Ken Coleman has inspired many by having the courage to leave an unfulfilling career and pursue his dreams. He is now a well-known personality on The Ramsey Show, a nationally syndicated program, and a two-time Wall Street Journal best-selling author. His work on the show allows him to engage, provoke thought, evoke emotions, and inspire action to improve people’s lives.
Almost a decade ago, Ken Coleman realized he wasn’t on the path he truly desired and was still unsure about his future. However, he summoned the courage to take the necessary steps towards his happiness and never looked back. This journey has eventually led him to the pinnacle of his success today.
Since the onset of COVID-19, The Ramsey Show has undergone some changes, including a name change to reflect the involvement of multiple hosts. Dave Ramsey now shares the spotlight with his team numerous days weekly, with Coleman often stepping in to substitute for him. Along with Rachel Cruze, Jade Warshaw, and George Kamel, Coleman carries The Ramsey Show forward, aiming to engage and entertain millions of listeners while improving their lives.
Ken Coleman often reminds his audience that persistence and being in the right place always lead to opportunities presenting themselves. His success is a testament to this, having gained clarity on his chosen life goal and embarking on the journey towards achieving it, consistently handling even the most modest tasks.
Ramsey Solutions is highly confident in its product. Ken Coleman advises talk radio executives to recognize the abundance of political talk shows available, whether local or national that provide a wide range of content for radio broadcasts. However, he firmly believes that no show can match The Ramsey Show, which has been consistently present for over 30 years.
During an interview with Barrett News Media, Ken Coleman discusses the biggest benefit he’s received working alongside Dave Ramsey, how The Ramsey Show is consistently able to connect with the news/talk audience, how the Ramsey brand prioritizes content for social media, and what he wants radio executives to know about The Ramsey Show.
Ryan Hedrick: How long have you been with Dave Ramsey? How did the relationship start?
Ken Coleman: 9 years. We have mutual friends. A few of his employees were also long-time friends of mine, and my wife worked for Dave many years ago, for about two years. So, we had all those mutual connections, and so we were acquaintances, and he was aware of my budding broadcast career and was following along.
RH: How did your career start?
KC: I was in my early 30s, and I was beginning to question the path that I had been on, which was the path to run for political office. I began to question that and lost the fire in the belly for that. In the process of doing some self-discovery to try and figure out what I was going to do, I got to a point where I realized there were some similarities between the public service role and broadcasting.
So, I started small. I took a broadcasting class with a bunch of 20-year-olds, started doing high school football play-by-play, and through a series of hustling and connecting, I built my way onto a Saturday morning radio show and, from there, started hosting a daily drive-time show. I was doing a podcast in the leadership space, where I interviewed Dave for the first time. I had all these irons in the fire. That’s how that happened.
RH: What is the most significant benefit and lesson that you have gained while working with Dave Ramsey?
KC: The most important blessing I’ve received from him is his unwavering belief in me. He has provided me with an invaluable platform. The biggest takeaway is that for Dave’s persona and gruff kind of irritating tough love, he does have a good thermometer to hear what’s going on with people. Some of those calls are not boilerplate problem and answer. Some of them have a lot of deep issues, scary things going on behind the scenes, and sometimes there’s a lot of confusion, and he’s able to see through that, and I’ve learned how to read people, even if you can’t look at them you can listen and hear things in their voice, even if they’re not saying it.
There comes a time when you are watching him (Dave), sitting next to him, dig behind the question; there’s always a question or two or three behind it, underneath the questions. That’s been something that I’ve learned.
RH: When creating content for radio listeners, how do you think your show connects with the news/talk audience?
KC: The Ramsey Show is caller-driven. Dave has instilled in us that when you’re taking that call, you have to take it and do it in a way that helps the rest of the audience. You’re addressing the caller’s need, but you’re addressing it in a way that the rest of the audience can get it. A caller-driven show is an intimate conversation that people are eavesdropping in on, and if you do it right, they feel like they’ve pulled up a chair and they’re listening in on that conversation.
