JOE WALSH – Could Donald Trump’s Tea Party Primary Challenger End his Presidency? | QT Politics

I’m Joe Walsh, and I think I can be the president. On Sunday August 25, 2019, Joe Walsh announced
that he would be running for president, issuing a primary challenge for President Donald Trump. The very first question Joe Walsh was asked
as a declared candidate is an obvious one for anyone who follows Trump’s approval ratings
closely. Indeed, Trump’s approval rating amongst Republicans
has remained high throughout his presidency. A recent Monmouth University Poll placed that
figure at 84%. The question of whether Joe Walsh could actually
beat Trump in a primary challenge is barely worth considering. To do so, Walsh would not just have to be
more popular amongst Republicans than Trump. He would have to be so much more favorable
that Republicans are willing to risk the White House on an untested candidate. A sitting president has never lost a primary
challenge, and Trump’s strong support from his party makes him unlikely to be an exception. But some presidents have faced serious primary
challenges: Ford, Carter, and Bush senior barely survived theirs. In all three cases, these presidents also
had problematic approval ratings. Not within their own party, but amongst the
general electorate. Along those lines, Trump’s ratings are also
low, meaning a serious primary challenge is likely. There’s something else Ford, Carter, and Bush
all have in common. They lost the general. This isn’t to say that the tough primary challenges
caused the general election loss, or that the low approval ratings caused the primary
challenges. All three things tend appear together, but
the causal links are up for interpretation. All we really know is that there seems to
be a correlation. So, the question is not whether Joe Walsh
will beat Trump in his primary race, or even whether his primary challenge will cause Trump
to lose the general election. Before a president loses a general election,
a tough primary challenger tends to emerge. The question about Joe Walsh is… Is he that guy? (Everybody gets pumped) In oder to be a serious primary challenger
for Donald Trump, Joe Walsh needs to be in it to win it. While Donald Trump’s 2016 run was initially
often regarded to be nothing more than a publicity stunt, to win, a candidate typically needs
to be serious about what they’re doing. Running a winning campaign—or even coming
close to that—requires a deep level of commitment. The easiest way to eliminate Walsh as a serious
contender for Trump would be to claim that the run is insincere. Fortunately for everyone, one person who has
laid that charge was Herman Cain, former presidential candidate, pizza CEO, and expert on Libya. Here’s what Herman Cain had to say about Joe
Walsh’s run. Dispersions! See, this is why I love Herman Cain. Every time he opens his mouth, it’s hilarious. In case you’re watching Herman, a dispersion
is the process of distributing something over a wide area, like what would happen to a sliced
Godfather pizza, if you threw it across the room. The word you were looking for was aspersion. Like, if someone were to say of you, that
your 9-9-9 tax policy was an obviously fiscally irresponsible platform, intended to cynically
prey on the mathematical illiteracy of the most ignorant of your potential supporters. I, of course, would never say this about you,
as I assume your character is such, that you, too, must be mathematically illiterate. Anyway, that was all just a fun tangent. I got so much stuff twirling around in my
head Let’s press on! Publicity! In fact, given that Walsh is a nationally-syndicated
radio host, the prospect of doing something just for the publicity is a real possibility. Except that, in fact, he has already lost
the national distribution of his show because of this presidential run, and according to
his radio network, his program will even be removed from local distribution once he becomes
“a viable and legal candidate for president.” Of course, you could argue that this was an
unintended consequence, and that the publicity run some how back fired. But, I’m inclined to believe Walsh when he
claims that he kind of expected this all along. He said, “I’m running for president. I oppose this president. Most of my listeners support the president. It’s not an easy thing to do to be in conservative
talk radio and oppose this president…And I knew that, John, when I made the announcement
yesterday, that it could be in jeapardy” It really is difficult to believe that Walsh
was so unaware of his own audience and the rules of his radio network that he couldn’t
anticipate losing his show over this run. At any rate, he did point out that he anticipated
serious backlash just moments after making his announcement. So, it seems clear that Walsh takes his own
candidacy seriously. As for Republican voters, well, that’s another
matter, altogether. For Joe Walsh to be the serious primary challenger
that would ultimately signal a general election defeat for the President, he would need to
give Republican primary voters a very good reason to switch sides. Three points he made repeatedly in his ABC
interview were that: 1. Trump is disloyal
2. Trump is unfit
3. Trump is a liar He also made these points in his campaign
video launched the same day Now all three of these points could be effective
attacks on the president, but they don’t exactly make a positive case for Walsh. Loyalty to the United States is obviously
a basic criterion to be president, and Trump’s loyalty has been certainly questioned quite
a bit. From his taking Putin’s side at Helsinki,
