Dave Smith Talked About Me On A Podcast: My Response

Added: 2026-05-24

[00:00:00]A clip comes across my feed yesterday.

[00:00:02]People were tagging me in it. This was be from before the Thomas Massie primary campaign uh before the election on Tuesday in which uh Dave Smith was taking some issue with my political analysis and my predictions. He was sitting with the reactionary commentator Nick Fuentes and Dave said that uh he he was really eager to see what my reaction would be if my prediction turned out to be incorrect.

[00:00:31]>> Then the betting markets start like ch clearly people are putting money in and influencing this. So, Michael Nolles over at the the Daily Wire, who I you know, I don't dislike Michael Nolles, but uh his take on this was he goes, "Man, if Thomas Massie loses, this just shows the iron grip that Donald Trump has on the Republican party."

[00:00:48]>> Oh, brother.

[00:00:49]>> And you're like, "Dude, dude." I mean, I think it shows the iron grip that the Israel lobby has if they like that might be a slightly more accurate take. But then I also go um and I'll be interested because I think Thomas Massie is going to win. I think it's close, but I think he's going to pull this off. Um, I wonder what Michael Null's reaction to that will be.

[00:01:08]>> So, if it if it proves that Trump has an iron grip when Massie falls out, what about when Thomas Massie wins and survives $20 million being pumped into his district? What would what would that uh suggest?

[00:01:20]>> I wonder what Michael Nolles what his reaction will be when his prediction proves incorrect. You see Nick Fuentes there. He says, "Oh, yes. Yeah. Mhm.

[00:01:28]Yeah, that's right. I wonder I wonder what my reaction would have been had I been wrong. I guess we'll never know because my prediction was totally correct. Right now, go to ground.news/nolles.

[00:01:44]If you are watching this, you already know that free speech is under attack across the West. European governments are openly censoring content online.

[00:01:50]Most of the mainstream media barely want to talk about it. Well, there is a solution. Ground News is a website and app that pulls in thousands of news stories from around the world every day, organizes them by story, shows you the bias, reliability, and ownership of every source. Here's a story that maybe you haven't heard of, unless you've been listening to me. The Trump administration is building freedom.gov.

[00:02:09]It's a portal designed to bypass digital content bans across the globe. US is making free speech a foreign policy priority. Yet, over 85 outlets covered it with 45% of coverage from the right versus just 19% from the left. Go figure. When you compare the headlines, the framing is very revealing. Gizmodo, which is a leftwing outlet, describes it as enabling Europeans to bypass bans on hate speech. Welt, which is a right-leaning outlet, calls it digital freedom against the EU censorship. So, you're getting the framing on both sides. Really, really cool website. Go to ground.news/nolles right now. Or scan the QR code for 40% off the Vantage plan. It's five bucks a month. So, give it a shot and stay better informed. And here Dave says, he goes, you know, look, I think it's going to be close. It wasn't even close. It wasn't close. was a nine-point swing.

[00:02:52]So, that was that was the first bit. I found that very delightful. And I appreciate that Dave says he goes, "Look, I don't dislike Michael Nolles and I feel exactly the same way."

[00:02:59]Actually, I'm I want to get Dave on one of the barfight shows cuz he'd be a good figure for the show. I would be the conservative. Dave is a libertarian, then we get some left-winger. I think that's a pretty good lineup because everybody could kind of disagree, but sometimes would agree with each other.

[00:03:13]So anyway, I I I'm uh grateful for Dave's statement there and I I look forward to uh you know, seeing him on a bar fight show or something. But but what about the first part where you say, "Okay, well maybe Michael was totally right in his prediction. Maybe Dave was wrong in his prediction." But Dave and Nick Fuentes both take issue with my analysis. My analysis was part of my prediction I said was if if Massie goes down, this will be evidence that Trump has an ironclad grip on the Republican party. And the two of them, they say, "Oh, brother, here we go." No, it doesn't show. That's not what it will chiefly show. What's going to show is that the pro-Israel lobby has an ironclad grip on the Republican party.

