The RTWJ Podcast
Join best friends John and Marcus (JAM) as they share their fresh perspectives on news, society, and culture, as well as personal stories and experiences. As a podcast hosted by members of the LGBTQ community, the RTWJ Podcast is proud to offer a platform that incorporates inclusivity and advocacy for civil rights as part of its values. New episodes are released on the 1st and 15th day of each month. Subscribe to The RTWJ Podcast on your favorite podcast app or listen online at thertwjpodcast.buzzsprout.com. Follow us on Instagram @thertwjpodcast.
The RTWJ Podcast
Trump’s Playbook: Policy by Whiplash
After celebrating John’s birthday, we’re back to address recent feedback from our March 22nd episode, particularly claims of “Trump Derangement Syndrome.” As public servants, our concerns stem from direct experience with the impact of erratic policies. Sudden tariff shifts, for example, disrupt planning and create instability, not out of partisanship, but because effective governance matters.
We also examine federal spending priorities, where minimal investment in homelessness contrasts sharply with massive military and debt expenditures. These choices reveal more about values than speeches do. Looking ahead to the midterms, we’ll discuss what Democrats must offer beyond opposition, including clear plans to govern effectively.
April 20, 2025
Cause I'm too messy and then I'm just too unclean. You told me, get a job and you asked where the hell I've been and I'm too perfect, so I open my big mouth. I want to be me. Is that not allowed?
Speaker 2:And I'm too clever and then I'm too stupid though you hate it when I cry, and it's just that time of the month.
Speaker 1:And I'm too perfect to show you that I'm not A thousand people. I could be for you and you ain't gonna hold it wrong. Hey everybody, welcome back to the RTWJ podcast.
Speaker 2:Happy Easter to those of you who celebrate and, of course, to our favorite host here, john. We want to wish you a very happy birthday, a belated birthday. It was last weekend. So for those of you that kept wondering, why do these guys keep delaying the episode, what's going on with them? You know what? Last weekend it was all about celebrating you and your birthday and celebrating your life and legacy and everything you bring to the world. So you know what we were busy, so we're sorry. We're here now and we're back on track. So happy belated birthday to John again.
Speaker 1:Thanks, marcus. It was a great weekend. I got to spend it with my partner, my best friend, of course, marcus, my family, my friends, disney yeah, I had an engagement party, so congrats to my good friends Olivia and Matthews on their engagement. I'm so excited for them and so happy to be part of their journey. And I was part of the also you know celebration too.
Speaker 1:That kind of fell in the middle of my birthday weekend, so I'm very happy for them it was pretty cool to see Did a lot of good stuff, had some great dinner, got a lot of good gifts, just had a really good time, just to kind of step back and settle and just, you know, take it in the drinks were going at california adventure too.
Speaker 2:You're having a good time with that. Let me tell you, weather was great, everything was great my place, disney, is my home.
Speaker 1:We've talked about it many, many times and I, you know, just love it. I will continue to stand by that uh, you know yeah take that charge. Thanks, marcus, I appreciate it, and thanks to everyone out there who wished me a happy birthday, and you know, yeah, here we go On to good things and on to our show.
Speaker 2:So Absolutely. Why are we here? We have a lot of business to take care of. Yes, that's true.
Speaker 1:Yes, first and foremost, you know our show has taken many different positions. As Marcus said, we talked about you know personal stuff. We've talked about politics and that's kind of what we, you know, stand by and what we do. And, of course, you know my little rants, as I'm being told I'm, you know, that's what I do.
Speaker 2:Oh yeah.
Speaker 1:I've always wanted people to react to our show and people to respond to our requests, people to respond to things we have to say. So finally, we got a pretty lively, you know well-voiced response on what I've been saying.
Speaker 2:Yes, you, especially you, really got the heat, so this is.
Speaker 1:I listened to the episode, so I'm going to say who it is. Jay from the hard parking podcast. Thanks for that feedback. Um, before I get started, jay, I want to just tell you that you are personally invited to our show let's talk live let's talk live, because one thing that I will stand by is that the real talk with jam podcast. Oh my god, excuse me, that was our um time to wake up. Yeah, that was our little information here.
