FM Talk 1065 Podcasts
Midday Mobile - Sean talks with (Alabama's) Robert Kennedy Jr about the upcoming election - September 4 2024
There will be no personal nor direct attacks on anyone and I would ask that you please try to keep down the loud cheering and the clapping. There will be no booing and no unruly behavior. With that this is painful and it will be for a long time. After all these are a couple of high-stepping turkeys and you know what to say about a high stepper. No step too high for a high stepper. This is Midday Mobile with Sean Sullivan on FM Talk 1065. Well Sean's a tough guy. I mean I think everybody knows that you know Sean he took some licks he hangs in there. Yeah what's wrong with the beer we got. I mean the beer we got pretty good don't it. Did you hear what I said? Last question. Were you high on drugs? Last question. Kiss my **** right away. We go FM Talk 1065 at Midday Mobile. Glad to have you here on this Wednesday. Our number two of the show phone numbers still the same. 343 0106 for a tax store phone call and with the FM Talk 1065 app you can always leave us one of those talk back messages. Give your heads up here. My buddy Trey is doing today well what he's been doing for 16 years and that's getting rid of junk in Mobile and Baldwin counties. Shows up every day to do it. You make the appointment they get the junk gone and maybe it's time to make that move. Holidays are coming up. You used to have a guest room. Remember that like we're guests would stay. Now it's full of boxes. I'm not accusing you directly just somebody told me something or there's these garage things where you can put a car in them but you might have a little bit of junk there or it's a storage unit. You pay on every month and you don't need the first thing in there but you're going to get around to it. Getting rid of the junk. Well get around to it. Make an appointment with my buddy Trey. 16 years getting junk gone in Mobile and Baldwin counties. Using personally using with this radio station several of us have here and you can go look at the Google reviews and like I always say it takes a lot for somebody to go put something positive on the internet. So that tells you something about when somebody has a service like that that the person feels compelled enough to go on and say this was a great service. I recommend them. Check out those Google reviews as well and get my man. Try to come by and get junk gone. Small stuff. Big stuff. Work you know at your work at your house at a storage unit where you got junk you need gone. You need 1-800-GOD-JUNK. Website 1-800-GOD-JUNK.com or pick up the phone. The name is the number. Give them a call at 1-800-GOD-JUNK. All right. Good to see this man back in studio and to those that have asked over the last couple of months. Hey, when's Robert Kennedy Jr. coming back on the show? Today's the day. Hey man. Hi. This is actually the second time I've been back during this cycle. But definitely good to be back here. Good to see you. Good to see the team and good to have the opportunity to tell you where you were wrong. Okay. I love it. I love it. This is going to be good. There's overall. Okay. Overall campaign strategy. Not only are your strategists. You've been a candidate. You've done this stay away from open mics or interview things. Sure. That strategy. Short term, we've seen it pay some dividends. Sure. But we got another two months. How long does Kamala Harris stay away from interviews? Well, first thing, so it's interesting, Aqual and I were talking about this a little bit as we came in here. That's way better half. That's much better half. Married up, definitely. And we were talking about there are 9 weeks left until the election from today. If we were consulting her, we would say, do every interview you can a minimum at least one per week and make that correspond to your rollout of policy. Because interviewing more actually ends up blunting the argument that's being levied against her right now that she's employing, call it a Biden-esque strategy, the stay in the base strategy. And all it does is it creates the opportunity to have a conversation that you don't really need to have. Because the one thing that came out of the interview that she did with ABC, even though it was only 18 minutes long in terms of total talk time, it at least checked the box. So it starts to blunt the argument. But the way to keep the argument off the radar screen is to continue to engage, continue to do in interviews from this point forward. You know, it would be like the fracking thing in 2019 against fracking, also in 2024, fracking and held true when she said she held true to her beliefs. If I'm advising somebody, like, because people say, well, and not the fracking is the key issue. People aren't lining up outside of Pennsylvania, a different story, line up to vote on fracking. But people are going to say, well, which one was your true belief? I mean, if somebody would say, you know what, I thought it was this way. Then I sat down with, even though my take on it is it's absolutely for political expediency, you change your opinion on fracking because of Pennsylvania. But if you would have the candidate say, no, I talked to Jane Smith from the such