2026 Election Night Livestream with the Besties!

0:00 to to split the difference. >> Really the issue honestly the issue is not about giving up money or paying taxes. The issue is about creating the idea that people can get taxed on their assets after they've paid income tax or illquid assets before they've paid income tax because it creates a mechanism that I think ultimately leads to ruin and socialism that makes it very hard for anyone in the country to progress individually. And I think the lack of progress that arises from these sorts of structural tax systems are what will be the ruin of Silicon Valley, the ruin of California, and potentially the ruin of the country. So that's what I'm most worried about.

0:37 >> Okay. that is an important issue. Looks like Steve Hilton was trending not so great. Chimoth on poly market like a 2% chance last time I checked and we'll pull that up in a second. unfortunately more of the same for California in terms of putting un in unqualified people in positions of power to run the state into the ground. I of course fled three years ago. how are you feeling tonight, Shimath? And what are your thoughts? Generally speaking, you chose to stay in California and fight.

1:10 >> To be honest, I stayed for my family and to keep building the businesses that I'm involved in and if I have to pay the tax, I'll pay the tax and I'll move on. But I do think it has a pretty negative slippery slope for the incentives to build here. And I think that that's not going to have some cataclysmic overnight effect, but I think it's going to cause the slow burn and decay of the state. So I'm hoping that Prop 40 fails and I hope Propositions 41 and 42 pass >> and if if those don't happen, we'll absorb the consequences, you know.

1:48 but I do think it has a really bad impact on Silicon Valley and then broadly America and then more generally I'm really surprised at where the betting markets and where the polls and the exit polls and are putting this election. it is if it stands again I don't know if it stands because most of the polls haven't closed yet but if it stands it is it's a pretty enormous shift in the sentiment of the country and I think that it's going to take a little while for us to unpack why and what that means.

2:24 >> Yeah. And we're going to do that tonight. We've got an incredible lineup of guests and we'll bring our first one on in a moment. It is 7:04 p.m. in the great state of Texas, which means it's 5:00 p.m. on the left coast and 8:00 p.m. on the right coast. Polls have closed in more than a dozen states. Georgia, Virginia, Florida, Ohio, North Carolina. They're counting their votes. Still early, but it does not look like this will be a blue spritz. Looking like it's going to be a blue tsunami as some people predicted. Let's pull up the balance of power here. 22 2026 midterms on poly market just in the last hour. If we were looking at it in the last hour, gentlemen, an hour ago was looking like 80 low 80s 83 84 even as low as 82% for the sweep. Sweep chances now 93%.

3:22 and these tend to be I think we all agree the if we if we can't trust the polls as much as we used to and for any number of reasons whether it's biases or their methodologies Freedberg when people do put large amounts of money in the volume on this one that we're looking at is 68.7 million when you get to that level you are talking about a pretty significant amount of money. And here to talk about it with us is the sitting senator from the great state now my state the great state of Texas. My guy the senior senator senior senator Ted.

4:11 How are we feeling tonight? You were caught on some microphones. I don't know if it was public statements or not. They were framing it as you were. This was leaked audio. I don't think it was leaked. You had concerns about tonight. And are those concerns realized? >> Well, I will say I was amused when it was characterized as leaked audio because it's what I said on my podcast I do every week, Verdict with Ted Cruz. So, so it's like saying your comment on the All-In podcast was leaked.

4:37 >> It was leaked from Apple Podcast and Spotify. They both were involved in this leak. >> So, listen, I am very worried about tonight. It It's early still. There's still people voting, but but we have polls closed on the east coast. The early votes we've seen all over the country, the Democrats have had a sizable advantage. I can tell you in Texas, if if the election had closed yesterday, we would face devastation in Texas. the early vote, the Democrats had a big advantage. That's true in most states across the country. now, there good news and bad news from that. if you look at how you analyze elections typically you you break voters down on the Republican side into what are called four Rs, three Rs, two Rs, and one Rs. A four R is someone who's voted in four of the last four Republican primaries. A three R obviously is three of the last four, etc. the Democrats do the same thing. If you look at early votes in Texas, you had about three4s of the 4Ds and 3Ds had voted early in Texas. And about half of the four Rs and three Rs said voted early in Texas. So there was a big differential. So if you ended it there, we were facing a blood bath.

5:49 That's the bad news. The good news, Republicans have a lot more outstanding votes that were available to come in on election day. There were a lot more three Rs and four Rs that hadn't voted than there were three Rs, 3Ds and 2Ds. Mhm. >> The question that I don't know sitting here just 8 minutes after polls closed in most of Texas is what turnout was on election day. To win, we need a big big Republican turnout. That's true in Texas. That's true in most states. And by the way, as we get further west for the folks still voting and there are congressional races in particular in California where where turnout is going to matter. And so even if we're looking at a really nasty election on the east coast, and we might be, I mean, right now Florida is basically tied the governor's race and the Senate race. I think we'll win both of those, but they're neck andneck. It's not encouraging. Georgia, the Senate race, it should have been our pick best pickup opportunity this cycle. They called it at 7:02 p.m. Texas time, about an hour after the Georgia polls closed.

6:53 >> That ain't good. Yeah. >> so but I will say for everyone where polls are still open, I if you are Republican, if you're libertarian, if you're independent, if you're just a normal common sense person, please come out and vote anyway because it can still make a difference while the polls are open. Ted, what do you think about the comment that this makes about specifically the president and the economy versus what has been, you know, a pretty consistent behavioral pattern in many elections before this, which is you tend to keep the balance of power by flipping. And so, how do you how do you aortion what is happening here? Like, what is the signal that the observer should take away? Yeah, look, there is a structural dynamic that that typically the party out of power gains seats in an off-year election and and there are a couple of reasons for that. One, the party out of power, they're usually angry, they're pissed off, and they're unified. In this case, if you are a left-wing voter, you hate Donald Trump w >> with a fury that could ignite a thousand sons. That hate motivates a lot of people to go online and give money and it motivates a lot of people to show up and vote. And so the left is all unified and even the differences among the left, hatred of Trump manages to paper over that. On the right, look, right now Republicans have control over the White House, the Senate, and the House.

8:19 The danger is a that our people are complacent. They say, "Gosh, things are pretty good. I don't need to show up." And b that we're divided. that you have different factions of folks in the middle and right that are upset at one thing or another. So in Texas, you have conservatives who are mad that that Congress hasn't passed the Save America Act. I'm mad that Congress hasn't passed the Save America Act. I've been fighting hard for it. We haven't had the votes.

8:43 We haven't had 50 votes in the Senate, but I understand that frustration, but that may well have kept some conservatives at home. In Texas, you've got moderates, some at least, who are mad that John Cornin lost the primary and and if conservatives stay home and moderates stay home, very quickly you start running out of votes. That happens in most elections. So, so I wouldn't necessarily overread it. I I will say I appreciate the president went all in. I mean, he was on the road for the last month. He was doing rallies all over the country. I did a bunch with him. Part of the reason my voice is so weak. I I did 17 rallies in nine states in the last 14 days. I I can barely speak. But as we sit here right now, we don't know if that was effective turning people out or not. And if folks stayed home, this night has the potential to be a really, really bad night.

9:36 >> Senator, what's the setup if the Democrats sweep the House and the Senate for legislative process going into next year? you know, what's going to happen and how are things going to get done or what's not going to get done? Are we gonna face a big shutdown? Maybe talk through some of the the big moments that are ahead here. >> Yeah. Look, I think if if Democrats take one or both houses of Congress, and tonight that is looking very very likely, we will see almost total legislative gridlock. I remember this is a party that's animated by hatred for the president. So, I I don't think we're going to see our Democrat colleagues come in and want to do much productive, actually want to do much legislating.

10:13 So, I think most legislation will grind to a halt. We'll name a few post offices. We'll do a few things that that are not terribly consequential, but but I don't expect major legislation to move if the Democrats take one or both houses. If the Democrats take the Senate, that's not the only thing that halts. I think confirmations grind to a halt. If we have cabinet vacancies, I think those cabinet vacancies stay open. We have subc cabinet vacancies where where the president has not nominated. I I think those stay open that the president will no longer be able to put his team in place in the executive branches. And I believe Chuck Schumer, if he's got a majority, will stop judicial confirmations as well. That's never happened. In the past, when you had a president of one party and and a senate of the other, you move forward with judicial nominations. It moderated some. So So the the nominations would be less extreme if you had dividing control. I think Schumer and the Democrats will just al halt all judges, which means if we have a Supreme Court vacancy, I think they'll keep the vacancy open for two years. I don't think they care because their base is that radicalized. I think we will also see two years of relentless impeachment. I believe the House will impeach Donald Trump if they have the House. they may impeach him multiple times. We will see subpoenas. We will see investigations. I think they will go after President Trump. I think they will go after his family. I think they will go after cabinet members. I expect in the lame duck we will see an impeachment of Pete Hegth. I think they're eager to go forward with that. and so I think it's just all out partisan war. And and the problem is if tonight is a really good night for the Democrats.

11:55 It encourages the crazies in their party. It encourages the open communists. It encourages the open Islamists. And and I will say for the topics you guys focus on which is tech and AI. If tonight is a big night for the Democrats, it is a very bad night for the economy in this country and in particular for AI and data centers because the Democrats have decided that AI writ large and data centers in particular are are the devil. And I think you're going to see if they have one or both fa houses of Congress a relentless assault on both AI and data centers which will be a massive contribution an inkind contribution to communist China because they'll do everything they can to slow America down which as you know if we halted all data center construction in America >> that would likely put the American economy into a recession. Unfortunately, the Democrats would celebrate that and they would blame it on Trump and say, "See how bad Trump is? Now we're in a recession." I think they're going to do everything they can to try to make that happen.

13:03 >> To your point, I think the game theory, we talked about this, Ted, on our on our pod last week, which is exactly what you said, which is if you have majority control of both houses, the Democratic agenda would be to subpoena everybody. >> Yep. >> Get as many documents as possible. either release those documents or leak the documents so that you create as much, you know, FUD around all of these folks as much as possible. And then to the extent that you can actually get something to the president's desk, you're going to do things that are so counter to what they would logically want to have happen that it forces the president somehow to veto them if possible. And so the setup is to almost push uncertainty into the marketplace, specifically the capital markets. and that freezes the markets. And if you freeze the market, to your point, you do induce a recession. And that's probably the best setup for a Democrat to run. There was a there was an interview that Peter Teal did that I don't know if you saw it, but he said that if there was a blue tsunami, it actually unshackles the Democrats to run their most extreme candidate because it they would view this as legitimization of the the far-left edges of the platform. Do you agree with that? And how do you see that playing out into 28 if you do?

14:25 >> Yeah, I I I think that is very likely correct. one of the states that I I campaign barnstorm the whole state with is is Michigan. I don't know what the results are going to be in Michigan, but I think the two most dangerous Democrat candidates this cycle are Abdul Alied in Michigan and James Talerico in Texas. And I think if one or both of them wins, I I I said this on the trail. If Al say wins in Michigan, I think it makes it much much more likely that AOC is the Democrat nominee for president in 2028. because I think she's already one of the top three contenders. I think AOC, Gavin Newsome, and probably John Oaf are the top three right now.

15:06 >> Yeah. >> The main knock against AOC in a Democrat primary is she's too extreme to win the general. If you get Al say winning in Michigan, the quintessential swing state. I think they say, "Look, it doesn't matter. You can go fullon crazy and win anyway." >> I think that's bad for the country, but I I do think it makes the Democrat party more extreme. I will say also look, the Democrats have already foreshadowed that that if they have one or both houses, they're going to use subpoenas to go after business executives who've worked with the president to go after Elon Musk. They've already declared they intend to engage in lawfare and and and in open attacks.

