The Donald Declares

Dennis Prager here. Thanks for listening to the Daily Dennis Prager Podcast. To hear the entire 3 hours of my radio show commercial-free every single day, become a member of Prager Utopia. You'll also get access to 15 years' worth of archives as well as the daily show prep. Subscribe at pragerutopia.com. Hello everybody, welcome to the Dennis Prager Show. Obviously, some comments are necessary with regard to President— former President Trump's speech last night announcing that he intends to run in 2024. So as there not be any confusion whatsoever or ambiguity, if he is nominated, he will have my full passionate support. My view is, has always been, that the most important issue is defeating the destructive, nihilistic, toxic left. The liberal could do it in a nanosecond by voting his or her values. Liberal values are not left-wing values, but liberals vote left. Some people are annoyed at me for constantly making the distinction between liberal and left. Our only hope of having liberals vote their values and not vote left is to keep reminding them that they don't hold left-wing values. If you just lump liberals and left together because they vote the same, then there is no hope in winning over a liberal. And there is hope. There is hope. Just some people have to do it. Ron DeSantis did it, obviously. First time Miami-Dade voted Republican in 20 years. Florida has the most imbalanced pro-Republican state legislature, I think, in its history. You don't think it can be done? I think I do it every day. I think PragerU does it. I think Daily Wire does it. I think TPUSA does it. I think that all the great websites are doing it, if people actually would read them. That's the issue. We have to get liberals to read these things. Of course this can be done, and by politicians. If it isn't done, then we have to look at ourselves. Why are we not more persuasive with regard to liberals? Anyway, that is my view. I don't think it is the view of all Republicans, and some of them are friends— I mean serious friends. Some of them are you listening to this show right now. I don't know if for every Republican the most important issue is defeating the left and then thereby saving America and liberty around the world. That's how big defeating the left in America is. As many of you know, I was in Denmark last week giving a lecture at the parliament— not to the parliament, at the parliament. A member of the parliament secured the room for, for me and the group that brought me the free Press Society of Denmark. And I became aware of the very sad fact that America is now regarded as the foundation and the exporter of bad ideas to the world. One obvious, if not the most obvious example, is the toxicity and the child abuse inherent in what is done with puberty blockers. Instead of telling an 11-year-old who says she is a boy, no, you're a girl. God made you this way. Biology made you this way. You have to work it through, darling, but you're not a boy. And we, we are not allowing you to cut off your healthy and beautiful soon-to-blossom breasts. And we will not allow you to ruin your health with puberty blockers because it's in— with regard to Instagram or whatever else you are following in the social media. Only in America are these things happening in any— in, in— to any degree, or to the degree that they are happening in, in America. European countries have actually closed hospitals or closed clinics in the hospitals that are removing girls' breasts because they say they're boys. The threat that they— that these people say to parents, your child will commit suicide if you don't cut her breasts off, is as vile an idea as I have heard in my lifetime. Back to my point, the issue is defeating the left. If Donald Trump can do it, God bless him. If Ron DeSantis can do it, God bless him. If Governor Youngkin of, uh, of Virginia can do it, God bless him. I, I don't care who does it. I just care that it be done. Therefore, I am not loyal to any one individual. I am loyal to the project of defeating the left. That's it. I said many times, many, many times, I thought Donald Trump was the finest president since Abraham Lincoln. Not in terms of his personality, but in terms of what he accomplished for the country, which frankly is overwhelmingly all I am concerned with with regard to a president. Or a governor or a mayor or a city councilman. What did you do for the community which elected you? That's it. That is the question. Would I like the person to also have sterling character like Abraham Lincoln did? Yes, I would. I live on Earth, however. I do not make utopian demands. I have a hierarchy of desires. And my first desire of a president is that he— thus far it's only been a he— do a good job as president. An interesting and important thing for you to understand is what happens if you Google "Trump speech." Maybe I'll do "Trump speech Mar-a-Lago," see if that gets Let's see. So let's see. That gives you actually old speeches. It's hard to isolate in a search. My point, however, is that if you do search his speech on Google, you will come up overwhelmingly with negative reports of the speech. There is no doubt in my mind of this. I am certain this is not a conspiracy. Well, it is a conspiracy, but it's not conspiratorial on my part. It's conspiratorial in reality. Google has algorithms that work on behalf of the Democratic Party and against the Republican Party. I had a liberal Democrat, brilliant man who works on these matters in the, in the world of high tech, and he has devoted years now to studying Google and to studying the internet. And it is as clear as a bell that YouTube is bends towards the Democratic Party in search results, resulting undoubtedly in more votes than they would have had if Google were honest. All I found aside from the Fox News report, all I found scrolling down were basically fact-checkers of Donald Trump's speech. If you put a the words Biden speech in Google, you don't get fact-checkers coming up, certainly not fact-checkers who presume to, to, or who claim that he told lies, which he does far more than Donald Trump does. That's as newsworthy as the actual announcement on the part of Donald Trump. The Wall Street Journal is not thrilled with him as a candidate, although they backed him for the 4 years he was president, and that is a very important thing to be noted. They fear that he is unelectable at this time. I don't know whether they are right. But I do believe that you have a moral obligation to ask that question, depending on whom you support. History repeats itself, and we're seeing that play out with inflation. When Jimmy Carter took office in the late '70s, gold sold for $140 an ounce. By 1980, the price of gold topped out at $870 an ounce. If today's market performs like it did when Carter was in office, the the price of gold could skyrocket from $1,800 an ounce to $9,300 an ounce. This is Dennis Prager for Ampfed Coin and