Up Next

Charlie Kirk Shot Dead in Utah: How Conservative Activist's Journey From High School Dreamer to MAGA Martyr Unfolded

Charlie Kirk Shot Dead in Utah: How Conservative Activist's Journey From High School Dreamer to MAGA Martyr Unfolded

29:47

Donald Trump Jr. on the Most Amazing Political Comeback in American History and Why Exile Made Them Stronger

Donald Trump Jr. on the Most Amazing Political Comeback in American History and Why Exile Made Them Stronger

22:56

Charlie Kirk Reveals Why Trump's 2024 Electoral Map Is Better Than 2016 and 2020 Combined

Charlie Kirk Reveals Why Trump's 2024 Electoral Map Is Better Than 2016 and 2020 Combined

33:20

Charlie Kirk's Personnel Argument for Trump Gets Unexpected Agreement from the Left on Cabinet Influence

Categories: Liberal Opinions
October 1, 2024

Charlie Kirk makes an argument that catches attention across the political spectrum: voting for president means voting for 5,000 people who will run the government. Kirk points to Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Tulsi Gabbard, and Elon Musk as part of what he calls "The Avengers team" that would staff a Trump administration, focusing on agencies like the FDA, CDC, and NIH. His pitch acknowledges that some voters find Trump personally repulsive, so he's reframing the election around personnel rather than personality. The argument resonates even with critics who note that presidential votes determine not just one person but thousands of appointments across regulatory agencies and federal courts, though they question whether figures like Kennedy, known for anti-vaccine positions, should lead health organizations.

The Horseshoe Theory in Action

Charlie Kirk presents an argument for Donald Trump that manages to find agreement in unexpected places. The Turning Point USA founder acknowledges a fundamental truth about presidential elections that transcends typical partisan talking points: when you vote for president, you're voting for approximately 5,000 people who will staff and run the government.

Kirk's argument represents a strategic shift, particularly when addressing younger voters who may find Trump personally off-putting. Rather than defending Trump's personality or specific statements, Kirk reframes the election as a choice between two competing teams of government personnel.

The "Avengers Team" Pitch

Kirk highlights what he calls an "Avengers team" that would potentially staff a Trump administration. This team includes Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who Kirk suggests would influence appointments at the FDA, CDC, and NIH. He also points to Tulsi Gabbard, noting her former position as co-chair of the DNC just years ago, and Elon Musk, described as the world's wealthiest man and a freethinker who previously supported Obama.

The Turning Point USA founder argues this represents an opportunity to replace what he characterizes as "an unelected oligarchy" making decisions on health, border policy, and war. He specifically mentions removing "Anthony Fauci and all of your minions" from the FDA and other agencies.

Personnel as Policy

Kirk emphasizes that these 5,000 positions span everything from the Department of Defense to border agencies. He criticizes media coverage for trying to personalize the election around individual Trump statements rather than focusing on the broader team that would govern.

For Arizona specifically, Kirk frames the state's electoral votes as particularly significant in determining who controls these thousands of government positions. His pitch represents Turning Point USA's role in get-out-the-vote operations for Trump, despite the organization's previous challenges in Arizona where Kari Lake lost significantly among the younger demographics Kirk claims to represent.

The Accuracy of the Argument

The fundamental premise holds true: presidential elections determine far more than a single individual. The winning candidate appoints personnel across regulatory agencies and federal judicial positions. The number may actually exceed 5,000 appointments when counting all positions influenced by a presidential administration.

However, questions arise about the specific personnel Kirk highlights. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. brings anti-vaccine positions and limited management experience to potential health leadership roles. The irony of fighting "oligarchs" while featuring one of the world's richest individuals remains apparent. Tulsi Gabbard's specific role in this proposed administration remains undefined.

Political Strategy Questions

The effectiveness of this argument faces scrutiny as a political strategy for Republicans. Unlike Democratic voters who typically care deeply about functional government and bureaucratic appointments, Republican voters often express desire to reduce or eliminate government functions. In Stephen Bannon's words, the goal is to "destroy the administrative state."

This creates a paradox in Kirk's pitch. Arguing that voters should care about which bureaucrats fill government positions works better when your base wants those positions to function effectively, not when they want them eliminated or reduced to ineffectiveness.