to his son trying to get dirt on Clinton from Russian operatives, to Trump having foreign
business interests all over the world. However you come down on these issues, it’s
fairly clear that loyalty is a more complicated issue with Trump than it is with Walsh. But, that isn’t because Walsh has done anything
uniquely patriotic. He just simply hasn’t done the things Trump
has done—which is not enough to make him a serious challenger. In terms of being unfit, certainly Trump has
faced questions about his mental fitness. He responded to these concerns by calling
himself a very stable genius, which didn’t help matters. He apparently had trouble reading his daily
briefings, and in plain view of the press, we’ve seen him say “oranges” when he meant
“origins” and claim the wrong birthplace for his own father. A number of the people who have worked with
Trump have even talked about invoking the 25th Amendment. But as with the loyalty issue, sanity is an
extremely low bar, one that virtually any primary challenger would likely clear. As for lying, it may be easy to be caught
lying less often than Trump, but it’s also a more muddled issue, since it’s not exactly
easy to find an honest politician. When it comes to dishonesty, Walsh may have
particular difficulty distinguishing himself even from Trump—let alone other potential
challengers. Flip-flopping can indicate dishonesty, and
like Trump, Walsh has flip-flopped on the abortion issue. He was a failed pro-choice candidate in the
1990s, before running as a pro-lifer when losing his seat in 2012. He’s also, of course flip-flopped on the issue
of Trump himself, having claimed he would be “grabbing [his] musket” if Clinton
won the 2016 election, to now challenging Trump in 2020. One of Trump’s most infamous lies was that
there was something suspicious about the circumstances of President Obama’s birth. Even before Obama produced his long-form birth
certificate, Birtherism was always a lie. Not only was Barrack born in America, there
was never any reason to doubt this—and insinuations that there were, were laced with both sinister
bigotry and thorough intellectual dishonesty. Trump helped to establish himself in the political
dialogue through Birtherism. But, so did Walsh, even as late as during
the Republican primary in 2015. He even dabbled in the dishonest narrative
about Obama’s religion. These tweets demonstrate sufficient dishonesty
that Walsh may have trouble claiming the moral high ground on the issue of honesty. They’re also quite divisive, which could threaten
another mantle he seems to be trying to take up. Expressing regret for some of his past statements,
Walsh wrote in a New York Times op-ed, “We now see where this can lead”. This is just one part of a broader campaign
theme, which he tapped into repeatedly in his launch video. The promise here, is the return to normal. A return to civility and character, and away
from ugliness and division. This theme has been expressed by a number
of Democratic candidates. It’s what Kamala Harris was connecting to
when she said, during the 2nd Democratic Debate, “We are better than this.” It’s what Joe Biden has been near-constantly
evoking with his catch phrase, “We are in a battle for the soul of this
nation.” Say what you will about Joe Biden, he does
genuinely represent civility: he’s in fact been criticized for being too civil. And rightly so, in my view. He’s been civil to segregationists and the
current vice president. Say what you will about Kamala Harris, she’s
not likely to say that some tiki torch-wielding white nationalists are very fine people, nor
is she likely to secure the support of David Duke. A return to normal, in my view, is not a particularly
strong campaign message. But it is a plausible choice, one that Joe
Walsh seems keen on associating with himself. But unlike his Democratic counterparts, he
does not exactly have the right history to claim this mantle. He himself has admitted, “I wouldn’t call myself a racist, but I’ve
said racist things on Twitter.” Now, I’m not a particular fan of the modern
phenomenon of digging through a public figure’s old and deleted tweets to dig up dirt. Just because someone tweeted an insensitive
joke ten years ago does not mean they should be subject to public shaming, or a boycott,
or barred from public office. But the sheer volume of hateful tweets that
have come from Joe Walsh is astounding, and he himself has made this an issue by criticizing
Trump’s twitter rants. So, let’s just look at a few of Walsh’s tweets
that may actually be worse than anything Trump has ever tweeted. Trump has criticized the media extensively,
and called for banning Muslims from entering the country during the 2016 campaign. He even jokingly-not-jokingly called upon
Russia to continue their DNC hacks. But I don’t think he’s ever asked Islamists
to commit gruesome acts of violence. Trump has tweeted about black-on-black crime,
and apparently called countries with majority black populations what he has. The racist subtext is fairly clear. But here, Walsh connects the racist implications
for us. In this astounding tweet, Walsh uses a straw
man argument about the Washington Red Skins, reminds of the good old days when people were
bigoted towards the Irish, and delights in gratuitously using the N word. Here he employs the N word and the S word,
and draws a false equivalency to racist terms about the race that has most of the people
and power in America. And here, he thankfully departs from using
the N word, while still managing to say something entirely racist. Suffice it to say, Joe Walsh does not exactly