RH: How do you prioritize and adapt content for Ramsey’s social media channels?
KC: With all the social platforms, you have to program to the platform. It’s important that in 2023, any media company or any media personality understands that you can have one clear message based on some principles, and so the principles don’t change, but the platforms dictate that the process has to be different on how you deliver the principles.
So, if you go on LinkedIn, that platform offers a lot of written content. Facebook is leaning more towards that. Instagram is video content, TikTok is video content, and YouTube is all video. But now you have to look at what works and what people want on YouTube. If you juxtapose that with a podcast audience, podcast audiences skew a little bit older, they’re wealthier, more educated, and they’re looking for more personal growth content. You have to program to the platform.
With every social media platform, you’re delivering the same content, but you’re delivering it in a different way.
RH: Has radio become a secondary priority for the Ramsey brand, or is it merely a bonus for the social content created by The Ramsey Show?
Ken Coleman: Radio is still the platform by which everything is standing. You’re still talking about 600-plus stations, the second-largest radio show in the world. The show that is distributed via YouTube, podcast, and social media is still from a radio format. We are still doing a traditional radio format every day, three hours a day, and then that content is being cut up and distributed on those other platforms.
Make no mistake, it is, first and foremost, a radio show, and everything else comes out of that. If you’re going to be a radio show or a television show, you are going to have to diversify. The digital world is here to stay. The Ramsey Show started as a radio show, still a radio show, but now it lives on multiple formats.
RH: As the show continues to grow and evolve, is there one important thing that you would like news/talk decision makers to understand about your team and the future of your show?
KC: I would for every talk radio executive to understand that there are plenty of political talk shows. You look at local, regional, and national political talk shows; there are more than enough to fill the airwaves but there is no show like ours that has been consistent for over 30 years beating the drum beat that is as important to your listeners as political talk.
In fact, I will remind you of a famous political moment when James Carville took a shot at George Herbert Walker Bush when he was running against Bill Clinton and said, ‘It’s the economy, stupid.’ He was reminding the president that it’s not about foreign policy; it’s not about any of that. People vote their pocketbooks.
The Ramsey Show is the only show in America that has taken on money, which is the most important thing to Americans. We’re certainly not hurting for radio exposure, but I would be baffled by any major talk network or station that doesn’t have The Ramsey Show in its daily lineup. All the policies and all the politics in the world don’t matter because it’s up to you to figure out your policy and your pocketbook and figure out your household budget. The money conversation we bring is more relevant than any political talk show. That is my very bold belief.
Every radio station in America should be carrying The Ramsey Show because of its relevance, not because we think that we’re good, not because we think that we’re better than anybody, but because for over three decades, we’ve met people where they are in the most intimate and most stress-filled areas of their life, and that’s their money.
RH: What are some of the individual and show goals you and your team have for the future?
Ken Coleman: Dave has said that your income has been your greatest wealth-building tool for decades. We know that from the largest net worth millionaire study ever done by Ramsey Solutions, ten thousand plus millionaires, 96 percent of millionaires said they enjoyed their work. We want to expand into work; we want to expand into relationships. Dr. John Delony has been a great success as well.
So, he and I represent the non-money personalities. If you look at the content of The Ramsey Show, obviously, it’s always going to be money-focused, but we’re now talking about work and relationships. You can’t talk about money without talking about relationships; you can’t talk about money without talking about work.
Expanding the content to meet people where they are and bring those three areas of life into balance through hope and practical steps for people to win in all three of those areas.
Ryan Hedrick works for WIBC in Indianapolis as a Morning News Anchor/Digital Content Producer. Prior to moving to Indy, he served as Assistant Program Director and Co-Host of the Morning News Express at WFMD. His career also includes stints at News Talk 103.7 FM in Chambersburg, PA, Sirius XM in Washington D.C., WBEN in Buffalo, NY, and WIBW-AM in Topeka KS where he earned the Kansas Association of Broadcasters (KAB) award for Major Market enterprise reporting in 2016. To connect with Ryan, find him on Twitter @SureToCover.