Bullion. Don't miss out on a great opportunity to purchase precious metals while the prices are still stable. If history repeats itself, we'll see a run on gold, silver, and platinum that will certainly drive up prices. Be smart and buy now, as I am. At Ampfed, you're dealing with specialists who provide you with personalized attention, honest information, and sound advice. You'll never be pressured into buying outrageously priced so-called collectible coins or anything that you don't need. Take advantage of today's prices. AmFed Coin and Bullion, 800-221-7694, AmericanFederal.com, AmericanFederal.com. The first hour of my show, I usually do most of the talking, if not all of the talking. This is a perfect example of the uniqueness of talk radio. Get a chance to hear what people are thinking, how you react to Donald Trump, Donald Trump's announcement. A legitimate question is, should he have waited until after the Georgia primary? That— well, not primary, excuse me, runoff, the Georgia runoff. I think he should have, and I worry that Republicans just may not flock to the polls thinking that it is not an urgency, while Democrats do think it's an urgency to stop Donald Trump. The Democrats are as anti-Trump as I am anti-left. They're anti-Republican That's clear. But Donald Trump is Dracula to them. He's Dracula to some Republicans, sadly. The Never Trumpers who put their emotions before their mind. They didn't ask, is he doing good for the country? They asked, is he an obnoxious personality? And whether you think he is or not, that's what they asked. It is so easy for people to get their eye off the ball. That's— I guess that's human nature, is not to stay focused on what matters. I, I do believe that I do. Liberty matters. Defeating the left, the most toxic force in American history since slavery, is, uh, is what you keep your, your eye on. The harm that they are doing to this country is unprecedented. How does America produce so many people who hate their own country? Not just hate their country, who hate liberty, who hate reason, who pass laws that doctors cannot help children embrace their sex. They pass laws, that's right. It becomes It's become illegal in certain states for psychiatrists, psychologists, therapists to say to an 11-year-old girl, you are a girl, and I'm gonna— I'm here to help you embrace this gift of being a girl and eventually a woman. You can't say that. Is that— it's unbelievable. Who would have predicted this? These are the things that animate me. The idiocy of, of mandating electric vehicles by 2035. You can't— you won't be able to sell a new gas-powered car in California. You think that will affect the world's temperature? In any significant way. Bjorn Lomborg has over and over again shown how minimal the effect of that is in terms of temperature, but it is so maximal, if that is a word, in terms of disrupting society. I have an article here on that very issue. And I'd like to bring it to your attention, what's going to happen when, uh, when trucks have to use electricity. Electric trucks. See, I probably have it on the computer. It's very important, so give me a moment. And yeah, here we go. In Bloomberg, electric truck stops will need as much power as a small town. Yeah, according to a sweeping new study of highway charging requirements conducted by utility company National Grid PLC, researchers found that by 2030, electrifying a typical highway gas station will require as much power as a professional sports stadium, and that's mostly just for passenger vehicles. As more electric trucks hit the road, the projected power needs for a big truck stop by 2035 will equal that of a small town. Where are we going to get all that electricity? Here in California, we were warned that we wouldn't have air conditioning on certain days in the summer, and we're going to— we're going to power 40 million cars and, and, uh, and all of these trucks. Even the authors who planned the study were caught off guard by how quickly highway power demands will change. A connection to the grid that can handle more than 5 megawatts takes up to 8 years to build at a cost of tens of millions of dollars. If power upgrades don't start soon, the transition to electric vehicles, let alone electric trucks, will quickly be constrained by a grid unprepared for the demand, warned Bart Franey, vice president of clean energy development. He's for clean energy development at National Grid. Yeah, that's quite something. The make-believe world of the environmentalists. So how did you react to last night's announcement? Is the, uh, is the Wall Street Journal correct in pointing out and claiming that Arizona, for example, which should have had a Republican senator and a Republican governor elected because of their maintaining with passion that the last election was stolen, lost the election in Arizona. Is there merit to that argument on the part of the Wall Street Journal? Back in a moment. You all have helped build MyPillow into the incredible company it is today and have trusted in Mike Lindell to give you a great night's sleep. On top of the special available to my listeners on the percale and Giza Dream bedsheets, marked down as low as $29.98, Mike is now changing the game with his 3-piece towel set. This set is made with USA cotton, making it extremely absorbent yet still providing the soft feel you look for in a towel. This set comes with 1 bath, 1 hand towel, and 1 washcloth, typically retailing for $49.99. For a limited time, you can get this 3-piece towel set for the low price of $19.98 with the promo code Prager. Don't miss out on these extraordinary offers. There's a limited supply, so be sure to order now. 800-761-6302. Use the promo code Prager or go to mypillow.com, click on the radio listener square, and use the promo code Prager. Dennis Prager. All right, I'm very, very interested in getting your feedback here. In the straw polls, or whatever term would be used in the polling in Iowa and other states, DeSantis is more favored than President Trump. I beg Trump supporters to understand that any Republican is better than any Democrat, that the gulf is unbridgeable. That's it. That's all I'm asking of people. I was a passionate defender of the president. I claim to this day. I said to his face at Mar-a-Lago a few months ago, Thought he was the finest president since Abraham Lincoln. Can't get more supportive than that. But my bigger agenda than Donald Trump is defeating the Democratic Party, which is now a left-wing party for the first time in American history. It was largely liberal. It is now left, and the left destroys everything it touches. There has been no exception since Lenin in 1917. Okay, let's, uh, let's get your calls. I'm very, very interested. If there is any audience that is large and filled with people who are pro-Trump, it would be my audience. So I'm very interested to, uh, to hear from you. Uh, let's go to Glenn in Phoenix, Arizona. Hello.

