The Trump Tariff strategy continues to compel divided reactions, even within his own party. Where does Republican strategist Chris Walker fall and is this the first major divide for his party?
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Previously on Your Morning Show with Michael del Chunho.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
US stock futures are plunging the world as we know
it is that and the economy is crashing. Oh my,
But if that's the case, what's happening in China? Their
market was down thirteen percent ours the future is predicted
to be at four percent, although it's been rebounding before
the market even opens. Germany was down nine percent, Japan
(00:25):
was down seven point nine percent, and according to the
White House, some fifty nations are ready to negotiate. Is
this an art of the deal in the making or
is this the end of our economy? Well, we're getting
strong opinions on both ends, both parties. Quite frankly, in fact,
it's compelled a divided reaction even within the Republican Party,
(00:48):
where it is our Republican strategist Chris Walker fall and
is this the first major divide for the party in
its newfound honeymoon of trump Ism?
Speaker 3 (00:56):
Good morning, Chris, Good morning, Michael. How are you well?
Speaker 2 (01:00):
You are talking to the foremost authority of the NCAA
twenty twenty five bracket. I am in the top seven
thousand out of twenty five million, and it has nothing
to do we're talking about.
Speaker 3 (01:11):
I just wanted to say to get out loud, where
do you fall on this?
Speaker 2 (01:15):
I mean, nobody's a fan of the temporary pain that
we're seeing on Wall Street, but the narrative in some
ways isn't.
Speaker 3 (01:22):
A complete story. But where do you fall on this issue?
Speaker 4 (01:27):
Well, you know, I'm open to the idea of some tariffs,
particularly as it relates to China. We gave you know,
we gave China most Favorite Trading Nations stats in two
thousand and one. We let them in the WTO in
nineteen ninety nine. You know, ever since then, they've kind
of eaten our lunch with them with an uncompetitive advantage.
And so I mean some type of change there I
(01:50):
think from the President is warranted American incorrect.
Speaker 5 (01:53):
What we saw last week was not that.
Speaker 3 (01:55):
It was, you know, kind.
Speaker 4 (01:56):
Of an effort to kind of introduce global tear on
numbers that aren't accurate. I mean, trade deficits are not
trade and balances. I mean Madagascar is not going to
trade at the same level as the United States because
it's our GDP's.
Speaker 5 (02:09):
Are cletally different.
Speaker 4 (02:10):
So in a way, I don't like or think that
the trade deficit angle is a good one, but that
seems to be a big motivator for President Trump. I
hope someone kind of gets muff that he won't. But
I just think that's a flawed logic in terms of
how trade will work. But ultimately, you know, we'll see
how the cell stakes out. I do think the market
will bounce back eventually. I think one of the biggest
(02:31):
lessons we learned from two thousand and eight, or should
have learned, is that an overreaction to a stock market
drop makes things worse.
Speaker 3 (02:39):
I think the the.
Speaker 4 (02:42):
The advice of saying, hey, you know, this is going
to be some medicine from short term pain, like the
President said yesterday on Air Force One, I think is accurate.
We don't need to overreact on anything. I mean, unless
you sell at the bottom, you haven't lost any money.
And so in a way, you know, having faith in
American markets, having faith in our businesses and our leadership,
(03:03):
is an act of the ability of trusting that that
process will go up again, as it usually does.
Speaker 3 (03:08):
We've had twenty.
Speaker 4 (03:09):
Four recessions in one hundred years and have twenty four
you know, bowl markets as well, and you know, all
of that kind of is cyclical. Changing that narrative and
changing the structure of spending billions of dollars AMNT accountable
dollars to prop up the stock market couldn't continue, especially
with the thirty plus billion of debt that.
Speaker 3 (03:25):
We're dealing with.
Speaker 2 (03:26):
But the narrative a narrative are problems. But the narrative
is the Wall Street numbers are down. Therefore this plan
is a failure. And that's simply not true. The markets
are reacting to uncertainty. When certainty arrives, the markets will correct.
And if the sky is falling, well, then what's happening
(03:47):
in China? We're our futures are down four percent. I
don't even think it's going to come in at four percent.
But even if it does, theirs was thirteen percent, Germany's
was nine percent, Japan's was seven point nine percent. If
this is so dumb for America, why are the others
that started this suffering more?
Speaker 4 (04:05):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (04:06):
I mean the East market is.
Speaker 4 (04:08):
Individual comparative to what's going on in their in their economies.