and such. And I went out to a thing and I saw where they were fracking and it doesn't do the things that the other people told me. And as we balance the environment and need for energy, I changed my mind. But that's not what happens like, no, no, not at all. You know, it's interesting. So when we think about, and I'm going to, you know, political science theory at this point. So traditionally, candidates operate closer to the polls and we're just a navigator primary, obviously trying to keep their base behind them. And then when you get to the general election from a traditional standpoint, you had a tendency to go to the middle. Right. But that's changed. So, Robert, I think that's not the same as when we were kids. It's not quite the same, but essentially, if you follow the train of Vice President Harris's thought and the timeframe and the way in which he communicated it, it actually makes sense what she did. So if you're in California, where folks are a little more liberal when it comes to environmental laws, you're a senator from California, you're going to have a tendency to be probably closer to the new green new deal side of things, then perhaps we would be here in South Alabama. But as soon as she goes on the ticket, that opposition to fracking is gone, because President Biden was very clear, being a guy from Scranton, Pennsylvania, that he was in favor of that. So that pivot to support your candidate is absolutely the case. Now, in the situation that we have right now, Vice President Harris did not have to go through a primary. Yeah. When she got anointed and Pennsylvania is a must-win state. That's it. So we talk about the battleground states. It looks like in everything I read, there's battleground states, but there's Pennsylvania. It sounds like the other ones are not, Pennsylvania is the keystone. Well, keystone to this. Just for everyone to keep everything in check from a total vote, what we refer to as the popular vote. Democrats have an inherent advantage, because the large population centers are mostly blue. Yes. But from an electoral college map perspective, Republicans have an advantage, because states like Alabama, where we have a lower population, we're actually punching above our weight in terms of electoral. Sure. And so, I mean, the number I've seen that Harris would need to win the popular vote by maybe 4% or more to make up the difference in the electoral college somewhere. It's something like that. But the way that I like to explain it when we're talking to folks was really, you put everything aside, the election will be determined based upon the results that occur in seven states. And it's the Sun Belt states, I think North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada. And then what they refer to is the blue wall. That's the Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania. And so if you look, and then there's that one district in Nebraska, there's one district in Nebraska that comes to this as play. But when you put all that together, really, if the Democrats win the blue wall, the Democrats win the election. If the Republicans pick off a state in the blue wall, then the Democrats need to pick off a corresponding state in the Sun Belt in order to have a chance to win. So that really just comes down to that. So having said all that, and looking at the landscape, of course, Vice President Harris is going to be in favor of fracking at this point, because she cannot risk losing Pennsylvania on that, but it's not genuine. Sean, come on, man, but it's not genuine. What folks are doing, there's advocacy, right? So going back to the notion of values, there are things that you value. And you can tell if a person feels that in the core of their soul. And then there are other things that people are going to support, whether they value them or not, at the end of the day, you're going based upon what people say. Now, the final long question would be, is if she gets elected, do you think she would revert back to the previous policy? And I simply don't think that's the case. Well, that we may disagree on that. I tell you what, we'll hold off the break. I want to ask this one. As we look at the messaging coming out, and this is where if the policy of the Biden-Harris administration doesn't work for Kamala Harris, they say, she's a vice president. She, I mean, she's a vice president. I mean, she presides over the Senate and does other things. And we can get in the czar stuff a little bit. But then it comes up, this is not even coming from the campaign. It's all the legions of people on cable news that are happy to promote. When it's something that benefits, there's like vice president Harris was shoulder to shoulder with president Biden doing the such and such. I mean, it's I've been expected from the campaign, but I mean, doesn't that drive you bonkers? It does drive you bonkers because I mean, it's either you were this this pivotal, you know, side side side kick to the president as vice president, or you were like somebody vice president as you were put out to pasture. Did you ever watch the moving money ball? Are you familiar with that? I'm familiar. I don't know that for so, but I know the concept. Sure. So basically they