Return to Transcripts main page

Smerconish

U.S. Barreling Toward "Seinfeld" Shutdown; Deptula: Budget Chaos Poses Threat To U.S. Security; Op-Ed: A.I. Girlfriends "Ruining an Entire Generation of Men"; Newsom in National Spotlight. Aired 9- 10a ET

Aired September 30, 2023 - 09:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:00:26]

MICHAEL SMERCONISH, CNN ANCHOR: It's a Seinfeld shutdown. I'm Michael Smerconish in Philadelphia. When we've been at this impasse before, it was for understandable reasons. In the mid-90s, it was about spending cuts in the Clinton years.

In 2013, the issue was bipartisan disagreement over the Affordable Care Act on President Obama's watch. In 2018, the issue was President Trump's desire to build a wall on the Mexican border. But this time, Michael Strain, Director of Economic Policy Studies at the American Enterprise Institute, has started to refer to the impasse as the Seinfeld shutdown. It dates back to George's pitch to TV executives.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think I can sum up the show for you with one word, nothing.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Nothing?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What does that mean?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The show is about nothing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: And indeed, like the series, it is a shutdown about nothing to which I would add nothing except polarization and intransigence. We'll get to the impact that it all has on the military in just a moment. Also on today's program, police say an online influencer live-streamed the widespread looting in Philadelphia this week and encouraged the targeting of specific stores. I'll discuss the thorny issue of whether law enforcement should be allowed to monitor social media to thwart such crimes. Or does that violate privacy rights?

As a matter of fact, it's the inspiration for today's poll question@smirkanish.com. Go there. Answer this. Is it appropriate for law enforcement to monitor social media to prevent and solve crimes? Also on today's program is the biggest peril of artificial

intelligence the trend of AI girlfriends on America's young men. They're already in a crisis of loneliness. And now that they can just program a fake ideal companion, will they ever learn to find a real one?

Plus, considering California Governor Gavin Newsom isn't a candidate for anything, he's having quite a moment in the spotlight. He was the Democratic spin doctor at the GOP debate this week. He announced he'll be taking on Ron DeSantis head-to-head in a debate of their own on Fox News. And now, after the death of Senator Diane Feinstein, he has the tricky position of naming her temporary successor when three of his state's representatives are already trying to win the seat in 2024.

But first, the current congressional impasse doesn't just threaten people's paychecks and government function, but also America's military capability and national security. That's what my next guest, retired Air Force Lieutenant General David Deptula, warns in a recent piece in Forbes under the heading Congressional budget dysfunction poses a threat to U.S. security, in which he argues this. "The failure of the 118th Congress to sufficiently fund the requirements of the U.S. Military may have a higher likelihood of undermining our security than China does."

Lieutenant General David Deptula joins me now. He was the Air Force's first Deputy chief of Intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. He's a fighter pilot with more than 3,000 flying hours. He was the principal attack planner for Operation Desert Storm's air campaign. Commander of no-fly operations over Iraq in the 90s and served on two congressional commissions focused on America's future defense strategy. These days, he's the dean of the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies.

General, welcome back. What worries you most?

DAVID DEPTULA, U.S. Air Force (Ret.): Well, Michael, first I think it's important for Americans to understand that with a government shutdown or even with a continuing resolution, the military is going to lose critical new initiatives to deal with the array of threats that are facing America. And the reason is simple. A continuing resolution essentially freezes spending to last year's appropriations and it doesn't allow new military programs to go into effect.

So you're not going to see any new tracking satellites in space to counter hostile hypersonic missile launches. There won't be any new agile combat employment equipment to counter the Chinese and the Pacific. There won't be any new drones to replace our aging and geriatric air force. There'll be a halt in production of the new ballistic missile submarine as well as other delayed purchases of important military equipment like the stealthy F-35.

So gridlock and congressional budget in action come at a steep price, especially given the scale and scope of the current threat environment.