Speaker 5 (04:11):
And so you know, looking at the at the S
and P or.
Speaker 4 (04:13):
The Dow and saying that's our economy is also inaccurate.
That's stocks being traded, you know, at high volume numbers
based on a lot.
Speaker 5 (04:21):
Of times AI these days, and so a point.
Speaker 4 (04:24):
A lot of that stuff is just natural. So, you know,
we have a we have a strong economy. There's there's
you know, hundreds of millions of people here who are
putting investing their time and capital into their jobs and
into their businesses and into their communities. And so you know,
the fundamentals to just steal a life from John McKain
in two thousand and eight are pretty sound still. So
you know, I don't think but look, I'm not a
market economist here, but but my overall point on this is,
(04:46):
you know, I think the way the President approached tariffs
last week was wrong. I don't think it was the
right way to approach it. You know, I think a methodical,
more measured tone would have would have kind of allowed
for this. I think we you know, we're either for
on showing jobs again or you know, using this as
an economic tool.
Speaker 5 (05:05):
You know, they can't both. They're mutually exclusive that they.
Speaker 3 (05:08):
Can't be both.
Speaker 4 (05:10):
And this idea that they're all of the things to
you know, all of the answers to questions on why
we're doing this just don't make sense. They're either an
economic disincentive or they're not. What we're seeing is they
are economic disincentives. And if they're used this leverage, fine,
So let's not pretend that they're somehow going to bring
back jobs in some areas of the country that just
aren't coming back.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
Let's also not pretend it's going to destroy the economy,
because if that was the case, China would be destroyed,
not benefiting, right, Vietnam would be destroyed, benefiting, Andy would
be destroyed, not benefiting.
Speaker 3 (05:38):
So, I mean, I get it. That's it's going to
be on the narrative. That's part of what we're doing today.
Speaker 4 (05:43):
But we can't micromanage, you know, the markets. I mean again,
government intervention in the markets is a negative. You know,
they're they're efficient and sometimes that's cold, but it leads
to wealth for everybody. We have benefited from trade tremendously,
you know, allowing for open.
Speaker 5 (06:02):
Open goods coming across our borders.
Speaker 4 (06:04):
They our goods coming coming across borders are positive for everyone,
positive for farmers.
Speaker 5 (06:09):
Let's not forget this.
Speaker 4 (06:10):
Four years ago and we talked about the Chinese trade
issue with Canadian farmers. We just spend a twenty nine
to billion dollar ballot for farmers because China stopped buying
are goods. There are consequences to that, and it leads
to more government spinning, which is the exact problem we
need to tax as well.
Speaker 3 (06:26):
Exactly.
Speaker 5 (06:26):
Those are all great pot free trader all the way.
Speaker 3 (06:29):
All right, yeah, Chris Walker joining us.
Speaker 2 (06:30):
All right, if this looks, we've got fifty nations, according
to the White House, have come forward ready to negotiate.
If the President chose to do this, not in the
style you would over language, you would have but ten
percent for everyone, including islands that produce nothing but penguins.
That's just across the boarder for everybody. And then for
those that are the toughest on us, we hit them
(06:50):
with reciprocals that are about half of what they're hitting
us with. All right, that's just to cross the board.
Then let everybody react. If he slowly renegotiates with Germany,
if he slowly re you know, negotiates with Britain and Europe,
in Japan and Mexico in China, I mean Mexico and
Canada and India, and the only one left out of
(07:13):
the party is China. You don't see that might be
where this is headed. And again unless it's permanent. If
it's just temporary, it was just a corrective hiccup in
Wall Street. But for the economy, you'd end up with
a win pretty quick.
Speaker 5 (07:30):
Well, I mean, guess that's where it's going.
Speaker 4 (07:31):
Fine, But you didn't need a ten trillion dollar market
shock to do it. Everyone has a phone, and everyone
has an ambassador and trade trade partner.
Speaker 2 (07:40):
You can and do it volitionally.
Speaker 4 (07:44):
Oh, I mean, I don't think that. I don't think
you need to shake up the entire market in the process.
If he's serious, and he has been, then people would
realize that. Now, if you have to shake up the
entire market to get somebody to listen to you, I'm bad.
Negates people's seriousness and what you're saying anyway. So, I mean,
I think that's what that's a lack of trust.
Speaker 3 (08:01):
And the president and his counterparts.
