trump himself and that the upcoming Trump administration doesn't already know. But that's baked in. It's like, all right, you're going to do this thing and it's going to be a huge, huge outcry.

I mean, you haven't seen anything like it in terms of the bad and Trump's seen a lot of backlash. But this is just you're going after one of the most sacred of sacred cows for these people. And then Department of Education itself is full of like hundreds of bureaucrats who you're gonna take their job away. I'm glad you will. Don't get me wrong. Absolutely make them unemployed. I think that's fantastic. But

they are not going to be happy. And some of these people are powerful. Some of them are well connected. And so, yeah, it's going to be a whole thing. It's going to be a whole thing, all right? Just to put it in very specific terms, it's going to be a whole thing. But here's the good news. There's going to be all this panic. Oh my gosh, he's abolishing it. And then everything will be fine. Then all of the panicked people will see that

The department was abolished, and here it is a year later, and everything's fine. So they didn't even notice. If not for the media screaming about it, they wouldn't have even noticed. Nothing in their lives or in their kids' lives has changed at all. Nothing at the school has changed. Okay, they're going to be told that, well, if you shut down the Department of Education, it means that the schools are shutting down. A year later, it's like, oh, no, the schools are still open. Schools are fine. Everything's fine. Nothing's changed. Literally nothing has changed. You will not even notice.

It does not change anything, not change for the worse anyway. It'll change some things for the better, but even those changes will take time to really settle in. Those changes are not gonna be immediately obvious. So really at worst, it won't change anything. And if you can get rid of an entire department of the federal government and it won't change anything on the ground at all, well then that department should not exist. That's reason enough to get rid of it.

So that's what's gonna happen and and and I think you know, the left is gonna keep screaming about it forever But I think most voters, you know, we got to be realistic. I mean people are not stupid but We have to be realistic and we realize that there's a certain, you know portion of people who are Susceptible to falling into these kind of mass panics We've seen it time and time again, and this is gonna be another one but

eventually you snap out of it and they're going to snap out of it and they're going to see that, well, wait a minute, everything's fine. Like it's fine. My kid's still going to school and everything is all the same as it was before. Hasn't hurt, hasn't hurt us at all. And then maybe you start thinking, wow, well, if we didn't need the department of education in order to have a functioning education system, then what else don't we need?

My gosh, can we have a clean environment without an environmental protection agency? Could that be possible? Can we have secure transportation without a Transportation Security Administration? And what exactly does the Department of Homeland Security do? Didn't we have a pretty secure homeland prior to its invention in the 21st century? Yes, there was 9/11, but did 9/11 happen because there wasn't a DHS? Is that the reason it happened?

What does the ATF do that isn't already done by like a dozen other federal law enforcement agencies? And so on and so on. These are the questions that maybe people start seriously asking themselves when they see how utterly and totally expendable the Department of Education actually is. This is the dirty little secret that is not much of a secret to some of us about the federal government is that so many of them, so many of them,

The job only exists for its own sake. It exists just to be a job that someone is doing and getting paid to do. It exists to justify its own existence. And truly, you could go in and wipe out 50% of the federal government, cut them tomorrow, and it would not affect anything on the ground for the vast majority of people. That is the truth. And they know it. All these people know it.

People that work in the federal government know it better than anybody, which is why if you ever talk to someone who works in the federal government or has worked in it and is honest about it, they're going to tell you, like, yeah, I did a job and there was like 10 other people just in my office who did the same job. It was like one job for 10 people. That's the whole government is like that. So...

Which is why they are so desperate to stop anyone from actually making any serious cuts, because they know that once that starts happening, people are going to start to realize how useless these people really are. And so, you know, you got to start somewhere. And I think this is a great place to start.

Men, have you heard of Rose Sparks? This dual action prescription merges the powerhouse ingredients found in generic Viagra and Cialis, Sildenafil and Tadalafil into one formidable treatment. But it's not merely about the ingredients and the medication, it's how you're taking it. That's why Rose Sparks are designed to dissolve under your tongue.