15:45 Bernie Sanders has suggested nationalizing seizing SpaceX and Starlink. I I I mean this is stuff out of out of like Fidel Castro's Cuba that they're talking about. >> Yeah. >> Alyssa Slotkin in Michigan who who styles herself a moderate >> has said they have a whole strategy of targeting business leaders who worked with the president and worked with the administration and also targeting young people like a 25year-old who goes and works in for the federal government.

16:14 They want to go persecute those young people to disincentivize anyone working with Republicans. I mean, >> you can say it's Senator. They're going to go after big balls. It's clear. >> They're going after big balls. here's the Texas Senate election winner. >> Wow. don't blame me. I just got here and I was told to when I go vote to just go straight red and don't bring blue to Texas. I'm wearing my red tie right now. I can assure you I have not brought California to Texas. But it's time right now, I think, Ted, maybe for a little reflection on why people are so charged up about what happened over the last two years. U I'm sure many people are listening right now saying, "Hey, these guys aren't even doing any kind of self-reflection." What do you think the Republicans can learn from tonight's shellacking? Are there things in the first two years of this president? And I know we're not allowed to criticize President Trump and everybody has to be in line and the criticism has to be very moderate, but you are an independent thinker and you have broken ranks with President Trump. Why is he getting such a strong reaction here if you had to list two or three things he should have done better in the first half to avoid this? What would they have been? Senator Ted Cruz.

17:32 >> Well, well, listen, I I don't want to overreact until we see all of the results tonight. There are a lot of signs that indicate it is bad, but but but elections, I want to wait till all the votes are counted. Okay, fair enough. >> But but it's clear the warning signs there are a lot of people that are unhappy. One of the real drivers that that makes so many elections bumpy is rural voters, farmers and ranchers are are really unhappy and that's that's made a big difference particularly right up the middle of the country. So it's a big factor in Texas. It's a factor in in states like like Kansas and Nebraska and Iowa and Michigan, states where you've got big a communities. and farmers and ranchers, they're frustrated.

18:11 They're frustrated because diesel's six or seven bucks a gallon. >> They're pissed off because fertilizer has gotten really, really expensive. And and the impact of tariffs has has really impacted them. And so you've got a lot of farmers that are historically they show up in big numbers for Republicans both in turnout and margin. And one real possibility, we'll find out after election days, if a bunch of those farmers stayed home, if a bunch of those ranchers stayed home, or if they or if they voted Democrat, even worse, that could lead to a terrible outcome.

18:43 You've you've also got suburban voters who have been a swing vote. where suburban voters ended up this cycle, I don't know. You look at a state like Georgia or a state like Arizona where just a few years ago, Georgia and Arizona were bright red, >> they've now turned purple at best, if not blue, because suburban voters in in Atlanta and Phoenix turned against the president. And and and so in Texas, I am worried. We're going to see the numbers, but you look at Hispanic voters, particularly Hispanic voters in South Texas. So, in my re-elect just two years ago, I won statewide by nine points.

19:22 I won by a million votes. And what I was most proud of is I carried Hispanics across the state of Texas by six points. And, and that's never happened. That is unprecedented. No Republican Senate candidate has done that. And and the Rio Grand Valley, which has been bright red, bright blue for a hundred years, we flipped it red. And I carried the valley and Trump carried the valley. Now, what I don't know, but I'm quite concerned about is is those voters in the valley who came out for the first time and pulled the lever Republican in 2024, did they stay home or did they switch back to what they and their parents and grandparents had been doing for a hundred years, which is voting Democrat?

20:02 And and and that's going to be something people are going to look at farmers and ranchers and a voters. They're going to look at bluecollar voters. They're going to look at Hispanic voters, which have a heavy overlap with bluecollar voters. and they're going to look at suburban voters and and and if if we're making having losses with all of them, that leads to to a wave if not a tsunami. >> Yeah. And that means it's an opportunity work to do winning those folks back.

20:28 Same way Trump won a lot of moderates. A lot of moderates were, >> you know, Trump 2.0 curious. So, you got a lot of work on your hands, Ted, as an elder statesman in the party. Thank you for coming as always. We appreciate you here in the great state of Texas. Thank you, Senator. >> Thank you, Senator. Okay, now from the other side of the aisle, and we have an update here. 42 Senate results right now. 42 Democrat, 31 Republican, according to New York Times. a long way to go. I I don't think it's going to be 11 people as the Delta. But with us now from the other side of the aisle or straight down the middle is a friend of yours, Dave Freedberg. Rahm Emanuel is joining us. former ambassador to my favorite country, Japan, former mayor of Chicago, and Obama, President Obama's chief of staff.

21:19 Welcome to the All-In election night coverage for 2026. Rahm Emanuel. Okay, a little technical difficulties there. Freeberg, your thoughts while we wait for Rahm here on Ted's comments there, especially towards the end. lessons in what happened over the last few years. He mentioned tariffs, he mentioned diesel, which obviously goes to the war obviously. any any thoughts there while we >> just I'll just reiterate what he said about farmers because I work in the agriculture industry. 98% or 97% of farms lose money now. They they can't make a profit. We lost our biggest customer, China, to our a export. The US is the world's largest exporter of agricultural products. China, our biggest buyer, disappeared and the fertilizer cost, which is the number one input cost for farming row crops, the price doubled >> and as senator mentioned, fuel prices doubled. So structurally, farmers cannot make a profit. So they've received multiple government checks, ad hoc payments over the last two years to try and keep them afloat. So, it's a crisis in agriculture right now and I think we're seeing that play out in these rural states in the in the the results.

22:38 >> Yeah. Okay. I believe we have Rahm Emanuel with us. Rom, are you here? I'm >> here. >> How are you? >> I'm great. You remember your good friend Dave Freedberg. Great to see you. >> You guys had a wonderful joy. >> Thanks for coming back. >> Thanks for coming back. You're always welcome, Rob. And meet my good friend Chimath Pia Hapatia, part of our quartet here. David Saxs couldn't make it. Rahm, we have a what looks to be right now 43 Democrats, 31 Republicans on the Senate. I think this is looking like the tsunami shellacking that was predicted. The polls seem to have been correct and certainly polymarket correct. Ram, what do you take away from tonight? And then what can we expect from the Dems if they do sweep the House and the Senate?

23:26 Look, I mean, a couple things. One is I think the you're going to see Dems all over the country win. I think that the truth is it will be that the Republicans lost it was repudiation, but that's an opportunity for Democrats to solidify this coalition. And we've got to be clear that we can make this the winning coalition of strong Democratic turnout, what I call non-Maga Republicans or John McCain, Mitt Romney Republicans who voted for Democrats and larger share in places like South Carolina, Kansas, and other kind of congressional districts and independents. We got to make this election not transactional but transformational >> things on ethics, do things on tariff relief, do things on a minimum wage that makes bills not only that we downpays on the change they voted for and also builds and rebuilds the trust and doesn't don't just spend it on our version of Donald Trump's Hunger Games, a Democratic version. Actually do the work. And I always use this out on the campaign trail.

24:37 you know, the kids on the Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier were at sea for 322 days straight. Bathrooms didn't work. It was ransom food. The Congress was in session for just shy of a 100 days. Why don't you show up like the kids on the Abraham Lincoln? pass a comprehensive ethics bill that affects all three branches of government. Ban stock trading. Ban participation in prediction markets for the executive branch. Mandatory blind trust if you make over a million dollars. Mandatory term limits or age out I say 75 fifth what I call the Jared Kushner rule. You can't be in government and taking foreign money. And when you get out you have a two-year hiatus before you can take any foreign investment. So to me that would be a way to establish that you actually heard the voters and and are going to do the work. The other thing is look at Florida, look at Texas, look at North Carolina and look at South Carolina. In each of those states Senate wise, Donald Trump picked the candidate.

25:44 We had very good candidates. And I always said this when I was chair 20 years ago in 2006 for the Democratic efforts to take the house. quality of candidates in the end of the day is very very important and is underappreciated and I think the president interjecting in South Carolina picking Darlene Graham a place we had no right to compete we had a great candidate there Annie Telerico versus Paxton as opposed to incumbent Senator Cornin Marshall North Carolina kind of chasing Tillis out giving Governor Cooper a real chance and he I I think just got called from what I said. So in each of these cases, the president being involved, Georgia is another example.

26:29 Hassaf was supposed to be a battleground. He just clean clock on Collins. Again, a candidate picked by the president in a crowded primary. I think that is a message as it relates to how the president in got in the middle of the primary, selected a candidate, and put the weakest foot for the Republicans forward. >> Maybe you have a question here. Yep. >> Yeah. You had a really interesting strategy which I just want to double click on. Your perspective. I just want to make sure I represented accurately is you think that these guys with majorities in both houses should be legislating and actively have an agenda that they can kind of come together, caucus on, agree on, and then start pushing forward legislation in these two periods versus what a lot of people think happens in this in a in a moment like this, which is a lame duck two years. Everybody focuses on 28. People kind of run to the exits. Can you just explain why that's so important?

27:23 >> Well, let me walk through a couple things. One is everyone I picked would unite Democrats and divide Republicans. That's on the political level and that's important to 2028. And B is I don't want to go in and having just rented the voters in 2026. A lot in a lot of states, independents and what I call non-MAGA Republicans are going to do something they don't normally do, which is vote Democrat. Affirm that vote.

27:54 Don't just use it and dump it. >> What does that mean? >> I'm all for hearings on follow the money. I want to know where the Venezuela money is. I want to know what deal was cut as it related to the you Qatar giving that plane. Follow the money. But if you end up going impeachment versus ethics reform, impeachment Republicans will solidify on ethics reform. You're going to get half the Republican caucus to vote with you and you're going to make a difference and you're going to clean up the the Supreme Court, the federal branch, the executive branch, the cabinet, and the House and the Senate. It's not like only one branch of government needs a good cleaning here. And so >> do you think that do you think that the ethics? Sorry, go ahead.

28:43 >> My point is in that case when you have that kind of big bipartisan vote, you'll affirm that you're governing. >> The same thing with the raising the minimum wage, you're going to get a lot of Republican votes, tariff relief, a lot of Republican votes, and the Democrats will be united in that effort. And so to me, in each of those cases, you know, and I draw a piece of history in 1991, George Mitchell sent George Bush 41 a tax and budget bill and the president broke his pledge, ended up getting Pap Buchanan in primary, and Bill Clinton was set up in '92. One year later, in 90 in 2007, we send George Bush 43 a kids healthc care bill and 60 Republicans voted with us.

29:32 It becomes the second bill that Barack Obama signs into law as president and 60 Republicans voted with us when George Bush vetoed it. So to me, what unites Democrats? What divides Republicans? And how do you make progress in telling the voters that took a lark on you? Are you aligned with the Democratic establishment on ethics reform or do you think that this is going to be a situation where you know it I mean you're an elder statesman of the party suggesting something that in practice it doesn't seem like either side wants a lot of for example like the stock bans and whatnot. No, I think there's no way when you look at the first of all is somebody who on a separate Ezra Klein's podcast December of 2024, literally 22 months ago, the headline of that podcast with me was it's the corruption stupid.