Additionally, Trump's appeal has always centered on cult of personality. Telling supporters the election isn't about his personality contradicts the fundamental nature of his political movement. Republican voters aren't nostalgic for specific appointees from Trump's first term like Betsy DeVos or Scott Pruitt.

Competing Visions of 5,000

The argument cuts both ways. Voters must consider which 5,000 people they prefer, but also which constituencies will influence those appointments. Without Bernie Sanders, the National Labor Relations Board likely wouldn't pursue current labor enforcement priorities. Without Elizabeth Warren, antitrust enforcement under figures like Lina Khan wouldn't exist.

The comparison extends to foreign policy. Kennedy criticizes billions in aid to Ukraine while defending similar spending for Israel's military operations. Gabbard, with her background in psychological operations, represents another piece of this proposed foreign policy team.

Why This Argument Emerges Now

Kirk's pivot to personnel over personality suggests underlying concerns. When a campaign known for personality-driven politics starts emphasizing bureaucratic appointments instead, it indicates potential weakness in the standard approach.

The argument works better in theory than practice for Republican audiences, yet Kirk deploys it anyway. This suggests challenges in making the traditional case for Trump to younger voters and others who may be skeptical of his personal conduct and statements.

Comments

Be the first to comment on this video.

Video Transcript

[00:00] it is rare that we find ourselves

[00:02] agreeing with Charlie Kirk this is I

[00:04] guess like this is like what the

[00:06] Horseshoe theory is right um this I do

[00:10] not want to meet Charlie at the end of

[00:11] the Horseshoe this is what the Horseshoe

[00:13] theory

[00:14] is this is

[00:16] where and and Charlie Kirk is is an

[00:18] intriguing figure to me because

[00:22] understand Charlie Kirk had I think his

[00:26] outfit turning points USA had one of the

[00:28] primary responsibilities

[00:30] to drive the youth vote in Arizona I

[00:33] mean like he dedicated his show his

[00:37] organization to making sure that Cary

[00:39] Lake wins in Arizona and not only did

[00:42] Cary Lake not lose I mean win in

[00:46] Arizona

[00:48] um she

[00:50] lost most extremely with the age

[00:53] demographic that Charlie uh Kirk

[00:55] supposedly speaks to uh now they're

[00:58] giving him another bite at the

[01:01] apple and turning points USA has a big

[01:04] part in the get out the vote operation

[01:07] for Donald Trump I just want everybody

[01:09] REM remember that if Donald Trump

[01:11] wins Charlie Kirk's vote get out the

[01:14] vote operation we're gonna see a lot of

[01:16] Charlie Kirk although like just from a

[01:18] temporal kind of point of view does his

[01:21] ability to speak to younger people kind

[01:23] of disintegrate as as long as the

[01:26] funders are old

[01:28] enough to to see uh Charlie Kirk tell

[01:32] them like you know what like as long as

[01:34] he can go in and go like Tik Tock is

[01:35] really uh communist no Tik Tok is super

[01:39] important uh for us to have a presence

[01:41] there I mean it's all the same

[01:43] but all this

[01:45] said uh Charlie Kirk realizes that with

[01:49] at least one cohort that he's addressing

[01:51] here I assume it's younger people that

[01:53] they find Donald Trump sort of

[01:56] repulsive and um and so

[02:02] he has to find another angle in which to

[02:05] uh support them and I think he hits on

[02:07] something that I think is absolutely

[02:09] accurate here in fact we've made the

[02:11] same

[02:14] argument this is where the horse Theory

[02:16] comes in and here he is for Trump you're

[02:19] voting for 5,000 people that will run

[02:21] your government do you think that Donald

[02:23] Trump will assemble 5,000 better people

[02:25] more in line with your worldview maybe

[02:26] not perfect or kamla Harris that's

[02:28] what's on the ticket it is a team of

[02:31] 5,000 people and that goes from

[02:33] everything from the Department of

[02:34] Defense to the border to all these

[02:36] issues and I they want to try to

[02:39] personalize this election in the media

[02:41] they want to try to make you feel

