Democrats COPE AND SEETHE, Claim Trump Voter REGRET While Trump Polling HIGHEST IN HIS CAREER
01:04:38 Share

Your data is like gold to hackers. They'll sell it to the highest bidder. Are you protected? McAfee helps shield you, blocking suspicious texts, malicious emails, and fraudulent websites. McAfee's secure VPN lets you browse safely, and its AI-powered text scam detector spots threats instantly. You'll also get up to $2 million of award-winning antivirus and identity theft protection, all for just $39.99 for your first year. Visit McAfee.com. Cancel any time. Terms apply.

This is the narrative that they've been trying to push for some time, and it's a lie. What I can say is that Donald Trump's approval rating in aggregate is still pretty good. It has declined in some areas. It has increased in some areas. And the truth is, we don't know. Of course, the liberal side of things are going to try and push a propaganda narrative that Trump supporters regret their votes. I got to be honest. I have not met a single Trump voter who regrets their vote.

I know people who are liberals. Yes, believe it or not. Now I'm going to pause. This is all propaganda, all the narrative battle. Everybody is vying for control of the narrative as the machine dwindles. Polls are coming out saying this, that or otherwise. None of it makes sense. The machine is crumbling. So what I can say right now is it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter.

Now, I can say, you know, for me personally, as I've already mentioned, I go outside and we're in a in a rather red area. But I say red 60 percent drive 15 minutes east and it's 50 50. The eastern panhandle of West Virginia is actually kind of blue. And it's because people from Loudoun County and people who work in D.C. want to live in West Virginia. We got better laws. But if I go to Maryland or Virginia, I see much the same thing. There are many people who don't know, don't care.

Not really tuned in one month in. They're not paying attention and staring at everything. Certainly, there are some federal workers who are upset now they're losing their jobs. But I'm just going to say, like, you voted for Trump. I don't think it's that pronounced, though. I think largely it's too soon for most people to care. The people who voted for Trump largely still like Donald Trump. The people who are concerned about weird, woke things are concerned with it more than ever now.

And the Democrats have not done anything to sway opinion. So while there may be some people who were like, I don't realize Trump was going to do this. I don't think it's statistically significant. And I don't think they're supporting Democrats. Democrats are coming out and putting this narrative forth that Trump is unpopular. His polls are bad and they all regret it. It's a lie.

And I'll break it down for you. We'll start with this video. Gunther Eagleman says disgraced pollster Alan Lichtman claims people are telling him they regret voting for Trump. Do you regret it? I sure as hell don't. I don't know anybody who does. And I mean that honestly. I know some moderates who don't really care one way or the other. They voted for Trump. I know some moderate Democrats literally don't care one way or the other. And the conversations around the issue of Trump are meh.

I've got a few friends that are liberals, and I love the liberals are going to say Tim doesn't. It's not true because they're eternally online lunatics. OK, some of my friends who are rather liberal and progressive are like, oh, man, I can't stand J.D. Vance. That's about it. Like the default liberal or default moderate conservative, whatever it might be, like the passive individual, the normies, we'd call them don't care that much. Take a listen to disgraced Alan Lichtman.

Lots of Trump voters are reporting buyers remorse saying we didn't vote for this. Oh, yes, you did. You vote for what? We didn't vote for this. Trump so far has done two big things. Secure the southern border.

And the Doge actions, gutting agencies. What regular person is like, oh, no, USAID. It's a lie. You were repeatedly warned that Trump would follow precisely this course. What course? According to Project 2025. Now remorse is spreading to the broader American public. In the latest poll, Trump's approval rating is down to 44%. What poll?

You see, this guy...

I feel bad for him. He predicted that Kamala Harris is going to win. And he was wrong because he just watches CNN and MSNBC. He doesn't actually research this stuff. And he's having a mental breakdown. I mean it. I feel bad with 51 percent disapproval. That's the worst of any postwar American president, except for Donald Trump in his first term. Lots in the latest poll. What does that mean?

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the real clear politics average. Reuters Ipsos has Trump minus seven. Is that the latest poll? Heavens to Betsy. It looks like this is selective reporting. Alan, Alan Lichtman, what are you doing? Economist YouGov has a poll spanning from the 1st of March to the 4th.

The Reuters Ipsos poll you cited is from the third to the fourth. The Reuters poll has Trump down seven points. Is that the one you cited? 44 to 51. The Economist poll has a tie. So what does this mean? Let's go back to Emerson. Emerson has one that goes in between from the second to the third with 1000 registered voters. Trump is up five points. Now, why would Alan Lichtman omit this from his video?

My friends, I don't care what you think. Believe whatever you want. Vote for whatever you want. Live your life. I am not responsible for your decisions. But scumbags like Alan Lichtman are going to come out and cherry pick one poll out of the aggregate to make you think Trump is the most unpopular ever. And Trump voters regret it. Why? Because he's having a mental breakdown. The dude is so distraught over having been wrong.

Now, I get the liberals spam blasting a video of me saying Trump's going to win. Trump's going to win. Trump's going to win. And then sure enough, when Biden won, I go, there it is, ladies and gentlemen, Joe Biden wins. Wow. I guess I was wrong about that. And then when all the Republicans and conservatives came out saying there was a it was a theft. Stop the steal. CIA servers in Germany. I said, no, guys, come on. It was ballot harvesting. Joe Biden came out, pushed on the covid issue and he won.

I got no problem being like, wow, guess I was wrong about that. This guy is having a breakdown right now in aggregate across all polls. Donald Trump is up one point one points. That is not the worst of any president ever, except for Donald Trump.

We can go back further. February 27th to March 5th, a Rasmussen poll, which spans beyond Reuters' Ipsos by several days, gives Trump a plus two spread. CBS News for the end of February, plus two. I and I and a tip poll, plus three. CNN, end of February, minus four. Atlas, it's a tie. Marist, minus six. Daily Mail, plus eight. Harvard-Harris, plus nine.