30:24 I said that corruption is going to be the major issue because Donald Trump was very clear that this was going to be a tenure of greed, grievance, and grand. And he's fulfilled exactly what he was going to do. And the greed is and I'm from Chicago. I got a high standard. I've never seen corruption like this. And it's blatant. And he tells you, "I never got credit for what I did in the first term. Forget about it." And they've just been going to town now.

30:47 >> Freeberg. >> Yeah. >> Oh, okay. >> Yeah. Let me let him finish. >> Okay. Go ahead. Go ahead. Finish. I just want to run out of time. >> I I think >> you can't The Democrats ran on the closing three weeks, 70%, if my math is right, of the ads were about corruption. If you do nothing about it, you're going to have in my way, in my view, wasted this second look that the public is giving you.

31:17 >> You cannot spike the ball as a party on the 20 yard line. If you do this 20, as I kind of say tonight, the Republicans are going to get a shellacking. They're going to lose. What we do in 2027 will determine whether we won. What do you think needs to be done to help the American people? Chasing the corruption helps with the politics of the governing of the people, but the cost of living, the lack of wage growth, the challenges that the everyday American is facing right now, the reason that people are so angry and feel so left behind. What can be done if this legislative structure causes what Ted Cruz causes a calls a gridlock? What do you think can be done? How would you advise the the party leadership going into this next cycle >> to actually solve the American people's problems?

32:06 >> You you're making it as if the corruption is over here and the cost of living is over here. They're actually heads and tails of the same coin. By way of example, president gets a $450 million Qatari gifted Air Force One, you get four bucks. 50 cents a gallon of gas. He's fixated on his arch and your family can't afford a meal at the Golden Arches. Don't think for a moment that corruption is some common cause Harvard good government and has nothing to do with economy. The American people think the reason they can't afford is because everybody's else making money as and this election unlike ' 06 has a level of anger towards the president because he promised money in your pocket and they watch him every day putting money in his own pocket. So don't separate. Now two >> to your longer term problem. While a lot of the media focuses appropriately on gas, groceries, etc., the number one issue that's driving Americans on inflation is health care costs.

33:10 40 million Americans put health care costs on their credit card. It's the number one reason for personal bankruptcy. And you have premiums going up at double digits and incomes are stagnant, >> right? Not counting utility rates, not counting gas prices, everything else that's piling on. Health care costs are the d when you think when if you go talk to people, which I have been in all corners of this country, health care costs is what is top of mind. And it's and look, I'm going to be as somebody that's taken on the insurance companies and the healthcare industry twice. One for kids healthcare under President Clinton and then a ACA for President Obama. The insurance company's business model is literally structured around the word no and your payments on premiums is based on the premise of yes. There's a mismatch here, >> right?

34:06 >> 25% of all hospital costs are driven over administration of insurance claims. The system needs a good restructuring to align people's interests towards better health care coverage, better health care results and more importantly where the econ were the kind of citence of the industry. >> Can can both parties Yeah. Can both parties align on that? I mean I I do think intuitively I've heard both sides speak in the same vein as you're speaking. you know, knowing that insurance, the insurance business model in health insurance is to take a percentage of the cost ultimately. So, as costs go up, if you're taking a percentage of the cost, you make more profit. So, the insurance business model is fundamentally aligned with getting everything to be more expensive.

34:50 >> And I would also argue that there's a role that inefficient government services play in this, but we can have that debate another time. But like, >> yeah, we can have that conversation, but can't can't can't they get aligned on this? I mean, what what do you think happens on this? Well, let me look. By way of reference, the insurance claim area is $1.5 trillion. I think every one of you are business people. Taking 10% out of that, $150 billion is really not hard. You can almost do it almost on just the pre-approval area. And again, 25 cents out of every dollar for the hospitals is dedicated to administrating administrative costs, which is all around insurance compliance. There's a mismatch in economics. You can get consensus also in and around I would do it on reimpportation pharmaceutical both drugs and prices. So there's greater competitiveness. there's greater things you could do on transparency and since the hospital costs that are driving the insurance numbers and the hospital numbers are directly related to insurance. So those are examples of what you could do. And I think like I say this, I took on the insurance companies to get 10 million kids healthcare for President Clinton. Obviously did what I did for President Obama through ACA.

36:17 There's a place here. You could try to do Medicare for all. That means nothing else will happen. I don't think it will happen. or do what I think are very doable bipartisan things that get at the cost structure and allow you to get better coverage. >> Ron, can I ask you a technical question? >> yeah, it's your I got to get going, but yes, you can get one one or two more. Go. >> Would you advise the Senate to eliminate the filibuster?

36:48 Well, I'm the wrong guy since I'm a former House member and anybody knows anything. Anybody from the House thinks the Senate is a constitutional mistake. look, I would not do that, but I be I No, I wouldn't do that. And that's not for me, but I would say no. But you have a lot to prove, otherwise we're going to start carving things out on the filibuster, meaning things that you can't filibuster around. So, you have a ch chance to govern.

37:15 Rahm, let me ask you a final question here since I know you have to go. there's a large number of moderates. I think you're obviously in that group. I think most of the people on this podcast are as well. but I don't speak for them, but generally we have a a a country now that has extremes in both parties. On one side, you got America first and really dark characters, anti-semitic racist, Nick Fuentes, that whole cohort. And then in the Democratic party, we now have these socialists and then also anti-semitism and all kinds of ugly stuff. I is there a way to get people back to the center and working together on these? You you've obviously done that in the past yourself, but how do we get the country back there?

38:04 >> My in postTrump world, >> right? My general view is to seek common ground, but I also know how to hold my ground. >> Okay. So my attitude and I did this when I was mayor when I was negotiating. Tell me what you want to do here. I'm going to tell you what I want to do. You tell me what you can live with. I'm going to tell you what I can live with. I'm going to tell you what I'm not going to live with and we'll compromise on this.

38:27 That's my general approach. Do I think it doesn't mean that it's moderate. It means you're hearing, listening, and where you can accommodating. >> Okay? >> But there are certain things you won't go towards. Now look, by way of reference, I think what Gingrich did in the government shutdown in '95, absolute mistake. Three years later, we got to a balanced budget agreement. So things were, you know, hold your ground, but then seek common ground. And that's where the bill.

38:54 >> Okay, guys. >> Thank you, Rahm Emanuel. I'm sure be hearing more from Rahm in the future. He hasn't announced yet Freedberg, but based on your encouragement, I'm sure he's thinking about it. You two guys have had some great moments here on the show already. hey, really excited for our next guest to jump on. do we have Oh, we don't. Not yet. Okay. so let's get an update here. 4332 for the Senate. we'll pull that up again.

39:28 North Carolina looks like it is going to the Democrats. Cooper has won. and what are your thoughts here, Chimamoth, on the neverending lawfare between these two parties? Obviously, there were a bunch of cases last time when Trump was running for a second term, they targeted him. You could argue some of the cases, you know, he maybe had stepped in it or made a couple of mistakes, but it was pretty obvious that a number of the cases were specifically because they wanted to stop him from running for president.

40:06 President Trump, he's then gone out and done a bunch of lawfare himself going after the people who went after him. And now there's this expectation in this interim second half of President Trump's 40 the 47th term here that it's all going to start all over again. and and this is something I don't think any American wants to see. Is there any off-road for these two parties to stop fighting each other and get back to work for the American people? What are your thoughts?

40:32 >> I mean I I hope that they would find a way to take the high road and start to focus on 28. I think if the if the if what Rom says is actually quite smart for the Democrats >> and I hadn't considered that option which is you want to reward the swing voters that came over to you by actually legislating along the lines of what the candidates have asked for. the thing that I struggle to understand though is the candidates are of such a wide spectrum on the Democratic side. It's not clear what the actual legislative through line is through all of them now.

41:09 So, but if they can caucus and figure that out, I had not considered that as a viable option. My presumed approach that they would take is sort of a scorched earth approach, which is just to try to slow the president down and to put a scarlet letter on as many people around so that they are almost like in a very difficult position and not in a position to run effectively in 28.

41:40 >> Again, that that that's what I thought that their strategy would be. I think that there's a version of this maybe where the president in focusing on his legacy can maybe negotiate some sort of an understanding which is there's a set of concepts that are maybe you know down the middle and most people would agree with and that gives the Democrats win but it also gives the president to win. Maybe that's Jason how you negotiate an offramp.

42:07 >> I think it's going to be very dynamic in these next six months because you're going to see the tenor of what the goal is. I think the Democrats have to come together though and coherently develop a strategy. What is it that you want to accomplish? Is it the scorched earth pat or is it the reward the swing voters path going into 28? I don't think you can do both because I think the the legislative horsepower that's required for one doesn't leave much room for the other.

42:34 >> Yeah, I think you got to go with the latter as you're saying. one of the things, the socialists and a lot of the folks on the left have done really well is just say, "Hey, it's about affordability and, you know, stopping foreign wars and, increasing the minimum wage and just getting really focused on affordability." And saying that over and over and over again. Freeberg, the last time the Democratic Party tried to put Trump in jail, all they did was make him a superhero and a martyr, and everybody came out on force to say, "Hey, this is unfair. We got to vote this guy back in." So, you'd think the Democrats would have learned their lesson that being the anti-Trump party and not having ideas would be a mistake. What's your take on how these two parties move on and maybe start working for the American people and if there's even a chance of that >> visa v lawfare etc. You think there's no hope? I don't know if there's like a working together thing that's going to happen. This I think the next year, Rahm is right, is going to be quite instrumental in figuring and Ted said the same thing. I think 2027 is the year where the Democratic nominee is selected for for president. They're going to just try and hold on. I think the Democrats are going to be very calculating and and thoughtful going into 28 because they're going to want to make sure that they keep themselves aligned and they're going to want to make sure that the the people continue to view them as the antidote to to their anger.

44:09 >> And they're going to try and find someone that's going to be angry and that's going to be strong and that's going to speak up for everyone that feels unheard. and going into 2028, I think that's who they're going to pick is that person. It's why I've said for a long time, I think AOC is gonna end up in that on that ballot. >> That would be disastrous for them. >> I I don't know. I I don't know if that's true. You could have said the same about Elsad two years ago. You could have said the same about a lot of these candidates that are winning tonight. I don't think that that's true.

44:38 I think that the tides have turned. I will argue once again that the cost of living in this country has gotten too high primarily as a function of the government being too high a percentage of our GDP and our spending. And I think it's very hard to get out of that cycle of inflation and that cycle of stagnant wages. And I think that the economy is stalling out for the majority of people and they're seeing their assets decline and they can't afford healthcare and on and on and on. And I I don't think that there's a good alternative to socialism for the majority of Americans today. Yeah, >> I think that that's the view and I think that because there isn't a good alternative, >> I think that the the sweeping up moment starts to happen in 27.

45:20 >> I I've given them my advice very simple. take a look at what Trump did. He created a huge tent. He invited everybody to Washington DC, business leaders, etc., celebrities. You got to have a big tent and you got to try to win that middle. And he can do that by just inviting Tim Cook, inviting Elon Musk, inviting anybody who wants to support America in this next presidency in the 48th term. You guys should just invite everybody to be part of it. The Democrats had that purity test. They kicked everybody out of the party. They were super critical and they lost and they kept losing. Maybe they take the note that they don't have to agree with everybody on every issue in their party and just start recruiting people to join forces with them. Next up on the all-in election night live stream, our guy Shane. Shane, are you here? There he is. Hey Shane, how are you? You're on mute. Shane Copelan is here. The founder of Poly Market, our special guest. Shane, are you there?