were off the table. There's the general manager of the baseball team and the guy sitting around the table was basically saying we advise he decides. So what does the vice president do? The vice president advises and the president decides. That's the reality, right? There's not power vested in the vice president right now, where I think that most of the critics have a viable argument was on what was the scope of responsibility associated with the title borders are? I think that's a legitimate argument. And as I've said on this show, the last time I was here, the borders of mess. Do you agree that it's legitimate, that it wasn't made up out of whole cloth that she was the border czar and named? I mean, I could play the note on it. There's no doubt that she had a title and was referred to as the border czar. I'm not debating that at all. That's because that's someone's a gaslighting. They came out like, no, she never was a border czar. And I'm like, wait, wait. But I was saying that part of what ends up happening and, you know, I'm fortunate, you know, with the type of work that I'm doing right now that I'm able to listen to a lot of FM talk one of six, five. And we thank you for that. And so when you or Dalton and Dan or Jeff poor or the guest are talking about it hour after hour after hour after hour, that particular part of the critique is reasonable. Most people don't look at it that way. Most people believe similar to what I said was the vice president advises. She can advocate, but she's not the decision maker. The decision maker is always the president. So with that being said, I've also been saying for since since July that it seems like this campaign is running not just against Donald Trump. The hair is well campaign. It's not just Trump against Trump fans. It's Trump fans as if they were the incumbent. Yes. Yeah. You were you were talking to April Marie about that. This is interesting. I'm like, yeah, but he's not been in power in three and a half years. No, no, this is actually very interesting. I actually agree with you and that assessment. And and I think it's all strategy. And here's why. So if we go back, the one that I like to reference the most often is Secretary Clinton. So she lost to Barack Obama 2008. And then she lost to Donald Trump in 2016. And so if you do the after action archaeology on that, you can come up with all types of political science reasons why she lost. But if you just kind of have the common person conversation of it was she took it for granted. She just kind of assumed and then opened up the window to just kind of discount. They're not really going to vote for. These rallies aren't really reflective of any enthusiasm is happening. Now, she did it with Barack Obama in 2008. She did with Donald Trump in 2016. Yeah. So how that works? The strategy didn't work out very well. It's one of your leanings, right? But the strategy associated of saying, hey, look, I'm going to have you project backwards and I'm going to run like I'm the underdog and I'm going to run like I'm five points behind. That is great strategy because at a minimum, it puts them in the position where they're not taking President Trump for granted because President Trump, which is different than what I said in 2018, President Trump can win this election, right? It's not like it was I'm sorry, 2020 when you and I were talking about it. I was like, oh, no, Trump's going to lose this one here. It's like, yeah, it's saying that it's within the margin of error, but they do need to be operating like they're five points behind. All right, coming right back more with Robert Kennedy, Jr. My guest right here on midday mobile. Text coming in here at 343 0 1 0 6 this is midday mobile with Sean Sullivan on FM Talk 1065. Right down 123 FM Talk 1065 midday mobile. Glad to have you here on this website. Good to have my friend, Robert Kennedy, Jr. in studio. Talking about a lot here with the Harris Malls campaign. Not you said nine weeks, nine weeks, six, three days, right? You know, it's time moves faster as you get older. And so nine weeks will be gone in an instant here. October surprises. I don't know if that's even a thing anymore. Oh, wow. I don't know what, you know, what can be thrown out there. I really don't know against Trump since the machinery of the Democrat party has gone after him for every possible thing. I don't know if there's any meat left on the bone there. Well, there's the sentencing. Right. That's supposed to happen for the New York case. That could be an October surprise. I think that's what's happened here when next few weeks or whatever. Right. Do you think there's any chance that he will get anything other than, you know, 36 hours of community service or something like that? I don't know. I mean, the whole idea was just to get him on record to have 36 felonies, right? Because that already changed. 