Speaker 4 (08:04):
I just this was an unnecessary self own in terms
of the economic harm that's caused. If they really are
negotiating in terms of trying to do you know, trade depsits,
then talk to your partners and say we're going to
do this. You don't do that, and if they don't
believe you so be it. But this this was a
completely unnecessary shock to the system. When everyone does how
the phone.
Speaker 3 (08:22):
You're able to do that anyway.
Speaker 4 (08:23):
I just I don't think that was necessary to do
that if that was the outcome that they were looking for.
Speaker 3 (08:27):
If it wasn't necessary, would have happened already. Is my problem?
All right? Let me get to aocrue.
Speaker 5 (08:31):
Is that true though?
Speaker 4 (08:32):
I mean, we don't know that he's only been in
office for sixty days he said.
Speaker 3 (08:35):
Was four years prior to that, and for the last fourteen.
Speaker 4 (08:40):
Year seriously about it.
Speaker 5 (08:42):
But I mean they are now lack of seriousness in
some of this.
Speaker 4 (08:45):
Well, I am everybody, I.
Speaker 3 (08:49):
Know, I know we disagree, and your opinion is is valid?
Is mine?
Speaker 2 (08:53):
I mean I don't have a problem with I want
I want to get your comments on yeh, what I mean.
The latest polling shows AOC in a land slide over
Chucky Schumer in New York, and we're seeing growing numbers
of other young socialist Democrats. And then we see a
proclibe of about eighty six percent of party Democrat Party
voters saying we're not doing enough to stop Trump. In
(09:15):
other words, don't go back to the center towards America.
We need a double down going left, and all indications
are AOC is the new Bernie Sanders. Can't you see
the writing on the wall of where this is going?
And as the Democrats interjected themselves over their voters with
Hillary and then with Joe and then with Kamala, they
plan to do the same with Robby Manuel and Wes Moore.
(09:37):
I mean, isn't this one looking so obvious you don't
have to be good at it?
Speaker 5 (09:43):
I mean, never may a scene.
Speaker 4 (09:45):
I think that Democrats embracing AOC is an incredible look.
President Trump won in a lot of ways, in part
because he was the person's going to return normalcy to
the United States and not doing this far left stuff
that's happening. We are not in where he is. If
the party wants to go that direction, you know, that's
(10:06):
their choice. I think it's a silly one. But I
also would not discount people's overreaction to things that are
happening now. I mean, when all the news of what's
happening relative to the economy, you're going to find people
finding a safe harbor and somebody promising you, you know,
incompatible and impossible results as a reaction to some of
(10:26):
the things that are being said by the news every
day right now relative to the economy.
Speaker 3 (10:29):
So you know, I don't want.
Speaker 4 (10:31):
To think that that is a unlikely scenario because in
some regards I could see it happen, just because you know,
the constant diet of the sky's falling because of President
Trump I think could lead people to making really rational
terrible decisions on a macro level relative to politics.
Speaker 2 (10:48):
Well, that's why the opening question was, this is finally
a first divide within the Republican Party that needs to
be sorted out prior to midterms and certainly the twenty
twenty eight presidential election. Final question has to do with
the send a GOP passing its budget plan. How much
will all of this division over trade impact that big,
beautiful deal that was really the centerpiece of what needed
(11:11):
to get done in the first one hundred days.
Speaker 4 (11:15):
I think it's I think it's problematic. You know, any
Republican in the House right now that's an R plus
five or R plus ten district is going to be worried.
Recessions tend to take every the governing party with them,
and if this is accelerating a likely not like let's
say not say that is this accelerating the potential of
a recession, then I think any any Republican in the
(11:39):
relative swing district is going to be in.
Speaker 5 (11:41):
Trouble as a results of that, maybe in some Senate seeds.
Speaker 4 (11:44):
And so from that regard, I think one you're going
to see the Hill start to push back a little
bit this week, secondly on tariffs, but secondly, you know
there's going to have to be some safe harbor for
these political figures to try to find a place to go,
and all that's going to have to shake itself out it.
I think you're going to see some moderation there because
it's going to have to because you can't have another
week like we had.
Speaker 5 (12:02):
Of the last two days last week.
Speaker 2 (12:03):
That's the bigger risk at the moment for Donald Trump
and his administration really than the economy or the market crashing.
Speaker 3 (12:10):
Great great insights.
Speaker 1 (12:11):
Miss a little, miss a lot, miss a lot, and
we'll miss you. It's your morning show with Michael del Churno.