46:21 Testing one, two, >> guys. Thanks for having me. >> Oh, okay. Well, we got to get it out of the way. Nicks in five. >> Shane has the technical skills of his grandfather. Can't unmute the >> Knicks in five. Shane, how are you feeling after the Knicks win? How you feeling after the big Knicks win? >> Incredible. It was incredible. We lugged out to to San Antonio twice. >> Yes, we did. I was I I saw you there.

46:44 You were able to get on the floor. I was three rows back, but I saw you were able to get on the floor and celebrate with the champions. >> Had a long time to save up for that moment. >> Yes, it was quite quite amazing. so Shane, tell us what's it like tonight at the desk at Poly Market. This must be a lot of volume to deal with and a lot of pressure. There was a lot of talk.

47:08 and let's just get right to it. The hardest issue are these markets, our prediction markets being manipulated in order to benefit certain parties. In other words, could the Russians create a bunch of accounts and start betting on one party, create momentum, and get people to not turn out in that state? What is the way that you deal with these kind of possibilities? I don't know if they've been tried. Have people tried to swing and create fear, uncertainty, and doubt for one political party with the platform? And how do you protect the platform against that kind of abuse?

47:45 >> Yeah, it's it's a good throwback. I I would say that obviously in the early days with poly market and prediction markets it was always like the most the most vocal criticism was hey what if someone just put a ton of money on one side and yeah I'm sure as you guys all remember the last roundabout two years ago there was always the big story that that Trump Trump's price was being inflated. I think the thing people miss is that a poly market when you look at these markets they're basically shares of candidates and the share becomes worth a dollar if that candidate wins.

48:21 And what that means is that at any given moment it trades not too dissimilar to a stock where people are buying and selling it and the price let's say it's trading at 25 cents. It it's implied that it's 25% likely to happen because it's trading at 25 cents to win a dollar. And you can map 25 cents to 25.25 and you can map $1 to one. So it's, you know, that's the probability. And I think the the biggest misconception with poly market is that it's sort of like a seessaw of how much money is on either side. What it actually is is it it trades like a stock where when you're buying, someone else has to be selling. So what we've seen is anytime someone has said, "Hey, we can go and push the price high or something like that, especially for these types of markets where there's like it's there's not someone who knows what the answer is going to be, right? Like there's a lot of data. Everyone's going and trying to make their best their best, you know, like prognosis of what's going to happen, how likely they think it is to happen." And the whole thing is that if someone's trying to push the price up, what they're basically saying is they're trying to pay more than market price for the share. So you can just think like, hey, if you've got a marketplace and there's tons of people, there's pro traders, there's market making firms, there's people who are political analysts who really believe in their in, you know, their sort of models of who's likely to win. If someone's like, "Hey, I have a ton of money and I'm just going to pay above market price." there's usually this flood on the other side once they notice and it can they can notice damn near instantly to go and take the other side of the you know of that trade. So the market rebalances is the >> rebalances basically instantly. And you know what people said about prediction markets when they were talking them more about more about them abstractly like before these this idea was really practical was that the more people try to manipulate the market the more of an incentive it is for the market to become more accurate because there's more financial incentive for people who can price it correctly to come on board and go and book the trade so to speak. So, I think that there was this cycle of every time there was a big election, whoever was losing, I got a lot of hate messages from and you know, I had to kind of give this spiel. And at this point, you kind of don't hear it as much anymore cuz I think so many people, you know, whatever your political affiliation is, like you've kind of been on either side of the polymer market coin where it's like one is poly market is favoring your candidate and you love it and you look at it and that price is going up and you feel good. and the inverse is, hey, this thing can't be right. And I think that we've built up enough credibility over time that you know poly market's right.

50:55 >> What happened with the Latam elections? So there was a number of poly markets that ended up being on the wrong side of those trades chain. Do you have a view on you know where those participants were? Why they bet the way they did relative I mean poly market has been quite predictive in the past but it was pretty wrong consistently in these elections that happened in the south. >> Yeah. Well for the Brazilian election which is I'm sure we were talking about a week ago. you know when it says someone has a higher price than the other person it doesn't mean it's like a lock that that's what's going to happen.

51:30 So in polling, if you hear that someone's going to get, you know, 70% of people of people like one candidate and that's what you know you're supposed to believe, that's indicative of that that candidate's going to run away with it. But 70% likely means that, you know, if you go and flip the coin 10 times, three times the other candidate's going to win. >> And what's cool about poly market is not that whoever has the higher price always wins, right? Because that's just not how it works. when you go in and you look at the odds of anything, when you look at an odds of a game, the underdog wins, you know, it happens all the time.

52:05 that doesn't mean that the market was priced inaccurately. And and I think that the thing that we saw with Brazil that was so interesting was everyone was looking at it the night of and then there was this extension. And again, I'm I'm not going to be one to opine on Brazilian politics because what do I know? But there was this extension by the Supreme Court and everyone who was Brazilian cuz everyone I know who was Brazilian was sending me poly market screenshots all the night. They're like everyone's looking at poly market etc etc. and the moment that the Supreme Court extended you saw Bolsinaro's odds just tank because the market was basically interpreting this extension as like oh something funk is about to happen. what it is that happened above my pay grade, but I looked at it more as a real-time barometer of the interpretation of what was going on at that point. And it's so hard to distill the signal from the noise, especially, you know, for for people like me. I know you guys are all your you're your own political experts, but like for me, I just I kind of just want to know what's going to happen so I can just look at the site and see things change in real time. And yeah, you know, like the odds of Bolsinaro, it said he was likely to win. And then before you know it, it was swinging in response very explicitly to this this progress. and you know, at that point, people realized, oh this is this is really material.

53:34 >> What do you think has surprised you the most about markets that are trading actively in the last call it year or two since you've been on the show? I mean, we always see examples of markets that are surprisingly deep, a lot of activity happening on on random stuff. I mean, what's been most interesting to you that that surprised you? >> Well, I think the the coolest thing is when you think about these global markets, like you look at oil and there's just the when when oil the other day oil went down a ton and you're like asking people why is oil down? If you ask five people who are really smart, they'll all most likely give you different answers or you'll get two or three different answers. and what it really is is a ton of people who have their own polymer markets in their head about these different topics and they're ascribing their own probabilities of what they think the likelihood of these different things are. And from that, they're deducing what they think the price should be. And they're all trading on that. And by letting people go and trade the market as well as look at the price of the market for act the actual important inputs that go into the price of such a big market like oil it just goes and and one leads to better price discovery for the underlying asset and help people understand better what's likely to happen and what are the moving levers in terms of why the price of the overarching asset is is fluctuating way that it is. But secondly, the the other thing is just like these things are already implicitly being traded and priced. but there hasn't really been a venue that's been able to aggregate that and have the right distribution on the demand side and the supply side. So, it's been cool that we've been able to do that and become sort of a a marker for a lot of these topics, especially with geopolitics and like just >> what's Shane, what's the deal with LeBron? What are you guys doing with LeBron?

55:27 you know he's he's he's a a partner of ours and he's he's been in ads and you know whenever he comes to this comes to the garden I'm never going to cheer for him because I'm a Knicks fan but you know he's the goat. >> Yeah, it's kind of hard for Nick fans after the decision that was so heartbreaking for us. We never forgave him. But he is you know he's the goat after Michael Jordan. >> Michael Jordan one or two.

55:57 >> I don't know exactly what Shane was thinking. >> No. I mean for Shane's generation he you know >> Shane's generation. >> No. Shane didn't get to see Michael Jordan. How old were you and Jordan was playing in the garden? Did you ever see him in the garden Shane? >> Of course not. >> Of course not. Yeah. It was two years. >> I used to just go on StubHub, man, and just scroll through the tickets and just be like, "Man, one day."

56:15 >> One day. Exactly. And then Shane's court said, "Listen, Shane, continued success. Thanks for everything you do at Poly Market. It certainly has made the world much more interesting and I think it's fantastic that people get to have this resource. It's it really has changed everything in the media space and for people trying to make crisp decisions in the world." We'll drop Shane off. By the way, speaking of poly market, in the last 40 minutes, 30 minutes, Texas governor has just flipped Gino Gino.

56:46 >> No. Oh, we not going to have Abbott. Oi. >> Greg Abbott on his way out. >> I I looked at the districtricting is all the all the blue districts have reported. >> Oh, >> I don't think that this holds. but if it if it were to hold, I just want to be very clear. Remember I told you guys there's only one thing that syncs the US economy. >> It's the data centers. >> AI trade. And the only way to sync the AI trade is to sync the data centers.

57:14 And the only >> Oh, Lord. >> Here we go. >> We just threw the baby out with the bathwater. >> And all the power that matters right now is in West Texas. >> Yeah. Get your checkbooks out. I don't know, man. I may need to go to Singapore or Tokyo. Hey guys, I know you didn't want him on the program. I know you guys banned our next guest, Chimath. You guys refused to have him on, but as the world's greatest moderator and executive producer for life, I went over your heads and I invited sloppy Steve Bannon to come on. Here he is, the one, the only Sloppy Steve Bannon. Steve Bannon, how are you doing, brother?

57:48 >> I'm excited because this is the last time I'm going to see you guys before you're brought in before a tribunal. >> I mean, this is the end of the road for you guys. I number one podcast in the world scam. It's been a good scam. It's gone for years, >> more than we thought. A lot of money, >> but soon you are going in front of a tribunal and you're going to have to account for your crimes. Let's be honest.

58:16 >> It's unbelievable. >> Be the time to to pay the piper and to account for the criminal behavior. >> Tim, tell us tell us what happened. What is happening? >> Yeah. >> Well, what is happening? I don't know. one of Donald Trump's biggest supporters, Tucker Carlson, came out two days ago and said he's considering nuking Iran. That's happening. I mean, >> no, no, no. Meaning, what what I mean very precisely is like what what is this? Is this a vote for Democrats? Is this a vote against Trump? Is it a vote against the cost of living? Is it what?

58:49 How do you interpret it? >> It's been said before, we have an economic war that's disguised as a culture war. meaning that I think people that don't have the confidence in their economic standing are attaching meaning to a lot of things culturally where there is none. And I think it's a vote against the cost of living. I think it's a vote against in some ways the corruption that people see is inherent in the system right now that Donald Trump won.

59:26 claiming that he was going to correct. I think it's a vote against, you know, the the what what Donald Trump unfortunately has become, which is the system. >> This is a vote against the system. the same people that elected Trump because they wanted cheaper gas, cheaper groceries, they didn't want to go to war with Iran. This was nobody wants nobody wanted that. 10 people wanted it and they they gave Trump a lot of money, but nobody wanted this. I think it's a vote a little bit against people's circumstances, their economic circumstances, and that's why people vote. And that's why I think you're going to have a massive shift to the Democrats.

60:20 Any concerns on the Democratic side? see the sort of socialism, you see some of the radicalism over there as well kind of brewing up the same way we see on the other side the America first movement. What's your what's your take on the sho horseshoe theory? You've talked about it before and essentially I I think you've talked a little bit about, you know, the the the end of the empire here. Is there a way to turn it around? And what do you think about the the extremes in this country at this point? People can't own a house, get married, have children, live, they're going to become radicalized on some in some way to some end of the political spectrum. I mean, that's obvious.

61:04 the people that voted for Mom Donnie were four-year college graduates who took out a lot of student loans. They're living in a very expensive city. They feel like they're losing ground. and they were incredibly excited to vote for somebody who was going to restore some type of balance, whether that happens or not, whatever. But that's what motivated people to get out there. You're not talking only about the poor people or the working poor or even the working class. There's a lot of white collar college graduates that are voting for the DSA candidates because they're mired in debt. They don't own anything and they don't feel like they ever will. And Trump was supposed to address those concerns. And if he doesn't, somebody else will.