Speaker 2:A little early morning, early morning show here. You gotta wake up in the morning here.
Speaker 1:But see if you hear that. That's one thing I was saying, jay, is that come on to the show, let's discuss this life, because one thing that I will stand by, that one thing we've done from the beginning here at the RTWJ podcast or Real Talk with Jam podcast, is that we record live. There is no two takes, there is no second take, there is no elimination of work, nothing. We are a show that records live, we produce it live and that is what gives us that raw, true, passionate speaking that we do, and we got feedback for that. I was told that I was um, that I was very passionate and that I sounded like a super left liberal, whatever that means. Um, that I sounded uneducated, cool. I like that feedback. I do. I like the feedback because you are invited to our show.
Speaker 2:All right.
Speaker 1:Jay, bring it to us.
Speaker 2:The invitation is out.
Speaker 1:That's fine, but bring it to us, let's talk, let's discuss a topic live on the show, let's discuss something about your president, and we will have fun with it.
Speaker 2:Okay, all right, jay, it's out there.
Speaker 1:But why is it personal to us, jay, before we get started on the real specific things? Because I want you to understand why this is so personal to us and why, in many senses, we might sound as we're very passionate, marcus and I, as all you know are public servants.
Speaker 1:We work in capacities that serve the public. That is our stark difference. We work in actual positions that serve the public. That is our stark difference. We work in actual positions that serve the public, and things that change in government affect the way we work and affect the way we serve those that we work for our stakeholders, members of the public, community members and fellow public officials in our organizations. So, as public servants, we deal with this all the time. The feedback is great. You can call me anything you want. I love it because Marcus and I are in positions that we've heard countless different things said to us about us, about our programs. And what do we do, marcus? Take it in stride and keep it pushing, because we are public servants and it is our job to serve the public. We took an oath to do that, so that's why this is so important to us, because the work we do is affected by those that make decisions, and right now they aren't making them too good, but we'll get into those specifics.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I mean I have to just lead into it. You already set up the stage. It's. You know we want to talk and some of the debate sometimes gets into the policy right how is the policy right? So the Trump administration sets one up and they're putting it out there. Let's debate the policy.
Speaker 2:The thing is we also, like you said, being that we work in public sector, we're dealing with the actual execution of the policies and that execution process alone. I can say, at least again from my experience, what I'm dealing with in my industry. The execution is an absolute nightmare. It's chaotic, it's unclear. Priorities change, what qualifies, things change, for example, with federal funding. So we've talked in the past. We talked about the federal funding freeze. That's one of the first things he did only a couple of weeks into the administration right, everything was frozen. So it was and don't hold me to the details 100%, but it was essentially they wanted to go through and do a review of all the different federal funding programs and assess whether it was something they wanted to continue. So in the meantime, no money was to go out until they did that. Well, that didn't work. That didn't work for neither kind of more. What would you say? Liberal states, liberal jurisdictions?
Speaker 1:as well as conservative.
Speaker 2:Conservative. States and districts also had a problem with it too, so they had to reverse it. They're still doing it, they're still going through this review. They just didn't hold the money back, right. But just this chaos that's been going on. Everything is chaotic, everything is uncertain. We don't know from one day to the next what's going to happen. Even certain projects. Now, if it incorporates DEI, if it incorporates this, if it incorporates that, it's under review, it could be pulled tomorrow. Every day is just a circus show and we just don't know what to do. We don't know how to function like that, with this uncertainty that we've never had to deal with before.
Speaker 1:This isn't one of his many failed businesses, by the way, this isn't you know, this isn't. There is track record of this man and his many failed businesses, from restaurants to hotel chains, to casinos, to even educational institutions. I mean, that itself gives me enough information to know that the president of the United States comes from a position that first has many failed businesses. And oh, here we go with the excuse. Right, we're gonna get into why they always defend him because they have a term about us too, you know. And the reason why this man does not travel out of the country he's a convicted felon. Many countries around the world do not allow convicted felons to travel amongst other countries. Have you noticed that he really hasn't left the us as much as he should have? Mind you, it's pretty soon in his administration, but in this time, sure, okay, devil's advocate here.