That's huge because dissolvable treatments hits your bloodstream faster than old school pills. Rose Sparks keeps you present with your partner instead of waiting for a pill to work. Rose Sparks leverages the benefits of sublingual administration, meaning the tablet dissolves under your tongue. This method allows for fast absorption directly into the bloodstream bypassing the digestive system. The result, quicker onset of action, reducing the wait time typically associated with traditional pills.

Plus, the dowel fill, the active ingredient in Cialis, lasts in the system for up to 36 hours. So when the mood is right, you'll be ready without another dose. To get $15 off your first order and to find out if prescription RoSparks are right for you, connect with a provider at ro.co.walsh. That's ro.co.walsh for $15 off your first order. Compounded drugs are permitted to be prescribed under federal law but are not FDA approved and do not undergo FDA safety effectiveness or manufacturing review. Only available if prescribed after an online consultation with a provider.

If you haven't heard, Am I Racist, the number one documentary of the decade, is now officially submitted for an Academy Award. That's right, it's Academy Award submitted. That has to mean something. No need to wait for a nomination or even a win. You can see what all the buzz is about right now on Daily Wire Plus. Use code TRUMP and we'll take 47% off your new annual membership. On top of that, with that, you'll get access to the movie, a special deleted scene that didn't make it into the theaters, and bonus behind-the-scenes footage from

showing how he pulled off one of the greatest trolls in history. But the only way to watch this Academy Award-submitted hit comedy is with a Daily Wire Plus membership. Go to dailywire.com slash subscribe. Use code Trump to get 47% off your new annual membership today. Now let's get to our daily cancellation. Over the weekend, I was callously attacked in a YouTube video by a notorious far-right extremist by the name of Ben Shapiro.

Ben waged this brutal cyber assault against me because of a recent video of mine where I listed the top five most overrated movies of all time. And Ben decided to issue a rebuttal to my list, even though I explicitly say at the beginning of my original video that my list is incontrovertibly correct and is not up for discussion. Did Ben not hear that disclaimer? What part of not up for discussion did you not understand, Ben?

Now, there's not enough time for me to explain my list in detail again. You can go to that video and hear for yourself. Just to briefly summarize, the top five most overrated films of all time, as declared by me and by science, are Shawshank Redemption, Toy Story, The Dark Knight, the entire Marvel Cinematic Universe, and all of the Star Wars films, including and especially the originals.

Now, some people have speculated that the whole reason I made this list and singled out those particular movies was solely to troll Ben Shapiro. That is the wild conspiracy theory floating out there on the internet. But I ask you this, do I seem like the kind of guy who would take the time to record a video just to troll someone? Am I so petty and contrarian and immature that

That I would make a video designed solely to annoy and antagonize one of the owners of the company I work for. I think we all know the answer to that question. Now today I want to respond to this unprovoked assault and onslaught from someone who I thought was a friend.

I'm not gonna even acknowledge his rebuttal to my points about Toy Story, Shawshank Redemption, Star Wars or Marvel. Frankly, I'm so obviously correct about all those films that would be almost insulting to the viewer for me to bother defending the point. My arguments were expressed so eloquently and presented with such striking lucidity and depth of analysis that it would be pointless to elaborate. It would be like asking Michelangelo to recreate the statue of David.

He could do it, certainly, but why should he waste his time repeating himself? Instead, I'm going to focus only on Ben's response to my arguments against The Dark Knight. Ben is very fond of The Dark Knight. He talks about it all the time. He told me he watches the movie once a week and weeps each time.

He didn't say that specifically, but I read between the lines. And the point is that he loves the movie. And that probably explains why his response on this movie in particular was so vicious and so hurtful. Watch.

Number three, The Dark Knight. Oh, shut the f*** up. Once again, good film. It just isn't the masterpiece that people make it out to be. Without Heath Ledger's great performance, this movie wouldn't be remembered for anything in particular. Oh, you mean one of the key roles in the film is actually crucial to the film? Truly one of the stupidest arguments I have ever heard, Matt. Without the Academy Award winning best villain in film history in the film, it's a different movie.