77 WABC and Newsmax Host Greg Kelly Tackles AI, Trust in Media, and Advice for the Next Generation
“I do think it’s important to experience life before you start kind of evaluating things. I think it’s very important to learn a skill.”
Greg Kelly — who hosts shows on both 77 WABC in New York and nationally on conservative cable news outlet Newsmax — is one of the hardest-working men in the industry.
“I am working approximately 11 hours a day, developing content for, two programs that I host,” Kelly told Barrett News Media over a Zoom call.
His shows have no scripts, and provide incredibly unique, very engaging content for his listeners.
Before joining the media Greg Kelly, like his famous father Former NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly, served in the Marine Corps. The younger Kelly retired from the Marines with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel before gracing America’s TV stations.
With over 20 years experience, he has covered some of the most important national events of our time. Even being injured while covering the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003.
While some on the left find him controversial, many right-leaning voters seek his wisdom — including on Artificial Intelligence being used in the media.
“I have experimented with all of the chatbots, especially, ChatGPT, and honestly for all the hype, I recognize that there are aspects to AI that are not necessarily accessible to the consumer or the user.”
Kelly added, “There are things going on with supercomputers and whatnot. But, I had not been impressed, quite frankly, with the output of, artificial intelligence. You can usually spot it right away. The questions that I’ve asked it, have not yielded usable results. To me, it’s like a crude Wikipedia. It just doesn’t, and it’s not as useful as even Wikipedia or your basic data you can find on the internet.”
When asked about concerns on how Artificial Intelligence is going to affect the election this year, Kelly said, “Well, I’ve seen these things myself, and you can kind of spot them right away. And I think the American voter and the American media consumer has achieved a certain level of sophistication. So, no, I’m not particularly concerned.”
Greg Kelly went on to give an example.
“The other day I saw something — Alvin Bragg announcing his resignation — and I knew in about a second and a half that it was fake. So these things are out there. It’s like a political cartoon. I would almost liken it to the political cartoons of yesteryear.”
He continued to say, “People can have a pretty good ability to figure out what’s true and what’s not in terms of what you’re talking about. The deep, the I guess they follow of deepfakes or whatever. Those things I think are detectable.”
Trust in Media
To be better media consumers Kelly believes viewers and listeners should do their own research before blindly following talking heads.
“Why rely on the media to give you a summary of things that you can access yourself? You know, for instance, these indictments of Donald Trump have been floating around,” he said. “I’ve yet to meet anybody who’s read one. I’ve yet to meet anyone, including folks in the media who actually sat down and read those 92 pages of Justice Engoron, [which were] released last Friday.”
He added, “You can, as a citizen, as a person, access this material there’s no need for, I mean, theoretically, for you to rely on anyone else to tell you about it. Most likely the person telling you about it hasn’t actually read it. They’re relying on yet somebody else’s summary.”
Greg Kelly went on to say, “Why do we need people who we know will distorting and almost I’m not saying that’s necessarily malicious, although often it is. But why go through that step? Why do we need people on the news at night to tell us things that we can access ourselves?”
He also recognized the limitations of working people saying, “Now, I understand, you know, the daily ritual that people are working in, that kind of thing. But, you know, people do consume a lot of content on their phones and elsewhere. I have been urging people to, you know, if you want to be as smart or smarter than somebody from The New York Times, read the primary source documents, which are often accessible to all of us.”
Advice to the Next Generation
His advice for young aspiring media personalities begins with a question.
“I would ask them first ‘Why?’ What is it you want to do?” Kelly later added, “I do think it’s important to experience life before you start kind of evaluating things. I think it’s very important to learn a skill.”