Here's the truth. The narrative machine is broken. It's all propaganda. It makes no sense to see such psychotic margins.

They were all saying Kamala was going to win. This guy was gargling his own refuse, thinking Kamala was going to win. No one knows. The narrative machine broke and there is no collective psyche for this country anymore. I'm not going to leave you there, man. We're going to go to 538. I want you to have as much information on this as possible. And you tell me when I'm wrong. Comment now. I'm not going to say one poll shows Trump up nine points. He's the most popular president ever. Here you go.

Five thirty eight soon to be defunct because they're shutting down. Has Trump's approval up zero point three points. So he's I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Sorry. I was wrong. It is down zero point three points. So it is a statistical tie. I was going to say that when I thought it was approval or disapproval. This is why I'm showing you this to give you the full context. The latest poll has Trump at forty four to fifty one.

Emerson, literally in the same time period with nearly the same amount of voters, has Trump up five civics for the same time period. Has Trump down for morning consult for roughly the same period? Has Trump up one? Nobody has any idea what is going on.

They're all polling in different ways. The polls are busted and there's no one for you to believe. Sorry, that's the truth. I can tell you this. Let's take the aggregate to the best of our ability. That is the best indicator of whether or not Trump is liked or disliked. I never like individual polls because of static, because of noise and bias.

Rasmussen was pretty accurate. They tend to be fairly pro-Trump. But guess what? Emerson, which is far from pro-Trump, actually gave him a better approval rating than Rasmussen did. So I say this. I throw it all out. I look at both in aggregate. Add them all together and what do you get? Between 538 and RCP, Trump's probably up what? 0.6. So he's up 0.6.

Trump's enjoying the best approval of his career in aggregate. No single poll matters. These people are lying to you. And you get these stories. Trump supporters have second thoughts. Sure. Technically, the truth, the best kind of the truth where they actually just polled like two guys met a guy down at the gas station, said he voted for Trump and he regrets it.

He was a Democrat his whole life. He thought Joe Biden's brain didn't work. So he said, screw it, I'll vote for Trump at the last minute. And then immediately said, man, maybe I should vote for Kamala. Does that count as Trump regret? Probably to these people. Take a look at this from Reddit. Change my view, laughing at MAGA supporters now regretting voting for Trump or having been personally harmed, thinking they should eat ish and got what they deserve contributes to a toxic political climate where some have come to see their domestic political opponents as a greater enemy than Russia.

Mocking former Trump voters who regret their choices doesn't just feel counterproductive. It actively deepens division. Indeed, it does. And this is a guy saying, don't rag on these people. However, the premise is false. They've got this story from the New Republic and from The New York Times. What are the Democrats doing? They're lying when they say that Trump supporters are now regretting their vote. But let me tell you to the best of my ability.

It is probably true, fair assessment, that there are many Trump supporters who regret their votes. It is not statistically significant. Meanwhile, at Xfinity.

Hey, Steve, why are you on the roof? Product research. We engineered the Xfinity mobile network to have super fast Wi-Fi on the go, plus reliable 5G where you need it. So you've been streaming movies all day? Yep, product research. Xfinity Internet customers. Now through March 18th, get the new Samsung Galaxy S25 Plus on us with qualifying trade-in. Learn more at XfinityMobile.com. Restrictions apply. Taxes and fees extra. Xfinity Internet required.

This episode is brought to you by Shopify. Upgrade your business with Shopify, home of the number one checkout on the planet. ShopPay boosts conversions up to 50%, meaning fewer carts going abandoned and more sales going cha-ching. So if you're into growing your business, get a commerce platform that's ready to sell wherever your customers are. Visit Shopify.com to upgrade your selling today. We can show you. Over time, Trump's approval rating has dropped from when he first got inaugurated

Fifty one point five in aggregate, a massive and tremendous plus eight point five spread with some polls having up 17 points. It's dropped down now. See that disapproval going up? Sure. There are some people who approved him when he got in and don't now, but it's statistically meaningless.

The aggregate polling shows Trump is doing well, and people like Alan Lichtman have been having a psychotic episode, a mental breakdown because the dude is an emotional child.

I don't care if Trump's approval rating is minus 15. I agree with much of what he is doing. And if most of the country doesn't agree, my mission is to say, how do we convince you? But when you get Democrats singing in the well, obstructing official proceedings, wiggling canes at Trump and people like Alan Lichtman or David Pakman saying it's an it's it's the end for Trump. Oh, let him keep doing it because they're not arguing anything. They're just lying.

So if you go to the average person and say, we don't got to do anything. Trump supporters regret it. Let's make fun of them. They're going to go, OK, I guess Trump voted. Meanwhile, I'm going to go to them and say, here's the problem with USAID. Here's what Elon Musk is doing. Here's where we should be concerned. And with you and me together, we can hold Trump's feet to the fire and make sure he does the best thing possible for everybody. Because if at any point we just stop paying attention and believe people like Alan Lichtman

Then who knows what Trump does? Trump responds to public pressure. So let's keep the population informed the best of our abilities so that we can make this country great again. But, you know, man, too many of these Democrats have checked out and they've decided to play the route of just lie. There's that video from what's that Democrat guy? I remember his name, the young Democrat. And he's like swirling his drink and he's like, you know.

So many Democrats already regret voting for Trump. And I'm like, you just made that up. So then I tweeted verbatim what he said, but wrote Democrats regret voting for Kamala. And I'm like, you want to play that game where you can just literally lie and make it up? I tweeted the same thing. It's so crazy to see so many Democrats regretting having voted for Kamala and now supporting Trump because of all success.

Come on. You want to play a narrative game? We can play the narrative game. The reality is we don't really know the general sentiment because the machine is broken. The news is broken. The ratings are dead. They're laying people off. Five thirty eight's over. Good luck. Good luck. I say unto you. In the meantime, I'm happy where I'm at. Trump is doing all that I could ask for and more. I have praised tariffs for years.