Speaker 1:Okay, look at you okay, yeah, yeah, you know it's uh, but you know he doesn't leave because you know. Okay, whatever, maybe he's convicted. Felon status right prevents him from leaving, which is absurd in many ways. But marcus taught tell us why or what we were called. Uh, you know, because they, you know. The feedback we got was that we hate trump and we do but stand by that, but there is a term that we were called and yes, that exists, and why we do we?
Speaker 2:we fall under this category and again and I should have looked this up before, I should have seen- I didn't know this existed, so you didn't know. And and there is a state, I don't want to say which one, I don't know if it's it's one of those ones in the midwest or the south, they're of course they're trying, of course, one of those that banks off of blue states because their economy just collapses.
Speaker 2:Okay there was legislation actually they attempted it I'm not sure what the status is to try and make this an actual medical condition that people can be diagnosed with. So we need to be careful where we travel now, because you might actually have this diagnosis. Oh no, so the term and I heard this term before, but I think it's becoming more prevalent now as people react to his administration and what's going on Because I think for some of us, we're looking at things and going, okay, it's really crazy to make us look crazy for thinking he's crazy. They use the term trump derangement syndrome or tds. Now I'm going to read this. This is from wikipedia, obviously the most reliable source of information on the web, as we all know, but I think this actually is a pretty accurate like conservatives do facebook and ai yeah, what is that?
Speaker 2:uh, what did we talk about before? What is the name of that? What was the name of that thing? 4chan, was it 4chan or some nonsense? They did that. That platform that people were spreading information on.
Speaker 1:Tds trump derangement I'm on attack mode.
Speaker 2:Sorry, it's okay it's all right, we're again. This is a live show. We, we don't have this scripted. I have a couple of notes just sitting here. Okay, tds, let me get into this.
Speaker 2:It is a pejorative term used to describe negative reactions to US President Donald Trump that are perceived to be irrational and to have little regard for Trump's actual policy positions. So I was mentioning that a little bit earlier. Where the execution of the policy right, just because you know, whatever the policy might be at the moment that's being put out there, let's say DEI, right, okay, dei. Well, you need to look at the merits of his position, blah, blah, blah. But we're talking about the execution and the problems that come with how it's actually being executed in real life. So this is saying that you're not being considerate of the policy itself. You're not being considerate of the policy itself. The term has mainly been used by Trump supporters to discredit criticism of him. Oh, here we go, john, there's you as a way of referring, I'm sorry, as a way of reframing the discussion by suggesting that his opponents are incapable of accurately perceiving the world. In other words, it suggests that people let their dislike of Trump supersede logic and reason.
Speaker 1:I can say the exact same thing for those who support Trump, because, no matter what we say, no matter how we criticize him, they continuously stand by the fact oh, oh, but this is why he did this, or this is why he's doing this right. As soon as he lost the debate with Kamala during the presidential debate, the first thing they went to was oh, oh, but this is why he did this, or this is why he's doing this right. As soon as he lost the debate with Kamala during the presidential debate, the first thing they went to was oh, her earrings are headphones, earpieces, right?
Speaker 1:There is this constant same thing? You guys do, same thing you do Jay, that's fine. Me and Marcus you know what. Let's self-diagnose ourselves with TDS. Ooh, it's not like we've been there before, right, that's what we have to deal with, but I mean it's the same thing.
Speaker 1:We critique Trump because he has been a failed person from the beginning. He is a TV celebrity, failed businesses, convicted felon. This is why we critique him. There is no policy issues dance that I've ever stood by. That he has said In many ways in the beginning during his first term of presidency okay, there were parts where he did say things that's a difference. But I was like okay, you know what, maybe in some aspect economy, economic wise he can put us into a different thing. Right, for example, the Trump tax cuts in the beginning, where we did beginning, where we did save a little portion of the way he allocated tax brackets and how we were able to better fit in the tax brackets amongst his first established policy that he enacted. I'm not too sure of the specifics. Marcus knows a little more about that.
Speaker 2:Okay, we have a bullet point for you. John, you're acknowledging, see, so there's some recognition.
Speaker 1:That's the thing, but he is not good. He isn't. When I hear him speak, he doesn't inspire me. He does not. He's not a good speaker. I'm sorry he's not. There was never a motivate during his entire run for presidency. There was never a motivational speech that gave me the chills. There wasn't anything like what Obama did. There wasn't anything like what Kamala did. Even Joe himself, bernie Sanders, there wasn't any. George Bush, even these john mccain. You know, these people gave me inspiration. They spoke in a way that that wanted to. You know what? If they lied to me, that's fine, but they at least convinced me that they gave me hope.
Speaker 2:However, that looked like okay, so I want to stop you right there. I'm going to challenge you, then let's let's do this devil's advocate thing. It's good. So what you just said, right, trump doesn't inspire you or make you feel like others.
Speaker 1:I feel like we're the stupidest country in the world when he talks.
Speaker 2:Is that TDS?
Speaker 1:No.
Speaker 2:Okay, talk to me, I'm a communications major Talk to me. This is what I do. I studied I. I have a Bachelor of.
Speaker 1:Science. Can I conclude? Since he doesn't motivate you, inspire you and give you an emotional response, that's why you hate him. A part of it is that, but I also hate him because he is a bigot. Okay, he has a failed track record.
Speaker 2:Okay.
Speaker 1:Nothing has been successful, right? For example, he's over here on his website saying that COVID was spread through a lab and critiquing the Biden administration. Buddy, you were president during the COVID-19 pandemic. What is it with your fascination for Biden? Let it go. You sound like a really upset ex-husband or ex-wife. Let it go. If you want to get married with Biden, go ahead, but let your relationship dwindle out. You guys got your divorce. That's it. Enough with the obsessions, right?
Speaker 1:But no, my really hate is that this man does not have any specific policy implications, does not talk like a powerful leader, does not have that style of communication that inspires others. He doesn't. He berates, he attacks, he interrupts, he ignores as someone that studied the science of communication, the communication between large groups, small groups, individuals, verbal, non-verbal, visual, non-visual all of these things he is really bad at things he is really bad at. He is really bad at this. He stands up there, spews nonsense and we all fall for it. We all do. I'm a victim of it too. I'll tell you, and marcus and I have said this if this man had a show where he went to talk shit about people, you best believe I would pay to be there, because he's good at doing that. Oh, he's outrageous.
Speaker 2:Yes, he's a great performer.
Speaker 1:I will give him that. He is a great performer and when it comes to the science of communication, his performance is top notch. As someone that studies communication habits and theories and policies, procedures, everything like that. This man does one thing that's good he convinces the poor, the uneducated and those that are missing that specific part of communication techniques that allow them to fall for what he says. He is good at that. He is damn well good at that, and I will give him that. I will give Trump that that he is good at convincing people with the stuff that he says and making an impact, Because all of us, whether you follow him or not, have something to say about him, something to respond, react about him. Yes, that's true, he does good at that. That's true.
Speaker 2:That's true Absolutely. And great perspective. Thank you for sharing more about your perspective on how you see him and I want to talk a little bit. So I always like to talk about specific issues. Let's do this policy, tds, execution.
Speaker 2:I want to look at an example of this kind of breakdown. I want to talk about the tariffs. I've been talking a lot about his economic kind of policy and stance. I want to just reflect on that. So let's break this down. Let's do a breakdown Policy-wise tariffs.
Speaker 2:We can sit and we can go back and forth all day on exactly who to put the tariff on right. Oh, this country deserves a tariff, this industry deserves a tariff. This is how much it should be. We can do that all day long.
Speaker 2:Personally, I'm not overly enthusiastic about tariffs, especially that we are now in 2025 in a global economy, and I don't think the US can just stand on its own away from the rest of the world. Our economy is too integrated with the international market. I'm not sure that we're there. So that's my personal view on that policy. Let's, let's take all, okay. So you know, we're talking about the policy. Let's now look at that and let's look at the execution. And this is where I have a problem. This is the thing.
Speaker 2:Every almost every day, the policy has changed china at one point. The beginning was 10, I believe, believe. And then we did Mexico and Canada. At what was it? 25%, right. How many times in the last couple of weeks have those figures changed? What the number was? It is constantly changing. By the day, by the week, the figure changes. What we're doing, oh, we're now negotiating One point, right? Honestly, right now, at this moment, sitting here, I don't know what the status is of Canada and Mexico. I don't know what their rate is right now. I don't know what they're being Don't forget the penguins.
Speaker 2:Oh, let's not even start with the island and the penguins. Yeah, the penguins are going to be tariffed, but I right now can't tell you what the the amount is of the tariff or what the tariff is. Okay, we got our studio cat here, coming in here right now. We gotta get control of the cat. Sorry, that's okay. So here's the thing. Look at the stock market. I believe that this and okay, we can go on all day about. I'll get feedback on this.
Speaker 2:I believe the stock market is the truth teller of how things are going in the economy. The stock market has been in free fall. It has its moments of recovery and then it just keeps blowing up. It's saying that things aren't good right now, right with the tariffs and everything. Just look at the execution of that. Let me pose a question. This is something I saw. We want production in the US right Right now. With the way things are with supply chains and tariffs, why would you start a factory in the US right now? How can you plan business for your business? How can you plan what your costs are going to be, how you're going to source materials or anything? With the way things are? This is chaotic. There is no strategy in how these tariffs are being done. They change by the day. He literally at one point tells China a couple of days ago, or weeks ago China.
Speaker 2:China right. Basically, let's save TikTok and I'll cut back on the tariffs. What happened to being tough? What happened to? We got to show it to them?
Speaker 1:Yes, you didn't hear this, I mean, I'm just like that's my reaction. Huh. What didn't hear this? I mean, I'm just like that's my reaction. Huh. What really like this is the state of our country.
Speaker 2:Let's just play games, and here we go. These tariffs everyday change.
Speaker 2:How do you, as a business, even this is the world's biggest economy, buddy, even in the okay public sector. Going back to our line of work, as we're planning our budgets and finances, what do sales tax revenues look like? What do investment returns look like? Absolutely, how do you plan for anything with this? There's no strategy. There's no path in how this is being executed. So again, regardless of whether you believe in tariffs oh, we need strong tariffs, let's give it to China, let's give it to so-and-so we can debate that, but then look at how he's actually executing it. It's a complete mess. So I would love to sit and, for example, with terrorists, look at the policy angle and focus on the policy angle. Let's debate the policy angle. The way it's being handled, though. I mean everything, everything. I mean.
Speaker 2:Look the mass layoffs, for example, that Doge did with various public agencies. Right, letting all these people go offering these buyouts. No strategy, no path. They've had to pull back people that they determined were critical. They've had to delay people from taking advantage, for example, the IRS. They had to say, nope, irs agents can't do it until after the tax season. Why? Oh, because we actually need you. We didn't really realize that at first, so we had to pull that back. Just everything's messy, chaotic, have to pull back. Just everything's messy, chaotic, have to pull back, have to correct. There's no strategy whatsoever, and that's my problem. With things I can't debate, for example, let's do mass layoffs, or let's cut the federal workforce, because the way it's being done is so messy it doesn't matter. So that's where I'm at. That's my little spiel about policy versus execution.
Speaker 2:Oh well, tds-wise. Look at versus execution. Oh well, you know, tds wise, you know. Look at the execution. How can I debate the? Policy when the execution alone is so messy.
Speaker 1:Exactly, and you know, marcus is more focused on the aspects of the policies, right, and I look at the humanity from the type of things, right, I look at the stupidity that we deal with, for example, trump's education secretary, rachel Maddow, which is so funny, right, because she's supposed to be running the Department of Education, an organization that she's also made to dismantle.
Speaker 2:Now clarify Rachel Maddow's the MSNBC host. What's the secretary's name?
Speaker 1:Oh sorry.
Speaker 2:I forget her name.
Speaker 1:Linda Mahone. However you say her name, I don't know, yeah. So on, Rachel Maddow sorry my.
Speaker 2:however you say her name, I don't know.
Speaker 1:Yeah, so on Rachel Maddow sorry, my words got jumbled there yeah, so on Rachel Maddow. Linda you know we're talking about how. Linda is truly just a great example of the people that were chosen for his administration and his cabinet. So in one press conference talking about AI technology, she called AI, ai oh, lord, have mercy and let me tell you I do love my a1 sauce and some steak. It makes it taste really good, really brings out the flavor a1 is a real problem, isn't it?
Speaker 2:this country a1?
Speaker 1:first of my first ago. She said it multiple times. My first example okay, and then we get into when um trump said that during a press conference, with telling president sergio matarella, he's indicated that the us and italy are bound together by shared cultural and political heritage dating back thousands of years to ancient rome. Um, the us wasn't around thousands of years ago.
Speaker 2:Um, so wasn't italy also part of the access powers in world war ii is. That is, that what they call germany and japan wasn't italy part of that crew too in world war ii.
Speaker 1:Don't hold me to that I'll give a benefit of the doubt. I will maybe say maybe he was highlighting the long-standing kind of cultural connections between the two nations. Maybe he was kind of indicating that.
Speaker 2:What he was trying to probably say was the fact that obviously many Italian immigrants came to the US in the 1800s and 1900s, but he was portraying it very inaccurately. You know what?
Speaker 1:Yeah, and now let's do rapid fire, let's do rapid fire of where our tax dollars are spent, and averages of where tax dollars are spent uh based on individual tax contributors like myself and marcus, okay, okay is, according to rotor rotors, uh, the associated press, sources of the associated press and the institute for public and policy studies.
Speaker 1:Okay, the average taxpayer contributed about $98 for deportations, immigrant detention and border control. About $26 for refugee assistance. Okay, the average taxpayer also contributed about $3,700 for weapons in war, a little over $1,800 for Medicaid. This is a good one, because you know, jay and everyone else love Elon Musk and say he's doing a great job. Right, the average taxpayer contributed about $6 for SpaceX contracts. Wow, look at that. But we only gave a little less than one cent for the Council on Homelessness. For the Council on Homelessness, the average taxpayer contributed over $2,000 for Pentagon contracts and troops and also this we contributed almost $4,000 for interest, just on the national debt. How much do you think the average taxpayer gave for diversity, equity and inclusion programs at the Pentagon? Take a wild guess.
Speaker 2:I'm going to say that's a hard one You're going why? Because is it according to the standards now by this current administration, where anything can be DEI? Basically, I don't know.
Speaker 1:I don't know how to guess that, but they say that they claim to be wasteful A little less than three cents.
Speaker 2:Is that the current administration saying that?
Speaker 1:This is yeah. So then you know, it's just, it's, it's it's. They say that these are wasteful spending tactics. Right, but we're looking at the implications on average as an individual taxpayer on SpaceX contracts than we are spending combined on the Consumer Protection, financial Bureau Agency, the National Park Service and Museum and Library Service. Oh, you know what? Let's throw in there the Postal Service. So the wastefulness where is it that it's going? Right, you know we are we going to stop the spacex contracts, jay? Is that what we're going to do? I mean, considering that this billionaire has billions of dollars in government contracts, right, where is the um?
Speaker 2:and the consumer finance protection bureau. Uh, talking about that. So the the budget on that that I have for this year, this current federal fiscal year, is 810 million. The agency has returned over 21 billion billion directly back to consumers. That agency, basically during the recession you had multiple agencies that were responsible for transparency and protections when it came to financial products for consumers. Right, they consolidated into one agency. That agency again has brought back over $21 billion direct to the public, direct to the citizens. Here's the thing In the past few weeks or, I'm sorry, I believe it was the past few weeks or if not the past few months the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau issued some guidelines when it came to digital payment platforms. They're going to have more jurisdiction over those types of platforms. Musk wants to start XMoney, which is a digital payment platform, and he's targeting an agency that would otherwise set rules and guidelines on how his platform operates. Isn't that interesting?
Speaker 2:Yeah that's exactly.
Speaker 1:And you know. Another thing is that I always will say that Republicans I'm sorry, not Republicans, because this is very different that Republicans I'm sorry, not Republicans, because this is very different MAGA Republicans and these crazy evangelical Christians, and you know everything they like to tell on themselves right, because we have the attack that's going on with Trump's syndication of Harvard. Right, and you?