SMERCONISH: How might our adversaries take advantage of the situation. [09:05:10]

DEPTULA: Well, you know, weakness encourages aggression. We have seen recently an increase in the number of Chinese Air Force intercepts of U.S. recognizance aircraft and attempts to push those and create situations that they can then focus their nation on the United States and external actions, creating issues that might flare up into all-out conflict. And so these are the kinds of issues that, when they see this kind of dysfunction occurring in the United States, tends to signal an opportunity for them to engage in adventurism. And they're the kinds of things that we simply that's an immediate indicator, but the long-term ones are much more damaging if you will. And that's our inability to recover, quite frankly, from 20 years of taking our eye off the ball of existential threats like China and Russia.

SMERCONISH: I want to ask you a question about the impact of a pay stoppage on morale. But first, this is what President Biden said on that subject yesterday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, U.S. PRESIDENT: Our troops deserve so much better and the House fails to fulfill its most basic function. It fails to fund government. By tomorrow, we'll have failed all our troops. Our service members will keep upholding their oaths, showing up for work, standing sentinel around the world, keeping our country secure, but they won't get paid. It's a disgrace.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: General Deptula, that's what really brings it home for me, the idea that our men and women in uniform won't get paid. Your reaction?

DEPTULA: Well, with respect to those impacts on both military as well as DoD civilian personnel, they're all going to be negatively affected. Now to what degree? Really kind of depends on their specific status in how long, the lapse in appropriations. But the over 2 million military personnel on active duty, they're going to have to continue to report to duty, but they're not going to receive pay for the work performed after today until those appropriation bills or a continuing resolution is passed, just like you heard the President say.

The other part of this is the civilian workforce in the Department of Defense. There are over 800,000 civilians who work there and over half of them will be furloughed while the other ones are legally exempt because they're not funded in annual appropriations. The other point to bring to your audience's attention is retirees will get continued to pay because their pay comes from a trust fund, not annual appropriation.

But one other point I'd like to make for you too, and that is that under a shutdown, the government stops payments on invoices that have not yet been paid or incurred before the shutdown. So there are some small private businesses out there who simply don't have the financial reserves to pay their cost and the government's not paying them.

SMERCONISH: It's a good point. Yes. General, it's embarrassing --

DEPTULA: It's the losses as well.

SMERCONISH: It's embarrassing. It's third worldish. Thank you so much for being here. I really appreciate your sentiments.

DEPTULA: Yeah, thank you. Take care.

SMERCONISH: What are your thoughts? Hit me up on social media. I'll share some responses throughout the course of the program. This is from the world of X. Why isn't the military exempt from the effects of a government shutdown like they did with Ukraine funding? The government's priorities are obviously. Mike Goldinger, it's also -- I meant what I said at the outset. I mean, I pay close attention to this. It's very hard to express, to discern what it's all about.

In the last several shutdowns or come close to a shutdown you could articulate. Oh, it's about the wall. Oh, it's about spending cuts. Oh. It's about the Affordable Care Act. What is it that the 21 of those cats that could not be herded by Kevin McCarthy last night. What are they even seeking? I have no idea.

Up ahead, young men in America are in crisis. A crisis of loneliness, many lacking friends, romance and sex. Now technology is offering up a fix. Virtual AI girlfriends like, Get a look, Alice. But they'll probably make the problem only worse. I'll explain.

And widespread looting here in Philadelphia this week. Police say it was live streamed and encouraged by an online influencer known as Meatball, who was later arrested and charged. Here's a question. Should law enforcement be permitted to monitor social media to prevent such crimes from happening? Or does that violate Americans right to privacy? That's today's poll question. Go to smerconish.com and answer this. Is it appropriate for law enforcement to monitor social media to prevent and solve crimes?

While you're there, sign up for the free daily newsletter. You'll get great exclusive editorial cartoons from Legends, like this commentary from Rob Rogers.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:14:33]

SMERCONISH: Question, is it appropriate for law enforcement to monitor social media to prevent and solve crimes? I ask because here in Philadelphia this week, parts of the city were ransacked by widespread smash and grab looting. The thieves targeted clothing and sneaker shops, high end stores, wine and spirits shops, pharmacies and an Apple store.

Police say the agitators organized their plans on social media. Among the more than 50 folks arrested was an influencer, Deja Blackwell known as Meatball. According to police, she livestreamed the ransacking and broadcast which stores and locations to loot.