Once one has the answer to that question, Kelly’s advice is both lengthy and wise.
“Number one: Read a lot of nonfiction. Everybody reads tweets. Everybody is surfing the internet. Very few people read books. That’s important. And no matter really what it is, personally, if you are interested in current events, politics, I do recommend nonfiction bestsellers. It is absolutely incredible what people are not reading.”
Greg Kelly continued by saying, “I would suggest, if you’re genuinely curious about what’s happening in the world — and that’s kind of where my impetus to do this kind of stuff is based on curiosity. And that’s kind of a rare thing I’ve come to discover. I thought more people were curious. I thought everybody had a level of curiosity. I’m shocked at how incurious people are. But I would say, yeah, read a lot of nonfiction.”
Second, Kelly advises, “I would say, try thinking about acquiring a skill. A true skill that is marketable, that you can make money from. Whether it’s becoming a pilot, whether it’s becoming an engineer, and then possibly embarking in media. We don’t know what it’s going to look like in a couple of years, right? Seems to be changing rather fast.
“I also tell people, no matter how old they are, if they’re asking me for advice, to do what I did about ten years ago, which was start reading the Bible. I took it for granted and I didn’t think too deeply about faith. In my earlier years, I was an atheist for a while. But about ten years ago, I started reading the Bible a bit more seriously.”
He succinctly wrapped up his advice by stating, “Start reading. Think about getting a skill and faith is important. I encourage them to take the journey if they wish.”
Krystina Alarcon Carroll is a columnist and features writer for Barrett News Media.She currently freelances at WPIX in New York, and has previously worked on live, streamed, and syndicated TV programs. Her prior employers have included NY1, Fox News Digital, Law & Crime Network, and Newsmax. You can find Krystina on X (formerly twitter) @KrystinaAlaCarr.
Deciphering What CBS Got Right and Wrong in the Catherine Herridge Saga
The actual details and timeline are quite murky.
There’s been significant media reporting and analysis concerning the very recent terminations of CBS employees, some quite familiar and one highlighted above them all because of her notoriety, her work and accusations that her exit was different from others in her situation.
Catherine Herridge is known for her political coverage past and present and more than anything, I think she has now become the poster child for what’s perceived as a controversial dismissal and alleged questionable termination practices.
If you read the reporting, Ms. Herridge, along with about 800 others recently were let go from Paramount and CBS in cost-cutting actions. Among stories out there are several stating that Herridge’s notes, files, and confidential information were “seized” by CBS management after she was let go.
This is certainly worth delving into if it’s true, or at least true in the way it has been depicted in the media so far.
I keep reading and hearing that reporter files and content are not retained by stations, networks, and parent companies following separations and that somehow this is a strange and unusual occurrence.
Somehow, people are inferring, it must have been done for reasons directly related to Herridge and her coverage of Hunter Biden, President Biden and the White House.
Okay, I guess.
Let’s be clear here, I will never claim to know anything, much less everything, and my experience and exposure to such matters is severely limited at best. But, I have worked more than a few jobs, at more than a few places, many of them in news, and among a slew of commonalities I have come face to face with are onboarding paperwork and company handbooks that pretty much lay out the groundwork that content generated, utilized or gathered under the company employ is in whole or part, theirs.
Meaning, a lot of the time, the company says it belongs to them, or at least both parties.
I’m not an attorney but I have seen writings like this before and, to be fair, I usually would skip down to the parts about non-compete clauses and how many vacation days I might get.
It sort of makes at least some sense to me.
You’re sitting at our desk, using our resources while gathering stories for our company to make use of as we see fit.
Yes, it’s ours but you probably, and hopefully, have copies of everything yourself and if you don’t, I for one, think you’re pretty silly.
The content a journalist or investigative reporter generates while working for an employer is not necessarily their sole property as many of us out there understand it. They create it at the behest and under the direction of a parent company, a station, or a network so I’m thinking it’s not just theirs.
