Hour 2 of NMN, Polling + Hons Von Spakovsky

Very briefly, we have Subaru owners that are letting us know that they are conservative and they're driving Suburus just to confuse people. One conservative female listener said, yeah, I drive a Subaru. I'm conservative. I don't know if she's straight, but she said, I like to drive my Subaru just to confuse people. So there you go. A lot of other Subaru owners are checking in as well. My younger brother drives one. Yeah? Yeah. You see a lib? Big time. Well, there you go. So is my younger sister. I'll say this. They are good cars. They are reliable. They're a pain in the butt if you have to fix them. But we're not hating on the Subaru. And don't blame us. We were not the marketing team in the 1990s that targeted a core group of individuals. So are Prius drivers? Are they labeled liberal? I don't know. They're typically covered in bumper stickers, like coexist. Co-exist. Vote blue no matter who. Right. Was it, was it Weaver that had a coexist bumper sticker? Oh, you guys weren't here. I think Ken Weaver had a coexist bumper sticker, but I don't remember the story behind it. I mean, Ken is, you know, not liberal. I'll just say that. And so I don't know where that, I think maybe one of his kids. I have no idea. I shouldn't even brought this up. Hey, have you seen the video. This is Karen Bass. You all know who she is, right? She's running for re-election in Los Angeles, mayor of Los Angeles. And this video just set the internet on fire yesterday. Your donation to our campaign is more critical right now than ever before. Let me explain. Thanks to LA's Supermatch program, every qualified donation from Los Angeles residents is matched 6 to 1 by the city. What?

So somebody donates five bucks and the city turns that into a $35 donation with taxpayer money? But after the primary, we had to start over from scratch. So we need you to rush your matching donation right now to help fuel this campaign. Chipping $5 right now and the city turns it into $35. Chipping $25 right now. And the city turns it into $175. Make your matching donation today. Thank you so much. So people were just, I mean, Bill Melusian and a whole bunch of other folks were just like, what in the world? But it's actually true. And it's legal in Los Angeles. Listen to this. In L.A., and this is one of those, you can call this one of those stories that we can point to to say, thank the Lord we live in the great state of Tennessee. In Los Angeles, they have this thing called the Supermatch Program, where if you donate to a qualifying candidate's campaign, they'll match it, six to one. So a $5 donation ends up being a $35 donation. That is crazy. So taxpayers end up funding campaigns and candidates that they may not be supporting. And a lot of people pointing out that this actually will help the more establishment politicians, perhaps. But I want you to think about this. This is how crazy this is. So taxpayers. With all of these issues that L.A. has are financing these campaigns. Meantime, with L.A., they have spending gaps, Los Angeles, millions of dollars in the hole. Their reserves, you know, like their rainy day fund here, their reserves have absolutely cratered in Los Angeles under Karen Bass. Crime is up. LA has a shortage of cops because of budget constraints. Homelessness is up, even though they've thrown millions of dollars at the problem. And so you wonder why people leave places like Los Angeles. It's like nothing makes sense. You have a city in dire financial straits, yet they match donations. Who does that? People who live in Los Angeles because voters approved this program back in 1990 and then it was expanded in 2019, I guess by the city council. So just, I mean, people want to know the info on that story. That's the info. That in Los Angeles, it is perfectly legal. And so when we say the taxation is theft, that's what we mean. By the way, speaking of which. Have you all heard the story about the polling company who released sketch data in the L.A. mayor's race? It was literally made up data. And they're admitting that their data was all fake. Basically what they said was that this was some sort of a social experiment. And here's the thing. And I'm going to get into this a little bit, but here's the thing, is that when you look at this story,

