Ep. 1072 - Biden’s No Good, Very Bad VP Pick

Episode Summary

Executive Summary: The episode argues that Biden’s selection of Kamala Harris exposed his campaign as a transitional vehicle and handed Trump a stronger target. The host portrays Harris as a radical, opportunistic, authoritarian politician whose record on crime, immigration, abortion, guns, religion, and taxes contradicts media claims that she is a pragmatic moderate.

Main Topics: Biden’s VP pick as a strategic error (Priority: 5/5): The host claims Biden’s choice of Harris undermines his moderate, normalcy-based campaign and effectively invites voters to focus on Harris as the likely successor rather than Biden himself. Media framing of Harris as a moderate historic pick (Priority: 5/5): The transcript criticizes major media outlets, especially the New York Times and CNN figures, for portraying Harris as a safe, pragmatic moderate and focusing on her demographic ‘firsts.’ Harris’s political opportunism and inconsistency (Priority: 5/5): The host argues Harris will say anything to gain power, citing her past attacks on Biden, her shifting positions, and her willingness to use identity politics and allegations strategically. Authoritarian and unconstitutional instincts (Priority: 5/5): Harris is presented as willing to bypass constitutional limits through executive action, support court packing, and expand government authority in policing, guns, and other areas. Record on criminal justice and law-and-order politics (Priority: 4/5): The transcript reviews Harris’s history as a prosecutor and attorney general, accusing her of harshness toward low-level offenders, selective enforcement, and politically motivated conduct in high-profile cases. Radical policy positions (Priority: 5/5): The host highlights Harris’s positions on Medicare for All, fracking, plastic straws, meat consumption, taxes, abortion, and immigration as evidence she is far from moderate. Trump’s response and campaign opportunity (Priority: 4/5): Trump is framed as benefiting from the shift because he can now run against Harris directly, and the Trump campaign’s immediate ad is presented as an effective attack line.

Key Arguments: Biden chose a VP who is likely to be his successor, so the vice-presidential pick matters far more than usual. Harris was selected largely for demographic symbolism rather than political moderation or competence. The media’s description of Harris as a pragmatic moderate is portrayed as false and propagandistic. Harris’s career shows a pattern of political convenience, from her early alliances to her attacks on Biden and Kavanaugh. Her record includes support for executive overreach, court packing, broad government control, and aggressive progressive policies. Her past as a prosecutor is used to argue she is authoritarian, selective, and politically calculating rather than principled. Trump should campaign against Harris directly, not Biden, because Harris embodies the future of the ticket. The selection gives Republicans a clearer target and weakens the Biden campaign’s claim to normalcy.

Data Points: Americans who agree Biden will not finish first term: 6 in 10 - The host cites polling to argue many Americans expect Harris to become president. Independents who agree Biden will not finish first term: 57% - Used to support the claim that Biden’s durability is widely doubted. Democrats who agree Biden will not finish first term: 49% - Cited to show even within his party there is concern about Biden’s ability to serve. GovTrack liberal ranking for Harris: 4th most liberal senator - Used to argue she is far from moderate. Harris vote alignment with Bernie Sanders: 92% - Presented as evidence of her ideological alignment with the left. Harris California primary support: 7% - Used to emphasize her weak presidential candidacy before the VP selection. Marijuana-related prosecutions: 1,500 people - Referenced as part of criticism of her prosecutorial record. Cases dismissed due to lab technician misconduct: more than 600 cases - Cited in a critique of Harris’s handling of evidence issues as prosecutor. Truancy program warning threshold: 30 minutes late more than twice - Described as part of Harris’s anti-truancy initiative targeting parents. Potential jail penalty for truancy: 1 year in jail or $2,500 fine - Used to illustrate harshness of her enforcement approach. Proposal time frame on guns: 100 days - Harris said Congress would get 100 days to act on gun laws before executive action. Gun sales background-check threshold: more than 5 guns a year - Specific policy Harris said she would impose via executive action. Federal tax rate idea discussed: 70% top tax rate - Used as an example of a radical policy she was open to exploring. Fracking stance: federal ban - Presented as a major policy position contrary to energy/jobs interests. Health care expansion claim: all residents, including undocumented immigrants - Harris said public health access should be available to all residents. Supreme Court response timeframe: 100 days - The host notes Harris’s stated willingness to act against gun violence if Congress failed to act within 100 days. Cars for Kids jingle phone number: 1-877-CARS-4-KIDS - Sponsor segment; repeated as a memorable promotional line. Pure Talk data plan: 2 gigs of data for $20/month - Sponsor segment describing wireless service pricing.

Pivotal Quotes: "Joe Biden finally picked his VP, or as I like to put it, Harris apparent." — Ben Shapiro: Opening framing of Harris as the assumed successor, not merely a running mate. "Senator Kamala Harris of California is Joe Biden's pick for vice president, a pragmatic moderate." — Ben Shapiro quoting the New York Times: Used sarcastically to critique media framing of Harris. "Upon being elected, I will give the United States Congress 100 days to get their act together... And if they fail to do it, then I will take executive action." — Kamala Harris: Cited as evidence of her willingness to bypass Congress on gun policy.

Implications: The episode frames Harris as the real target of the 2020 race and warns that Biden’s campaign could be judged as a gateway to a far more radical presidency. For listeners, the takeaway is that VP vetting now carries major governing implications.