Yes, sir, Mr. Prager. So I hold the same position that you do, but I have family, in particular my mom, and she's on our side. But there are people that are enamored with the personality of Donald Trump. I personally love what he did. I would— my only caveat with you is I think he's the second best president since Lincoln. I think Ronald Reagan was. But that's, that's here nor there. He was a great president. I'd support him in a millisecond. But my concern is, is that he's gotten more toxic over the years. And there are people not only on our side, but independents that won't support him. So what I'm concerned about— this is what I told the call screener— is everybody talks about the Never Trumpers, but I coined a phrase called the Always Trumpers that I'm afraid that to the extent that Trump is not the nominee, whether it's Pompeo, DeSantis, Dr. Carson, or Larry Elder, I would love Larry Elder. I'm concerned that those people will be great.

Yeah, yeah.

I'm concerned that those people will say— so there are people that I believe that are enamored with the personality.

So the word, the word, your, your, your term should be slightly modified. It's not always Trumpers, it's only Trumpers.

Amen. That's a better term then. I'll use that now. Only Trumpers. And so I am, I am concerned about them because they have this sort of dichotomy that only he can do it, only he can defeat the left, only him. And I'm concerned that they've kind of erected him almost as a savior. He's a great man, and I'd look at— I'd support him in a second, but I don't know where we are going to go.

Right. So, so what were you saying? Was it your mother or mother-in-law? What were you saying?

It's my mom.

I mean, she's— she will— she will support— I've said this before and I say it kind of tongue-in-cheek, but she almost Looks at him like he's sinless, like there are people that—

so, all right, so, so this is perfect. So would she vote for anyone other than Donald Trump, or would she stay home?

I don't know. I don't know, and I will ask her that this week. Yeah, that's my concern.

Well, all right, well, ask her and call me back. I'm not kidding. I'm very, very interested in getting your mother's reaction to that question. All right, let's see here. In Naperville, Illinois, Gary, hello.

Hi, Dennis, thanks a lot. I appreciate all the wonderful things you do.

Thank you.

And the university and all. And I agree with the last caller, but also I wanted to add in this, and I'm just, you know, again, with your wisdom, we have to figure this out. You're around my age, I'm 68. I've followed politics with my dad since I was young, and what I've seen is the press, which is corrupt leftists, have smeared anyone who gets into leadership, uh, probably back to Dewey, but certainly, you know, they didn't do it with Eisenhower, who's a hero, but, you know, Nixon, uh, Reagan, you know, I was a teacher, they called him Ronald Reagan, and everyone who comes up as a Republican leader, they turn into this evil—

That's true. They, they said if Barry Goldwater wins, there'll be a nuclear war.

Exactly, exactly. So what I'm trying to figure out, and maybe with your wisdom we can figure this out, is do we have to go to just 4-year terms, because whoever comes in, you know, like, look at McCain. You know, he was a hero when he was opposing Bush.

That's right. No, you're entirely right. That's correct. You're entirely right. That's right. They will smear any Republican who runs. They smeared Mitt Romney, who's now their hero. The Fed is unstable. Interest rates could go up at any moment. If you're relocating and need to buy a new home or invest in real estate, get fully underwritten and approved with Andrew Del Rey and Todd Avakian at Sierra Pacific Mortgage before you make an offer. Their fast-track approval process will allow you to compete with cash offers whether you're buying today, tomorrow, or a year from now. Even though housing prices are stabilizing or coming down, economic uncertainty, supply chain issues, and limited construction means the real estate market is limited and competitive. Go to AndrewAndTodd.com. That's AndrewAndTodd.com right now. Get fully approved today and have confidence so that when you're ready to buy, you'll have the money ready to go. Don't wait. Go to AndrewAndTodd.com. Lock in today's still historically low rates. Go to AndrewAndTodd.com. That's AndrewAndTodd.com. All right, y'all, Dennis Prager here. I have a lot of Trump supporters among my listeners. I was— can't get more passionate Trump supporter during his presidency than I was, or when he was— once he was nominated. And yet I look at the board and it's very interesting. People are worried about a Trump candidacy. Never Trumpers are wrong, and only Trumpers are wrong. The best is the enemy of the better. Even if Ronald Reagan is the best, if you don't attain the best, you have to attain the better. That's the way life works. Very rarely do you get the best. The best is the enemy of the better. All right, let's see here. Yucaipa, California, and Joey. Hello, Joey.

How are you, sir? Well, you know, if Donald Trump could learn to bend a little bit and quit saying, just go completely off the deep end because my wife's a firm supporter of him, and she says, but he just goes on and on and claims everything's his deal. But he's not the problem. The problem is a globalist, and there was way too many globalists, including in the Republican Party, because I guarantee you, uh, Bush were globalist. I mean, Bush never Bush and Bush's grandfather was fired, but his bank was closed because the fact that he was doing money with the Germans during World War II.

All right, well, that, that's, that's, that's not a key point right now. I thank you for your call. Globalists are a threat, and globalists are leftists. There is no distinction between the left and globalists. The left has contempt for nationalism, including American nationalism. They associate nationalism with Hitler. This is the, this is the infantile mind of a leftist. You have no idea how superficial the thinking is of every single leftist. You have no idea. I've lived with them since I went to Columbia. The intellectual depth of their thinking is as shallow as a puddle. Nationalism bad, right? Is that right? Nationalism is bad?

Hmm?

