Welker started by asking if Scott respects people's right to peacefully protest; the question came in reaction to increased police involvement on campuses. His response, all 279 words of it, started out with
Well, we certainly respect the right to peaceful protest. What we're seeing on college campuses, however, is too often not peaceful protest.
He went on to talk about the violence that's occurring, and the 2000 arrests that have been made, and continued
What we have to understand is the antisemitism that we're seeing on college campuses today is akin to what we saw in the 1960s. What we should be saying as a nation, the American people, they're saying it loud and clear. They support eliminating antisemitism from college campuses. They're being very clear. There's no space for hate in America.
He then accused President Biden of pandering by not speaking out sooner, and spoke of the 'privilege' that is federal funding for education, a favorite refrain of the Rs. Welker noted that Scott himself has acknowledged the anti-Semitism in his own party, but I guess because it's not happening on campuses as much as it is at 'conservative' gatherings, it's not as urgent.
Kristen, let me just say this though, Kristen. Once of the things we should make sure we do is continue to focus on the issues that we are seeing faced by those students today... This is the kind of scourge on our nation, the thing that scars the soul of a country as in we don't stand up for the vulnerable. We should make sure we do that today, tomorrow, and every day going forward.
And ignore the stuff 'we' did in the past.
Her next question was whether or not he talked with Trump over the weekend - they were together at Mar-a-Lago - about being his running mate.
No, ma'am. What we talked about this weekend was how bad the economy is for single parents like the one that raised me. We had a lot of conversations around the room about the importance of eliminating Bidenomics, about the importance of getting inflation back down to 2%. We were just better off under President Trump. Inflation, Kristen, was at 2% and we had the lowest unemployment rates for African Americans, for Hispanics, for Asians, a 70-year low for women. We had the highest funding for historically Black colleges and universities in the history of the country under President Trump. So we were excited to have a conversation. We had no conversations about the VP pick, to be honest with you, to be clear. But we had a lot of conversations about the failures of Joe Biden and the success of Donald Trump.
Again, Welker tried to argue with him, talking economic numbers, and how some were better under Biden than Trump, but are creeping back up, he said (he's right) and then, using her favorite interview tactic, she asked him again (and again) about the VP role, saying "But just to be very clear. It didn't come up at all? Do you think you're on the short list?"
TS: No – no, ma'am. It did not come up. African American unemployment rate is 6.4% today –
KW: But what about being – what about being VP–
TS: There's no doubt that it would be –
KW: What about being President Trump's VP? Did it come up at all? Do you think you're on the –
TS: Yes –
KW: – short list?
TS: I hope that the president will choose a person who helps the country unite and heal. I certainly expect to have a decision from President Trump in the next 60 days or so. But he did not bring it up. I certainly didn't bring it up. I'm excited that in this nation a poor kid from South Carolina can rise to the level of being a United States senator. It just tells me that all things are possible for kids growing up in poverty today. Listen to this show and know that all things are possible for your future.
Instead of talking about policy stuff, Welker decided to talk about "some of the headlines this week," and I groaned. At least she didn't mention the criminal election interference trial in New York. Instead, it was Trump's failure to commit to accepting the results of the 2024 election if he weren't the winner.
Her question for Scott, who voted to certify the 2020 results? "Why would you join a ticket with someone who believes the exact opposite on this critical point?
Well, I think we have to listen to what President Trump said and not what the reporters said that he actually said. Here's one of the things that he's been very clear, and even talking about the situation in Wisconsin, what he said was he expects there to be an honest election. He expects the results will be clear and for him to be successful. I expect him to be successful as well. There's no doubt that when you look at the polls across our country the one thing that is crystal clear, that the American people now having a contrast between four years of Joe Biden versus four years of Donald Trump. They're really excited to get back to the Trump years. And so I expect the election to be fair, and I expect Donald Trump to be our next president.
She pushed back, quoting Trump's own words, and also mentioned Wisconsin, noting that Trump again this week said he won the state, which he lost. And after that, she asked her question again.
So again, to the point, you voted to certify the election results of 2020. It's the exact opposite of what you said and did after 2020. Why would you want to be on a ticket with someone where there's such a fundamental difference?
Because he's all about today, tomorrow and the future, he blew off the entire concern. Basically, no worries, we don't have to fret about losing and having to make any kind of decision. Why is that not a problem?
There is clear facts here. President Trump himself said he expects this election to be fair, he expects it to be honest, and he expects to win. That's what the presidential candidate should expect, and I expect the exact same thing. And frankly the American people agree with him. This is an issue that is not an issue, so I'm not going to make it an issue.
And then it became the Sunday School classroom equivalent of a pissing match, and I can't stand either one of them, I really can't.
KW: Well, senator, will you commit to accepting the election results of 2024, bottom line?
TS: At the end of the day, the 47th president of the United States will be President Donald Trump, and I'm excited to get back to low inflation, low unemployment –
KS: Wait – wait, senator, yes or no? Yes or no? Will you accept the election results of 2024 no matter who wins?
TS: That is my statement.
KS: But is it – just yes or no? Will you accept the election results of 2024?
TS: I look forward to President Trump being the 47th president and Kristen, you can ask them multiple times –
KS: – Senator, just a yes or no answer.
TS: – but at the end of the day – so the American people, the American people will make the decision. And the decision will be –
KW: But I don't hear you committing –
TS: – for President Trump. That's clear.
KW: I don't hear you coming to the election results. S
TS: – Here's the deal. This is why so many –
KW: Will you commit to accepting the election results?
TS: This is why so many – this is why so many Americans believe that NBC is an extension of the Democrat party. At the end of the day, I said what I said. I know that the American people, their voices will be heard. And I believe that President Trump will be our next president. It's that simple.
KW: But senator, as you know, the hallmark of our democracy is that both candidates agree to a peaceful transfer of power. So I'm asking you as a potential VP nominee, will you accept to commit to the election results in this election cycle, no matter who wins? Just simply yes or no.
TS: I expect President Trump to win the next election and listen I'm not going to answer your hypothetical question when in fact I believe the American people are speaking today on the results of the election and if it continues – if it continues for the next six months, we find ourselves in a great position where we get back to another degree of American prosperity. I'm looking forward to that.
I'm not going to bore you with the part of the interview about abortion, because again, she asked a question, he gave a non-answer, she pushed back, she asked again, he non-answered again, declared his non-answer to be his answer, and so on.
Scott has walked away from what he has said believes in, and supports whatever Trump believes in. I believe everyone in the universe knows this, and there really is no reason to interview folks like Scott unless it's to get information on what Trump plans on doing if he's elected.
There is no other reason to invite him to a classroom - any classroom, unless maybe there's an open seat in a kindergarten classroom somewhere. And Welker? With her repetitive badgering of guests, and her asking only the obvious questions, she belongs there most of the time, too.
See you around campus - Noem's up next.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!