34 or whatever, however many it is to get him. Can you vote in the Florida election? That felony? I don't know. You had the polysotic, I was a communication guy. I do not know that. We're talked about a couple of things here rolled out in the Harris campaign, but we will come back to it. But Trump, okay, interesting when the news breaks with Robert Kennedy, Jr., endorsing Trump. I don't know the right term, didn't shut down the campaigns, like, spend it in certain states or something. And endorsing Trump. And in his comments, he said he first reached out to the Harris campaign. And, you know, see if there's a way to work with them. And he was, can you say, snubbed? Yeah. Yeah. You know, it's interesting. The political science in me absolutely loves it. And what it shows is it shows accountability for how it is you're being treated by the establishment. Now, I know that you had as much as your libertarian brain would allow you, you liked Tulsi Gabbard. I do, yeah. But let's take a step back and see what it was that actually happened to, you know, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. So the first thing was you attempted to run as a Democrat and Democratic primary. And as is the case, and this happens on the Republican side, as well as the Democratic side, is when you have an incumbent, the machine discourages people from challenging the incumbent. Yeah. And they call Bernie Sanders. See what he thinks about this. That's snubbed. That's snubbed number one. Yeah. So you've now been snubbed by the party. Snubbed number two is the DNC was actually fighting against him getting ballot access in New York. And with the claim that he was in Los Angeles or something, even though he says, I mean, his house has been very... We went through the same thing when I ran for the United States Senate, right? So if you have ownership of houses in multiple states, then someone's going to say you live in multiple states, right? It is what it is. So that's the second thing. The third thing was... You can't at least have houses everywhere. I mean, you had your namesake. No, no. We were fortunate and blessed. And, you know, our parents set us up nicely when they transitioned. But the third thing was he was never able to get media access. So if you think about the last time there was a viable third-party candidate, it was Ross Permo, good Naval Academy graduate, which was in 1992. It's not his nose. I was such a fan of that guy too. But Ross Perro got an enormous amount of mainstream media presence, just being interviewed and stuff like that. And he had his own resources. So he was also able to purchase blocks of time. That's exactly where he went out and explained things, right? So that's the third thing. So now, just imagine your body Kennedy. And you've now been snubbed three times by the Democratic Party. And then time number four is like, hey, I think I'm going to wrap my campaign up. I'd like to talk to somebody about possible options that happen with my campaign sunsets. And nobody talks to you. Yeah. All you're doing is pushing that individual out. And so this ends up being the challenge when you start talking about establishment politics. Now, I have no doubt in my mind that if the Republicans had nominated a traditional establishment candidate and Bobby Kennedy reached out to them, they probably would have snubbed him too. But Trump, love him or hate him, is anti-establishment. So now he does the thing that you and I were talking about that you really would want people to do just in the real world is say, hey, look, I can pick up a guy over here who agrees with me on these two things, doesn't agree with me on these eight things. And I can leverage and use him for the two things he agrees with me on. Right. And you notice that over the past two weeks, he's gotten much more mainstream media attention. It's amazing. Then he did during the time that he was actually a candidate. Yes. So like, that's what I'm saying. I love the accountability aspect of it because I think it puts accountability on the establishment to say, you know what, you still got to treat people with a certain amount of courtesy and respect. Otherwise, you're just going to push them to the other side. It's also interesting too that maybe the Trump, Trump tent with Republicans is bigger. You know, Democrats are always big tent, right? And the Republicans have grown the size of the tent, maybe saying, we'll let people come in here that don't agree on everything, that there's not this orthodoxy, that maybe the tent grows bigger. Maybe I don't think in the mug conservative like me, you know, would be they'd like, add, there's not room, but a populist like Trump, like, yeah, well, we'll work, we'll work around this. But I don't actually believe that Trump would have any additional loyalty to him. I think he'd end up getting fired just like anyone in the last administration. But the point being that at this moment, very savvy move on this point. All right, coming right back more mid-day mobile at more of Robert Kennedy Jr. This one, we'll talk about the other one in the back. This is mid-day mobile with Sean Sullivan on FM Talk 1065. 