The people, you didn't start a business just to keep the lights on. You're here to sell more today than yesterday. You're here to win. Lucky for you, Shopify built the best converting checkout on the planet. Like the just one tapping, ridiculously fast acting, sky high sales stacking, championed at checkouts. That's the good stuff right there. So if your business is in it to win it, win with Shopify. Start your free trial today at Shopify.com slash win. The U.S. Soccer Podcast. These players are battered and exhausted, but you don't hurt like this if you don't care about this team, about this country, about this game. I think you can feel the intensity, the goals, the energy that, wow, look at us. Here in the U.S., I have got some news for you. There's so much more to come. My name is Megan Klingberg, and we're just getting started. The U.S. Soccer Podcast, presented by Henkel. Follow and listen on your favorite platform. That were behind the fake polling company. Okay, they're bad. But you know who looks really bad? People like Geraldo Rivera who took the data. and ran with it. This company, Median Strategies, sounds like a polling company. Just, it sounds like a bunch of bros sitting around, making up numbers that political pundits and longtime, even experienced reporters like myself, relied on. It was published in all the papers, the LA Times, all of the newspapers, because it was so provocative. It showed Karen Bass, killing her opponent in the L.A. mayor's race and Frances... in Wisconsin, running away with the governor's race there. She lost. Karen Bass says that's a fake poll. She, you know, relied on it. We'll use it as a rallying cry. We'll see what happens in Los Angeles. Yeah. But just people should know this was an absolute fake poll. Now these people, median strategies, they're hiding. Okay. Because, you know, a lot of reporters are after them. Yeah, that was on news. Nation. There's some polling out there that I find hard to believe. And Sam, can you look this up for me? I didn't actually pull it, but Hasan Piker is suddenly like seven points ahead of Mike Rogers. Literally yesterday, there was polling out there that said that Mike Rogers was leading Hasan Piker. What? So, not Hasan Piker. Abdul El-Sayed. I'm sorry. Do you know what's so funny? They all look the same to Dan Mandus. Six of wine, half a dozen the other. Thank you, Sam, for saying it for everybody. Anyway.

Dan, they don't, they're all morons. Can I just say that? Hasan Piker, Abdul El-Sayed. Yeah, they're all morons. Six and one and a half those, yeah. I tell you what, Dan, if there had not been video of that Geraldo clip, I never would have guessed that was Geraldo. He doesn't sound like Geraldo anymore, to me anyway. What do you mean? I mean, he... You mean, his voice quality or the thing that he says? No, no, he doesn't sound like he used to. I mean, well, the man is 83 years old. Maybe that has something to do with it. Listen. He just totally sounded different. I would never have guessed that was Geraldo. He still got that mustache. Yeah. He still got that mustache. And he still got that. I'm an idiot vibe. Anyway. So, yeah. And he fell for it. And everybody fell for this fake polling. So now we hear that Abdul El-Sayed is leading Mike Rogers in that Senate race by something like seven percentage points. That was part of the news cycle this morning. And I'm sorry, but you know what? You wonder why people don't believe polling data anymore. There's people that are actually now saying that these people with median strategies that they actually may have broken the law. And so we'll talk about that a little bit more, and we'll also talk about what could happen to the, as he said, as Geraldo Rivera said, these bros behind medium strategies, will they face any charges? So the Abdul El-Sayed polling, you know what? Every time I'm saying now, Abdul El-Sayed, I'm going to think about Hasan Piker. It just... And you calling me out, they all look alike and sound alike, according to Mandus. It warranted a text from one Joan Jay Jones. Oh, what did you? Oh, I can imagine what Jay Jones. She's quoting me and laughing at it. Okay, very good. You know, that was actually good. All right. So suddenly yesterday, as the polling showed that Mike Rogers was taking the lead against Abdul El-Sayed, now this morning we wake up and you've got Abdul El-Sayed seven percentage points ahead of... ahead of Mike Rogers. I just, I don't buy it. I don't buy any of this polling. And this is from Susquehanna polling? Susquehanna polling. I think that's how you say it. Susquehanna. It's Susquehanna. I used to work for a radio group called Susquehanna. Yeah, polling and research based out of Pennsylvania. I don't know. Let's see. I mean, and they're, whoever they were targeting say that voters disapproved the job. Trump is doing by a 56 to 38% margin, which is wide. Jay, do you believe any polling? Not, I really take it with a grain of salt. I'm at the point now where, I mean, it just, none of it makes any sense. I mean, when you look at some of the polling that is out there and then the actual election happens and the polling is exactly the opposite of what actually turned out with the election, it's just, you know, shoulders around the ears and it's like, whatever. Yet, you know, people and I don't. I don't.