have a history of being woke on Twitter. Now, anti-Trump Republicans might rightly
be irritated by the fact that Walsh might be politically damaged by his own bigotry,
while Trump seems to be immune to similar criticism. New York Times contributor, Peter Wehner,
who considers himself to be one of the earliest Republican never Trumpers expressed frustration
at the fact that Trump supporters have been demanding that Walsh be called out. “Mr. Trump’s most vocal supporters are now
demanding that Mr. Trump’s most vocal critics do what they will not, which is to publicly
recoil against a politician—in this case, Mr. Walsh—who appeals to the worst instincts
and ugliest sentiments in America.” “Their argument seems to be that decency
requires the president’s relatively few conservative critics to call out Mr. Walsh for saying detestable
things while Mr. Trump’s right-wing supporters cheerfully defend him under any and all circumstances,
regardless of the fact that the president’s rhetoric is pathologically dishonest, dehumanizing,
cruel, crude, racist and misogynistic. There’s a word for what Trump supporters are
doing here: hypocrisy.” Wehner, by the way, would go on to criticize
Walsh at length in his op-ed, concluding with these words about Joe Walsh and Donald Trump: “They are cut from the same rancid cloth. That they personify the Republican Party today
is still, for some of us at least, a source of shock and shame.” The point I’m making about Walsh’s divisiveness
is not that he should be shamed or criticized or barred from office because of it—although
he should. My point is that his past statements make
it impossible for Walsh to successfully present himself as plausible bearer of the civility
mantle. Republicans who are sick of Trump’s divisive
language and bullying are unlikely to chose Walsh as an alternative, just as the Trump
fans who either don’t mind or enjoy his most vicious rhetoric are not likely switch to
Walsh, who has now positioned himself as formally against all that nasty stuff. As such, he is not likely to have any chance
of becoming a serious primary challenger for Trump, even if Trump’s popularity amongst
Republicans dropped dramatically. It also doesn’t help that after serving his
present term, Trump will have significantly more qualifying experience than the one-term
congressman. Now, Trump is also facing a primary challenge
from libertarian Bill Weld, and may soon be threatened by Mark Sanford, who Trump once
mocked for his infamous made-up journey through… The Tallahassee Trail! Unfortunately, he didn’t go there! Unfortunately that’s not a thing. It was the Appalachian Trail that he was not
actually hiking. At any rate, neither the scandal-ridden Mark
Sanford, nor the libertarian Bill Weld are likely to major challenges for Trump, either. Despite declaring his exploratory committee
back in February, Bill Weld’s gained little traction. He’s raised less than 700k in individual contributions,
averaging $98, meaning he’s received just over 7,000 donations. That’s not a lot of supporters. He poor fundraising has also lead to serious
financial trouble for his campaign. His FEC filing indicates his cash on hand
is $299k, and debts owed are $226k. Compare this to Trump, whose campaign has
similar debts ($294k) and $57 million cash on hand. One could argue that all three combined might
be able to deal enough damage to bring Trump down. In my view, multiple weaker opponents only
serve to help the president. By knocking them down, Trump is able to demonstrate
his own strength. Having a divided Republican opposition to
Trump also diverts attention away from a potential serious competitor. Someone like Mitt Romney, Jeff Flake, Paul
Ryan, Bob Corker, Larry Hogan or Nikki Haley could potentially pose a real threat to Trump
in a primary. Unfortunately, all of these candidates have
declined to run. Even John Kasich, who has expressed interest
in the past, has said he doesn’t see a path right now, but added, “That doesn’t mean there wouldn’t be a path
down the road.” Without a strong, unified opposition, Trump
is likely to breeze through the primaries. Without a strong primary challenge, losing
his general election campaign would be unprecedented. So unless Kasich, or some other viable candidate
steps up, Democrats should get used to the very real potential of losing the 2020 election. And Republicans, too, need to prepare for
what another 4 years of Trump will mean for the party. As the electorate of America grows increasingly
multicultural and diverse, as the sjw snowflake millennial generation ages—and thus becomes
more likely to vote in greater numbers, and as blue collar workers continue to lose their
jobs as their billionaire bosses turn to automation, the Republican party must adapt, if it is
to survive. I’ll leave it to my Republican friends to
decide just how the GOP should change to meet the needs of an ever-changing America. But just as progressive Democrats had serious
concerns about what a President Hilary Clinton would mean for the Democratic brand, Republicans
must seriously consider what eight years of President Trump will mean for the GOP. As an insurgent candidate in 2016, Trump’s
first term could be chalked up as a bizarre departure for the GOP. A blip. But after serving two terms, Trumpism will
become synonymous with the conservative movement and the Republican party. Trump will define the party for a generation. So, I do recommend that Republicans seriously
consider what kind of person would best embody Republican character and values in the 21st
century, then take a long hard look at Trump, and ask yourselves, Is he that guy?