135 FM Talk 1065 and mid-day mobile. Glad to have you along on this Wednesday and enjoy my conversation with my buddy Robert Kennedy Jr. We're talking about Robert Kennedy Jr. as well. We were indeed, we were indeed, and this is back to what, you know, you and I had this conversation, I think on text or phone call or something. I've said it on the air, I think once or twice, what you're talking about, bringing somebody in. So if I'm running a company, right, and this person is really good at this thing, okay, good at this thing. There's other things I'm not crazy about, but they are going to make this thing better in this position. They can't affect things outside of that position, right, then put them in there. So I mean, if somebody is looking at this and goes, Trump's going to bring him in, and he's going to be HHS or something like that, then he's the policies that would be contrary to many Republicans. He's not going to express those because they're outside the designation of the job. Yeah, I think he's going to be hard pressed to go into a position like that, you know, given some of the views that he had on vaccines and some of the comments that he made during COVID. But one of the things that he touched on that I thought he was, I mean, I think, I'm saying, let me. Okay. And this is a traditional cabinet position like leading HHS, where I thought he said something that really resonated with me was the impact of chronic illnesses, particularly on children and the long-term implication of those chronic illnesses following them throughout their lifetime. So where I think he may be better suited in a Trump administration would be as some sort of senior advisor for, you know, X, Y, and Z versus managing a traditional bureaucracy. Okay. I think and you and the things he said about sure, I just resonate. It's crazy. It's crazy. I mean, you look at these things and go, are we really trying out? I don't, I'm not a physician, not a researcher, I'm not, but it does seem like we're in the business of managing illness versus avoiding it or curing it. Absolutely. I don't think there's people in lab coats going, we're going to make sure these, it's just the business of it. The money's in the medicine. Yeah. The money's not in the cure. Yeah. Yeah. And I mean, it's affecting, it's been going on decades. It was now so good for somebody standing up and saying it, sure, you know, the problem is, you're not going to get a lot of, you know, donations from Pfizer or anything when you do that. But he says, so what kind of percentage do you think he brings to Trump for votes in those states like a Pennsylvania or something like that, where he comes out the venue? I don't think very many. You know, I think from a Trump perspective, having, having a Kennedy on the tickets, probably a nice little dig to the Democratic party. But, you know, I still think he pulls as many votes away from Trump as he pulls away from Vice President Harris, you know, given the fact that he's still going to be on the ballot in a number of those states. But I don't think it's, it's very much at all. Yeah. Speaking of, now, let me, okay. Now, if he had picked Kennedy as a running mate, as opposed to Jay E. Vance, it would have been a lot more interesting. But that's not the situation we're in. In other vaccine thing too, we know we've talked about this, I went on a tear when Zuckerberg finally came out and told everybody what everybody knew. You know, I'd watched enough press conferences to, to, to know how that hustle was done on the misinformation. They would come out and say, we're not, we're not telling Facebook to take people off there saying that we're just making them aware. I mean, come on. If you don't see the Godfather's like, hey, it's not that I'm going to burn down your, you know, your store here. I would hate for that to happen. By the way, you do what we want you to do and things work out. Here's the part about it that, that particular conversation, it drives me bonkers. Good. So, okay. It was, let's just say the facts are what the facts are, right? That some folks within the four walls of the Facebook organization did some, what's this, the Hunter laptop? Well, we got a, just the first one, the first one is that people that had opinions that were different than the federal narrative on the vaccine, on the origins of the virus, and those things were being, Facebook was being made aware of them by the administration. The executive branch is telling a company that does owe something to the executive branch and the government, because of its protections, the 230 or whatever, the protections there that, hey, just want to make you aware. I know how this works. They said, well, we didn't tell them they had to remove, come on. But, but the, the message was there, but this is the part that I'm saying is the whining thing, right? So, it's just like whining. So, so you just, you just tell them no. So, you don't have enough. But then you have section two, then the chances you lose your protection, or whatever. Okay. So, then you get sued for every comment that Sean Sullivan made on your platform. I got you, but I'm just like, at a certain point, isn't that what all of us are doing that in every single thing. So, so there was a time when the vaccine mandates and the mask mandates and the separations was okay-ish. And then there was a time that it wasn't because people just weren't going to do it anymore. But if you don't have other voices out there, if you're silencing other voices, you know, one sort of sharpens the other, right? I mean, if you don't do that, you don't have this great experiment that we, we love and we live