But I mean, how often do we hear of either fake polling data? We don't really hear fake polling data, but what we do here is polling data that is so out of left field that it might as well be fake. The only difference between media and strategies and some of the other polling companies out there in my estimation is that they came out and they admitted it. Yeah, you know what? We put fake polling out there. You know why? Because we see the media taking polling and just running with it and not asking any questions. And so the media in this case looks really bad because they fell for it, hook, line and sinker. All right. What are people saying we asked on the supertext line, have you ever been polled by a polling company? So you go first. 5354 says the only poll I've ever been associated with is the Daily Dan poll. The Daily Dayn Poll. Thank you, 53, 54. Yeah, 8552 says, I got polled once, but that was in a gay bar. Okay. Jay. Yes. I am looking at literally hundreds of text messages that have come in. That's the one you choose. Of course it is. I like what 3888 had to say. I've been polled in the exit polls, but I lied to them. Strippers get pulled quite often. That's another one here.

Hey, you were conversing with Joan a few minutes ago. Can you ask her to come back early? Jay, I'm totally kidding. Well, hey, these are your listeners, Dan. Don't blame me for their gutter texts. 1139, never been polled in 52 years of living. Yeah, overwhelmingly, though, Dan. A lot of people have never been polled, but it's not for lack of trying. Yeah, well, most of them say that... Now you got me going, Jay. Most of them say that they've never been, you know, heard from the pollster. The ones that are saying they have, most of them are saying it's when they had a landline phone. they would get a polly, you know, a pollster calling. Yeah. But I'm getting a lot of, now, these days I'm getting a lot of, like, obviously, I think we're all dealing with the fake phone calls that want to give me some sort of a loan. Yeah, that or the texts that just come out of nowhere. Or the text that just come out of nowhere. Yeah, like, hey, Bill, going to want to meet for cigars after work? You know, just. Have you noticed now they've changed tact, just real quick, and then we'll move on. But. Have you noticed, Jay, that when they call and they leave a message, they've changed tact a little bit where they pretend that they're in mid-sentence talking to someone else. And then they say, oh, hi, we'd like to offer you a 4.9, whatever it is. And it's like, I'm not falling for this. I would dare submit. I don't know if anybody who does fall for, I mean, somebody must fall for those spam calls because they keep going. Yeah, they keep going on them, right. How was that, by the way, how is that and spam mail into your mail? How is that not illegal somehow? Like, how are we not cracked down on that? I don't know, but Bill says that Jay Harper is his new hero. Jason says the only poll that matters is the one at deja vu. Is that still around? I guess they moved it. Yeah. How do you not know this, Jay? No, I mean, I don't keep up on the on these stripper joints, Dan. Really? Because some of the stuff you come up with, apparently some of the stuff you come up with, I would picture you as a guy that knows exactly where all the stripper joints are. 2065, there was polling and broke back mountain. Okay. So anyway, this tremendously backfired on the host. So we're going to go 624. You're saying the pole backfired? Yes, that's exactly what I said. It was raining cats and dogs and probably some hamsters too when we were driving in. And people are letting us know that lightning definitely is still out there as well. So we've got a lot of accidents. So just keep us slow, plenty of extra time if you're heading out to work this morning. And keep it here on Super Talk 997. Looking at radar, it does look like the... Kind of the back end of this system this morning is in the Clarksville area, but as the weather forecast has been saying, we'll get a little break later this morning, but if we look further west, there's more coming this afternoon. All right.

And we'll keep you updated. Super Talk, 997. Hans von Spakovsky is joining us on the newsmaker hotline. Hans, always great to have you on. I wanted to have you on. Of course, you are my expert in so many things, but one of them, of course, is constitutionally. A little bit of a wrinkle, though. You and I, Hans, have been talking about the constitutionality of flock cameras, of course, at the federal level, and will this end up at the Supreme Court? But, you know, here in Tennessee, we've got a big conversation going on about flock cameras. So now the question has come up as to whether or not flak cameras will pass constitutional muster here in the state of Tennessee, specifically. The Tennessee Constitution Article 1, Section 7, it says this, Hans, that the people shall be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and possessions from unreasonable searches and seizures. So my question is, Hans, does that, when it says our possession, does that apply to our vehicles? And what does that mean constitutionally for the state of Tennessee? Yeah, and that provision continues prohibiting what are called General Warrants, which is what this is all about. And folks who don't know what that means, look, when we were still a colony, the King of England issued what they called General Warrants, which gave his legal authorities the ability to go search you, search your home, search your office. not because they had evidence of a crime already, but because they were looking for evidence of a crime. And so the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and state constitutions like the Tennessee Constitution prohibit that. They specifically say, you can't be searched unless... legal authorities have probable cause to believe that you have committed a crime. They then have to go to a court. They've got to get a search warrant. And that search warrant has to be very specific. You know, it has to say, for example, what they are looking for when they go into your home. So far, all across the country in the... Mike Drop, hosted by former Navy SEAL Mike Ridland. How would you characterize your prowess? I'd say my style is that I just kind of outwork everybody until I get there because I'm not a quitter. It's just you. And that's yourself. Everything else is team-oriented. The motivation, it was a sort of anger at myself for being weak. That ends up being the driving factor. That anger, that pride, that ego, I think it's a muscle. It gets stronger. When you take that voice seriously, you start to change your life. Mike Drop, follow and listen on your favorite platform. Multiple cases that have been filed about the flock camera systems, no court has said that it violates either the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution or state constitutional provisions like this. Now, it's like they're slowly working towards that, Dan. In 2012, in a case called US Jay Jones, they said...