Previously on Your Morning Show with Michael del Chunho.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
US stock futures are plunging the world as we know
it is that and the economy is crashing. Oh my,
But if that's the case, what's happening in China? Their
market was down thirteen percent ours the future is predicted
to be at four percent, although it's been rebounding before
the market even opens. Germany was down nine percent, Japan
(00:25):
was down seven point nine percent, and according to the
White House, some fifty nations are ready to negotiate. Is
this an art of the deal in the making or
is this the end of our economy? Well, we're getting
strong opinions on both ends, both parties. Quite frankly, in fact,
it's compelled a divided reaction even within the Republican Party,
(00:48):
where it is our Republican strategist Chris Walker fall and
is this the first major divide for the party in
its newfound honeymoon of trump Ism?
Speaker 3 (00:56):
Good morning, Chris, Good morning, Michael. How are you well?
Speaker 2 (01:00):
You are talking to the foremost authority of the NCAA
twenty twenty five bracket. I am in the top seven
thousand out of twenty five million, and it has nothing
to do we're talking about.
Speaker 3 (01:11):
I just wanted to say to get out loud, where
do you fall on this?
Speaker 2 (01:15):
I mean, nobody's a fan of the temporary pain that
we're seeing on Wall Street, but the narrative in some
ways isn't.
Speaker 3 (01:22):
A complete story. But where do you fall on this issue?
Speaker 4 (01:27):
Well, you know, I'm open to the idea of some tariffs,
particularly as it relates to China. We gave you know,
we gave China most Favorite Trading Nations stats in two
thousand and one. We let them in the WTO in
nineteen ninety nine. You know, ever since then, they've kind
of eaten our lunch with them with an uncompetitive advantage.
And so I mean some type of change there I
(01:50):
think from the President is warranted American incorrect.
Speaker 5 (01:53):
What we saw last week was not that.
Speaker 3 (01:55):
It was, you know, kind.
Speaker 4 (01:56):
Of an effort to kind of introduce global tear on
numbers that aren't accurate. I mean, trade deficits are not
trade and balances. I mean Madagascar is not going to
trade at the same level as the United States because
it's our GDP's.
Speaker 5 (02:09):
Are cletally different.
Speaker 4 (02:10):
So in a way, I don't like or think that
the trade deficit angle is a good one, but that
seems to be a big motivator for President Trump. I
hope someone kind of gets muff that he won't. But
I just think that's a flawed logic in terms of
how trade will work. But ultimately, you know, we'll see
how the cell stakes out. I do think the market
will bounce back eventually. I think one of the biggest
(02:31):
lessons we learned from two thousand and eight, or should
have learned, is that an overreaction to a stock market
drop makes things worse.
Speaker 3 (02:39):
I think the the.
Speaker 4 (02:42):
The advice of saying, hey, you know, this is going
to be some medicine from short term pain, like the
President said yesterday on Air Force One, I think is accurate.
We don't need to overreact on anything. I mean, unless
you sell at the bottom, you haven't lost any money.
And so in a way, you know, having faith in
American markets, having faith in our businesses and our leadership,
(03:03):
is an act of the ability of trusting that that
process will go up again, as it usually does.
Speaker 3 (03:08):
We've had twenty.
Speaker 4 (03:09):
Four recessions in one hundred years and have twenty four
you know, bowl markets as well, and you know, all
of that kind of is cyclical. Changing that narrative and
changing the structure of spending billions of dollars AMNT accountable
dollars to prop up the stock market couldn't continue, especially
with the thirty plus billion of debt that.
Speaker 3 (03:25):
We're dealing with.
Speaker 2 (03:26):
But the narrative a narrative are problems. But the narrative
is the Wall Street numbers are down. Therefore this plan
is a failure. And that's simply not true. The markets
are reacting to uncertainty. When certainty arrives, the markets will correct.
And if the sky is falling, well, then what's happening
(03:47):
in China? We're our futures are down four percent. I
don't even think it's going to come in at four percent.
But even if it does, theirs was thirteen percent, Germany's
was nine percent, Japan's was seven point nine percent. If
this is so dumb for America, why are the others
that started this suffering more?
Speaker 4 (04:05):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (04:06):
I mean the East market is.
Speaker 4 (04:08):
Individual comparative to what's going on in their in their economies.
Speaker 5 (04:11):
And so you know, looking at the at the S
and P or.
Speaker 4 (04:13):
The Dow and saying that's our economy is also inaccurate.
That's stocks being traded, you know, at high volume numbers
based on a lot.
Speaker 5 (04:21):
Of times AI these days, and so a point.
Speaker 4 (04:24):
A lot of that stuff is just natural. So, you know,
we have a we have a strong economy. There's there's
you know, hundreds of millions of people here who are
putting investing their time and capital into their jobs and
into their businesses and into their communities. And so you know,
the fundamentals to just steal a life from John McKain
in two thousand and eight are pretty sound still. So
you know, I don't think but look, I'm not a
market economist here, but but my overall point on this is,
(04:46):
you know, I think the way the President approached tariffs
last week was wrong. I don't think it was the
right way to approach it. You know, I think a methodical,
more measured tone would have would have kind of allowed
for this. I think we you know, we're either for
on showing jobs again or you know, using this as
an economic tool.
Speaker 5 (05:05):
You know, they can't both. They're mutually exclusive that they.
Speaker 3 (05:08):
Can't be both.
Speaker 4 (05:10):
And this idea that they're all of the things to
you know, all of the answers to questions on why
we're doing this just don't make sense. They're either an
economic disincentive or they're not. What we're seeing is they
are economic disincentives. And if they're used this leverage, fine,
So let's not pretend that they're somehow going to bring
back jobs in some areas of the country that just
aren't coming back.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
Let's also not pretend it's going to destroy the economy,
because if that was the case, China would be destroyed,
not benefiting, right, Vietnam would be destroyed, benefiting, Andy would
be destroyed, not benefiting.
Speaker 3 (05:38):
So, I mean, I get it. That's it's going to
be on the narrative. That's part of what we're doing today.
Speaker 4 (05:43):
But we can't micromanage, you know, the markets. I mean again,
government intervention in the markets is a negative. You know,
they're they're efficient and sometimes that's cold, but it leads
to wealth for everybody. We have benefited from trade tremendously,
you know, allowing for open.
Speaker 5 (06:02):
Open goods coming across our borders.
Speaker 4 (06:04):
They our goods coming coming across borders are positive for everyone,
positive for farmers.
Speaker 5 (06:09):
Let's not forget this.
Speaker 4 (06:10):
Four years ago and we talked about the Chinese trade
issue with Canadian farmers. We just spend a twenty nine
to billion dollar ballot for farmers because China stopped buying
are goods. There are consequences to that, and it leads
to more government spinning, which is the exact problem we
need to tax as well.
Speaker 3 (06:26):
Exactly.
Speaker 5 (06:26):
Those are all great pot free trader all the way.
Speaker 3 (06:29):
All right, yeah, Chris Walker joining us.
Speaker 2 (06:30):
All right, if this looks, we've got fifty nations, according
to the White House, have come forward ready to negotiate.
If the President chose to do this, not in the
style you would over language, you would have but ten
percent for everyone, including islands that produce nothing but penguins.
That's just across the boarder for everybody. And then for
those that are the toughest on us, we hit them
(06:50):
with reciprocals that are about half of what they're hitting
us with. All right, that's just to cross the board.
Then let everybody react. If he slowly renegotiates with Germany,
if he slowly re you know, negotiates with Britain and Europe,
in Japan and Mexico in China, I mean Mexico and
Canada and India, and the only one left out of
(07:13):
the party is China. You don't see that might be
where this is headed. And again unless it's permanent. If
it's just temporary, it was just a corrective hiccup in
Wall Street. But for the economy, you'd end up with
a win pretty quick.
Speaker 5 (07:30):
Well, I mean, guess that's where it's going.
Speaker 4 (07:31):
Fine, But you didn't need a ten trillion dollar market
shock to do it. Everyone has a phone, and everyone
has an ambassador and trade trade partner.
Speaker 2 (07:40):
You can and do it volitionally.
Speaker 4 (07:44):
Oh, I mean, I don't think that. I don't think
you need to shake up the entire market in the process.
If he's serious, and he has been, then people would
realize that. Now, if you have to shake up the
entire market to get somebody to listen to you, I'm bad.
Negates people's seriousness and what you're saying anyway. So, I mean,
I think that's what that's a lack of trust.
Speaker 3 (08:01):
And the president and his counterparts.
Speaker 4 (08:04):
I just this was an unnecessary self own in terms
of the economic harm that's caused. If they really are
negotiating in terms of trying to do you know, trade depsits,
then talk to your partners and say we're going to
do this. You don't do that, and if they don't
believe you so be it. But this this was a
completely unnecessary shock to the system. When everyone does how
the phone.