[09:15:12]

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Let's go, Philly. The cop is coming. Here they go. We trying -- we go to 52nd street. Everybody must eat. Everybody must eat. Everybody must eat.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: She was later arrested after what the Philadelphia Enquirer dubbed a digital cat and mouse game with police. She now faces eight charges, including criminal conspiracy and riot. She declined CNN's request for comment, but later told a local TV station that her lawyer had advised her not to do interviews.

What happened in Philadelphia isn't a lone incident, not a one off. Cities across the country are working to combat organized retail crime and performance crime, where perpetrators often brag about their actions on social media. With more people posting crimes publicly, online or using social media as a criminal tool. Police departments are stressing the importance of ramping up surveillance so that they can monitor accounts for threats or criminal activity. But they're facing stiff opposition from civil liberty advocates who say that it's just another way for the government to infringe on your right to privacy. Take Boston as just one example.

In 2016, the city wanted to spend $1.4 million to beef up its social media monitoring but kicked it down the road after backlash from the ACLU, who said that it would chill free speech and could target communities already subjected to extra scrutiny, including Muslims and people of color. New York has ramped up their monitoring, even signing a contract with a company that uses AI to monitor online behavior. And in 2021, a public records request by the Brennan center found the Los Angeles Police department authorizes its officers to engage in extensive surveillance of social media without internal monitoring of the nature or effectiveness of the searches.

The LAPD responded by saying that it works to keep residents safe and is committed to protecting their privacy rights as we confront the challenge every day. With me now to discuss is Faiza Patel, the senior director of the Liberty and National Security program at the Brennan Center for justice.

Thank you so much for being here. To me, it seems natural, intuitive, logical that law enforcement would be following the social media accounts of individuals they know, or suspect are involved in this kind of activity. And if they know we're headed to the Apple store on Walnut Street, police ought to be there to meet them. What am I getting wrong?

FAIZA PATEL, SR. DIR. LIBERTY AND NAT'L. SECURITY PROGRAM, BRENAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE: You're not getting anything wrong. It's just that's not the only thing that police use social media for, and that's the problem. So if you think about investigating a crime, for example, right, you know, of some kind of criminal ring that is posting things on social media that might be relevant to your investigation, of course, the cops should be able to look at that.

If you know that there is a protest or a demonstration organized somewhere and the cops want to know, well, how many people do we need to have out there? What is the potential that things might get out of hand? What is our resource allocation? Absolutely, you need to be able to look at social media to do that.

Unfortunately, because the rules are so lax, police also use social media to monitor protest movements. You mentioned the Boston Police Department's attempt to buy a $1.4 million contract for social media monitoring. Why did it get derailed? In part because evidence came out that the BPD was actually monitoring Black Lives Matter hashtags, as well as what they called hashtag Muslim Lives Matter and other political, religious, and racial protest categories. The same thing is true with the LAPD.

It's not that were worried that they're going to be using it to solve crimes. We were worried because we found evidence that they were using it to monitor protest activities. So not to be --

SMERCONISH: What if there's overlap between the two?

PATEL: What's that?

SMERCONISH: Faiza, what if there's overlap between the two in the examples that you articulated, or in a hypothetical where, okay, there's a group that seemingly is involved in some social justice profile, but there's reason to believe that there will be trouble afoot from some of its members? Then what?

PATEL: Then I think you do have the ability to monitor in that context, but you have to have rules around it. And I think that's where most police departments fall down, which is that the rules that they have are very permissive. They are just like, oh, social media monitoring is useful. You're allowed to do it. But in fact, if you're monitoring for public safety purposes, say, to figure out what resources you need at a protest or where you might be afraid that there might be some violence, then once that protest is done, you don't need to keep that data anymore. You don't need to be creating dossiers on activists and protesters, right?

[09:20:23]

So it's really a question of how to make sure that police can use social media as an effective crime fighting tool, but not use it to infringe on people's First Amendment rights.

SMERCONISH: You're reminding me of a recent I'm on the fly here, but I think I'm right. Within the last couple of years, there was a Supreme Court case. Tell me if you think that this is fair for comparison. And it said that if Faiza Patel is driving down the street, law enforcement can follow you as you go about your business in public. But in order to place a GPS tracker on your car, there's going to have to be a showing and a warrant.