In the case of Ms. Herridge, there are conflicting versions of what actually transpired in all this. And nearly all of it is attributed to sources and opinion columns like that of Jonathan Turley, who is older, far more experienced, and certainly better educated than I.
Turley wrote in part,” A former CBS manager, who also spoke on condition of anonymity, said that he had “never heard of anything like this.” He attested to the fact that, in past departures, journalists took all of their files and office contents. Indeed, the company would box up everything from cups to post-its for departing reporters. He said the holding of the material was “outrageous” and clearly endangered confidential sources.”
Okay, that’s one school of thought for sure. Apparently, the SAG-AFTRA union agrees, calling it, according to Turley, “very unusual” and “a matter of serious concern”.
I’ll buy that, if that’s how things happened. But in all my reading on the subject, the actual details and timeline are quite murky. Were there discussions or negotiations during any potential out-processing or exit interviews?
Everyone referenced except those identified as uninvolved business analysts is unnamed, unidentified, or a confidential source.
CBS denied seizing material yet it also says the files and materials have been returned. So, which Is it?
Herridge, as far as I have read, has said nothing but, nonetheless, the House Judiciary Committee has reportedly asked questions about her termination and the claims of personal files and notes being seized.
So, accurate or not, it looks like more than just a few people are rattled by all this.
As a cop, I knew a lot of detectives and patrol officers who had snitches and informants and it was not always like all these identities and information were passed up the chain of command.
“If you want to keep a secret, don’t tell the boss.”
-Jimmy Malone, The Untouchables.
Do journalists share every source, note, and contact with their bosses? My guess is no, but is it unreasonable for an employer to have access to content, background, and related materials so when someone else picks up the next chapter of the story they are not starting from a blank page?
Would it be right if Herridge left of her own accord and said, “Sorry, I’m taking everything I’ve done while you’ve been paying me and supporting my efforts with me and you’ll have to reinvestigate and pursue your own sources and contacts?”
Does that seem reasonable or even likely?
Hopefully, there is a bit more mutual respect between journalists and employers than has been implied by the stories published since Herridge and many others were separated from Paramount and CBS. Equally, I would trust that nobody at CBS is unaware that anything left behind in the form of content, product and notes has not already been copied and is safely in the possession of those who were shown the door.
Let’s be real here, please.
I still have my old desk blotter from when I was a producer in Seattle in 1999. Prior to the common use of all the electronic information storage choices, I would write names and numbers on my desk calendar, and when I ran out of months, I wrote it on the cardboard underneath. I took that cardboard with me to my next job and the job after that and the job after that. I’m pretty sure if I unearthed it today there would be at least one name and number that would still be useful, but it’s really not holding any particular information that the station didn’t have also.
However, If the nice people at KIRO asked if I had so and so’s name or number from 25 years ago, I would unpack a box and gladly offer it up.
Again, if you’re not making a copy of everything you do for your own reference and future use then I don’t know what to tell you.
This is news and in this and many other businesses, you can be out the door at any given moment so I’m pretty confident Ms. Herridge has everything she came to CBS with and much more. And I find nothing wrong with that.
If you or others want to read into some sort of political motives and conspiracy because of Herridge’s reporting and her story coverage, well, that’s up to you. Have fun with that.
What am I missing here?
When a reporter, investigative or not, does work for a station or network or any outlet really, pretty much anything they’re doing is retained and archived. Coverage of countless stories as they unfold, can continue for weeks, months, and years.
Did Carl Bernstein take everything with him when he left The Washington Post?
The Post still had to cover countless aspects of Watergate and the Nixon administration and everything that followed long after he departed and I imagine Woodward couldn’t fill in all the holes just because he stuck around.
I see this all as either very simple or extremely complicated depending perhaps on what the actual big deal is here.
Is it because this is about Catherine Herridge and people are angry that she was given a pink slip? Is anyone upset about the other people also losing their jobs?