And this is all, you know, it's like modern technology, finally, they're bringing the Constitution to bear. So in 2012, they said the cops can't attach a GPS tracking device to your car unless they get a warrant under the Fourth Amendment, because that's a violation if they do without it. Just this past term, you know, which ended on June 30th. they did the same ruling with what are called geo fence searches in other words in that particular case there was a bank robbery and so the cops went to Google and said we want the names of everybody whose cell phone was close to this bank at the time it was robbed. And what the Supreme Court said was, you can't do that without getting a search warrant. But so far, they haven't ruled that with flock cameras. Probably the closest case that really goes into this issue was a case in actually state court in Virginia, in which the court said, No, the license plate tracking system didn't violate either the state constitution or the federal constitution. Why? Because it didn't continuously monitor people. You know, the cameras were just set at particular points, and the state can't retain the information for more than 21 days, and there's all kinds of other limits on it. the courts have upheld it. I have a question talking about Article 1, Section 7, Tennessee Constitution. Again, for people just joining us, that the people shall be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and possessions from unreasonable searches and seizures. Now, when it talks about unreasonable searches and seizures, does that meaning include... tracking us where we go and being able to predict our every move based on that tracking. Do they see that as a search or a seizure? I think the courts might if it was continuous. And I think that's where at some point in the future, we may cross the line and have courts say that a tracking system is a violation of that. Remember, what I just said about that Virginia, a court of appeals decision. They pointed out that this wasn't continuous tracking of a vehicle. It was just set at certain points along the highway. They didn't retain the data. I think if you had a situation where a state set up... really a comprehensive camera system and they retain the data so that at any time, for example, police could just go into that system and say, what was Dan Mandus doing on this particular day and they could track you everywhere you're going? Then I think they would find a violation of law. That is the kind of system. You may know this that they have in London. London has set up.

cameras everywhere so they can track you wherever you go. That, I think, there's no system like that yet set up anywhere in the U.S. And I think if a city tried to do that, that the courts would find is a problem. Talking about the constitutionality of flock cameras here in the state of Tennessee. Now, Hans, one of the things that is in the news this morning is that in response to some of the criticisms that have been out there, flock, who insists that they are doing nothing wrong has now cut their data retention from 30 days to seven. The ACLU says that's all fine well and good, but the central issue remains. Who gets to search people's movements in the first place? Is that how you see it as well? Yeah, look, I don't often agree with the ACLU. Yeah, I know me either. I tend to agree with them on that. And again, the Virginia Court of Appeals, one of the key factors in them saying that Norfolk, the city of Norfolk's flock camera system did not violate the Fourth Amendment requirements of getting a search warrant was that they had under state law. They had a strict 21-21-day retention cap. After 21 days, the state authorities, legal authorities, they have to basically delete the data they've got on these camera pictures. So that was a key part of it. Flock, I'm sure, has done this, reduced it to seven-day retention specifically to avoid. giving any ammunition to folks who are suing over the taking these cameras. Keep in mind. that all of this is balanced by the fact that there have been numerous cases that have said that you don't have an expectation of privacy in public. In other words, look, if I'm walking down the street in a particular town and some tourist takes my photo, I don't have a right to sue that tourist for taking my photo. I mean, that's been a long established principle. The problem with flock cameras is... Well, take that same tourist. If instead he's just taking one picture of you, what if he's stalking you and taking pictures of you everywhere your go? That's when it kind of probably bleeds over into being a violation. Well, and they can figure out pattern. And Hans, they can figure out patterns in your life too, where it's like, okay, so this is where Mandus is going to go.