[02:42] emotional about something Trump said or

[02:44] did not say but we will win if we can

[02:47] rise above that and say Hey you have

[02:49] Bobby Kennedy involved in a presidential

[02:51] transition team of who's going to be at

[02:53] the FDA the CDC the NIH I

[02:57] mean that's a game changer this is the

[02:59] The Avengers team Tulsi gabard Tulsi is

[03:02] the former co-chair of the DNC just a

[03:05] couple years ago you got Elon Musk who

[03:07] is the world's wealthiest man and is a

[03:09] freethinker and used to be an Obama

[03:11] supporter of course Bobby Kennedy and I

[03:12] think it's really something for those of

[03:14] us that can see what's really going on

[03:16] in the country Beyond just the media

[03:18] news cycle and the chatter on cable TV

[03:20] we know that we are at risk of losing

[03:22] our country because there's an unelected

[03:25] oligarchy that is making decisions for

[03:27] health for border for war and and this

[03:30] is our opportunity our framers gave us

[03:32] this especially here in Arizona because

[03:35] this these electoral votes are going to

[03:36] matter a lot are going to say Hey you

[03:39] could take back those 5,000 positions

[03:42] you can all of a sudden say no Anthony

[03:43] fouchy all of your minions are gone in

[03:45] the FDA they're

[03:47] gone

[03:49] okay so I agree I actually think it

[03:52] actually is probably even like a little

[03:53] more than 5,000 uh to be honest with you

[03:56] but nevertheless the point remains he is

[03:59] right

[04:00] you are

[04:01] not voting for just an

[04:04] individual uh to be president you're

[04:06] voting for all of the Personnel that

[04:09] will

[04:10] fill Regulatory

[04:13] Agencies I mean

[04:15] frankly Federal uh judicial spots yeah

[04:20] um you're voting for all of that now

[04:24] maybe you want someone who is

[04:25] fundamentally antivaxx in charge of all

[04:28] these uh uh you know know organizations

[04:31] somebody who hasn't I mean I know

[04:32] Bobby's

[04:34] expertise he has not

[04:36] managed as far as I can tell anything

[04:40] and I know I mean I know his what his

[04:41] role was on the River Keeper and this

[04:43] and that um I know I mean I know what

[04:47] he's done he's not a manager I don't

[04:49] know what Tulsa gabd is goingon to be in

[04:50] charge of on The Avengers team um it's

[04:54] going to be hard to deal with the

[04:56] oligarchs when you have one of the

[04:58] richest human beings

[05:01] alive in charge of whatever he's going

[05:03] to be in charge with and then another

[05:04] billionaire incidentally that's what

[05:07] oligarchs

[05:08] are just in case well okay so is this

[05:12] true it's 100% true um is it good

[05:15] politics to emphasize this no does it

[05:17] mean I think they're worried yes because

[05:21] they want to argue first of all it's Le

[05:24] a less salian argument with Republicans

[05:25] than it is with Democrats because they

[05:27] don't give a if there's about the

[05:29] government so they don't care about who

[05:31] the bureaucrats are because they don't

[05:32] want government to function those

[05:34] bureaucrats are being put in to in the

[05:37] words of Steve

[05:39] Bannon destroy the administrative State

[05:42] yes so they don't so in terms of like

[05:45] appealing to saying like we'll have our

[05:47] people in there to destroy the

[05:49] administrative state it it matters much

[05:51] less than Democrats arguing well we've

[05:54] got to elect Biden in this instance to

[05:57] make sure that you don't get those

[05:58] people in there who will destroy the

[06:00] administrative state it doesn't work as

[06:01] well in the reverse I think but also it

[06:03] means you're losing because you can't

[06:06] make the case that like you got to vote

[06:08] for Trump because remember how good

[06:09] things were under Betsy DeVos or like

[06:12] you got to vote for Trump we need Scott

[06:14] puit back in the EPA the Republican

[06:16] voter base does not give a crap

[06:18] especially because Trump is a cult of

[06:20] personality so when you say it's not

[06:22] about his personality what are you

[06:24] talking about anymore it's so it's a bad

[06:27] argument like for us it's a good

[06:29] argument but that's why we're not

[06:32] Republicans I I think you could it's