I have called for border security and I have called out the bureaucracy. And so many of you have as well. So let's have a good time. I'm going to wrap it up there, my friends. Stay tuned. More to come. And this is a beautiful Friday show. We'll have Timcast IRL tonight. It's going to be fun. Thanks for hanging out. We'll see y'all then.

You know, one of the reasons why I left New Jersey was because of their insane laws pertaining to self-defense. California is probably one of the worst. There are states they refer to as the evil seven. That's what someone told me. I'm not the biggest gun guy. But, you know, when you have a guy try to break into your house, and now since then several times, plus swattings and death threats,

You may want to defend yourself or at least be prepared to do so. Now, for us here at Timcast, we have since upgraded to very expensive security. So, guys, if you're wondering, man, let me just tell you. Let me just tell you if you're wondering. You know, a lot of people wonder how much money a company makes. What do you do with all that money? And let me tell you, my friends, I wish it was as simple to say, oh, boy, it's so easy. When you make a lot of money, you can buy anything you want.

But we get millions, tens of millions. We have two of the biggest podcasts in the world. And with that, as Elon Musk says, the amount of death threats you get is proportional to how many times someone says your name. And I ain't complaining. I just moved to a state where I'm allowed to wield guns as per the Constitution. And we have security. But security is insanely expensive.

I mean, you got a big property, you got crazy death threats, and that's where a lot of the money goes. I'm not kidding. Go to any one of these big media companies, especially in politics. When we say things like we need your support by being a Rumble premium member, TimCastPremium.com, sign up to Rumble, use promo code Tim10. When we say buy Cast Brew Coffee, yeah, I wish it was as simple as that money comes in and then we're like, let's spend money.

But the reality is security, insurance and other means of protection are a massive expenditure and insurance and all that stuff. So I ain't going to go move to a state like California and I ain't going to stay in a place like New Jersey or Maryland where they basically say you die when someone comes to your home. New California bill would require homeowners to exhaust every reasonable means to escape prior to confronting home invader with deadly force or face homicide charges. Many of you may know the story.

Let me tell you about how New Jersey operates. Now, this isn't so much as what the law prescribes, what I was warned by police. So a guy tries to break into my house. This is nuts. It's like three in the morning. I hear someone trying to get in and I roll off my bed. Lights are off. I'm look at the window. We've got security cameras. I immediately call the police. I do not have any weapons at this moment. Cops end up finding the guy crazy guy.

And the one officer says to me, if it was me, I'd have just answered the door of the shotgun. And I'm like, oh, is that allowed in New Jersey? And he laughs. Here's what he tells me. I don't want to say this one cop because it was basically a conversation with a bunch of cops that night. And it's been a few years. They basically said, look, if this guy came into your house and you had a weapon and you blasted him, you'd be in prison right now on homicide charges. And I was like, whoa, but you guys know he's trying to break into my house. It doesn't matter. You killed him. You kill a guy. You go to prison. That's it. Have a nice day.

And I was like, well, what about self-defense? And they're like, listen, here's how it would really work. A guy breaks into your house. You shoot and kill him, right? We show up. And what do we see? A dead guy and a guy with a gun. We know you live here. You can prove it. Whatever. Doesn't matter. We don't know if that guy broke in. We don't know if you invited him in. We don't know who or anything about him. All we know is you gun dead guy. You're under arrest on suspicion of murder. You go to prison.

Maybe you'll see a judge in a week or so. Good luck. Then you're going to tell the judge you should get bail and they're going to argue for it. You're going to say, you know, I'm not guilty of this crime. I was defending my home. The prosecution is going to say this man was not defending his home. This man had a person come into his house and the first thing he does is kill him. And you're like, whoa, whoa, wait, even the prosecution is going to admit that.

And then you're going to say to the judge, this is what the cops explained to me. You're going to say to the judge, this guy, I don't know, breaks into my house. I'm not going to sit here. I don't know what I feared for my life. Someone was breaking in. And the judge is going to say, did you did you try to flee and flee to where? Well, outside. Did you try to just get outside? And if you respond, no, the court is going to say you have just admitted guilt to committing murder.

You have outright said you would rather shoot a man you don't know than stand outside. Murder proven. You confessed. No, no joke. That's what they said. They said, good luck telling a New Jersey court that you would rather shoot a guy to death than go outside. And I was like, what?

But what if he attacks me? Like, what? Doesn't matter. That's New Jersey for you. The stories out of New Jersey are nuts. That's what California wants. Now, Maryland is a little better, but still really bad because Maryland's got a list of guns they banned for arbitrary reasons. So they'll tell you in Maryland, you're allowed to have guns. We're not crazy. You can have long guns. You separate the ammo. They give you the rules. Then they show up and they go, what's the problem? You say, well,

This guy's got a weapon. And you say, look, I just have my standard long gun. The ammo is separated. They say, see, that was totally allowed. Let me take a look. Oh, that specific gun is an assault weapon, though. And you're like, wait, what? This gun's from 1970. It can hold 10 rounds. And they're like, well, you should have read the list. You've committed a very serious felony, sir. When it comes to self-defense in Maryland, the way it works, if someone comes onto your physical property, you're required to warn them and retreat.

I'm on not your house, on your grounds. Right. Because Maryland has some amount of decently large properties. There's some urban areas you must read into your home. If the individual at that point after being warned tries to gain unlawful entry into your home upon them gaining entry, you are allowed to defend yourself with lethal force. In Maryland, they say you don't have to run outside.