So how does that compare to this? Because this individual, who's been charged in Philadelphia with 185,000 Instagram followers, is very publicly allegedly making the case. Here's where we should go. Here's what we want to hit next. And so in my analysis, that's the case of law enforcement following you down the street. They shouldn't need to do anything. They should be able to follow her like any of the other nearly 200,000 people.

PATEL: So I think one of the things to understand about surveillance technology over the last couple of decades is that it has changed dramatically, right? When we used to think about surveillance, we would think about wiretaps, right? I call you. And if the police want to listen in, they need to get a warrant.

Now, what we're looking at more and more is public surveillance, right? Which is the ability of technology to track people generally without their knowing, through cell phone, GPS, those kinds of technologies. Social media falls in a slightly different place because in those instances, you're not actively trying to reveal your location to anybody. You're just walking down the street, right. Whereas social media, you're actually putting information out there. So I think it is reasonable to allow police access to social media, but at the same time, we need to make sure that we have protections in place so that access is not used to monitor protesters and people who are exercising in their rights.

SMERCONISH: I get it. I get it. Let me just cite by way of example and put this up on the screen, it's from the Philadelphia Enquirer this week about what just went on here, blocks from where I'm seated. I mean, this was some of what was being said in social media. What time we going to "shopping". "We looting or not? I know they say tearing up our stuff ain't right, but that's the only way they hear us."

I mean, I'm just hoping that there's a cop with a smartphone in a police van on patrol who is also following this and saying, AHA, here's where we need to go next. You get the final word. What did you most want to say in 30 seconds?

PATEL: I think that social media monitoring can be a useful tool for fighting crime, but I think it's really important that police departments have clear standards and safeguards so that tool is not turned against Americans exercising their First Amendment rights.

SMERCONISH: Faiza Patel, thank you so much for being here. Speaking of social media, what has come in relative to this issue? Robert, if they can get the bad guys to friend them, I see no legal problem. We aren't concerned about ethics when it comes to stopping violence. Well, we are concerned about ethics when it comes to stopping violence, but you already heard me. I think it's not only proper, it's necessary.

I always worry that law enforcement are the last ones to get the best of the tools of technology. But in the example that I just cited for you and where they're literally telegraphing where they are going next, the cops ought to be there waiting for them. Here's one more social media. What do we have on this?

With a court order only, says Rand. Really, Rand? Like, Rand, I hope that you right now are following me on X because I have a Twitter account. I have an X account, and anyone in the public can follow me on Twitter. But we're going to say law enforcement cannot follow Smerconish. Maybe Smerconish is going to stir things up and cause looting somewhere. And while you can follow me, the cops can't. That doesn't make any sense. Not to me.

Go to smerconish.com and vote on today's poll question, because now you get it. Is it appropriate for law enforcement to monitor social media to prevent and solve crimes? While you're there, sign up for the free daily newsletter. Jack Omen submitted this week. We love it. Check that out. There we go. Yeah, you got to look at the bags that well, Senator Menendez.

Still to come, the latest opposed by artificial intelligence apps offering virtual girlfriends who chat with you quickly adapt to what you like, and further interfere with America's young men forming real life relationships. You're not going to believe this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:30:00]

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You're dating a computer?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She's not just a computer.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You always wanted to have a wife without the challenges of actually dealing with anything real. I'm glad that you found someone.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: That sci-fi concept is fast becoming a troubling reality. As an example, here's one of countless chatbot apps providing A.I. friends. It's called Kupid A.I. with a K for Kupid. It offers several avatars with distinct physical features and a list of personality traits for you to start interacting with and customizing. For instance, here's the opening message from an avatar named Alice described as a curious and open-minded photographer.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ALICE, A.I. AVATAR: I'm Alice, a 25 years old fun-loving and adventurous girl, seeking a partner in crime to travel the world with and make unforgettable memories. If you are new here, let me explain a few things. You can chat with me as much as you want, and I'd be more than happy to learn more about you and please you in any way I can.

If you want me to send you a photo, you just have to ask it in the chat like, hey, Alice, can you send me a picture of you? And I'll be more than happy to send you one.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: But, of course, to bump up from texting to more voice chat as well as receiving sexy and, well, other sorts of picture, Alice asks that we become a premium member for $9.99 a month. So, we bid her farewell but there are many who are engaging.