  1. Walsh is just a useful idiot who could weaken trump if republicans start to turn on trump after recession, which I hope will happen soon

  2. This will be more Beneficial for the democrats.
    Just because if History tells us… a primary challenge against an incumbent always breaks moral on the party and would help moral on the opposition.

  3. It belongs to the Tea Party? The Tea Party is the movement that was the first fruits of the radicalization to the right of the GOP. Joe Walsh was one of those people who explained to us the 44th President of the United States Barack Obama is not American and Muslim like trump … Today he wants to face the monster that he and his movement created, but he has no chance because according to recent polls trump is supported by 95% of GOP activists.

  4. You always make the best videos @question time! After watching your videos, I have a debate with my friend, and loose in style

  5. Would you choose joe Walsh over trump? Also, in your opinion, do you think that he could actually beat trump and win the whole election?

  6. He won't gain traction in my opinion because he launched his campaign using Democratic party talking points he should've carved out his own set of criticisms which have no links to the mortal enemy of the GOP

  7. Can you do more videos like your “Who will be Bernie’s VP” about other candidates? For the top four candidates I think the most likely pairings are this:


  8. I don’t think Joe Walsh is the right guy. But someone will come along and be a serious threat to Trump. Not Weld, not Walsh, maybe Nikki Haley?

  9. I think if nikki haley runs she will be more dangerous than paul Ryan or any of the Republicans you mentioned that could be a serious threat to trump in the nominee

  10. None of the current 2020 Republican primary challengers are likely to pose any threat to Trump, at most they'll be what John Wolfe was to Obama in 2012, appealing to a smaller shrinking demographic of the party. Bill Weld raised in Q1, and Q2 an amassed $880K to Trump's $150M. Mark Sanford might be the only credible challenge due to name recognition, saying he's served in office more recently than both Walsh and Weld. But Sanford's disavowments of the President have already cost him political ground in South Carolina, he was successfully primaried. Sanford would be the closest thing we have to a formidable opponent to Trump, but he would immediately be setting off to a wrong foot with media reviving his 2009 scandal.

  11. The only way I could see a primary challenger working is if they ran 100% on Corruption. Like outlining a corruption plan and talking about how Trump inspired that plan. Maybe saying "I want to end wars, Trump has escalated these wars" could work too. That might be enough to get 5% nationally in a primary.

  12. I didn't finish the video yet because you dropped this while i'm serving my corporate overlords with compulsory Overtime. Did you give papa a shoutout??? – David G from Patreon.

  13. I agree with you and all, but trump didn’t say the white supremacists were very fine people, he said that they and neo nazis should be condemned totally. He didn’t say they were fine people. Don’t lie like trump.

  14. Due to the nature of our electoral college system it will mostly come down to whichever candidate wins the rustbelt states. Now Trumps approval rating in those states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan etc. are in the net negatives due in part to his trade war hurting farmers. In 2016 he won them by about 70,000 votes. The Dems have a good shot but they need to put a favorable candidate that will appeal to and win votes from farmers and 2 type Obama voters who went to Trump, and that candidate is definitely not Joe Biden.

  15. When covering the last Democratic Debates, CNN hit the channel pretty hard with content claims. I told you guys about it, and you guys came through big for me. I got a ton of new patrons, generously signing up for monthly donations to help support this channel, and keep me going through demonetization and copyright claims. I want to give a huge thank you to all of the patrons. I can't thank you all enough, but a big shout out to you all:

    Sergio Guerrero
    Emil Styrbaek Moller
    David Goodrich
    Adam Riordan
    Dawson Finger
    Ahegao Comics
    Skhe Mkosi
    Victor Holmberg
    Torge Kummerow
    Jack Stokes
    Jocob Starkey
    Mike Lodato
    Sir Bobbet
    Charlotte Holden
    Christopher Greene
    Eduardo Gonzalez
    Blake Malin

    You can join these noble heroes by supporting this channel at

  16. I’d like to clear something up about what you said about being endorsed by someone. Being endorsed by someone and accepting that endorsement are two very different things. David Duke and other conservatives have also endorsed Tulsi Gabbard, but she rejects their endorsements. As did Reagan when Duke endorsed him. Trump did not. There is an important difference here.