62:03 >> Yeah. And so >> I know what you guys think. Let's just build another data center on top of all of those people that are angry. Put another >> Yes, they could work in the data center. >> Put another data center. I know it's always the data centers with you. It never ends. >> It never ends. We were thinking Central Park. Tim is do it. >> It's so central. >> I know you're kidding about putting a data center in Central Park, but there was a sparkle in Tramat's eye when you said that >> that cannot be thanked. that can't be fake.

62:37 >> I mean, >> well, here's here's what I will say. I I and I've said this before. If you go back to the Gilded Age, and I I agree with you, Tim, at some point, the leading oligarchs of that era sat around in a table, and they allocated responsibility for societal good and they understood that unless you created economic gains that were far-felt, nobody wins. And so, you know, you dispatch Rockefeller, you dispatch Carnegie, you dispatch JP Morgan, and all these folks had to do stuff. And if you compare that moment to this moment, to your point, you have these symbols of a handful of companies, which really means a handful of thousands of individual employees winning these totems. I think that's what Freeberg called it, which I think is very accurate. And you don't see any broad-based gains. And it's it's it's clearly catching up with everybody where I think at first they thought that President Trump was the antidote and maybe now what they're saying is the other side is the antidote and they're going to keep looking for the more extreme version until they break the system. Do you do you buy that or No.

63:47 >> Yeah. I mean I I think I think that's absolutely true. I think that if one party does not address these concerns, another party will. And that's the entire story of tonight is if you're a Republican strategist, you had nothing to sell. You know, you what were you selling? I mean, that's the reality. Like two years into this administration, what are you selling to people?

64:22 And the Democrats in my estimation lost two years ago because they were selling you know this very kind of you know it was all about democracy. It was very symbolic. The Democrats were selling symbolism. It democracy was on the ballot. They were saying all of these things but they weren't addressing those core concerns. The Republicans are now in the same position where they're selling symbolism, but people are going to fill up their car. They're going to the grocery store. They're going in, you know, to pay their rent because they're not paying a mortgage. And that's why the the Republicans don't have a coherent message two years in. And a lot of people are drawing a line between what seems to be this misadventure in Iran and the rising costs at home.

65:24 >> And when you have the Pentagon going, we could have a wave of cyber attacks and bases need to be self-sufficient for 90 days. And you have Europe, and I know this isn't directly, you know, necessarily American, but you have Europe telling people you should stockpile food. I mean, this doesn't fill people with overwhelming confidence. We're we're making people extremely uncomfortable with these predictions that you're going to lose your jobs, the robots are coming. I I got to get into what's happening in comedy circles. I know you're on all the group chats, Tim.

65:58 You're with all the great comedians in the >> I love how much you guys love comedy. It's so wild to me how much you love. It's like it's unbelievable how much you love. It's like >> we're your subs. You can d us anytime. >> We are your stance. We are your >> I love that it's like they just came out Palmer Lucky is going to have genetically engineered robot dogs and you're like what's going on in the comedy circles?

66:20 >> Yes. Well, no, here's my specific question. The Overton window is about to close a bit. What's going to happen at the mothership when Tony Hinchcliffe, you know, and Joe Rogan can't use the word anymore? What's going to happen in circles when this closes a bit? >> I think they'll be all right. You know, I'm a survivor. You know, truly I am a survivor. I'll throw on a burka tomorrow >> and I'll do what needs to be done.

66:45 >> Yes. You'll wear the >> burka done. I'll be in Minnesota with a burka on with Abdul Shik Muhammad bin Sim, whatever his name is. I don't even care. I will be there doing everything I have to do. What the hell do I care? I mean, >> I'm a survivor, baby. I've been in this business a long time. And I will get out there in sub45 degree weather with 15 Somali and we will do a daycare comedy benefit cuz I don't give a >> You need to get that. You got to keep those corporate gigs alive.

67:17 >> Have you done a corporate gig at a mosque? Have you done that yet? Where do you draw the line? The comedy there. Can you do it? >> To I was fired from Saudi Arabia because I offered a defense of their indentured servitude program which I think was productive for them. And they fired me. >> I was fired. >> Not for being gay. They were fine with gay. >> They were fine with that. >> Fine with it. Hey Tim, just before we get away too far from comedy, I just want to ask one more question around what you're seeing on this this night and what else you've seen, is there an alternative that you've seen that sells well that isn't socialism? What is out there that that that doesn't taste and look and smell like socialism that seems to be a shot at working?

68:06 >> Nazism. >> Oh my god. I mean I I mean I don't I'm just saying that's if you want if you look on the internet those are the things that are I mean u that's what's taking off >> what Listen here's what's always going to sell I don't think Americans are ideologues and I don't believe they are I don't believe they're I think they're pragmatic a lot of Americans are pragmatic not all of them the more money you have ironically the more ideological you become and the more you want to remake everything and you know re-engineer everything and revolutionize everything. I think what sells really well is I think Terico's probably going to have a good night in Texas. Maybe I'm wrong.

68:48 >> No. >> Yeah. What's selling to me is sort of a economically populous, culturally moderate Democrat right now. somebody who's not annoyingly woke, who's not going to, you know, be put put the trans child issue front and center. Somebody who's economically populous, socially moderate, which by the way was Donald Trump. Yes. >> So that seems to be where a lot of the country is because I think a lot of people feel that again we've covered the economics of it but culturally they want to raise their children. They have values and they want to try to give their values to their children and they don't want to feel like they're in a tugofwar with the school system or the state when it comes to what their children are learning.

69:44 So I think the Democrats that pivot to economics and start talking about healthare, start talking about jobs, don't only talk about illegal immigrants, don't only talk about u you know the cultural issues. If you can talk about the working class, talk about healthcare, talk about jobs, that was how Bill Clinton got eight years in office. Barack Obama had eight years in office with those messages. if you pivot back to that >> that while not being inherently >> socialist like get rid of prisons and get rid of cops.

70:20 >> But I think people will follow that message. >> Speaking of no longer annoyingly woke, Taylor Loren is with us. How are you Taylor? >> Nice to see you. >> Just a little joke there, Taylor. Come on. You are so based now >> tonight. Woke is back. You guys are going to be crawling in Woke. You're going to have the pronouns in bio by the end of the night. >> Will we have laser eyes and pronouns in bios? Tell her. Tim, Tim, Taylor, Taylor, we in the group chats, let me be honest with you, you have become suddenly very based. You seem annoyed with the woke You seem to be dunking on people for ridiculousness.

71:00 Everybody seems to think that you have a Republican boyfriend, a hidden Republican boyfriend, and that you have become based for some reason. I didn't say this. It's a theory that's out there. Have is something happened that triggered you to have had enough of the woke nonsense? What's going on here? >> I love the woke nonsense. I love it. I live for it. I You know, why not? Let's get woke again. People are so no one gives a about any of this. Like it's all vibes. The Republicans are losing. I'm not going to get on board with a bunch of losers at the 12th hour when they're they're fall getting on board with the Republicans in 2026. Not a winning move. yeah, I mean I I care more about policies than parties. I don't really affiliate with either either party and I haven't for a very very long time. What? But now what's going on in all seriousness and you're you're such a good sport and we we all you know love to have you on you have good insights into younger generations. You may have heard Tim Dylan talking, hey we housing and maybe your degree was a little too expensive.

72:06 You got a bunch of people who feel like maybe the the government isn't working for them. What's the vibes as the kids say? because the vibes are no longer immaculate from what I understand on the interweb. So the vibes are no longer immaculate. What are they? What's the vibes? >> I think Yeah, I think Tim is like 100% correct on his read that people care about there's this economic populism. Obviously Trump, you know, it was very sort of wielded effectively by Trump for years. now you see the Democratic socialists sort of wielding that. People care about improving their material condition. People don't want to hear about culture war They really want to know like, am I going to be able to are, you know, is my groceries going to cost more? Can I afford a house? Are we going to send all of our money to Iran? hopefully not.

72:52 You know, I'd like to keep some of my paycheck. So, I I think yeah, I mean, I just think Tim read on it all. It's correct. And I think neither party has I mean, Trump has been able to effectively wield that. And now you're seeing the Democratic socialists feed into that type of language. you know but the Democratic establishment hates that and the Democratic establishment has not done a good job of speaking to average you know working people's needs.

73:15 >> Okay, most importantly we need to know is Tim Dylan and is UNK is he going into his UNC era? Is Tim got that vibe about him now? >> What is that? >> You it's going to be explained. Tim, you want to explain as you understand? You've been called now at airports when or at the FBO. It's shortened for uncle. >> Correct. Yes. >> Someone who's wise. >> Someone who has age, wisdom, somebody who has. By the way, I completely agree with Taylor Lens. I never thought I'd say that in my life.

73:52 >> Here we are in 2027. Taylor the Reds for the win. I have no problem being an I'm I'm proud. >> This is Ank Taylor. >> Actually, Jason, hold on. Sorry. Let's get back to something normal. I have I have a question. >> >> Jason's lost the mic. Mute. >> Yeah, he's Yeah, mute him. I want to know from Tim and from Taylor, >> if you guys had to pick not just a Democrat, but then the Republican candidate that you think best has a chance of taking that platform.

74:25 Who do you think it is? Maybe start with Taylor. Both sides. >> Oh god. well, I mean, I think like Cruz and Rubio are sort of like the front runners on, you know, the Republican side. I guess B is in there, too. I don't know who's going to sort of be able to see like when Trump Trump's such a singular figure. I don't know that anybody can speak to sort of speak in that rhetoric the way that Trump has and build the base in the way that he has. So, I don't know. On the Democrat side, I don't know. I don't think it's AOC. I know that people want I know that like certain factions of the party want her.

75:01 Maybe it's her. I So, but she's not like I don't know. She doesn't have that Bernie energy, you know? Like Bernie really was the soul of that sort of like socialist like left movement and I think he's tried to kind of seed the torch to AOC, but I just don't think she can. I don't mean she's not she's not a quite old man. I don't know. But she I Yeah, I don't know. I don't I don't think anybody Roana is trying. He's trying.

75:26 >> What's your take on Roana, Taylor? >> You know, >> is he actually appealing broadly? Because to me, he comes off as >> he just doesn't seem appealing to anyone. Like, I I don't get it. He says a lot of things that he thinks are going to work, but then >> it just doesn't really land. It's like a bad comedian, Tim. It's like he gets up there and it's like >> says all these great jokes that other people have written and then no one laughs.

75:48 >> My Yeah. My issue is the flip-flopping and all over the place, right? I think I like listen he did something that a lot of Democrats don't do which is he leaned into digital early. He was going on Twitch streams and stuff years ago. He was on Hassan stream tonight. which I'm sorry to report it's mogging your stream a little bit in terms of viewership but no is >> we're only 50,000. What does he have? 500.

76:10 >> By the way, it's only beating them in viewership until they're arrested live on stream. says if if the Democrats get enough >> clips, you're going to see them per walked live on. It's going to be amazing and then we're going to crush stream when they are per walked out. >> Yeah. >> They're going to jail. The people on the stream are going to jail. And it doesn't mean they're not good people. And it doesn't mean that they're not fun.

