Poor Ron DeSantis fella can't catch a break.
In fact, this morning The New York Times revealed that a firm affiliated
with Ron DeSantis's Super PAC had posted literally hundreds of pages
of documents online for the Florida governor to use as debate prep.
I don't know why they did this, very bad idea.
I mean, just totally sabotaged the guy, and
everyone's now dunking on him as a result.
The contents of that document are both hilarious and embarrassingly pathetic, and
you'll know exactly what I mean in just a moment.
And look, let's keep it real, it pretty much sums up
what Ron DeSantis's presidential campaign has looked like so far.
But nonetheless,
here's how the documents outline DeSantis's main priorities for the debate.
1, Attack Joe Biden and the media 3 to 5 times.
2, State DeSantis's positive vision 2 to 3 times.
3, Hammer Vivek Ramaswamy in a response,
you really need documents to tell you to do this, anyway.
4, Defend Donald Trump in absentia in response
to a Chris Christie attack, all right?
So we're gonna get back to that fourth thing listed
about avoiding the attacks against Donald Trump.
But before we do, before we circle back to that, let's get to the other stuff.
First, let's talk about hammering Ramaswamy, because the documents have
a pretty hilarious suggestion on how Ron DeSantis should do that.
So it says, take a sledgehammer to Vivek Ramaswamy.
Fake the Vivek or Vivek the Fake.
People get paid for this, Cenk, what are we doing with our careers?
People make money to give this advice.
>> Speaker 2: Guys, look, I know politics inside and out,
not just because of what we do here on air, but
because of conversations I have with people involved in politics off air, okay?
And you would be shocked at how disastrous consultant advice is.
>> Speaker 1: It's so bad.
>> Speaker 2: And candidates believe it completely.
And it's not just Republicans, Democrats too.
Even more so for Democrats.
If a consultant tells, well, yes, you paid me a ton of money here, and
I'm going to tell you, call him Vivek the Fake.
That'll get him.
They'll go right away.
Okay, Vivek the fake.
What is that?
What is-.
>> No, but guys-.
>> They're so removed from reality.
>> Speaker 1: But this is the reason why I hate to admit this,
I hate that this is the reality, but this is the reason why Donald Trump,
unfortunately, outshines the other Republican candidates.
Because the other Republican candidates are,
we are still operating as if it is 20 years ago.
What are the consultants saying, right?
They're following the consultants.
And you look at Trump he can't stand reading from a prompter.
He can't stand sticking to a script.
He just likes to riff.
And when you juxtapose the authenticity of someone who's refusing
the advice of the consultants and just going his own way to know typical dry,
robotic politicians, obviously Trump is gonna outshine them.
It's so frustrating that these people don't realize it.
>> Speaker 2: Yeah, look, I have so much to say.
And there's one thing the consultant said that is true,
I'll get to that in a second too.
But first, look, following the consultants, this is subconscious,
but people pick it up, especially Republican voters.
Makes you look weak because you're not a strong man who follows
his own instincts and his own wisdom and judgment.
But you're asking, what should I do?
I'll just do it, right?
And it doesn't feel authentic.
And so, look, I'm super biased because I worked with Al Gore and
I really like him, and he was 100% right about climate change, etc.
And so I know that this was a smear, but it worked, when he was running,
they ran a deceptive article about how he was getting consultant advice on
what to wear, and it was from a woman.
And that's part of why it was a smear,
because it was, he's listening to a woman on what to wear, right?
>> Speaker 1: That was considered a bad thing?
>> Speaker 2: But before Trump, the tiniest,
most ridiculous things were considered scandals, especially about Democrats.
Gore got into massive trouble for
sighing during a debate when he was debating an idiot like George Bush and
for getting dressed by a consultant, which wasn't even true, right?
>> Speaker 1: By the way,
every single one of these mofos should be dressed by a woman.
>> Speaker 2: So should I.
[LAUGH].
But anyways, but
the reason it worked against Gore is because people think it's weak, okay?
And so he's given off those weak vibes, 24/7 DeSantis, okay?
But one more thing about that, debate prep is real.
You should do debate prep.
You shouldn't be an [INAUDIBLE],
debate prep is so obviously relevant that even Trump does it a little bit.
He used to do it with Chris Christie, etc, right?
So nothing wrong with debate prep.
So I'm not getting on DeSantis for that.
But when they're this specific, okay,
you must attack him three to four times and then do this two to three times.
>> Speaker 1: You need a document.