There's good nationalism and bad nationalism. It's like saying homicide is bad. Really? Homicide when it is conducted against a guy shooting children in a school is good. Homicide in fighting Nazis in World War II or the Japanese in World War II, that was good. There's good in homicide and bad homicide. Do you know I wrote about this about 25 years ago, and you have no idea how many left-wing sites attacked my article that there is moral killing and immoral killing. Such is the shallowness, the superficiality of every leftist's thinking. You cannot be deep and be a leftist. You can be deep and a liberal. You can be deep and is a conservative. It is not possible. Shallowness is at the core. That's all they know, right? If a— there was a whole series of tweets that were publicized by left-wing sites last night that Donald Trump's speech had transphobia in it. Yes, transphobia. New term which has caught on. Most hated group in America, Christians, but there's no term for Christian hatred. Interesting, right? Term for hatred of transgendered people, so that if you say that a biological male should not compete on a women's team and in women's sports, you're all— you're a transphobe. That is the superficiality at the core of all left-wing thinking. You can't be deep and a leftist. It is not possible. Just remember that. Nationalism is bad is like men give birth. Nationalism, like everything else in life— saying nationalism is bad is like saying knives are bad. Knives are used in surgery to save life, and knives are used by homicidal maniacs to stab people to death. There's no such thing as a good knife or a bad knife. It is the wielder. It is like nationalism— can be wielded for good and it can be wielded for bad. But there is little that frightens me as much as America giving up its sovereignty. It's why I supported Brexit. That's why most Brits supported Brexit. It might have hurt them in the short run or even in the medium run financially, but they didn't want to be told by faceless bureaucrats, by superficial drones in Brazil— excuse me, in Brussels— what to do with their country. That's what it is. More of your calls here. Uh, Isaac in Los Angeles, hello.

Hi Dennis, hi, pleasure.

Thank you.

I just wanted to say, like any job, you do it the second time, you do it the third time, you get better at it. Can you imagine being president for 4 years, how much he accomplished, how much more he's going to accomplish as the president again, he will clean up the FBI to the top. He will clean up the Department of Justice. He will make Democrats, liberals, Republicans, all Americans. We are first Americans, and we've lost sight of that in this country.

Right. I agree. I agree with every word you're saying. So the only question is, he has to win in order to do that. Do you think he's the most likely Republican to win?

No, no.

Well, you know what, that's a very— I did not expect that answer, and I salute you. This is actually revelatory to me, your calls. I, I expected call after call to say it doesn't matter, he's the man, we have to nominate him. Well, here was someone who said he'll do the best and says, but he's not likely to win. You can't do any of those things if you don't win. You have to win. Okay, all, Dennis Prager here. Beth in Adel, Georgia. Hello, Beth.

Hi, I was just calling to say how much I love Trump. And Trump is the only one that I would ever vote for for president. He started out to get us out of the hole we were in with the deep state and everything. And I do not trust anyone coming up, not even DeSantis, because he's a good governor. But I do not like who's backing him.

Who's backing him?

Ross Perot.

I'm sorry, Wall Street.

Wall Street. And they said that.

Yeah. So you would rather have Joe Biden or Kamala Harris than— No, than Ron DeSantis?

Well, I'm not—

No, you have to answer. You have to answer that, Beth.

No, I had not rather have them.

I'm sorry, I'm not following.

Democrat.

Right. But if you don't, if you're a Republican who doesn't vote for someone other than Trump, you are voting for a Democrat.

No, I would vote for DeSantis.

Oh, you would?

I would.

Oh, well, you called up and said you would only vote for Trump.

I would.

If Trump's running, I only will vote for Trump.

No, no, no. Well, of course, me too. But you would vote for another Republican if Trump were not the nominee.

Oh, okay.