I am really asking the questions here.
Am I way off base in my thinking?
Is what I am putting forth here incorrect, erroneous and without factual basis?
If I am on the wrong side of the truth here, I will accept it and stand wide open in admitting it. I also welcome the reeducation I must sorely require.
Or, could it be that this is simply about money?
Show me the inner workings of the financial wizards who pay an exceedingly small number of individuals inflated wages while eliminating the lowest-paid support staff in the interest of fat-trimming and cost-cutting but who will, every once in a while, publicly toss a few well-compensated “sacrificial lambs” into the fire to try and make themselves look and feel better.
Or if, as the conspiracy theorists have already begun to claim, Herridge is being silenced for her work and revelations, firing her is not exactly the best way to accomplish that. She is well-known, respected, and incredibly good at her job. As we will no doubt see very soon, she will land someplace else, perhaps before my prattling here even makes it online.
I’m sure NewsNation has another hour of availability in their lineup.
By the way, I certainly hope that Mr. Pegues, Ms. Ruffini, and Ms. Falk land on their feet along with all of the reported 800 others that were let go in what has been described in job action terms as a “bloodbath”.
In regard to Mr. Turley’s outrage at the actions taken by CBS, I will point out that on my and most anyone’s best day, none would likely be professionally capable of carrying his briefcase or laptop. My opinion and perspective are offered here, of course, and remain my own.
With that in mind I will also state simply and humbly to Mr. Turley that merely quoting Murrow and Cronkite in your opinion piece does not validate your point to a higher degree, no matter how renowned and accomplished you, yourself may be.
But in the interest of fairness and curiosity, I will give it a shot:
“We are in the same tent as the clowns and the freaks-that’s show business.”
– Edward R. Murrow
“And that’s the way it is.”
Bill Zito has devoted most of his work efforts to broadcast news since 1999. He made the career switch after serving a dozen years as a police officer on both coasts. Splitting time between Radio and TV, he’s worked for ABC, Fox News, News 12 and The Weather Channel in New York. He worked for KIRO and KOMO in Seattle and WCBD in Charleston, SC. Most recently, he anchored and reported for Audacy’s WTIC-AM/FM in Hartford. He lives in New England. You can find him on social media @BillZitoNEWS.
Can the Media Predict America’s Looming Challenge?
Based on data and polls, are that President Donald Trump could begin his 2nd term in about eleven months, and similar to his first time in office, many think he’ll have his work cut out for him.
While many experts are predicting brighter economic days ahead, some media pundits are warning that it might take longer than expected to get the good times rolling again.
A former World Bank President took to the airwaves recently to share his opinion about what faces the U.S. economy in the future, and what can be done to reverse the current period of instability and hardship.
Based on data and polls, are that former President Donald Trump could begin his 2nd term in about eleven months, and similar to his first time in office, many think he’ll have his work cut out for him.
“Growth in the U.S. held up last year, up more than three percent annually in the fourth quarter, despite inflation, high rates, global tensions,” Barron’s Roundtable host, Jack Hough, began on Friday. “But my next guest says this news is not as good as it sounds on the surface.”
“The storm is, growth simply not fast enough to raise peoples’ living standards or to pay back the debt,” David Malpass began on the Fox Business program. “You’ve got the energy problems that are mounting in the world. Germany today, I don’t know if you saw, but lowered their forecast for 2024 to only .2 percent. So basically, a really severe slowdown or recession going on in Europe.”
U.S. national debt has now surpassed a record $34 trillion, and the Federal Reserve is predicting American GDP will only grow at an anemic 1.4 percent this year. Even more soberingly, they expect only 1.8 percent growth next year. That’s a far cry from the 2.5 percent annual growth spurred by Mr. Trump during his first three years in office.
“Africa and Latin America are in deep trouble and it all stems back to the U.S. holding up it’s growth by simply borrowing money from everybody else to dump it into the economy,” Malpass added.