Speaker 3 (08:22):
You're able to do that anyway.
Speaker 4 (08:23):
I just I don't think that was necessary to do
that if that was the outcome that they were looking for.
Speaker 3 (08:27):
If it wasn't necessary, would have happened already. Is my problem?
All right? Let me get to aocrue.
Speaker 5 (08:31):
Is that true though?
Speaker 4 (08:32):
I mean, we don't know that he's only been in
office for sixty days he said.
Speaker 3 (08:35):
Was four years prior to that, and for the last fourteen.
Speaker 4 (08:40):
Year seriously about it.
Speaker 5 (08:42):
But I mean they are now lack of seriousness in
some of this.
Speaker 4 (08:45):
Well, I am everybody, I.
Speaker 3 (08:49):
Know, I know we disagree, and your opinion is is valid?
Is mine?
Speaker 2 (08:53):
I mean I don't have a problem with I want
I want to get your comments on yeh, what I mean.
The latest polling shows AOC in a land slide over
Chucky Schumer in New York, and we're seeing growing numbers
of other young socialist Democrats. And then we see a
proclibe of about eighty six percent of party Democrat Party
voters saying we're not doing enough to stop Trump. In
(09:15):
other words, don't go back to the center towards America.
We need a double down going left, and all indications
are AOC is the new Bernie Sanders. Can't you see
the writing on the wall of where this is going?
And as the Democrats interjected themselves over their voters with
Hillary and then with Joe and then with Kamala, they
plan to do the same with Robby Manuel and Wes Moore.
(09:37):
I mean, isn't this one looking so obvious you don't
have to be good at it?
Speaker 5 (09:43):
I mean, never may a scene.
Speaker 4 (09:45):
I think that Democrats embracing AOC is an incredible look.
President Trump won in a lot of ways, in part
because he was the person's going to return normalcy to
the United States and not doing this far left stuff
that's happening. We are not in where he is. If
the party wants to go that direction, you know, that's
(10:06):
their choice. I think it's a silly one. But I
also would not discount people's overreaction to things that are
happening now. I mean, when all the news of what's
happening relative to the economy, you're going to find people
finding a safe harbor and somebody promising you, you know,
incompatible and impossible results as a reaction to some of
(10:26):
the things that are being said by the news every
day right now relative to the economy.
Speaker 3 (10:29):
So you know, I don't want.
Speaker 4 (10:31):
To think that that is a unlikely scenario because in
some regards I could see it happen, just because you know,
the constant diet of the sky's falling because of President
Trump I think could lead people to making really rational
terrible decisions on a macro level relative to politics.
Speaker 2 (10:48):
Well, that's why the opening question was, this is finally
a first divide within the Republican Party that needs to
be sorted out prior to midterms and certainly the twenty
twenty eight presidential election. Final question has to do with
the send a GOP passing its budget plan. How much
will all of this division over trade impact that big,
beautiful deal that was really the centerpiece of what needed
(11:11):
to get done in the first one hundred days.
Speaker 4 (11:15):
I think it's I think it's problematic. You know, any
Republican in the House right now that's an R plus
five or R plus ten district is going to be worried.
Recessions tend to take every the governing party with them,
and if this is accelerating a likely not like let's
say not say that is this accelerating the potential of
a recession, then I think any any Republican in the
(11:39):
relative swing district is going to be in.
Speaker 5 (11:41):
Trouble as a results of that, maybe in some Senate seeds.
Speaker 4 (11:44):
And so from that regard, I think one you're going
to see the Hill start to push back a little
bit this week, secondly on tariffs, but secondly, you know
there's going to have to be some safe harbor for
these political figures to try to find a place to go,
and all that's going to have to shake itself out it.
I think you're going to see some moderation there because
it's going to have to because you can't have another
week like we had.
Speaker 5 (12:02):
Of the last two days last week.
Speaker 2 (12:03):
That's the bigger risk at the moment for Donald Trump
and his administration really than the economy or the market crashing.
Speaker 3 (12:10):
Great great insights.
Speaker 1 (12:11):
Miss a little, miss a lot, miss a lot, and
we'll miss you. It's your morning show with Michael del Churno.
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
40s and Free Agents: NFL Draft Season
Daniel Jeremiah of Move the Sticks and Gregg Rosenthal of NFL Daily join forces to break down every team's needs this offseason.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.