[06:34] also just as easy as to say like do

[06:37] which crew of people do you want which

[06:39] 5,000 do you want and it's not just that

[06:41] 5,000 incidentally it's also the

[06:44] constituencies that will be

[06:46] voting and influencing who those 5,000

[06:50] are I mean if there's no Bernie Sanders

[06:55] I don't think we have the uh labor

[06:58] enforcement and the labor rulings that

[07:00] we're getting from the National Labor

[07:01] Relations Board I don't think there's

[07:02] really any chance you don't have War's

[07:04] no Warren you don't have the antitrust

[07:07] you don't have uh caner or

[07:12] con uh this is

[07:16] like he's accurate he it's

[07:19] accurate you can get like his supposed

[07:22] Avengers like U Misfit

[07:25] Adventures who all share you know like I

[07:28] was watching uh Kennedy uh a clip where

[07:32] he was bemoaning the fact that um uh the

[07:35] Democrats are funding uh billions of

[07:37] dollars to uh

[07:38] Ukraine which incidentally is fighting a

[07:41] country that's invading

[07:43] them but he has

[07:45] absolutely less than no problem with the

[07:48] billions of dollars going to Israel to

[07:50] invade other countries to occupy other

[07:52] people to blow up with 10 2,000lb bombs

[07:56] uh children

[07:58] women Civ ions no problem whatsoever uh

[08:02] that's the anti-war candidate

[08:04] incidentally uh Tulsi gabri also

[08:07] similarly situated is she in

[08:09] psychological

[08:11] operations um isn't that her kind of her

[08:14] that's her division right all right we

[08:17] gotta go oh geez uh all right I'm sorry

[08:22] folks my my time management these days

[08:24] are not good um all right 10 10 of these

[08:29] uh uh Pier baren hearings we're down to

[08:32] a single Highwayman resat in pass Chau

[08:36] far poor favore I don't know what any of

[08:39] that means oh the highway man he's

[08:40] talking about Chris Christophers CHR

[08:41] Chris Christopherson um he's saying rest

[08:44] in peace in Italian ah okay that's uh

[08:47] Willie Nelson is the only one remaining

[08:49] Johnny yeah uh Johnny Cash gone but I uh

[08:52] the highway man's a who was the fourth

[08:54] guy in that then Merl Haggard and

[08:59] man great song in and of itself I don't

[09:01] know

[09:02] if Sam regarding your remarks on the

[09:05] right-wing crime narrative are you

[09:07] calling tyt right-wing well I'm talking

[09:10] the specific like the people that I'm

[09:12] saying are right-wing are like what was

[09:14] the name of that guy social justice

[09:16] Warrior guy that we had on actual

[09:19] Justice Warrior or actual Justice

[09:20] Warrior or you know Tim P or Ruben or

[09:25] you know Charlie Kirk or Rogan or I mean

[09:30] this is a right-wing talking point

[09:32] without a doubt

[09:34] um just because you repeat a right-wing

[09:37] talking point and pursue it over and

[09:40] over again does not make you necessarily

[09:47] rightwing

[09:50] okay uh the devil's region by the way

[09:52] why in hell is Lou dejoy still a

[09:54] Postmaster General that is a good

[09:55] question it's also I mean what's the

[09:58] status of his uh appointing of was it

[10:00] Val demings that he wanted to appoint on

[10:03] the

[10:03] board um because they still have an

[10:06] empty board seat that you need like that

[10:08] to vacate to Joy but it's ridiculous I

[10:11] had to send out like my you know stuff

[10:13] like my save the dates for my wedding uh

[10:15] the PO the amount postage is more

[10:17] expensive than I've seen in in quite a

[10:21] while I'm shocked to see that but it's

[10:23] and I would not be still a deal yeah

[10:24] it's still a deal but I'm not trust me

[10:26] I'm not disparaging the postal service

[10:28] but it do does does seem like the joys

[10:31] uh well you know you got to buy a lot of

[10:34] forever stamps that's why they that's

[10:36] why you do it that's what I did I'm

[10:38] still living off of forever stamps I

[10:40] bought five years ago way to flex on on

[10:43] me hey folks don't forget to hit the

[10:45] Subscribe button and check out our daily

[10:47] show we do it every day at 12:00 p.m.

[10:50] Eastern for about 2 and 1 half hours we

[10:52] even take phone calls you should check

[10:54] that out

Link copied to clipboard!