Bless you. Okay. That was not clear from the beginning. That's, that's my worry is that there is some percentage of Republicans who would not vote for anyone other than Donald Trump. That may, that may be selling Trump supporters short. It's hard to imagine. That if asked that question, would you prefer a Democrat over any Republican other than Donald Trump, that they would say yes. So I don't want to, I don't want to sell Trump supporters short. Passionate support of Donald Trump, I understand. Not voting for another Republican if one is nominated. That I don't understand, but I don't know how many of those there are. I thought Beth was one of those, and turns out she isn't. That was a relief, and that is very important. Let's see here, I'm looking at the— let's see, California, Tennessee, Wisconsin, New York, Texas, California. So that's interesting. Every, every call is, uh, is more or less supportive of my position. You've got to vote for any Republican, period, over any Democrat, and you have to try to convince others to do the same. The country is truly at stake. Yes, yes, yes, go on, go on. Well, I'm not going to cancel the Male-Female Hour two weeks in a row. That is, as the Germans would say, verboten, forbidden. Last week it was after Election Day, totally understandably. But as much as people are thinking about the Donald Trump speech last night and the whole issue of who should be the Republican nominee, nevertheless, life goes on and we must address all topics. It was a certain, I would say, gamble or risk to have hours that have nothing to do with the news cycle. And I've been vindicated over the course of decades in doing that. And one of those hours, of course, is the Male-Female Hour, the most honest talk I know of about men and women in the public arena today. There may well be others equally honest. I'm not in a competition, but I did want to say that to the best of my knowledge, that is the case. So I have an interesting topic today. When I speak about marriage, men and women, etc., I often note the following: that most marriages are a moody married to a non-moody. And I put it this way: Some marriages are two non-moodies. Most marriages are a moody and a non-moody. But I've never encountered a marriage of two moodies. So here's the question. Well, no, before the question, here's my punchline. The moody may be unhappy. But they're not stupid. They never marry one of their own. So now the question: why does a non-Moody marry a Moody? That's the question. 1-800-DENNIS-PRAGER, 776-877-243-7776. Yep. So why is that? I have a theory. While you call in, I'll offer you my theory. The odds are your marriage is exactly what I'm describing. The odds are that your marriage is a moody and a non-moody. So there are two possible explanations, at least that I can come up with. You may have a third. Two possible explanations for why a non-Moody would marry a Moody. Actually, I have now come up in my fertile brain a third one just as I posed it, which means I have to write this down. Uh, don't— let me see. Okay. No. Okay, I got 3 responses. Ready? Not in any order of importance. One is that the non-moody does not know how moody the other person is when they marry. And that's a toughie because it suggests that the non-moody did not allow his or her moods to be manifested while dating. We have a term for that. It's called false advertising. Buy our car. We happen to know that there is a flawed steering. It comes with flawed steering, but when you test drive it, we make sure you don't experience it. Dating is a test drive, and a lot of the moodies don't allow their moodiness to manifest itself while dating. That's possible reason number 1 why a non-moody would marry a moody. Number 2, the non-moody knows that the person that they will marry is moody, but they don't know how problematic that is in a relationship. It only becomes apparent over the course of time in marriage. You can put up with a lot of things while dating because you're falling in love, or You are in love and you're crazy about the person, and so he or she has these moods. Eh, you know, I'm not happy about it, but, you know, big deal. I can live with it. But after many years, I can live with it is not as true as it was when you were dating and falling in love. That's explanation number 2 for why a non-Moody would marry a Moody. And explanation number 3 is that a lot of happy folks, the non-Moody if you will, have a sort of messianic complex. They, they feel that they can save the person. They can make that person happy. A lot of happy people, understandably I might add, think of themselves because they know that happiness is contagious. It is. Smile and the whole world smiles with you, as the classic song goes. So they think, I can make this person that I am in love with, this wonderful human being who isn't happy, I can make this person happy. If you have a fourth reason, and I think that it is a valid one, I will send Sean to your home and he will bring a box of donuts. Not a cigar, because most people don't smoke cigars. Gluten-free donuts, he adds. So for the chance of a visit from Sean with a box of donuts, is there a fourth reason, or do you agree with my three reasons? And Is— does this characterize your marriage? A moody married to a non-moody? And if so, and if you are the non-moody, why did you marry the moody? If you are the moody, how do you react to my 3 reasons? You faked it during dating. The per— 2, the person just didn't think it was that important. And/or 3, your happy partner thought that he or she could fix you. Which goes, by the way, to a very important point that I make in my book on happiness, Happiness Is a Serious Problem. The only person who can make you happy is you. That's a revelation to most people. You can make another person unhappy, but you can't make another person happy. That's why sort of life is weighted in favor of unhappiness increasing, because you can— you do have the ability to make another person unhappy. But not to make another person happy. You can make another person happier. That's true, and that's a beautiful thing if you can. All right, I will take your calls. Why does the non-moody marry the moody? Smile though your heart is aching.

Smile.

That's right, smile though your heart is aching. There was more wisdom in popular music in the '30s and '40s and 20s probably than at any university, virtually any university today. I mean that completely sincerely and rationally. This is the Male-Female Hour. Every Wednesday, the second hour, Why do moody— excuse me, why do non-moody people marry moody people? I gave 3 possible explanations. And let's go to your calls. This is a true life learning hour. Uh, all right, Los Angeles, California. Scott, hello.

Hi Dennis, it's a privilege to speak with you.

Thank you.

Um, so, uh, you know, it may be— when I was talking to the call screener, I, I think it was when you were presenting the third option, but so this might be related, but I think it's actually different. Um, a— there could be a non-moody person who is, you know, has sort of a boring life and it's exciting to engage with the moody person. It brings— it's a challenge and it brings excitement to that person's life. It may be related to thinking that they could change them, but—

No, no, it's different. It is different. And obviously it is related, but it is different. I'm just curious since I never would have thought of that, although I do always speak about boredom as a very big motivator for people's attitudes and behaviors. I would never have thought of this. So are you speaking autobiographically?

Um, at the risk, uh, yes.

And I, I, I assumed such because I— how, how else would one come up with such an interesting theory? I assume you're the non-Moody in your marriage?

Yes, although I have my moments that I'm sure my wife would, would, would say that.

Um, And, uh, yeah, so you, you actually saw this as a, an experiment or a challenge?

I mean, I not necessarily consciously, but, you know, after, uh, being, you know, staying married for so long, um, you know, I've accepted the challenge and, and felt that. But all right, so putting aside the fact I, I have strong love for my, my spouse, right?

I was just going to say that. So putting aside the fact that you, that you love her, and I, I assumed that from your tone, putting that aside, would you say that it was, it was an unwise idea to think of this as a desirable challenge?

I think for most people, yes, that, that is a true statement. You know, if you know everything up front, you know, it would not be a smart move to move forward.

That's correct. That was one of my three explanations. People underestimate how serious a problem a moody spouse is. Hence the cliché. Both clichés are true. Happy wife, happy life. Happy husband, happy life is not as true, but it is true. As well. People don't realize. That's why I wrote a book on happiness and have a happiness hour, because it is such an important subject. Northvale, New Jersey. Dean. Hello, Dean, the famous Dean of Northvale.

Hi. Hey, you know, uh, if I wasn't bribed with the box of donuts, I would have just agreed with you and said, yeah, it's a trial period. Nobody shows their moods or their bad aspects when they drive. But I did come up with another one because I really wanted the donuts, you know.

No, wait, wait, wait, that— wait, wait, that's a little insulting. You mean Sean delivering them is less important than the donuts?

No, no, no, it just made me think. So that—

okay. All right.

When I got out of college, this could have happened to me. Um, this is going to sound weird, but your audience, I think, would understand that she was really, really, really, really hot, and I was really, really, really, really young and immature, and I guess she wasn't. A good judge of character. So we got married. It only lasted 3 or 4 years, but I mean, that's another reason that you could be faked out.