I could do that with literally anything. You know, the New Testament without Jesus, not nearly as good. Like take Keith Ledger out of it. What does anyone remember about this movie? Who cares about this movie except for that? It's great by Batman movie standards, but it's not great as a piece of cinema. I thought my jokes were bad. Okay, first of all, Ben, please watch the language. Second, please watch the sarcasm. I would never stoop to being sarcastic. I expected more from you.

Third, yeah, you really understood my argument, didn't you? I'm not saying that if you take the Joker character out of the film, it's not a great film anymore. That's not my point. You would be correct to point out that any film is bad if you take out its most compelling characters. That's not my argument. I'm saying that the Joker character is actually not that great. Heath Ledger's performance of the character elevates it beyond what it would otherwise be. The Joker in the script is kind of hokey and corny.

The Joker that Heath Ledger creates in spite of the film and the script is compelling. I'll give you an example. One of the Joker's first lines in the film, I think his first line is, whatever doesn't kill you only makes you stranger. Okay, that is a bad line. That's just a bad line to have. That is not the kind of line you find in a cinematic masterpiece. In fact, if that line is in your movie, it's not a masterpiece. I don't care what else happens. Automatically, it's not a masterpiece. But Ledger managed to deliver that line in a way that

disguised its corniness. Great actors can do that sort of thing. I mean, you could cast Daniel Day-Lewis in an elementary school Christmas pageant, and it would instantly be compelling and fascinating. But that wouldn't make it a great play. The third grade teacher who wrote and directed the pageant is not suddenly a great playwright. Daniel Day-Lewis can elevate anything. So could Heath Ledger.

Compare this to, say, Vito Corleone in The Godfather. Obviously, Marlon Brando's performance in the role is legendary, but the character was so brilliantly written and the film around him so incredible that it would have still been a great film with another capable actor in the role. The same cannot be said of The Dark Knight. Without that one performance, not the character, the performance, the film would not be remembered for anything, actually.

Also, the Joker is not the greatest villain in cinema history. That title belongs unquestionably to Anton Chigurh in No Country for Old Men. He is both more menacing and more interesting than the Joker. There's not one scene in The Dark Knight that even comes close to matching, even just the gas station scene in No Country for Old Men. And Joker in The Dark Knight never had one line that matches Anton Chigurh's immortal question posed to Woody Harrelson's character. If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?

So he conveyed the Joker's philosophy far more effectively and in a much more clever way than the Joker ever did. Let's continue. How does the Joker wire an entire hospital with enough explosives to demolish it in 15 seconds without anyone noticing? How-

This is a working hospital. People are in it 24 hours a day, seven days a week. How did you, you wired the whole thing? It's not even just like one part of it explodes. The whole thing is taken down. Wait, wait, that's it. That's his critique. His critique is like the practicality of wiring a building to explode. I mean, yes, that's correct. Gotham City's a show. They have a literal insane asylum where they keep people in every five minutes. People break out of the insane asylum. Also, has he been to a hospital recently? They're not really all that well run. I remember when my wife was in residency.

Yeah, man. I mean, not that I would have committed a criminal act like the Joker, but I don't feel like it would have been that hard. You don't think it'd be hard to wire the entire hospital to explode? Do you know how many explosives will be needed to blow up an entire hospital? A lot. I don't know exactly how much. I started to Google it, but then I realized that I might be putting myself on an FBI watch list with a Google search like that. Of course, I'm probably already on an FBI watch list. Any case, this is a massive demolition project that would take many hours to complete.

Even with lax security, it just isn't close to realistic. Now, I know you might say, well, it's a Batman movie. It's not supposed to be realistic. You can't have it both ways, Ben. You can't tell me that it's this gritty, mature, Oscar-worthy Batman film, but then also insist that it's just a silly superhero flick, so it doesn't matter if it's not believable. Which is it? You can't just hide behind Gotham City's show. No, this movie's a show. The script is a show. You, sir, are a show.