“What should the next president do first, bearing in mind that it could take some cooperation from Congress?” Hough asked.
“It could, but the Commander in Chief has huge power to state the outlook for the U.S., but also for the world. The world waits with bated breath to hear what the U.S. is going to do in terms of economic policy, in terms of foreign policy and energy policy,” Malpass, the former Treasury Undersecretary added, noting that the policies of the current administration are not helping matters. “The latest is cutting off the LNG exports. That’s driven the natural gas prices down in the U.S. It’s gone down by 50 percent just since January.”
While that might sound great to homeowners and consumers on the surface, Malpass says it has created more harm than good.
“What that means is lots of jobs lost in the U.S., but for the rest of the world what it means is a shortage of energy. And that’s really important to their GDP,” he said. “So the new President has to say, we’re going to create an environment in the world where the U.S. can grow fast. That’s a top priority. And that’s going to allow us to project security for the world. And that will comfort everyone and allow them to begin investing again.”
Hough pointed out that last year, 2023, ended up being much better economically than most analysts predicted prior to the year.
“The U.S. spent a lot more than was expected,” Malpass explained. “ And also, I think, the model has changed for the interest rate hikes. You know in the past when the Fed raised interest rates, that meant that people felt the bite. But this time the government is borrowing so much itself that as the rates go up, they’re paying all the upper-income people around the U.S., and even outside the U.S., top dollar for all of this borrowed money.
“So as the interest rates went up, it caused a huge spewing of money into the economy. Plus the direct government spending. So I think the projections didn’t work out for the U.S., but if we look outside the U.S. the slowdown was intense. Just as bad as expected.”
Hough highlighted a recent piece Malpass wrote in The Wall Street Journal, in which he illustrated a model that worked in such a difficult historical economic situation – Ronald Reagan’s combination of pro-growth policies and peace through strength. And while not mentioning Trump by name during the entirety of the interview, it was clear that Malpass believes such an approach will certainly be needed by our next president.
“We hear some growing calls in the U.S. for a more isolationist stance. Do you see any kind of a risk there?” Hough asked.
“I think isolationism is not the answer. It is peace through strength. And Reagan did that through having a strong economy and then by having a strong defense policy that showed the Soviet Union that communism was not going to be given this free ride,” Malpass said, echoing the policies that succeeded under Trump’s first term. Most experts, however, think it unlikely that today’s Democratic party would do such an about-face against socialism and communism around the world. Especially as the party pushes such policies at home.
“That, of course, brought down communism. It fell of its own weight,” Malpass said. “And that was a giant relief for the world. We ended up with a peace dividend and so it was a good investment to have the U.S. be strong, because that then stabilized the world. We can do that again. Markets are forward-looking. And so if they see the U.S. talking about defending the dollar, controlling the government spending so that there’s some money left over for the rest of the people in the U.S. and around the world.”
Malpass told Hough that the results of such an approach would be tangible for working American families.
“That will allow interest rates to come down, which would be positive. And it means that there can be more growth,” Malpass said. “Right now, we’re looking at this prospect of some years of really stagnant growth.”
In other words, even though he did it once, Mr. Trump’s second go-around might be even more challenging than the first.
Rick Schultz is a former Sports Director for WFUV Radio at Fordham University. He has coached and mentored hundreds of Sports Broadcasting students at the Connecticut School of Broadcasting, Marist College and privately. His media career experiences include working for the Hudson Valley Renegades, Army Sports at West Point, The Norwich Navigators, 1340/1390 ESPN Radio in Poughkeepsie, NY, Time Warner Cable TV, Scorephone NY, Metro Networks, NBC Sports, ABC Sports, Cumulus Media, Pamal Broadcasting and WATR. He has also authored a number of books including “A Renegade Championship Summer” and “Untold Tales From The Bush Leagues”. To get in touch, find him on Twitter @RickSchultzNY.