  17. Anyone who has paid any attention to Donald Trump knows that he will beat Joe Walsh in the primaries. Joe is very ignorant of the president and his actions. He still believes in the Russia collusion conspiracy which has been proven to be false, and he calls him a liar, when he is the actual liar himself!

  18. I was just thinking it's been a minute (pun intended) since you uploaded~
    Great video

  19. Um… so… I heard something different than the narrator when the KKK guy was talking.
    I heard him say that he'd plan to tell people HE'D voted for him.
    Not tell people TO vote for him.
    Which makes his jab at the KKK guy for not knowing the meaning of the word endorsement, pointless.

  20. 1:00 Franklin Pierce lost his primary against James Buchanan in 1856. I guess you could say that since this was before the age of the modern primary contest that it might not count as a primary loss, but either way, Pierce actively sought renomination at his party's convention, and lost to Buchanan. Great video otherwise!

  21. Trump’s supporters do not care that Trump is: a liar, unfit, disloyal to the US. They love him for being that way, and they will support him till the day they die. The only good thing about this is it’ll keep the Republicans occupied for a little while the Democrats hopefully focus on unifying the party.

  22. Unrelated, but will you be doing any videos on the upcoming Canadian federal election? Being located just north of the US (the country you focus on), and you living there, I think it would be a good video for you to make.

  23. "Could Donald Trump's Tea Party Primary Challenger End his Presidency? " No. As much as the fruitcakes would love it, there will be no miracle for those who want to destroy the republic. Trump is president for as long as he wants the job.

  24. Hey you know your every ugly about us presidents video and your everything great about us presidents video can you please do one on Australian Prime Ministers

  25. That closing statement about the republican party evolving is very true and something I hadn't thought about. Good point.

  26. Joe Walsh is truly delusional to think he has any chance at even denting Trump. He's basically Trump in terms of his policies and inflammatory comments, just more establishment friendly.

  27. Joe Walsh is Urolagnia
    Urolagnia (also known as urophilia) is a sexual fetish with a focus on urine and urination. People with urolagnia often like to urinate in public, or urinate on, or be urinated on by other people, and may also drink the urine. The consumption of urine is urophagia. Some like to watch others doing these things. These activities are often described by the euphemisms "golden showers" or "watersports".

  28. Joe Walsh sounds like an Establishment Democrat while trying to compete with Trump.

    Also, you know that Trump will use that tweet Joe posted supporting him as a way to undermine Joe's credibility.

  29. @questiontime – do you follow Canadian politics at all? What are your thoughts of the up coming elections?

    With Trudeau coming into the election fresh off of scandals with a 32% approval rating, up against Scheer who many are suspicious of his right wing views and turned off of from Doug Fords policy implementation in Ontario.

    Do you think that western politics is no longer an age of voting for the most favourable candidate but rather the political party that you align with no matter the representative they have as a leader? I find in the past 10 years the representatives for parties are getting worse and worse with the elections ending up with all the candidates being unliked by the majority of the people.

  30. I hope that all of the "never trump" Republicans will throw their support behind this Joe Walsh guy and get out of the Democratic primary race! I am so tired of these neoconservative types trying to hijack the Democratic Party by insisting our Democratic candidate needs to be more like a 1990s Republican. Let them vote for Joe Walsh and leave the Democratic Party to the progressives. I'm looking at you Nicole Wallace and Ana Navarro! Just because your party lost its collective mind and elected Trump doesn't mean the Democratic party has to shift even further to the right.

  31. So can anyone tell me why Joe Walsh is getting more attention than Bill Weld? Media favoritism for some reason is my suspicion, but I'm not sure why. Joe Walsh is a one term congressman with a lot of controversy and isn't especially different from Trump ideologically. But Bill Weld is a twice elected GOP governor from a liberal state with arguably a higher national profile and an obvious ideological difference. I don't think it's up for argument that Bill Weld is a much more qualified and likely competitor, but he' being ignored now in the face of this virtually unknown candidate (that the media seems to think is a big deal). so what gives?

  32. I think Trump will win sadly.all of the Democratic candidates are people who have already lost before and in politics loosers dont usually win

  33. John Tyler, Millard Fillmore, Franklin Pierce, Andrew Johnson and Chester A. Arthur all failed to be renominated by their respective parties. Lyndon Johnson also didn’t seek a renomination in 1968 in a move that was viewed as a reaction to the many formidable primary opponents in the Democratic Party that year.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *