39:04
GOP staffers say the party has a groer problem. So groper problem, you know, we're talking about Fuentes. So yeah, polling shows that the overwhelming majority of young conservatives reject anti-semitic views, though their support for Israel has dropped significantly from their prior generations. They also are more skeptical of military intervention than forebears. The oldest members of the Gen Z cohort were toddlers on 911 grew up in a era of multi-deade multi- trillion dollar wars and found themselves unable to afford homes as they reached adulthood. Many come of their mistrust of GOP or orthodoxy honestly. So do you think there is a grower problem on the right?
I mean, obviously, you know, Nick has built himself a nicized audience, and I think that there that a lot of these sort of, you know, edgy half comedy, half not comedy stuff that he's doing has traffic. I mean, transgressive politics is always attractive to young people. Whether it's Hassan saying he loves Mau on the left, or whether it's Fuentes saying he loves Hitler on the right, the kind of violating the rules is always sexy to people. And so, it kind of bespeaks authenticity or bespeaks humor or whatever it is. So, yeah. No, I think that there's a legitimate issue with people who believe some of the things and because at a certain point and you see this with the DSA left the way you're seeing with the Grier, right, is it's all
joking until it's not joking, right? Like you joke about Hitler, you joke about and a certain point you're like, am I really joking about Hitler or was he really kind of okay? Like was he really kind of an OG or was he not, right? Like you think he's joking? You think No, I No, I don't think that Fentes is joking. I think that he likes to use humor as a cover for the fact that he is not joking. Actually, I think that his belief system is, you know, I'll grant him the courtesy of sincerity. I think he's sincere in his belief systems. I think he's wrong, but I think much of what he says is quite morally terrible, but I think that he comes by it honestly.
You work with them? Uh, I did not. So, did he work what was the relationship with you guys back in the days? Cuz I know he came on I asked him the question. So, he has this whole like weird villain origin story that he's come up with uh with regard to his rise and Daily Wire and all this. I'll be honest with you, I don't remember pretty much any of this because this was not important to me at any point in my life. So, this is like um the only thing I remember is that Cassie Dylan, now Cassie Akiva, uh was friends with Fuentes, I believe, and she texted me a debate that Fuentes had done. I think it was he was a BU at the time on immigration and it was and he did a tremendous job because Nick is a smart guy. like he's again I think what
he believes is quite terrible but he has an IQ and so I had Daily Wire cover that debate because he did really it was an immigration debate um and uh and then I don't know if I was following him on Twitter or what the story was some tweet of his came up where he was basically accusing anybody who is pro-Israel of dual loyalty and I said that's an anti-semitic trope that everybody who supports Israel is loyal to the state of Israel over the United States or is more loyal or as loyal to Israel as to the United States. And he uses that, I guess, now as sort of like, and that's when I decided that I had to go, you know, dawn the dark cape. And it's like, well, first of all, that's that's oddly illogical. If the
idea I struggle to find a position that I think is evil where if somebody called me that thing, I'd become more of it. So, I've been labeled alt-right a thousand times wrongly because the alt-right despises me and hates me and h and a significant portion of my death threats come from the alt-right. Um, at no point have I said, "Okay, well, the left called me all right, so I'm going to do it." Right? The left, like if my critique of Nick was back whenever it was when I tweeted that that he was engaging in anti-semitism and his response was Hitler was an OG, number one, was I wrong, and number two, why would that drive you to that? I'm I'm confused. Right. There's literally no political position that I find despicable that you could
force me to take simply out of oppositionality. Like that's not that's a weird thing. That's a very weird thing. So again, I think that you know, from my perspective, I don't that's literally all I recall of any of this. You know, you'll have to ask Cassie about it because Cassie probably recalls more. Um but the idea that he was ever like an intern with us or he was slated for a job with us or that he was going none of that's true. H how much of what you're seeing his recreation as he's going through the space, right? hero and then first guy that kind of went up against Israel and a lot of people followed his lead and then now he's like, "Well, I'm gonna vote Democrat. No, we got to vote Republican." What do you think he's solving for? I had him on here. I
I actually enjoy talking to the guy. He's a smart guy. Like you said, this is not somebody that's not smart. Yeah. And he's funny. He's entertaining. He's got a of course he's super He is a He's a very funny broadcaster for sure. Um again, lots of people I disagree with and think are terrible are funny at their jobs. Um so what is he gaming for? He's aiming for personal loyalty. One of the great tragedies of my political life is the recognition that people don't follow ideas, they follow people. It makes me very sad because I'm not a kind of person who wants that, right? I mean, this guy and goes back to blind spots.
Yeah. I've always thought that I'm grateful for my position because I get to espouse ideas that I care about. But the idea that people are like Ben Shapiro stands or they love Ben Shapiro. This has never been a motivating factor for me, nor do I think that like if I say something wrong, I'm fine with people calling me out on it. And also like when people come up to me and they say, "I love you, but I disagree with a lot of what you say." Cool. Like that's that's like I'm glad that you I'm glad I prefer you agree with everything I say and not love me as much.
Meaning like I actually care about the positions. I think for Nick when you're trying to build a movement, which is clearly what he's tried to do, the unpredictability and the loyalty tests of it, like I'm going left, no, I'm going right and I'm going this way and I'm going that way. Follow me around. Like that is all part of the game. I think that's true for Tucker, too. I think it's true for a lot of these people. Like the more you can get people to buy into mutually contradictory assertions in loyalty to you, the more loyal they are. I'm I'm very internally coherent in my politics. So, I'm never going to ask you to buy into two propositions that contradict one another and prove your loyalty to me by doing so.
Are you surprised that um him and Tucker are not more united? Uh well, I mean, I think that's a business thing. Meaning, I think that Tucker largely probably agrees with Fuentes. And I think Fuentes would probably think that, too. Um, I think that Fuentes was sort of takenback by the fact that he went there and Tucker treated him really well and basically hugged him on a show and then next thing you know, Tucker was sort of disassociating from him because he realized that it was bad business to be associated with Fuentes. So, you know, that whole kind of twostep is from the outside. Tucker admires Nick for him to be a little bit more free to say whatever he wants to say.
Doesn't give a about making money. He's just kind of like saying whatever's on his mind. Well, I mean I think that to a certain extent Tucker thinks that Fuentes is going to drink his milkshake. So you think Fuentes is eventually going to come inside with him? That Tucker thinks Nick is going to join Tucker? No, the opposite. I think that Tucker is deeply afraid that Nick is going to drink his milkshake, that he's going to take his I got it. Okay. That he sees him in a competitive space and that's why he's constantly doing the like, I'm patting you on the head. No, I don't want to see you again. I'm going to pat you on the head. No, you're a gay little FBI fat.
You can't do that to Nick. Nick is not that guy. Nick tend to agree, by the way. No, Nick is not that guy. Nick is there's some guys that are uh you know they have the street thug gangster side to them that they don't they understand that part. They don't need flattery. I don't think Nick's part of the flattery camp. I think that may work with certain people. I don't think that's going to work. I tend to agree with that. Yeah. So, okay. So, what role do you think he's going to play in 28? Not much. Uh I mean I think he'll play a role in so far as the GOP refuses to distance itself from people. I think he'll be used as a weapon for sure.
I mean this is the way politics works, right? I mean like Hassan campaigning with the Democrats is a weapon for Republicans. Sure. And refusal to disavail people or to or to you know say that you don't want the support of people who openly stand Hitler. Uh I don't think that ends well for people typically speaking. And I think that the mistake again that the vice president is making with you know the Tucker of it or with the you know he'll condemn Fuentes. He won't condemn Tucker. I think that's a very difficult line to draw to a certain extent.
Backfired when he you know criticized Fuentes. Yes. Um, and so I think that, you know, you remember what he said? What the kids? Yeah. And but he sort of had to. But the problem is that you can't play that game and then be like that was a bad move on the VP, honestly. Well, I mean, if you're going to do it, man. What I mean by that is if you're going to condemn Fuentes, then condemn everybody who holds that point of view, right? I'll do that, right?
Like one foot, not the VP. I understand, but I don't game. But if you're in the But again, I don't think that's the audience he needs to be. Okay, so let me construct an alternative JD Vance for Okay, here's the alternative JD Vance that I would recommend the vice president pursue. Okay, so if I were JD Vance and I were somebody who has a blue collar appeal because, you know, I go back to Appalachia and all of that, here's where I would not be aiming. I would not be aiming at the Fuentes Tucker Catholic integralist crowd. That's not where I would be aiming because that's a very small percentage of the population. I would be the version of JD Vance that you saw on stage with Tim Walls.
Politically moderate, kind of a kind, a person who loves his wife and kids. I'd put them in all my pictures. I would be I'd be talking in friendly terms about what I plan to do for you. I would be significantly less kind of asserbic and dispic about my politics, the sort of kind of sour face that you see on JD sometimes. And I would be attempting to reach out to he could do better with women than Trump. It's possible, but he needs to actually like make that move, right? He could do better with say college educated than Trump, right? Trump did not do well with college educated. JD is a Yale law school graduate who's very smart. M he could be reaching out to that crowd by making, you know, kind of more intellectually more intellectual
appeals. Instead, he's sort of trying to drive home the bluecollarness of him, but the bluecollar voters are likely to vote for JD anyway. Like that's your home base. Like so again, I think that there is a way that he could be running and he's choosing not to run that way. I think that's a foolish strategy. What's more likely to happen? A sit down with you and Tucker or sit down with you and Nick? Um I mean neither is particularly likely I would imagine. Um the Tucker I've offered a thousand times. Um you know, open invite. Uh you know, Nick is a bit of a different story. And the reason that Nick is a bit of a different story
is because Nick's entire mode, and listen, I admire it. I even sometimes get a bizarre kick out of it. But Nick's entire mode is he's a comedian. Okay? Nick is an is a comedian masquerading as a political pundit. He has political views, but in essence, he's a comedian. And you can't really have an honest political conversation with a comedian. It'd be more like interviewing Dave Chappelle or something, but like Nazi Dave Chappelle. Meaning, what does Nick believe? What does he not believe? I don't know. I mean, it depends on what's funny at the moment. And so, trying to So, you don't think he has core beliefs?
Uh, no. I mean, I do think that he has core beliefs, but I think that one of the tactics that he uses to avoid being pinned down on his core beliefs is diffusing with humor. And I think that when you try to pin him down with that, then the idea is that you're an uncool person for even asking him to be pinned down on that sort of thing. And so there's no sort of honest conversation that can be had about like what are your core beliefs and are they right or are they wrong because that's that's not what he does. I think when he's asked a tough question then he immediately reverts to the sort of 17-year-old humor that listen people can find it transgressively funny. I on occasion find it transgressively funny. Um but
that is not an honest conversation about his politics or his principles. And I don't think that's probably in the offing. I think he's different when he's on the mic and on the screen talking him and the camera like this versus 101. Very different one. Also, obviously his incentive structure if we were to sit down together would be to get the only the Shapiro moment, right, and then blow it up all over the internet. Clearly, would you ever have him on? Would I ever have him on? Um, I mean, it depends. Again, if he were I would the answer is no, I think. But the reason I'm hesitating is because
if he ever if I got the impression that he were willing to have like an actual serious sit down conversation without all of the, you know, now I'm just going to call you a Jew for the shits and giggles of it so that the audience goes crazy. Like I'm just I'm not interested in that. Why not? Why am I not interested in having on somebody who just calls me a Jew for the shits and giggles of it? Because I think I actually don't think he'll do that. I So it's I mean listen it if you could convince me of that then I would do it. I don't think he would do that. I or the you know I think it would be a real good debate and I it would be a good conversation.
Uh and I think a lot of the youth would sit there and say good for Ben for having him on. It would be what a lot of people would never see coming and I think you would be more surprised on how he is one-on-one. By the way, just so you know, I mean, again, from the day he's been on my podcast, I'm sure he's a very nice guy in oneonone. From the day he was here with me, the interview till today, him and I haven't spoken at all. Yeah. So, it's not like it's a conversation or anything like that. I just think it would be a good conversation to have him. And, you know, selfishly, I would also like to see you and Tucker sitting down. You on his or him on yours. I know. And that's
I've tucker that about a thousand times. I have seen that. Um, and uh, I really doubt that's going to happen. Again, I think that there's a misalignment of incentives. I think that, you know, Nick, let's put this way, Nick does not want to be pinned down on his ideological beliefs with data or with counterargument that is serious. And so his incentive structure very strongly would be to sort of do the Piers Morgan interview, right? Like if you watch Nick's interview with Piers Morgan, again, I found it amusing too because Nick's really good at that game. But Piers is trying to pin him down on his beliefs about the Holocaust. And so what Nick does, he immediately launches into a bunch of jokes about the
Holocaust. Well, again, those jokes may be transgressively funny, but that doesn't actually get to the root of the issue. Is everyone smarter for having heard that? I think actually everyone might be stupider for having heard this. Yeah. That's the hard part, right? A certain a level of debate requires a level of sincere revelation of your interior beliefs and willing to defend them. If you're if what you're going to do is run away to comedy or to humor or to insult, then that's not worthwhile. It is it doesn't it doesn't advance the it doesn't advance the ball. You know there's a difference with comedy and there's a difference with rage baiting comments that you know it's going to get under your skin. I think if
like when I was at Afist and somebody asked me a question why won't you sit down with Nick? I said I'm not comfortable with him saying the N word all the time and I said it from stage. I'm like I just want you to be respectful. You know, I listened to hip-hop for many years and maybe a little bit too much when I was a kid, but I chose to change and I went a different direction in my life. And then we had a very respectful conversation together. Like Crowder is com. Crowder is one of the most talented guys. I know you guys had something that happened many years ago, but I think Crowder is super talented. Of course. And he's funny as Like this stuff
they used to do back in the days. You're like, who is this guy? You would watch him, you would say, super brilliant, but he's also able to do this. Again, I think it is important for me to say at this point that at no point, so what's what's funny is that there's been this conflation. I'm just going to make this point because you're not making it, but I know that how the internet works. I'm not saying that anybody should take away Nick Quent as his microphone or anyone else's microphone. Whether I choose to be on a podcast with somebody or not choose to be on is an that is an aspect of free speech the same as it is whether I want to or whether I don't want to. Uh, so again, I think there are circumstances under which I
would do something like that, but I'd have to believe certain things about how he would approach the thing in order to mean that I would think it's worthwhile. Now, other people might think it's worthwhile, right? But, but they're not me. So, you know, I think it's a way to get in front of the youth that right now is not getting a platform because they're listening to him more than you. So, I think sitting down with you, you would get in front of his audience. And if you feel your argument is more logical, his audience is going to say, you know what, he's actually got a good point. So that would be the biggest thing if even that is definitely the strongest steel
man argument in favor. Yeah. Even if it's a 5% that's reasonable that's willing to sh and the strongest steel man's argument against is that it's a setup. Right. That's the strongest steel man argument. Yeah. But if it's on your territory there's no risk. You're controlling the territory. I mean I don't think that's true because again I'm honest enough to I would not slice and dice it. Right. And anything that we taped you would put out. Yeah. No listen I mean I came to your territory so I've seen how you guys do things. I mean, we're so kind with our interviews, as you know, that like we'll say that if somebody says something they feel they didn't articulate properly in the moment, we'll
say like go back and articulate it better. When we set out to create a shoe that blends comfort, function, and luxury, we had the choice to make it fast. We had the choice to make it cheap. We chose neither. Instead, we chose Tuscan Italy. We chose true Italian craftsmanship. Each pair touched by 50 skilled hands. We chose patience, spending two years perfecting every detail. And we chose the finest quality at every step. Introducing the future looks bright collection. Not rushed, not disposable, not ordinary, rather intentional, luxurious, timeless. If you enjoy this video, you want to watch more videos like this, click here. And if you want to watch the entire podcast, click here.