So the way they frame it, a little bit more reasonable, it's still nuts. You run to your home or you're in your home. They don't expect you to run anywhere else. When it came to Jersey, I was like, where am I supposed to go? Like, I'm in my home. Like, there's nowhere else to be. And they're like, in the alley, in the street. You could stand you can stand out there in the street. And I'm like, there's snow. They're like, again, tell a judge you would rather shoot and kill a man than stand in the cold. And they're going to be like, OK, one is more extreme than the other.

It was really hard to get a gun in New Jersey as well. They lied to me over and over again about the policies and procedures. It was hilarious until finally I realized I'm going to go ask the gun store how to get the permit for a gun. And then I got it in a few days. Crazy. The cops were lying to me. The cops in New Jersey, suburban cops lied to me. Now let's take a look at this California bill. Exhaust every reasonable means to escape is what they say. A California bill introduced last month would require homeowners to escape. We get it.

Assembly Bill 1333 introduced by Democratic caucus chair Rick Chavez, Zeber, seeks to modify the state's justifiable homicide laws. The bill states it would eliminate certain circumstances under which homicide is justifiable, including among others, in defense of a habitation or property. It also aims to clarify circumstances in which homicide is not justifiable among among among others,

when a person uses more force than necessary to defend against the danger. And that's the argument they make in New Jersey. What makes a great pair of glasses? At Warby Parker, it's all the invisible extras.

without the extra cost. Their designer quality frames start at $95, including prescription lenses, plus scratch-resistant, smudge-resistant, and anti-reflective coatings, and UV protection, and free adjustments for life. To find your next pair of glasses, sunglasses, or contact lenses, or to find the Warby Parker store nearest you, head over to warbyparker.com. That's warbyparker.com.

This episode is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Do you ever find yourself playing the budgeting game? Well, with the Name Your Price tool from Progressive, you can find options that fit your budget and potentially lower your bills. Try it at Progressive.com. Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and Affiliates. Price and coverage match limited by state law. Not available in all states.

They're going to mention Assemblyman David Tangipa says, so the homeowner would have to determine within seconds or whatever why a stranger suddenly showed up inside their house at any given hour before they could safely do anything to defend themselves. They would have to exercise all other options of, oh, well, you could just run away. You could have jumped out the window.

Before using your deadly force to protect yourself and your own home or protect your family, you have to prove that was necessary to shoot somebody who broke into your house. And how do you prove that? If that person has a bat, I almost have to allow them to hit me first, then prove they intended to kill me. Yes. Just like in the Gulag archipelago, when Sultan Itzan says that there was a army soldier being stabbed and he fought the knife away from the guy, defended himself and got arrested for it. They said, why did you kill him? He was like, he was stabbing me. You could have ran.

That's how communists think. Let me tell you about West Virginia and West Virginia. Castle Doctrine, constitutional carry. If you own a 100 acre plot of land, you do not have to retreat into your home to defend yourself, which creates very interesting circumstances. That is, if someone enters your property, which is a physical property with you got to have signs up. If you own a big field, you have to give warning to people.

Now, West Virginia is a reasonable state. If some random person just happens to be walking in your field, you can't shoot them. OK, you can walk up and warn them if they present any threat. You are allowed to defend yourself if you fear for your safety or your life on your property. West Virginia is a lot of rural land. And so a lot of farmers, a lot of hunters, they will be on their property.

And they're not going to be anywhere near a structure. So with West Virginia having large properties and big acreages in the middle of nowhere, it makes no sense to say retreat into your home, which is nuts for Maryland. Maryland has big properties. I mean, one of our properties, we've got like 11 or 12 acres. So somebody walks on my property and people have done this. We had a guy show up and attack one of our employees. I'm not kidding. Physically attack one of our employees because they're nuts. And I'm like, we can't operate in Maryland. We have to run from the person as they're shooting at us.

That's insane. Now, to be fair, I think if you're in Maryland, you might get like if someone's actively shooting at you to defend yourself. The problem is there's other properties, other buildings. And now you've got all sorts of crazy liability in West Virginia. Big properties. We got acres, you know, 100, 200 acres. Someone's walking around. You can say, stop. You're on private property trespassing. What are you doing? And if in any way they present a threat, you can defend yourself. The challenge there for these ne'er-do-wells.

Well, West Virginia isn't much of a state to put the onus on the property owner. So when the cops show up and they see a man is down, maybe he's got a weapon, and they see the property owner say, I warned him, he threatened me. The cops are going to be like, what can we do? You're not going to arrest a property owner when a strange man is on your property and he's got a weapon. That being said, even if he doesn't, it creates interesting circumstances.

Now, I do understand, you know, in California and places like this, the concern is in dense urban environments. How do you deal with these things? But I wouldn't want to live in New York where the criminals don't care if their bullets go through the walls and you're not allowed to defend yourself.

I was talking to Luke Rutkowski, and he was mentioning, you should be able to defend yourself in New York. And I said, what if you got a rifle with like .308 and someone breaks in your house? That bullet's going to go through every apartment on your building. And he's like, oh, cool. Maybe we say no .308. I'm like, aha, gun control, gun control. See, there's the challenge, man. I don't think it's surprising that people who live in a densely populated area are like, we don't want guns. The problem is the criminals don't care.

So you ain't actually banning the guns. You're just making sure only the criminals have them and the bullets still fly. Take a look at Chicago. It's California for you, my friends. You're not going to want to live in a place like that. I'm going to wrap it up there. Smash the like button. Share the show with everyone. You know, we got more segments coming up. Stay tuned. Excuse me. And we'll see you all in the next segment.

So a couple of gay dads are angered to be stuck in Cyprus amid passport problems after hiring surrogate to give them twins. The story is actually kind of simple. Two guys, they wanted to have a baby. They found a woman in Cyprus. They said, will you carry the baby? She ended up getting twins. They said, great. Now they are there in Cyprus and they can't get passports, leading to a big debate over what people refer to as like buying babies or hiring them to manufacture babies, whatever.

And I got to tell you, I recently had a child and my view on this has moved significantly. Now, to be fair, I was never a staunch proponent or a staunch critic. I was the milquetoast fence hitter, as it were. But I recently had a child and oh boy, was I naive and ignorant. I learned a lot right away from the doctors, things that blew my mind.

Things I didn't even think were possible. Seriously. And I'm learning about what babies need. And I'm going to say it right now. Babies need moms. It's not a question of morality, as I largely perceived it early on. I viewed the development of babies largely as, look, we have formula milk. So if there's two guys and they want to have a kid, I understand the question of morality.

Some people think it's morally wrong. A kid needs its mother and father. They view this as a more traditionalist moral statement of what a child needs to develop.

No, I learned this from the doctor specifically that babies need their moms. Yeah, development is possible with formula milk, but it is stunting children. And in fact, some believe it's resulting in genetic abnormalities. I'm not trying to say that to be a dick. I was talking, we spoke with a few doctors. They mentioned that there are

What would they say? There's an error in the expression of a certain gene resulting in certain effects on modern babies without proper nutrition and diet. And it's pretty nuts. Environmental toxins are causing this, too. So that's irrespective of the father or the mother. But I'll get into this. I do want to give you the news first, what the story is, and then talk about my view specifically.

I, uh, I wouldn't say that I'm a staunch. It can't be like 100%. No, no. It shut it all down. I'm a, I would discourage the practice. Whereas probably before I'm a kid, I think I was more like a, well, you know, look, I know a handful of, uh, gay men who have had kids and, uh, through surrogates and, you know, it's, it's questionable. It is because

The debate is you're basically paying a woman to use her egg, to use her body, to nourish and produce a child whom they pay to take. And that's kind of questionable. But, you know, I was still a bit more like probably leaning towards that. I'm not a fan of it. Now I'm leaning towards the strongly oppose. I'm not so strongly to say like not so strongly to say like I think it should be banned outright. And, you know, but I'll explain why for scientific reasons. And I mean this sincerely. The story is this. Human Events has the reporting.

A gay British couple remains stuck in Cyprus with newborn twins due to ongoing delays in processing their passports. These two guys spent £85,000 to hire a woman to carry their children and deliver twins but have been unable to return home. They're going to say the kids were born January 3rd, but despite submitting passport applications, the couple says the process has been repeatedly delayed due to administrative errors. The passport issue is incredibly frustrating.

They're going to mention that these guys had flown out in December 23 to deposit their sperm, choosing an egg donor.

Right now, up to 55% off your Babbel subscription at

babbel.com slash spotify podcast spelled b-a-b-b-e-l dot com slash spotify podcast rules and restrictions may apply

This is a message from sponsor Intuit TurboTax. Taxes was waiting and wondering and worrying if you were ever going to get any money back. And then waiting, wondering, and worrying some more. Now taxes is matching with a TurboTax expert who can do your taxes as soon as today. An expert who gives your taxes their undivided attention as they work on your return while you get real-time updates on their progress so you can focus on your day. An

An expert who will find you every deduction possible and file every form, every investment, every everything with 100% accuracy. All so you can get the most money back guaranteed. No waiting, no wondering, no worries. Now this is taxes. Get an expert now on TurboTax.com. Only available with TurboTax Live full service. Real-time updates only in iOS mobile app.

See guarantee details at TurboTax.com forward slash guarantees. Three viable embryos were created and a surrogate was selected by March in March. By April, they learned they were expecting twins. Following the birth, they quickly sought to return to the U.K.,

They say the guy had a year of leave, time off, but they're having problems. Emails from the passport office indicated that certain documents were missing, but the couple said they'd already been submitted under the initial applications. The couple has moved between three different Airbnbs, incurring massive costs. They've been advised there's no timeline for the process. That story is actually rather straightforward.

Couple of guys have some surrogate kids. The debate being ignited by the story, however, is should we allow surrogacy? People on the right largely view this as child trafficking, not an exaggeration, basically paying a woman to produce a child whom they can then purchase. Now, I do know that a lot of people who are more liberal or, you know, gay individuals, maybe they're more libertarian, conservative leading may take issue with

With the phrase purchase. But I'm not here to make an emotional argument. We're talking about the actual process. A woman carries the child. You pay her money. She hands you the baby. If you don't like the way that's described, that's not my problem. That's your problem. Now, like I said, I'm not in the we should ban it outright category, but I'm leaning closer to it for a variety of reasons. So after having just having my own child learn some tremendous stuff, tremendous,

So watching the birth, the umbilical cord, all of these things, and learning about skin-to-skin contact, why it's important.

They the doctors basically advised us that the mother and the father should have contact with the child because scent hormones, pheromones, all of these things like who you are, you your body as you share these things. It's the bonding process. It is not so simple as just this mystical, spiritual thing. I didn't know that. I thought it was some hippy dippy garbage nonsense. Now, obviously, the mom is going to hold the baby after the baby is born.

A lot of times the fathers don't. And they say the doctor said, no, the father should as well. And I was like, really? And I was like, I get it. There's like a spiritual bond. But what's the real purpose? And then they mentioned like that the baby doesn't just interact. It's not just this scientific thing like there's a baby and hold it in your spirit's bond. There are smells. There's like sweat. There's there's hormones. There's a bunch of stuff involved in this.

And I was like, I don't know if I believe all that stuff until the doctor said to me that mothers produce breast milk for their baby specifically. It is a specific formula produced by the body specifically for the baby. And I was like, no, right. Like you're saying, like, you know, breast milk is made and the baby drinks it. And they're like, no, the mother's body produces a specific formula of protein, fats and carbohydrates for that specific baby. And I was like, wait, wait, what?

Explain this to me. Because, you know, looking at stories like this, I know that it's possible to raise a baby on formula. However...