Now, the movie hopes that you won't notice that problem because you'll be distracted by, like, the moment in the hospital when Joker shows up in Two-Face's room wearing a surgical mask and isn't noticed by Two-Face until he takes the mask off. But even with the mask on, you can still tell that he has white face paint and black paint around his eyes. So how did Two-Face, the criminal genius, not notice that? Well, maybe it's because Two-Face isn't a criminal genius in this. He's a villain for about half a scene, and then he's dead. It's like Christopher Nolan forgot to include Two-Face

They're about to put the movie out. What is the... It's like a week and the movie's gonna come out and someone says, whoa, we forgot we're gonna put Two-Face in this thing. Oh yeah, then they gotta go back. What are you talking about? That's the entire character arc of Two-Face. It doesn't change anything in the movie at all. No, what...

Are you kidding me? Are you kidding me? Stop it for a second. Just stop it. That's so... Oh, my God. Oh, my God. The entire plot point in the film is that Two-Face is supposed to be a representation of the fallen state of humanity, right? He goes from the hero to the villain. And the whole point is that

All hopes for sort of cleanliness in Gotham City can be obliterated. And if you have too much of an idealistic view about what humanity is, which is what Harvey Dent has for most of the movie, then you end up falling because once you fall, you really fall hard. Oh, was that the message? Wow, how profound. Sometimes good people become bad people. Amazing.

Christopher Nolan, again, demonstrating his profound understanding of the human condition with this insight that my five-year-old daughter could offer. Yes, I understand that Harvey Dent had an idealistic view of humanity and then ends up becoming everything he was fighting against. I get that. How could I not get it? Nolan beats you over the head with that message over and over again. The whole movie is just Christopher Nolan bashing you in the skull with a two-by-four, screaming his philosophical ideas at you.

Each character takes turn giving speeches for the entire movie. The whole movie is just one speech after another. We freaking get it, okay? I get it. I get it.

This is a problem in Nolan films. The same thing happened in Interstellar. I went to that film, excited to watch a movie about space exploration. I didn't realize I'd have to listen to Anne Hathaway drone on about the transcendent power of love for the entire trip to Jupiter or wherever they were going. The Dark Knight isn't quite as bad as that, but it's still pretty heavy handed. Now, the problem is that the characters spend so much time giving speeches that they forget to be actual characters. Harvey Dent flips like a switch from super good guy to super bad guy with almost no runway in between.

Not to mention those burns on his face would be fatal, okay? He would not still be alive like that. There's just no way somebody survives having half of their head melted away. Okay, Nolan was so obsessed with having everything look realistic that he actually ended up with a Two-Face that was less realistic than the one from the cartoons.

In fact, I would go so far as to say that the Batman animated series from the 90s not only had a far superior Two-Face character, but was all around in every way a superior product to Nolan's version. Indeed, I would also say that the 90s cartoon Batman is the best thing Mark Hamill ever did. I can't think of a single other thing Mark Hamill starred in that would match the Batman cartoon. These are not just opinions that I'm coming up with right now on the spot to annoy you even more, or if they are, I also think that they might be kind of true, potentially.

Anyway, I think I've made my point. I don't wanna make the same mistake Christopher Nolan made in The Dark Knight by repeating myself over and over again. I don't want this segment to run long like The Dark Knight did at a punishing run at runtime of two and a half hours. I realized two and a half hours is downright efficient by Nolan standards. I tried to watch Oppenheimer, took me seven weeks watching it for an hour a day to get through half of it. And I'm not even exaggerating, and I gave up. But the runtime is even more unforgivable for a Batman movie, okay?

There is no excuse for a movie about a superhero in a rubber costume running around doing karate against the bad guys to go longer than 85 minutes. 90 minutes at the absolute most. No one only had 90 minutes of story. The additional hour consisted of each character delivering the State of the Union address. It's 90 minutes of story and an hour of speeches. That's why I could even argue that Batman Forever starring Val Kilmer was better than The Dark Knight. At least it got to the point much quicker and it had a better two-face.

But the worst Two-Face of all is you, Ben. I am still in shock that after all this time working together, you would attack me so savagely. I'm both horrified and offended by this unprovoked assault. But more than that, I'm disappointed. Your video was the most disappointing thing I've seen since the Dark Knight. And that is why both the Dark Knight and you, Ben Shapiro, are today canceled.

I'll do it for the show today. Thanks for watching. Thanks for listening. Have a great day. Talk to you tomorrow. Godspeed.