in. I, the fact that I hear people daily that disagree with me vehemently about things is good. I don't want that not to be there. I don't want to be muted. Yeah, I'm not debated, but I don't want to mute it. And that's what this idea, you know, the people are too stupid. You can't let these contrary, this mince information or whatever it was called out there because, you know, the sheep will just, you know, believe it and they won't go do the thing we want them to do. No, I got you on that. But I'm saying the person that you should be mad at is Facebook. You shouldn't be mad at the administration. I should be mad at the administration because the administration is telling this company, get rid of these things. And the administration, the federal government offers protections for social media platforms from being sued for, it's slander or libel, which one is libel, right? So slander is verbal. Right. Yeah. I think we both were both on slander. Yeah. And so yeah, there is they they've they're a heavy in this. So they got some help me on this on the timeline, right? So when COVID hit, COVID hit still in the Trump administration for the first part of it, it could call it wave one, if you will. Okay. And then you had the second omnicron or something like that that hit after president Biden, we had remixes. So who was pressuring them during the first part of it? They weren't happened. They weren't, but I mean, I went to this was came to light for me because I would watch the press conferences and and watch them say, get questions about this. And then we'll get to the laptop in a second. But the question is, they said, we're not telling Facebook that they have to mute or get rid of these people. We're just making, I mean, it was so transparent. No, no, I get taking them the guy or the godfather. Yeah. Hey, you know, I'm just making, I just want you to know what I'm talking about here. I don't know who knows what might happen. But my my point is that governments influence media. It's like that she that's shocking to you, right? The media is a bulwark against government, right? But they're when they became for profit companies is the same thing we talk about here, right? In terms of the number of newsrooms we had when they became profit centers within larger companies, the impact that had on reporting, et cetera, etc. But just like business tries to influence what the media does, governments try to influence what the media does. It's on the media not to respond to that. That's the someone trying to get someone to reveal their sources that say, Hey, I'm willing to go to jail rather than reveal my sort. That's what I'm saying. I agree. Agreed. But yeah, when you Facebook didn't get any gold stars for me on this one, you know, they just look weak. Oh, well, they in coming out all this time later and saying, Oh, this is what happened. I mean, all right, the 100 by laptop. Let's talk about this part of it too. Sure. The number of intelligence officials. I mean, my friend served served in the Navy, went back and served again. CIA that that group out there that people that came out, I don't think if you see somebody was with the CIA, it's not the same as having somebody who's a sailor, who's a Marine, you know, soldier, but there's some something that goes with it. We're like, wow, they know stuff that I don't know. And they come out of 60 of them or something signed on this 100 Biden laptop thing is Russian disinformation. Okay, they come out and say it. That's government. That's the narrative going through the government for these people to say that. And then these platforms, either muted or down, you know, down great, whatever the term is. They tinkered with the algorithm, right, to make sure people couldn't see this thing. And then said, and they would take it off if people put like the New York Post, but the story now that you couldn't be saying this is a Russian disinformation. Dude, that's a scary world to me that you have that kind of machine truly working. Sometimes I think the amount of swamp in Washington's overstated and sometimes I hear stories like this, I go, Oh my gosh, okay, Finoki, watch out this thing. Yeah, I think, you know, large skill bureaucratic organizations exist to protect themselves, right? So yeah, but protecting it. So it's just because Trump is going to be tough on us in the intelligence world, we are going to say something that we don't know to be true, but it's Russia because it's not Russian disinformation. It was real. So we're going to come out and sign on to this to try to keep this guy out of office. Yeah, I'm trying. I'm not justifying it. I'm just trying to get my head around the explanation. It's like, do you think that Trump lost the 2020 election? Yeah, he lost the 2020 election. Okay. Now you and I've had conversations on air about now, you can say folks were playing fast and loose with the rules. Oh, no, I can say, I can say that I think there were some things in there that were not great. No, no, but I'm saying you got to look at it, but did the end up of the vote total? Did he lose it? Yes. Now how he, how Biden got those votes and stuff we can talk about, but he Trump lost the election. But but but this, I'm trying to circle back to this. So, you know, 64 court cases, this, that and the other and they're like, you know, 63 of them he lost. I think he won like one of them, et cetera, et cetera. But my point being is that folks line up behind their advocacy a lot of times. And that's one of our larger problems in society is exist right now, right? So 60 people saying that it's Russian interference. That's a problem. If in fact, it wasn't Russian interference, but if 60 people are looking at things that they thought could have been Russian interference and therefore concluding that it was, you know what I'm saying, it's just, it's just different. But those, I mean, those people who came out and said it, it's not like, just grab 60 of us will go out here, airport in 65 and get 60 of us out of the cards. And we say, CIA, how many which then gives, even if they didn't believe it, which I don't know, I mean, the idea back then at Twitter and how Dorsey ran that place, but it gives you, even if you didn't believe it, it gives you cover because you said, well, I had to do it. Because look, here are these people that are CIA people telling me this is, and I don't know that that changed the election. But that's the reason why that's the reason why I wanted to use the election as the, for example, right? Because there are a lot of people who ended up lining up behind President Trump, who actually believed that it was not people playing fast and loose with the rules, but actually cheating and he didn't get more votes, etc, etc. And so if you have all these people who are lined up behind that and all those court cases that ended up going against him, then it's very easy to understand how somebody could look at a piece of information and think that was Russian interference when in fact, as you mentioned, it was not like you do a little bit of digging there and go, nobody does to do diligence. That's part of our challenge as a society. Well, and it's affecting things in big ways with, and somebody was asking about mail-in voting, too. So let's look at this going into nine weeks from now. Somebody said, are we still, are we doing, Steve said, are some states still allowing mail-in voting? Sure. Yeah. I think, yes. But going into this, do you think that we're going to have the fast and loose going on? I mean, a lot of that was driven also, at least from my perspective, COVID was used as an excuse for doing things that got Democrats in advantage in the election. No, but that stuff happened in Republican states, too. That's my whole point. So everyone was doing it. And back to the early voting and all that stuff, I heard, I think Jeff talking about earlier with somebody, yeah, you can sit as Republicans ago. That doesn't work for us. Our people, the way the world's going, if you be forward, if you make it easier, if you're going to have those many votes, have them come in early, that's fine, early voting, whatever. I am a crotchety old guy, and I think people should show up at the poll on election day. So, but if the new game is mail-in, let me just give you an example. So one of the Kennedy Strategic Communication clients was the public service campaign that was done by Judge Don Davis for in-person absentee. We needed a filming sub-commercials for that, right? Does anybody think that Don Davis was trying to do something to advantage Democrats? No, all he was doing was letting folks know within the four walls of the Alabama law, which is what was being followed, that there's a provision that allows you to go down to the probate court and basically do your absentee ballot there at the probate court, and they had open on a couple of Saturdays and stuff like that. That part was different, right? So it was a couple of Saturdays that was available. And so, to your point, I think the rules that state legislators have put in place, because that's where the rules are made, because then the state legislative level are going to be in case where it ended up hurting Republicans in 2020, was they were essentially being discouraged from participating in the process. It wasn't a very Republican thing to do, or whatever it was. We were in Florida. We had a client in Florida that was in an election over there, a client one, by the way. And in Florida, they have early voting. Do you think that Ron DeSantis and the Republican legislature in Florida is trying to do something to advantage Democrats? Of course not. But they come to the conclusion that having that two-week early voting period, which include weekends, so people who, you know, souls to polls, they can go off to church and stuff like that, they concluded that that was a good way for them to get more people involved in the election process. And as a matter of fact, 75% of the votes in the state of Florida happened before election day. It's only 25%. But again, they're not doing it to advantage Democrats. They're doing it because they think it's a better process. Okay. One of the break, come back. I get another segment here with my friend, Robert Kennedy Jr. I'll get some of your text here. I got some more questions when we return. This is Midday Mobile with Sean Sullivan on FM Talk 1065. Alright, welcome back. Midday Mobile FM Talk 1065. Time to check in with