Speaker 1:know, we're going to cut this and we're going to cut that right. Remember back in 2013, when the GOP was, you know, talking about the IRS supposedly targeting political enemies of President Obama? Yes, and how they said quote, quote the IRS can go after you because of what you think. If that's the case, or what you believe, or what you do, we no longer live in a free country. Okay, that's what one GOP member said. Okay, the next one said this is great.
Speaker 1:They are direct actions that are taken, you know, far worse than Watergate. You know that they were taken against Americans, and they said that Americans had sought to exercise their first amendment rights under the free speech. And then here's another one. Here's another one Said if this were a Republican president targeting the ACLU or some gruel's, gruel's or anything of an administration, the mainstream media would be on top of it. Right, the GOP said this back in 2013. But what are they doing now? The exact same thing they talked about, and that's where my frustration stands. Everything they have said. They turn around and do exactly what they talked about, and that's what bothers me the most. They always give out their plans via their accusations, every single time, absolutely, yes, they always give out their plans via their accusations, every single time?
Speaker 2:Absolutely yes, that's been a thing. Now, what they accuse of is what they're actually doing. That is true, very true.
Speaker 1:All hypocrisy that falls out of their mouths. So, as we end this episode, before we get to the end, we have a lot more to talk about. We do Absolutely, and there's never enough time for every single. Before we get to the end, we have a lot more to talk about. We do Absolutely, and there's never enough time for every single policy that we want to discuss that we were called out on. We'll do it on another episode, but at the end of the day, this is a mess. It has to be given and it has to be said.
Speaker 1:If you look up to someone, as you do Trump, and praise him to be a God, you're in a cult. You're absolutely in a cult. If you think that that one person can save everybody from persecution, you're looking at him as a religious entity, and that is a cult and I'm afraid for the future because of that aspect. We shouldn't be praising one person like that. We should be working together. We are in a democracy. A democracy works with multiple gears and aspects come together to form one ending, one product, one solution. That's how it should be. This is a democracy, not a theocracy, not a dictatorship, not fascism, not a fascist government. This is a type of government that works best when all of the foundations that were created come together and work like a well-oiled machine. But that's not happening, and that's my concern. Any last points, marcus.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I'll set the stage for our next episode. One question, you know again, we're we're gonna be honest and we're gonna be, you know, really dive into this. One thing, too, is what do Democrats have to do next year in the midterms? That is a big question we have to ask. The thing is, this can't just be a referendum against Trump. That is one thing that I will throw out there, and that's one thing that I will throw out there, and that's one thing that we've been asked we have to discuss, and we'll discuss this next episode a little more. What do Democrats do going forward and how do we reclaim?
Speaker 2:You know, we talk a lot about what happened with the last presidential election in Kamala right, and why did she? Why did she lose? There are many different reasons. One thing, though, that did happen is that campaign became a lot about becoming a referendum against Trump, and Democrats have to also talk about what they are going to do and how they're going to deliver for the people. That's been something that has been brought up, especially as we analyze those that were kind of on the fence and ultimately went for Trump. What were the reasons for that?
Speaker 2:We need to dive into that a little more, and I'll set the stage that we get into that more next episode too. We have to be able to answer that. On this episode we talked a lot about him and again our perspective and why we have the strong positions that we do. Now, what do we do going forward? That's going to be the next question and we will address that. So we do. We have to, and that's something that's been coming up. I've been seeing, as we start talking about the midterms, many prominent democratic figures are starting to bring up that question. It's an important one and it's one that we need to answer. So we'll get into that next episode.
Speaker 1:A lot of work to do, always and forever. One thing about us, though as me and Marcus, I like to say that we're educated and yeah, call me uneducated, but we're not. I think we're educated Because we don't look up to political figures as kings and gods and saviors. We criticize them just as many times we criticize Biden and we criticize the Democratic Party we do. I'll stand by that, because they're a mess in many ways, and we need to get it together.
Speaker 1:But that's our stark difference is that we recognize those differences. We recognize that not everyone is perfect and we do not look up to political figures as the saviors of the new world for all of us here at the rtwj podcast.
Speaker 2:I'm john and I'm marcus, and we'll catch you guys on our next episode, take care Promise me no promises. Don't you promise me nothing when you're free? Just be careful Promise me no promises.