76:39 >> Right. >> Tim, what great choice. Yeah. >> well, number one, Ted Cruz is not gonna be the president. Let's just let's just say that Ted Cruz will never be the president. His family won't vote for him. Marco Rubio will probably run for the Republicans. Vance is is, you know, poor Vance. I mean, what are we going to do? God bless him in a Dumbledore costume. That's not going to happen. John Oaf will be the next president.

77:06 I'm putting my money on it right here. Poly Market or whatever. John Oaf is He's the guy. He's the guy. He has Yeah, he has like the he has the the hype. He has the momentum and he's able to kind of speak to the the progressive wing like they like him, but he's also centrist enough to like appeal to the normies. Also, he's just a generic guy, you know what I mean? There's nothing he doesn't have like controversies around him. There's nothing I don't think he's ever done anything too extreme that would raise a you know, I'm sure there's going to be a on him, but yeah, I agree with him.

77:41 >> Tell me what do you guys think happens? This is this is more related to the earlier question, but what do you think happens in terms of the temperature to be able to say the things? One of the things that I think President Trump kind of ushered in was this freedom where, you know, everybody did it. And Tim, you know, you were able to really open up and let loose and said whatever you wanted. Now, you probably did before as well, but it it was probably much more visible then. Taylor, you did it as well. Does that change now? do you guys think that people start to selfensor a little bit more? Do you think that it's important now to watch what you post, watch what you say?

78:14 Do you think that that there is that element of you know potential? >> Well, let's not act like you know it's been free speech. I think both parties have embraced censorship and both parties have embraced policies of censorship from the top. Look at the new pieces of bipartisan the only bipartisan tech regulation we're getting is this you know, save all the children stuff by, you know, banning all the bad misinformation from the internet. ban all the bad words, you know, that we don't like from the internet. I I'm very disappointed that obviously Ted Cruz and Widen have had the Jawone Act, a great piece of legislation that would prevent a government overstepping, you know, pressuring these tech companies to just regulate, censor content and you know, basically do whatever the government wants. Nobody's getting on board with that because they love wielding government pressure to censor speech. And look at what's happening in Europe. I mean, it's terrifying. I think we should look at what's happening in Europe in terms of the tech policies that's getting through and the censorship that's happening over there in places like the UK and it should terrify anybody here and there is no political faction that is that that is fighting this stuff. It's it's literally no one. The leftist that the leftists love it and the right has gotten on board with it. So both parties want to start >> what do you guys think is the right solution for oligarchy inside the United States? What's the right thing to do about it? What is the right thing to do around the concentration of wealth?

79:40 And what is the right thing to do about the responsibility of folks with extreme wealth on behalf of the American citizenry? Tim, do you want to start? >> Well, I think you're going to have to look at the way that we tax certain kinds of income, specifically investments, and we're going to have to balance that more with how we tax work. I think, you know, this is something that's been talked about, never fully addressed. I think there's a lot of people that, you know, the assetowning class has done very well, but people that work at wage jobs have not.

80:21 >> Yeah. >> And if and and that's because I think we have a a an incentive structure for people to invest money, which is good. You need that to a certain degree. However, I think you need to tax some of that money the way that you would tax somebody who's working as an EMT or a firefighter or a cop or a teacher. And I think you have to restore some balance to that unless you are going to get, you know, people that are taxing everybody at very high rates. like if you don't restore balance to the way that you tax certain income, whether it's capital gains, whether it's dividends, you you have to whether it's I know wealth taxes are not popular, but at a certain level of extreme wealth, they're they're pretty understandable to most people. and I think if you don't do that, you're going to you're going to have a world that people don't want. I will say though on the last question, the enduring legacy of Trump when all said and done, if you know we don't get into a nuclear war, the good thing will be he did open up the channels.

81:41 I think he put a lot of pressure on tech to make it easier to say what you want online. And I think you need free speech for any democracy to work. And I think that will be an enduring part of his legacy is that because he, you know, himself said anything he wanted to, he sort of opened the floodgates for good and for bad. But I do think before, you know, it was a lot harder the policies of a lot of >> How can you say that when Brendan Carr like I mean he want like is is threatening every trying to regulate social media and these obscene ways like I mean I agree with you like there's some good things that Trump has done in that area and I think like you know he he's sort of like spiritually like been you know sort of maybe moved the sort of guardrails in terms of what you can say but I don't No, I mean ultimately I don't think he's done anything to ensure that Meta censors less. Meta is only getting more and more sensorious, especially with these, you know, stupid settlements that they keep signing with all the state attorney generals.

82:51 >> Why are they stupid? Explain your position here on people having to register with the social networks, agegating. You you have a very I think insightful or a great insight here. >> Yeah, I mean it's just a racket. I think that these estate attorney generals have just realized that they can get good headlines by going after Meta for these, you know, nonsense claims of social media addiction, child harm, or whatever. And I'm not arguing that they're perfect platforms that you should let your 12-year-old on. No, take some parental responsibility. But what is ultimately happening is these regulators and these state level lawmakers are ushering in these systems of national ID of of mass surveillance of you're not going to be able to get online without your government ID.

83:32 You're not going to be able to post anonymously. How can you say that Trump is being bringing back free speech when it's harder and harder? It's harder to post anonymously online today than it was five years ago. You know, these are huge problems. >> I would agree with you. By the way, I don't like that the Ellison's own everything in America. And I don't like the consolidation of media. Of course, I would just say that the instances of people getting kicked off YouTube for speculating that a virus that originated in China, might have originated in China. I do think that as you said the word spiritually the Overton window did shift under Trump second term to where you did YouTube is less sensorious than they were. Elon bought Axe.

84:14 I disagree with Elon on a lot of things, but he did bring freedom of speech to that platform. And, you know, I'm not I I don't know Meta as much in terms of like what they are censoring and what they're not censoring, but I do know that there was an Overton window that opened up for more speech in America. But I I don't like the consolidation of media under Trump. and and and I I think that's going to be a huge problem.

84:45 And we're going to have to probably look at some anti- monopoly legislation there, too. If you want to talk at talk about oligarchy and what we should do about it, I don't think that you can have one family owning like 20 media outlets. >> Yeah, it is pretty clear that the consolidation of on that side is pretty fast and furious. Tim, you know, I'm a big fan of your show and on the YouTube and I think the stuff you're doing the past six months has been so off the rails, unbridled going for it.

85:19 I don't think you would have been allowed to do that four years ago. You would have been kicked off by now. >> I don't think you're going to be able to do it two years from now if they pass the Kids Online Safety Act and all this other the Screen Act and all the other that they're trying to force through in Congress. I mean, I I'm just I'm terrified at what happens when, you know, obviously Trump goes out of office. I don't think he cares as much about this stuff. But let's look at the 2028 candidates. Who's taking who's focused on free speech on the internet?

85:47 Who's focused on protecting free expression? I don't see anyone across the board that's made that a central point. And that's really scary. >> Yeah, we definitely need to move that up on the agenda. >> Listen, great job, Taylor, great job, Tim. wonderful to have you here on the live stream. >> Thank you, guys. voting for Barry Weiss. I will be voting for Barry Weiss. >> I will be leaving the studio and voting for Barry Weiss. And I voted for VC Ram.

86:16 Dingdong >> illegally because he paid me to. And I used the names of dead children and I voted for him. >> You did. You voted illegally multiple times >> by the strangled children of that woman who strangled her own kids. You were paid to do that by come visit. Come visit us at the pen. >> Yes. And will you Is it true that you will be directing along with Nathaniel >> the Freedberg Penitentiary documentary if he doesn't >> I know I by the way I you guys are so much fun and you'll do well in prison and you know you will.

86:50 >> We'll do well. We'll do well. Funny is a good thing in prison. I mean listen Holmes seemed to be doing wonderful in prison. What did you think guys of the I'll I'll leave you guys with this. What did you think of You Can See Everything Tim Dylan and then we'll go to you. Tell >> I I thought it was great. >> Yeah. Did you have a favorite moment from Billy Evans? You know, Freeberg has a deep meaningful relationship with Billy Evans. He got the exclusive interview at the Allan Summit. Tim, did you have a favorite Billy Evans? And what's your what's your take on Billy Evans there in the documentary?

87:22 >> I haven't seen the documentary. >> Oh, okay. So, you loved it. >> You have strong opinions. I haven't seen it yet, but I love the idea that I'm sure it's great. I have not seen it. I can't commit three hours to it, but I will see it. >> Okay. Well, listen, when you next time you're on tour in a city, you should go see it. >> You must see it. Best needs to win. Best picture. Best movie alive. Lance Oppenheim is a genius. Nathan's a genius. Extremely good. Tim, I'm with you. I was like three-hour documentary.

87:48 Absolutely not. I saw it in a place that I could leave to potentially go to the mall and actually I was glued to my chair. It was so good. It's so good. You weren't on social media during it. Really? >> Off my phone, unplugged, locked in. Everybody go see it. It's Yeah, it's a great movie. >> All right, there you have it. Tim Dylan. Taylor Loren's >> two of the goats. Two of the goats. Well done.

88:08 >> All right, let's bring in our fifth bestie. I think our fifth bestie is here. Speaking of Oh, look at this guy. >> Where are you? Are you in Ukraine? In a palace? Where are you? You're in Ukrainian palace. Put the tie on. >> What are you in Croatia? What's going on here? anthropic ideal third world country. Are you celebrating a gigantic Democrat victory tonight? Yeah. >> You do have your blue tie on. You have your blue tie on.

88:35 >> >> I am I am I am at an event in San Francisco with Jensen and I can tell I can report to you that you know life marches on notwithstanding the fact that AI stocks have had a 10% reversal in the last hour. as as the market now appears to be a blue tsunami. >> Oh, really? Is that you're not making a joke here. The markets are showing Robin Hood, whatever, whoever has aftermarket a 10% dip for AI stocks. Is that correct?

89:07 >> Well, so I would say I would say here's where my eyes are on. if you look at overseas stocks, so these are overseas trading in Japan, Korea, etc., they've had about a 5 to 10% reversal in the last two hours. on the news mostly the big fear here of course and I think it's overblown but the big fear is that in a blue tsunami particularly in the state of Texas you have hosa who will issue a moratorium on new data centers u may make it difficult for the existing data centers to get permitted if you recall at the all-in summit we highlighted this as a risk to markets and so if you look at pre-market now or after hours on Nvidia and coreweave Nvidia's down 2% core Weeav's down 6%.

89:52 you know, so this we showed this slide, but if you go to the next one, Lisa, which is, you know, we said this is the flight path for the balance of 2026. At the time, the NASDAQ was up 15%, now it's up 11%. And we pointed out that the election and regulation associated with that really was a risk. And it looks like if we just opened where the market is down right now, the NASDAQ would be up 8% for the year. So we, you know, on this flight path, we said it could give up 10% of that 15, take us down to five. Now we're going to be at eight tomorrow. Could be worse by the time it it it's done. So we may test taking the NASDAQ all the way back to flat for the year. and giving up a lot of returns that were baked into the cake.

90:35 >> Brad, I I was telling these guys how bad it would be for markets if specifically and narrowly Hosa wins in Texas. Yeah, >> it it is it's probably the single most effective way to slow the AI trade down. >> Yeah, I can tell you downstairs where I was with a lot of folks you know who are in AI, you know, they're lamenting this, but the reality is Republicans really struggle with the messaging and not just in the last 3 months ahead of this election. I think I think the AI community and Republicans have struggled with the messaging over the course of the last 18 months. They've been on their heels. Now, of course, it's about affordability. It's about anxiety for people's lives and their kids as a >> but what I No, but what I mean is what hap what happens how many megawatts or gigawatts >> Yeah. are taken offline >> are taken offline that are in everybody's models >> like meaning for example in your do you have a model where you've sensitized >> megawatts and gigawatts pulled through in a democratic governorship >> where for example narrowly what happened was >> you know Greg Abbott introduced this moratorum via >> TCEQ which is the you know think of that as like California squa where you can just kind of slow things down and have all this excess permitting requirements.