You need a literal document that your campaign paid for to tell you that
you should go after your political opponents in the context of a debate.
>> Speaker 2: Yes, and as you're going to see in a bit, they tell them for
the 18th time, you must exhibit human emotion.
And that's why they're programming a robot, right?
And so they're, okay, attack three to four times.
And he's, I will now attack three to four times.
Show human emotion.
Hello, I am human.
I am showing human emotion.
I will close down this whole park if you don't listen to me.
>> Speaker 1: You either got it or you don't.
You can't fake it.
>> Speaker 2: Democrats lost to this guy by 20 points, okay?
They're just such a sad party.
Anyway, keep coming.
>> Okay, so in regard to attacking Vivek Ramaswamy,
the document described the type of attack as a potential orchestra pit moment,
which apparently I didn't know this.
It's a reference to Roger Ailes' Orchestra Pit Theory,
which posits that a candidate who does a great job talking about and explaining
policy will be outshined by someone who does something more controversial.
Even someone who falls on stage is gonna get way more attention than the candidate
who's actually talking about the substance and doing it well.
>> Speaker 2: So this is the part I agree with the consultants on.
This is correct, and this is actually what I advise progressive candidates to do,
although they never listen.
>> Speaker 1: Don't fall on stage.
>> Speaker 2: I don't tell them to physically fall.
But the original Roger Ailes' theory was that if you give an excellent description
of your foreign policy in a debate and
another candidate falls in the orchestra pit, the only thing that
anybody is gonna talk about is a candidate that fell in the orchestra pit.
Nobody's going to give a goddamn about your foreign policy.
And that is definitely true.
I don't want it to be true, but it is true.
Now you don't have to fall into an orchestra pit,
I tell progressive candidates,
you should significantly insult your opponent because it'll get press.
That's the equivalent of the orchestra pit theory, right?
And so they go, no, but that would be uncivil, and NPR tells me not to.
And then they never get any press and they loss.
And in the Democratic circles, especially in a primary,
insulting a Democratic incumbent is considered the worst crime in America, so
that none of them do it, and then they don't get the results they want.
The ones that did do it, by the way, like AOC, won.
>> Speaker 1: Yeah, look, I think the devil's in the details,
because the insulting your opponent, I mean,
opponent within your own party, that could backfire tremendously.
It certainly did for Elizabeth Warren, who attacked Bernie Sanders as some sort of
sexist on the debate stage during the primaries.
>> Speaker 2: But remember okay, so first of all, of course,
if you attack on things that are massively wrong or immoral, etc, and
you're in the Democratic Party, of course, it could blow it back on you.
But what I say is attack on a moral high ground.
Do the insult on something like higher minimum wage or paid family leave so
that people focus on the issue, that way you get a win win.
You got a lot of attention on it, and you're more likely to win because you're
focusing on a winning issue for you, and you're more likely to pass a bill that is
really, really important by putting a spotlight on something that the American
people already want and your voters already want.
>> Speaker 1: Yes, I totally agree with you on that.
Now, Vivek Ramaswamy had a field day with these documents and
the news of these documents.
He tweeted the following or X'd the following, I guess, another boring,
establishment attack from Super PAC-creation, Robot Ron,
>> That's pretty good, actually.
>> Speaker 1: It is good.
Who is literally taking lame, pre-programmed attack lines against me for
next week's debate, Hammer Ramaswamy.
And that's know in quotation marks because he's referencing how the document says to
hammer Ramaswamy.
God, this is embarrassing for DeSantis, to say the least.
Now- >> I just want to make a quick note there.
I had not seen Vivek's tweet there, and I said the same exact thing he did.
So, yeah, he's robot Ron, as opposed to, I don't like Vivek Ramaswamy at all, I think
he is fake as opposed to Vivek the fake, which doesn't do anything for anybody.
>> Yeah, I agree.
>> He's a robot and he doesn't know how to be populous.
Vivek's full of crap, but at least he knows how to do it.
>> Speaker 1: Yes, now, what's interesting is, as you guys probably already know,
the document says, attack Vivek, but don't attack Trump.
So let's touch on that a little bit, okay?
So here's how the document suggested that DeSantis should handle the Trump question,
which, by the way, as it stands today,
Trump is not expected to be part of the first Republican primary debate.
The document says, or, the debate-prep memo also urges DeSantis to
defend Trump when Chris Christie attacks him,
with a specific suggestion for an attack line accusing Christie,
the former New Jersey governor, of appealing mainly to Democrats.