Oh yeah, no, no, well, of course. Well, I said that you're crazy in love and, uh, you know, the, uh, the physical attraction is intense. I, I included that. Your point is well taken. That's right. When you don't think rationally when you fall in love, it's very hard. Do you know that I thought for much of my life that the most powerful single emotion is— I know this sounds dark— but is hate. I've seen so much horror coming from hate. And then I started thinking about it and experiencing it, and I would say that when you fall in love, it takes you over more. Maybe there are people who've been taken over by hate because something horrible happened to them or whatever. I, I don't know. But I— and I, by the way, now I still think that There is a period of time where nothing rivals falling in love. So that's why you have to think rationally at the same time. If the person is moody, you overlook it because you're falling in love and falling in lust and all of that. But I'm not saying you shouldn't marry a moody person. I'm saying you better do it with your eyes open. That's all. You're not going to change them. That's not in your capacity. And over time, it can wear down even love. That's why I beg the moody to, to work on their moods, or at least not express them. You can express unhappiness. But you can't be moody. That's a better marriage. The whole world smiles with you, baby. Yes, when you laughing, when you laughing. Yes, the sun All right, everybody, Dennis Prager here. Male-female hour. Why do the— why do so many— I shouldn't say these— why do so many non-moodies marry moody people? I gave 3 explanations, and we are headed toward your theories on this. Uh, Kathy in Tampa, Florida, hello.

Hi, Dennis.

Hi.

I want to preface my thoughts first by saying that I was a special education teacher, newly retired. I taught for 37 years. So my job was to teach people how to communicate. And communicate appropriately and label their emotions. And, um, I used what's called Conscious Discipline in the classroom. I was trained, highly trained in that area. So having a husband who's very moody, I don't know, I guess maybe it was a challenge for me, the same as my job was.

Wow. You're the second one to offer that as a theory. People like challenges. That I never— I, I did not think of that. That is— that was that conscious on your part?

Um, not at first. Not, you know, I— we got married in 1990, and at the time I don't think I realized it, but over time, being married to somebody who was moody and I didn't most of the time didn't even know what was going on, why he was so moody and a grudge holder and stuff. But you know, when I kind of figured out more, wasn't in my youth anymore, you know, it was just, I don't know. And I think maybe he married me because, because you weren't moody, because I could deal with it.

Right. Right. Are you still married?

Yes.

And does he know, does he know the negative impact of his moods on you?

Um, he doesn't believe it if I tell him.

I don't, I don't quite understand that.

He's in denial over that.

Well, he denies that he's moody.

Um, no, he doesn't deny that he's moody, but he denies that You know, it has had any impact on me over the years.

Wow, that's odd. Why, why, why would he— why would he think it wouldn't? It would have an impact on him if you were moody.

Yeah, I never— I've always felt that one moody person was quite enough.

Yes, that's why my point. I've never met— I've never encountered a marriage of two moodies. It's almost always—

they wouldn't survive.

It wouldn't— well, and they, they're not attracted. As I said, the moody may be unhappy, but they're not stupid. They never marry one of their own. That's the irony. Moodies can't stand moodies, but a lot of them think that they're lovable, and many are. I acknowledge that, otherwise none of them would be married. Well, I wish I could talk to him. All right, yeah, well, that's actually what some of you are calling in to say. David, Rockford, Illinois. Hello.

Hello, can you hear me?

Why not?

Awesome.

So, Mr. Prager, I got to say thank you for letting me take your call, and this— I have two possible reasons. We'll start with the one I gave your screener, and it goes like this: once upon a time, a non-moody married a person who wasn't moody at the time, but over the course of time and exposure to life and the challenges that are presented through being married and the rest of our lives and liberty and loss of liberty and the pursuit of happiness and all that comes with that has made me moody. I'm the moody. My wife is the ray of sunshine. And so the point being is sometimes the moody person wasn't always moody.

