Speaker 1: Let's go next to. Oh, I don't know. There's a lot of a lot of people a lot of
interesting folks waiting today. Why don't we go to Ruminate in Kentucky as
ruminate your first or last name. Speaker 5: Is just my stage name.
Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 5: David Mann,
I appreciate you taking the call. Can you hear me? Speaker 1: Well, I can hear you beautifully.
Speaker 5: Perfect. So I'm a big fan of the show. I was introduced to you during the pandemic and
you and like Brian Tyler Cohen and a bunch of others, you helped get me through it. So
I appreciate, you know, all that you do. I do have a specific question about rhetoric,
moderating rhetoric. So, you know, friends of yours like Destiny, who I'm also a fan of,
and even your new correspondent, Luke Beesley, who did a great job at Texas.
He did. They are fans of or they seem to be proponents of moderating rhetoric that leftist,
even progressive leftists in terms of their public outreach should moderate their rhetoric,
even though the GOP seems to be increasingly radical, increasingly aggressive. And there's
this this dispute in the leftist community. Should we be more aggressive? Should we
try to appeal more across the aisle? And I'm curious what you think about it.
Speaker 1: Well, let me ask, what do you what? Why do you say that? Our
correspondent Luke seems to favor moderating rhetoric. What gave you that impression?
Speaker 5: He did a discussion with Weisz or Walsh yesterday. Was a really good conversation.
Speaker 1: Basically did? Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 1: How did they get in touch? That's fascinating.
I didn't know they talked to each other. Speaker 5: I mean, your name carries weight,
man. He's he's a Deepak correspondent. That's like that's political royalty.
Speaker 1: Oh, I'm going to have to watch that. Okay. And
so he said he was a fan of moderating rhetoric. Speaker 5: Yeah. Because I mean, I'm sure you're
familiar enough with Bosh, know that, you know, which I'm a fan of his as well. But he definitely
takes a more aggressive route with respect to rhetoric. He thinks that the Republican Party
as an institution, its leadership is evil, they're morally wicked.
And so he feels that there should be a greater condemnation of the GOP by leftists, by Democrats,
by progressive, by just bog standard liberals. Yeah. And Luke's position was probably like, Hey,
man, I think that that's going to scare people away. And I see both sides of it. But I also feel
this is the loop aired more closely on the side of moderate rhetoric. I am is a moderate person,
and yet it doesn't seem to be doing him any favors with independents and centrists and whatnot.
So that's why I wanted your take on I mean, you you in your videos, you are very candid
that the Republican Party and the Democratic Party, though flawed, are not comparable.
The Democrat, the Republicans are infinitely worse as a institution. Yeah. Do you think that
leftists should be more emphatic about that? Like, no, this this notion of a bipartisan
future and that we need a strong Republican Party like Speaker Pelosi says that that's just crap and
we've got to get more radical in our rhetoric. Speaker 1: So here's my view. I don't think that
it should be one thing or the other for contrived reasons of optics or strategy. I think that we
should just be really clear about calling things as I see them. So I can't speak for anybody else's
perspective. My perspective is I'm not going to artificially use milder or more extreme rhetoric
just for the reason of how it will look. I'm going to describe things in the way that I think they
are and with the language that I think is most appropriate. And when I'm talking about radical,
repugnant, lunatic Trumpists, that's what I'll call them. I won't say anything that's moderate,
more moderate or more extreme than than what I see them as being. I'm open to other people saying,
no, the strategy should be to use either more moderate or radical rhetoric for this reason or
for that reason. My approach and people can tell me it doesn't work or it's wrong is I
just call things and describe things as they are with the language that feels accurate.
Speaker 5: Right. Fair enough. And then one last thing I just want to say. I think that you are
you're probably your standout quality on your show is you are a superb interviewer. So I was going
back and watching your interviews with Tim Poole and Michael Knowles and Sam Harris and that recent
one, trigonometry. Yeah. My guess my last question is, do you do right wingers or more centrist
figures like Sam Harris isn't a right winger, but he is certainly more centrist, I think,
than many others. Do they avoid interviews with you or like do you reach out to people
often to have those sorts of incisive Tuesdays? And do they do they take you up on the offer?
Speaker 1: It's a mix. We reach out to tons of people all the time and there is no rule. You
know, Sam Harris has previously accepted requests from us, but for a year and a half, I've been
trying to get him back on and he has not accepted. So I, I, there's no hard and fast rule, but I'm
obviously open to talking to all sorts of people. Speaker 5: Yeah, well, I appreciate it, David.
Thanks. And keep doing what you're doing, man. Speaker 1: Thank you so much. Appreciate the call.
I mean, I have to check out that Vouch and Luke Beasley appearance. That sounds pretty interesting