91:53 The expectation was he will win. He lifts the moratorum. Everybody kind of goes back to building. Now, if he doesn't win, that moratorium could stay. Other regulations may come on top. It's going to the under the re-underwriting would change. How much less compute is available to AI to AI in a world where the Democrats win the governorship of Texas? Do you have a model about that? >> well, I would say not specifically on the gigawatts in Texas, but what I said at the all-in summit, the consensus forecast, which we'll call the semianalysis Dylan Patel forecast for next year, is a total of 43 gawatts coming online in 2027. Now, just to put that in perspective, the total gigawatts online at the end of 26, the cumulative in the United States is about 38. So the consensus forecast is we're going to bring online more next year than all of the compute that we've had we built to date. I said on stage and it got a lot of blowback on Twitter at the time that we may end up building half of that bringing half of that online in 2027.

93:06 And part of what I was concerned about was the growing backlash even from guys like Greg Abbott. But now with this blue wave I think it'll slow it down even more. so I think we could see at least 10 to 15 gigawatts of the expected build not come online. which, you know, that's why I think it's going to be really challenging for the AI infra. we have the dollars to pay for it, but I think that, you know, imagine what we're going to hear, Chimamoth, for the next two weeks out of the governors, out of, you know, you know, a speakerake Jeff or a leader Schumer. They ran on slowing down AI.

93:47 That was their principal agenda. And so they have to deliver that you know to folks. And and by the way, it turns out they were more in tune with America than Republicans on this issue and and on the issue of affordability. That's why we're seeing the results that we're seeing tonight. And so, you know, I don't think this at the end of the day is going to cause America to retreat from AI. This is a global race. We need to win. We need to innovate. But in the short run, it's going to be I think choppy for markets.

94:14 >> Brad, the Republican party, embraced the technology industry like it never had before. brought everybody to the White House, built a very big tent. It didn't matter if you were in a company, Apple, Google, that was 96% Democratic or it were people who had given tens of millions of dollars previously to the Democratic party, they pulled them in. >> Yeah. Is that not what needs to happen with the technology industry and the Democrats on both sides? Do we not need to maybe embrace the Democratic party that's won now? Some of those key players and say, "Hey, we we're supporting Trump, of course, but we'll support you as well and we'd love to have you be part of this, whether it's invest America. Do we need to kind of bridge both sides as the industry?" And as you pointed out, we kind of did the damage ourselves, telling people that it was a 10% chance of everybody dying, telling people that 50% of people are losing their jobs. I mean, we created half of this problem. and so what's your advice then for our industry, for the capitalists amongst us for pulling the Democrats back in to the industry?

95:28 Because right now it is a standoff. >> Yeah. The great the great news is I think that most of the people who are winning you know I think they're you know center left I don't think this is DSA shut down all of AI. I think these are folks that want to be at the table and they're are saying hey we want to have input into the AI regulation the conversation that was going on around the table and frankly I think the White House and the president is open to that.

95:51 demonstrated that, you know, at that table at the start of the day said, we got Democrats around the table, Republicans around the table. But I think Democrats by virtue of winning, they're going to be more around the table and they're going to have more input as you know, as the voters have now, you know, said they should into these issues and I think it would be in the White House's best interest. And listen, the the one thing to understand about this president is he's a dealmaker and chief, right? He's described himself as a deal junkie. So what do you think he's going to do? He's going to invite the Democrats to the White House, right? He's going to figure out whether or not there are deals to be made on things like, you know, like data center, like AI regulation, etc. I think that's the right thing to do.

96:31 nothing's going to get done in Washington, right, without bipartisanship. And I still think there are issues you can move ahead. I know we have a lot of bipartisan agreement, Jason. You mentioned Invest America Act. there's a bunch of stuff that we want to want to do to make this even more favorable to newborns in America. And I know there's, you know, goodwill on both sides of the aisle. I saw Senator Warner won tonight, Senator Booker won tonight, huge supporters of of the Invest America Act. I think there are things that, you know, that could be pulled forward.

96:57 but to be sure, it's going to require you know, we've, for the last few years, it's been Republicans kind of jamming things you know, their way. And I think now it's going to be, you know, Democrats sitting at the leadership table and you're going to have to find bipartisan agreement. >> Yeah. which is ultimately probably a good thing at least in my mind when you have the split government people are forced to sit down and great to not have a clean sweep you know independent of this although I'm a little concerned what's going to happen turning into California go ahead >> yeah what's going to happen to this anthropic IPO Brad >> yeah >> does it get repriced like it still goes but it gets repriced or >> yeah I mean listen everything weighs in at the end of the day to price you got to clear the market I I I think they're going to go either way. I think there's a lot of demand for this. And and by the way, I I think you can differentiate these two layers, right?

97:47 Intelligence doesn't require that much compute. Remember, they generated 100 billion of revenue, run rate revenue this year with 2 GW of compute, right? The amount of compute they dedicated to inference generating revenue was probably like 500 megawatt. So, you know, yes, they want to bring on a lot of compute, but if you slow down the rate at which compute comes online, I'm not sure that's a big problem for the labs. They may actually benefit in some ways from that happening. So, you know, I think it's a problem for the infrastructure trade. I'm not sure it's a problem for the anthropic IPO, but listen, overall sentiment in the market, will be, you know, I think less euphoric. so it will probably, you know, this pushes it a little bit more to the lower end of the range wherever it was going to price. But I'll tell you, there is pretty pretty pretty serious demand for the offering.

98:40 I know our enthusiasm for it hasn't changed. You know, we hope to be one of the largest buyers in the IPO. And so, I I can bifurcate those two things, David. I can say the infrastructure trade is challenged but I still think you know the raw intelligence and the acceleration we're seeing in their revenues in October and you know into November I think will continue. >> Take into account all the data you have in this very moment. Close your eyes and don't be too precise but tell me an exact number impact on GDP growth over the next 12 months by this election tonight. You know, I I would say if you look at it this year, about 75% of GDP growth, I think came from AI infrastructure. And so if we slow it down by 50%, you know, you could have a 50 basis point headwind to GDP growth next year.

99:29 >> 50 50 basis point. >> Yeah. 50 basis point slowdown to G. >> Only half a point, huh? >> Yeah. I mean, listen, I I >> You think things just keep on rolling? >> Well, I I mean, no. Like I'm saying, if you build 27 gawatts, remember 27 gawatt is about as much as all the total compute we have in the United States for AI today. So it's still an enormous amount. and I think I think we large we probably get past 30. I just don't think you're going to hit the higher end of those estimates. David, have you guys talked about Prop 40 yet?

99:59 >> Oh, we've not because California's polls don't close for an hour and 15 minutes. >> so are we not allowed to talk about it? >> No, no, absolutely. We don't have any data. We talk started any exit pulling. >> Yeah. I mean, I I would I would say what one thing that will be the most interesting thing I'm watching tonight because around the country, we're seeing a referendum on AI, right? And you would think in that scenario that there is no way that Prop 40, right, would fail. You would think that that would win by you know, it's attacks on billionaires.

100:30 You would think that that would win going away. My prediction is that you know, Prop 40 is going to fail in California. and I think if that happens in California, at the same time you're seeing this blue tsunami, like it's a really interesting juxtiposition and shows how particularly bad you know, voters view an asset seizure tax if it can't win in California in the year of a blue tsunami like it can never win in America or in other states.

101:01 >> All right, that's our guy Brad Gersonner. Looking good. Get back. Get back to the opera. Have fun at the opera tonight. I'm not at the opera. What are you talking about? >> The I know. I was invited to He invited all the opera. >> You're at a food bank. You're at the opera. we know we were all invited. Okay. Great job, everybody. We'll Yeah. Freeberg, I know you missed the opera tonight as well to be on the live stream. any regrets there? You would have liked to see Matter and Butterfly, huh? You would have loved to see it.

101:32 >> Is that the only opera you know? That's probably the only opera you know, right? I've been to a bunch of pooini in my day. I've been to a bunch of pooini. I you know I've been to some >> What else? What else besides >> What else have you seen? Yeah. What other >> Joseph and the Technicolor Dream Coat? That's not an opera. >> No, I tell you what I used to do. Here's what I used to work. Let me tell you my strategy. When I was at Ford, >> you don't answer the question. Go ahead.

101:56 >> They would give you I saw tons of things. I don't remember. This is 30 years ago. I was broke and you know trying to you know ask girls on a date and I would buy they would have student tickets five or 10 bucks to go to the opera at Lincoln Center but it was like yeah same day or day before I would just buy the tickets and I try to get a date with a girl and I'd be like hey I I know this is kind of last minute but I got these things and they'd be like you you're asking me to go to the opera?

102:23 Absolutely. Speaking of opera and musicals our friend Ben Shapiro is here. He is a fan of musicals. People don't know this, Ben, but you are a huge fan of musicals. what is your favorite opera and musical at the at the moment right now? Do you have a a preference? >> sure. My my favorite opera is either Com and Magic Flute. and my favorite musical of all time is probably Westside Story or 1776. But boys, I got to tell you, I picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue.

102:52 >> This is this is not an evening to remember over here. I'm happy to talk about you want to do musicals for the next few minutes. I I will be a happy camp. >> That sounds great. >> Ben, Ben, what what what happened in your estimation? >> I mean, I I think that honestly the president said going in that the election was going to be a referendum on him. Act like he's on the ballot. And I think that, you know, the president was kind of on the ballot. If this were just a case of of a few outstandingly bad Republican candidates losing like Paxton in Texas for example or if it were were just a matter of an outstanding Democrat candidate winning somewhere like Josh Hurrick in Iowa which again we'll see what happens in Iowa still but the fact that South Carolina is going and you just basically have an empty suit in South Carolina losing or or the fact that Florida again Florida stayed red but very very very closely I mean Angie that's my home state so I know that state really well. Angie Nixon is a full-scale nutcase and Angie Nixon is going to lose that senatorial race by about two points. David Jolly who spent I think 17th of what Byron Donald spent in that race is going to lose by a couple of points. I mean it's it's a wipeout for Republicans and I there's no there's no way to sugarcoat that and again if you're looking at it across the map that bodess pretty ill for for 2028 and and I got to say that it it's just I think it's it's a stacking function a bunch of things.

104:09 >> Is it a platform repudiation? Is it a character repudiation? Is it a strategy repudiation? Is it all of the above? Like what is like what what do Republicans do to retool that >> or personality repudiation of >> I mean I think I think it's an all of the above. Honestly, I I think that if you look at the the presidential approval ratings which which moved lock step with Republican approval ratings more broadly here the the president's approval ratings were in the 50s when he first started. and then Liberation Day hit and you can see it's it's basically an arithmetic decline in his approval rating. obviously exacerbated a little bit by the Iran war, but it looks kind of like a straight line with very few step functions in the decline of of the approval rating. I think the the basic sense that most American voters have of this stuff, I I think that, you know, all of us who watch politics or the economy really closely, we tend to get pretty granular on on the specific policies that are alienating people. I think most people in America tend to vote based on a sort of gestalt of what's happening. And I think the American people believe that the the president is disconnected from their sort of everyday concerns. and whether that gets undermined by the tariffs or by the Iran war or by the the reflecting pool. If they feel like the president is not looking at the thing they're looking at and that he's distracted by a bunch of other things and then you add on top of that corruption issues and and all the rest of it, I mean, none of that is going to line up particularly well for Republicans. Now, again, I think that there are two things Republicans can do to fix that. I mean, there are a few things they can do politically to to focus in on things that the American people care more about. I think one is that they can end the Iran war successfully. I I emphasize successfully because Americans don't like losing as Joe Biden saw in Afghanistan. They can end that successfully. I think the president of the United States can refocus on economic growth, which again I think he he's done a pretty good job on that. But I think that he can obviously moderate away from a tariff regime that I think has been largely unsuccessful and unpopular. And then I think that he's got to, you know, actually look at the imogistic problems of apparent corruption within his administration. is like the top issue in some of the Fox News exit polling in this election cycle for a lot of people.