That's interesting. Yes, that is interesting. By the way, I have a vindication of your comment. A friend of mine told me about 5 to 10 years into his marriage, he said to me— I'm put you on hold, stay on with me— He said to me, you know, one of the things I've discovered being married is how moody I am. Not I, Dennis. He was speaking about himself. That's a very interesting take on this matter, that the moody did not start out moody, and through no fault of the spouse Got moody because of life. Well, all right, I'm going to, going to ask him more questions. Hello, my friends, Dennis Prager here. We return to the subject of Donald Trump's announcement that he will seek the nomination of the Republican Party. I've been reading a polls done, and things have changed in the Republican Party in the last few weeks. Whereas the president, former president, was ahead in Iowa and elsewhere, now Governor DeSantis is ahead in all of those states. I— anything could happen in politics, but I don't foresee that changing at this time. My own position is I will support, needless to say, any Republican, because any Republican that I can think of is better than any Democrat that I can think of at this time. It was not always the case, but it is the case today. The Democratic Party is no longer a liberal party. It is a left-wing party. And as such, remember, everything the left touches it damages and usually destroys. So that's my position. However, there are questions that are raised. Before I raise some of those questions, listen to this. This is a very, very significant point that is made in the Wall Street Journal today. Republicans appear set to take the House with a historically small margin. If the GOP winds up with, say, 221 seats, that equates to 50.8% of the chamber's 435 total. Yet in House races overall— this is the point here, this is very important— the popular vote for Republicans is beating Democrats by 4.4 percentage points. So does this mean U.S. democracy is structurally rigged? Don't the Democrats keep saying that it should be the popular vote by which we assess not only who becomes— who, who is elected, but that should be reflected in our electoral institutions, right? Well, if that is the case, it's not fair to Republicans that they are winning the popular vote for the House by 4.4%, but they are only having a, a much, much smaller percentage of more seats. So the House, by Democrats' own reckoning is not democratic. As astute readers are probably already yelling into their coffee that the House popular vote is not a thing that strictly speaking exists. Rather, the U.S. has 435 House races in 435 separate districts. 'Twas ever thus. Yet for years, progressives have pointed to similar figures in the other direction as proof that democracy is fundamentally broken. Quote, this is from a headline in The New Yorker in 2014: Has gerrymandering made it impossible for Democrats to win the House? Well, they won it in 2018 and again in 2020. A New York Times writer nonetheless fretted in 2020, gerrymandering and geography mean that Democrats need to win a substantial majority in the House popular vote to take the gavel. But it's not true. They almost took the gavel and they have a minority of the House popular vote. So the next time you hear about, oh, It's not a democracy because the popular vote doesn't elect the president. Well, the popular vote doesn't elect the House. If the popular vote were the only criterion for House members, there would be a lot more Republicans in the House than there are now. Good point on the part of the Wall Street Journal. And now back to the problems of the election. So I'd like you to respond to this. The first hour I raised the whole issue of if you are a Trump lover, and I was a major Trump supporter, will you vote for another Republican if nominated? And the first hour was reassuring. Not one person called in and said, I would only vote for Donald Trump. It is one thing to be a Trump supporter. It is another thing to only support Trump. That's right, the word only is the word to be avoided. So here is the Wall Street Journal take today about Kari Lake's loss and what it means. See, she was truly a terrific candidate for governor of Arizona. She has everything going for her, and her opponent has little going for her. So what happened? What happened in the senatorial race in Arizona and others? Here's the take of the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal. And if you can't dismiss them as RINOs, they are not RINOs at the Wall Street Journal editorial board. I mean, I've had some of their members like Dan Henninger and others regularly. And these people can't stand the Democrats. These people were major defenders of President Trump in his presidency. Kari Lake, a former TV news anchor, had all the sparkling charisma that Donald Trump's other favorite candidates lacked. She loved telling off journalists. She called 2020 a corrupt, stolen election. And she repeated that line to the bitter end. As Mr. Trump bragged in a phone call captured on tape, "If they say, 'How is your family?' She says the election was rigged and stolen." But she lost 49.6% to 50.4%, according to the latest data. The Democratic gubernatorial nominee, Katie Hobbs, ran an uninspiring campaign and went all in for the teachers union. She still won. God, to go all in for the teachers union is to go all in for hurting children in schools, period. No one does more damage to children in America as a group than teachers unions. She still won. As a reminder of how winnable Arizona should be for Republicans, this is important. Governor Doug Ducey, Republican, was reelected in 2018 by a whopping— I'm adding the words whopping— a whopping 14 points and is finishing a highly successful second term that includes statewide school choice and a 2.5% flat tax. Abraham Hammadi, the Trump-endorsed Republican candidate for attorney general, promised a, quote, day of reckoning for those who work to rob President Trump in the rigged 2020 election, unquote. That race isn't called yet and could go to a recount. But Mr. Hamade is currently losing 49.9 to 50.1. Mark Fincham, the Trump-endorsed Republican candidate for Secretary of State, essentially made himself a walking referendum on 2020 fraud theories. He lost 47.6 to 52.4. Blake Masters, the Trump-endorsed Republican candidate for Senate, said in an early ad, I think Trump won. After he captured the GOP nomination, he tried to pivot by decrying the influence of big tech while saying he saw no evidence of fraudulent vote totals. That earned him a debasing rebuke from Mr. Trump. Mr. Masters lost 46.5 to 51.4. Notably, the GOP wipeout didn't go all the way down the ballot. This is important. Republican State Treasurer Kimberly Yee sailed to reelection 55.6 to 44.4. Curious, yes? Mr. Trump might retort that this race was relatively low profile and the treasurer's office has been Republican for decades. On the other hand, doesn't that make it a proxy for generic GOP support? Look at the raw totals. Mr. Yee won roughly 115,000 more votes than Ms. Lake. The GOP also won 6 of 9 Arizona House districts, and Republicans in those 9 races received 50,000 more votes than Ms. Lake. Both figures are well above her losing margin. Your reactions coming up. Play that little montage of the president's, uh, the former president's announcement last night.

In order to make America great and glorious again, I am tonight announcing my candidacy for President of the United States. Together, we will be taking on the most corrupt forces and entrenched interests imaginable. Our country is in a horrible state. We're in grave trouble. This is not a task for a politician or a conventional candidate. This is a task for a great movement that embodies the courage, confidence, and the spirit of the American people. This is a movement. This is not for any one individual. This is a job for tens of millions of proud people working together from all across the land and from all walks of life, young and old, black and white, Hispanic and Asian, many of whom we have brought together for the very, very first time. This will not be my campaign. This will be our campaign altogether.