Every day, because most people, they go along the same route. They do oftentimes the same things every day. So do you think, final question here, Hans, so where do you think this whole thing is going to go? I mean, flock cameras and these types of cameras and this type of technology is only going to get better. So where do you think this is going to go from a state of Tennessee? I know that you got your law degree here in Nashville at Vanderbilt. That's right. So, I mean, where do you think this whole thing is going to go in Tennessee and the Supreme Court? Do you have any predictions? I think what's going to – I think that as long as – as long as state laws limit the use of the data it's not continuous cameras everywhere they're only in fixed locations they have limits on the data retention etc probably the courts are going to say it's okay the key to this is going to be state legislators basically putting in very strict laws on the use of the data uh... the retention of it and putting in auditate to make sure that the private companies doing this are complying with those kind of legal, legal restraints on them. Well, and our own state legislature has said on this show that they will be taking a look at this in their next legislative session. And with that, I'll let you go. But Hans, always great to have you on and very much appreciate it. Sure. Thanks for having me. All righty. Hans von Spakovsky, 650, Super Talk, 997. Uh, WTN, is it just me or is Sophie Cunningham really, and I've got some video, uh, becoming a national treasure. I mean, Jay, you and I have talked about it. You were, you were of course born with the sports gene, as was Sam. So there is video of, um, and I meant to play this yesterday. So if you've seen it, I apologize. But, uh, there's video of Sophie and, uh, it's before a game. And you have all of these basketball players in, as the Star Spangled Banner plays, she's the only one with her right hand on her heart. No one else, I don't know how many girls there are out there, but there's a lot. No one else has their right hand over their heart. singing the national anthem, and not even Caitlin Clark has her hand over her, her right hand over her heart. I'm surprised they still sing the anthem at WNBA game. Man, that's a great point, Jay. Actually, that's a really good point. Apparently the Atlanta team, if I'm reading the text, the tweets correctly, didn't even bother to come out until after the anthem. But I don't know. So Sophie Cunningham, the only one to have her right hand over her heart during the national anthem. You got to love Sophie Clark. Cunningham. You got to love Sophie Cunningham. The irony is just so grand. You know, this is the freest nation in the world. This is, especially for women, women have arguably the most rights in the United States. If you want to debate about the right to terminate a, you know, a human life inside you, that's a different conversation for another day.

to mock that, to basically spit in the face of that and all who've died to give that to you, is despicable and deplorable. And it really makes me want Caitlin and Sophie to take their much more respectful and talented butts overseas to play in Europe so that the WNBA collapses. I would love nothing more. By the way, did you hear what the absolute latest is on the WNBA? Oh, it is, as Matt Murphy would say, delicious. And I'm going to talk about that coming up. It is 652. Got a lot of other things coming up as well. By the way, Hans von Spikovsky, he mentioned London. And London is going to be calling here in a little bit because Matthew Hurt at 735, he is going to be calling in from London as a matter of fact. And so I'm going to ask him what Londoners think about the cameras there. There was an intentional clash reference, right? Yes, it was an intentional. Thank you for stating the obvious. Yes, it was a clash reference. And so we'll ask him what Londoners feel about being watched all the time because I'd be willing to bet that it's a slippery slope. Well, like they complained about it at first and then they probably, you know, decided, eh, whatever. And there's, I'm so surprised. There's so many people that say, well, if you're not doing anything wrong, I mean. Do not worry about being stalked. Do not worry about somebody, if you've got a neighbor, if you've got an enemy at work, whatever, and they've got access to this information? And they can stalk your every move. Start your day with the morning jolt of Drake Toll. Anywhere in the country. Your home for talking sports. The United States hockey team has four teeth left. What is LeBron James Legacy? Leonel Mess. 906 career goals is stupid. All of it. The Knicks. The Los Angeles Lakers. Aaron Rogers. Georgia football players. The Dolphins. The Mets. As it happened, when it happened. We'll talk all of it. Westwood One Sports Talk. Your home for Drake Toll follow. and listen on your favorite platform.