"The Hill" recently published a piece by my next guest data science professor Liberty Vittert under the headline "A.I. girlfriends are ruining an entire generation of men." She wrote the following, "Apps have created virtual girlfriends that talk to you, love you, allow you to live out your erotic fantasies, and learn, through data, exactly what you like and what you don't like, creating the perfect relationship." And that young men are "choosing A.I. girlfriends over real women, meaning they don't have relationships with real women, don't marry them and then don't have and raise babies with them."

As I have discussed here before, we're living in an epidemic of loneliness among young men. Professor Scott Galloway told me that failing young men he perceives to be an existential crisis for the country. Why? Well, Pew found that 63 percent of young men under 30 are single compared with only 34 percent of women the same age.

One in five American men who are unmarried and not in a romantic relationship report not having any close friends. And according to Pew there's a decline in the number of single men actively seeking relationships or even casual dates currently around 50 percent.

Joining me now is Liberty Vittert, professor of data science at Washington University in St. Louis and opinion contributor for "The Hill." So not to be prurient at this time of day, but are all the needs of these young men able to be facilitated, taken care of by A.I. avatars?

LIBERTY VITTERT, PROFESSOR OF DATA SCIENCE, WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY IN ST. LOUIS: Well, you have to think about this word A.I. It's not a virtual girlfriend. It's an A.I. girlfriend. So, it learns from you. It learns what you like and what don't like, what kind of pictures you like, what kind of pictures you don't like.

And while not all needs are met, that is the next step, is actual physical girlfriends. A.I. ones, for that matter. And so, the next step or the next frontier is one that can meet all of your needs.

SMERCONISH: So, there's going to be some type of pairing between what I have already shown to the CNN audience and something 3D that's going to be, you know, in your living room or bedroom?

VITTERT: Yes. I mean, that's -- that is the world we are moving into. And as you said, it's enabling this entire generation of young men to continue in this loneliness epidemic. It's really the enabler for this to continue.

SMERCONISH: Professor, what's going on with young women? If this is a trend among young men, is there something similarly taking place with the ladies?

VITTERT: We don't see that. You know, with -- as you saw it's two to one the ratio of single men to single women. Young women are marrying older men because they want to have children. They have a biological clock and so you see them being with older men. And that is, obviously, causing huge issues with birth decline. We've had a 50 percent decline over the past 60 years because women go with older men.

We also see psychologically that younger women they have more close friends, they have more wider groups of friends and they are not being nearly as affected as young men in this sort of silent epidemic of loneliness.

SMERCONISH: I have read about incels, involuntarily celibate guys who are angry about it. I think their argument is that women today are less approachable.

Has something happened? Has something shifted in terms of the dynamics, the power dynamics between young men and young women? I guess, that's my question.

VITTERT: I think there's certainly an argument there that -- I mean, if you look at college campuses, there's more women than men. Women are having are careers. They are having children later. So, there might be an argument that men need to adapt to this change in women, but calling it women's fault I don't think is probably the right way to go.

[09:35:04]

SMERCONISH: Professor Scott Galloway, himself a professor at NYU Stern School of Business and host of a successful podcast, Professor G is the title of it, he's often been a guest of mine, talking about the troubles among young men. I'm going to show you and everyone else something that he said to me on these air waves about a year ago and then you can react. Roll it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCOTT GALLOWAY, PROFESSOR, NYU STERN SCHOOL OF BUSINESS: But the issue is when you have a group of men, the lower half of attractiveness of men and online dating, which has doubled, now it's about half of relationships, and the top 20 percent of men in terms of attractiveness get about 60 percent of the interest, you end up with a group of men that are more prone to conspiracy theory, more prone to misogynistic content, more prone to believe -- not believe in climate change.

So, these -- this is the American story, if it's written with a pen whose ink is failing young men, does not end well. This is an existential crisis failing young men.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: Make sense to you, Professor Vittert?

VITTERT: Absolutely. You know, what happens is these young men get in these A.I. relationships and because the A.I. learns from you exactly what you like and you don't like, you end up having these perfect relationships. So, that when you go into real life and you try to have a relationship, the most human thing we can do, it's not perfect. And there's ups and downs and they are not able to deal with these ups and downs, not only in relationships, but in life in general. SMERCONISH: Professor Vittert, if a young man has an A.I. girlfriend is there shame in that? In other words, is this a sort of thing that you share with your buddy? Or are you keeping it a secret?