They recommend against it. Formula, I understand that some moms can't breastfeed and so they have no choice. And it's not so bad, right? However, when you learn that babies have specific needs and their development can be stunted if they don't get those specific needs, formula doesn't cut it. There's been a big controversy in the US over how European formula is better than American formula, and we can't have it. We got seed oils, even in the best of our formulas. Okay, well,

It used to be that when a mother couldn't supplement, couldn't produce enough breast milk, a wet nurse would provide. Here's the crazy thing. I did not know this. The woman who is lactating will produce specific milk for baby. I'm like, wait, hold on. You mean it's out? Yeah, no joke. Let me show you. So wet nurses, right?

They said that like back in the day, it was very common up to the 20th century. So with the advent of formula milk, people started buying it. You have milk kinship, milk siblings. You know, it used to be in a society, there'd be a ton of women and they'd all have babies all the time. So they were typically lactating. If a new mother wasn't producing, then the baby could nurse off a different woman.

Here's the crazy thing. The saliva of the baby interacting with the mother's skin resulted in a specific formula. I did not know that. That to me didn't sound possible. So I'm talking to these doctors and they're like, so here's the thing. Your baby has a certain set of requirements. And they started talking about this. They mentioned how some babies that are premature, the mother's milk has way more fat in it because you can, that's when you can actually see the difference. And it's like,

Alaska Airlines and Hawaiian Airlines have come together, bringing you more destinations and even more rewards. Now your miles add up no matter which airline you fly. Head to Hawaii with Hawaiian or explore Mexico, the Bahamas, the East Coast, and beyond with Alaska. Your loyalty just got a major upgrade. More flights from the West Coast, more perks, and more ways to earn. Book now at alaskaair.com.

I'm ready for my life to change. ABC Sunday, American Idol returns. Give it your all, good luck, come out with a golden ticket. Let's hear it. This is a man's world. I've never seen anything like it. And a new chapter begins. We're going to Hollywood. Carrie Underwood joins Lionel Richie, Luke Bryan, and Ryan Seacrest on American Idol. Season premieres Sunday, 8, 7 central on ABC and stream on Hulu.

Really? And the doctor's like, yes. And I said, but how is that possible? Like, is there like a psychic connection? And they were like, no, it's the spit. And I was like, what? Yeah, the baby's saliva has a certain chemical composition that interacts with the skin of the mother, resulting in the breast producing a specific kind of milk, a specific formula. No joke. So I pulled this up for you on ChatGPT.com.

Do women produce different milk for premature babies? Yes. Women's bodies adapt to produce milk with higher protein, fat and immune factors specifically tailored to support the needs of premature babies. What's me? I look at me. I didn't know nothing about this. I know there's a lot of dads watching, laughing, being like, yep, we knew all that. I said, how does the body know?

The body detects preterm birth through hormonal signals, placental detachment, and interactions between the mammary glands and the baby's saliva during breastfeeding, triggering the production of milk with specialized nutrients for the premature infant. So then I said, so is all breast milk specifically tailored to the baby's needs? Yes. Breast milk composition continuously adapts based on the baby's age, health, and needs, influenced by hormonal signals, baby's saliva, and maternal diet. I did not know that.

Did not know that. I think that would have been great if I didn't know that. Seriously. So the reason I bring this up is I'm sure there's a lot of people right now commenting, comment below being like, Tim, how did you not know this? I mean, I'm the first time dad never talked to a doctor about it. But that dramatically informs my perception on the issues of surrogacy. This is something I think conservatives should absolutely be addressing first and foremost on the matter.

Now, I've heard the arguments that a child needs its mother, but that sounds spiritual to me. It's like kids deserved to have a mother and a father. And I'm like, sure, because we all grew up and we enjoyed it. No, formula can't cut it. It really can't. While formula is better than nothing and babies can't survive on it. If a baby is like, let's say, low on protein, giving it bulk formula is not giving it everything it needs. It's not getting enough protein that affects baby's development. If baby needs, you know, X protein, Y fat,

interacting with the mother, it's going to get that. If you give it formula, it's getting flat of both. So it's going to be lacking in one area or the other. Some have suggested to me, this has resulted in faulty gene expression and the development of youth because they're not getting everything they need when we supplement formula instead of breast milk. Yo, crazy. So from that, I said, man,

So if a woman gives birth to a baby and then I don't care if it's a gay couple or otherwise, they take the baby away from the mom and she and the baby is not getting breast milk and is being formula fed. It will be worse off. Now, I'm not saying it will be so worse off. We should ban it. Why? Well, because some women can't breastfeed and formula is the best they can do. And I don't I think that's totally fine. What I am saying is that there is a moral component to needing a mother. Seriously, the other thing that I told us, too, is mom's got a cradle baby.

For real failure to thrive, babies who are not touched by their parents die. They just die. It's crazy. Right. And so there is a evolutionary component to that, whatever it may be, that babies need to know they're being comforted and protected. That's pretty wild. And let me let me just put it this way. I do believe everybody should be allowed, should be should be able to have children. It is a component of life. All life reproduces.

And there's a challenge in this application of two men paying a woman to do it. You've got the legal, the moral, the ethical, but also the scientific. The legal, moral, and ethical, I remain largely like, I'm not a big fan of it.

The scientific, I think, is clear, plain as day. Babies need interactions from their biological mother. Not every child can get it. Because of this, I recognize we shouldn't just condemn the whole structure because there are exceptions to the rule. I do understand the conservative argument, though. And so I lean largely in favor of not allowing surrogacy for anybody in this regard. Look, I get it. There are some women who can't have kids.

And so the man will get a surrogate so that he and his wife can have a child through another woman. But that woman still needs to be involved in helping that child develop. And it presents real challenges morally and ethically that I can't answer. What I can say is babies need moms for more than just spiritual reasons. And it's crazy stuff. A lot you learn, huh? Mainly, I do understand that most people probably already know this stuff. It's like baby 101.