[00:03:52]That will be the chief takeaway if Massie goes down. But I don't think Massie is going to go down. Yeah. No, I don't think he's going to go down. No, he'll win. It'll be close. Whatever.

[00:04:00]Okay. So, I want to point out I was also completely correct in my political analysis of the of the broader context here. And let's be totally clear about it. I am not denying in the least that pro-Israel donors wanted to take Massie out. I'm not denying that at all. It's a little complicated because Massiey's biggest individual backer was ardently pro-Israel. That's a slight confounding factor, but it's true. Apac wanted to take Massie out. The pro-Israel donors really wanted to take Massie out. But that was not the chief takeaway. And my proof of this is all of the other races, all of the other primaries that Trump intervened in. You can say the Israel issue was a big factor in the Massie race. How do you explain Brad Raffensburgger in Georgia? Israel didn't play a single role in that election.

[00:04:49]That primary race was about Raffensburgger's reaction to the 2020 presidential election. How do you explain Bill Cassid's Senate primary?

[00:04:58]Bill Cassidy's Senate primary had nothing whatsoever to do with Israel.

[00:05:02]He just irritated Trump by turning against him. Turning against him on the issue of impeachment. How do you explain the five Indiana state legislators who went down in their primary campaigns in all the races that Trump intervened in?

[00:05:16]That issue wasn't about Israel. That was about redistricting because they turned on Trump on redistricting.

[00:05:22]My point is not that the pro-Israel donors didn't want to take Massie out.

[00:05:25]My point is that the chief takeaway of Massie going down alongside Raffensburgger and Cassidy and the Indiana legislature all at the same time is that the only common thread there, it wasn't Israel, it wasn't the 2020 election, it wasn't impeachment, it wasn't redistricting, those were individual issues. The only common thread to them all going down at the same time is that Trump turned on them and told voters not to vote for them.

[00:05:52]And so if we're trying to find the common thread, the chief cause of their going down, the only conclusion that we can draw is that it was Trump having an ironclad grip on the Republican party despite the predictions and prognostications of podcasters who keep being proven wrong. That's my point.

[00:06:11]I'll go even further in the Massie race.

[00:06:13]There there are a number of Republican congressmen who don't like Israel, who have voted to defund Israel, who are still in their seats. I'm sure Apac would love to take them out, too. The deciding factor is Trump hadn't turned on them.

[00:06:27]That's that's where I get my political observation from. I'd go even further.

[00:06:32]The last point I'll make on Massie is had Massie played nicely with Trump, had Massie voted for the big beautiful bill, had Massie not started ping around with Roana, an un anxious Democrat, Trump very likely would not have turned on him. And even if you had the pro-Israel donors trying to take him out, my point is that wouldn't have mattered because the decisive factor was Trump. Now, once again, as I'm I pointed this out in the Massie race, you can say it's good that Massie opposed the GOP.

[00:06:59]You can say it's good that Massie opposed Trump. You can say you like Massie more than Trump or the Republicans. You can say any of those things. I'm not You can say you want to be a libertarian instead of a conservative. I'm not making any comment on that in this context. All I'm saying is if you if you want to understand what's going on in politics and if you want to be able to be more likely to make accurate political predictions, you have to understand the underlying structures, how party politics actually works. And the fact that you know, look, you know how much I hate to say I told you so, but the fact that my observations and predictions have this habit of uh being proven correct. Now look, not all none of us is omnisient, but the fact that there is pattern recognition here and they do keep uh playing out in reality that would seem to suggest that that analysis on what's going on in politics is the more accurate one. That's and you know, I hate to say I told you so, but who knows? Maybe David, very nice comments there. Maybe we can hash it out in a bar fight. I hope I hope in the future.

[00:08:02]Okay, there's a great clip. Now stop.

[00:08:04]Stop. Stop. Stop.

[00:08:09]You with me? Are we here together? It's just me and you, right? Close the door.

[00:08:15]Close the windows. Close the door. Lean in.

[00:08:20]Subscribe.