VITTERT: You know, it's interesting. It started off as something that was kept secret. Sort of like the porn industry. Young men wouldn't talk about porn. Playboy was hidden behind some -- you know, some house somewhere, but then it became part of the normal conversation and that's what we're seeing with A.I. girlfriends is now -- it is becoming part of the normal conversation, and it's no longer shameful, which means it becomes significantly bigger.

SMERCONISH: I mean, you saw -- I hope you saw it. I don't know if you have a return monitor, but we showed -- can you put up again, Jordan? Can you just show the imaging?

It's so sophisticated. And I'm sure it's only going to get better and better. And I'm wondering the impact that it's going to have on a young man -- there. I'm showing one of these avatars right now.

I'm also wondering much like porn being ubiquitous, it's going to raise expectations, right? If porn is so accessible among young men, they are going to have expectations that that's, you know, the natural course of business, when perhaps it isn't. I think I'll say it that way.

And similarly, when there's an avatar who looks like that, it, too, is going to set expectations. You get the final word.

VITTERT: You can set things down to their rear end size. So, you can set anything you want, which is going to create really terrible expectations and just continue this epidemic of loneliness that has enormous repercussions.

SMERCONISH: I'm going to read some social media aloud. So, don't tap out yet. Let's see what we have. Put it up on the screen. Here we go.

Human relationships are hard. A.I. relationships are easy. It's unhealthy for technology to save us from all of life's challenges, says Conspiracy Crush.

But, Professor Vittert, I don't know how we put this genie back in the bottle, right?

VITTERT: I'm not sure there is a way to keep the A.I. genie back in a bottle. I think we have to address these issues at the root of them, which is where this loneliness starts and that would be what solves this, if ever.

SMERCONISH: One more social media. Put it up if you can, Jordan, and I'll read it aloud. What do we have?

A.I. is a quick fix that will eventually backfire, I think, says Kelly.

I think the backfiring, Professor Vittert, has already begun and the level of sophistication when the pairing that you referenced is now a part of this drill. My God, the world is coming to hell in a handbasket. The final is yours.

VITTERT: I think we're going to see what we only dreamed up in the movies and it's not a really good reality.

SMERCONISH: Yes. Thank you so much. That was really, really of interest.

VITTERT: Thank you.

SMERCONISH: Still to come, Gavin Newsom isn't running for anything, but this week he was highly visible spinning after the GOP debate and firming up his own one-on-one against Ron DeSantis in November. Now the passing of his state's senior senator, Dianne Feinstein, puts Newsom in a powerful but tricky position. It's his job to name her temporary successor and there are already three Democratic hats in the ring for her seat in 2024. His choice will have consequences not only for them but for him.

And a little reminder. Go to Smerconish.com and vote on today's poll question. Is it appropriate for law enforcement to monitor social media to prevent and solve crimes?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:44:14]

SMERCONISH: Newsom rising. The California governor's emergence as the heir apparent to President Biden for leadership of the Democratic Party got two big boosts this week. As he was the team spin doctor post GOP debate and "Fox News" confirmed he will debate Ron DeSantis on November 30. Now he finds himself facing an important political test, the naming of a United States senator.

Dianne Feinstein was the Senate's longest serving female member. Her passing at age 90 on Friday creates both a void and a vacancy. It now falls to Newsom to appoint someone to fill the unexpired portion of her term. It won't be easy to fill the shoes of such a long and distinguished career.

As her Senate bio reflects, her career was one of many firsts. "She was the first woman president of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, the first woman mayor of San Francisco, the first woman elected senator of California, the first woman member and first woman ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the first woman to chair the Senate Rules and Administration Committee and the first woman to chair the Senate Intelligence Committee."

[09:45:17]

Senator Feinstein served for nine years as a San Francisco County supervisor starting in 1969. She became mayor of San Francisco in 1978 following the assassination of George Moscone and supervisor Harvey Milk. Feinstein had 15 months left in her Senate term. There's already a race in progress among three House members seeking to win the Democratic nomination, Barbara Lee, Katie Porter and Adam Schiff.