But because I didn't, I thought I'd make a video explaining that I just learned this and it's a very powerful and important argument to bring up in the whole surrogacy issue. So I'm going to leave it there. Stick around. We got more segments coming up. Thanks for hanging out and I'll see y'all shortly.

I saw this interesting post on X from an individual, Cory Walker, who says that, as I predicted, support for gay marriage has plummeted among Republicans. I suspect that the unrelenting barrage of trans and queer politics has caused some to rethink their support of gay marriage, gay marriage. After marriage equality was achieved, the LGBT movement introduced gender ideology. Indeed, my friends. And earlier in the week,

We played this clip on Tim Kess IRL just before the presidential address. It is Proposition 8, the musical.

For those unfamiliar, it was this video that went viral back in, I think, like 2008 about a proposition in California that would put into their I believe it put in their constitution. I could be wrong that marriage was only between a man and a woman. Well, in fact, it passed. California, as liberal and progressive as we view it back then, said, yeah, marriage is between a man and a woman. Arguments were made by Hollywood elites and celebrities that we should embrace gay marriage.

They lied. Interestingly, the reason why I bring up that play is because the core argument presented by the conservative side in the musical, despite the whole thing being a straw man, was that gay rights activists would teach children about sodomy. And then the liberals in the video say, that's not right. That's a lie. And the conservatives say, but it worked. So we don't care.

Well, the reality is they are teaching, as Phil Labonte pointed out, sodomy is actually the lowest, the least controversial thing they're teaching kids. Don't believe me? I'll show you the evidence. So we'll start here. Politics and poll tracker shows that support for gay marriage currently right now, 52%. That's way down. It was 71% according to Gallup. Gallup now has it at 69%, so it's dropped by only a few points, but opposition at 36%.

This guy, Corey Walker, I'm not super familiar with him, but I saw the post and I said, this is interesting take on these things. And he's right. We all agree. I, as well as many others, pro-gay marriage saying, yeah, I literally don't care if like two dudes or two chicks are minding their own business in their house. The problem was the narrative always in the beginning was it's in the privacy of your own house. Where are we today?

At pride events across the country, there has always been gratuitous sex. That's a fact. As far as I can remember, my family owned a business on North Halstead in Chicago, which they call Boys Town. I wasn't allowed to go outside during pride events because it was gratuitous sex, like literally men doing things to each other in the streets. We now have videos of it.

In San Francisco, it is more rampant than ever. You have videos of nude men, one viral video of a guy wearing a Bugs Bunny mask hopping around naked in front of children. Yeah, it used to be the people to bring their kids to these things. Now they're having drag shows for children, which is a sex show. And all of these things has made people basically say whatever it is, LGBT, I am out.

It's not just plummeting among Republicans. It's plummeting among everybody, particularly young people. Young people are more likely to say it's gone too far. Even Democrats. Let me show you what we got so far in this post from Politics and Poll Tracker. Democrats, 77 percent support, 12 percent oppose. Independents, 45 percent support, 35. Actually, wait. Yeah.

And among Republicans, 65 percent opposed. Now, that's pretty obvious. This is an economist. You gov poll the latest data. We have this from politics and poll trackers saying there was once a time where a majority of Republicans, albeit small, once supported same sex marriage. Now occurring in a new you gov survey. It's underwater by Republicans by 41 points.

Isn't that crazy? In 2021, Republicans, 55 percent agreed. And then Democrats smashed that goodwill, bludgeoning the issue to death with trans and gender ideology issues. In 2021, Gallup released this poll, a record high 70 percent in the U.S. support same sex marriage. Magic, wasn't it? 70 percent. If we go down, you can see this for the first time, a small majority of Republicans support it.

Republicans, 55 percent. Democrats, 83. Amazing. Let's jump. Let's jump forward in time. We have this now from 2024. Same sex relations, marriage still supported by most in the U.S. Republican backing for same sex union dips below 50. So we can see all in all, it's at 69 percent, seeing a drop from its high of 71. Minor decreases of 2024. Not a big deal, right?

It's going to go lower among Republicans. It's dropped quite a bit. Nine points. Now, here's the issue. Even among Democrats, it's gone down by a point among independents. Three, it is shifting downward across all political ideologies. What's truly fascinating is the you gov data. Older Democrats are more likely than younger Democrats to want more acceptance of sexual minorities. This is fascinating. Take a look at this. They ask.

When it comes to accepting people who are LGBT, whatever, has American society gone too far or not gone far enough? Democrats, 17 percent actually say it's gone too far. Thirty three percent of Americans say gone too far. Obviously, among independents, still 32, but Republicans, 53. The interesting thing is 18 to 25 year old Democrats, 25 percent, 22 percent is a weird graph, by the way.

Older Democrats are more likely than younger ones to say society has not gone far enough in accepting LGBTQ. Only 22% of Democrats agree with that statement. That's right. 22% say that it's just about right. Well, it says only 22% think it has not gone far enough. We'll put it that way. So that means 78% are probably like it's either gone too far or it's fine where it is. 70% of Democrats who are 76 and older agree.

That's crazy. It is. Is it really stupid graph? You go like this ridiculous. Older white Democrats are especially likely to say society has not gone far enough in accepting LGBTQ people. But now let me give you this, this famous moment. Let's just I don't really care to play. I'll play the whole thing. Some of you may not have seen it. I think it's really cringe, but I'll play it for for you guys anyway.

When you want to have fun and have scratchers to scratch, there's a playful way you can do just that. Scratch with a key or acrylic nail. Scratch with a quill from a porcupine tail. Use a belt buckle from your friend Lamar. Or scratch with your pick while you play guitar. You can scratch in a bunch of different playful ways. Scratchers from the California Lottery. A little play can make your day. Please play responsibly. Must be 18 years or older to purchase, play, or claim.