And here's the suggestion, Trump isn't here, so
let's just leave him leave him alone.
Leave Britney alone, okay?
Leave him alone.
He's too weak to defend himself here.
We're all running against him.
I don't think we want to join forces with someone on this
stage who's auditioning for a show on MSNBC.
What say you, Cenk?
You think that's a proper job?
>> Speaker 2: Yeah, it's not that bad.
Because the rap on Chris Christie is that he's helping the Democrats.
And the reason he's got to attack Chris Christie,
though, is because Chris Christie is rising the polls, and
in the last poll actually just went ahead of Ron DeSantis.
And is that because he's helping Democrats?
No, that's because he's being a man, and he's being strong and
actually punching Trump in the face.
Now, Republican voters generally don't like it when you punch Trump in the face,
so why is it working?
Because at least he's punching someone in the face, and Republican voters love that.
>> Speaker 1: Well, also, I mean, look,
I think it shows I don't know if I would use this word with Chris Christie, right?
But I think in most contexts, when you are a person with convictions and
you have genuine values and beliefs and you continue to espouse those values and
stick to them despite the backlash you're dealing with, that shows strength.
>> Speaker 2: Definitely, that's why I said Christy would rise.
And by the way, hashtag Cenk was right.
So here's all of a sudden when I said he remember he was at 0 or 1%,
and everybody's, no, he's attacking Trump.
No way, he'll rise.
They love Trump.
And here he is rising.
There's a Super PAC, go and watch out for Chris Christie.
>> Speaker 1: He has risen.
>> Right?
[LAUGH].
Which is a challenge for him.
Okay, anyway, I know glass house a lot, etc.
So now, guys, two more things that are important here.
They're making the same mistake as 2016.
You see that?
In 2016, they're like, Trump's a loser.
He's gonna be out of the race soon.
So, Marco, make sure you attack Jeb, Jeb.
Make sure you attack Marco.
Cruz make sure you attack Kasich.
Kasich attacked Cruz, and nobody attacked Trump.
Now they're making the same mistake, but for a different reason this time.
They're, no, Trump is the beloved.
So even though he's got a 40 point lead on me, don't attack him, instead,
attack Rando Vivek Ramaswamy, who walked out of the woods yesterday.
>> Speaker 1: Right, but look, to be fair, I understand why they're focusing on Vivek
because Vivek is rising in the polls much faster than expected.
>> Speaker 2: I know, but it's a mistake, because if you attack Vivek,
who's a Rando, it's only going to make him stronger.
It's gonna make him look more like a legitimate, credible candidate.
Was Biden going to attack,
I'm sorry, I'm gonna say it even though I love her, right?
And I think he's not gonna engage with Marianne Williamson now, right?
He's not gonna engage with RFK Jr who I don't love, right?
Because he's above it.
Now he's not actually above it, but that's the appearance he's giving, and
it makes him look more credible.
And you think he was gonna attack Marianne Williamson in 2020?
Of course not.
There's all those people in the race,
it would have given her legitimacy to do that.
So this is very poorly played.
But I've got to answer one more thing for you guys,
if you're wondering why in the world did they make this public?
That's so weird.
>> Speaker 1: Why did they do it?
>> Speaker 2: I'll tell you why.
Because the Super PAC cannot coordinate with the campaign, but all
the money is in the Super PAC, because you can give unlimited money to a Super PAC,
but you can't give unlimited money to a candidate.
So DeSantis has already milked all the top donors for their maximum amount, and so
since he doesn't have enough grassroots support,
he's not gathering grassroots money, and he's tapped out.
So the Super PAC has all the polling.
It has all the information.
It has everything that he needs.
And you remember we covered the Republicans doing this before,
McConnell and others, Herman Cain would put up just pictures or
video of themselves on their site, and people are, what are they doing?
It would just be them going, And then you would
later see it in a Super PAC ad because they were saying, hey, super PAC,
I'm not coordinating with you, but I made this picture and this video public, okay?
And so they're saying here, well, I didn't coordinate with Ron DeSantis,
I just happened to put it on a website and he happened to see it.
That's why the fact that they got caught is so important.
So somebody saw it on their website and was, aha,
here's this strategy for the debate.
>> Speaker 1: So the Beastie Boys report was incorrect.
So when they said, listen, all y'all, this is sabotage, it's not.
>> Speaker 2: No, no, no, no.
>> Speaker 1: Okay, all right, Beastie Boys, you're on notice.