Newsom has previously said that in this circumstance he would select a Black female, but also ruled out appointing any of the candidates seeking the office in next year's election. Given the slim Senate margin held by Democrat, there's pressure on Newsom to make this appointment quickly. And it's yet another way in which Newsom is making national news.

This past Wednesday, he was the chief Biden/Harris surrogate in the spin room post the second Republican debate at the Reagan Library. And he has accepted an invitation from "Fox News" to debate Florida Governor Ron DeSantis with Sean Hannity moderating. Newsom has recently relished mixing it up with the anchor.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. GAVIN NEWSOM (D-CA): I don't disagree.

SEAN HANNITY, FOX NEWS HOST: But you're a sanctuary state.

NEWSOM: And --

HANNITY: And you want illegal immigration.

NEWSOM: -- and it's the fifth largest economy in the world. We had 7.8 percent GDP growth in 2021, and we dominate on innovation.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: For DeSantis, a Newsom debate feels like a hail Mary, to reassert himself as the future of his party. His numbers have only headed downward since formally getting into the race. In a recent CNN poll showed him dropping by 13 points in New Hampshire since July. He's now polling about even with Vivek Ramaswamy, Nikki Haley and Chris Christie.

When the Newsom/DeSantis debate was announced, I tweeted that I could think of someone not happy with that pairing. I meant the vice president. Newsom is in the process of potentially positioning himself as the to go-to in the event President Biden really doesn't run in 2024. Potentially leapfrogging over Gretchen Whitmer, Josh Shapiro, Amy Klobuchar, Bernie Sanders and Kamala Harris. He was tapped by the Biden/Harris campaign to be in the spin room post GOP debate and logic dictates that would have sought clearance before accepting the high- profile DeSantis debate on Fox.

Why would Biden want him in those roles? Perhaps for the very simple reason that Newsom is willing, telegenic and thinks quickly on his feet. Or maybe the added benefit is that Biden gets to watch Newsom have his tires kicked in a debate on a national stage testing his mettle, because the president is not blind to the consistency of the polling data showing the way that he, Biden, is perceived by Americans. Nor deaf to the calls of some that he stand aside in 2024 or unaware of his owner mortality, a reminder we must all think about with the passing of Senator Dianne Feinstein. Still to come, the final results of the poll question. Go to Smerconish.com, answer this. Is it appropriate for law enforcement to monitor social media to prevent and solve crimes?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:53:57]

SMERCONISH: So, there's the result of today's poll question -- whoa. Whoa. Is it appropriate for law enforcement to monitor social media to prevent and solve crimes? More than 31,000 have voted so far. Ninety -- it's been a long time since we've had like a 95 to five result. I don't even like 95 to five results.

When I -- when I write these I try and come up with something where there's going to be a legitimate divide. So, I'm genuinely surprised by the outcome but the 95 percent have the correct answer. Here's some social media that came in during the course of the program.

Are you kidding me? No monitoring for terrorism, potential assassins, school shooters and mayhem? Really? Might as well defund the police if you are going to blind them anyhow.

I don't know that my guests would have disagreed with the outcome of this. Because as I listened to her what she was saying is that she was worried about the overlap when there's like a protest organization. To which I respond, if it's a protest organization that has a violent element to it then you're kind of surrendering or making subservient whatever that speech right might be that you possess in favor of protecting society.

[09:55:10]

I mean, the idea to me that individuals were able to create such mayhem blocks from where I'm sitting right now all communicating by social media, I want law enforcement, you know, to be on their smart devices and saying, OK, let's see, here's where they're headed next. Next, what do we have? Sorry. I didn't mean to get long-winded.

Newsom doing everything right to position himself as the rightful successor to Biden in 2028. He needs to be a good soldier for '24, make sure Harris isn't viewed as their heir, and keep his Democratic approval high. He's doing that masterfully.

You know, Dergon, it just occurred to me that in accepting the debate invitation against DeSantis -- like how does that play in the West Wing? Obviously, he would have sought some type of approval or clearance. They must want him out there.

And maybe they want him out there because he's a smart guy, good on his feet, good looking handsome guy, et cetera, et cetera. Or maybe it's Joe saying, I'm going to give this guy an opportunity to test his own mettle. I'll see you next week.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)