Have you ever spotted McDonald's hot crispy fries right as they're being scooped into the carton? And time just stands still. Ba-da-ba-ba-ba. It's a brand new bright Obama day. What a time to be black or gay. No, nothing could go wrong. So join us in the song of happy days for the gays. Nothing can go wrong.

Look, nobody's watching. It's time to spread some hate and put it in the Constitution. Now how? Proposition 8. Proposition 8. Now I'm going to pause real quick. They say it's hate. It was literally just a question. Is marriage between a man and a woman? And majority of California said yes. So when they called it hate, it's very weird to see majority of California said that it is true. And they called, okay, so majority of California is hateful. But here you go. Listen to this. The fake conservatives.

People listen to our plea. We'll teach kids about sodomy. Sodomy. Whoa, they'll teach kids about sodomy? Look at this. All of the liberals run to the voting booth. Very good.

That wasn't right. That's a lie. That wasn't right. That's a lie. But it worked, so we don't care. Now you wish we'd all shut up. But make our clothes and fix our hair. And our love's not a sin. Well, the Bible says it's so. Well, the Bible says a lot of things, you know. Jesus Christ! Hey, how's it going? Jesus, doesn't the Bible say these people are an abomination? Yeah, but you know, it says the exact same thing about this shrimp cocktail.

She keeps saying Obama nation. Yeah, he was an abomination. Okay, you get the point.

The fake conservatives eventually realized they can make a bunch of money. It's time to groom. They paint that wedding hall and lavender is the shade. There's money to be made. And conservatives threw away all of their morals for money. That's the argument. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you this from Pink News. This book is gay among LGBTQ titles facing bans in the UK study fines.

I'm still pro-gay marriage. Yeah, and I don't say marriage because it's an Abrahamic institution, but like civil unions or whatever, as long as the rights are equal, I don't care. But the idea still is always going to be that we're not teaching kids about sexual themes. Sex ed is simply about reproduction, not gratification. And that all changed because the slippery slope goes in every direction. So what's next? Obergefell will likely be overturned, in my opinion. Conservatives are making those moves to overturn gay marriage. And yeah, I think it'll happen.

Why? I will no longer defend you. I hope you look into my eyes and you hear what I have to say. I will never defend you again. And, you know, I'll say this because I know people who are gay married and they're not certainly pushing these things, but I'm bowing out. I'm out of this fight, my friends. Back when that whatever musical came out, I actually was like, yeah, OK, I agree. Like simply whatever, man, if you want to get married and I don't care. I

I actually did fundraising on behalf of the HRC, the Human Rights Campaign, advocating for what was basically just gay rights. There were two issues. You couldn't be fired for being gay. And I was like, why fire someone for being gay? That's weird. Like, if they're going around doing weird sex things, fire them. But if someone just happens to have a boyfriend or a husband, you should really just fire them for that. To be fair, though, largely you should be able to fire anybody if you just don't want to work with them. And even if we had those protections, you can just fire them anyway. So it was kind of whatever.

And it was the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. And so I actually did, as an activist, fight for you guys. I won't anymore. So I don't know. Maybe you win, whatever. But I ain't going to be there. This book is gay. Here you go. Glory Hole. Grinder. Okay. Need I say more? That's in the book. And they're giving it to children. Why? Why?

Why do they want kids to have it? Here you go. I'm a queer school librarian and book bans enrage me. My straight students feel unsafe around a gay self-help book. So who is this lady, right? What level of school is she at? She said, I need to respite from the drama. It's been a long week. Book challenges aren't anything new for me as a queer school librarian. Okay, let me ask you. School implies either grade school or high school.

And I will tell you this restricted section, these books that explain how to use a glory hole and how to use grinder should not be given to children. But let me give you a, uh, one better example, teacher police book, Illinois. Uh, here we go. Let's, uh, let's pull this one up. Ladies and gentlemen, parents call police after Illinois teacher offers LGBTQ book for her students. Heaven's me. What book did she give? Um, it's an elementary school, uh,

And she gave their kids a book called This Book is Gay. Sarah Bonner held a book tasting, including Juno Dawson's This Book is Gay, which quickly became the epicenter of controversy. The parents called the police because the book explains how to use Grindr and she gave it to children. Why are they trying to teach kids about glory holes, Grindr? And also, don't get me wrong, I only showed you one page. There's scat in there like there's stuff that kids should not be learning about.

She has the notion that I was putting kids in danger, blah, blah. You were. I mean, this is disgusting stuff. Now, what's funny is they all use this image igniting social action in the ELA classroom. That's not the book she was giving people. She was giving kids the book. This book is gay. That's predatory behavior. She's giving kids a book that teaches them how to use Grindr.

Why would a 10 year old in grade school need to know how to do that? And this was back in 2023, mind you, almost two years ago. So where are we at now? If you're asking yourself why support for gay marriage has gone way down, why it will continue to go down, why Donald Trump won an election and why Obergefell and gay marriage will be overturned. It's because the liberal minded individuals who largely agreed and said it's fine, we don't care out of the fight.

Out of the fight completely and some completely flipped. Republicans have abandoned the issue. They're abandoning it in mass. And people like me who I don't I'm an independent, not a fan of the Republican Party. There's like seven Congress members of Congress that I like. And I voted for Trump, who was a former Democrat. I tell you this. You will not see me voting for anything related to expanding, quote unquote, LGBTQ rights. Never going to happen.

So you're not going to have me advocating. And you know what? From the looks of things, you ain't going to be having young people either because young people overwhelmingly say, yeah, you know, we're fine where we are at the bare minimum. So go get your elderly Democrats to advocate for this because across the board, Republicans, independents and Democrats largely agree. When asked if you think society has not gone far enough, only 14 percent of Republican youth, 21 percent of independents and 22 percent Democrats agree with that statement. It's coming down. I'll leave it there.

We got more segments coming up. Smash the like button. Share the show with everyone you know. Thanks for hanging out. We'll see you all in the next segment.