my buddy David McCraery at LCM Motor Cars. Inventory is a story and you got new inventory arriving, well, like now. We do and we've got a truckload about 45 minutes out. So and that's eight cars on the truck. We got nine of them yesterday, but one of them didn't pass our checklist. So we left it there. So the nine or the eight that we do have come and have all been inspected and we know what we're getting. There's one thing we talked about a lot, Sean, that I wasn't telling you a second ago, finding cars for people. We've got two vehicles out here and this is something different that we found for some folks. It's a company and we bought them a 2024 Genesis G70, which is I mean a hot ride today and and we also bought them a 2024 Fs for AS350. So that's something that we do do if anybody's looking for stuff like that. It gives us a call. The real, real late model stuff, about under 5,000 miles. Let me find it as well. Alright, we'll tell folks how to do that to see you in person and give you a call about those vehicles. You come see us in person, we're at Highway 90 in Plantation. It's one mile south of I-10. Exit 15A. Give us a call at 251-375-0068. Go to the website LCMMotorCars.com or come to one of mine and Robert's class reunions. We'll make sure you're there. There we go. Good deal. There goes David McCrary. Check it in and go from David to Robert. What class reunion you got coming up? We did a great class of 1988. Shaw High School. It's so good that school doesn't even exist anymore. I'll shut it down, Ben. Okay, there's so many text questions. I may get some of these. I want to ask you this too. Kind of a broader question. Do you think, I know who you support, you support Kamala Harris. Do you think she's ready for the job? Yes. Why? unequivocally. Yeah. Because you have to distinguish between qualifications and policy. So from a qualification path, having served in local office and state office statewide, and then serving in the United States and four years as vice president, those things make her qualified. All the critiques that folks have levied her way literally distilled down to some things I really don't even care to repeat, but maybe she's not bright or she had a relationship 30 years ago or, you know, fill in the blank, fill in the blank, fill in the blank. But any person with that resume that's operating at that particular level is qualified to do the job because at the end of the day, what you want them to do is you want them to take in information and make decisions that move the organization or the country forward. And I think she's more than capable of doing that. You know, I look at the on here. I look on the international side. There's so many things to worry me. International side worries me as well. Because I see, since the beginning, I respect the right of the Ukrainians fight for their sovereignty. Sure. Helping them early on is one thing. I don't see how Ukraine wins this. You know, I don't see how this ends. So continuing this, I think it's actually not kind to continue to support the Ukrainians when they can't win. But I mean, the casualty numbers are unbelievable with that country separate. And I see in Vice President Harris, somebody who seems to be on board for continuing that. But that's policy, right? Yeah, it is policy. That's what I'm about. On a slight tangent here. So when we were in the election for the Senate, it was a result of Jeff Sessions being appointed as Attorney General. And so that came up a lot on the campaign trail. And I would often say that at the time, Senator Sessions becoming Attorney General Sessions, he was qualified to do the job. The same way that I feel about former Senator Doug Jones, if he becomes Attorney General, Jones in a prospective Harris administration. It's important to make that distinction because from a traditional standpoint, there are only a finite number of people who have checked the boxes in order to be president, sans those who are appointed as vice president. And I believe she's one of those people. But I'm following you. But I've moved on from qualified. I asked you, and you answered, and I heard your opinion on it. I think I may disagree. But I then said, okay, but now on policy, here's some things that I worry me greatly. Yeah, if you want to vote against somebody because you believe that they're going to continue the war in Ukraine, the way that's happening now, then what you have to have is you have to have a corresponding argument is what's the other person going to do that's different. Because what you don't want to have happen is what we talked about happen at the end of Afghanistan, as you don't you don't want it to be just an absolute debacle, and you end up getting more people killed, getting out than you did when you were maintaining presence for a while. But yeah, I think she's qualified to be president. I think she has a very good chance of winning, and we'll be looking to see what happens. We're going to talk again to get a chance to talk about price controls and all that kind of stuff with you. And we had an hour. So we'll do it again soon. We will. All right. Paul Finebaum takes over this thing in just minutes. You all have a great one. We'll do it again tomorrow.