That was a series of interesting takes. He knows, which is to his credit, that he can't at least rhetorically just make it about himself. I will save the country. We will save the country. Anyway, I wanted to play that for you. The Wall Street Journal editorial is pretty powerful. If it's accurate, and it, uh, it's one of a number of pieces that I have read in conservative sources, that candidates that emphasized their belief that the 2020 election was stolen did not fare well. Is that true? Well, based on what I read, it seems to be. It's not universally true, obviously. Anyway, it describes Kari Lake, who should have won, and she was so far superior to her Democratic opponent in every way. And it, it's painful to me because I think very highly of her. I think highly of Blake Masters, who didn't win for the Senate. Anyway, he, uh, they show this. This is really something. The GOP won 6 of 9 Arizona House districts, and Republicans in those 9 races received 50,000 more votes than Kari Lake. Both figures are well above her losing margin. What explains the gap? According to exit polls, Miss Lake lost independents by 7 points and moderates by 20. At the same time, she lost 9% of self-identified Republicans. So let me, let me go to the third rail on this one because I tell you what I think. Whether or not one believes that 2020 was decided fairly And I have questions. That is not what we can run on. And for the record, I regard Joe Biden as the President of the United States. I consider him a despicable human being. I think he's done more damage to this country in 2 years than any president did in the history of the United States. But he is, in my view, the President of the United States nevertheless. So I wanted to make that clear. I have never disliked the president like I dislike him. I remember what I said when Barack Obama finally left office. And of course, I was a talk show host all 8 years of his administration. I had, if I may say, an interesting thought. It may not be accurate, but it was still interesting. I said, you know, I've been watching this man for 8 years, and I don't know him one whit better than I did 8 years ago. And I would say that to this day. I don't know what's there. He is very eloquent, very bright. Very glib, but I don't know what's there. I also know that race relations in this country were better on the day he was elected than on the day he left office, which you would think should not have happened. If anyone could have said to Black America, we live in a good country We live in a good country. Racism is very— a very small aspect of American life. Had he given that message, a lot of good could have been done and wasn't done. Nearly everywhere— I finished this piece in the Wall Street Journal— nearly everywhere in competitive races last week, Mr. Trump's endorsed candidates went down in pyrotechnics. But the flameout of an awkward eccentric such as Doug Mastriano in Pennsylvania or Don Bolduc in New Hampshire only says so much. Kari Lake is a telegenic fraud theorist straight out of Mar-a-Lago casting. Running in a historically red state in a year with an unpopular Democratic president and 8% inflation. If Ms. Lake couldn't win on Stop the Steal in 2022, it's hard to see how anyone else can pull it off. Maybe at last the 2020 election is over. Even if the last election were fraudulent and, and the fraud determined the election, I learned something at driver's ed in high school. It's the only thing I remember from driver's ed in high school, and it was worth it. Don't be dead right. It's a very— it was a very good lesson about driving. It is a very good lesson about life. If you're dead, having been right doesn't help. Back in a moment. The Dennis Prager Show. Well, y'all, Dennis Prager here. Let me see here. Who among you— oh, I guess that person hung up. So somebody called in and said that he or she has the fear that Donald Trump might start a third party. I don't, I don't have that fear. Anything is possible in life. But I don't have that fear. He would be regarded as the most destructive Republican in modern history, so it's, it's hard to, it's hard to imagine that he would do that. He was a great president. I think one can acknowledge that, and one has to then ask the greatest question right now is not was he a great president— he was— is who can win. All right, let's see here now. Kelly in Van Nuys, California. Hi.

Hi, Dennis. I wish that some of your commentary regarding Kari Lake's analysis would have taken on the information as released by Charlie Kirk, Turning Point USA. There are so many ballots of Republicans that have not been cured, so many people that went to Maricopa County and went to go vote. Are you there?

Yeah, I'm listening. I didn't quite follow. There are so many people in Maricopa County who what?

Went to the polling place to vote and were told they couldn't vote. The voting machines were broken, they wouldn't be tallied, go somewhere else. They went somewhere else until they already voted.

And how many, how many do we assume that was?

They—

at least 40%. At least 40%. And how many people left Maricopa County on their lunch hour and decided, oh, I'm not going to the other place to vote. I have to get back to work. I have to get kids from school.

Did this affect Democratic voters as much as Republican?

Uh, well, it did, but then they cured all the votes. And also, the Democratic voters all voted early. They voted by mail. Very few people that came in. And if you—

right, no, that's true.

She was saying she was counting on getting day-of-vote, right? That's what was gonna pull her.

No, I, I agree with you. I agree.

And I don't think they've done a good enough analysis, and I think it's—

well, that's why I took your call. That's why I took your call, because I, I'm, I'm not aware of everything you're saying, and I want to be. All right, I appreciate it. It's— I will look into that. My— I did not know how much, and I still don't know. I'm just relying on the Wall Street Journal piece that I read to you, and it's not from the news section, it's from the opinion section, which is conservative. The news section of the Wall Street Journal is liberal. So I did not know how much Kari Lake, whom I have great affection for, great respect for, had her on my show, and I had very few candidates on the show. It's not the nature of my show. And I feel, frankly, I'd be very open with you, it would have helped my cause had she won. She said on my show how much she used PragerU materials. For her children. Imagine that, the governor of a major state in this country and publicly announcing that she used PragerU materials for her children. All we want is that more and more parents use these materials. So, uh, on, uh, on grounds of her being extremely, uh, attractive in every way And therefore material for the future, even in higher office in America. And on the grounds that Arizona needed a Republican governor, and on the grounds that she would have been a great advertisement for the use of PragerU materials for, for children to try to undo damage done in schools, I really wanted this woman to win. So the question I— and again, I— so I don't know. The Wall Street Journal editorial implies that calling 2020 a steal was a theme in her campaign. I don't know how true that is. I just don't think it helps. That's why I said don't be dead right. I don't, I don't think that that is helpful in getting Republicans elected. I don't think it was helpful in Pennsylvania or, or elsewhere. Dennis Prager here. Thanks for listening to the Daily Dennis Prager Podcast. To hear the entire 3 hours of my radio show commercial-free every single day, Become a member of Pragertopia. You'll also get access to 15 years' worth of archives, as well as the Daily Show prep. Subscribe at pragertopia.com.