106:01 I think that that's going to be required because I'm looking at this electoral map tonight and I'm looking forward to 2028 and I was counting it up. I mean, if you're looking at the vulnerable Republican states, you places that could go blue. If that now includes, say, Texas, if that now includes places like Ohio, and and now you're talking about all the swing states plus those, you're talking about a potential map for Democrats that runs in the range of 382 electoral votes and and basically 150 some Republican votes that are kind of guaranteed. That that's a heavy hill for them to to have to climb going into 2028 if things don't change.

106:32 >> Right. Ben, if we hadn't had the tariff chaos, which people felt it was pretty chaotic, and you referenced that, if we hadn't had the ICE situation, which people referenced, hey, maybe we want to close the border, but we don't want to see masked agents, you know, being violent in the streets. and then of course the war, and the war obviously exacerbated inflation, but it's probably a secondary downstream effect. But just those first three, if you eliminated two out of those three, all three of those, or one of those three, what would tonight have looked like in your estimation?

107:04 >> I think it would look like some moderate Republican losses, but not the complete wipeout that you're looking at. I think that, you know, the the the American people can take a certain amount of, you know, President Trump's sort of chaotic online behavior if they feel like everything else is sort of smooth sailing. but but I think that that combining all of that when they already have a bit of heartburn is not going is not going to help things. So, I think that when when you look at, you know, sort of of what has happened over the course of the last couple of years, I think the biggest mistake that gets made in politics, and we've seen this in in a bunch of midterm elections at this point over the course of the last 20 years, is that somebody gets elected and the first thing they think is it's time to do worldbreaking change. And you know what?

107:38 The American people generally are not in favor of worldbreaking change. The American people generally just want some sense of normality and predictability. Maybe a certain level of incremental change. maybe get rid of a few of the really outlying issues like for example just shut the southern border but you know don't put out memes on studio Jibli of ICE you know arresting illegal immigrant like >> trolling the ribs backfired yes >> yeah I I I do think that I mean I think that if you look at at tonight's result there are only two things that really explain it well three one is Democrats all all the Democrats showed up to vote obviously like huge Democratic turnout two is independents who did show up to vote voted against the president and three is there were some Republican against his pepsia with with the president's performance you combine all of that and you end up with this extraordinary down ballot effect. But yeah, I I do think that the trollery goes over okay when the rest of America's, you know, when everything seems to be going okay in your life, you know, when when you're concerned about affordability and the president is doing his last day talking about the grouting at the reflecting pool, you know, you can get >> seems a little unfocused. Handicap 2028 for us. on the Democratic side, on the Republican side, JD Vance, Marco Rubio, other on the the left, Rahm Emanuel, AOC, the other Shapiro, obviously I don't think you're running, you enjoy running a media company. So, or wild cards, you know, a lot of other wild cards. Your friend Tucker, you know, starting his third party.

109:03 >> I mean, that listen, Tucker, Tucker had a great night. He was rooting very hard for some of the Democratic candidates who won. So, you know, good for him. but as far as some of the the other people who who you're talking about, I think look, Vance is the primitive front runner until declared otherwise, I think that frankly there are some Republicans who might have thought about jumping in the field and now are looking at this like am I going to walk directly into a buzzsaw if I do, you know, that that means that Vance has, you know, a real, as we say, a hill to climb. And I I I'll be interested to see how he tries to build a coalition that is different from President Trump's coalition.

109:33 Because I think that what this election shows is that if you take the Trump coalition, then you shrink it by 20%, you end up with what you have today. Right? If you take the Hispanic vote and you drop that from 48% of the Hispanic vote down to the 20s, then you end up with losing all of South Texas in all of those various districts. If you take the the white collar blue the the the blueco collar white vote and and you reduce that by 15 20% you end up with what you're seeing right now in Kansas or or South Carolina or Ohio. So you know it can JD Vance just sort of copypaste Trump's coalition. Trump couldn't even copypaste Trump's coalition in this particular election cycle. So he's going to have to build something new. As far as the Democrats again I think the Democrats have the whipand going into 2028. but I I think that some of the names that are that are being mentioned right now are probably not going to be it. I I do not think that that AOC, for example, is kind of the foregone conclusion as as a candidate. I don't think Gavin Newsome is the guy either. I look at the Democratic electoral map. I think Wes Moore is being widely underrated. U he's, you know, he just won heavy re-election tonight, like big numbers over over in Maryland.

110:34 Obviously, that's expected. But, you know, if you look at the early Democratic voting states, those are states that are disproportionately black. th the those states tend to favor black candidates who last that long. Kla Harris didn't last that long. in 2020 or 2020 and and in 2024 obviously you know she was she was sort of slotted in so yeah if I had to sort of if I were going if I if I if I run the prediction markets I would buy low on Wes Moore I think that there's some some move room to move there let let me ask you a slightly oh sorry go ahead >> yeah let me >> let me just based on who won tonight you know there's not a lot of DSA chatter in in the winners thus far how far has the party moved towards that DSA end of the spectrum from are we starting to fall down the socialism well and what's your view on the the the quality of the candidates that that won on the blue side >> tonight? I think you can kind it's kind of pick your own adventure for the Democrats here, right? If you want to say that that Democratic moderates are doing well tonight, then you could theoretically point at maybe Telerico in Texas, maybe Josh Turk in Iowa, depending on how that race moves. the the candidate Hamilton in Kansas. if you want to make the DSA case, you're going to point to El Saledad over in Michigan, who did not moderate one iota on any of his third worldest and and quasi socialistic policies. Not one iota, and is going to win, it appears pretty handily, over Mike Rogers in in Michigan. I think that that the Michigan story is fascinating, less because Elsa won in a state that again he's filling a Democratic seat. It's an off-year election, more interesting because of the rapid response of Democrats to Haley Stevens saying she wasn't going to vote for him. That part is, I think, should should be disturbing to to people of moderate or independent bent. The fact that that Haley Stevens was ripped harder by the Democrats for saying that she was going to vote for Elsa's opponent than Elsid was ever ripped anywhere during this campaign for saying it of extraordinary things is amazing.

112:21 >> In a in a Democratic majority in the House and a Democratic majority in the Senate, what does it mean for Israel? listen, I I I think that it it obviously means, you know, questions about funding, which is, I think, why the president and and Prime Minister Netanyahu already sort of announced that they were coming to an early end to the memorandum of understanding between the United States and Israel as far as military aid. I think the Israelis already know that. They know the direction the Democratic Party is moving. And so, I think that the Israelis are already preparing for that.

112:52 This is, I think, less of a less of a shock and more of just an acceleration of a trend that was already occurring. And then second question, back it's back to the first one. If you had to sort of look at candidates that were outside the normal political bent, like maybe you know like the Donald Trump-like character that comes from the outside in, are there people that you're looking at both on the left for the right that kind of like catch your eye and catch your attention that you think we should be looking at them?

113:18 >> It's a great question. I I really have not seen anyone who has the sort of magnetic effect that Trump had. And I think that, you know, this sort of mistake that people make of like who's going to be the next Trump. There is no next Trump, just like there was no next Barack Obama. And so I think that it's very likely that, you know, for for the next couple of rounds anyway, most of the candidates are going to be inside the sort of elected official box and not the celebrity box. And Trump is one of one. And I think that that anyone who tries to imitate him tends to fall short. and and you know, at a certain point, maybe they act worse then and the American people get upset about it. But but I I I don't see somebody, you know, running. I don't see Mark Cuban running in from the wings and seizing the Democratic nomination by storm.

113:56 >> And Ben, we didn't see any January 6 election interference nonsense tonight. And you don't see that happening. Nor do you see Trump doing the ban and trying to get the third term. All those things the Dems were hand ringing about. That's off the table. Yeah. Yeah. That's total nonsense. The president is is perfectly happy, I think, to to finish his his second term. He was already talking about this yesterday. I mean, he said he'll basically become a veto machine and then he'll end up cutting whatever deals he can with Democrats and then he'll do what presidents since Barack Obama have done. He'll rely on his pen and his phone, which unfortunately is the way we now do governance in this country. I mean, the reality is we have not passed a single major bill in the United States absent reconciliation or a supermajority since the Bush administration. I mean, it really has been that long.

114:38 >> All right, Ben Shapiro, our guy, thank you so much for joining us. >> Thanks, Ben. Back to the meth over here. >> Yes. and I'll see you in a little bit. I'm going to jump on Ben stream in a little and talk talk it up with him. Gentlemen, what a great stream. we hit 400 or 500,000 to Hassan and Nick Fuentes's 100 and 200,000. So, we mogged them. We we mo streamed them all. We live mogged them. any thoughts here as we wrap on the stream and on the guests that we had here? What a great flow of guests.

115:13 Do you feel any surprise tonight, you guys? >> I do. I I I I think that I didn't understand personally how disconnected I was to certain races where I just thought that that there was an entrenched established pattern that I think was reliable. you know, going into the Ohio governorship race, Ohio was Republican plus 10. That was not a purple state by any means. for the last two, three election cycles. That that looks like it's flipping. Texas looks like it's flipping in the Senate and also the governorship. So, for me, I have to go back and and look at my priors. And I think that the very most important takeaway for me is it's always about the economy and it's always specifically not about GDP which I think I get caught up in too much but it is about fundamental W2 wage growth and I think that I probably explained away too much of it >> and so that's an important thing that I have to go and and completely relearn and and figure out how to reestablish a sense of what's actually going on and what's important.

116:38 >> Incredibly insightful. Jimoth, I think that's some great self-reflection there. >> You know, I my feeling on this and I and I I got a lot of hate in the comments from from our reader or our viewership over the last year when I started to point out, you know, hey, the tariffs don't seem to be going too well. Could be executed a little better. the ICE stuff really is rubbing Americans the wrong way. And hey, obviously we all know Americans have absolutely no desire to be in a foreign endless war in the Middle East.

117:10 You put those three things together and the ICE stuff on top of it, which I was very passionate about. I I could feel people were getting upset about this, especially people who were really sold on the Trump 2.0 agenda. And I and honestly, I really wanted to see Trump succeed into this and could keep the mandate going. and I think this was self-inflicted and it is the economy every time. Chimoth, that is always the lesson. People feel the economy. I'll finish. I'll finish. We're going to get cut. I >> It's okay. I feel the economy is the most important part about this.

117:43 >> And Freeberg, what's your final thoughts? >> I'm just going to say guys, that's it. We're done with the all-in coverage. The coverage will continue over on the Poly Market app. Thank you guys. >> All right. Thank you too, our friends over at Polyark. And check out the DC Navyyard. >> They're having a crazy party over there. I don't know who's getting more drunk, the Dems or the Republic.